Why Linux On Desktop Failed: A Discussion With Mark Shuttleworth

vallor wrote:

"Slimer", AKA Rabid Rogue wrote:

vallor wrote:

"Slimer", AKA Rabid Rogue wrote:

Still, I like having access to movies and music for purchase and Linux
fails miserably in that respect

Not sure what you're talking about.

Digital purchases. I suppose that some people are completely against
DRM-protected movies and would rather purchase the disc, but I see no
disadvantage to buying from iTunes which has the best selection I've
ever seen.

I'm not sure Amazon lets you download a movie, but you can stream for-pay
movies on Linux. Same with NetFlix.

I use a Linux laptop to put movies in my watch list, then play them on
the Sony Blueray player (which supports Amazon and Netflix, among other
things).

You see, according to Slimer, "Linux fails miserably" because it
doesn't run iTunes.

What a dip****.

--
"[Hirohito's] request was fair and the Americans should have treated
him fairly as well. However, as we all know when dealing with
leftists..." - "Slimer", claiming "liberals bad", because the US
demanded Japan's unconditional surrender (I couldn't make this stuff
up, folks.)

"Weatherman" wrote

| LEGAL movies.
|
| Where I live, downloading for personal use is legal.

Interesting. A place with no copyright law. China?
Your English is very good.

Mayayana wrote:
"Weatherman" wrote

| LEGAL movies.
|
| Where I live, downloading for personal use is legal.

Interesting. A place with no copyright law. China?
Your English is very good.



Spain and I speak English well because am from the USA. The record/film
industry has taken folks to court 15 times and 15 times the judges ruled
that personal use in not a crime. Now if I download an album of the
Stones, for example, and burn DVDs and go out on the street to sell
them, *that* is illegal.

Il 16/09/19 13:59, chrisv ha scritto:
Soviet_Mario wrote:

Il 13/09/19 20:05, chrisv ha scritto:
Soviet_Mario wrote:

again the variety is a strong enemy.

It is not. Variety is an asset.

I'm not gonna deny this point in general (variety is
resilience under the attack of problems) but I don't think
here is much relevant, as here we hope to find solutions
rather than sources of problems.

Then we'll wave our magic wands, and implement that solution, right?

futile irony


So a "defensive" stance is a problem in itself, a symptom
that we are in a unhealthy environment.

Nope. Just the opposite, in fact.

disagree.


There are in the FOSS
too many variants, each rather limited, and versatile as a
whole, which need a lot of exploration just to be
discovered, as nobody makes them known out of the official
distro repository.

I don't think that anyone denies that some people, "newbies" in
particular, would like less variety, more "standardization". This is
true in many markets.

I think the problem is not variety in itself, but
fragmentation of resources which prevent the aggregation of
a "critical mass" of skill necessary to reach a high quality
of the software. Complex, serious software is too difficult
for half a dozen heads. Simple is not a problem.

I think the problem is trolls

when one has weak arguments, he resorts to disqualify the
interlocutor with "troll" label.

who think that they know better than
everyone else, what should be done.

everyone has the right to have opinions and report it

They think that they could "plan
better" than a free market.

FOSS in not much of a market in a strict sense, but a
volunteer cooperation, and as such surely deserve
acknowledgment in itself.

Anyway you seem to oppose the concept of "critical mass" in
itself


However, we can't forget that, for many people, that would not work.
Many people benefit from the more customized, optimized environment
that FOSS allows.

I was not referring to the OS actually, but to big client sw.
Some FOSS are big enough to be state-of-the-art (Libre
Office, Mozilla, and others). But there are a lot of
programs backed by a few developers which never reach true
maturity in the sense the common user mean.

Well then, choose a different vendor.

the fact of outlining some drawbacks does not mean one
consider those so critical to discard the FOSS.
Just to not be a "pasdaran" with blind eyes

I still prefer FOSS for freedom and absence of spyware.
But I often see not top quality.
It's not a general truth : some FOSS are even better than
sold counterparts.
In file compression utility I've found in linux programs
faster and more resilient that any windows counterparts.
Also disk management utilities are both stronger, broader
and faster.
Sheet music also seems to offer very high level open SW

in CAD the reverse is true. In the chemical area which I
used to use a lot, the difference is still greater, even
free vs free. Evidently serious developer have neglected
linux deliberately.




