Re: Vienna backtracks on OpenSource - gives stuff choice or running Windows
Matt
> <quote>
> 23 December 2009
> Vienna: Windows and Linux to coexist
>
> Based on the results of a recently announced study it has been decided that
> the municipal authority of the City of Vienna will not at present be
> shifting entirely to open source for its software needs. Rather
> administrative staff will have the choice of running either Windows and
> Microsoft Office or Linux (in the form of Wienux, a Debian/Ubuntu-based
> custom distribution) and OpenOffice on their desktop.
>
> As noted in the Viennese study, often the decision not to migrate is based
> on the need to run specialised software where high quality examples are only
> available for the Windows platform. For example Vienna's kindergartens
> recently reverted to Windows when an essential application was not supported
> under Linux.
> </quote>
>
>
> http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Vienna-Windows-and-Linux-to-coexist-892081.html
Oh, but you left out the best part:
same link:
(((((
> The reason for the decision given in the study's summary is that "more than half of PC workstations use software products for which no Linux alternatives are available without migration investments". In view of this, the authors of the study consider a long-term coexistence of Windows and Linux the only viable solution.
)))))
There you have it from the horse's mouth. Vienna has to maintain its
addiction to Windows indefinitely because of migration costs (which
wouldn't be there if they had had cross-platform apps across the board).
The cross-platform apps aren't there now, and Vienna needs Windows
indefinitely---because of past Linux-only fanaticism.
Ezekiel
"Matt" <ma...@themattfella.xxxyyz.com> wrote in message
news:G_s0n.6872$Gf3....@newsfe22.iad...
It says:
<quote>
As noted in the Viennese study, often the decision not to migrate is based
on the need to run specialised software where high quality examples are only
available for the Windows platform.
</quote>
There are foss alternatives but the quality of those applications are too
low. It's not "Windows" they are locked in to - it's "applications" that are
available for Windows that don't have suitable foss counterparts.
Chris Ahlstrom
>> http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Vienna-Windows-and-Linux-to-coexist-892081.html
>
> Oh, but you left out the best part:
>
> same link:
> (((((
>> The reason for the decision given in the study's summary is that "more than half of PC workstations use software products for which no Linux alternatives are available without migration investments". In view of this, the authors of the study consider a long-term coexistence of Windows and Linux the only viable solution.
>)))))
>
> There you have it from the horse's mouth. Vienna has to maintain its
> addiction to Windows indefinitely because of migration costs (which
> wouldn't be there if they had had cross-platform apps across the board).
>
> The cross-platform apps aren't there now, and Vienna needs Windows
> indefinitely---because of past Linux-only fanaticism.
No. Because of past Windows-only fanaticism.
--
The notes blatted skyward as they rose over the Canada geese, feathered
rumps mooning the day, webbed appendages frantically pedaling unseen
bicycles in their search for sustenance, driven by cruel Nature's maxim,
'Ya wanna eat, ya gotta work,' and at last I knew Pittsburgh.
-- Winning sentence, 1987 Bulwer-Lytton bad fiction contest.
Matt
> Matt pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>>> http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Vienna-Windows-and-Linux-to-coexist-892081.html
>> Oh, but you left out the best part:
>>
>> same link:
>> (((((
>>> The reason for the decision given in the study's summary is that "more than half of PC workstations use software products for which no Linux alternatives are available without migration investments". In view of this, the authors of the study consider a long-term coexistence of Windows and Linux the only viable solution.
>> )))))
>>
>> There you have it from the horse's mouth. Vienna has to maintain its
>> addiction to Windows indefinitely because of migration costs (which
>> wouldn't be there if they had had cross-platform apps across the board).
>>
>> The cross-platform apps aren't there now, and Vienna needs Windows
>> indefinitely---because of past Linux-only fanaticism.
>
>
<"No" snipped>
> Because of past Windows-only fanaticism.
That too. They feed off each other.
Matt
If the FOSS alternatives are of low quality, the biggest reason is
probably that they don't attract developers, because the FOSS apps have
so often in the past been Linux only. The developers who want their
stuff to be used as widely as possible aren't interested in building
Linux-only apps. There is a big overlap between those who want their
stuff used and those who want their stuff to be of high quality.
Linux-only programming is apt to be a pursuit of joy or experience or
friendship or spite. That's all fine, but it doesn't increase usage of
Linux or the FOSS app in question, and it doesn't help get rid of
Windows. Not that all Linux-only apps are low quality. But they are
all disused inasmuch as Linux is disused. Not talking about
coffee-makers or servers here.
Rainer Weikusat
[...]
> There are foss alternatives but the quality of those applications are too
> low. It's not "Windows" they are locked in to
No it is 'Windows' you are locked into. And consequently, anyone
relying on you for first-level support is, too. That's certainly
something to shed a tear or two about on national mourning day or
another occasion which doesn't lend itself to anything else. And now
... WOULD YOU PLEASE KEEP YOUR ADVOCACY CRAP IN ADVOCACY NEWSGROUPS.
