On Thursday 23 September 2004 16:25, Lanman wrote: > Feel free to get as annoyed as you want, but I beg to differ on some of > your points of view. Still, I respect the fact that you have a right to > them, and I'm not saying that mine is better than yours but consider > this,...
Differences are what makes the world an interesting place. > I find that many times, scripts are written from the personal point of > view. That is, from the perspective of a person who has done several > installs of a program, and has prepared the system in advance. Many > things which would normally be included in a script file, are omitted on > purpose - since the person writing the script didn't need it for their > own install (assuming that their database or apache config had already > been completed), or by accident simply due to the fact that the script > writer felt that anyone using the script would have already done these > preparations. I can think of a multitude of other reasons, all of which > would point to the human-factor. We have nothing to disagree about here. Again, I was suggesting that the script be used as a guide. See their steps, figure out if something is missing and fill in the blanks. I always keep in mind that an RPM usually installs the necessary files but doesn't necessarily configure the environment. I have worked with a lot of packages so far that needed to be configured after I installed the RPM, I don't count on those to be one-stop installations. > You can count me into the "Others" category here. Helping others is one > of the way that my company contributes back to the Linux community. I > make it the responsibility of every employee to contribute something, > even though I'm the one paying their salaries while they're out helping > on a volunteer basis. They select the person or persons or groups they > will assist and we allot a salary incentive to those staff members who > can track and vouch for that time. > > When I "waltz" in and ask for help, I'm not asking for a lecture or > perspective on whether or not the help is "billable" or not. I've taken > hours and days out of my time to help others on this list (past and > present), and will continue to do so in the future. For me, it's not > always a question of money. If you're curious, I'd be willing to send > you a short list of some of the most recent times I've helped others. I don't really need one, and I am not questioning whether you have contributed or helped someone. I am questioning the tone of your second message that was basically, if I can't get this to work and no one helps me to get it working, then Gnu/Linux isn't <insert FUD phrase here>. First of all, whether ogo works or not is no reflection on Linux. Second, whether or not that particular package works for you is not a reflection of anything more than that that particular package is not working for you. I never fault anything else first before I fault myself. That said, I have often come out vigorously against people who have seemed to suggest that if they didn't get what they wanted, then somehow Linux was at fault and it was not worth bothering with. I still find the tone of such a suggestion infuriating. > Fortunately for both of us, I wasn't saying "I can't get something to > work, can someone give me exact instructions to make it work in my > environment, with my installed software, telling me exactly what to do", > I was asking if anyone had managed to get it working in Mandrake and > whether they could help or not. If you need a reminder of that, I'll be > happy to re-post my original message. I remember the first message, and I will note that I did not GRRR until you posted your second one. "Like I said in my previous post, I fail to see why anyone would bother to make and include the RPM's for something that can't be installed easily. If Linux is going to make a bigger dent in the world, it's going to have to fix this � type of problem." > FYI, I consider 4 days sufficient time. Well, you know your own levels of expertise better than do I. Usually, I get something working the first time and then calculate sufficient time in future against the baseline. For what it is worth, my first Linux installation/configuration took about 6 months before I got things working well enough that I felt comfortable dumping Windows entirely. YMMV. > However, like any smart > consumer, I am not about to buy a package or pay for support for > something that I haven't seen, and I would hope that you wouldn't > either. All I've seen are a few screen shots which don't tell me whether > or not the product is stable or flexible or how customizable it may be. No, I probably wouldn't myself. Then again, I am not in need of an enterprise level groupware application and my understanding is that enterprises who are in that market do so all the time. Not that it is a good idea, mind you, but they do buy them sight unseen. However, for the record, the web site has an image of a Live-CD based on Knoppix that they say that you can pop into a CD-Drive, boot the machine up and then immediately use for testing and demo purposes. Would this not serve that particular purpose for you? > I can relate to your points here, but again it brings me back to the > point that if the script file can't find these answers or ask the person > installing it for the answers, then they should make a point of locking > down the dependencies so that it's easier to install. I've seen many > scripts do exactly that, and they have worked flawlessly for me and > probably for many others. Well, to be