Just because some people would like less choice, it doesn't mean that
there is too much choice. Some people would like even more!

I agree, the problem is not the choice in itself, but the
fact it very often goes at the expense of quality.

Obviously, the market is OK with that trade-off.

and I am too, but that don't imply I'have to omit to mention
drawbacks. I find it hypocritical.


tens/hundreds of programs doing more or less the same thing,
none doing it perfectly, insted of "some" very complete
doing it very well.

Sounds like just about every other market on the planet.

nope : in the highest ranked sw areas just a few firms can
top the rank.

in niche areas the pressure is smaller, but also "investments"

Why should
this one be different?


FOSS is not a true market, both for the absence of sure
revenue, and for the absence of proper copyright
There the humans are rather free to organize in the forms
they prefer. But if you produce a "****" of piece of SW for
free, noone would complain. And you'll not go bankrupt cause
you're supposed to have another reveue to live on other than
that piece of ****
Different logics


--
1) Resistere, resistere, resistere.
2) Se tutti pagano le tasse, le tasse le pagano tutti
Soviet_Mario - (aka Gatto_Vizzato)

"Weatherman" wrote

| Spain and I speak English well because am from the USA. The record/film
| industry has taken folks to court 15 times and 15 times the judges ruled
| that personal use in not a crime. Now if I download an album of the
| Stones, for example, and burn DVDs and go out on the street to sell
| them, *that* is illegal.

Thanks for the explanation. I didn't know about that.
I wonder how many other countries are similar. It is
a weird scenario. Copyright has been extended so much
that almost everything going back 100 years is still owned
by someone. E-books are nothing more than poorly
designed rental media, yet with costs comparable to
printed books. I can't get a movie online legally, but
I can stream it very cheap. And I can get if for free at
the local library. (Which is mostly what I do these days.
I can't be bothered to set up streaming and I don't want
to do it illegally. I'd rather get the DVD.)

If libraries were created for the first time today they'd
be regarded as a commie plot and quickly banned.

Today in the NYT editorial page there was a piece from
a college professor who discovered many of his students
were downloading illegal copies of a textbook. He found out
because when he asked them to opem to page x, there was
no page x in the illegal copies.

The professor goes on to complain about how the kids
don't understand they're stealing from authors. All of his
complaints are true. As a shareware author I know that most
people won't pay if they can avoid it. But what the professor
doesn't mention is that the public were trained to this.
Overpriced books. Overpriced ebooks. Wildly overpriced
software. Apple music at $1 a song with embedded spyware
ID. Scams and spyware. The "intellectual property
industry" has been consistently exploitive and dishonest.
Especially when it came to online media and software.

Why did people pass around their MS Office and Photoshop
CDs 20 years ago? Because the companies were charging
10 times what the product was worth. But also because it's
hard to exactly define fair use. Since the companies try
to define it in the most exploitive terms possible, the customers
tend to respond with equal sleaze. And now the public have
been trained to that system.

Soviet_Mario wrote:

FOSS is not a true market, both for the absence of sure
revenue, and for the absence of proper copyright
There the humans are rather free to organize in the forms
they prefer.

That's the error of your thinking. It is absolutely a "true market".

Just as in any market, FOSS must be "profitable", i.e. worth the cost
to produce/maintain, or it will fade-away.

It matters not, if "money" actually changes hands.

Humans are *not* "rather free" to defy market forces, which are
already working to allocate resources in this market.

--
'My view is very simple : too much "choice" is a bad thing.' - "True
Linux advocate" Hadron Quark

On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 16:15:45 +0200
Soviet_Mario wrote:

everyone has the right to have opinions and report it

That is Just Not SO.

Everyone has a right to informed and rational opinions. Uninformed
and/or irrational opinions aren't really opinions, just animistic
feelings with no basis in fact and, therefore, not worthy of discussion
or even consideration.

Unfortunately, most 'opinions' fall into the latter category.

--
Cybe R. Wizard

My other computer is a HOLMES IV with the Mycroft OS
My other car is a Chandler MetalSmith Mark III

On 9/16/2019 10:12 AM, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 16:15:45 +0200
Soviet_Mario wrote:

everyone has the right to have opinions and report it

That is Just Not SO.