Chris Ahlstrom
I was going to agree, but then I thought, that's like Catholic and
Protestant fanaticism feeding off of each other. That is, battles. With
Linux and Windows in this case, it is not battles, it is Microsoft feeding
the Windows-only fanaticism. Microsoft is the primary reason there are
Windows-only apps.
--
Every cloud engenders not a storm.
-- William Shakespeare, "Henry VI"
Chris Ahlstrom
> Ezekiel wrote:
>
>> There are foss alternatives but the quality of those applications are too
>> low. It's not "Windows" they are locked in to - it's "applications" that are
>> available for Windows that don't have suitable foss counterparts.
>
> If the FOSS alternatives are of low quality, the biggest reason is
> probably that they don't attract developers, because the FOSS apps have
> so often in the past been Linux only. The developers who want their
> stuff to be used as widely as possible aren't interested in building
> Linux-only apps. There is a big overlap between those who want their
> stuff used and those who want their stuff to be of high quality.
> Linux-only programming is apt to be a pursuit of joy or experience or
> friendship or spite.
Or, *cough* *cough* Freedom.
> That's all fine, but it doesn't increase usage of
> Linux or the FOSS app in question, and it doesn't help get rid of
> Windows. Not that all Linux-only apps are low quality. But they are
> all disused inasmuch as Linux is disused. Not talking about
> coffee-makers or servers here.
Well, there are a *lot* of low-quality Windows applications, too.
And some of them are commercial.
--
Water, taken in moderation cannot hurt anybody.
-- Mark Twain
Hadron
> "Ezekiel" <not-...@the-zeke.com> writes:
>
> [...]
>
>> There are foss alternatives but the quality of those applications are too
>> low. It's not "Windows" they are locked in to
>
> No it is 'Windows' you are locked into. And consequently, anyone
No its not. Try reading the bloody report.
IF those apps ran ok on Linux then fine.
Mark Kent
You don't get "linux-only" fanatiscism, you get an economic case for
escaping from proprietary lock-in. Windows is all about lock-in, Linux
is about freedom from lock-in.
This is about competing economic models; one requires abuse of the
customer, the other empowers the customer.
It not fanatiscism, it's abuse of customers, abuse of monopolies, which
characterise this decision space.
--
| mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |
chrisv
>>
>> It's not "Windows" they are locked in to - it's "applications" that are
>> available for Windows that don't have suitable foss counterparts.
Gosh, "a lot of people and companies use Windows because of it's nice
selection of apps."
Thanks for letting us know that, you stupid shit. We didn't know
that. </sarcasm>
Why don't you just fsck off, you worthless asshole.
Matt
> Matt pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> Ezekiel wrote:
>>
>>> There are foss alternatives but the quality of those applications are too
>>> low. It's not "Windows" they are locked in to - it's "applications" that are
>>> available for Windows that don't have suitable foss counterparts.
>> If the FOSS alternatives are of low quality, the biggest reason is
>> probably that they don't attract developers, because the FOSS apps have
>> so often in the past been Linux only. The developers who want their
>> stuff to be used as widely as possible aren't interested in building
>> Linux-only apps. There is a big overlap between those who want their
>> stuff used and those who want their stuff to be of high quality.
>> Linux-only programming is apt to be a pursuit of joy or experience or
>> friendship or spite.
>
> Or, *cough* *cough* Freedom.
If I were interested in freeing people, I would rather free a hundred
people than one or two.
And I could rally more support from others in trying to free the hundred
than in trying to free the one or two.
And I would get more resistance from the slavers in trying to free the
hundred than in trying to free the one or two.
>> That's all fine, but it doesn't increase usage of
>> Linux or the FOSS app in question, and it doesn't help get rid of
>> Windows. Not that all Linux-only apps are low quality. But they are
>> all disused inasmuch as Linux is disused. Not talking about
>> coffee-makers or servers here.
>
> Well, there are a *lot* of low-quality Windows applications, too.
> And some of them are commercial.
And very often for the same reason: not enough developers because there
are not enough users.
Hadron
> Matt pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> Ezekiel wrote:
>>
>>> There are foss alternatives but the quality of those applications are too
>>> low. It's not "Windows" they are locked in to - it's "applications" that are
>>> available for Windows that don't have suitable foss counterparts.
>>
>> If the FOSS alternatives are of low quality, the biggest reason is
>> probably that they don't attract developers, because the FOSS apps have
>> so often in the past been Linux only. The developers who want their
>> stuff to be used as widely as possible aren't interested in building
>> Linux-only apps. There is a big overlap between those who want their
>> stuff used and those who want their stuff to be of high quality.
>> Linux-only programming is apt to be a pursuit of joy or experience or
>> friendship or spite.
>
> Or, *cough* *cough* Freedom.
What like the freedom for you to insult Joerg Shilling and call OSS
advocates "fuckwits" when YOU write proprietary code for Windows and
openly boast here about how much money you make doing it?
