How to import digital photos from iPad to Linux using USB cable?

[Pat Wilson]

I'm having lots of trouble using the default Shotwell application
on Ubuntu 13.10 to import photos from the ipad Air (iOS 7).

How do YOU import photos from your iPad to your Linux PC using USB cable?

I keep failing:
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2935/13956264620_b17b60c7d6_h.jpg

Every five seconds (seemingly forever), I get the iPad question:
Trust This Computer?
Your settings and data will be accessible from this computer
when connected.
[TRUST?] [DON'T TRUST?]

And, at the same time, I get the Shotwell error:
Shotwell: Unable to fetch previews from the camera:
Unspecified error (-1)

Googling, I find it's likely a problem with the iPad not being
recognized as a camera on Linux PCs.

Here's what my 'lsusb" command reveals on Linux:
Bus 002 Device `125: ID 05ac:12ab Apple, Inc.

Do you have further debugging commands?

Since I can't be the only one who wishes to import photos from the
iPad to Linux, may I ask you Linux & camera experts what solution
YOU use to import your videos & photos by USB cable from your iPad
to your Linux PC?

[TJ]

Don't know how much help I'll be, as I don't have an iPad - I have an
Android tablet. And I don't use Ubuntu and Gnome - I use Mageia 4 and
KDE. But for what it's worth...

I use KDE's Dolphin file manager to transfer photos from my tablet - or
from my cameras, for that matter. Dolphin deals with the devices as it
would a thumb drive or flash card reader, and mounts the file system.
(FAT32 on the cameras. I haven't looked at the tablet's "internal SD
card" file system, but I believe it is EXT4.) I can then copy the files
to my PC's hard drive and do what I want with them from there.

Now, my cameras and tablet use a standard jpeg file type. If the iPad is
different, well...

TJ

[nospam]

In article <lkikuc$glh$1...@dont-email.me>, TJ <T...@noneofyour.business>
wrote:

> > Since I can't be the only one who wishes to import photos from the
> > iPad to Linux, may I ask you Linux & camera experts what solution
> > YOU use to import your videos & photos by USB cable from your iPad
> > to your Linux PC?
>
> Don't know how much help I'll be, as I don't have an iPad - I have an
> Android tablet. And I don't use Ubuntu and Gnome - I use Mageia 4 and
> KDE. But for what it's worth...
>
> I use KDE's Dolphin file manager to transfer photos from my tablet - or
> from my cameras, for that matter. Dolphin deals with the devices as it
> would a thumb drive or flash card reader, and mounts the file system.
> (FAT32 on the cameras. I haven't looked at the tablet's "internal SD
> card" file system, but I believe it is EXT4.) I can then copy the files
> to my PC's hard drive and do what I want with them from there.
>
> Now, my cameras and tablet use a standard jpeg file type. If the iPad is
> different, well...

again, the ipad shows up as a normal digital camera and it shoots jpeg
like any other digital camera does. any software that works for a
digital camera will work for an ipad.

[Whiskers]

I'm iPad-free, so I can't experiment. But
<https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Shotwell> could have some clues. Shotwell
seems to use gphoto as its 'camera detector', which should be able to
handle an iPad <http://gphoto.org/>
<http://gphoto.org/proj/libgphoto2/support.php> - can you put the iPad
into "PTP mode" before connecting it to your computer?

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~

[Alfred Molon]

In article <lki0pt$6lj$2...@dont-email.me>, patw...@example.com says...

> I'm having lots of trouble using the default Shotwell application
> on Ubuntu 13.10 to import photos from the ipad Air (iOS 7).
>
> How do YOU import photos from your iPad to your Linux PC using USB cable?
>
> I keep failing:

You should try Android devices. With these it's not a problem to
import/export any kind of data via USB...
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

[Alan Browne]

On 2014.05.09, 03:40 , Pat Wilson wrote:
> I'm having lots of trouble using the default Shotwell application
> on Ubuntu 13.10 to import photos from the ipad Air (iOS 7).
>
> How do YOU import photos from your iPad to your Linux PC using USB cable?
>
> I keep failing:
> http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2935/13956264620_b17b60c7d6_h.jpg
>
> Every five seconds (seemingly forever), I get the iPad question:
> Trust This Computer?
> Your settings and data will be accessible from this computer
> when connected.
> [TRUST?] [DON'T TRUST?]
>
> And, at the same time, I get the Shotwell error:
> Shotwell: Unable to fetch previews from the camera:
> Unspecified error (-1)
>
> Googling, I find it's likely a problem with the iPad not being
> recognized as a camera on Linux PCs.

I just connected by iPhone 4 (iOS 7) to my Mac running Ubunutu in a VM
under Fusion.

Ubuntu definitely recognized it as a camera (etc..)

After the "Trust" pass on the iPhone, I had a dialog showing various
things on the iPhone and a button to launch shotwell. Did so, saw the
photos on my iPhone and selected some for import into a linux folder.

They copied over with no problem.

But the iPhone did repeat the "Trust?" dialog again and the connection
was not maintained. Also got a "Unable to mount AlansiPhone - already
mounted" dialog that would not cancel properly or close. At that point
I was locked out. Another dialog about an audio player popped up for
the 2nd time - non-responsive.

I disconnected and re-connected the iPhone.

- the Linux session became non-responsve - could not even get to the
shutdown dialog

- the "Trust" dialog repeated every 10 seconds or so - appears that the
iPhone and Linux are attempting to talk but are not happy with each other...

- was able to invoke a clean shutdown from the VM control panel.



So, then I tried OpenSUSE.

Default was Gwenview - no photos showed / Trust dialog on iPhone kept
popping up.

Tried Digikam - no luck.

Next tried Gwenview again. This time the photos thumbnails listed.
Trust dialog on iPhone again and an "unknown error 150" message from
Gwenview on OpenSUSE.



No appearance of iPhone/iOS 7 - Linux happiness here...

G'luck

--
"Big data can reduce anything to a single number,
but you shouldn’t be fooled by the appearance of exactitude."
-Gary Marcus and Ernest Davis, NYT, 2014.04.07

[nospam]

In article <slrnlmqf9h.3...@ID-107770.user.individual.net>,

Whiskers <catwh...@operamail.com> wrote:

> > Since I can't be the only one who wishes to import photos from the
> > iPad to Linux, may I ask you Linux & camera experts what solution YOU
> > use to import your videos & photos by USB cable from your iPad to your
> > Linux PC?
>
> I'm iPad-free, so I can't experiment. But
> <https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Shotwell> could have some clues. Shotwell
> seems to use gphoto as its 'camera detector', which should be able to
> handle an iPad <http://gphoto.org/>
> <http://gphoto.org/proj/libgphoto2/support.php> - can you put the iPad
> into "PTP mode" before connecting it to your computer?

it connects in ptp mode, as other digital cameras do.

there is no need to do anything special nor is there a need for special
software. just pretend it's a nikon or canon camera.

[nospam]

In article <MPG.2dd7f9037...@news.supernews.com>, Alfred

Molon <alfred...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > I'm having lots of trouble using the default Shotwell application
> > on Ubuntu 13.10 to import photos from the ipad Air (iOS 7).
> >
> > How do YOU import photos from your iPad to your Linux PC using USB cable?
> >
> > I keep failing:
>
> You should try Android devices. With these it's not a problem to
> import/export any kind of data via USB...

there isn't any problem importing photos from an ios device either.
it's exactly the same as any other camera.

[cas...@home.com]

On Fri, 9 May 2014 07:40:46 +0000 (UTC), Pat Wilson
<patw...@example.com> wrote:

>I'm having lots of trouble using the default Shotwell application
>on Ubuntu 13.10 to import photos from the ipad Air (iOS 7).

I know nothing about Ipads, adn little abotu linux, but after reading
this thread, I had a thought. Why not upload your photos to one of
those free photo websites, and then download them on the other device.

Just a thought, maybe this is not even possible, but it was a
thought....

[nospam]

In article <pgssm9902096otkut...@4ax.com>,

<cas...@home.com> wrote:

> >I'm having lots of trouble using the default Shotwell application
> >on Ubuntu 13.10 to import photos from the ipad Air (iOS 7).
>
> I know nothing about Ipads, adn little abotu linux, but after reading
> this thread, I had a thought. Why not upload your photos to one of
> those free photo websites, and then download them on the other device.
>
> Just a thought, maybe this is not even possible, but it was a
> thought....

it's possible, including on the fly as they're taken. however, it does
need wifi or cellular service.

[Whiskers]

On 2014-05-09, Pat Wilson <patw...@example.com> wrote:

> I'm having lots of trouble using the default Shotwell application on
> Ubuntu 13.10 to import photos from the ipad Air (iOS 7).
>
> How do YOU import photos from your iPad to your Linux PC using USB
> cable?
>
> I keep failing:
> http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2935/13956264620_b17b60c7d6_h.jpg
>
> Every five seconds (seemingly forever), I get the iPad question: Trust
> This Computer? Your settings and data will be accessible from this
> computer when connected. [TRUST?] [DON'T TRUST?]

[...]

You seem not to be alone: "How to Fix the iPad and iPhone 'Trust' Bug on
Ubuntu"
<http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2014/03/ios7-ipad-iphone-ubuntu-trust>

Alternatives to using a USB cable do exist.

If the memory card holding the photos can be removed from the iPad, then
it should be possible to read it directly or through an adaptor.

You could use FTP (or SFTP or SSH) over your local WiFi - an FTP client
on the iPad and an FTP server on the computer (or the other way around)
should make it possible to copy or move files between the two - that's
what I do with my Android smartphone.

Is there a 'network accessible storage' (NAS) device already set up on
your local network and accessible to the iPad over WiFi?

Bluetooth can be made to handle file transfers.

Failing those options, use 'the cloud' (eg Dropbox) to upload from the
iPad and download to the computer.

[PeterN]

Helpful answer.

--
PeterN

[nospam]

In article <slrnlmt2at.3...@ID-107770.user.individual.net>,

Whiskers <catwh...@operamail.com> wrote:

> You seem not to be alone: "How to Fix the iPad and iPhone 'Trust' Bug on
> Ubuntu"
> <http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2014/03/ios7-ipad-iphone-ubuntu-trust>

it isn't saving the trust ticket properly.

> Alternatives to using a USB cable do exist.

most of which are more hassle than using a usb cable. just boot into
windows and be done with it. why make things harder than necessary.

> If the memory card holding the photos can be removed from the iPad, then
> it should be possible to read it directly or through an adaptor.

there is no memory card on an ipad nor is there a memory card on many
android devices.

> You could use FTP (or SFTP or SSH) over your local WiFi - an FTP client
> on the iPad and an FTP server on the computer (or the other way around)
> should make it possible to copy or move files between the two - that's
> what I do with my Android smartphone.

unless the app is designed to copy all the photos at once, that will be
a huge pain in the ass.

> Is there a 'network accessible storage' (NAS) device already set up on
> your local network and accessible to the iPad over WiFi?

a nas doesn't matter.

> Bluetooth can be made to handle file transfers.

not at a speed that is useful for photos and certainly not videos.
ipads don't support file transfer over bluetooth for that reason. it
sucks, and there are much better ways to do it.

> Failing those options, use 'the cloud' (eg Dropbox) to upload from the
> iPad and download to the computer.

the cloud is the most convenient method, and with photostream, it's
transparent to the user.

[Alan Browne]

It's both very possible and a good idea. When I don't have my iPhone
cable I do just that (via e-mail, but it could go via Dropbox or the
Apple iCloud as well).

It just lacks that common sense idea that one should be able to load
photos from an iOS device to a computer without the pain that Linux
users seem to suffer.

[Whiskers]

On 2014-05-10, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <slrnlmt2at.3...@ID-107770.user.individual.net>,
> Whiskers <catwh...@operamail.com> wrote:
>
>> You seem not to be alone: "How to Fix the iPad and iPhone 'Trust' Bug on
>> Ubuntu"
>> <http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2014/03/ios7-ipad-iphone-ubuntu-trust>
>
> it isn't saving the trust ticket properly.
>
>> Alternatives to using a USB cable do exist.
>
> most of which are more hassle than using a usb cable. just boot into
> windows and be done with it. why make things harder than necessary.

Not using a USB cable is nearly always less hassle than using a USB
cable. Particularly when using the USB cable doesn't work at all, as in
this instance.

Booting into Windows only works if you have Windows installed - and
Windows has USB problems of its own.

>> If the memory card holding the photos can be removed from the iPad, then
>> it should be possible to read it directly or through an adaptor.
>
> there is no memory card on an ipad nor is there a memory card on many
> android devices.

OK. I used the conditional mode to cover that possibility.

>> You could use FTP (or SFTP or SSH) over your local WiFi - an FTP client
>> on the iPad and an FTP server on the computer (or the other way around)
>> should make it possible to copy or move files between the two - that's
>> what I do with my Android smartphone.
>
> unless the app is designed to copy all the photos at once, that will be
> a huge pain in the ass.

Which could explain why FTP clients usually have means for handling
whole directories and directory trees, not to mention 'wildcard' or
'regex' methods for identifying the files to be copied. A web browser
might not, but who uses a web browser for file management?

