Today's economic times(pg 13) has an interbiew with some microsoft guy about the companies outlook to open source. It seems he didn't know what he was talking about.
There are a few things which stand out.
1. "We see open source as a software development method" He undoubtedly has still not opened his eyes to the revolution
2. "We compete with OSS products" He continued to mention red hat, ibm and oracle. THey don't realise that the bigger threat is from the stuff that matters to the majority of the people. its projects like KDE and ubuntu leading to their gradual fall, the ones that matter to the common people, not products made by some company.
3. "OSS is at its peak" I thought we are still at the foot of the mountain (or a plateau since we never go down) while microsoft is finished climbing and now going down
4. "99% of devs work on drivers and such" Yes i suppose kde/gnome/etc are all device drivers offering a protocol to communicate with the user's brain. its not the kernel thats starting to matter these days, its the software on top of it. I have always been one who doesn't give a damn about enterprise level software. its not a big problem if linux doesn't reach there, it is almost never seen by Average Joe. the place where it matters on the desktop, the DE's, the search tools, the browsers, the multimedia. That is what is going to reinforce linux on the desktop, that is m$ biggest threat since most of their revenue comes from windows. M$ seriously has to wake up and reassess the situation, they are still stuck in the OSS situation of say 5 years ago.
What are your views on the article.
Nikhil Marathe wrote:
Today's economic times(pg 13) has an interbiew with some microsoft guy about the companies outlook to open source. It seems he didn't know what he was talking about.
There are a few things which stand out.
- "We see open source as a software development method"
He undoubtedly has still not opened his eyes to the revolution
- "We compete with OSS products"
He continued to mention red hat, ibm and oracle. THey don't realise that the bigger threat is from the stuff that matters to the majority of the people. its projects like KDE and ubuntu leading to their gradual fall, the ones that matter to the common people, not products made by some company.
- "OSS is at its peak"
I thought we are still at the foot of the mountain (or a plateau since we never go down) while microsoft is finished climbing and now going down
- "99% of devs work on drivers and such"
Yes i suppose kde/gnome/etc are all device drivers offering a protocol to communicate with the user's brain. its not the kernel thats starting to matter these days, its the software on top of it. I have always been one who doesn't give a damn about enterprise level software. its not a big problem if linux doesn't reach there, it is almost never seen by Average Joe. the place where it matters on the desktop, the DE's, the search tools, the browsers, the multimedia. That is what is going to reinforce linux on the desktop, that is m$ biggest threat since most of their revenue comes from windows. M$ seriously has to wake up and reassess the situation, they are still stuck in the OSS situation of say 5 years ago.
It is better for the FLOSS community if Microsoft does not wake up and continues to think at the level indicated by the article. In spite of all that FLOSS community would like to think, Microsoft is a very competitive company. In each case where it missed the bus, it caught up very quickly later.
However, I work with few microsoft people and what is in the article is mainly PR tripe. They know what is happening and are working on counter action strategy and products. Look at things like speech recorgnition. They are way ahead. Look at pure tablet pcs, which is where the future of computing will go....again microsoft will be there before FLOSS.
And do not foget they have a fantastic benefit of a powerful and popular RAD tool called Visual Studio.net 2005. Finally, what will drive the market is availability of products and ability to create business applications at an acceptable cost.
Regards Saswata
What are your views on the article.
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 09:37:21AM +0530, Saswata Banerjee & Associates wrote:
Finally, what will drive the market is availability of products and ability to create business applications at an acceptable cost.
True! The weak area of FOSS is that nobody owns it so there is no aggressive marketing thought process.
When low cost laptops are sold, they come with a disclaimer that "it has linux pre-loaded which is free so it has limitted functionality until another operating system is installed". Does it imply that linux being a free os will never have the full functionality of a 'paid' os?
Why is it that even commercial linux distros or their free versions like RH, Mandrivia, Suse, Novel etc. fail to make it to the desktop computers and laptops as 'fully functional' OSes?
When pc or laptop manufacturers make such claims of limitted functionality of linux, can they be pulled up for mis-representation of facts? If a manufacturer provides linux pre-loaded, to what extent does the onus lie on that manufacturer to provide it as a 'fully functional' OS or stop pre-loading it at all, instead of doing linux a dis-service. To what extent is a device manufacturer liable to provide fully functional device drivers?
If we look at it from the consumer guidance and protection ideology, shouldn't a buyer have every right to know what hardware he/she is buying and have full details available to:- a) Enable the device maker to provide ready drivers for that device, irrespective of the os platform. or b) Provide enough details to let others create drivers for the same device.
What is the use of buying hardware that does not function in the buyers' systems? Does making a claim that the device will only be supported in certain OSes absolve the manufacturer of providing multi-os support? Why is software still a grey area when it comes to consumer protection?
Regards,
Rony.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 12:18:01PM +0530, Rony wrote:
When low cost laptops are sold, they come with a disclaimer that "it has linux pre-loaded which is free so it has limitted functionality until another operating system is installed". Does it imply that linux being a free os will never have the full functionality of a 'paid' os?
Because the sheep cannot open their PowerPoint files on them.
Yes, yes, I know about Openoffice, but that is the perception. Besides, the way MS owns and holds the file formats a secret (XML? Ha! More likely to be a binary dump inside an <MS /> tag) OOo cannot keep up and be 100% compatible. Hell, *MS* can't keep up.
