RE: IE in FreeBSD?
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of RW Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 5:40 AM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: IE in FreeBSD? On Wednesday 21 September 2005 19:00, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote: On Tuesday 20 September 2005 14:52, Ashley Moran wrote: RW wrote: Because it's common for companies and recruitment agencies to specify MS Word documents only. It's a de facto standard. I have never gotten grief when I tell the recruiter that I do not have Word and I do not support proprietary formats and then send a PDF. You are missing the point. If and when you *are* disadvantaged by using PDF, no-one will tell you. Since a recruiter makes money by placing candidates they aren't going to let a minor thing like the file format of the resume get in the way of finding qualified product - I mean people - to sell to their customers. And if they do, you as a candidate don't want to have anything to do with them because if they are that incompetent to deal with that simple of a thing they are going to certainly munge your placement. Since the HR people in a company almost always pretty much regard resumes as nuisance items to deal with - except for the few times in the year that they actually are under the gun to find someone - I can believe that some fat-assed old cow in a HR department might be willing to make a stink over the file format a resume is in. Ted ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
On Wednesday 21 September 2005 19:00, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote: On Tuesday 20 September 2005 14:52, Ashley Moran wrote: RW wrote: Because it's common for companies and recruitment agencies to specify MS Word documents only. It's a de facto standard. I have never gotten grief when I tell the recruiter that I do not have Word and I do not support proprietary formats and then send a PDF. You are missing the point. If and when you *are* disadvantaged by using PDF, no-one will tell you. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IE in FreeBSD?
You guys are relentless. geez. Write it on a napkin for christ's sake, and send it by homing pigeon. :-) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RW Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 8:40 AM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: IE in FreeBSD? On Wednesday 21 September 2005 19:00, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote: On Tuesday 20 September 2005 14:52, Ashley Moran wrote: RW wrote: Because it's common for companies and recruitment agencies to specify MS Word documents only. It's a de facto standard. I have never gotten grief when I tell the recruiter that I do not have Word and I do not support proprietary formats and then send a PDF. You are missing the point. If and when you *are* disadvantaged by using PDF, no-one will tell you. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IE in FreeBSD?
-Original Message- From: Frank Jahnke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 10:33 AM To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: IE in FreeBSD? One example: how do you suggest that complex forms in PDF format are filled out and saved on a FreeBSD system? PDF doesn't belong in complex forms that are filled out online. I didn't say these were filled on on line -- that can be done just fine with OSS or the free Adobe Reader products. What I was talking about was downloading PDF forms, filling them out locally, and saving them. Right now OSS and other free products can fill out forms and have them printed -- they cannot be saved. When the forms are 45 pages or more, treating the computer as a simple typewriter is just silly. You need to be able to go back and edit them. I know of no way to do that with anything other than a proprietary product, such as Acrobat. Well, people did this for years with textfiles before Adobe came along and convinced people that they couldn't use text to do this anymore. In any case if PDF is the issue, then yes you can do this, just download the PDF and edit it with Ghostscript and submit it back. That's fine: the documents I'm describing are downloaded, completed locally, signed, copied, and submitted (an original and six to eight copies). That your company does it differently is wonderful. I don't have a choice in this matter, if I wish to do business with this concern. And I do -- there are $24 billion in proposals that are funded annually that I would like to take part in. In many ways, this sums up the entire disagreement: I'm saying I have a need that I have to deal with. You are saying I shouldn't have that need if they did it properly. In this case, they don't. So I need to deal with it, and some Windows applications work just fine. I'd just like to run them on the computer where I do the majority of my work. I do think that there will remain a lot processing that is done locally, like the web browsing that started this whole thread off, particularly for smaller concerns such as mine. For smaller companies having desktops works well enough, and is probably a better use of resources. It is in my case, where the needs are rather diverse and complex. I think I see the issue here, to speak plainly. You know how to use Acrobat, you don't want to learn how to deal with PDFs with any other tool. You want an emulator so you don't have to learn how to use Ghostscript or any other open source free tool that can deal with PDFs. I can understand all this. What I can't understand is why you think that having the OSS people provide you with a crutch so you don't have to take the time to use Ghostscript and dump Acrobat is in any way helpful to OSS. Why not simply continue to run Acrobat under Windows? Why are you bothering at all with FreeBSD when you don't want to learn how to use the rest of the OSS applications out there? Understand this is a devils advocate question. But, anyone running FreeBSD should be able to answer it. A laboratory notebook is a term of art that describes the legal documentation of laboratory work which is ultimately used for patent prosecution and FDA approvals, among others. An electronic laboratory notebook is simply its electronic version, and there are companies who have tailored products to fulfill patenting and FDA requirements. These are specialized databases where access and modification rights (among other things) are handled carefully, and yes, they are all server-client based, though the client end does process a lot of data from diverse sources (like LIMs-- laboratory information management systems) before it is approved and entered to the central database. Nowhere did I say anything about a notebook computer. Ah. I was pointing out the need for a certain kind of software that is available for Windows that will not be filled by the OSS community. Whether the application will be ported by an ISV I have no way of knowing, but my initial inquiries have not been encouraging. The front-ends on user computers are not that complicated, and can certainly be run under emulation. Could this be created as a bespoke application? Sure. It would make absolutely no sense, though, as procuring all of the required USPTO, PCT and FDA approvals simply costs too much money and takes too much time. That was my point in its original context. An OSS operating system like FreeBSD or Linux is not just only good as a platform for running OSS applications. It's good for that but it's just as good for running the kind of narrow market, sophisticated and expensive applications your talking about. The goal needs to be to knock some sense into the ISVs that produce those applications and tell them you aren't going to buy those apps unless they port to FreeBSD. It shouldn't be to say Oh, those poor babies life is so hard for them, let's make
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
On Tuesday 20 September 2005 15:50, Dimitar Vasilev wrote: If you use openoffice and then export to PDF it ok. If you're able to write your resume in PostScript and then convert it to PDF that would be perfect solution. Regards, You are missing the point. I'm not asking for advice about how to create a CV, I'm pointing out an instance where it's virtually essential to use a real copy of MS word to edit (or at least check) a document before it's sent. If someone has to wade through hundreds of CVs and you have not submitted yours in the format they asked for, or have submitted a badly formated copy, then you place yourself at a severe disadvantage. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IE in FreeBSD?
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of RW Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 7:25 AM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: IE in FreeBSD? On Tuesday 20 September 2005 14:52, Ashley Moran wrote: RW wrote: For example, if you are applying for a job, you have to check that your cv/resume views correctly on a real microsoft word. Why not submit your CV as a PDF? Because it's common for companies and recruitment agencies to specify MS Word documents only. It's a de facto standard. You know it amazes me that ANY recruiting agency would defend Microsoft after this hit the press: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2002468560_msft google03.html I know Bob, let's standardize on a document format for our company that is set by a company that is actively working to put us out of business! Great idea, Sam! But who ever said recruiters were particularly intelligent. Ted ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IE in FreeBSD?
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Garrett Cooper Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 12:12 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: IE in FreeBSD? Sorry, that was a bit harsh to Frank. I was talking primarily of Ted since he seems to be perpetuating this discussion as a soapbox for himself and his ideals. Hmm, surprising how many OTHER people agree with me. I think you are bowing out because you finally understood what I'm talking about and you can't figure out how to reconcile your position. Ted ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IE in FreeBSD?