>
>> That's all fine, but it doesn't increase usage of
>> Linux or the FOSS app in question, and it doesn't help get rid of
>> Windows. Not that all Linux-only apps are low quality. But they are
>> all disused inasmuch as Linux is disused. Not talking about
>> coffee-makers or servers here.
>
> Well, there are a *lot* of low-quality Windows applications, too.
> And some of them are commercial.
There are a lot of high quality ones too. What's your point?
Chris Ahlstrom
> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> Well, there are a *lot* of low-quality Windows applications, too.
>> And some of them are commercial.
>
> And very often for the same reason: not enough developers because there
> are not enough users.
Not always. Consider, for example, one of the more problematic Windows
applications: Windows Explorer.
What explains its chronic and long-standing problems?
And why hasn't Microsoft, after 20 years, gotten a solid and stable (in the
sense of no feature-creep and an ever-diminishing number of bugs) version of
all of the products in the Office suite?
I agree with chrisv (whom others accuse so wrongly of never saying anything
of substance) that open data formats would be a big step forward.
I also agree with you that cross-platform apps are desirable... and I'm
puzzled why people don't do it, given how easy it is.
(Well, we know why Microsoft doesn't do it... they want to force you to
stick with their products.)
--
Q: What's the difference between the 1950's and the 1980's?
A: In the 80's, a man walks into a drugstore and states loudly, "I'd
like some condoms," and then, leaning over the counter, whispers,
"and some cigarettes."
Ezekiel
"Chris Ahlstrom" <ahls...@launchmodem.com> wrote in message
news:hi0m7i$a3e$5...@news.eternal-september.org...
> Matt pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>>> Well, there are a *lot* of low-quality Windows applications, too.
>>> And some of them are commercial.
>>
>> And very often for the same reason: not enough developers because there
>> are not enough users.
>
> Not always. Consider, for example, one of the more problematic Windows
> applications: Windows Explorer.
>
> What explains its chronic and long-standing problems?
Such as?
> And why hasn't Microsoft, after 20 years, gotten a solid and stable (in
> the
> sense of no feature-creep and an ever-diminishing number of bugs) version
> of
> all of the products in the Office suite?
Feel free to list all of the Linux apps that focus on fixing bugs instead of
introducing new features.
> I agree with chrisv (whom others accuse so wrongly of never saying
> anything
> of substance) that open data formats would be a big step forward.
I think that this is nice in theory but in practice it doesn't work all that
well. For the "core" data this is do-able but each app typically has
unique/custom features that don't appear in other apps. So how are those
going to be stored? Example - I embed a Visio diagram into a MS-Word
document. Or my Open-Office doc has some OO specific macros. The "core" data
can be stored but app specific stuff won't work.
> I also agree with you that cross-platform apps are desirable... and I'm
> puzzled why people don't do it, given how easy it is.
Non-trivial cross platform apps aren't as easy as you make them out to be.
Hadron
> Matt pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>>> Well, there are a *lot* of low-quality Windows applications, too.
>>> And some of them are commercial.
>>
>> And very often for the same reason: not enough developers because there
>> are not enough users.
>
> Not always. Consider, for example, one of the more problematic Windows
> applications: Windows Explorer.
>
> What explains its chronic and long-standing problems?
What problems? The delay one that Gnome file open dialog suffers from tto?
>
> And why hasn't Microsoft, after 20 years, gotten a solid and stable (in the
> sense of no feature-creep and an ever-diminishing number of bugs) version of
> all of the products in the Office suite?
What is buggy?
>
> I agree with chrisv (whom others accuse so wrongly of never saying anything
> of substance) that open data formats would be a big step forward.
You agree because you're a suck up. That and "yes we all know open
standards are better" - its not rocket science.
>
> I also agree with you that cross-platform apps are desirable... and I'm
> puzzled why people don't do it, given how easy it is.
Because it isn't easy. Half the time time apps turn out to be
Frankenstein's monster.
>
> (Well, we know why Microsoft doesn't do it... they want to force you to
> stick with their products.)
Or appeal so that people buy them.
Matt
> "Chris Ahlstrom" <ahls...@launchmodem.com> wrote in message
>> I also agree with you that cross-platform apps are desirable... and I'm
>> puzzled why people don't do it, given how easy it is.
>
> Non-trivial cross platform apps aren't as easy as you make them out to be.
IME Firefox is quite far from working the same on Linux as it does on
XP. I think a lot of that might come from FF's desire to have a
"native" look and feel. Or it could be some problem regarding fonts
that I don't understand. Unfortunately as I understand it, Chrome is
taking the same goal of native look and feel and, instead of using Qt
and going through the Qt API, is supposedly planning to build a lot of
GUI stuff for each OS. That approach brings a tendency for the minority
OSes to be neglected. So it would seem that true cross-platform
development hasn't yet been tried for the two leading alternative browsers.