fair, many applications are installed much more often than are enterprise level groupware apps so it is possible that over time, those scripts were able to be polished. More use, usually means better anticipation for deviation. Also, the more complex a package is, the harder it is to tailor an installation script that works out of box. But, I am repeating myself. Fact is, some of these scripts were built by people for themselves, not necessarily for the use of others. One shouldn't expect them to have anticipated anything really. > This makes perfect sense, since they are written for XFree and not > necessarily for Xorg, even though the two are relatively > interchangeable. No, the Nvidia script fails while trying to compile the driver, xorg has nothing to do with it. Just pointing out that the most polished of installation scripts can sometimes bork on something that we might consider relatively easy to handle, even when it has handled it in the past. > > And install scripts for Microsoft Exchange might be easier than ogo as > > well. That is very much totally beside the point. You are not working > > with those packages or those developers, you are working with ogo. > > Well, since I'm not now, nor never have used MS Exchange, despite > acquiring and maintaining my MCSE status for the last 6 years, but my > point was simply that programs that install on MS-Based PC's and Servers > are specifically written so that installation and configuration are as > easy as possible. With all the additional functionality and power than > Linux and Open-Source provide, putting together a clearly defined list > of dependencies (Ie; MySQL and PostgreSQL, Apache 1.3.X and Apache2) > would narrow down the variations in the script file, thereby alloowing > the writer to put a single, comprehensive install script together. After > all, it's not like we're unfamiliar with dependencies, now are we? And the point that I made still stands. When you have a multi-variable environment, it is harder to anticipate. When you have a unified environment, it is easier. When you are being paid to deliver ease of installation, that is what you deliver. When you are being paid to develop new features, that is what you deliver. Every single thing in life involves making trade-offs and this is simply one of them. > Feel free to handle that in any which way you like, but tone or no tone, > I expect certain things to work. If they don't I'll take some very > expensive time and try to make it work. If I can't, I'll then ask for > help, and yes, maybe I'll vent a little about what I perceive as the > problem. Well, I consider this part of the price we pay for an absolutely stunning and "free as in speech" product. So, my personal frustration is always tempered by my appreciation. And, nothing personal, but my usual response to venting about the quality of the gift that I use and supremely enjoy is along the lines of David Spade's steward(ess) character on SNL: "Buh-bye" > Whether or not you or I or anyone else in the Linux community likes it > or not, Linux will be getting compared to Microsoft-based products for > some time to come. That's just the reality of it. Certainly, and I personally feel that they compare very well. Just not on the same points. You don't compare a Formula 1 to a Bentley by noting that the suspension on the race car is stiffer and that there is more noise. Or you just end up looking like a complete idiot. Not that people looking like complete idiots is newsworthy or anything. > Consumers are more concerned about getting it to > work quickly and easily than they are about our perspectives on which is > better. Then they should BUY a product then. Buy a computer with Linux preloaded or pay someone to come and install and configure it for them. Then they will get quicker and easier. If they want better, reflecting their own needs and uses, cheaper, customized, then perhaps they should consider investing the effort to do things themselves. If all the consumer wants is quicker and easier, then let them eat MS. It is very quick and supremely easy. > The trick is to make Linux easier. Sorry, I simply don't agree. If making it easier means sacrificing features, freedom, customization, then I don't want it to be any easier. (We can, of course, argue about this point, but bottom line, every minute spent on improving ease of use is a minute not spent on features, customization, etc. Some ease of use is necessary, but making something so easy that a braindead consumer can do it, is not only unnecessary but, IMO, it should cost money for the consumer, they should provide something. And a lot of the ease of use currently being discussed involves standards and unifying the platforms and that will inevitably reduce security, customization, etc unless it proves impossible.) If you can get easier without sacrificing in any other area, then I am fine with it, but, and this is most important to me, I have no right to DEMAND anything unless I am willing to do it myself or pay someone to do it for me. > It's already better than the > commercial closed-source alternatives - no question. But it needs to > surpass, not to be the same. > > > Linux requires more effort than something that you buy from someone. > > That is the nature of it. Comparing a free product that was given to you > > with a product that earned the authors millions of dollars in revenue is > > simply not a material comparison. Give me money and I have an incentive > > to make you happy. Give me nothing, and my only incentive is what makes > > me happy. If