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Frank Jahnke Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 11:47 AM To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mario Hoerich; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: IE in FreeBSD? Uh, Ted? It really is customary to at least acknowledge and reply to the proper author. Mario Hoerich wrote about home apps; I did not. So Mario set no such ground rules. You are correct. Since you were making identical arguments I confused both of you. Given how this thread appears to have turned into your own personal soapbox to show heaven knows what, I'll bow out. That's the old maybe I can discredit his ideas by claiming nobody else agrees with him It's been around for ever since mailing lists were setup and is no more valid now than it ever was. And in any case I'm not claiming authorship of them, either. Maybe you should read a bit more about open source philosophy? Didn't it ever occur to you that most people don't release open source apps because someone is paying them to do so? They don't, they release them for more idealistic reasons than perhaps you are comfortable with. You can't take FreeBSD or Linux without buying into the philosophy behind them. Perhaps if you wrote and released your own open source package you might understand this. Ted ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD
On Tuesday 20 September 2005 14:52, Ashley Moran wrote: Why not submit your CV as a PDF? Because it's common for companies and recruitment agencies to specify MS Word documents only. It's a de facto standard. I have never gotten grief when I tell the recruiter that I do not have Word and I do not support proprietary formats and then send a PDF. YMMV My wife is an independent recruiter in the life sciences area. She can personally read a CV in most any format (and the few she can't I convert for her). It is the preference of the Human Resources department within her client companies who specify the MS .doc format. If a resume comes into HR that is not in .doc format, they will ask that it be resubmitted in that format. It is not a formal standard, but it sure is a de facto one. Companies in the IT area more be more flexible; I can't say. Chad Frank ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
On Thursday 15 September 2005 02:28, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: As a result the existence of these programs discourages interest in native FreeBSD programs, and encourages people not to wholeheartedly switch over to FreeBSD. That would be true if you could download any windows software, run the installer and have it work just like on Windows. That's not the case, wine is nowhere near that good. Most applictions that run at all are a pain to setup and use. I know from personal experience that the current situation, where wine promises more than it delivers, is very helpful in getting people to swap over. One of the applictions I didn't want to lose was Forte Agent (1.x). This has a reputation for working well under wine; even so I had so many problems that I started using Pan as a stopgap until I got Agent working properly. In the end I just got used to Pan. However bad wine is for day to day use, and however good the native alternatives get, there remain occasions when it is essential to use an industry-standard Microsoft application. For example, if you are applying for a job, you have to check that your cv/resume views correctly on a real microsoft word. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
RW wrote: However bad wine is for day to day use, and however good the native alternatives get, there remain occasions when it is essential to use an industry-standard Microsoft application. For example, if you are applying for a job, you have to check that your cv/resume views correctly on a real microsoft word. Why not submit your CV as a PDF? Ashley ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
On Tuesday 20 September 2005 14:52, Ashley Moran wrote: RW wrote: For example, if you are applying for a job, you have to check that your cv/resume views correctly on a real microsoft word. Why not submit your CV as a PDF? Because it's common for companies and recruitment agencies to specify MS Word documents only. It's a de facto standard. Actually I don't find pdf to be as portable as they should be, I've seen lots of example that wont display completely or properly. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
If you use openoffice and then export to PDF it ok. If you're able to write your resume in PostScript and then convert it to PDF that would be perfect solution. Regards, -- Димитър Василев Dimitar Vassilev ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
hi! On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 15:24:38 +0100 RW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Because it's common for companies and recruitment agencies to specify MS Word documents only. It's a de facto standard. this may be a bit offtopic :) ... but i think we agree that this situation is not good. is there any 'official' standard for office documents like there is for html, css, xml etc.? if not, are there any efforts to create one? if such a standard would be created by an international institution and for example governments start/plan using it MS would be forced to adapt it... jonas ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
The standarts we are speaking are per company basis - e.g. West European governments are slightly shifting to Linux as a desktop, while others strictly mention what formats of resumes they accept on their recruitment sites. In most cases of big companies I have seen, they say that prefer HTML or plain text or PDF, unless stated otherwise or if you're sent to fill in a MS Word application form. MS Office files are good media for sending viruses, so they try to avoid them. As Microsoft standarts are closed, do not expect IE to run natively on other platforms besides Windows and MacOSX. Opera is a good alternative and can fool sites that you're running IE. 2005/9/20, jonas [EMAIL PROTECTED]: hi! On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 15:24:38 +0100 RW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Because it's common for companies and recruitment agencies to specify MS Word documents only. It's a de facto standard. this may be a bit offtopic :) ... but i think we agree that this situation is not good. is there any 'official' standard for office documents like there is for html, css, xml etc.? if not, are there any efforts to create one? if such a standard would be created by an international institution and for example governments start/plan using it MS would be forced to adapt it... jonas ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Димитър Василев Dimitar Vassilev ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
On Tuesday 20 September 2005 11:19 am, jonas wrote: hi! On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 15:24:38 +0100 RW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Because it's common for companies and recruitment agencies to specify MS Word documents only. It's a de facto standard. this may be a bit offtopic :) ... but i think we agree that this situation is not good. is there any 'official' standard for office documents like there is for html, css, xml etc.? if not, are there any efforts to create one? if such a standard would be created by an international institution and for example governments start/plan using it MS would be forced to adapt it... Open Office's Open Document is good, trouble is I doubt if MS or the like will ever adopt something that will make it easy to use software other than MS. And remember MS NEEDS frequent upgrades for their continued hold on corporate. Mike -- Michael W. Holdeman Powered by Gentoo Linux www.gentoo.org | Kernel 2.6.11-ck8 | Win4Lin 5-1-20 netraverse.com | Win4LinPro 6.1.1-03 win4lin.com | | ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
jonas wrote: hi! On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 15:24:38 +0100 RW [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Because it's common for companies and recruitment agencies to specify MS Word documents only. It's a de facto standard. this may be a bit offtopic :) ... but i think we agree that this situation is not good. is there any 'official' standard for office documents like there is for html, css, xml etc.? Probably there are several official standards. If Microsoft ever invades the EU and wins, then there will be one ;-) More seriously: [EMAIL PROTECTED] # file fooresume.doc fooresume.doc: Rich Text Format data, version 1, ANSI --- seems to indicate that the American National Standards Institute has a standard for Rich Text Format, which IIRC, was invented by Microsoft many a long year ago see, for example: http://latex2rtf.sourceforge.net/RTF-Spec-1.0.txt if not, are there any efforts to create one? if such a standard would be created by an international institution and for example governments start/plan using it MS would be forced to adapt it... Hmm, I sort of doubt it. Not unless they actually *lost* a lawsuit. And their RTF has already been standardized, hrm? Anyway FWIW, both TextMaker (www.softmaker.de) and AbiWord (and I'm sure probably Star Office, Open Office, Koffice, etc.) make a decent *.doc file that looks good in the versions of MS Word I have around here. I don't know about the latest Office this year though. A major complaint with MS it that *.doc is quite a moving target ... and of course, they aren't publishing on sourceforge.net Kevin Kinsey ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IE in FreeBSD?
-Original Message-
From: Mario Hoerich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 10:07 AM
To: Ted Mittelstaedt
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: IE in FreeBSD?
# Ted Mittelstaedt:
# On Behalf Of Frank Jahnke
filled out and saved on a FreeBSD system?
PDF doesn't belong in complex forms that are filled out online. I use
PDF at my job and we use it for one use only - contracts. A contract
must be in paper with a human's signature on it to have any validity
whatsoever in a court of law, despite what you may read otherwise.
In Germany, electronic signatures conforming to the conditions in
§17 SiG (signature law) and §15 Annex 1 SigV (signature decree)
are as valid as a hard signature and can (for example) be used for
communication with government departments.