Ezekiel
That's really the issue - the desire to have a "native app" for each
platform. Not a cross-platform app. In theory people could just use Java and
"write once, run everywhere). And they'll have something that nobody really
wants to use on any platform. Google might know a thing or two about
software development and they certainly have enourmous amounts of resources
available to them. They know that for an app to be successful, it needs to
be *native* for each platform. That's why they're not using one of these
cross-platform toolkits.
There's not many successful "graphical" apps that are cross platform. I
can't actually think of any. Most successful cross-platform apps fall into
the "computational" category - databases, web-servers, etc. Successful apps
where the end-user needs to use the GUI a large percentage of the time
almost always have a native UI.
JeffM
>>one of the more problematic Windows applications:
>>Windows Explorer.
>>What explains its chronic and long-standing problems?
>>
>Such as?
>
Security
http://google.com/search?q=cache:_E2LJe_wEXMJ:www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/713878+domain.zone-security-model.*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-file-system.*-*-*-*.*.*-*-*-*-*.DHTML.document-object-model.*-*-*.*-*-*-*.*.*-*.HTML-Help-system.MIME-*-determination.the-*-*-*-*.GUI.*-and-ActiveX+*-*-different-*-browser+2004-06.*-*+the.IE+significant.vulnerabilities+Carnegie+University+Mellon+reduce.exposure
http://tinyurl.com/Use-ANY-OtherBrwser
http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/713878
Standards compliance
http://google.com/search?q=cache:P4JJtiECCuEJ:commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Acid3+Internet.Explorer.6+may+%22+100+100%22+12-100+20-100#Trident_-_Internet_Explorer
http://tinyurl.com/20percentReallySucks
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Acid3#Trident_-_Internet_Explorer
Chris Ahlstrom
> "Chris Ahlstrom" <ahls...@launchmodem.com> wrote in message
> news:hi0m7i$a3e$5...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Matt pulled this Usenet boner:
>>
>>> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>
>>>> Well, there are a *lot* of low-quality Windows applications, too.
>>>> And some of them are commercial.
>>>
>>> And very often for the same reason: not enough developers because there
>>> are not enough users.
>>
>> Not always. Consider, for example, one of the more problematic Windows
>> applications: Windows Explorer.
>>
>> What explains its chronic and long-standing problems?
>
> Such as?
The hourglass when you have a mapped drive.
And that actually happens now on my Win 7 install /without/ any mapped
drives.
That behavior has been bugging me for /years/.
With Windows Explorer, I find myself /escaping/ to the command line to
access files sometimes.
>> And why hasn't Microsoft, after 20 years, gotten a solid and stable (in
>> the sense of no feature-creep and an ever-diminishing number of
>> bugs) version of all of the products in the Office suite?
>
> Feel free to list all of the Linux apps that focus on fixing bugs instead of
> introducing new features.
You're being disengenous. You can add new features /and/ focus on fixing
bugs. But, to answer:
The kernel.
TeX.
Fluxbox.
Pretty much any GNU application.
An awful lot of projects in the Debian repositories.
Regressions do occur. But generally, an awful lot of open-source software
simply matures and works better and better as time goes on.
>> I agree with chrisv (whom others accuse so wrongly of never saying
>> anything of substance) that open data formats would be a big step forward.
>
> I think that this is nice in theory but in practice it doesn't work all that
> well. For the "core" data this is do-able but each app typically has
> unique/custom features that don't appear in other apps. So how are those
> going to be stored? Example - I embed a Visio diagram into a MS-Word
> document. Or my Open-Office doc has some OO specific macros. The "core" data
> can be stored but app specific stuff won't work.
Well, then it isn't quite open, is it?
>> I also agree with you that cross-platform apps are desirable... and I'm
>> puzzled why people don't do it, given how easy it is.
>
> Non-trivial cross platform apps aren't as easy as you make them out to be.
I beg to differ. Your buddy "Hadron", in fact, is always claiming how much
software "runs on Windows, too". The fact is, there is a very significant
amount of application and library code that runs on multiple platforms, so
it is not as hard as some like to paint it.
--
Perfect day for scrubbing the floor and other exciting things.
Chris Ahlstrom
> Ezekiel wrote:
I have to say that this sounds like bullshit, based on my experience with
Firefox, at least.
Maybe it is because I install the Vimperator on both the Linux and Windows
versions. :-D
--
Be careful! UGLY strikes 9 out of 10!
Chris Ahlstrom
> That's really the issue - the desire to have a "native app" for each
> platform. Not a cross-platform app. In theory people could just use Java and
> "write once, run everywhere). And they'll have something that nobody really
> wants to use on any platform. Google might know a thing or two about
> software development and they certainly have enourmous amounts of resources
> available to them. They know that for an app to be successful, it needs to
> be *native* for each platform. That's why they're not using one of these
> cross-platform toolkits.
>
> There's not many successful "graphical" apps that are cross platform. I
> can't actually think of any. Most successful cross-platform apps fall into
> the "computational" category - databases, web-servers, etc. Successful apps
> where the end-user needs to use the GUI a large percentage of the time
> almost always have a native UI.