that also makes you happy, then great, if not, oh well. > > Your absolutely right about Linux requiring more effort, but my point is > that it doesn't necessarily have to require more effort. Well, we will just have to disagree about that. Either it requires more effort or it requires more resources. One or the other. You don't get something for nothing. > Linux is/was > developed by technical people with technical minds and perspectives. > This was/is a necessary part of the whole process. But Linux needs > people who are just regular people, who can look at it and say that this > or that is too complicated and needs to be made easier. If the technical > powers that be are smart enough to pay attention to that, we'll see a > faster adoption of Linux throughout the world. We are already seeing the commercialization of Linux, Sun has announced plans to compete against Linux and MS is in the process of redefining Linux from a free/better software method, design architecture to just another software company (IBM) so they have a target to go to battle with. I don't necessarily agree that that is the right path to go down. Obviously, there is room for disagreement about that as you seem to be sitting on the other side. If you redefine Linux to be just like MS, you are going to have to sacrifice what makes Linux special and ultimately gives Steve Jobs and Bill Gates the night sweats and you will end up with just another company going head to head against a business that has crushed all of its competition ruthlessly up to now. If that is the future, I just may have to go the Debian route and become religious. > But to be more specific, the fact that OGO is included as a significant > or even a contributed application implies that it should be ready and > able to install with little help, not that it should be virtually > useless. From a common sense standpoint, why bother making Mandrake > specific RPM's if it doesn't work? Look, I can configure, make and build source and produce RPM's automatically using Checkinstall. Doesn't mean that because someone did it and contributed the RPM's that they were vouching for the completeness of the install package. Fact is that the reason that they are in contrib and not in the official repository is because no one was willing to vouch for it. > You implied that it has to do with the fact that I've made a mistake, > since the author of the script got it to work, but looking at the > script, it seems fairly simple, and yet 4 of my developers who are far > smarter than you AND I put together could figure it out either. Well, you could start with the Live-CD version, get it up and running and then go and look at the configurations that they are using to see how they have it running and then compare to yours. Not that you need me to tell you how to do things but I know a lot of developers who are absolute idiot's when it comes to troubleshooting and diagnosing problems. That is why QA people like me have jobs. Or at least that is what I tell myself with when the nightmares of homelessness come. > So, while I can understand your views, I also see that you haven't tried > installing it which means that you don't know what the difficulties are > any more than I do. > > There is no such thing as a free lunch. And that is not a poor > > reflection on Linux/OS, it is merely the reality of the world that > > Linux/OS resides in. > > Well, here we are at a crossroads again. The world that the Linux OS > resides in IS a Microsoft world. That's just a fact that we have to deal > with. None of us like it much, but that's the way it is. Until Linux > dominates the OS world and Open-Source applications dominate the > software world, we'll just have to bear the stress on our collective > shoulders. Again, we violently diverge. Linux is not about crushing Microsoft or becoming a dominant player. Linux is about choice. Co-existence. Options. Go peddle the "we need to do this to beat MS stuff" to the anti-MS zealots, that is not what it is about to a lot of us who are dedicated to Linux. The whole philosophy of free software is not about beating MS. It is about being free to choose what works for you. > In order to succeed, it will have to show the world how MUCH better it > is. Until it becomes more install and config and user friendly, the > battle will be a lot harder than it NEEDS to be. End of story. Again, IMO, you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. 180 degrees different from my viewpoint and I suspect, Linus Torvald's, Richard Stallman's and many of the biggest forces behind Linux and free software. > I don't have a problem with your "free lunch" point of view, since I pay > for virtually everything as it is. But I'm not going to buy OGO or > anything else without seeing it perform and without knowing the ins and > outs of the install and configuration process. No one should have to. If they download the Live-CD and they shouldn't have to. > I'll tell you something that may shock you, and anyone who can't handle > the truth should plug their ears and close their eyes, cuz it won't be > pretty. People don't want that much choice. Of course, I'm not talking > about us Linux newbies, experts, geeks or guru's, but about the general > consumers. They certainly don't want as much choice as Linux and > open-Source provides. Yes, they do. They want to be able to choose to buy something that just works and that doesn't require any learning. Others want to be able to get something that requires learning but works better. Still others want something that is