The world doesn't end on US borders.
Sure, try suing someone for $200 in small claims for that - the expert
witness fees to verify to the court that such a signature exists and is
valid will be more than the amount your trying to get.
The Mac isn't
a gateway to UNIX by any means. Apple made it easy for
Mac users to
continue to be stone stupid, and the Mac users by and
large chose to
stay stone stupid. Apple knows it's customer base that's for sure.
*Shrug*. I'm a CS + Math student and I've used FreeBSD since 3.3
(Linux before). I don't think I'm stone stupid.
Are you aware of that the terminology by and large means in that
context?
Perhaps not, maybe the translation to German modified the meaning?
So, your the one in a thousand Mac user that's not stone stupid, an
occurrance that my statement allowed to exist.
I find this attitude to be very distressing, but remarkably common.
Yup.
Sure, users are not as informed as they might be, and they
can do stupid
things. But they use the computer as a tool to do certain tasks, and
they shouldn't have to know about how the computer works to
accomplish
those tasks.
Yah yah yah. I hear the same thing about cars - we shouldn't need to
know how a car works to drive it Sure - sounds great.
Cars != computers. With cars, failure to understand their basic
features is likely to get people killed. I don't see that kind
of risk with ordinary PCs. The analogy is thus pointless.
You could just as well demand that anyone ever using mathematics
knows the entire theory behind it.
Hey, you just said the analogy is pointless - then proceed to argue it?
Must be a valid analogy or you wouldn't have proceeded to argue.
It's like teaching mathematics in school. You can teach the
kids to do
addition, subtraction, multiplication and division by hand, so they
understand what is going on,
No, they don't. Mathematics in school is nothing but a desktop
for real mathematics.
Why are you continuing to divert focus here? Let me restate and
rephrase:
You can teach the kids to do addition, subtraction, multiplication and
division by hand, so they understand what is going on with addition,
subtraction, multiplication and division.
With just school mathematics, you don't
understand the slightest thing of what's going on, but you've
learned how to use it. The above example is *very* basic (this
is the stuff you usually learn at the very beginning of your
first math-lecture at a university), but you won't learn any
of that in school. At least not around here.
A more advanced example are integrals. You learn how to integrate,
but you haven't got the slightest clue an integral is really defined
as (from the top of my head)
\int f := \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} f_k
where each f_k is a step function, i.e. an element of the
vector space \mathcal{F}_{ST}(|R,|R) spanned by the elementary
functions g_i. That is:
f_k := \sum_{i=1}^{k} \lamda_i g_i
with
g_i(x) := \begin{cases}1 x \in [a,b[ \\ 0 otherwise\end{cases}
There's a *lot* of theory behind those few lines and believe me,
it ain't pretty or simple. However, there's no reason anyone
but a mathematician should care about this.
Baloney. Sure, someone who uses integrals every day to build
or create something does not need to
know the theory well enough to repeat it, or remember enough of it
to understand all of it correctly.
But sometime during the teaching of how to work an integral they should
have been instructed by someone who really understood it and could
help them to form a mental image that would be an analogy of what is
going on. They should have the general gist of the idea.
Your attitude is reminicent of Pay no attention to that man behind the
curtain
from the Wizard of Oz. It's elitist and snobbish - oh only us priests
can
understand it you commoners never can so go away and let your betters
handle this
That's why the desktop school mathematics exists. So people
who aren't interested in mathematics won't have to deal with
its intricacies.
When I was growing up there was a LOT of stuff I had stuffed into
my head when I
RE: IE in FreeBSD?
On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 10:58 -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: And as for basic apps like wordprocessors and such - well I have to remind you that you yourself already argued in a previous post that this entire scenario of yours that your talking about here specifically dealt with apps that are more complex than that. In other words the rules of engagement you set up for this discussion was specifically NOT home user apps, it was complex business apps in a work environment. Now your dragging in home users which are a different deal alltogether. Recall the OP wants to run IE to deal with vendor websites that are IE specific and already ruled out telling the vendors of these busted websites to fuck off (like a home user has the freedom to do) since he has to go to them for work. Uh, Ted? It really is customary to at least acknowledge and reply to the proper author. Mario Hoerich wrote about home apps; I did not. So Mario set no such ground rules. Given how this thread appears to have turned into your own personal soapbox to show heaven knows what, I'll bow out. Frank ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005, Garrett Cooper wrote: Frank Jahnke wrote: On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 10:58 -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: And as for basic apps like wordprocessors and such - well I have to remind you that you yourself already argued in a previous post that this entire scenario of yours that your talking about here specifically dealt with apps that are more complex than that. In other words the rules of engagement you set up for this discussion was specifically NOT home user apps, it was complex business apps in a work environment. Now your dragging in home users which are a different deal alltogether. Recall the OP wants to run IE to deal with vendor websites that are IE specific and already ruled out telling the vendors of these busted websites to fuck off (like a home user has the freedom to do) since he has to go to them for work. Uh, Ted? It really is customary to at least acknowledge and reply to the proper author. Mario Hoerich wrote about home apps; I did not. So Mario set no such ground rules. Given how this thread appears to have turned into your own personal soapbox to show heaven knows what, I'll bow out. Frank Sheesh, the original poster has not replied in eons--so leave the thread dead. I would rather not hear someone's whining about OSes and software please. I was just providing support and backing up my statements previously, but now-like all OS-specific related threads this has now turned into flamebait. Please take this to another discussion forum or list. -Garrett Sorry, that was a bit harsh to Frank. I was talking primarily of Ted since he seems to be perpetuating this discussion as a soapbox for himself and his ideals. -Garrett ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IE in FreeBSD?
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of P.U.Kruppa Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 9:44 PM To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: Garrett Cooper; FreeBSD Questions Subject: RE: IE in FreeBSD? On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: My opinion on WINE is that it merely harms people who are writing software for FreeBSD. If I write a wordprocessor for Linux or FreeBSD and try to sell it, why would a customer buy it when he can just use his Microsoft Word under Wine? Don't forget Wine, Qemu, etc. are pieces of software themselves, written by great programmers and hackers for Linux and FreeBSD. They weren't discouraged from anything: They do contribute to the open source community. I don't but there's so much other stuff that needs programming attention that I think it's too bad that all that talent isn't working on that instead. Ted ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IE in FreeBSD?