On Linux, "Midnight Commander" (mc) is my preferred file management tool;
it integrates FTP among all its other abilities. On Android, "Ghost
Commander" has a similar interface and has plugins for FTP and SFTP among
other things. There are several 'WiFi file transfer' apps for Android
which set up a simple FTP server on the device; I like "WIFI FTP" by
"Nalic". Putting the FTP server on the smartphone or tablet means that
one can use the file manager or other FTP client on the computer to
handle all the user input, which is (I find) easier than using a
touch-screen for intricate selection.

>> Is there a 'network accessible storage' (NAS) device already set up on
>> your local network and accessible to the iPad over WiFi?
>
> a nas doesn't matter.

Although if there is one, it'll be far quicker and entirely more private
than using 'the cloud'.

>> Bluetooth can be made to handle file transfers.
>
> not at a speed that is useful for photos and certainly not videos.
> ipads don't support file transfer over bluetooth for that reason. it
> sucks, and there are much better ways to do it.
>
>> Failing those options, use 'the cloud' (eg Dropbox) to upload from the
>> iPad and download to the computer.
>
> the cloud is the most convenient method, and with photostream, it's
> transparent to the user.

Provided you trust strangers with your files and can handle the costs.

[Savageduck]

On 2014-05-11 12:56:41 +0000, Alan Browne

<alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> said:

> On 2014.05.10, 14:41 , cas...@home.com wrote:
>> On Fri, 9 May 2014 07:40:46 +0000 (UTC), Pat Wilson
>> <patw...@example.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm having lots of trouble using the default Shotwell application
>>> on Ubuntu 13.10 to import photos from the ipad Air (iOS 7).
>>
>> I know nothing about Ipads, adn little abotu linux, but after reading
>> this thread, I had a thought. Why not upload your photos to one of
>> those free photo websites, and then download them on the other device.
>>
>> Just a thought, maybe this is not even possible, but it was a
>> thought....
>
>
> It's both very possible and a good idea. When I don't have my iPhone
> cable I do just that (via e-mail, but it could go via Dropbox or the
> Apple iCloud as well).

My photo transfer needs with iPad are in the reverse direction,
computer-to-iPad, to add PP finished images to a portfolio, as I don't
use the iPad camera for image capture.

I have several methods to get this done starting with one of the cloud
storage options, Dropbox (2.25GB free), Box(50GB free), Pogoplug(4GB
free/1TB personal) and the Photo Transfer App.
Each of these works just as well in the reverse direction.

…and since subscribing to PS CC I have another two methods to have
files available online for working on, or display with 20GB of
creativecloud.com space and the ability to share Lightroom collections
with Lightroom Mobile.

Email is a way to get it done, but can be a bit inefficient if you have
a fair number of images to move.

I don't use Apple photo streaming/iPhoto.

> It just lacks that common sense idea that one should be able to load
> photos from an iOS device to a computer without the pain that Linux
> users seem to suffer.

As for providing assistance or advice to Linux iPad users, I have
nothing useful to say.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

[nospam]

In article <slrnlmut35.1...@ID-107770.user.individual.net>,

Whiskers <catwh...@operamail.com> wrote:

> >> Alternatives to using a USB cable do exist.
> >
> > most of which are more hassle than using a usb cable. just boot into
> > windows and be done with it. why make things harder than necessary.
>
> Not using a USB cable is nearly always less hassle than using a USB
> cable. Particularly when using the USB cable doesn't work at all, as in
> this instance.

no, because using a usb cable is much faster than the alternatives and
it's linux that is the issue here, not a cable.

> Booting into Windows only works if you have Windows installed - and
> Windows has USB problems of its own.

not really and certainly nothing that affects this situation.

> >> You could use FTP (or SFTP or SSH) over your local WiFi - an FTP client
> >> on the iPad and an FTP server on the computer (or the other way around)
> >> should make it possible to copy or move files between the two - that's
> >> what I do with my Android smartphone.
> >
> > unless the app is designed to copy all the photos at once, that will be
> > a huge pain in the ass.
>
> Which could explain why FTP clients usually have means for handling
> whole directories and directory trees, not to mention 'wildcard' or
> 'regex' methods for identifying the files to be copied. A web browser
> might not, but who uses a web browser for file management?

who said anything about using a web browser?

whether an app can select more than one photo is up to the app author.
there are no doubt apps that can, but that doesn't mean all of them
will do that.

> >> Is there a 'network accessible storage' (NAS) device already set up on
> >> your local network and accessible to the iPad over WiFi?
> >
> > a nas doesn't matter.
>
> Although if there is one, it'll be far quicker and entirely more private
> than using 'the cloud'.

it will make absolutely no difference whatsoever since the bottleneck
is the wireless interface, especially if it's cellular.

> >> Failing those options, use 'the cloud' (eg Dropbox) to upload from the
> >> iPad and download to the computer.
> >
> > the cloud is the most convenient method, and with photostream, it's
> > transparent to the user.
>
> Provided you trust strangers with your files and can handle the costs.

encryption and the cloud is free (and with paid options for more space).

[Whiskers]

On 2014-05-11, Alan Browne <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> On 2014.05.10, 14:41 , cas...@home.com wrote:
>> On Fri, 9 May 2014 07:40:46 +0000 (UTC), Pat Wilson
>> <patw...@example.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm having lots of trouble using the default Shotwell application on
>>> Ubuntu 13.10 to import photos from the ipad Air (iOS 7).
>>
>> I know nothing about Ipads, adn little abotu linux, but after reading
>> this thread, I had a thought. Why not upload your photos to one of
>> those free photo websites, and then download them on the other
>> device.
>>
>> Just a thought, maybe this is not even possible, but it was a
>> thought....
>
>
> It's both very possible and a good idea. When I don't have my iPhone
> cable I do just that (via e-mail, but it could go via Dropbox or the
> Apple iCloud as well).
>
> It just lacks that common sense idea that one should be able to load
> photos from an iOS device to a computer without the pain that Linux
> users seem to suffer.

Ask Apple why they can't stick to industry standards.

[William Unruh]

On 2014-05-11, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <slrnlmut35.1...@ID-107770.user.individual.net>,
> Whiskers <catwh...@operamail.com> wrote:
>
>> >> Alternatives to using a USB cable do exist.
>> >
>> > most of which are more hassle than using a usb cable. just boot into
>> > windows and be done with it. why make things harder than necessary.
>>
>> Not using a USB cable is nearly always less hassle than using a USB
>> cable. Particularly when using the USB cable doesn't work at all, as in
>> this instance.
>
> no, because using a usb cable is much faster than the alternatives and
> it's linux that is the issue here, not a cable.

How is linux the issue? Most smart phones have a mode in which they look
like a usb memory device. If the iphone does not, that is a problem with
the iphone, not with Linux.
If on windows or on Mac there is some proprietary software then ask
apple where you can get it for Linux. Since Mac IS unix, the software
should be readily available.

....

>
> whether an app can select more than one photo is up to the app author.
> there are no doubt apps that can, but that doesn't mean all of them
> will do that.

But the talk was about ftp and ftp apps can.

[nospam]

In article <slrnlmv99n.7...@ID-107770.user.individual.net>,

Whiskers <catwh...@operamail.com> wrote:

> Ask Apple why they can't stick to industry standards.

they definitely do, much more than other companies.

[nospam]

In article <lko9s2$edo$1...@dont-email.me>, William Unruh

<un...@invalid.ca> wrote:

> >> >> Alternatives to using a USB cable do exist.
> >> >
> >> > most of which are more hassle than using a usb cable. just boot into
> >> > windows and be done with it. why make things harder than necessary.
> >>
> >> Not using a USB cable is nearly always less hassle than using a USB
> >> cable. Particularly when using the USB cable doesn't work at all, as in
> >> this instance.
> >
> > no, because using a usb cable is much faster than the alternatives and
> > it's linux that is the issue here, not a cable.
>
> How is linux the issue?

linux is not saving the trust ticket, so the phone keeps asking to
trust the device.

> Most smart phones have a mode in which they look
> like a usb memory device. If the iphone does not, that is a problem with
> the iphone, not with Linux.

iphones and ipads show up as a standard digital camera and *any*
software that can copy photos will work.

> If on windows or on Mac there is some proprietary software then ask
> apple where you can get it for Linux. Since Mac IS unix, the software
> should be readily available.

there is no need for any proprietary software to copy photos and never
was.

the issue is the trust ticket.

> > whether an app can select more than one photo is up to the app author.
> > there are no doubt apps that can, but that doesn't mean all of them
> > will do that.
>
> But the talk was about ftp and ftp apps can.

only if the author of the ftp implements the ability to do so. some do,
some don't.

[William Unruh]

On 2014-05-11, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>

>> > whether an app can select more than one photo is up to the app author.
>> > there are no doubt apps that can, but that doesn't mean all of them
>> > will do that.
>>
>> But the talk was about ftp and ftp apps can.
>
> only if the author of the ftp implements the ability to do so. some do,
> some don't.

Which don't?

[Sandman]

In article <slrnlmv99n.7...@ID-107770.user.individual.net>, Whiskers wrote:

> > > > Pat Wilson:

> > > > I'm having lots of trouble using the default Shotwell
> > > > application on Ubuntu 13.10 to import photos from the ipad Air
> > > > (iOS 7).
> > >
> > > :
> > > I know nothing about Ipads, adn little abotu linux, but after
> > > reading this thread, I had a thought. Why not upload your
> > > photos to one of those free photo websites, and then download
> > > them on the other device.
> >
> > > Just a thought, maybe this is not even possible, but it was a
> > > thought....
> >

> > Alan Browne:

> > It's both very possible and a good idea. When I don't have my
> > iPhone cable I do just that (via e-mail, but it could go via
> > Dropbox or the Apple iCloud as well).
>
> > It just lacks that common sense idea that one should be able to
> > load photos from an iOS device to a computer without the pain that
> > Linux users seem to suffer.
>
> Ask Apple why they can't stick to industry standards.

It begs the question though - what IS the industry standard for
transferring files between computers? Is it Samba? FTP? And furthermore,
what is the industry standard for transferring files from a tablet OS to a
desktop OS, since that's really what we're talking about?

And there's also the matter of security vs. industry standards here as
well. The reason why iOS7 is being picky is because of security, not
because Apple refuses to adhere to some presumed standard. When you connect
your iPad to a computer, the iPad asks you if you want to trust the
computer. If you, by default, has passcode lock on, you can only answer
this question while being "logged in".

There are some workaround for this:

<http://itsfoss.com/mount-iphone-ipad-ios-7-ubuntu-13-10/>


--
Sandman[.net]

[Peter Köhlmann]

You own me a new keyboard

That is about the worst bullshit you could have come up with

[Peter Köhlmann]

nospam wrote:

> In article <lko9s2$edo$1...@dont-email.me>, William Unruh
> <un...@invalid.ca> wrote:
>
>> >> >> Alternatives to using a USB cable do exist.
>> >> >
>> >> > most of which are more hassle than using a usb cable. just boot into
>> >> > windows and be done with it. why make things harder than necessary.
>> >>
>> >> Not using a USB cable is nearly always less hassle than using a USB
>> >> cable. Particularly when using the USB cable doesn't work at all, as
>> >> in this instance.
>> >
>> > no, because using a usb cable is much faster than the alternatives and
>> > it's linux that is the issue here, not a cable.
>>
>> How is linux the issue?
>
> linux is not saving the trust ticket, so the phone keeps asking to
> trust the device.

Wrong. It has nothing to do with "linux not saving the trust ticket", as it
is not anything with "trust tickets" at all. In short, you know diddly squat
what you are blubbering about

It is an error introduced by *apple*
Apple changed the access in iOS7 after a linux program was found which acted
as a "fake apple charger" which could install rogue software on the iOS
devices. These changes by *apple* make it necessary to install a new
"imobiledevice library" on the linux machine affected.

So what you are doing here is blaming linux for a problem which was
introduced by apple (and not even reported back to the linux community,
which had to resolve this without apples help).

Well, I don't expect better from apple Fanbois. Those are usually way dumber
than heated dirt

[nospam]

In article <lkoc4e$196$1...@dont-email.me>, William Unruh

<un...@invalid.ca> wrote:

> >> > whether an app can select more than one photo is up to the app author.
> >> > there are no doubt apps that can, but that doesn't mean all of them
> >> > will do that.
> >>
> >> But the talk was about ftp and ftp apps can.
> >
> > only if the author of the ftp implements the ability to do so. some do,
> > some don't.
>
> Which don't?

plenty of them.

the normal use case is to send one file, so that is what many such apps
are optimized for. some might also include being able to choose and
send multiple files, but that's less common so not all of them do.

it's up to the app developer what features to include and what the
purpose of the app actually is.

[nospam]

In article <lkofkn$qu7$1...@dont-email.me>, Peter K�hlmann

<peter-k...@t-online.de> wrote:

> >> Ask Apple why they can't stick to industry standards.
> >
> > they definitely do, much more than other companies.
>
> You own me a new keyboard
>
> That is about the worst bullshit you could have come up with

it's not bullshit.

look at microsoft for proprietary.

there's nothing standard about wma/wmv, active directory, internet
explorer and its html hacks, wins, c#, .net and plenty more. microsoft
locks people into their products by creating their own proprietary
format or taking an existing one and making a change that only works
with windows.

meanwhile, apple sticks to industry standards. not only that but a
large part of os x is open source. good luck getting the source of
anything in windows.