Yes, yes, I know about Openoffice, but that is the perception. Besides, the way MS owns and holds the file formats a secret (XML? Ha! More likely to be a binary dump inside an <MS /> tag) OOo cannot keep up and be 100% compatible. Hell, *MS* can't keep up.
Wait.. weren't the XML formats standardized or something? I remember reading something to that effect on Slashdot.
On 5/18/06, jtd jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:
THAT is the key. Setting up and hand holding the defector. If u are not available when the defector is stuck he will reboot into familiar territory. The incentive to switch is the disincentive of the ad nauseum window problems - but the pressure to get things done is much more. And from a business point of view handholding for weeks a defector is a total drain. OTOH handholding a newbie on ANY os is an equal pain. So much for "user friendly" UIs.
Yup, some hand-holding is necessary. I don't think this is rocket science but most users (moreso business users) are used to the applications they use rather than the OS environment. So here's what I did:
1. Removed MS Office and put in OOo so trhat they get used to it. 2. Installed Firefox. I didn't have to waste any time trying to convince them to use it. They used it once and liked it :) 3. Used Thunderbird as the defacto email client for my mother's business.
Once they got used to the applications all I had to do was introduce them to the cooler looking UI ;) And they're loving it.
Also, I guess I must give much of the credit to them for actually wanting to change. I guess most of the migrations get stalled due to this very resistance to change.
Siddhesh
PS: Completely OT I guess, but did anyone see the FOSS program (part 2) on BBC today? A decent and insightful documentary I thought. The Baramati bus computers idea was awesome! I think there's a thread with alternate timings on this list for those who missed it.
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 11:44:39AM -0400, Satya wrote:
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 12:18:01PM +0530, Rony wrote:
When low cost laptops are sold, they come with a disclaimer that "it has linux pre-loaded which is free so it has limitted functionality until....
Yes, yes, I know about Openoffice, but that is the perception. Besides,
My other point was that why are they pre-loading linux if according to them it has 'limitted functionality'? No one asked them to load linux then why load it and then treat it like a pariah. This is just like the pcq guy who botched up the pcq 2k6 distro and then blamed OSS for it. As a linux forum, can we demand from them to either remove the disclaimer or stop pre-loading linux? They are not doing linux any favour.
Just like the petition websites, we could have a petition page that will send an email with collected signatures to organisations that abuse linux.
Regards,
Rony. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
On 18/05/06 09:22 +0530, Nikhil Marathe wrote: <snip>
matter these days, its the software on top of it. I have always been one who doesn't give a damn about enterprise level software. its not a big problem if linux doesn't reach there, it is almost never seen by Average Joe. the place where it matters on the desktop, the DE's, the search tools, the browsers, the multimedia. That is what is going to reinforce linux on the
Bzzzt. People run at home what they run at work. Multimedia is a pain, but that is mostly because of DRM, mp3 and wma. If you want applications, you have to make inroads into business desktops. Home users are mostly a market that no-one cares about now (if anyone ever did).
The only way you will see hardware manufacturers change is if you buy hardware with Linux preloaded, and refuse to buy Windows at all. Make it clear to the vendor that "Linux is a free OS and you will not get full functionality" is not going to be acceptable. Vote with your money, that has far more effect than any amount of ranting on a mailing list. And remember that every rupee is a vote. The more you spend, the more your votes count.
Money, code, support, useful feedback. Take your pick of contribution methods.
desktop, that is m$ biggest threat since most of their revenue comes from windows. M$ seriously has to wake up and reassess the situation, they are still stuck in the OSS situation of say 5 years ago.
Microsoft's revenues from the desktop will stay assured until someone manages to beat Excel for functionality, and gets rid of MS Office in a work environment (without replacing it with Lotus Notes).
Don't bother about the user-friendliness. User friendly == what people know most of the time.
Devdas Bhagat
Sometime Today, NM cobbled together some glyphs to say:
- "We see open source as a software development method"
He undoubtedly has still not opened his eyes to the revolution
it is in fact a development method. release often, release early is the development procedure. many eyeballs making bug shallow is bug finding procedure.
- "We compete with OSS products"
He continued to mention red hat, ibm and oracle. THey don't realise that the
people will not use something that does not appear to have a company behind it. it does not matter how free it is. Winamp was built, marketed and sold by one guy, but he put a company behind it, which made it successful. The larger the app, the larger the apparent size of the company needs to be.
- "OSS is at its peak"
I thought we are still at the foot of the mountain (or a plateau since we never go down) while microsoft is finished climbing and now going down
I doubt anyone can finish climbing. What OSS is probably way ahead in terms of stability, performance and efficiency, but guess what? those things don't matter to users. Users are willing to put up with one crash a week as long as their window borders have a drop shadow. What OSS lacks is good User Experience Designers. UEDs don't generally care about FOSS.
Companies like Microsoft and Apple are way ahead of the curve here. They've been running usability labs for decades. They know what users want, and they put more of their resources in there. They know that when the user clicks the close button on a window, that button should appear to get depressed. They know that a certain item should be the first item on any menu, and a certain other item should always be the third. They know when to put ... in a menu, and when to put pictures.