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Frank Jahnke Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 9:58 AM To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: IE in FreeBSD? An alternative always exists. It depends on how far you want to go with alternatives. Sure, you could keep a Windows box around. You could not do the task. Those too are alternatives. But if you are looking to do certain tasks on a BSD desktop, I will say that in many cases there is no alternative, at least no alternative that is workable. One example: how do you suggest that complex forms in PDF format are filled out and saved on a FreeBSD system? PDF doesn't belong in complex forms that are filled out online. I use PDF at my job and we use it for one use only - contracts. A contract must be in paper with a human's signature on it to have any validity whatsoever in a court of law, despite what you may read otherwise. The PDF forms we send out are NOT intended to be filled out and printed, they are designed to be printed only, then the printout filled out and signed by hand. And we have alternative formats available (such as word doc) for those who don't have Acrobat loaded. I'd send these out in .png format if I figured the user could print them off without botching the printout. Or in PostScript to be fed directly to the printer. Every other type of form we deal with that doesn't have to stand up to legal scrutiny (ie: needs a siggy) we have long ago migrated to online webforms. Look at Macintosh software sometime, the UI for most apps is little different than what it was under System 7 except more colorful and glitzy. Most Mac users don't even know UNIX is involved with their OS. The Mac isn't a gateway to UNIX by any means. Apple made it easy for Mac users to continue to be stone stupid, and the Mac users by and large chose to stay stone stupid. Apple knows it's customer base that's for sure. I find this attitude to be very distressing, but remarkably common. Sure, users are not as informed as they might be, and they can do stupid things. But they use the computer as a tool to do certain tasks, and they shouldn't have to know about how the computer works to accomplish those tasks. Yah yah yah. I hear the same thing about cars - we shouldn't need to know how a car works to drive it Sure - sounds great. Let's put a bunch of drivers on the road that don't understand bullcrap about automobile suspensions and how they work then watch them kill themselves the first time it snows and freezes up. Oh I forgot, that's what we already have. Great attitude! My own work is in biological physical chemistry -- that's what pays the bills. Should I require my IT people to be conversant with that area, and understand the experiments that we do? Yes. There's a big difference between being 'conversant' in a field and being 'qualified' in a field. I would expect the IT people that are servicing an accounting company to have a basic idea of accounting, and the IT people supporting a food company to have a basic understanding of how the food industry works. Otherwise how can they possibly be effective at providing applications to the users that the users need? You may as a car driver not be qualified to take apart the front suspension of a vehicle and repair it. You may not even be qualified to diagnose something as simple as a wheel shimmy caused by a loose tie rod. You might not know the difference between a tie rod and a tied shoe. But you don't need any of that to understand some basic things like if the tire isn't straight up and down that it's not gripping the road well enough, (ie: front end misalignment) and that if the vehicle has a lift kit on it and is jacked up into God's ass that it's probably a lot easier to roll it over (ie: center of gravity) and that a locked up tire skidding has less traction than a turning tire that's braking (ie: Antilock Braking Systems) Unless you understand the basics of how the suspension works, your a hazard to yourself and other drivers when your on the road. And that is true even if it's broad daylight sunny weather. Indeed, the tools I am developing are designed so that the user does not have to know all of the details about how they work. They put stuff in, and get useful information out. If they don't know how these tools work then how do they know if the tool is working properly? If I had to hire Maxwell's demons to do the work, the users wouldn't care. It is my job to do the hard work and tailor it to their needs. And as the tool user it's their job to have enough understanding of what your tools are supposed to be spitting out as to recognize when you screw it up and your tools give out bogus results. It's like teaching mathematics in school. You can teach the kids to do addition, subtraction, multiplication and division by hand, so they understand what is going on, or you
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
# Ted Mittelstaedt:
# On Behalf Of Frank Jahnke
filled out and saved on a FreeBSD system?
PDF doesn't belong in complex forms that are filled out online. I use
PDF at my job and we use it for one use only - contracts. A contract
must be in paper with a human's signature on it to have any validity
whatsoever in a court of law, despite what you may read otherwise.
In Germany, electronic signatures conforming to the conditions in
§17 SiG (signature law) and §15 Annex 1 SigV (signature decree)
are as valid as a hard signature and can (for example) be used for
communication with government departments.
The world doesn't end on US borders.
The Mac isn't
a gateway to UNIX by any means. Apple made it easy for Mac users to
continue to be stone stupid, and the Mac users by and large chose to
stay stone stupid. Apple knows it's customer base that's for sure.
*Shrug*. I'm a CS + Math student and I've used FreeBSD since 3.3
(Linux before). I don't think I'm stone stupid. Yet I happen to
like my Powerbook.
I find this attitude to be very distressing, but remarkably common.
Yup.
Sure, users are not as informed as they might be, and they can do stupid
things. But they use the computer as a tool to do certain tasks, and
they shouldn't have to know about how the computer works to accomplish
those tasks.
Yah yah yah. I hear the same thing about cars - we shouldn't need to
know how a car works to drive it Sure - sounds great.
Cars != computers. With cars, failure to understand their basic
features is likely to get people killed. I don't see that kind
of risk with ordinary PCs. The analogy is thus pointless.
You could just as well demand that anyone ever using mathematics
knows the entire theory behind it. Next time you assume that
1*(1 + 1) = 2 (in |R), please take a brief moment to remind
yourself that the result is guaranteed to exist solely because |R
is a field and thus both (|R, +) and (|R, *) form abelean groups,
i.e. |R is closed under both addition and multiplication.
Please remember as well the proof that 1 is uniquely identified,
2 defined as 1+1 and thus 2 is uniquely identified as well.
Don't forget that 1 is also the neutral element of (|R, *)
and thus you can safely assume that 1*(1+1) = (1+1).
And sure as hell hope you never need \pi, because that's a
rather unpleasant series, even using the simple Leibniz
formula.
It's like teaching mathematics in school. You can teach the kids to do
addition, subtraction, multiplication and division by hand, so they
understand what is going on,
No, they don't. Mathematics in school is nothing but a desktop
for real mathematics. With just school mathematics, you don't
understand the slightest thing of what's going on, but you've
learned how to use it. The above example is *very* basic (this
is the stuff you usually learn at the very beginning of your
first math-lecture at a university), but you won't learn any
of that in school. At least not around here.
A more advanced example are integrals. You learn how to integrate,
but you haven't got the slightest clue an integral is really defined
as (from the top of my head)
\int f := \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} f_k
where each f_k is a step function, i.e. an element of the
vector space \mathcal{F}_{ST}(|R,|R) spanned by the elementary
functions g_i. That is:
f_k := \sum_{i=1}^{k} \lamda_i g_i
with
g_i(x) := \begin{cases}1 x \in [a,b[ \\ 0 otherwise\end{cases}
There's a *lot* of theory behind those few lines and believe me,
it ain't pretty or simple. However, there's no reason anyone
but a mathematician should care about this.
That's why the desktop school mathematics exists. So people
who aren't interested in mathematics won't have to deal with
its intricacies.
I think this is a better analogy than yours, because in both cases
i) the matters involved are widely considered complicated.
ii) the users have to deal with virtual quantities, i.e. they
can't touch them. This tends to be a problem for many people.
iii) the risks involved are pretty much the same.
None of this applies to cars.
It seems that you are arguing the BSDs (Free, Net, Open and so on)
should be used only for servers (and perhaps a few other applications
like embedded systems), and to leave the desktop to the Mac and Windows.
No, you are missing the point totally. I'm arguing that the so-called
desktop isn't important.
For you. There's other needs than yours and they're of no less
importance.
The desktop needs to serve as a portal to the real applications
and processing, which is centralized. It is a means to an end,
not an end itself. The servers in the center that are doing the
Really Important Work are of course all FreeBSD.
This doesn't exactly make sense for home PCs. I'll certainly not
stick another machine in my single room appartment so I have a
server.
[ data on notebooks ]
Move the data to a central location and the notebook
RE: IE in FreeBSD?