[nospam]

In article <lkoghp$3ln$1...@dont-email.me>, Peter K�hlmann

<peter-k...@t-online.de> wrote:

> >> How is linux the issue?
> >
> > linux is not saving the trust ticket, so the phone keeps asking to
> > trust the device.
>
> Wrong. It has nothing to do with "linux not saving the trust ticket", as it
> is not anything with "trust tickets" at all. In short, you know diddly squat
> what you are blubbering about

it has everything to do with it and i know exactly what the mechanism
by which an ios device pairs with a computer.

you do not.

> It is an error introduced by *apple*
> Apple changed the access in iOS7 after a linux program was found which acted
> as a "fake apple charger" which could install rogue software on the iOS
> devices. These changes by *apple* make it necessary to install a new
> "imobiledevice library" on the linux machine affected.

it's called juice jacking and is an issue for more than just apple
products. it's a potential exploit that apple patched on their devices.

all linux needs to do is properly pair with the ios device. until it
does so, the device will continue to ask to trust it.

> So what you are doing here is blaming linux for a problem which was
> introduced by apple (and not even reported back to the linux community,
> which had to resolve this without apples help).

apple did not introduce a problem. instead, they *fixed* a problem,
that being a potential security exploit. non-apple mobile devices are
still at risk.

> Well, I don't expect better from apple Fanbois. Those are usually way dumber
> than heated dirt

insults mean there's nothing to back up your statements.

[PeterN]

I wouldn't say that. He manages to come up with some whoppers.

--
PeterN

[Peter Köhlmann]

nospam wrote:

> In article <lkofkn$qu7$1...@dont-email.me>, Peter Köhlmann

You (for some reason escaping me) failed to notice that

a) this is not a MS group
b) I don't use windows

c) you are a stupid prick

[nospam]

In article <lkooos$20d$1...@dont-email.me>, Peter K�hlmann

neither of which changes anything that apple or microsoft or any other
company does.

> c) you are a stupid prick

when all you have are insults, then you have nothing.

[Savageduck]

On 2014-05-11 21:06:36 +0000, Peter Köhlmann

If you note the cross post to rec.photo.digital, you might understand
your introduction to *nospam* and his standard M.O. which he is
currently exercising in this thread.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

[PeterN]

On 5/11/2014 4:31 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article <lkofkn$qu7$1...@dont-email.me>, Peter K�hlmann
> <peter-k...@t-online.de> wrote:
>
>>>> Ask Apple why they can't stick to industry standards.
>>>
>>> they definitely do, much more than other companies.
>>
>> You own me a new keyboard
>>
>> That is about the worst bullshit you could have come up with
>
> it's not bullshit.
>
> look at microsoft for proprietary.
>
> there's nothing standard about wma/wmv, active directory, internet
> explorer and its html hacks, wins, c#, .net and plenty more. microsoft
> locks people into their products by creating their own proprietary
> format or taking an existing one and making a change that only works
> with windows.

You said all Windows apps can be run on a Mac. If that is true, your
above statement isn't.
make up your mind.

>
> meanwhile, apple sticks to industry standards. not only that but a
> large part of os x is open source. good luck getting the source of
> anything in windows.
>

--
PeterN

[nospam]

In article <lkord...@news4.newsguy.com>, PeterN

<peter.n...@verizon.net> wrote:

> > look at microsoft for proprietary.
> >
> > there's nothing standard about wma/wmv, active directory, internet
> > explorer and its html hacks, wins, c#, .net and plenty more. microsoft
> > locks people into their products by creating their own proprietary
> > format or taking an existing one and making a change that only works
> > with windows.
>
> You said all Windows apps can be run on a Mac. If that is true, your
> above statement isn't.
> make up your mind.

they do not conflict and both are true.

you really have no clue about what is being discussed.

[Peter Köhlmann]

Hilarious

[Peter Köhlmann]

nospam wrote:

>
>> It is an error introduced by *apple*
>> Apple changed the access in iOS7 after a linux program was found which
>> acted as a "fake apple charger" which could install rogue software on the
>> iOS devices. These changes by *apple* make it necessary to install a new
>> "imobiledevice library" on the linux machine affected.
>
> it's called juice jacking and is an issue for more than just apple
> products. it's a potential exploit that apple patched on their devices.

What part of "imobiledevice" seems like a library for other devices than
apples junk for you?

Hint: It is a library which contains the protocols to access iOS devices.
Linux does not need it for other ones. It is exclusivly for i-junk

In short: You again made yourself look like that incompetent stupid
nincompoop you really are

[PeterN]

No need fr a reply

> you really have no clue about what is being discussed.

"insults mean there's nothing to back up your statements."

--
PeterN

[nospam]

In article <lkosfb$vq3$1...@dont-email.me>, Peter K�hlmann

<peter-k...@t-online.de> wrote:

> What part of "imobiledevice" seems like a library for other devices than
> apples junk for you?
>
> Hint: It is a library which contains the protocols to access iOS devices.
> Linux does not need it for other ones. It is exclusivly for i-junk

that library is not needed to copy photos off an ios device.

ios devices connect and look like any normal digital camera would and
use ptp, an standard protocol, to transfer photos.

[nospam]

In article <lkou3...@news4.newsguy.com>, PeterN

<peter.n...@verizon.net> wrote:

> > you really have no clue about what is being discussed.
>
> "insults mean there's nothing to back up your statements."

it's not an insult. it's a statement of fact based on your ridiculous
posts. you consistently miss the points being discussed and often say
the most irrelevant and bizarre things. you really have no idea what
you're talking about.

furthermore, you are the one who insults first, which means you admit
your statements have nothing backing them, not that anyone is surprised
about that.

[J. Clarke]

In article <lkooos$20d$1...@dont-email.me>, peter-k...@t-online.de
says...
>
> nospam wrote:
>
> > In article <lkofkn$qu7$1...@dont-email.me>, Peter Kï¿œhlmann

(d) If you are an enterprise or OEM customer or an MVP you can obtain
the Windows source from Microsoft at no charge.

[PeterN]

Everyone who disputes your assinine statements, misses the point.


--
PeterN

[nospam]

In article <MPG.2dd9dbf83...@news.newsguy.com>, J. Clarke

<jclark...@cox.net> wrote:

>
> (d) If you are an enterprise or OEM customer or an MVP you can obtain
> the Windows source from Microsoft at no charge.

windows is *not* open source. it's as proprietary as it gets and good
luck reusing anything from that in other projects.

[nospam]

In article <lkp5q...@news6.newsguy.com>, PeterN

<peter.n...@verizon.net> wrote:

> >
> >>> you really have no clue about what is being discussed.
> >>
> >> "insults mean there's nothing to back up your statements."
> >
> > it's not an insult. it's a statement of fact based on your ridiculous
> > posts. you consistently miss the points being discussed and often say
> > the most irrelevant and bizarre things. you really have no idea what
> > you're talking about.
> >
> > furthermore, you are the one who insults first, which means you admit
> > your statements have nothing backing them, not that anyone is surprised
> > about that.
>
> Everyone who disputes your assinine statements, misses the point.

wrong on that too.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

nospam wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

You can check out the restrictions here:

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sharedsource/default.aspx

Personally, I would view it as a way to taint an open-source developer and
make him more likely to have his ass sued off if he ever published any kind
of commercial software.

--
Anyone who has attended a USENIX conference in a fancy hotel can tell you
that a sentence like "You're one of those computer people, aren't you?"
is roughly equivalent to "Look, another amazingly mobile form of slime
mold!" in the mouth of a hotel cocktail waitress.
-- Elizabeth Zwicky

[Whiskers]

On 2014-05-11, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <lkosfb$vq3$1...@dont-email.me>, Peter Köhlmann

> <peter-k...@t-online.de> wrote:
>
>> What part of "imobiledevice" seems like a library for other devices
>> than apples junk for you?
>>
>> Hint: It is a library which contains the protocols to access iOS
>> devices. Linux does not need it for other ones. It is exclusivly for
>> i-junk
>
> that library is not needed to copy photos off an ios device.

Not if you're connecting your iPad to an Apple computer, or a Windows
computer with the "iPad drivers" installed. But Apple do not provide
any "drivers" for connecting their devices to other operating systems,
nor do they reveal the code in the device firmware to make it easy for
anyone else to provide such "drivers".

"libimobiledevice" is an independent third-party project to get around
that Apple-created problem. <http://www.libimobiledevice.org/>.

Apple changed the way iOS 7 connects to computers, so inevitably
libimobiledevice no longer worked for iOS 7. The volunteers who
maintain libimobiledevice had to 'reverse engineer' the iOS 7 firmware
and work out how to operate with the changes. That takes time.

> ios devices connect and look like any normal digital camera would

No they don't, they connect like iOS devices, using Apple's own
proprietary methods.

> and use ptp, an standard protocol, to transfer photos.

Only once the device is successfully connected to the computer.

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~

[Whiskers]

On 2014-05-11, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <lkoghp$3ln$1...@dont-email.me>, Peter Köhlmann

> <peter-k...@t-online.de> wrote:
>
>> >> How is linux the issue?
>> >
>> > linux is not saving the trust ticket, so the phone keeps asking to
>> > trust the device.
>>
>> Wrong. It has nothing to do with "linux not saving the trust ticket", as it
>> is not anything with "trust tickets" at all. In short, you know diddly squat
>> what you are blubbering about
>
> it has everything to do with it and i know exactly what the mechanism
> by which an ios device pairs with a computer.
>
> you do not.
>
>> It is an error introduced by *apple*
>> Apple changed the access in iOS7 after a linux program was found which acted
>> as a "fake apple charger" which could install rogue software on the iOS
>> devices. These changes by *apple* make it necessary to install a new
>> "imobiledevice library" on the linux machine affected.
>
> it's called juice jacking and is an issue for more than just apple
> products. it's a potential exploit that apple patched on their devices.

But iOS devices are extremely vulnerable to it, because they are
designed to interact automatically and 'back up' and 'update' everything
every time they are plugged in to a 'trusted' computer - and the user
only has to 'trust' that computer once for the life of the iOS device.
That's jolly handy for iPad users, but also jolly handy for anyone who
wants to get inside your iPad without you knowing.

(Android devices are less promiscuous by design).

The real danger comes from using a 'public' USB charging socket to
charge your gadget; you should never ever do that, but apparently some
people were doing it. ("There's one born every minute").

Apple had to move quickly to protect their ignorant gullible users from
themselves. Better a flat iPad than one taken over by a malicious or
intrusive person or agency. The inability to connect your iPad with any
computer not equipped with the latest "iOS drivers" is precisely the
effect Apple intended, they did it on purpose "for your own good". Too
bad that people with iOS 7 gadgets but no up-dated Apple or Windows
computer would no longer be able to connect their iOS thing with their
own computer (at least, until someone works out how to get around
Apple's latest changes to iOS 7).

> all linux needs to do is properly pair with the ios device. until it
> does so, the device will continue to ask to trust it.

Exactly. But it's the iOS thing that isn't talking; Linux wants to but
iOS refuses to listen.

>> So what you are doing here is blaming linux for a problem which was
>> introduced by apple (and not even reported back to the linux
>> community, which had to resolve this without apples help).
>
> apple did not introduce a problem. instead, they *fixed* a problem,
> that being a potential security exploit. non-apple mobile devices are
> still at risk.

Apple put a massive security hole in their iOS system design, then
created problems for some of their users by trying to patch that hole.

>> Well, I don't expect better from apple Fanbois. Those are usually way
>> dumber than heated dirt
>
> insults mean there's nothing to back up your statements.

<http://www.howtogeek.com/166497/htg-explains-what-is-juice-jacking-and-how-worried-should-you-be/> <http://preview.tinyurl.com/mux3k6v>

[nospam]

In article <slrnln1nu2.2...@ID-107770.user.individual.net>,

Whiskers <catwh...@operamail.com> wrote:

> >> It is an error introduced by *apple*
> >> Apple changed the access in iOS7 after a linux program was found which
> >> acted as a "fake apple charger" which could install rogue software on the iOS
> >> devices. These changes by *apple* make it necessary to install a new
> >> "imobiledevice library" on the linux machine affected.
> >
> > it's called juice jacking and is an issue for more than just apple
> > products. it's a potential exploit that apple patched on their devices.
>
> But iOS devices are extremely vulnerable to it, because they are
> designed to interact automatically and 'back up' and 'update' everything
> every time they are plugged in to a 'trusted' computer - and the user
> only has to 'trust' that computer once for the life of the iOS device.
> That's jolly handy for iPad users, but also jolly handy for anyone who
> wants to get inside your iPad without you knowing.

all mobile devices are vulnerable to juice jacking.

> (Android devices are less promiscuous by design).

complete nonsense.

the usual criticism is the opposite, that ios devices are locked down,
a 'walled garden', not that they are promiscuous.

99% of mobile malware targeted android:
<http://www.cisco.com/web/offers/lp/2014-annual-security-report/index.ht
ml>

> The real danger comes from using a 'public' USB charging socket to
> charge your gadget; you should never ever do that, but apparently some
> people were doing it. ("There's one born every minute").

many people do that since there are usb ports everywhere, including on
airplanes and hotels.

why should someone fear what is basically a +5v power supply?