Gnome and KDE are getting there, but there is no one, anywhere, who is bothered with sitting down and going through every button, every menu item, every click, every keypress on these systems to say what is wrong. There are users who do this kind of stuff, but then you have developers who say - hey we'll fix the usability issues later, let's make it stable first. Which brings us back to the difference in priorities between users and devs.
Philip
On Thursday 18 May 2006 03:52, Nikhil Marathe wrote:
- "We compete with OSS products"
He continued to mention red hat, ibm and oracle. THey don't realise that the bigger threat is from the stuff that matters to the majority of the people. its projects like KDE and ubuntu leading to their gradual fall, the ones that matter to the common people, not products made by some company.
Umm...not to play a spoilt sport but I have run the latest KDE / GNOME and they are no where near the responsiveness, intuitiveness, userfriendliness that XP's (or M$) GUI offer. I see the GNOME community harping all along how KDE is evil and all. But I dont see any userfriendliness being built into GNOME. As a concrete example, I still cannot right click any file and associate it with an app. This has been a standard in M$ GUI for like ever and even KDE guys added it a long time ago. See its the little things that matter. I can see that GNOME has come a long way, its now faster, more optimized but it still lacks a good "control panel" (infact AFAIK it doesnt have one). KDE is far far ahead of GNOME in this case. But KDE is bloatware, I agree. I still use KDE and GNOME on my FC5 system and I find that none of them are upto the mark when it comes to userfriendliness.
Just to disillusion you, Microsoft has no threat from Linux's DEs. None of them match upto the potential of their UI. However, they have to fear linux on the server end.
That is what is going to reinforce linux on the desktop, that is m$ biggest threat since most of their revenue comes from windows. M$ seriously has to wake up and reassess the situation, they are still stuck in the OSS situation of say 5 years ago.
Agreed. But as I said none of the DEs are a threat to M$. Linux, is a very stable core but you need a good shell to compete with them. Besides, you forget that very few vendors have opened up their hardware specs so that the OSS community can build drivers for Linux. Major vendors still havent extended their support... So, while you hack at your machine to get something working, Windows guys are just gonna pop in that driver CD, install that driver, reboot and enjoy their hardware :/
And one last thing, I dunno who that guy was but it doesnt matter whether he is aware of FLOSS. What matters is that Ballmer and Butthead are already aware of the threat and are watching the OSS intently :)
P.S.: I might sound like a pro-M$ guy but I am not ;) I love my Linux - all three of my machines run it :D
Umm...not to play a spoilt sport but I have run the latest KDE / GNOME and they are no where near the responsiveness, intuitiveness, userfriendliness that XP's (or M$) GUI offer. I see the GNOME community
I guess you're right if you consider someone moving from windows to linux. For someone who's not used a computer before, KDE and Gnome are really quite nice. Ofcourse, the Microsoft "Start" button is the best feature they have since a first timer will know where to "start".
time ago. See its the little things that matter. I can see that GNOME has come a long way, its now faster, more optimized but it still lacks a good "control panel" (infact AFAIK it doesnt have one). KDE is far
It does have a "Gnome Control Center". It's not directly accessible though. OTOH it has a separate menu that lets you access all the options of the control center, which I believe is not the most "novice friendly" way. But even then, if a novice wants to configure something he usually takes someone elses help.
And novices do constitute the overwhelming majority of the computer users.
far ahead of GNOME in this case. But KDE is bloatware, I agree. I still
Well you argue that KDE has all the necessary features and then you go on to call it bloatware because it has those features. Barring the slightly unintuitive "Start button", it is a very good desktop environment. It has everything anyone would want (regardless of whether you want it or not). If you want less then you have gnome, even less you have xfce. The minimalist would fall in love with fluxbox/blackbox.
As an additional note, the gnome/kde menu is (atleast in my opinion) the best menu layout you can have. Anoone who knows how to read can easily get through the menus and get his/her work done.
Just to disillusion you, Microsoft has no threat from Linux's DEs. None of them match upto the potential of their UI. However, they have to fear linux on the server end.
I recently coaxed my mother and sister (both very regular windows users since the last 4-5 years) to move to linux. I set up the system for them and showed them where the apps they wanted were (openoffice, firefox, ). They soon found out about the other stuff (home directory, xmms, kaffeine, ark, etc.) all by themselves. And they absolutely LOVE the eye-candy of KDE.
They've been using the system for 5 months now without any hassles whatsoever. They haven't complained even once so far about missing features or anything of that sort. there is the odd confusion at times due to differences in OOo and MS Office, but thats a given. (Novice users don't RTFM ;) )
Agreed. But as I said none of the DEs are a threat to M$. Linux, is a very stable core but you need a good shell to compete with them. Besides, you forget that very few vendors have opened up their hardware specs so that the OSS community can build drivers for Linux. Major vendors still havent extended their support... So, while you hack at your machine to get something working, Windows guys are just gonna pop in that driver CD, install that driver, reboot and enjoy their hardware :/
True, this is one genuine problem, though the scenario is getting better as time goes on.
All we need is one manufacturer to come out with an ad saying "comes pre-installed with the most robust OS" or something like that. But that will impact the international scenario to a certain extent, not us much. For home users in India, the PC assembly freelancers need to take the initiative.