One example: how do you suggest that complex forms in PDF format are filled out and saved on a FreeBSD system? PDF doesn't belong in complex forms that are filled out online. I didn't say these were filled on on line -- that can be done just fine with OSS or the free Adobe Reader products. What I was talking about was downloading PDF forms, filling them out locally, and saving them. Right now OSS and other free products can fill out forms and have them printed -- they cannot be saved. When the forms are 45 pages or more, treating the computer as a simple typewriter is just silly. You need to be able to go back and edit them. I know of no way to do that with anything other than a proprietary product, such as Acrobat. I have that running under Wine on BSD. I use PDF at my job and we use it for one use only - contracts. A contract must be in paper with a human's signature on it to have any validity whatsoever in a court of law, despite what you may read otherwise. The PDF forms we send out are NOT intended to be filled out and printed, they are designed to be printed only, then the printout filled out and signed by hand. And we have alternative formats available (such as word doc) for those who don't have Acrobat loaded. I'd send these out in .png format if I figured the user could print them off without botching the printout. Or in PostScript to be fed directly to the printer. Every other type of form we deal with that doesn't have to stand up to legal scrutiny (ie: needs a siggy) we have long ago migrated to online webforms. That's fine: the documents I'm describing are downloaded, completed locally, signed, copied, and submitted (an original and six to eight copies). That your company does it differently is wonderful. I don't have a choice in this matter, if I wish to do business with this concern. And I do -- there are $24 billion in proposals that are funded annually that I would like to take part in. In many ways, this sums up the entire disagreement: I'm saying I have a need that I have to deal with. You are saying I shouldn't have that need if they did it properly. In this case, they don't. So I need to deal with it, and some Windows applications work just fine. I'd just like to run them on the computer where I do the majority of my work. No, you are missing the point totally. I'm arguing that the so-called desktop isn't important. The desktop needs to serve as a portal to the real applications and processing, which is centralized. It is a means to an end, not an end itself. The servers in the center that are doing the Really Important Work are of course all FreeBSD. If Microsoft wants to spend it's life writing goopy gimpy winders that runs on the latest Far East dreck, more power to them as long as they put a decent networking stack in the thing so that my xterms don't get disconnected all the time. So here we are at the crux of it, and I haven't missed that point at all. As I said, I have no issue with a server-client architecture, and I'll extend that all the way to having a mainframe and terminals. For many situations, it is a better or at least a reasonable way to go. If the only issue is how much local power or intelligence remains, that's fine. I do think that there will remain a lot processing that is done locally, like the web browsing that started this whole thread off, particularly for smaller concerns such as mine. For smaller companies having desktops works well enough, and is probably a better use of resources. It is in my case, where the needs are rather diverse and complex. One example: an electronic laboratory notebook that complies with FDA tracability and data integrity requirements. You see this is a perfect example once again. Why do you need traceability and data integrity on a notebook? Because there's data there!! Move the data to a central location and the notebook becomes a dumb window with no data on it, and there's no need to pay attention to the notebook. A laboratory notebook is a term of art that describes the legal documentation of laboratory work which is ultimately used for patent prosecution and FDA approvals, among others. An electronic laboratory notebook is simply its electronic version, and there are companies who have tailored products to fulfill patenting and FDA requirements. These are specialized databases where access and modification rights (among other things) are handled carefully, and yes, they are all server-client based, though the client end does process a lot of data from diverse sources (like LIMs-- laboratory information management systems) before it is approved and entered to the central database. Nowhere did I say anything about a notebook computer. I was pointing out the need for a certain kind of software that is available for Windows that will not be filled by the OSS community. Whether the application will be ported by an ISV I have no way of
RE: IE in FreeBSD?
On Thu, 2005-09-15 at 22:12 -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: My opinion on WINE is that it merely harms people who are writing software for FreeBSD. I often hear this said, but I don't think it is true. I saw this kill OS/2. I ran OS/2 exclusively as a desktop OS for a number of years, it had excellent networking integration with UNIX, better than Windows. But IBM spent way too much effort in keeping Windows emulation going in the OS and as a result didn't put the development effort where it would have helped - primariarly strengthing the OS on different hardware. There a lots of opinions on why OS/2 failed. I won't go through those, but I do remember those days well. As far as I can tell, there is essentially no commercial software written for FreeBSD (and very little for Linux) as it stands, and while the FOSS software has improved a great deal, much of that targeted for the desktop is either not good enough or simply does not exist at all. Not desktop but there's a lot of commercial back-end software that uses FreeBSD. I don't think that commercial back-end software is a target for Wine; I'd guess those will continue to grow in number. I'm talking about the desktop alone. The one good commercial software title for BSD is TextMaker from SoftMaker (German; a Word clone). They do not seem inclined to release their new version on BSD. They simply are not a replacement for native programs unless no alternative exists. An alternative always exists. It depends on how far you want to go with alternatives. Sure, you could keep a Windows box around. You could not do the task. Those too are alternatives. But if you are looking to do certain tasks on a BSD desktop, I will say that in many cases there is no alternative, at least no alternative that is workable. One example: how do you suggest that complex forms in PDF format are filled out and saved on a FreeBSD system? Anyway, in a way it does because it forces the user to go through a lot more trouble than an emulator, and the only way to get users to invest the time to learn how to use FreeBSD is to make the alternative more difficult. Look at Macintosh software sometime, the UI for most apps is little different than what it was under System 7 except more colorful and glitzy. Most Mac users don't even know UNIX is involved with their OS. The Mac isn't a gateway to UNIX by any means. Apple made it easy for Mac users to continue to be stone stupid, and the Mac users by and large chose to stay stone stupid. Apple knows it's customer base that's for sure. I find this attitude to be very distressing, but remarkably common. Sure, users are not as informed as they might be, and they can do stupid things. But they use the computer as a tool to do certain tasks, and they shouldn't have to know about how the computer works to accomplish those tasks. My own work is in biological physical chemistry -- that's what pays the bills. Should I require my IT people to be conversant with that area, and understand the experiments that we do? If not, why should I require my molecular biologists to understand the ins and outs of their computer? Indeed, the tools I am developing are designed so that the user does not have to know all of the details about how they work. They put stuff in, and get useful information out. If I had to hire Maxwell's demons to do the work, the users wouldn't care. It is my job to do the hard work and tailor it to their needs. This is not so different from computers. Simply increasing the market share numbers won't do jack. Look at MacOS, Apple has far less of a market share than FreeBSD yet has tons of software for it and more every day. You must increase the market share among the people that pay money for software in order to interest ISV's in porting. That's fair enough. Many people in the FOSS community simply don't want to pay for software. That has to change. Still, I would posit that the Mac has a much larger installed base on the desktop than BSD. This is one of the famous catch-22 of FreeBSD. Skilled and smart techs can make free applications that run under free OS's like FreeBSD work for them, or fix them if they don't work. Garden variety users don't want to learn much and are willing to pay money to not have to do so. If you dumb-down the OS like Windows and MacOS is, you attract the garden variety users and you get a lot of money which atttracts all the ISV's who want to port to you, but the skilled users get sick of the shit and they are out of there. For commercial OS's that's not a problem they just pay people to continue building them, but it will break the back of an Open Source volunteer effort. RedHat understood this and that's why most RedHat Linux users today are pretty basic, and the skilled Linux people have fled to Suse and Debian, and even some to Fedora, while the RedHat owners are smiling all the way
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
Yuan Jue wrote: Does anybody successfully run Internet Explorer under Wine in FreeBSD? What should I do to get it run? Any suggestion will be appreciated. I recommend qemu emulator too. It's easy to install, you get native platform and it's not that slow (even usable on a 366MHz notebook). When you install your favourite OS on it, you can copy the image around as much as you like and share it with other users in snapshot mode as their changes won't be written back... could go on and on :) -- Regards, Karel Miklav ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IE in FreeBSD?