> Apple had to move quickly to protect their ignorant gullible users from
> themselves. Better a flat iPad than one taken over by a malicious or
> intrusive person or agency. The inability to connect your iPad with any
> computer not equipped with the latest "iOS drivers" is precisely the
> effect Apple intended, they did it on purpose "for your own good". Too
> bad that people with iOS 7 gadgets but no up-dated Apple or Windows
> computer would no longer be able to connect their iOS thing with their
> own computer (at least, until someone works out how to get around
> Apple's latest changes to iOS 7).

nonsense. the drivers are only required for syncing. it can connect,
charge and copy photos without drivers.

> > all linux needs to do is properly pair with the ios device. until it
> > does so, the device will continue to ask to trust it.
>
> Exactly. But it's the iOS thing that isn't talking; Linux wants to but
> iOS refuses to listen.

it is talking and it's talking ptp.

android on the other hand, doesn't even do that much. i just plugged in
my android phone to my computer and lightroom didn't see it at all
because unlike ios devices, it doesn't show up as a standard digital
camera.

in other words, you are bashing the wrong product for not being
standards compliant.

> >> So what you are doing here is blaming linux for a problem which was
> >> introduced by apple (and not even reported back to the linux
> >> community, which had to resolve this without apples help).
> >
> > apple did not introduce a problem. instead, they *fixed* a problem,
> > that being a potential security exploit. non-apple mobile devices are
> > still at risk.
>
> Apple put a massive security hole in their iOS system design, then
> created problems for some of their users by trying to patch that hole.

they didn't put a security hole there.

they *removed* a security hole, which still exists on other mobile
devices.

that's one reason why android has 99% of mobile malware.

> >> Well, I don't expect better from apple Fanbois. Those are usually way
> >> dumber than heated dirt
> >
> > insults mean there's nothing to back up your statements.
>
> <http://www.howtogeek.com/166497/htg-explains-what-is-juice-jacking-and-how-worried-should-you-be/>
> <http://preview.tinyurl.com/mux3k6v>

i know what juice jacking is and i know how the pairing trust ticket
mechanism works and i know how enterprise customers disable it (no
jailbreaking required).

you do not.

[nospam]

In article <slrnln1k5u.2...@ID-107770.user.individual.net>,

Whiskers <catwh...@operamail.com> wrote:


> >> What part of "imobiledevice" seems like a library for other devices
> >> than apples junk for you?
> >>
> >> Hint: It is a library which contains the protocols to access iOS
> >> devices. Linux does not need it for other ones. It is exclusivly for
> >> i-junk
> >
> > that library is not needed to copy photos off an ios device.
>
> Not if you're connecting your iPad to an Apple computer, or a Windows
> computer with the "iPad drivers" installed. But Apple do not provide
> any "drivers" for connecting their devices to other operating systems,
> nor do they reveal the code in the device firmware to make it easy for
> anyone else to provide such "drivers".

the drivers are not needed to copy photos.

they are used for other services.

> "libimobiledevice" is an independent third-party project to get around
> that Apple-created problem. <http://www.libimobiledevice.org/>.
>
> Apple changed the way iOS 7 connects to computers, so inevitably
> libimobiledevice no longer worked for iOS 7. The volunteers who
> maintain libimobiledevice had to 'reverse engineer' the iOS 7 firmware
> and work out how to operate with the changes. That takes time.

what they changed was asking the user to trust the computer to which it
is connected and that's a good thing.

and the volunteers didn't need to reverse engineer anything. the method
by which the pairing works has not changed. the only thing that changed
is it now asks the user to trust the device when the keys are
exchanged. if it worked properly in the first place there would not be
a problem. in other words, their first attempt was buggy and
incomplete.

> > ios devices connect and look like any normal digital camera would
>
> No they don't, they connect like iOS devices, using Apple's own
> proprietary methods.

yes they absolutely do look like digital cameras and *any* software
that can copy photos from a camera will work.

android devices on the other hand, do *not* do that. one of the most
popular image processing apps, lightroom, does not see my android
phone.

> > and use ptp, an standard protocol, to transfer photos.
>
> Only once the device is successfully connected to the computer.

which is where the usb cable comes in.

[Alan Browne]

On 2014.05.11, 12:28 , Whiskers wrote:
> On 2014-05-11, Alan Browne <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>> On 2014.05.10, 14:41 , cas...@home.com wrote:
>>> On Fri, 9 May 2014 07:40:46 +0000 (UTC), Pat Wilson
>>> <patw...@example.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm having lots of trouble using the default Shotwell application on
>>>> Ubuntu 13.10 to import photos from the ipad Air (iOS 7).
>>>
>>> I know nothing about Ipads, adn little abotu linux, but after reading
>>> this thread, I had a thought. Why not upload your photos to one of
>>> those free photo websites, and then download them on the other
>>> device.
>>>
>>> Just a thought, maybe this is not even possible, but it was a
>>> thought....
>>
>>
>> It's both very possible and a good idea. When I don't have my iPhone
>> cable I do just that (via e-mail, but it could go via Dropbox or the
>> Apple iCloud as well).
>>
>> It just lacks that common sense idea that one should be able to load
>> photos from an iOS device to a computer without the pain that Linux
>> users seem to suffer.

>
> Ask Apple why they can't stick to industry standards.

I don't care. I have a Mac and an iPhone. If I need a tablet it will
be an iPad. While I lament that Linux users aren't getting a smooth
ride from Apple it is not with terribly large tears as I've always
maintained that Linux is not a very good desktop/laptop environment for
GP computing.

It's strengths are in servers, databases, embedded, super-C and other
narrower areas of endeavour.

--
"Big data can reduce anything to a single number,
but you shouldn’t be fooled by the appearance of exactitude."
-Gary Marcus and Ernest Davis, NYT, 2014.04.07

[Alan Browne]

On 2014.05.11, 14:30 , Peter Köhlmann wrote:
> nospam wrote:
>
>> In article <slrnlmv99n.7...@ID-107770.user.individual.net>,
>> Whiskers <catwh...@operamail.com> wrote:
>>

>>> Ask Apple why they can't stick to industry standards.
>>

>> they definitely do, much more than other companies.
>
> You own me a new keyboard
>
> That is about the worst bullshit you could have come up with

I assure you that he comes up with much worse.

[Alan Browne]

On 2014.05.11, 14:46 , Peter Köhlmann wrote:
> nospam wrote:
>

>> In article <lko9s2$edo$1...@dont-email.me>, William Unruh
>> <un...@invalid.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> Alternatives to using a USB cable do exist.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> most of which are more hassle than using a usb cable. just boot into
>>>>>> windows and be done with it. why make things harder than necessary.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not using a USB cable is nearly always less hassle than using a USB
>>>>> cable. Particularly when using the USB cable doesn't work at all, as
>>>>> in this instance.
>>>>
>>>> no, because using a usb cable is much faster than the alternatives and
>>>> it's linux that is the issue here, not a cable.

>>>
>>> How is linux the issue?
>>
>> linux is not saving the trust ticket, so the phone keeps asking to
>> trust the device.
>
> Wrong. It has nothing to do with "linux not saving the trust ticket", as it
> is not anything with "trust tickets" at all. In short, you know diddly squat
> what you are blubbering about
>

> It is an error introduced by *apple*
> Apple changed the access in iOS7 after a linux program was found which acted
> as a "fake apple charger" which could install rogue software on the iOS
> devices. These changes by *apple* make it necessary to install a new
> "imobiledevice library" on the linux machine affected.
>

> So what you are doing here is blaming linux for a problem which was
> introduced by apple (and not even reported back to the linux community,
> which had to resolve this without apples help).

It just proves that Apple don't take Linux seriously as a personal
computing environment. And rightly so. That is why they don't provide
iTunes for Linux. Why Adobe don't provide photo/graphic editing for
Linux. Why MS don't provide Office for Linux. And so on...

Linux just blows as a personal computing platform and Linux fans can't
get that through their heads.

Linux is great for servers, databases, embedded, super-computing, some
automation systems and so on.

Just keep it away from unsuspecting, normal people.

[Aragorn]

On Tuesday 13 May 2014 00:07, Alan Browne conveyed the following to
alt.os.linux...

> On 2014.05.11, 14:46 , Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>
>> Wrong. It has nothing to do with "linux not saving the trust ticket",
>> as it is not anything with "trust tickets" at all. In short, you know
>> diddly squat what you are blubbering about
>>
>> It is an error introduced by *apple*
>> Apple changed the access in iOS7 after a linux program was found
>> which acted as a "fake apple charger" which could install rogue
>> software on the iOS devices. These changes by *apple* make it
>> necessary to install a new "imobiledevice library" on the linux
>> machine affected.
>>
>> So what you are doing here is blaming linux for a problem which was
>> introduced by apple (and not even reported back to the linux
>> community, which had to resolve this without apples help).
>
> It just proves that Apple don't take Linux seriously as a personal
> computing environment. And rightly so. That is why they don't
> provide iTunes for Linux. Why Adobe don't provide photo/graphic
> editing for Linux. Why MS don't provide Office for Linux. And so
> on...

No, that is incorrect. The reason why Apple refuses to support
GNU/Linux is because they know that GNU/Linux comes from an entirely
different social ecosystem, where software is usually free in every
sense, including the financial aspect.

Given that Apple is a proprietary software maker and that they expect
not to be able to make a single dime out of GNU/Linux, they refuse to
support it. It's that simple.

> Linux just blows as a personal computing platform and Linux fans can't
> get that through their heads.

Shhh, don't tell my computer, and don't tell my friends who use
GNU/Linux as their day-to-day workstations. I've only been using it for
the last 14+ years, and I've never needed (or wanted) anything else.

> Linux is great for servers, databases, embedded, super-computing, some
> automation systems and so on.
>
> Just keep it away from unsuspecting, normal people.

If your definition of "normal" means what an intelligent person would
construe as "brain-dead", then I agree with you.

--
= Aragorn =

http://www.linuxcounter.net - registrant #223157

[Alan Browne]

On 2014.05.12, 18:15 , Aragorn wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 May 2014 00:07, Alan Browne conveyed the following to
> alt.os.linux...

>> It just proves that Apple don't take Linux seriously as a personal
>> computing environment. And rightly so. That is why they don't
>> provide iTunes for Linux. Why Adobe don't provide photo/graphic
>> editing for Linux. Why MS don't provide Office for Linux. And so
>> on...
>
> No, that is incorrect. The reason why Apple refuses to support
> GNU/Linux is because they know that GNU/Linux comes from an entirely
> different social ecosystem, where software is usually free in every
> sense, including the financial aspect.

Apple are interested in selling content: Music, video. Guess what?
Those producers and artists do expect revenue for their product.

> Given that Apple is a proprietary software maker and that they expect
> not to be able to make a single dime out of GNU/Linux, they refuse to
> support it. It's that simple.

They give away iTunes to Windows users. Of course those same Windows
users buy music and video via iTunes (and sync their iThings with it too).

If Apple thought their was a business prop. with Linux desktop users,
there would be iTunes for Linux.

(BTW: It's okay and moral to make money selling s/w and content. Really).

>> Linux just blows as a personal computing platform and Linux fans can't
>> get that through their heads.
>
> Shhh, don't tell my computer, and don't tell my friends who use
> GNU/Linux as their day-to-day workstations. I've only been using it for
> the last 14+ years, and I've never needed (or wanted) anything else.

Yeah, that sizzling 1.5 - 2% of the market is a real attractor for Apple.

>> Linux is great for servers, databases, embedded, super-computing, some
>> automation systems and so on.
>>
>> Just keep it away from unsuspecting, normal people.
>
> If your definition of "normal" means what an intelligent person would
> construe as "brain-dead", then I agree with you.

No - people who don't have time to waste on the nonsense that is the
proliferation of poorly designed desktop environments and apps for
Linux. (I'm running two different Linux systems here, BTW - I'm just
not trapped in the Linux mind warp).

[Aragorn]

On Tuesday 13 May 2014 02:49, Alan Browne conveyed the following to

alt.os.linux...

> On 2014.05.12, 18:15 , Aragorn wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday 13 May 2014 00:07, Alan Browne conveyed the following to
>> alt.os.linux...
>>
>>> It just proves that Apple don't take Linux seriously as a personal
>>> computing environment. And rightly so. That is why they don't
>>> provide iTunes for Linux. Why Adobe don't provide photo/graphic
>>> editing for Linux. Why MS don't provide Office for Linux. And so
>>> on...
>>
>> No, that is incorrect. The reason why Apple refuses to support
>> GNU/Linux is because they know that GNU/Linux comes from an entirely
>> different social ecosystem, where software is usually free in every
>> sense, including the financial aspect.
>
> Apple are interested in selling content: Music, video. Guess what?
> Those producers and artists do expect revenue for their product.

Yes, and like I said, the GNU/Linux ecosystem is slightly different.

>> Given that Apple is a proprietary software maker and that they expect
>> not to be able to make a single dime out of GNU/Linux, they refuse to
>> support it. It's that simple.
>
> They give away iTunes to Windows users. Of course those same Windows
> users buy music and video via iTunes (and sync their iThings with it
> too).
>
> If Apple thought their was a business prop. with Linux desktop users,
> there would be iTunes for Linux.

Isn't that what I was saying, then?

> (BTW: It's okay and moral to make money selling s/w and content.
> Really).

Personally I disagree with that, but I will grant you that not everyone
in the GNU/Linux and FLOSS community feels the same about that as I do.