Siddhesh
On Thursday 18 May 2006 08:08, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
Well you argue that KDE has all the necessary features and then you go on to call it bloatware because it has those features. Barring the slightly unintuitive "Start button", it is a very good desktop environment. It has everything anyone would want (regardless of whether you want it or not). If you want less then you have gnome, even less you have xfce. The minimalist would fall in love with fluxbox/blackbox.
No. Even KDE doesn't match up with Windows' UI. I call it bloatware because it consumer a lot more memory than GNOME and is generally slower than GNOME. But a heck lot more userfriendly than GNOME.
What I fail to understand is why GNOME / KDE guys want to reinvent the wheel? Rather why dont they adopt what is in existence and improve it? There is no problem if they copy the Windows UI and add their own improvements. It will make transition for first timers much easier.
I know there is XPDE but its still very nascent.
No. Even KDE doesn't match up with Windows' UI. I call it bloatware because it consumer a lot more memory than GNOME and is generally slower than GNOME. But a heck lot more userfriendly than GNOME.
It's slower because it has more features and eyecandy. Turn off all eye candy and it'll run as fast as Gnome, if not faster (I've tried this on an old celeron box).
What I fail to understand is why GNOME / KDE guys want to reinvent the wheel? Rather why dont they adopt what is in existence and improve it? There is no problem if they copy the Windows UI and add their own improvements. It will make transition for first timers much easier.
You say that because you feel that everyone in the world uses windows. There's actually a sizeable number of people in the world (in numbers, not in percentages) who use Mac OSX. We as Indians always used to see OS=Windows and now OS=Windows || Linux. Macs are way more popular in the home user section (not corporate) than what you're giving it credit for.
And if you're talking about the perfect UI experience, you're talking about the Mac OSX, not windows. Its just that Indians have never seen a Mac ;)
Also, we could customize a distro to make it look and feel much like Windows. There was some livecd distro called Phlak Linux I had tried a few years ago that had a "cheat mode" which would make it look and feel exactly like Win2K, Start button and all. I've heard of Lindows, but never seen or used it, so won't comment.
So mimicking can be done; one of us just has to be driven enough to take the effort. That's what FOSS is all about eh ;)
Siddhesh
On 18/05/06 14:35 +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: <snip>
And if you're talking about the perfect UI experience, you're talking about the Mac OSX, not windows. Its just that Indians have never seen a Mac ;)
Some of us did. We have actually played around with Macs.
Personally, I find the Mac UI crippling. Give me a minimalistic UI, virtual desktops, and a bunch of terminals (xterms or otherwise).
My priorities are different from the users targetted by MSFT/Apple, and my interface needs to reflect that.
Devdas Bhagat
Sometime Today, DB cobbled together some glyphs to say:
My priorities are different from the users targetted by MSFT/Apple, and my interface needs to reflect that.
you are not worth it. you don't pay as much money as all the users of MSFT/Apple put together.
On 18/05/06 16:10 +0530, Philip Tellis wrote:
Sometime Today, DB cobbled together some glyphs to say:
My priorities are different from the users targetted by MSFT/Apple, and my interface needs to reflect that.
you are not worth it. you don't pay as much money as all the users of MSFT/Apple put together.
I agree. Which is also the reason why I don't use their products.
Devdas Bhagat
On Thursday 18 May 2006 09:05, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
always used to see OS=Windows and now OS=Windows || Linux. Macs are way more popular in the home user section (not corporate) than what you're giving it credit for.
Tell me if they are so popular then why doesnt everyone have one? :)
And if you're talking about the perfect UI experience, you're talking about the Mac OSX, not windows. Its just that Indians have never seen a Mac ;)
Umm...no I am _not_ talking about Mac OS X. OS X may have a lot of eye candy but I can definitely remember a particular review (by a long time Mac user himself) which said that M$ GUI is much better than the OS X GUI. Why? Well, the M$ mantra is - "You wanna do something, then you can do it from 10 different places in 10 different ways" :). It's something that Linux and OS X both lack.
feel exactly like Win2K, Start button and all. I've heard of Lindows, but never seen or used it, so won't comment.
Lindows is pretty neat but the same issues crop up ;)
On 5/18/06, Dinesh Joshi dinesh.a.joshi@gmail.com wrote:
Tell me if they are so popular then why doesnt everyone have one? :)
It is much costly than damn pirated Windows! and runs on Mac hardware only (Well, I am not talking about emulators like pearpc)
Umm...no I am _not_ talking about Mac OS X. OS X may have a lot of eye candy but I can definitely remember a particular review (by a long time Mac user himself) which said that M$ GUI is much better than the OS X GUI. Why? Well, the M$ mantra is - "You wanna do something, then you can do it from 10 different places in 10 different ways" :). It's something that Linux and OS X both lack.
I have to say Mac OS X has rocksolid bsd backend. Mac has also lots of softwares for one task. And have you search for particular software on Freshmeat for Linux? Try it !
On 5/18/06, Philip Tellis philip.tellis@gmx.net wrote:
Sometime Today, KM cobbled together some glyphs to say:
It is much costly than damn pirated Windows! and runs on Mac hardware only (Well, I am not talking about emulators like pearpc)
Mac OSX runs natively on intel PCs.
Hi Philip,
Before MacIntel arrived?
Mac OSX runs natively on intel PCs.
But not ANY generic x86 PCs AFAIR. Only on those tailor-made for the OSX by Intel.