My opinion on WINE is that it merely harms people who are writing software for FreeBSD. If I write a wordprocessor for Linux or FreeBSD and try to sell it, why would a customer buy it when he can just use his Microsoft Word under Wine? As a result the existence of these programs discourages interest in native FreeBSD programs, and encourages people not to wholeheartedly switch over to FreeBSD. It also gives an excuse to software developers not to bother writing software for open source development since they can always run it on wine Ted I often hear this said, but I don't think it is true. As far as I can tell, there is essentially no commercial software written for FreeBSD (and very little for Linux) as it stands, and while the FOSS software has improved a great deal, much of that targeted for the desktop is either not good enough or simply does not exist at all. Wine will always be a compromise: some (but with hope, an increasing number of) important programs will work very well, some will perform with limited functionality which may be OK for a few selected tasks, and many or most will not work well enough if they work at all. They will also continue to be difficult to integrate with other desktop programs, even more so than Linux programs which are bad enough already. They simply are not a replacement for native programs unless no alternative exists. Your early proposed solution of running a remote desktop to run the real windows program also does not encourage writers to introduce a FreeBSD program version. Instead of saying run it on Wine, one could always say run it on a remote desktop. Old computers that may well be good enough for such occasional use are very inexpensive. Why then would anyone run a native version? I think that the best way to increase the number of native programs written for or ported to FreeBSD is to increase its market share, particularly on the desktop. The rapid acceptance of desktop-oriented versions of FreeBSD, such as PC-BSD and DesktopBSD, I find very heartening. But as long as the OS has such a small market share, we will have to rely on such non-optimal solutions such as qemu, Wine, CrossOver Office and the like. Sadly, I think this will be the case for the near-term future of a few years at least. It will likely be longer. In the short term, I have work to do that requires windows programs, or at least the function of certain windows programs. Not IE, as the original poster of this thread, but others that are common in the Windows world. I'd like to use a single computer and its tools for this purpose -- the workflow is so much more convenient. As it stands, I cannot turn wholeheartedly to FreeBSD until I can perform the sort of tasks I need to -- I will always need a Windows box for too many things otherwise. And I certainly can't subject my employees to this situation, unless they are Unix heads like me. That's why I started the petition to CodeWeavers to port CrossOver Office to BSD. That product may not be the perfect solution, but it would sure help me a lot with most of the needs I have now. That petition is located at http://www.bsdnexus.com/petition.asp and to date we have nearly 900 signatories. If you have not signed, I would encourage you to do so. Frank ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
On Sep 15, 2005, at 7:23 AM, Frank Jahnke wrote: My opinion on WINE is that it merely harms people who are writing software for FreeBSD. If I write a wordprocessor for Linux or FreeBSD and try to sell it, why would a customer buy it when he can just use his Microsoft Word under Wine? Because it's an industry standard. Unless you come up with a better product and convince the masses to switch, people aren't really as willing to learn new software albeit the fact that it may be better in terms of features/functionality. As a result the existence of these programs discourages interest in native FreeBSD programs, and encourages people not to wholeheartedly switch over to FreeBSD. It also gives an excuse to software developers not to bother writing software for open source development since they can always run it on wine Not true. Running Wine means I don't have to have Windows installed and thus I don't have to dualboot my machine or use a true emulator like vmware, qemu, etc to have to run a copy of Windows on top of FreeBSD. I often hear this said, but I don't think it is true. As far as I can tell, there is essentially no commercial software written for FreeBSD (and very little for Linux) as it stands, and while the FOSS software has improved a great deal, much of that targeted for the desktop is either not good enough or simply does not exist at all. True in some respects, IMHO. Wine will always be a compromise: some (but with hope, an increasing number of) important programs will work very well, some will perform with limited functionality which may be OK for a few selected tasks, and many or most will not work well enough if they work at all. They will also continue to be difficult to integrate with other desktop programs, even more so than Linux programs which are bad enough already. They simply are not a replacement for native programs unless no alternative exists. Very true. That's why I mentioned the fact that installing and running IE is very difficult under Wine. In effect it's so much of a pain in the ass I wouldn't even bother to be honest, but some people need ActiveX, etc like I mentioned before. Your early proposed solution of running a remote desktop to run the real windows program also does not encourage writers to introduce a FreeBSD program version. Instead of saying run it on Wine, one could always say run it on a remote desktop. Old computers that may well be good enough for such occasional use are very inexpensive. Why then would anyone run a native version? Yes. Waste of power and hardware if you ask me because I would rather devote a machine to a greater series of tasks as opposed to running an OS which I don't really need except for a few programs. The purpose of my email previous was not to invoke people's unhappiness and spite against Microsoft; I am in fact very anti- Microsoft (or a better way to phrase it would be pro-Mac/-Unix?) since I believe the Windows is getting more and more bloated as time progresses and is very limiting by design. However, keeping that in mind one must realize that one solution does not fit all problems and as such I don't think it's right to forget that there are many options available in Windows in terms of applications that may be better suited to solving a problem or less time consuming to use. Besides, a lot of people I know don't share our enthusiasm for Unix and will stick by Windows no matter what. Heh. -Garrett ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD
Sorry I can't continue this as a thread -- I get this as a digest and unless I'm copied, I can't. My opinion on WINE is that it merely harms people who are writing software for FreeBSD. If I write a wordprocessor for Linux or FreeBSD and try to sell it, why would a customer buy it when he can just use his Microsoft Word under Wine? Because it's an industry standard. Unless you come up with a better product and convince the masses to switch, people aren't really as willing to learn new software albeit the fact that it may be better in terms of features/functionality. One thing that is overlooked is that office and other professional software is much, much more than Microsoft Office. How about complete Acrobat, AutoCAD, electronic laboratory notebooks, solids modeling, laboratory information management systems, LabView, and ... and ... FOSS seems to do alright with entertainment software (music, videos, IM, RSS and so forth) but is woefully deficient in so many other areas. I give one practical example in my interview with Dru at http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/7731 Not true. Running Wine means I don't have to have Windows installed and thus I don't have to dualboot my machine or use a true emulator like vmware, qemu, etc to have to run a copy of Windows on top of FreeBSD. Absolutely. Dual booting is so inconvenient that it simply is not worth it for me. And for workflow reasons I'd really rather run every application from the same desktop. Wine will always be a compromise: some (but with hope, an increasing number of) important programs will work very well, some will perform with limited functionality which may be OK for a few selected tasks, and many or most will not work well enough if they work at all. They will also continue to be difficult to integrate with other desktop programs, even more so than Linux programs which are bad enough already. They simply are not a replacement for native programs unless no alternative exists. Very true. That's why I mentioned the fact that installing and running IE is very difficult under Wine. In effect it's so much of a pain in the ass I wouldn't even bother to be honest, but some people need ActiveX, etc like I mentioned before. Wine is indeed difficult, and it usually requires a lot of futzing with DLLs and such to get acceptable installations. That's once you get the program installed from the source disk in the first place, which is often not trivial. That's the area where CodeWeavers' product can really help. Old computers that may well be good enough for such occasional use are very inexpensive. Why then would anyone run a native version? Yes. Waste of power and hardware if you ask me because I would rather devote a machine to a greater series of tasks as opposed to running an OS which I don't really need except for a few programs. Agreed (again). I use an old PIII with a small monitor for some of these applications. It just seems silly to waste a BSD machine with dual monitors and dual CPUs. The purpose of my email previous was not to invoke people's unhappiness and spite against Microsoft; I am in fact very anti- Microsoft (or a better way to phrase it would be pro-Mac/-Unix?) It does seem like the Mac is a good way to go to get a reasonable form of Unix and a decent selection of commercial software. Unless I can get the software situation improved (like with CrossOver Office), that is really my only option. Frank ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
On Wednesday 14 September 2005 11:21 pm, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: Let's quit beating around the bush, shall we? The only vendor that custom tailors their content to IE and who will not correct gross HTML coding errors on their website and in their products is Microsoft. Everybody else, if you wave cash in front of them and say I will buy your product once you fix these gross html errors your product spews out they will get real interested in fixing them, all the sudden. except the feds, like FEMA... -- Michael W. Holdeman Powered by Gentoo Linux www.gentoo.org | Kernel 2.6.11-ck8 | Win4Lin 5-1-20 netraverse.com | Win4LinPro 6.1.1-03 win4lin.com | | ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IE in FreeBSD?