>>> Linux just blows as a personal computing platform and Linux fans
>>> can't get that through their heads.
>>
>> Shhh, don't tell my computer, and don't tell my friends who use
>> GNU/Linux as their day-to-day workstations. I've only been using it
>> for the last 14+ years, and I've never needed (or wanted) anything
>> else.
>
> Yeah, that sizzling 1.5 - 2% of the market is a real attractor for
> Apple.

More like 5% at the least, and possibly 8%, which is not bad for an
operating system that doesn't have any marketing behind it at all, and
which is effectively being boycotted in the corporately controlled
mainstream media.

>>> Linux is great for servers, databases, embedded, super-computing,
>>> some automation systems and so on.
>>>
>>> Just keep it away from unsuspecting, normal people.
>>
>> If your definition of "normal" means what an intelligent person would
>> construe as "brain-dead", then I agree with you.
>
> No - people who don't have time to waste on the nonsense that is the
> proliferation of poorly designed desktop environments and apps for
> Linux.

You consider "versatile and configurable" a sign of poor design?

> (I'm running two different Linux systems here, BTW - I'm just
> not trapped in the Linux mind warp).

Indeed not. It is *very clear* that you are trapped in the MacIntosh
mind warp.

[Marek Novotny]

Peter, if Linux isn't for you don't use it. No one stuck a gun to your
head. Linux is my choice and I like it just fine. I used almost
everything made at one point or another and I choose this.

> Shhh, don't tell my computer, and don't tell my friends who use
> GNU/Linux as their day-to-day workstations. I've only been using it for
> the last 14+ years, and I've never needed (or wanted) anything else.
>
>> Linux is great for servers, databases, embedded, super-computing, some
>> automation systems and so on.
>>
>> Just keep it away from unsuspecting, normal people.

Since when do Linux users shove Linux in anyone face? What authority do
you think we have anyway? If someone wants to try Linux they will. End
of story.

> If your definition of "normal" means what an intelligent person would
> construe as "brain-dead", then I agree with you.

What a complete nut.


--
Marek Novotny
A member of the Linux Foundation
http://www.linuxfoundation.org
git with the program

[William Poaster]

Marek Novotny wrote:

> On 2014-05-12, Aragorn <thor...@telenet.be.invalid> wrote:
>> On Tuesday 13 May 2014 00:07, Alan Browne conveyed the following to
>> alt.os.linux...
>>

??? Surely you mean the "Alan Browne" Macfanboi?

> No one stuck a gun to your
> head. Linux is my choice and I like it just fine. I used almost
> everything made at one point or another and I choose this.

>> Shhh, don't tell my computer, and don't tell my friends who use
>> GNU/Linux as their day-to-day workstations. I've only been using it for
>> the last 14+ years, and I've never needed (or wanted) anything else.
>>
>>> Linux is great for servers, databases, embedded, super-computing, some
>>> automation systems and so on.
>>>
>>> Just keep it away from unsuspecting, normal people.
>
> Since when do Linux users shove Linux in anyone face? What authority do
> you think we have anyway? If someone wants to try Linux they will. End
> of story.
>
>> If your definition of "normal" means what an intelligent person would
>> construe as "brain-dead", then I agree with you.
>
> What a complete nut.

A Mac user, AMZ (Apple Mac Zealot).

--
So much for Windwoes AV:
Antivirus products were developed to keep hackers out, but in todayļæ½s world,
Symantec only keeps about 45 percent of attempted breaches from ever making it inside.
http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/1113140089/antivirus-software-dead-technology-brian-dye-symantec-050714/

[Whiskers]

On 2014-05-12, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <slrnln1nu2.2...@ID-107770.user.individual.net>,
> Whiskers <catwh...@operamail.com> wrote:
>
>> >> It is an error introduced by *apple*
>> >> Apple changed the access in iOS7 after a linux program was found which
>> >> acted as a "fake apple charger" which could install rogue software on the iOS
>> >> devices. These changes by *apple* make it necessary to install a new
>> >> "imobiledevice library" on the linux machine affected.
>> >
>> > it's called juice jacking and is an issue for more than just apple
>> > products. it's a potential exploit that apple patched on their devices.
>>
>> But iOS devices are extremely vulnerable to it, because they are
>> designed to interact automatically and 'back up' and 'update' everything
>> every time they are plugged in to a 'trusted' computer - and the user
>> only has to 'trust' that computer once for the life of the iOS device.
>> That's jolly handy for iPad users, but also jolly handy for anyone who
>> wants to get inside your iPad without you knowing.
>
> all mobile devices are vulnerable to juice jacking.

Potentially, yes; but only iOS devices are designed by default and
without involving the user, to allow a connected computer to do almost
anything it wants to with them.

>> (Android devices are less promiscuous by design).
>
> complete nonsense.
>
> the usual criticism is the opposite, that ios devices are locked down,
> a 'walled garden', not that they are promiscuous.

It's an orgy inside that wall.

> 99% of mobile malware targeted android:
> <http://www.cisco.com/web/offers/lp/2014-annual-security-report/index.html>
>
>> The real danger comes from using a 'public' USB charging socket to
>> charge your gadget; you should never ever do that, but apparently some
>> people were doing it. ("There's one born every minute").
>
> many people do that since there are usb ports everywhere, including on
> airplanes and hotels.
>
> why should someone fear what is basically a +5v power supply?

A USB socket is not basically a power supply. It's a data transfer
device that happens to have the ability to deliver power as well. If
you don't know what the socket has behind it, you should not plug
anything into it. Find a 'mains' socket (or in a car, the 'cigar
lighter' 12v socket) and use your own power adaptor/charger.

>> Apple had to move quickly to protect their ignorant gullible users from
>> themselves. Better a flat iPad than one taken over by a malicious or
>> intrusive person or agency. The inability to connect your iPad with any
>> computer not equipped with the latest "iOS drivers" is precisely the
>> effect Apple intended, they did it on purpose "for your own good". Too
>> bad that people with iOS 7 gadgets but no up-dated Apple or Windows
>> computer would no longer be able to connect their iOS thing with their
>> own computer (at least, until someone works out how to get around
>> Apple's latest changes to iOS 7).
>
> nonsense. the drivers are only required for syncing. it can connect,
> charge and copy photos without drivers.

No it can't; that's the problem that started this thread.

>> > all linux needs to do is properly pair with the ios device. until it
>> > does so, the device will continue to ask to trust it.
>>
>> Exactly. But it's the iOS thing that isn't talking; Linux wants to but
>> iOS refuses to listen.
>
> it is talking and it's talking ptp.

No, the iOS device is talking Apple.

> android on the other hand, doesn't even do that much. i just plugged in
> my android phone to my computer and lightroom didn't see it at all
> because unlike ios devices, it doesn't show up as a standard digital
> camera.
>
> in other words, you are bashing the wrong product for not being
> standards compliant.

I'm glad to hear that your Android is behaving correctly. If you don't
know how to tell the Android device to make it's data files accessible
to your computer, and then tell your computer how to do it, the only
safe thing for the Android and your computer to do is nothing.

In Android 4.2.2 go to Settings - Storage and touch the three-dots
'menu' icon and then choose 'USB computer connection' and select
'Connect as Media Device (MTP)' or 'Camera (PTP)' whichever is
appropriate for the computer software you want to use it with - or leave
both options unselected if all you want is to charge the Android.

Older Android versions allow you to give computers access to the microSD
card as a simple 'USB mass storage device' which your computer can
'mount' and 'unmount' just like a USB memory stick or disc drive. Many
digital cameras and music players do the same.

>> >> So what you are doing here is blaming linux for a problem which was
>> >> introduced by apple (and not even reported back to the linux
>> >> community, which had to resolve this without apples help).
>> >
>> > apple did not introduce a problem. instead, they *fixed* a problem,
>> > that being a potential security exploit. non-apple mobile devices are
>> > still at risk.
>>
>> Apple put a massive security hole in their iOS system design, then
>> created problems for some of their users by trying to patch that hole.
>
> they didn't put a security hole there.
>
> they *removed* a security hole, which still exists on other mobile
> devices.
>
> that's one reason why android has 99% of mobile malware.
>
>> >> Well, I don't expect better from apple Fanbois. Those are usually way
>> >> dumber than heated dirt
>> >
>> > insults mean there's nothing to back up your statements.
>>

>> <http://www.howtogeek.com/166497/htg-explains-what-is-juice-jacking-and-how-worried-should-you-b/>

>> <http://preview.tinyurl.com/mux3k6v>
>
> i know what juice jacking is and i know how the pairing trust ticket
> mechanism works and i know how enterprise customers disable it (no
> jailbreaking required).
>
> you do not.

The problem being discussed here is that the iOS 'pairing trust
certificate mechanism' doesn't always 'work'.

[TJ]

On 05/12/2014 06:07 PM, Alan Browne wrote:

>
> It just proves that Apple don't take Linux seriously as a personal
> computing environment. And rightly so. That is why they don't provide
> iTunes for Linux. Why Adobe don't provide photo/graphic editing for
> Linux. Why MS don't provide Office for Linux. And so on...
>
> Linux just blows as a personal computing platform and Linux fans can't
> get that through their heads.
>
> Linux is great for servers, databases, embedded, super-computing, some
> automation systems and so on.
>
> Just keep it away from unsuspecting, normal people.
>

"Unsuspecting, normal people" are usually one breed of sheep or another,
often several breeds at once. They feel safety in being part of a large
herd.

Thank (Deity of your choice) that I'm not "normal." Linux does
everything I want to do, and it does it well. I don't need to waste $$$$
on Microsoft or Apple products. Sure, it's OK to make money on software
and content, if you can. It's also OK for me to *not* spend $$$ if I can
do the job I want to do without it.

YMMV. That's OK, too.

TJ

[J. Clarke]

In article <slrnln45k1.2...@ID-107770.user.individual.net>,
catwh...@operamail.com says...

Just an aside but I came back from a break yesterday to find a coworker
charging her phone from my laptop. If she knew me she wouldn't have
done that. I don't have it set up to suck every detail of her life out
of an attached phone but mostly because it never occurred to me that
someone other than me would attach a phone to it.

[Savageduck]

On 2014-05-13 14:55:35 +0000, "J. Clarke" <jclark...@cox.net> said:
>
> Just an aside but I came back from a break yesterday to find a coworker
> charging her phone from my laptop. If she knew me she wouldn't have
> done that. I don't have it set up to suck every detail of her life out
> of an attached phone but mostly because it never occurred to me that
> someone other than me would attach a phone to it.

That is wrong on so many different levels.
Starting with the lack of a courteous exchange of request and gaining
permission, to the potential security issues for both of you.
It also makes you wonder how often she had done this before just to get
a power boost for her phone. I suspect that this was not the first time
you had been taken advantage of.

The question I have is, didn’t this co-worker have access to a USB port
on her own computer?
…or knowing she was a heavy iPhone user (at work) brought her own very
small Apple charger cube, or one of the available Lithium ion battery
packs from Mophie or Hyper.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

[nospam]

In article <lkt7jg$2v8$1...@dont-email.me>, TJ <T...@noneofyour.business>

wrote:

> > It just proves that Apple don't take Linux seriously as a personal
> > computing environment. And rightly so. That is why they don't provide
> > iTunes for Linux. Why Adobe don't provide photo/graphic editing for
> > Linux. Why MS don't provide Office for Linux. And so on...
> >
> > Linux just blows as a personal computing platform and Linux fans can't
> > get that through their heads.
> >
> > Linux is great for servers, databases, embedded, super-computing, some
> > automation systems and so on.
> >
> > Just keep it away from unsuspecting, normal people.
> >
> "Unsuspecting, normal people" are usually one breed of sheep or another,
> often several breeds at once. They feel safety in being part of a large
> herd.

nonsense. people make their own choices based on their needs. nobody is
following any herd.

> Thank (Deity of your choice) that I'm not "normal." Linux does
> everything I want to do, and it does it well. I don't need to waste $$$$
> on Microsoft or Apple products. Sure, it's OK to make money on software
> and content, if you can. It's also OK for me to *not* spend $$$ if I can
> do the job I want to do without it.

if you can do it for free, that's wonderful, but your needs must be
incredibly simple.

the cost of quality software is not a waste. it pays for itself very
quickly in productivity gains.

as they say, you get what you pay for.

[nospam]

In article <slrnln45k1.2...@ID-107770.user.individual.net>,

Whiskers <catwh...@operamail.com> wrote:

> >> > it's called juice jacking and is an issue for more than just apple
> >> > products. it's a potential exploit that apple patched on their devices.
> >>
> >> But iOS devices are extremely vulnerable to it, because they are
> >> designed to interact automatically and 'back up' and 'update' everything
> >> every time they are plugged in to a 'trusted' computer - and the user
> >> only has to 'trust' that computer once for the life of the iOS device.
> >> That's jolly handy for iPad users, but also jolly handy for anyone who
> >> wants to get inside your iPad without you knowing.
> >
> > all mobile devices are vulnerable to juice jacking.
>
> Potentially, yes; but only iOS devices are designed by default and
> without involving the user, to allow a connected computer to do almost
> anything it wants to with them.

incorrect.

> >> (Android devices are less promiscuous by design).
> >
> > complete nonsense.
> >
> > the usual criticism is the opposite, that ios devices are locked down,
> > a 'walled garden', not that they are promiscuous.
>
> It's an orgy inside that wall.

incorrect.