Siddhesh
On Thursday 18 May 2006 13:50, Philip Tellis wrote:
Mac OSX runs natively on intel PCs.
Umm...its just a few months that the new MacTels have been out...
P.S.: Just for everyones information, Apple has announced that OS X kernel for the i386 branch is now closed source (proprietary) property of Apple ;)
On Thursday 18 May 2006 13:18, Kartik Mistry wrote:
It is much costly than damn pirated Windows! and runs on Mac hardware only (Well, I am not talking about emulators like pearpc)
There you go :) Macs aren't that popular. They were and are still going to remain a luxury while the PC isn't :)
I have to say Mac OS X has rocksolid bsd backend. Mac has also lots of softwares for one task. And have you search for particular software on Freshmeat for Linux? Try it !
We aren't talking about the back end. We are talking about the front end and no we aren't talking of apps either. We are talking about the UI to your OS :)
On Thu, 2006-05-18 at 18:03 +0000, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Thursday 18 May 2006 09:05, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
feel exactly like Win2K, Start button and all. I've heard of Lindows, but never seen or used it, so won't comment.
Lindows is pretty neat but the same issues crop up ;)
Lindows was renamed to Linspire after M$ sued Lindows because it sounded/looked close to Windows.
-- Arun Khan (knura at yahoo dot com) Do not sleep in a eucalyptus tree tonight.
On Thursday 18 May 2006 06:53 pm, Arun K. Khan wrote:
Lindows was renamed to Linspire after M$ sued Lindows because it sounded/looked close to Windows.
Iindows was renamed to linspire after an out of court settelment where M$ paid $400M (or some such small change) to lindows. Prior to the settelment Lindows was barred from doing bussiness in one of the European countries. Lindows appealed both in US and the Eur country. As usual M$ had very persuasive $$ args and convinced Lindows about the conspirational name Linspire.
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 06:03:41PM +0000, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Thursday 18 May 2006 09:05, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
always used to see OS=Windows and now OS=Windows || Linux. Macs are way more popular in the home user section (not corporate) than what you're giving it credit for.
Tell me if they are so popular then why doesnt everyone have one? :)
Because it's fscking expensive.
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 02:01:36PM +0000, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Thursday 18 May 2006 08:08, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
Well you argue that KDE has all the necessary features and then you go on to call it bloatware because it has those features.
No. Even KDE doesn't match up with Windows' UI. I call it bloatware because it consumer a lot more memory than GNOME and is generally slower than GNOME. But a heck lot more userfriendly than GNOME.
As a freelance computer maintainence engineer in the SOHO segment, my experience has been that it is not the desktops or decoration that makes a difference even to a home user, it is the functionality of the OS in supporting the various non-standard softwares that generally go into a windows system that make a difference. Email, internet, documentation is fine but theres more to it than that.
If linux gives better security and stability they are willing to change their OS, subject to all their regular work being executed in linux too with full migration of data. This is something not possible as of now. some examples are:-
1) Banking websites insist on using IE. 2) BOLT and other share trading softwares are available for M$ only. 3) Tally does not have a replacement in linux and its data cannot be ported to any other equivalent linux based software that works just like it. 4) People are used to Corel Draw, Photoshop,.Net, Autocad etc. 5) Accounting and invoice packages available in the trader market are M$ based. 6) Ticketing softwares for travel agents are windows based. 7) Most file sharing softwares for songs are M$ based and many live song sites run only on IE. 8) Some third party documentation softwares use MS Office as the export destination and anyway they are for the windows platform. 9) Most of the popular games are M$ based.
The list can go on. Please everyone, do not discuss the individual cases as the intention is only to highlight the problems. I do not agree with the arguement put forth by Devdas that by not buying products that do not support linux we can make a difference. We can make a difference like that only if we are a majority. The market is so vast for the M$ platform that nobody really bothers about linux users.
Regards,
Rony. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
On 18/05/06 23:17 +0530, Rony wrote: <snip>
The list can go on. Please everyone, do not discuss the individual cases as the intention is only to highlight the problems. I do not agree with the arguement put forth by Devdas that by not buying products that do not support linux we can make a difference. We can make a difference like that only if we are a majority. The market is so vast for the M$ platform that nobody really bothers about linux users.
Oh, the idea is to point out that the Linux market is big enough not to be ignored. We don't want to kill MSFT, we want to use Free software and not closed source stuff. Now, getting rid of Windows on the issue of security would be far nicer.
Devdas Bhagat
On Thursday 18 May 2006 17:47, Rony wrote: *snip*
If linux gives better security and stability they are willing to change their OS, subject to all their regular work being executed in linux too with full migration of data. This is something not possible as of now. some examples are:-
- Banking websites insist on using IE.
- BOLT and other share trading softwares are available for M$ only.
- Tally does not have a replacement in linux and its data cannot be
ported to any other equivalent linux based software that works just like it. 4) People are used to Corel Draw, Photoshop,.Net, Autocad etc. 5) Accounting and invoice packages available in the trader market are M$ based. 6) Ticketing softwares for travel agents are windows based. 7) Most file sharing softwares for songs are M$ based and many live song sites run only on IE. 8) Some third party documentation softwares use MS Office as the export destination and anyway they are for the windows platform. 9) Most of the popular games are M$ based.
kudos rony! You hit the nail on the head :) But you need to agree that KDE and GNOME still have a long way before they can become as userfriendly as Windows UI.
