> On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 8:26 PM, Allen Brown <[email protected]> wrote: >> I am very interested in feedback. >> http://brown.armoredpenguin.com/~abrown/Linux/LinuxUbuntu.html > > Good start on a worthy project. Here is my constructive feedback on > the current draft: > > A fair number of typos. But those can be dealt with once you're past > the rough draft stage.
Yes. I was going cross-eyed yesterday after typing for too long. I will review it today. And thank you very much for your review. It is most excellent! > Suggested rewrite for following paragraph because of small > inaccuracies and language susceptible to libel charges: > > "Tired of supporting an illegal monopoly. Microshaft was convicted of > antitrust violations. However before action could be taken the company > bought politicians to get the charges dismissed in the USA. They have > been unable to do this in Europe and now face penalties in the EU." > > Tired of supporting a monopoly? Microsoft was found to have committed > antitrust violations in both the U.S. and the E.U. in regard to > Windows but in the U.S., an incoming new Administration backed off and > settled on terms extremely favorable to Microsoft. However, in the > E.U., no such lenience was shown. Stiff penalties and remedial > measures were imposed. Microsoft is now being prosecuted in the E.U. > on new antitrust charges involving a host of its other software > products, including its alleged undermining of open Web standards and > refusal to provide interoperability information for Microsoft Office > and software that interacts with Office. Thank you. I have taken your paragraph wholesale. I only changed Microsoft to Microshaft. I don't know if this subterfuge will provide any real protection against attack by their lawyers, but it is at least a fig-leaf. > Partial Explanation: > > The term "convicted" applies only to criminal matters. The Microsoft > prosecutions on both continents were civil proceedings. Also, there > are reasons to suspect that Microsoft bought politicians, but I'm > aware of no hard evidence that it did. Bribery of public officials is > also a serious crime. > > Allegations of crime involving dishonesty are, generally speaking, > actionable libel where the defendant bears the burden of proving truth > of the allegation as a defense. Such accusations are best avoided > unless one is actually prepared to prove truth. > > Also, on both continents Microsoft was found to have achieved its > monopoly lawfully but was instead found to have unlawfully maintained > it once achieved. With the penalties and remedial measures imposed, > the Windoze monopoly remains lawful (according to the courts; YMMV). > > My suggested rewrite accounts for those issues and corrects a few > minor factual errors. It should make the paragraph less of a lightning > rod. It's not as though there's high danger that Microsoft would sue > you, but the present language would forfeit credibility with folks > more acquainted with the paragraph's subject matter. The meat of your > publication is elsewhere; no need to offend sensibilities on what is a > tangential issue. Good points all. > I have some quarrel with the following paragraph as stated: > > "If you don't know anybody running Linux and are not technically > sophisticated, stay with Windoze. It will be too difficult for you. > Just stay with what's easy." [cut cut cut] > I recognize that you were discussing folks already using Windoze, but > raise the issue of their competence in doing so. Not all people who > use Windows have had a happy computing experience with it. All of this is true. But having tried to support my parents remotely I have come to realize how hard it is to do. I don't want to encourage people to switch unless they are ready and it looks like it won't turn out to be a bad experience for them. OTOH my parents had no Windoze experience. They came from a C64 background. It didn't provide much of a knowledge base to leverage from. OTOOH if somebody is currently using Windoze I assume they have developed some comfort with it, even if it continually annoys them. Linux has it's own annoyances. Combining that with learning something new can be too much. I don't want to oversell Linux. > I'm sure you're aware of such issues so won't belabor the point. But > for the folks who just want to browse the web, do email and chat, and > knock out the occasional letter, I think Linux is a far easier and > better solution for users. I've persuaded many such users whose > Windoze systems were running at a crawl to switch and installed > K/Ubuntu for them. They've uniformly been overjoyed with the switch. Also very good points. I think I should point this out on the page: that "the fewer applications and hardware you use on your computer the less painful the switch will be". I definitely want this to be a good experience for them. People talk. We want them to be happy with Linux. And doing this without hands-on is an order of magnitude more difficult. > I think the other factors you listed in that section are far more > meaty and less needful of nuance than the factor I address. > > "Q: But I can't afford to love Windoze. " Suggest deleting "can't > afford to" to make sense of the sentence in context. > > "Q: OK smarty-pants. If Linux is so great how come Windows has almost > all of the market? > A: Microshaft has one great strength. Marketing. Linux doesn't have a > marketing department but instead spreads by word of mouth." > > Maybe instead: > > Microsoft gained its monopoly by treating customers like victims to be > fleeced rather than as valued customers. For example, it made deals > with equipment manufacturers that forbade them supplying computers > equipped with other operating systems. It denied competitors the > information required to interoperate with Windoze and thus pose a > competitive threat. > > Microsoft also embraced and extended open standards to create > unnecessary interoperability barriers and quelch competitive threats. > Microsoft is also very skilled at marketing but is often far less than > forthright in its advertising. Linux doesn't have a marketing > department but instead spreads by word of mouth. Thank you. I edited this to dumb it down. But kept the stuff that I think they will understand. For instance we recognize the importance of interoperability. But n00bs don't even know what that is. And certainly won't know why a monopoly in particular has to be more liberal about it. > "Make sure the boot order in your BIOS will try CDs before the hard disk." > > You might look for a web page to link to that provides general > instructions on how to do this. Many people have no idea what a BIOS > even is let alone how to access it. Found a great one! > In the testing steps, you might add a new item between 5 and 6 > explaining that an OS running from CD will run far slower than it will > once installed. People who don't know that could give up at the point > they see the software execution speed running a Live CD. That was nagging at me as I wrote it. Thank you for reminding me. > On the list of hardware and software to test in paragraph 6, you might > consider adding a "How to Test" link after each that points to some > documentation, e.g., in user forums or in the Ubuntu documentation. What I did instead was to direct them to deviantart (my social networking site) where they can post questions. I will use the questions to determine where I need to add detail. Some of these could be painful to document. Others trivial. > In the same section, you might add a sentence to the end of 7 > explaining what to do if "Linux User Group mycity" produces no hits. > I.e., try it with the name of a larger city near you. > > Best regards, > Paul Thank you. I expanded that quite a bit. -- Allen Brown http://brown.armoredpenguin.com/~abrown/ There are those who would misteach us that to stick in a rut is consistency--and a virtue, and that to climb out of the rut is inconsistency--and a vice. ---Mark Twain _______________________________________________ EUGLUG mailing list [email protected] http://www.euglug.org/mailman/listinfo/euglug