> > 99% of mobile malware targeted android:
> > <http://www.cisco.com/web/offers/lp/2014-annual-security-report/index.html>
> >
> >> The real danger comes from using a 'public' USB charging socket to
> >> charge your gadget; you should never ever do that, but apparently some
> >> people were doing it. ("There's one born every minute").
> >
> > many people do that since there are usb ports everywhere, including on
> > airplanes and hotels.
> >
> > why should someone fear what is basically a +5v power supply?
>
> A USB socket is not basically a power supply. It's a data transfer
> device that happens to have the ability to deliver power as well. If
> you don't know what the socket has behind it, you should not plug
> anything into it. Find a 'mains' socket (or in a car, the 'cigar
> lighter' 12v socket) and use your own power adaptor/charger.

that is true but why should someone fear a public charging station?

it's a convenience so that they don't need to carry a charger, and in
some cases, a cable as well.

the fact that they can be juice jacked is a problem that needs to be
solved. the reality is that there are public charging kiosks/ports and
people *will* use them, which means the devices *must* do something to
block juice jacking. apple addressed it, while other mobile devices are
still vulnerable.

on the other hand, many of those ports are not fully usb compliant and
don't always charge a device anyway.

> >> Apple had to move quickly to protect their ignorant gullible users from
> >> themselves. Better a flat iPad than one taken over by a malicious or
> >> intrusive person or agency. The inability to connect your iPad with any
> >> computer not equipped with the latest "iOS drivers" is precisely the
> >> effect Apple intended, they did it on purpose "for your own good". Too
> >> bad that people with iOS 7 gadgets but no up-dated Apple or Windows
> >> computer would no longer be able to connect their iOS thing with their
> >> own computer (at least, until someone works out how to get around
> >> Apple's latest changes to iOS 7).
> >
> > nonsense. the drivers are only required for syncing. it can connect,
> > charge and copy photos without drivers.
>
> No it can't; that's the problem that started this thread.

incorrect.

it absolutely can copy photos without custom drivers. i tested it prior
to posting.

you said earlier you don't have an ios device so how would you even
know what it does or doesn't do?

> >> > all linux needs to do is properly pair with the ios device. until it
> >> > does so, the device will continue to ask to trust it.
> >>
> >> Exactly. But it's the iOS thing that isn't talking; Linux wants to but
> >> iOS refuses to listen.
> >
> > it is talking and it's talking ptp.
>
> No, the iOS device is talking Apple.

incorrect.

> > android on the other hand, doesn't even do that much. i just plugged in
> > my android phone to my computer and lightroom didn't see it at all
> > because unlike ios devices, it doesn't show up as a standard digital
> > camera.
> >
> > in other words, you are bashing the wrong product for not being
> > standards compliant.
>
> I'm glad to hear that your Android is behaving correctly. If you don't
> know how to tell the Android device to make it's data files accessible
> to your computer, and then tell your computer how to do it, the only
> safe thing for the Android and your computer to do is nothing.
>
> In Android 4.2.2 go to Settings - Storage and touch the three-dots
> 'menu' icon and then choose 'USB computer connection' and select
> 'Connect as Media Device (MTP)' or 'Camera (PTP)' whichever is
> appropriate for the computer software you want to use it with - or leave
> both options unselected if all you want is to charge the Android.
>
> Older Android versions allow you to give computers access to the microSD
> card as a simple 'USB mass storage device' which your computer can
> 'mount' and 'unmount' just like a USB memory stick or disc drive. Many
> digital cameras and music players do the same.

burdening the user to manage all of those details is a shitty user
experience, which is why android almost always defaults to giving full
access to the device too.

this is why apple went one step further, so that the ios device shows
up as a normal digital camera and can be seen by photo management
software so that photos can be easily copied and in many cases,
automatically (depending on the configuration of said software), as
well as not requiring the user to manually unmount a mass storage
device each time they plug and unplug the device.

>
> The problem being discussed here is that the iOS 'pairing trust
> certificate mechanism' doesn't always 'work'.

it works fine on mac and windows.

as i originally said, the problem is with linux.

[William Unruh]

On 2014-05-13, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> A USB socket is not basically a power supply. It's a data transfer
>> device that happens to have the ability to deliver power as well. If
>> you don't know what the socket has behind it, you should not plug
>> anything into it. Find a 'mains' socket (or in a car, the 'cigar
>> lighter' 12v socket) and use your own power adaptor/charger.
>
> that is true but why should someone fear a public charging station?

Because it need not be just a charging station. It could be attached to
a computer which downloads stuff from you phone when you plug it in. Do
you know where the wire from that charging station goes?

>
> it's a convenience so that they don't need to carry a charger, and in
> some cases, a cable as well.
>
> the fact that they can be juice jacked is a problem that needs to be
> solved. the reality is that there are public charging kiosks/ports and
> people *will* use them, which means the devices *must* do something to
> block juice jacking. apple addressed it, while other mobile devices are
> still vulnerable.

So you understand the problem and still ask "why should someone fear a
public charging station"?

>

> on the other hand, many of those ports are not fully usb compliant and
> don't always charge a device anyway.

Their current levels could be too low ( and that is not a "usb
complient" thing).
Thus when the phone tries to draw 1-2 amps the voltage drops well below
the charging level.

[J. Clarke]

In article <2014051308361612623-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com says...

>
> On 2014-05-13 14:55:35 +0000, "J. Clarke" <jclark...@cox.net> said:
> >
> > Just an aside but I came back from a break yesterday to find a coworker
> > charging her phone from my laptop. If she knew me she wouldn't have
> > done that. I don't have it set up to suck every detail of her life out
> > of an attached phone but mostly because it never occurred to me that
> > someone other than me would attach a phone to it.
>
> That is wrong on so many different levels.
> Starting with the lack of a courteous exchange of request and gaining
> permission, to the potential security issues for both of you.

I'm willing to waive the courteous exchange. She's seriously pretty and
I'm an old goat. But the security issues are another matter.

> It also makes you wonder how often she had done this before just to get
> a power boost for her phone. I suspect that this was not the first time
> you had been taken advantage of.

I seldom take breaks and she hasn't been there long. I guess I should
talk to her about it.
>
> The question I have is, didn?t this co-worker have access to a USB port
> on her own computer?

No. She doesn't have a computer.

> ?or knowing she was a heavy iPhone user (at work) brought her own very

> small Apple charger cube, or one of the available Lithium ion battery
> packs from Mophie or Hyper.

Actually hers is an android phone, but the same principles apply.

[nospam]

In article <lktf0s$mtm$1...@dont-email.me>, William Unruh

<un...@invalid.ca> wrote:

> >> A USB socket is not basically a power supply. It's a data transfer
> >> device that happens to have the ability to deliver power as well. If
> >> you don't know what the socket has behind it, you should not plug
> >> anything into it. Find a 'mains' socket (or in a car, the 'cigar
> >> lighter' 12v socket) and use your own power adaptor/charger.
> >
> > that is true but why should someone fear a public charging station?
>
> Because it need not be just a charging station. It could be attached to
> a computer which downloads stuff from you phone when you plug it in. Do
> you know where the wire from that charging station goes?

so what? why should someone need to worry about that?

there is *currently* a problem with juice jacking, which is something
that needs to be fixed.

people are going to avail themselves of a public charging station
whether you approve of it or not.

> > it's a convenience so that they don't need to carry a charger, and in
> > some cases, a cable as well.
> >
> > the fact that they can be juice jacked is a problem that needs to be
> > solved. the reality is that there are public charging kiosks/ports and
> > people *will* use them, which means the devices *must* do something to
> > block juice jacking. apple addressed it, while other mobile devices are
> > still vulnerable.
>
> So you understand the problem and still ask "why should someone fear a
> public charging station"?

see above.

telling people to avoid public charging stations to not be juice jacked
is like trying to solve teen pregnancy by telling teenagers not to have
sex.

the exploit needs to be fixed.

> > on the other hand, many of those ports are not fully usb compliant and
> > don't always charge a device anyway.
>
> Their current levels could be too low ( and that is not a "usb
> complient" thing).
> Thus when the phone tries to draw 1-2 amps the voltage drops well below
> the charging level.

it absolutely is a usb compliant thing and if the voltage drops below
5v for any reason, it's also non-compliant.

the way usb charging works is that the charger and device must
negotiate how much power is needed and how much is available.

a lot of chargers do not do that properly (or at all) and therefore the
device will not charge. some devices don't care (and are themselves
non-compliant) and will work with a non-compliant charger.

this isn't just charging stations either. a lot of cheap noname usb
chargers have this same problem.

there's a lot of crap out there.

[Savageduck]

On 2014-05-13 15:55:56 +0000, "J. Clarke" <jclark...@cox.net> said:

> In article <2014051308361612623-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
> savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com says...
>>
>> On 2014-05-13 14:55:35 +0000, "J. Clarke" <jclark...@cox.net> said:
>>>
>>> Just an aside but I came back from a break yesterday to find a coworker
>>> charging her phone from my laptop. If she knew me she wouldn't have
>>> done that. I don't have it set up to suck every detail of her life out
>>> of an attached phone but mostly because it never occurred to me that
>>> someone other than me would attach a phone to it.
>>
>> That is wrong on so many different levels.
>> Starting with the lack of a courteous exchange of request and gaining
>> permission, to the potential security issues for both of you.
>
> I'm willing to waive the courteous exchange. She's seriously pretty and
> I'm an old goat.

Horney old goat. ;-)

> But the security issues are another matter.

Yup!

>> It also makes you wonder how often she had done this before just to get
>> a power boost for her phone. I suspect that this was not the first time
>> you had been taken advantage of.
>
> I seldom take breaks and she hasn't been there long. I guess I should
> talk to her about it.

Yup!

>> The question I have is, didn?t this co-worker have access to a USB port
>> on her own computer?
>
> No. She doesn't have a computer.
>
>> ?or knowing she was a heavy iPhone user (at work) brought her own very
>> small Apple charger cube, or one of the available Lithium ion battery
>> packs from Mophie or Hyper.
>
> Actually hers is an android phone, but the same principles apply.

For not much, $15-$25 she could drop one of these (Apple, Android, or
generic) USB charger cubes into whatever bag she carries, and would
then have a means of charging her phone with her at all times.
< https://db.tt/1UTKT9wO >

--
Regards,

Savageduck

[TJ]

Simple - I suppose so. Incredibly - I wouldn't go that far. There are a
lot of computers out there doing a lot of work that aren't part of some
company's IT department.

> the cost of quality software is not a waste. it pays for itself very
> quickly in productivity gains.

Not always. Depends on what you're doing.

>
> as they say, you get what you pay for.
>

Sometimes. Often you get less than you pay for, and just as often or
more you can get more than you pay for. It depends on how carefully you
shop.

TJ

[Chris Ahlstrom]

nospam wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> In article <lkt7jg$2v8$1...@dont-email.me>, TJ <T...@noneofyour.business>
>

>> Thank (Deity of your choice) that I'm not "normal." Linux does
>> everything I want to do, and it does it well. I don't need to waste $$$$
>> on Microsoft or Apple products. Sure, it's OK to make money on software
>> and content, if you can. It's also OK for me to *not* spend $$$ if I can
>> do the job I want to do without it.
>
> if you can do it for free, that's wonderful, but your needs must be
> incredibly simple.

Load of malarkey.

> the cost of quality software is not a waste. it pays for itself very
> quickly in productivity gains.
>
> as they say, you get what you pay for.

Tell that to the users of vim and emacs. LibreOffice. The Linux kernel and
the GNU system, and the GNU compilers. GIMP. Firefox, Chrome. Desktops
ranging from Awesome to KDE. I could go on naming many fine software
packages that are Free software (and not just "free as in beer").

"Your needs must be incredibly simple."

That statement about Free software is so idiotic and myopic that it beggars
belief. You're trolling.

--
The American Dental Association announced today that most plaque tends
to form on teeth around 4:00 PM in the afternoon.

Film at 11:00.

[nospam]

In article <lktmd3$l4q$1...@dont-email.me>, TJ <T...@noneofyour.business>
wrote:

> >> Thank (Deity of your choice) that I'm not "normal." Linux does
> >> everything I want to do, and it does it well. I don't need to waste $$$$
> >> on Microsoft or Apple products. Sure, it's OK to make money on software
> >> and content, if you can. It's also OK for me to *not* spend $$$ if I can
> >> do the job I want to do without it.
> >
> > if you can do it for free, that's wonderful, but your needs must be
> > incredibly simple.
> >
> Simple - I suppose so. Incredibly - I wouldn't go that far. There are a
> lot of computers out there doing a lot of work that aren't part of some
> company's IT department.

who said anything about a company's it department?

there are a lot of non-it users who have needs that cannot be met by
free software or just don't want the hassles involved.

> > the cost of quality software is not a waste. it pays for itself very
> > quickly in productivity gains.
>
> Not always. Depends on what you're doing.

obviously.

> > as they say, you get what you pay for.
> >
> Sometimes. Often you get less than you pay for, and just as often or
> more you can get more than you pay for. It depends on how carefully you
> shop.

there is the occasional exception, but generally, quality products cost
more than crap products.