On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 01:02:46AM +0000, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Thursday 18 May 2006 17:47, Rony wrote: *snip*
If linux gives better security and stability they are willing to change their OS, subject to all their regular work being executed in linux too with full migration of data. This is something not possible as of now. some examples are:-
kudos rony! You hit the nail on the head :) But you need to agree that KDE and GNOME still have a long way before they can become as userfriendly as Windows UI.
True! After using XP I never wanted to go back to Me.
Regards,
Rony. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
On Friday 19 May 2006 06:32 am, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Thursday 18 May 2006 17:47, Rony wrote: *snip*
If linux gives better security and stability they are willing to change their OS, subject to all their regular work being executed in linux too with full migration of data. This is something not possible as of now. some examples are:-
- Banking websites insist on using IE.
- BOLT and other share trading softwares are available for M$
only. 3) Tally does not have a replacement in linux and its data cannot be ported to any other equivalent linux based software that works just like it.
Somone on the list is running tally under wine.
- People are used to Corel Draw, Photoshop,.Net, Autocad etc.
Fully paid versions?. Now dont turn the arg around and say same price as the linux equiv.
- Accounting and invoice packages available in the trader market
are M$ based.
Off the shelf?. How many run customised packages. Large numbers that i know of.
- Ticketing softwares for travel agents are windows based.
Package names pls. Let see if it's economically viable to do some middleware for a sutable client.
- Most file sharing softwares for songs are M$ based and many
live song sites run only on IE.
VLC can connect to almost any server and play any format including WMA (ahem with M$ codecs).
- Some third party documentation softwares use MS Office as the
export destination and anyway they are for the windows platform.
specify pls.
- Most of the popular games are M$ based.
Agreed. But we play fun games like bashing the shell or killall apache and the rear mount and unmount while fscking. Killbill is boring since hes doing it all by himself.
kudos rony! You hit the nail on the head :) But you need to agree that KDE and GNOME still have a long way before they can become as userfriendly as Windows UI.
Ruuubbissssh. Read my earlier post on kids and comps.
-- Dinesh A. Joshi
On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 04:55:45PM +0530, jtd wrote:
Somone on the list is running tally under wine.
Version 7.2 anyone? Without using the windows partition?
- People are used to Corel Draw, Photoshop,.Net, Autocad etc.
Fully paid versions?. Now dont turn the arg around and say same price as the linux equiv.
Thats not my problem. If they have no inclination for linux equivalents, I can't force it down their throats. I have mentioned earlier that piracy is killing FOSS.
- Accounting and invoice packages available in the trader market
are M$ based.
Off the shelf?. How many run customised packages. Large numbers that i know of.
Large numbers of what? All my clients use windows based software packages.
- Ticketing softwares for travel agents are windows based.
Package names pls. Let see if it's economically viable to do some middleware for a sutable client.
Amedius (spelling?), can't recollect the others.
- Most file sharing softwares for songs are M$ based and many
live song sites run only on IE.
VLC can connect to almost any server and play any format including WMA (ahem with M$ codecs).
Active X ?
- Some third party documentation softwares use MS Office as the
export destination and anyway they are for the windows platform.
specify pls.
Will find out. The client has XP legal and OO but that software wants MS Office. The client was enquiring about its price. I will see if OO can suffice.
- Most of the popular games are M$ based.
Agreed. But we play fun games like bashing the shell or killall apache and the rear mount and unmount while fscking. Killbill is boring since hes doing it all by himself.
I serve the client, I cannot tell him this. My rear will get rear mounted. :-D
But you need to agree that KDE and GNOME still have a long way before they can become as userfriendly as Windows UI.
Ruuubbissssh. Read my earlier post on kids and comps.
How many of the kids changed their file associations with different applications? What you experimented IMHO was the 'intutiveness' of an environment but with regular users who have their hands set on an OS, the equation is different. Siddesh P has explained it nicely in his mail describing 3 different types of users. Philip has rightly explained in his earlier mail about 'user testing' of environments and how Linux lags behind in this area.
Regards,
Rony.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
On Sat, May 20, 2006 at 09:47:16AM +0530, Devdas Bhagat wrote:
On 20/05/06 00:39 +0530, Rony wrote:
<snip> > Amedius (spelling?), can't recollect the others. > Amadeus. They have a web based interface too.
It *is* web based. But the authentication and other 'gale-padu' part is first installed in the system. That too has to be activated by them, so one has to fill a form and send it to them with full details of OS, hardware, company details, blah blah. The client was already using it in the system but to install in the laptop, it was new chore once again.
Regards,
Rony. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
On Friday 19 May 2006 11:25, jtd wrote:
Ruuubbissssh. Read my earlier post on kids and comps.
Heh. If what we're talking is so rubbish then why isn't every computer running KDE? Why are so many people dependent on the XP UI? Why do people rate XP's UI better than KDE / GNOME ? And why does KDE keep adding XMMS in nonsensical places in the menus? :/ Umm...jtd, no offense but the first step to improve is to accept ones shortcomings. The Linux desktop offerings arent going to get any better if we try to mould people into doing the things our way rather we should adopt the software to do things their way and then slowly transition them :/
In the end it doesnt matter if Linux can do everything including walking your dog, if users aren't attracted and feel at home with our desktop offerings then its senseless to add features _we_ feel are useful. If you're going to shove unwanted features down a users throat then he will just format his disk and move over to something else. Give him what _he_ wants!