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: My opinion on WINE is that it merely harms people who are writing software for FreeBSD. If I write a wordprocessor for Linux or FreeBSD and try to sell it, why would a customer buy it when he can just use his Microsoft Word under Wine? Don't forget Wine, Qemu, etc. are pieces of software themselves, written by great programmers and hackers for Linux and FreeBSD. They weren't discouraged from anything: They do contribute to the open source community. Regards, Uli. As a result the existence of these programs discourages interest in native FreeBSD programs, and encourages people not to wholeheartedly switch over to FreeBSD. It also gives an excuse to software developers not to bother writing software for open source development since they can always run it on wine Ted -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Garrett Cooper Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 3:40 PM To: FreeBSD Questions Subject: Re: IE in FreeBSD? On Sep 14, 2005, at 2:35 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: I run it in a window under the remote desktop port. Of course you need a real windows box somewhere... Ted -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Yuan Jue Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 8:30 AM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: IE in FreeBSD? Hello, all Does anybody successfully run Internet Explorer under Wine in FreeBSD? What should I do to get it run? Any suggestion will be appreciated. Thanks. -- Best Regards. Yuan Jue It's possible under wine, but very difficult to configure and install. Search google for Wine IE, or the gentoo linux forums (forums.gentoo.org) for IE. -Garrett ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/86 - Release Date: 8/31/2005 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Peter Ulrich Kruppa - Wuppertal - Germany * * ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IE in FreeBSD?
-Original Message- From: Frank Jahnke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 7:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: IE in FreeBSD? My opinion on WINE is that it merely harms people who are writing software for FreeBSD. If I write a wordprocessor for Linux or FreeBSD and try to sell it, why would a customer buy it when he can just use his Microsoft Word under Wine? As a result the existence of these programs discourages interest in native FreeBSD programs, and encourages people not to wholeheartedly switch over to FreeBSD. It also gives an excuse to software developers not to bother writing software for open source development since they can always run it on wine Ted I often hear this said, but I don't think it is true. I saw this kill OS/2. I ran OS/2 exclusively as a desktop OS for a number of years, it had excellent networking integration with UNIX, better than Windows. But IBM spent way too much effort in keeping Windows emulation going in the OS and as a result didn't put the development effort where it would have helped - primariarly strengthing the OS on different hardware. This is what put companies like DeScribe out of business. As far as I can tell, there is essentially no commercial software written for FreeBSD (and very little for Linux) as it stands, and while the FOSS software has improved a great deal, much of that targeted for the desktop is either not good enough or simply does not exist at all. Not desktop but there's a lot of commercial back-end software that uses FreeBSD. Wine will always be a compromise: some (but with hope, an increasing number of) important programs will work very well, some will perform with limited functionality which may be OK for a few selected tasks, and many or most will not work well enough if they work at all. They will also continue to be difficult to integrate with other desktop programs, even more so than Linux programs which are bad enough already. They simply are not a replacement for native programs unless no alternative exists. An alternative always exists. Your early proposed solution of running a remote desktop to run the real windows program also does not encourage writers to introduce a FreeBSD program version. That was a joke. Anyway, in a way it does because it forces the user to go through a lot more trouble than an emulator, and the only way to get users to invest the time to learn how to use FreeBSD is to make the alternative more difficult. Look at Macintosh software sometime, the UI for most apps is little different than what it was under System 7 except more colorful and glitzy. Most Mac users don't even know UNIX is involved with their OS. The Mac isn't a gateway to UNIX by any means. Apple made it easy for Mac users to continue to be stone stupid, and the Mac users by and large chose to stay stone stupid. Apple knows it's customer base that's for sure. Instead of saying run it on Wine, one could always say run it on a remote desktop. Old computers that may well be good enough for such occasional use are very inexpensive. Why then would anyone run a native version? I think that the best way to increase the number of native programs written for or ported to FreeBSD is to increase its market share, particularly on the desktop. The rapid acceptance of desktop-oriented versions of FreeBSD, such as PC-BSD and DesktopBSD, I find very heartening. But as long as the OS has such a small market share, we will have to rely on such non-optimal solutions such as qemu, Wine, CrossOver Office and the like. Sadly, I think this will be the case for the near-term future of a few years at least. It will likely be longer. Simply increasing the market share numbers won't do jack. Look at MacOS, Apple has far less of a market share than FreeBSD yet has tons of software for it and more every day. You must increase the market share among the people that pay money for software in order to interest ISV's in porting. This is one of the famous catch-22 of FreeBSD. Skilled and smart techs can make free applications that run under free OS's like FreeBSD work for them, or fix them if they don't work. Garden variety users don't want to learn much and are willing to pay money to not have to do so. If you dumb-down the OS like Windows and MacOS is, you attract the garden variety users and you get a lot of money which atttracts all the ISV's who want to port to you, but the skilled users get sick of the shit and they are out of there. For commercial OS's that's not a problem they just pay people to continue building them, but it will break the back of an Open Source volunteer effort. RedHat understood this and that's why most RedHat Linux users today are pretty basic, and the skilled Linux people have fled to Suse and Debian, and even some to Fedora, while the RedHat owners are smiling all the way to the bank, and you have ISV's
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
On Wednesday 14 September 2005 23:46, Matt Kosht wrote: Does anybody successfully run Internet Explorer under Wine in FreeBSD? What should I do to get it run? Any suggestion will be appreciated. I would suggest instead of Wine using an RDP client (rdesktop in ports for example) and run IE via terminal services on a Windows server or XP desktop PC. Thanks. It is a way to solve this problem. But my particular problem is I do not have a Windows server or XP desktop PC around. My laptop is the only computer I have. So is there any other suggestion? -- Best Regards. Yuan Jue ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
Yuan Jue wrote: Hello, all Does anybody successfully run Internet Explorer under Wine in FreeBSD? What should I do to get it run? Any suggestion will be appreciated. Thanks. I don't know if you've already seen this, but the WINE Application DB may have info on how others got it to run: http://appdb.winehq.org/appview.php?appId=25 Another suggestion would be to run a browser that runs natively on FreeBSD such as Mozilla Firefox, regular Mozilla, Opera, or even Konqueror if you use KDE. I stopped using IE when the first Mozilla Firebird beta came out and I can't say I've missed anything. :) -Mark ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 11:55:25PM +0800, Yuan Jue wrote: On Wednesday 14 September 2005 23:46, Matt Kosht wrote: Does anybody successfully run Internet Explorer under Wine in FreeBSD? What should I do to get it run? Any suggestion will be appreciated. I would suggest instead of Wine using an RDP client (rdesktop in ports for example) and run IE via terminal services on a Windows server or XP desktop PC. Thanks. It is a way to solve this problem. But my particular problem is I do not have a Windows server or XP desktop PC around. My laptop is the only computer I have. So is there any other suggestion? You mean apart from dumping IE and using firefox? ;-) Install windoze on a virtual machine on your FreeBSD laptop. You could use bochs or qemu. The latter is probably faster. Roland -- R.F.Smith (http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/) Please send e-mail as plain text. public key: http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/pubkey.txt pgp1qzBVkM9cP.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: IE in FreeBSD?