[nospam]

In article <lktor5$5th$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris Ahlstrom

<OFee...@teleworm.us> wrote:

> >> Thank (Deity of your choice) that I'm not "normal." Linux does
> >> everything I want to do, and it does it well. I don't need to waste $$$$
> >> on Microsoft or Apple products. Sure, it's OK to make money on software
> >> and content, if you can. It's also OK for me to *not* spend $$$ if I can
> >> do the job I want to do without it.
> >
> > if you can do it for free, that's wonderful, but your needs must be
> > incredibly simple.
>
> Load of malarkey.

not at all, otherwise people would be flocking to free software and
they don't.

people willingly pay for quality software because it does a lot more
than the free apps and does so without any hassles and often there
isn't any free equivalent anyway.

> > the cost of quality software is not a waste. it pays for itself very
> > quickly in productivity gains.
> >
> > as they say, you get what you pay for.
>
> Tell that to the users of vim and emacs. LibreOffice. The Linux kernel and
> the GNU system, and the GNU compilers. GIMP. Firefox, Chrome. Desktops
> ranging from Awesome to KDE. I could go on naming many fine software
> packages that are Free software (and not just "free as in beer").
>
> "Your needs must be incredibly simple."

i'll gladly tell it to them, and i do.

libreoffice is sufficient for simple documents but it starts to show
its limitations with medium and certainly complex documents, such as
ones with tables. it is not fully compatible with microsoft office and
if someone needs to work with others who use the real thing and
exchange files with them (i.e., most of the world), then there will be
problems as well.

not only is the gimp significantly slower than photoshop, but it is
roughly 10 years behind in features and even lacks a couple of
functions that photoshop had over 20 years ago, which means lower
productivity for anything more than casual use. photoshop elements is
typically $50 street price (often bundled for free with various
hardware) and does a *lot* more than the gimp does and with a muhc
easier to use interface, which is well worth it just to avoid the
hassles, even for a hobbyist.

other apps that do not exist on linux include lightroom, final cut pro,
avid, illustrator, office, nikon and canon software, garmin and much,
much more.

sometimes there are free apps that do a subset of what those apps do
but not as fully and nowhere near as polished, and that's assuming they
even exist at all.

garmin software, for example, does not exist on linux so there's no way
to load maps to a garmin gps in linux. nikon and canon do not offer
linux versions, so if someone wants to use the camera maker's own
software (often considered to be the best because only the camera
manufacturer knows the specifics about the sensor), then they're out of
luck in linux too. gps and digital cameras are mainstream products.

firefox and chrome are exceptions, but browsers are normally free
anyway and chrome isn't really 'free' since google tracks what you do,
which means you're the product being sold. there's a version of chrome
with that stripped out but someone would need to know about it and
where to find it and probably how to build it. more hassles.

anyone who restricts themselves to free software or just what runs in
linux does themselves a huge disservice because there are a shitload of
options out there that aren't free or do not exist otherwise and often
*much* better.

> That statement about Free software is so idiotic and myopic that it beggars
> belief. You're trolling.

more accurately, living in reality.

there's a reason why linux has the tiny desktop market share that it
does and that's because it isn't all it's cracked up to be.

people pay money for software because it's worth it, particularly pros,
who don't have time to fuck around. if a commercial software product
saves them even just a few hours of work over a free option, it has
already paid for itself.

[Peter Köhlmann]

nospam wrote:

>
> libreoffice is sufficient for simple documents but it starts to show
> its limitations with medium and certainly complex documents, such as
> ones with tables.

Pull the other one, lying imbecile

[Eef Hartman]

In alt.os.linux Aragorn <thor...@telenet.be.invalid> wrote:
> Shhh, don't tell my computer, and don't tell my friends who use
> GNU/Linux as their day-to-day workstations. I've only been using it for
> the last 14+ years, and I've never needed (or wanted) anything else.

And I have for the last 20 (since Linux became mature enough to take
over from our propietary UNIX workstations, which we had been using
since about the late 1980's).
Compared to current-day Linux those workstations were rather primitive
but still much better then a DOS + Windows 3.x PC, which was the
alternative if you wanted to go Intel/PC hardware.
In those days Apple MacIntosh was the only alternative and they were
just about just as expensive (and not as fast).

PS: at THAT time both our Unix workstations and the Mac were using
Motorola 680x0 hardware (68030/040 in our case).
Early 90's Sun switched to Sparc and HP to HP-PA, both RISC cpu's.

[Eef Hartman]

In alt.os.linux nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> than the free apps and does so without any hassles

Like MS Internet Explorer having a _serious_ security hole for
the last 13 (THIRTEEN, since IE 6 all the way in 2001) years ???

>> > the cost of quality software is not a waste. it pays for itself very
>> > quickly in productivity gains.

Tell that to our SSC/ICT (Shared Service Centre / Information &
Communications Technology) department, since they went all MS they
are having about 10 times more down-time and problems then when it
was all Unix/Linux.
But yeah, then they had administrators that knew what they were doing
and not the people who can just read the manual and need external help
every time a serious problem occurs.
But indeed - the in-house personnel cost is a lot less now.....

[Aragorn]

On Tuesday 13 May 2014 23:20, nospam conveyed the following to
alt.os.linux...

> In article <lktor5$5th$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <OFee...@teleworm.us> wrote:
>
>> >> Thank (Deity of your choice) that I'm not "normal." Linux does
>> >> everything I want to do, and it does it well. I don't need to
>> >> waste $$$$ on Microsoft or Apple products. Sure, it's OK to make
>> >> money on software and content, if you can. It's also OK for me to
>> >> *not* spend $$$ if I can do the job I want to do without it.
>> >
>> > if you can do it for free, that's wonderful, but your needs must
>> > be incredibly simple.
>>
>> Load of malarkey.
>
> not at all, otherwise people would be flocking to free software and
> they don't.
>
> people willingly pay for quality software because it does a lot more
> than the free apps and does so without any hassles and often there
> isn't any free equivalent anyway.

People pay for proprietary software because they're not aware of the
existence of software which is free in every sense, period. There is no
marketing machine and no advertising behind Free Software.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

nospam wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> In article <lktor5$5th$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <OFee...@teleworm.us> wrote:
>
>> >> Thank (Deity of your choice) that I'm not "normal." Linux does
>> >> everything I want to do, and it does it well. I don't need to waste $$$$
>> >> on Microsoft or Apple products. Sure, it's OK to make money on software
>> >> and content, if you can. It's also OK for me to *not* spend $$$ if I can
>> >> do the job I want to do without it.
>> >
>> > if you can do it for free, that's wonderful, but your needs must be
>> > incredibly simple.
>>
>> Load of malarkey.
>
> not at all, otherwise people would be flocking to free software and
> they don't.

It has nothing to do with quality or lack thereof. Quite simply, most
people still don't know about Free software; or they have your attitude
that "you get what you pay", which, in many cases, is wrong; or they are
simply brand fixated.

I snipped the rest of your ignorant assessment of Free software. You are
simply wrong.

Sure, some proprietary packages are "best of breed" in their categories.
Nonetheless, you're very like to find an acceptable, and even excellent
selection in the world of Free software, spam.

--
"You can have my Unix system when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers."
-- Cal Keegan

[Chris Ahlstrom]

Peter Köhlmann wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

Amazing, isn't it, the bald-faced lies they will tell about Free software.

Why do they need to *lie*, if Free software is as bad as they claim?

--
When the leaders speak of peace
The common folk know
That war is coming
When the leaders curse war
The mobilization order is already written out.

Every day, to earn my daily bread
I go to the market where lies are bought
Hopefully
I take my place among the sellers.
-- Bertolt Brecht, "Hollywood"

[Aragorn]

On Wednesday 14 May 2014 01:46, Chris Ahlstrom conveyed the following to
alt.os.linux...

> Peter Köhlmann wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> nospam wrote:
>>
>>> libreoffice is sufficient for simple documents but it starts to show
>>> its limitations with medium and certainly complex documents, such as
>>> ones with tables.
>>
>> Pull the other one, lying imbecile
>
> Amazing, isn't it, the bald-faced lies they will tell about Free
> software.
>
> Why do they need to *lie*, if Free software is as bad as they claim?

And moreover, if it were really so bad, then how come people are
actually using it, instead of going for the shiny Barbieware box with
all the colors and the fancy logos?

[Alan Browne]

On 2014.05.12, 21:15 , Aragorn wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 May 2014 02:49, Alan Browne conveyed the following to
> alt.os.linux...
>
>> On 2014.05.12, 18:15 , Aragorn wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday 13 May 2014 00:07, Alan Browne conveyed the following to
>>> alt.os.linux...
>>>
>>>> It just proves that Apple don't take Linux seriously as a personal
>>>> computing environment. And rightly so. That is why they don't
>>>> provide iTunes for Linux. Why Adobe don't provide photo/graphic
>>>> editing for Linux. Why MS don't provide Office for Linux. And so
>>>> on...
>>>
>>> No, that is incorrect. The reason why Apple refuses to support
>>> GNU/Linux is because they know that GNU/Linux comes from an entirely
>>> different social ecosystem, where software is usually free in every
>>> sense, including the financial aspect.
>>
>> Apple are interested in selling content: Music, video. Guess what?
>> Those producers and artists do expect revenue for their product.
>
> Yes, and like I said, the GNU/Linux ecosystem is slightly different.

They expect producers and artists to provide free music and video?

>
>>> Given that Apple is a proprietary software maker and that they expect
>>> not to be able to make a single dime out of GNU/Linux, they refuse to
>>> support it. It's that simple.
>>
>> They give away iTunes to Windows users. Of course those same Windows
>> users buy music and video via iTunes (and sync their iThings with it
>> too).
>>
>> If Apple thought their was a business prop. with Linux desktop users,
>> there would be iTunes for Linux.
>
> Isn't that what I was saying, then?

Confirming there is not enough community (desktop/home users) to bother
with. Linux is not really meant for desktop use.

It's an engine, not a car.

>> (BTW: It's okay and moral to make money selling s/w and content.
>> Really).
>
> Personally I disagree with that, but I will grant you that not everyone
> in the GNU/Linux and FLOSS community feels the same about that as I do.

Dude: s/w and content are creative endeavours. I know people who make
their living doing such. I used to program embedded and R/T systems and
I was paid for it. There is no world in which toiling 60 - 80 hours per
week can go on without compensation.

>>>> Linux just blows as a personal computing platform and Linux fans
>>>> can't get that through their heads.
>>>
>>> Shhh, don't tell my computer, and don't tell my friends who use
>>> GNU/Linux as their day-to-day workstations. I've only been using it
>>> for the last 14+ years, and I've never needed (or wanted) anything
>>> else.
>>
>> Yeah, that sizzling 1.5 - 2% of the market is a real attractor for
>> Apple.
>
> More like 5% at the least, and possibly 8%, which is not bad for an
> operating system that doesn't have any marketing behind it at all, and
> which is effectively being boycotted in the corporately controlled
> mainstream media.

In desktop use (based on web use statistics - A portion of Linux users
do use the internet/WWW) it is about 1.58% at the current probing.

I don't count in this all the near billions of embedded devices, and the
millions of servers, database systems and so on, not to mention Android.
Those areas are rightly served by Linux - but of course not those who
use desktops and laptops in creative pursuits.

>
>>>> Linux is great for servers, databases, embedded, super-computing,
>>>> some automation systems and so on.
>>>>
>>>> Just keep it away from unsuspecting, normal people.
>>>
>>> If your definition of "normal" means what an intelligent person would
>>> construe as "brain-dead", then I agree with you.
>>
>> No - people who don't have time to waste on the nonsense that is the
>> proliferation of poorly designed desktop environments and apps for
>> Linux.
>
> You consider "versatile and configurable" a sign of poor design?

As the saying goes, it's not finished when there is nothing left to add
but when there is nothing left to take away[1].

Linux desktops are horrid. Recent ones with all the popping into
transparency and back are the worst examples of "Look ma, I'm
transparent" just for the sake of being clever. Horrid.

Even St-Torvalds finds them ridiculous.

>
>> (I'm running two different Linux systems here, BTW - I'm just
>> not trapped in the Linux mind warp).
>
> Indeed not. It is *very clear* that you are trapped in the MacIntosh
> mind warp.

Yeah. Clear. Simple. Effective. Apps support from Microsoft (Office
stuff) and Adobe (Photoshop, etc.) and much more.

And of course superior integration with all the other Apple crap we have
around (a couple laptops, iPhones).

More expensive than a Linux life? In dollar terms, sure. In time lost
terms, quite the opposite with heavy multipliers. And time is much more
precious than a few bucks saved on an OS and freeware that isn't quite
compatible with the rest of the world. LibreOffice? Nothing free about
the time lost using that dog.

BTW: The follow-up-to gag doesn't work, so save the mouse clicks ;-)

[1]: Antoine de Saint Exupéry.

[Alan Browne]

On 2014.05.13, 09:44 , TJ wrote:
> On 05/12/2014 06:07 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
>
>>
>> It just proves that Apple don't take Linux seriously as a personal
>> computing environment. And rightly so. That is why they don't provide
>> iTunes for Linux. Why Adobe don't provide photo/graphic editing for
>> Linux. Why MS don't provide Office for Linux. And so on...
>>
>> Linux just blows as a personal computing platform and Linux fans can't
>> get that through their heads.
>>
>> Linux is great for servers, databases, embedded, super-computing, some
>> automation systems and so on.
>>
>> Just keep it away from unsuspecting, normal people.
>>
> "Unsuspecting, normal people" are usually one breed of sheep or another,
> often several breeds at once. They feel safety in being part of a large
> herd.