Microsoft isn't all that evil. The Linux community can learn some things from Microsoft....well....atleast the Microsoft of the 1990s.
P.S.: I read your earlier post on kids and comps. Well, catch 'em young is what even M$ is doing currently. But the vast majority need to _transition_ from the Win platform to the Linux platform! :/
On Saturday 20 May 2006 05:00, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Friday 19 May 2006 11:25, jtd wrote:
Ruuubbissssh. Read my earlier post on kids and comps.
Heh. If what we're talking is so rubbish then why isn't every computer running KDE? Why are so many people dependent on the XP UI? Why do people rate XP's UI better than KDE / GNOME ? And why does KDE keep adding XMMS in nonsensical places in the menus? :/ Umm...jtd, no offense but the first step to improve is to accept ones shortcomings. The Linux desktop offerings arent going to get any better if we try to mould people into doing the things our way rather we should adopt the software to do things their way and then slowly transition them :/
I migrated from Windows XP to RH 9. I thought Gnome sucked and KDE rocked. Now I don't think Gnome sucks, I'm pretty much used to it, but after using KDE for so long, I find the XP UI boring and it doesn't let me customise as much as I want to. KDE allows me that. Seriously, I can't live without KDE now.
I think the problem, if you can call it that, with KDE, is that it is too customisable. Meaning, there are just too many options everywhere. This could (and probably does, I wouldn't know) intimidate newbies. Now, didn't I hear this exact argument about KDE 4? IIRC, developers were discussing how to present a decent number of options to the users upfront and maybe move the more advanced options, which are not _required_ somewhere else, so as to clean up the UI.
Anyway, I like KDE and the way it functions. I'm not sure how much I'd like it if it tried to force me to change to allow some newbies easier migration. Why should I sacrifice my comfort because some newbie needs to be spoon-fed? Isn't this like proprietary software? Software telling me what to do and changing my habits, rather than the other way around. I would rather have it keep doing what it does best, the way it does it, because I'm used to it. Surely, as an old (!) user, I deserve some attention. What's more important, adding new users and losing the current ones or keeping the current ones and on top of that adding any new users _that might want to come along_.
Seriously, why are we talking in a language that reads "People _must_ use Linux". Shouldn't it be,"People who want to use Linux, should use Linux. Those who don't, shouldn't." What will you gain by making a Windows lover use Linux and then have him blame it because it doesn't function the way Windows does? I like the way KDE works, I don't want it to work the way Windows does. If some wannabe user of KDE has a problem with that, he's free to keep using Windows. Why do want to force a change in KDE just because you want to make that user use KDE instead of Windows. Where's the choice? I do not want to transition to Windows way of things again, when I'm using KDE.
This is like saying, make Linux work exactly like Windows. We'll attract a lot more people that way. Seriously, would you still use Linux if it worked like Windows?
In the end it doesnt matter if Linux can do everything including walking your dog, if users aren't attracted and feel at home with our desktop offerings then its senseless to add features _we_ feel are useful.
Why? I want some feature. I need it. I want it to be added. Again, why should the existing user base sacrifice?
If you're going to shove unwanted features down a users throat then he will just format his disk and move over to something else. Give him what _he_ wants!
Sure, but I do want what I want too.
Microsoft isn't all that evil. The Linux community can learn some things from Microsoft....well....atleast the Microsoft of the 1990s.
Sure. But what it should not unlearn is the habit of making the software work perfectly first, rather than just being attractive to attract loads of users.
P.S.: I read your earlier post on kids and comps. Well, catch 'em young is what even M$ is doing currently. But the vast majority need to _transition_ from the Win platform to the Linux platform! :/
*Shrugs*. I migrated and I don't want to migrate back to the old Windows way of things. Where's 'choice' and 'alternative'? I want to be able to things differently from Windows. KDE allows me that. Do I want KDE to work like Windows too?
-- Dinesh A. Joshi
On Saturday 20 May 2006 05:00 am, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Friday 19 May 2006 11:25, jtd wrote:
Ruuubbissssh. Read my earlier post on kids and comps.
Heh. If what we're talking is so rubbish then why isn't every computer running KDE? Why are so many people dependent on the XP UI? Why do people rate XP's UI better than KDE / GNOME ? And why does KDE keep adding XMMS in nonsensical places in the menus? :/
There are a whole lot of reasons which have absolutely nothing to do with usability, ergonomics, eyecandy etc. it's more about illegal monopoly, money power yak yak. Siddesh mail abt 3 classes of users is a better clasification of desktop users. Within these groups there are further subdivisions. Software companies have already invested massive resources in entangling themselves in the M$edusa. Most will stay there slowly asphyxiating to death. A few will build apps on the GNU/Linux platform. And that is inded happening very rapidly. From the days when we had to struggle to get i810 boards running to a time when there is no M$ software which is 64bit ready.
Umm...jtd, no offense but the first step to improve is to accept ones shortcomings.