Everyone has a right to informed and rational opinions. Uninformed
and/or irrational opinions aren't really opinions, just animistic
feelings with no basis in fact and, therefore, not worthy of discussion
or even consideration.

Unfortunately, most 'opinions' fall into the latter category.


That is true. Trying to find the actual facts won't be found here.
You have to look into the actual companies history, and even most of the
times it was written by an apologist for that company.

Il 16/09/19 18:12, Cybe R. Wizard ha scritto:
On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 16:15:45 +0200
Soviet_Mario wrote:

everyone has the right to have opinions and report it

That is Just Not SO.

Everyone has a right to informed and rational opinions. Uninformed
and/or irrational opinions aren't really opinions, just animistic
feelings with no basis in fact and, therefore, not worthy of discussion
or even consideration.

Unfortunately, most 'opinions' fall into the latter category.


then explain why mine do not fulfill YOUR standard of
rationality

--
1) Resistere, resistere, resistere.
2) Se tutti pagano le tasse, le tasse le pagano tutti
Soviet_Mario - (aka Gatto_Vizzato)

On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:47:07 +0200
Soviet_Mario wrote:

Il 16/09/19 18:12, Cybe R. Wizard ha scritto:
On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 16:15:45 +0200
Soviet_Mario wrote:

everyone has the right to have opinions and report it

That is Just Not SO.

Everyone has a right to informed and rational opinions. Uninformed
and/or irrational opinions aren't really opinions, just animistic
feelings with no basis in fact and, therefore, not worthy of
discussion or even consideration.

Unfortunately, most 'opinions' fall into the latter category.


then explain why mine do not fulfill YOUR standard of rationality

What?

Where/when have I denied the rationality of your views (no matter
how misguided they might be)?

--
Cybe R. Wizard

My other computer is a HOLMES IV with the Mycroft OS
My other car is a Chandler MetalSmith Mark III

Il 17/09/19 08:41, Cybe R. Wizard ha scritto:
On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:47:07 +0200
Soviet_Mario wrote:

Il 16/09/19 18:12, Cybe R. Wizard ha scritto:
On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 16:15:45 +0200
Soviet_Mario wrote:

everyone has the right to have opinions and report it

That is Just Not SO.

Everyone has a right to informed and rational opinions. Uninformed
and/or irrational opinions aren't really opinions, just animistic
feelings with no basis in fact and, therefore, not worthy of
discussion or even consideration.

Unfortunately, most 'opinions' fall into the latter category.


then explain why mine do not fulfill YOUR standard of rationality

What?

Where/when have I denied the rationality of your views (no matter
how misguided they might be)?


I've thought it was implicit in the structure of the thread.
You've replied to my post, thus I deemed you were referring
to myself



--
1) Resistere, resistere, resistere.
2) Se tutti pagano le tasse, le tasse le pagano tutti
Soviet_Mario - (aka Gatto_Vizzato)

Rabid Rogue wrote:
On 2019-09-14 4:56 p.m., F Russell wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 20:30:12 +0000, Frank Slootweg wrote:

FYI, I've been - mostly professionally - supporting, managing and
using (real) UNIX systems for three decades, but for my private/
personal/whatever use, Windows is the only realistic choice,

You are an antiquated "has been" of a bygone generation.

Beat it, grandpa. Go shopping for a funeral casket.

GNU/Linux has been king of the hill for many, many years now
but your decrepit, semi-comatose brain has been unable to fathom
that basic fact.

Micro$oft Windoze has no excuse for existence. It is being kept
alive by totally incompetent and crippled idiots like you.

When it comes to TRUE and COMPREHENSIVE superiority, it is all
inherent in the designation of GNU/Linux.

Now go and change your oxygen bottle.

Asshole idiot.

Ladies and gentlemen, your typical Linux advocate.

Yes, and ain't it hilarious that it proves the validity of the very
"And I indeed encountered the obnoxious and pompous attitude of some of
the 'Linux community' that was mentioned in this thread." comment I
made!?

BTW, Linux advocate is fine by me, Linux zealot - or whatever zealot
for that matter - no so much.