I think you're making the mistake of taking correlation for cause. You may
be conflating "commercial" with "native GUI". Not to mention applying a
parochial point of view derived from the dominance of your main platform,
Windows.
Besides, there is no native UI for Linux.
--
So you're back... about time...
Hadron
Come, come : our resident QT expert has pronounced it pretty
easy. Surely Ahlstrom doesn't know something that Firefox and Google
have missed?
Hadron
Hold on. Ian Hilliard claims to design and implement all his on time
projects first and THEN choose the target OS. Now how does THAT work????
Matt
> Matt pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> Ezekiel wrote:
>>> "Chris Ahlstrom" <ahls...@launchmodem.com> wrote in message
>>>> I also agree with you that cross-platform apps are desirable... and I'm
>>>> puzzled why people don't do it, given how easy it is.
>>> Non-trivial cross platform apps aren't as easy as you make them out to be.
>> IME Firefox is quite far from working the same on Linux as it does on
>> XP. I think a lot of that might come from FF's desire to have a
>> "native" look and feel. Or it could be some problem regarding fonts
>> that I don't understand. Unfortunately as I understand it, Chrome is
>> taking the same goal of native look and feel and, instead of using Qt
>> and going through the Qt API, is supposedly planning to build a lot of
>> GUI stuff for each OS. That approach brings a tendency for the minority
>> OSes to be neglected. So it would seem that true cross-platform
>> development hasn't yet been tried for the two leading alternative browsers.
>
> I have to say that this sounds like bullshit, based on my experience with
> Firefox, at least.
Okay, here is an example that just occurred.
I went to http://www.lg.com/index.jsp and found there is a section
"About LG Corp". With Linux FF (3.0.16, Ubuntu) the choice "Social
Responsibility" appears on two lines, whereas with Windows FF (3.0.14,
XP) it appears on one line. With Linux the word "Responsibility" is
mostly cut off, and I can only see about the top 1/4 of the letters, and
I can't tell whether there are more choices below that that are cut off.
So I think it is a font problem and compare the font options on Linux
FF with those for Windows FF. On Linux I go
Edit-->Preferences-->Content-->Default Font(Advanced),
but on Windows I go
Tools-->Options-->Content-->Default Font(Advanced).
Now that difference in itself seems like pure foolishness, but more
importantly, Linux does not present the same particular font choices as
Windows. I change some of the font-size choices on Linux to match those
on Windows and try again. The "Social Responsibility" choice is still
on two lines instead of one, but now I can see the top half of
"Responsibility" instead of the top quarter.
That is an example that I think you may be able to reproduce on your
own. But a couple weeks ago I was at the verizon site, and the
rendering on Linux FF was disastrous. I couldn't find what I wanted,
and I thought the site must have been designed by complete idiots, until
I tried it on Windows FF and was able to find my way around the site. I
mean Linux FF was failing to show whole drop-down menus as if maybe the
order of rendition was wrong, and the menus were being overwritten.
Anyway I went back to the verizon site this evening, and it looked okay
with Linux, so I don't know whether the change was due to a FF update or
what. It is not something that feel I should have to think about.
> Maybe it is because I install the Vimperator on both the Linux and Windows
> versions. :-D
I don't get your apparent joke about the Vimperator.
TomB
On 2010-01-06, the following emerged from the brain of Ezekiel:
> There's not many successful "graphical" apps that are cross platform. I
> can't actually think of any. Most successful cross-platform apps fall into
> the "computational" category - databases, web-servers, etc. Successful apps
> where the end-user needs to use the GUI a large percentage of the time
> almost always have a native UI.
Gimp and Pidgin use the GTK toolkit on both Windows and GNU/Linux.
--
Hippies.They're everywhere. They wanna save the earth, but all they do
is smoke pot and smell bad.
~ Eric Cartman
Jasen Betts
> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> Matt pulled this Usenet boner:
>>
>>> Ezekiel wrote:
>>>> "Chris Ahlstrom" <ahls...@launchmodem.com> wrote in message
>>>>> I also agree with you that cross-platform apps are desirable... and I'm
>>>>> puzzled why people don't do it, given how easy it is.
>>>> Non-trivial cross platform apps aren't as easy as you make them out to be.
>>> IME Firefox is quite far from working the same on Linux as it does on
>>> XP. I think a lot of that might come from FF's desire to have a
> I went to http://www.lg.com/index.jsp and found there is a section
> "About LG Corp". With Linux FF (3.0.16, Ubuntu) the choice "Social
> Responsibility" appears on two lines, whereas with Windows FF (3.0.14,
> XP) it appears on one line. With Linux the word "Responsibility" is
> mostly cut off, and I can only see about the top 1/4 of the letters, and
> I can't tell whether there are more choices below that that are cut off.
> So I think it is a font problem and compare the font options on Linux
> FF with those for Windows FF. On Linux I go
> Edit-->Preferences-->Content-->Default Font(Advanced),
> but on Windows I go
> Tools-->Options-->Content-->Default Font(Advanced).