complicated and works fantastically, like it reads your mind. The diverse marketplace is a reflection of what people want. Every time someone tells me what people want or don't want, I automatically write them off as hopelessly clueless. There is nothing in this world that someone, somewhere didn't want. If this is a vibrant, thriving marketplace of ideas, software, etc., it is because that is what people want. If they don't want choice, we would probably all still be running Unix. <rest snipped because I found it useless> > Calm down Bryan. You're gonna wear out the G & R keys on your keyboard! Lanman, if I thought you were a total troll, I would simply ignore it. It is when someone that I think is reasonable spouts what I think is totally unreasonable stuff that I get irritated. > First, I used the word "apparently", which means that it's not > necessarily the case. Secondly, I return to my statement about being > able to test and evaluate the O-S version before buying the commercial > version. I have NO problem with buying a good product, but unfortunately > I can't determine if it's good or not and you already know why. Thirdly, > it would also be a good idea if they considered selling the install > script for a small fee instead of only including it in the commercial > version, if my previous statement holds water. To answer your points 1. Perhaps, but it is immaterial 2. You can't possibly have done very much research without noticing the Live-CD link. So, I have to assume that either you didn't research it or you couldn't get the Live-CD to work. Which is it? 3. Unless they have bundled support alongside the installation script which they would hardly offer for a small fee depending on how much might be needed. Many companies bundle support with their commercial GPL offerings for very good (financial) reasons and I don't see anything wrong with that, in practice or in spirit of the GPL. The GPL was always about free speech, never about free beer. > But even I have to face reality and deal with the real world, and that > world is a Microsoft one. Sun Tzu said: In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy them. - Sun Tzu > I'm very good at showing clients why Linux is > better. Part of my job is to evaluate the possible solutions out there, > and to define an easy installation and procedural process for any new > products we take on. If I can't install it for testing purposes, I'm not > going to consider it as a viable option. If my developers can't get it > to work, then it's not going to be easy for my technical or sales staff > to sell or maintain. That is what will hurt Linux and O-S software in > the long run. The inability for the general consumers to try it for > themselves before buying it. Plain and simple. The fact that OGO is > either missing a clear and precise installation document or simply > doesn't work without some significant step that seems to be missing, > means it's not quite there yet. End of story. Yeah, I got that point, however I still don't understand this lack of trying the Live-CD. You really need to clear that up for me. > Looks like your two cents turned out to be wooden nickels Bryan. There > was NO reason to be insulting or demeaning in your reply. I asked for > help not for judgments. Well, I will grant that you asked for help the first time out. The second time, however, I disagree. You were making judgements and I just reflected those back at you. > Perhaps you should reconsider your comments. Okay, done. I stand by what I said. If you think that Linux will die if only it doesn't fulfill what you have stated that it needs to do, which if I read correctly, is to replace Microsoft in all things, then I disagree and think that you are misguided at best and dangerous to my own vision of what I want at worst. If I thought that the powers that be were going to take your counsel and trod down that path, I would immediately begin looking for some other OS that would stick with technical excellence and free as in speech, as the primary goals with quality, security, features, performance, and ease of use coming in dead last. > I > deal in the real world, and it would be nice if you did too. Well, I do. I work in the software world and have to deal with the problems caused by monolithic software structures centered around ease of use. Linux has put a jump in my step and a sparkle in my eye that was almost squashed out by having to deal with people convinced that they could be stupid because the software they used encouraged it. I am not eager to go back down that road again. I would rather raise sheep. > We're in > for a hell of a fight against the Big Bad in Redmond, and it would be > nice if we could stop fighting amongst ourselves before we try to take > them on. MS may be fighting us but we are NOT fighting them. And discourse and disagreements, vigorously discussed makes us stronger, not weaker. If you go along to get along, you won't get very far at all. > No matter how good linux is or will become, it won't make a bit > of difference if the community as a whole is constantly at odds with > each other. Like the saying goes,... if you're not part of the > solutions, you're part of the problem. Well, we seem to both be pointing back at the other and saying that you are the problem. I guess that goes with the territory. -- Bryan Phinney
____________________________________________________ Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com Join the Club : http://www.mandrakeclub.com ____________________________________________________