I run it in a window under the remote desktop port. Of course you need a real windows box somewhere... Ted -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Yuan Jue Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 8:30 AM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: IE in FreeBSD? Hello, all Does anybody successfully run Internet Explorer under Wine in FreeBSD? What should I do to get it run? Any suggestion will be appreciated. Thanks. -- Best Regards. Yuan Jue ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/86 - Release Date: 8/31/2005 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
On Sep 14, 2005, at 2:35 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: I run it in a window under the remote desktop port. Of course you need a real windows box somewhere... Ted -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Yuan Jue Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 8:30 AM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: IE in FreeBSD? Hello, all Does anybody successfully run Internet Explorer under Wine in FreeBSD? What should I do to get it run? Any suggestion will be appreciated. Thanks. -- Best Regards. Yuan Jue It's possible under wine, but very difficult to configure and install. Search google for Wine IE, or the gentoo linux forums (forums.gentoo.org) for IE. -Garrett ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IE in FreeBSD?
My opinion on WINE is that it merely harms people who are writing software for FreeBSD. If I write a wordprocessor for Linux or FreeBSD and try to sell it, why would a customer buy it when he can just use his Microsoft Word under Wine? As a result the existence of these programs discourages interest in native FreeBSD programs, and encourages people not to wholeheartedly switch over to FreeBSD. It also gives an excuse to software developers not to bother writing software for open source development since they can always run it on wine Ted -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Garrett Cooper Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 3:40 PM To: FreeBSD Questions Subject: Re: IE in FreeBSD? On Sep 14, 2005, at 2:35 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: I run it in a window under the remote desktop port. Of course you need a real windows box somewhere... Ted -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Yuan Jue Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 8:30 AM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: IE in FreeBSD? Hello, all Does anybody successfully run Internet Explorer under Wine in FreeBSD? What should I do to get it run? Any suggestion will be appreciated. Thanks. -- Best Regards. Yuan Jue It's possible under wine, but very difficult to configure and install. Search google for Wine IE, or the gentoo linux forums (forums.gentoo.org) for IE. -Garrett ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/86 - Release Date: 8/31/2005 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
Roland Smith wrote: On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 11:55:25PM +0800, Yuan Jue wrote: On Wednesday 14 September 2005 23:46, Matt Kosht wrote: Does anybody successfully run Internet Explorer under Wine in FreeBSD? What should I do to get it run? Any suggestion will be appreciated. I would suggest instead of Wine using an RDP client (rdesktop in ports for example) and run IE via terminal services on a Windows server or XP desktop PC. Thanks. It is a way to solve this problem. But my particular problem is I do not have a Windows server or XP desktop PC around. My laptop is the only computer I have. So is there any other suggestion? You mean apart from dumping IE and using firefox? ;-) Install windoze on a virtual machine on your FreeBSD laptop. You could use bochs or qemu. The latter is probably faster. I'll second the qemu vote. It works very well. You don't mention *why* you need IE. Stating why might help someone provide a better alternative. Roland -- Regards, Eric ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
On Sep 14, 2005, at 7:01 PM, Eric Schuele wrote: Roland Smith wrote: On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 11:55:25PM +0800, Yuan Jue wrote: On Wednesday 14 September 2005 23:46, Matt Kosht wrote: Does anybody successfully run Internet Explorer under Wine in FreeBSD? What should I do to get it run? Any suggestion will be appreciated. I would suggest instead of Wine using an RDP client (rdesktop in ports for example) and run IE via terminal services on a Windows server or XP desktop PC. Thanks. It is a way to solve this problem. But my particular problem is I do not have a Windows server or XP desktop PC around. My laptop is the only computer I have. So is there any other suggestion? You mean apart from dumping IE and using firefox? ;-) Install windoze on a virtual machine on your FreeBSD laptop. You could use bochs or qemu. The latter is probably faster. I'll second the qemu vote. It works very well. You don't mention *why* you need IE. Stating why might help someone provide a better alternative. Roland -- Regards, Eric The reason why I can see using IE is the ridiculous requirement made by many software vendors and website designers that custom tailor their content to use either ActiveX (Valve's CS and CS:S for example) or certain features only available in IE, or they are just plain lazy and don't want to make their content Mozilla friendly. -Garrett ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IE in FreeBSD?
At 19:22 14/9/2005 -0700, Garret Cooper wrote: On Sep 14, 2005, at 7:01 PM, Eric Schuele wrote: Roland Smith wrote: On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 11:55:25PM +0800, Yuan Jue wrote: On Wednesday 14 September 2005 23:46, Matt Kosht wrote: Does anybody successfully run Internet Explorer under Wine in FreeBSD? What should I do to get it run? Any suggestion will be appreciated. I would suggest instead of Wine using an RDP client (rdesktop in ports for example) and run IE via terminal services on a Windows server or XP desktop PC. Thanks. It is a way to solve this problem. But my particular problem is I do not have a Windows server or XP desktop PC around. My laptop is the only computer I have. So is there any other suggestion? You mean apart from dumping IE and using firefox? ;-) Install windoze on a virtual machine on your FreeBSD laptop. You could use bochs or qemu. The latter is probably faster. I'll second the qemu vote. It works very well. You don't mention *why* you need IE. Stating why might help someone provide a better alternative. The reason why I can see using IE is the ridiculous requirement made by many software vendors and website designers that custom tailor their content to use either ActiveX (Valve's CS and CS:S for example) or certain features only available in IE, or they are just plain lazy and don't want to make their content Mozilla friendly. -Garrett I don't think you mean Mozilla friendly, I think you mean according to accepted standards. I would be suspicious of anyone selling software who was too unaware of web standards to follow standards in their web site (well, I would except someone who used tables rather than CSS to lay out a page -- I can forgive that). Frankly, there are so many web sites offering information I need that I don't really have time to worry about those sites that require IE. I'm already suffering overload. -- Roger ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IE in FreeBSD?
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Roger Merritt Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 8:09 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: IE in FreeBSD? At 19:22 14/9/2005 -0700, Garret Cooper wrote: You don't mention *why* you need IE. Stating why might help someone provide a better alternative. The reason why I can see using IE is the ridiculous requirement made by many software vendors and website designers that custom tailor their content to use either ActiveX (Valve's CS and CS:S for example) or certain features only available in IE, or they are just plain lazy and don't want to make their content Mozilla friendly. -Garrett I don't think you mean Mozilla friendly, I think you mean according to accepted standards. I would be suspicious of anyone selling software who was too unaware of web standards to follow standards in their web site (well, I would except someone who used tables rather than CSS to lay out a page -- I can forgive that). Frankly, there are so many web sites offering information I need that I don't really have time to worry about those sites that require IE. I'm already suffering overload. Let's quit beating around the bush, shall we? The only vendor that custom tailors their content to IE and who will not correct gross HTML coding errors on their website and in their products is Microsoft. Everybody else, if you wave cash in front of them and say I will buy your product once you fix these gross html errors your product spews out they will get real interested in fixing them, all the sudden. Ted ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IE in FreeBSD?
There is also a petition circulating to encourage CodeWeavers to port their CrossOver Office product to BSD. It should be able to run IE. Not tomorrow, mind you, but soon (if the petition and its follow-on efforts succeed, and I think it will). Please sign if this might help you. The petition is located at http://www.bsdnexus.com/petition.asp Frank ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