> Now that difference in itself seems like pure foolishness, but more
> importantly, Linux does not present the same particular font choices as
> Windows. I change some of the font-size choices on Linux to match those
> on Windows and try again. The "Social Responsibility" choice is still
> on two lines instead of one, but now I can see the top half of
> "Responsibility" instead of the top quarter.
dunno what you've done to it. it works here.
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---
Chris Ahlstrom
> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>> Non-trivial cross platform apps aren't as easy as you make them out to be.
>>> IME Firefox is quite far from working the same on Linux as it does on
>>> XP. I think a lot of that might come from FF's desire to have a
>>> "native" look and feel. Or it could be some problem regarding fonts
>>> that I don't understand.
>>
>> I have to say that this sounds like bullshit, based on my experience with
>> Firefox, at least.
>
> Okay, here is an example that just occurred.
>
> I went to http://www.lg.com/index.jsp and found there is a section
> "About LG Corp". With Linux FF (3.0.16, Ubuntu) the choice "Social
> Responsibility" appears on two lines, whereas with Windows FF (3.0.14,
> XP) it appears on one line. With Linux the word "Responsibility" is
> mostly cut off, and I can only see about the top 1/4 of the letters, and
> I can't tell whether there are more choices below that that are cut off.
> So I think it is a font problem ...
Or CSS, depending on which IE you use.
> and compare the font options on Linux
> FF with those for Windows FF. On Linux I go
> Edit-->Preferences-->Content-->Default Font(Advanced),
> but on Windows I go
> Tools-->Options-->Content-->Default Font(Advanced).
> Now that difference in itself seems like pure foolishness, ...
Nah, it is convention.
> but more
> importantly, Linux does not present the same particular font choices as
> Windows. I change some of the font-size choices on Linux to match those
> on Windows and try again. The "Social Responsibility" choice is still
> on two lines instead of one, but now I can see the top half of
> "Responsibility" instead of the top quarter.
I really wouldn't call this a browser problem, so much as a web-site
problem.
An just hit Ctrl-minus or Ctrl-plus in both versions of FireFox
(or "zo" or "zi" in Vimperator :-)
> That is an example that I think you may be able to reproduce on your
> own. But a couple weeks ago I was at the verizon site, and the
> rendering on Linux FF was disastrous. I couldn't find what I wanted,
> and I thought the site must have been designed by complete idiots, until
> I tried it on Windows FF and was able to find my way around the site. I
> mean Linux FF was failing to show whole drop-down menus as if maybe the
> order of rendition was wrong, and the menus were being overwritten.
> Anyway I went back to the verizon site this evening, and it looked okay
> with Linux, so I don't know whether the change was due to a FF update or
> what. It is not something that feel I should have to think about.
Indeed, but blame the web site, not FireFox. The former avoids web
standards in favor of single-platform stuff, the latter adapts to each
platform as best it can.
>> Maybe it is because I install the Vimperator on both the Linux and Windows
>> versions. :-D
>
> I don't get your apparent joke about the Vimperator.
With Vimperator, you don't have to worry about the locations of
commands/options in the menus as much. A familiarity with vi helps.
I joke because my response to this nascent Snit circus is "they're different
systems, deal with it". I find the differences (except for the worst of the
web sites) trivial.
By the way, as far as off-beat web sites go, I have to applaud Microsoft for
the way they've really cleaned up how their sites (e.g. msdn.microsoft.com)
work with Linux browsers.
--
A vivid and creative mind characterizes you.
TomB
> Matt pulled this Usenet boner:
>> FF with those for Windows FF. On Linux I go
>> Edit-->Preferences-->Content-->Default Font(Advanced),
>> but on Windows I go
>> Tools-->Options-->Content-->Default Font(Advanced).
>> Now that difference in itself seems like pure foolishness, ...
>
> Nah, it is convention.
I think it's silly too. I'd rather see cross-platform applications
behave the same accross environments than adapt the conventions of the
environment they are running in. If I'm working on a computer I don't
think "hey, I'm in this environments so the application will behave
like this", but rather "hey, I'm using application X so it will behave
like this".
--
I wanna, I wanna, I wanna, I wanna, I wanna really
really really wanna zigazig ha.
~ The Spice Girls
Snit
The alternative is to create apps that do not fit in well with the OS they
are running on and thus are not as usable.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Ezekiel
"JeffM" <jef...@email.com> wrote in message
news:2464c161-9029-4f47...@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
Read it again - he said *Windows Explorer* and not "Internet Explorer."
Ezekiel
> Ezekiel pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> "Chris Ahlstrom" <ahls...@launchmodem.com> wrote in message
>> news:hi0m7i$a3e$5...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> Matt pulled this Usenet boner:
>>>
>>>> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Well, there are a *lot* of low-quality Windows applications, too.
>>>>> And some of them are commercial.
>>>>
>>>> And very often for the same reason: not enough developers because there
>>>> are not enough users.
>>>
>>> Not always. Consider, for example, one of the more problematic Windows
>>> applications: Windows Explorer.