You are falling for the this-is-a-feature-not-bug syndrome, and presuming that since many are familiar with a particular mode of operation everything else should do so. I have extreme difficulty in doing anything at all on the XP crap, not to mention the fly by spyware feature. Why is M$ not switching itself to the provenly better development methodology or adopting the ODF format or ..... They cant
The Linux desktop offerings arent going to get any better if we try to mould people into doing the things our way rather we should adopt the software to do things their way and then slowly transition them :/
You are trying to play M$ game with their warped up rules. And like N numbers of companies before u are doomed. Just forget about M$ software and do your thing. Fight them on standards, performance, stability. These are the areas where thay have absolutely no legs to standon let alone run with.
In the end it doesnt matter if Linux can do everything including walking your dog, if users aren't attracted and feel at home with our desktop offerings then its senseless to add features _we_ feel are useful. If you're going to shove unwanted features down a users throat then he will just format his disk and move over to something else. Give him what _he_ wants!
Let him do so. Inspite of what you say switching over is happening at an extraordinary pace and will conitnue exponentially.
Microsoft isn't all that evil.
Bom Jesus! perish the thought. Archangels will bow to the holiest of holies HM Billbaba and 40040 chors. Those pissy EU judges simply cannot see billybaba's reality and are being misled by a bunch o commie anticapitalistas.
The Linux community can learn some things from Microsoft....well....atleast the Microsoft of the 1990s.
Like how to kill friends and influenza people. Or perhaps how to rob joeand pay him pennies if he hits the courts. Or how to magically create software with Gary Kidall's code. Come on DJ u know better.
P.S.: I read your earlier post on kids and comps. Well, catch 'em young is what even M$ is doing currently.
U are right. But that was not the point. The point was that the alleged weakness of linux ui v/s M$ ui is a pre bias caused by exposure to M$. Both i/f are equally intutive to an unbiased user. Even to computer illeterate kids BSOD in the middle of a game is no no (madhech bandh padto).
But the vast majority need to _transition_ from the Win platform to the Linux platform!
Many will after suffering at the hands of the beast. One developer group whom I had lectured to agreed with my rant but did not transistion. That was a year ago. Yesterday i happened to meet the project leader. After struggling for a year with win2003 server, MS SQL and IIS they are switching over to GNU/Linux - one month after having lost the contract to me. Plenty of cries of pain from them as they switch over and I dont know if they will stay the course. If they dont they WILL bite the dust.
P.S.: I read your earlier post on kids and comps. Well, catch 'em young is what even M$ is doing currently.
U are right. But that was not the point. The point was that the alleged weakness of linux ui v/s M$ ui is a pre bias caused by exposure to M$. Both i/f are equally intutive to an unbiased user. Even to computer illeterate kids BSOD in the middle of a game is no no (madhech bandh padto).
I agree, today two kids came over to my house. I showed them KAtomic and they loved playing it. They had never seen linux before but they knew from using windows that the menu is in the bottom-left, they didn't even ask me what this other system was. Kids are ready to accept change since they are still growing, its only the adults who will not. They even loved amor a lot. Who says kids want only windows.
Nikhil
On 5/20/06, Nikhil Marathe nsm.nikhil@gmail.com wrote:
I agree, today two kids came over to my house. I showed them KAtomic and they loved playing it. They had never seen linux before but they knew from using windows that the menu is in the bottom-left, they didn't even ask me what this other system was. Kids are ready to accept change since they are still growing, its only the adults who will not. They even loved amor a lot. Who says kids want only windows.
Nikhil
You and we all know - Change is evil - It is better to accept change(s) than living with more Evil M$.
Come on guys, Usability comes at second stage - things need to be Free and Open first.
On Thursday 18 May 2006 01:38 pm, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
I recently coaxed my mother and sister (both very regular windows users since the last 4-5 years) to move to linux. I set up the system for them and showed them where the apps they wanted were (openoffice, firefox, ).
THAT is the key. Setting up and hand holding the defector. If u are not available when the defector is stuck he will reboot into familiar territory. The incentive to switch is the disincentive of the ad nauseum window problems - but the pressure to get things done is much more. And from a business point of view handholding for weeks a defector is a total drain. OTOH handholding a newbie on ANY os is an equal pain. So much for "user friendly" UIs.
All the eye candy, userfriendlyness etc. arguments are basically individual bias. The "research" is an extension of the bias in a particular direction - M$, Mac, KDE, Gnome whatever. So we dont have a better pointing device than the mouse, and no better data input method than the keyboard. I had conducted informal tests several yrs (2000 afair) ago with many kids in the neighbourhood some familiar with windows, most completely un familiar with PCs. ALL were equally at ease with KDE, GNOME and Enlightenment. They happily booted into both to play their game of the day. I had minimal interaction with them. However my 6 yr old nephew was always watching us use the PC and i suspect that he was the "trainer".
As Philip points out developer priorities are different from those of users and in the GNU world usually at odds with short term marketing goals. Computing and software are relatively immature industries. Things should (and have ) improve much more rapidly in an open environment than in a closed one.
-
Arun K. Khan -
Devdas Bhagat -
Dinesh Joshi -
jtd -
Kartik Mistry -
Mrugesh Karnik -
Nikhil Marathe -
Philip Tellis -
ronbillypop＠yahoo.co.uk -
Saswata Banerjee & Associates -
Satya -
Siddhesh Poyarekar