>>>
>>> What explains its chronic and long-standing problems?
>>
>> Such as?
>
> The hourglass when you have a mapped drive.
>
> And that actually happens now on my Win 7 install /without/ any mapped
> drives.
>
> That behavior has been bugging me for /years/.
I'm not saying this doesn't happen... but it doesn't happen to me at work or
at home. In either case I would argue that this isn't a problem with Windows
Explorer - it's most likely somethng at a lower networking/connection level
and Win-Explorer is simply waiting for something else to finish.
> With Windows Explorer, I find myself /escaping/ to the command line to
> access files sometimes.
I'll do that too but it depends on what it is that I want to do at the time.
I use Win-Explorer and it's pretty responsive. If there's some sort of
network delay or bottleneck then that's really outside of it's control.
>>> And why hasn't Microsoft, after 20 years, gotten a solid and stable (in
>>> the sense of no feature-creep and an ever-diminishing number of
>>> bugs) version of all of the products in the Office suite?
>>
>> Feel free to list all of the Linux apps that focus on fixing bugs instead
>> of
>> introducing new features.
>
> You're being disengenous. You can add new features /and/ focus on fixing
> bugs. But, to answer:
>
> The kernel.
>
> TeX.
I think the implicit criteria is to compare apples-to-apples. (ie - not a
GUI Office suite to a kernel). I'm talking about something like Gimp,
Open-Office, etc. This genre of apps typically prefers to add new features.
The reality is that hardly anyone is going to upgrade or get a new version
of these apps because some obscure bugs were fixed - but they will do this
if new features are added.
ChiTown
> Feel free to list all of the Linux apps that focus on fixing bugs instead of
> introducing new features.
Ubuntu does that. It keeps getting better and more stable with each
release. I'm looking forward to the next version.
Ezekiel
"ChiTown" <chito...@entmail.org> wrote in message
news:ddnrvlo30qpo.z...@40tude.net...
Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!! Good one!!!
Hadron
Why? What's so buggy you need an entire new version?
Come on freetard fan boy, spill the beans.
Matt
Consistent with TomB's remark elsewhere, usability depends on the user's
mindset.
If the user is devoted to a certain OS that has an established look and
feel, then he gets surprised by anything that acts foreign. When
somebody builds a cross-platform app, he should build to suit the user
who knows he is using a cross-platform app and who wants to use a
cross-platform app and who accepts the idea that consistency across
platforms is more important than adapting to whatever platform he
happens to be on at the time. The user who seeks a cross-platform app
by his nature wants the platform to be irrelevant.
You might debate whether Windows or Mac has a superior look and feel and
whether Linux has any recognizable look and feel at all. I would that
cross-platform programmers become philistines and choose an arbitrary
convention, maybe 1) the look and feel of Windows, as that presents the
least surprise to randomly-recruited users of a cross-platform app, or
2) a look and feel that is convenient to implement for lots of apps, as
available in something like Qt or Java, so that the look and feel is
inherited automatically from the toolset.
Snit
> Snit wrote:
>> Matt stated in post 5FR0n.10185$Sh7....@newsfe25.iad on 1/5/10 6:26 PM:
>>
>>> Ezekiel wrote:
>>>> "Chris Ahlstrom" <ahls...@launchmodem.com> wrote in message
>>>>> I also agree with you that cross-platform apps are desirable... and I'm
>>>>> puzzled why people don't do it, given how easy it is.
>>>> Non-trivial cross platform apps aren't as easy as you make them out to be.
>>>
>>> IME Firefox is quite far from working the same on Linux as it does on
>>> XP. I think a lot of that might come from FF's desire to have a
>>> "native" look and feel. Or it could be some problem regarding fonts
>>> that I don't understand. Unfortunately as I understand it, Chrome is
>>> taking the same goal of native look and feel and, instead of using Qt
>>> and going through the Qt API, is supposedly planning to build a lot of
>>> GUI stuff for each OS. That approach brings a tendency for the minority
>>> OSes to be neglected. So it would seem that true cross-platform
>>> development hasn't yet been tried for the two leading alternative browsers.
>>
>> The alternative is to create apps that do not fit in well with the OS they
>> are running on and thus are not as usable.
>
> Consistent with TomB's remark elsewhere, usability depends on the user's
> mindset.
To some extent, perhaps - but there is a massive amount of established
*science* to GUI usability.
> If the user is devoted to a certain OS that has an established look and
> feel, then he gets surprised by anything that acts foreign. When
> somebody builds a cross-platform app, he should build to suit the user
> who knows he is using a cross-platform app and who wants to use a
> cross-platform app and who accepts the idea that consistency across
> platforms is more important than adapting to whatever platform he
> happens to be on at the time. The user who seeks a cross-platform app
> by his nature wants the platform to be irrelevant.
I use many cross platform apps: Firefox, MS Office, Dreamweaver, Photoshop,
VLC, etc. I am happy the developers are aware enough of usability to
understand the importance of having the programs work with the OS I use (and
others).
> You might debate whether Windows or Mac has a superior look and feel and
> whether Linux has any recognizable look and feel at all.
It has a number of inconsistent and poorly followed UI conventions... which
makes it a bit of a usability mess. When you are using such an environment,
of course, there is no goal for developers to really strive for... best they
can do is pick one and try to actually follow it (which many clearly do
not)... unless there is a user based reason not to.
> I would that cross-platform programmers become philistines and choose an
> arbitrary convention, maybe 1) the look and feel of Windows, as that presents
> the least surprise to randomly-recruited users of a cross-platform app, or 2)
> a look and feel that is convenient to implement for lots of apps, as available
> in something like Qt or Java, so that the look and feel is inherited
> automatically from the toolset.
I want my apps, when possible, to take advantage of the look and feel *and*
functionality of my OS. That, of course, does not happen 100%, but it is
almost always better for the user when an app developer spends the time to
do this.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
TomB
> Consistent with TomB's remark elsewhere, usability depends on the user's
> mindset.
>
> If the user is devoted to a certain OS that has an established look and
> feel, then he gets surprised by anything that acts foreign. When
> somebody builds a cross-platform app, he should build to suit the user
> who knows he is using a cross-platform app and who wants to use a
> cross-platform app and who accepts the idea that consistency across
> platforms is more important than adapting to whatever platform he
> happens to be on at the time. The user who seeks a cross-platform app
> by his nature wants the platform to be irrelevant.
>
> You might debate whether Windows or Mac has a superior look and feel and
> whether Linux has any recognizable look and feel at all. I would that
> cross-platform programmers become philistines and choose an arbitrary
> convention, maybe 1) the look and feel of Windows, as that presents the
> least surprise to randomly-recruited users of a cross-platform app, or
> 2) a look and feel that is convenient to implement for lots of apps, as
> available in something like Qt or Java, so that the look and feel is
> inherited automatically from the toolset.
Nice breakdown, and *exactly* my view on the subject too.
--
You ever notice how all the prices end in nine?
Damn, that's eerie...
~ Dante Hicks
Rex Ballard
> >> Feel free to list all of the Linux apps that focus
> >> on fixing bugs instead of
> >> introducing new features.
There are hundreds of support programs and applications that help
developers implement new applications quickly, and debug them
effectively, and get them into packages that can easily be installed
using RPM, Debian packages, and/or "tarballs".
> > Ubuntu does that. It keeps getting better and more stable with each
> > release. I'm looking forward to the next version.
> Why? What's so buggy you need an entire new version?
Every new release comes with new features, applications, new
capabilities for old applications, and more flexibility. Getting a
typical Linux distribution would be comparable to getting nearly every
product Microsoft makes, for about $100 per year.
> Come on freetard fan boy, spill the beans.
In professional environments, most companies are establishing a
"corporate image", usually a more stable and slightly older version of
Red Hat, SUSE or Ubuntu, and then Developers can "dual-boot" into one
of the more "up to date" distributions for personal use, testing new
software for compatibility, and the most up-to-date tools that might
not run on the older kernels/libraries because the developers are
using new library features.
ceed
>> What explains its chronic and long-standing problems?
> Such as?
There tons more of these all over. I have a lot of friends and family on
Windows. Behind malware and general windows not working problems Explorer
related ones is a good #3.
--
//ceed
Ezekiel
"ceed" <cdposte...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:op.u55vvjpf325jvr@christian-laptop...
I've been using Windows for many years. Not only have I never seen this
bug - I've never even heard of this. And this doesn't sound like a "long
standing problem with Windows Explorer" - it sounds like a bug with the
installer:
<quote>
While trying to install/uninstall applications from Windows 7 by using the
well-known Windows Installer, or even while trying to update the operating
system by using Windows Update, the system could get stuck or crash causing
Windows Explorer or even Windows Installer itself to give the user the
following error messages:
</quote>
Kadaitcha Man
> "ceed" <cdposte...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:op.u55vvjpf325jvr@christian-laptop...
>> On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 18:54:51 -0600, Ezekiel <not-...@the-zeke.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> What explains its chronic and long-standing problems?
>>> Such as?
>>
>> http://is.gd/5QSLB
>>
>> There tons more of these all over. I have a lot of friends and family
>> on Windows. Behind malware and general windows not working problems
>> Explorer related ones is a good #3.
>
> I've been using Windows for many years. Not only have I never seen this
> bug - I've never even heard of this. And this doesn't sound like a "long
> standing problem<BITCHSLAP>
"Windows 7"
You brain-dead fuckweed.
--
Test signature
Matt
I don't know what I've done to it either. I have messed with the font
and size options sometimes. I guess I would like to reset all the
relevant options to some kind of out-of-the-box defaults, but I don't
know whether there is a way to do that without losing stuff like my
years-old bookmarks.
Kadaitcha Man
> I don't know what I've done to it either.
I said that to one of my rent-wives who came home with a looser cunt than
what she went out with.
I have scratches down the side of my face to prove it.
--
Test signature