It's convenient to roll out such platitudes, but the real fact of the
world is people are no longer amazed by computers. They just need
something to get things done. The best solution for most people is
(regrettably) Windows. The next best solution (and a much better one
technically, aesthetically and just plain no-nonsense get things done)
is OS X.

>
> Thank (Deity of your choice) that I'm not "normal." Linux does
> everything I want to do, and it does it well. I don't need to waste $$$$
> on Microsoft or Apple products. Sure, it's OK to make money on software
> and content, if you can. It's also OK for me to *not* spend $$$ if I can
> do the job I want to do without it.
>
> YMMV. That's OK, too.

I've wasted tons of time with Linux in several flavours. I've had
graphics driver issues that took a week to solve. All the time I've
wasted on Linux would have paid for a Mac Pro ... or 2 - probably more.

It is useless as a desktop environment where productivity is concerned.

This is why, despite the "free"ness, it has not caught on at all -
believe me if there were Photoshop and Windows-Office class products for
Linux that were usable in the real world, Linux would have at least 25%
of the desktop market by now .

They don't. Not even 1/10th of that.

(And no - it is not a conspiracy by bad old MS and Apple).

[Alan Browne]

On 2014.05.13, 14:38 , Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> nospam wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> In article <lkt7jg$2v8$1...@dont-email.me>, TJ <T...@noneofyour.business>
>>
>>> Thank (Deity of your choice) that I'm not "normal." Linux does
>>> everything I want to do, and it does it well. I don't need to waste $$$$
>>> on Microsoft or Apple products. Sure, it's OK to make money on software
>>> and content, if you can. It's also OK for me to *not* spend $$$ if I can
>>> do the job I want to do without it.
>>
>> if you can do it for free, that's wonderful, but your needs must be
>> incredibly simple.
>
> Load of malarkey.
>
>> the cost of quality software is not a waste. it pays for itself very
>> quickly in productivity gains.
>>
>> as they say, you get what you pay for.
>
> Tell that to the users of vim and emacs. LibreOffice. The Linux kernel and
> the GNU system, and the GNU compilers. GIMP. Firefox, Chrome. Desktops
> ranging from Awesome to KDE. I could go on naming many fine software
> packages that are Free software (and not just "free as in beer").

Please explain why, if all that lovely stuff is free (not even "free as
in beer"), there are not hordes converting to Linux for desktop use?

If it's so freaking "free" why isn't it a success?

(Gimp, by the way, is pretty much the laughing stock of the photography
world, but if it floats your armada, feel "free" to do as you like.
LibreOffice I won't dignify with a reply).


--
GNOME 3.4 is a "total user experience design failure"
** Linus Torvalds **

[Marek Novotny]

On 2014-05-13, Chris Ahlstrom <OFee...@teleworm.us> wrote:
> nospam wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> In article <lkt7jg$2v8$1...@dont-email.me>, TJ <T...@noneofyour.business>
>>
>>> Thank (Deity of your choice) that I'm not "normal." Linux does
>>> everything I want to do, and it does it well. I don't need to waste $$$$
>>> on Microsoft or Apple products. Sure, it's OK to make money on software
>>> and content, if you can. It's also OK for me to *not* spend $$$ if I can
>>> do the job I want to do without it.
>>
>> if you can do it for free, that's wonderful, but your needs must be
>> incredibly simple.
>
> Load of malarkey.
>
>> the cost of quality software is not a waste. it pays for itself very
>> quickly in productivity gains.
>>
>> as they say, you get what you pay for.
>
> Tell that to the users of vim and emacs. LibreOffice. The Linux kernel and
> the GNU system, and the GNU compilers. GIMP. Firefox, Chrome. Desktops
> ranging from Awesome to KDE. I could go on naming many fine software
> packages that are Free software (and not just "free as in beer").
>
> "Your needs must be incredibly simple."
>
> That statement about Free software is so idiotic and myopic that it beggars
> belief. You're trolling.

Couldn't agree more. Vim, tmux, vim-airline, KeepassX, Gimp, Inkscape,
Firefox, Thunderbird, Libre Office, the whole LAMP stack, OpenStack,
FileZilla, Git, and on and on. I would MUCH rather use Gnome or KDE to
the Windows or Mac UI as well. And I'll take Linux over Windows or
MacOSX any day.

--
Marek Novotny
A member of the Linux Foundation
http://www.linuxfoundation.org
git with the program

[Alan Browne]

Well the world has moved on. Apple made the dastardly switch to intel
and the Mac makes Apple $20B / year in sales (desktops, laptops, Mac
Mini, Mac Pro).

Unix? http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/certificates/1200p.pdf

Linux is ... Linux. Great engine, nice suspension. But no car. So put
it in servers, database systems, transaction processing, embedded ...
etc. where it does so well...

[Alan Browne]

On 2014.05.13, 19:46 , Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Peter Köhlmann wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> nospam wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> libreoffice is sufficient for simple documents but it starts to show
>>> its limitations with medium and certainly complex documents, such as
>>> ones with tables.
>>
>> Pull the other one, lying imbecile
>
> Amazing, isn't it, the bald-faced lies they will tell about Free software.
>
> Why do they need to *lie*, if Free software is as bad as they claim?

Why do people and companies pay for MS Office (and even the Apple suite
which isn't quite as good as MS Office) when they have a chance to get
all that free software?

Companies have incentive, often fiduciary obligation, to get the best
value in services and products for their companies - you would think
they would RUN to Libre Office.

But they don't.

[Alan Browne]

On 2014.05.13, 18:13 , Eef Hartman wrote:
> In alt.os.linux nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> than the free apps and does so without any hassles
>
> Like MS Internet Explorer having a _serious_ security hole for
> the last 13 (THIRTEEN, since IE 6 all the way in 2001) years ???

Personally I haven't used IE since Firefox came out - for that matter I
used the old Mosaic, then some IE, then Firefox, then Chrome. That was
back when I used (due to work) mostly Windows.

Occasional use of Safari (where Chrome has some issues).

>
>>>> the cost of quality software is not a waste. it pays for itself very
>>>> quickly in productivity gains.
>
> Tell that to our SSC/ICT (Shared Service Centre / Information &
> Communications Technology) department, since they went all MS they
> are having about 10 times more down-time and problems then when it
> was all Unix/Linux.

BS. I'm not saying there is no difference, but I doubt it's a factor of
10 or the bean counters would be making a clear business case for the
better.

> But yeah, then they had administrators that knew what they were doing
> and not the people who can just read the manual and need external help
> every time a serious problem occurs.
> But indeed - the in-house personnel cost is a lot less now.....

We run mixed: back office is mainly Linux (servers, operations and so
on), MS (front office, marketing, etc.). The glorious old 370 was put
to pasture in 2000/01. The graphics artist types and a few others are
"allowed" Macs.

[Alan Browne]

On 2014.05.13, 19:44 , Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> nospam wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> In article <lktor5$5th$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris Ahlstrom
>> <OFee...@teleworm.us> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Thank (Deity of your choice) that I'm not "normal." Linux does
>>>>> everything I want to do, and it does it well. I don't need to waste $$$$
>>>>> on Microsoft or Apple products. Sure, it's OK to make money on software
>>>>> and content, if you can. It's also OK for me to *not* spend $$$ if I can
>>>>> do the job I want to do without it.
>>>>
>>>> if you can do it for free, that's wonderful, but your needs must be
>>>> incredibly simple.
>>>
>>> Load of malarkey.
>>
>> not at all, otherwise people would be flocking to free software and
>> they don't.
>
> It has nothing to do with quality or lack thereof. Quite simply, most
> people still don't know about Free software; or they have your attitude
> that "you get what you pay", which, in many cases, is wrong; or they are
> simply brand fixated.

Wrong. And so is the prior poster. The business issue is about
collaboration with customers, partners, suppliers, government and so on.
The plain fact is, despite best effort, there is no way to take a
complex document in Word, edit it in LO and export it as Word again and
expect formatting to be whole after the process.

>
> I snipped the rest of your ignorant assessment of Free software. You are
> simply wrong.

You're simply obstinate. It's not about how "free" it is - it's about
how costly it is to use 'free' software like LibreOffice when your
ecosystem is as complex as it is in a B2B2G world. (aka: the real world).

>
> Sure, some proprietary packages are "best of breed" in their categories.
> Nonetheless, you're very like to find an acceptable, and even excellent
> selection in the world of Free software, spam.

But not one that you can get a business ecosystem to agree upon. For
all its crappy evil, MS staked the ground hard and fast and there is no
way LibreOffice will ever dent that in a significant way.

[Marek Novotny]

On 2014-05-14, Alan Browne <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> On 2014.05.13, 19:46 , Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> Peter Köhlmann wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>
>>> nospam wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> libreoffice is sufficient for simple documents but it starts to show
>>>> its limitations with medium and certainly complex documents, such as
>>>> ones with tables.
>>>
>>> Pull the other one, lying imbecile
>>
>> Amazing, isn't it, the bald-faced lies they will tell about Free software.
>>
>> Why do they need to *lie*, if Free software is as bad as they claim?
>
>
> Why do people and companies pay for MS Office (and even the Apple suite
> which isn't quite as good as MS Office) when they have a chance to get
> all that free software?
>
> Companies have incentive, often fiduciary obligation, to get the best
> value in services and products for their companies - you would think
> they would RUN to Libre Office.
>
> But they don't.

Oh but they do. This is simply new to corporate America. Open Office and
Libre Office are relative newcomers to the office space. At my office we
have been running into issues where not every user has PowerPoint and
we've been giving them Libre Office. Do you think the employer cares?
They are all for it. It works, it costs nothing. They like it.

However they also have a lot of Word and Excel in use. Word is hardly
used. It comes to Excel for us. And I have been able to show that there
is nothing that we do that can't be done in Calc.

Most things we export from our own apps or from commerce web sites is
either in the form a delimited text file which we turn into an excel
file or come as a csv, which we again turn into an excel file. Both of
these workflows can easily be done in Calc.

In fact I started about talking about building a large array based on
Linux with Samba and the owner starting asking if it would be possible
to get rid of Windows Server 2003. They don't want to pay for a modern
version all over again. Questions about things like NAS are now front
and center where they weren't several years ago.

I was the first one using a Blackberry. Once others started getting
smartphones they quickly realized how awesome it is to have such a
device. And then I got into box, then Sharepoint and then Dropbox. Now I
use my own server with rsync and scripts I wrote. I showed off my script
and the owner was blown away. He had no idea what I was doing could be
done. So he wants a script that will gather file changes for him.

I'm convinced many small businesses simply do not have a clue as to what
is possible with Linux, some shell scripts and free Samba, NAS, and
other general free software.

Vim and Emacs are HUGE. Since learning Vim I don't even touch Word
anymore. I see no reason to. I guess if I want to a pretty document I
would just use Writer. But 99.99% of the time I use Vim or GVim. And
once you learn things like vimdiff and the basics of Vim you'll realize
that this little text editor has an absolute TON of features. It's
light, extremely fast, never corrupts anything and uses just about zero
resources. It doesn't introduce formatting problems or odd characters.
It's a freaking pleasure to use.

I think Microsoft is fooling a lot of people. I've got Vim on everything
now. Even my Android tablet runs Vim!

[nospam]

In article <lkuapi$avg$2...@dont-email.me>, Chris Ahlstrom

<OFee...@teleworm.us> wrote:

> >> >> Thank (Deity of your choice) that I'm not "normal." Linux does
> >> >> everything I want to do, and it does it well. I don't need to waste
> >> >> $$$$
> >> >> on Microsoft or Apple products. Sure, it's OK to make money on software
> >> >> and content, if you can. It's also OK for me to *not* spend $$$ if I
> >> >> can
> >> >> do the job I want to do without it.
> >> >
> >> > if you can do it for free, that's wonderful, but your needs must be
> >> > incredibly simple.
> >>
> >> Load of malarkey.
> >
> > not at all, otherwise people would be flocking to free software and
> > they don't.
>
> It has nothing to do with quality or lack thereof.

it has everything to do with that.

if the quality was there, people would choose free. why pay money when
yo don't have to?

the fact is that the quality *isn't* there and sometimes the free
versions aren't even worth free and in some cases they end up costing
more than a paid solution would have because of the lost productivity.

> Quite simply, most
> people still don't know about Free software; or they have your attitude
> that "you get what you pay", which, in many cases, is wrong; or they are
> simply brand fixated.

nonsense. if the free software was any good, word would get around.

people know about firefox because it's very good, not because it's free
as most browsers are. however, it's the exception.

the gimp is often considered to be a 'photoshop equivalent', but only
by people who haven't any clue about what photoshop can actually do and
almost always, they've never used photoshop beyond casually, if that
much.

the gimp still to this day lacks some features that photoshop had over
20 *years* ago and based on the gimp's road map, likely never will. the
gimp is also significantly slower than photoshop (as much as an order
of magnitude on some operations). that adds up to a huge loss in
productivity.

even photoshop elements at $50 street price is well worth it for its
features and speed unless someone's needs are so simple that all they
do is edit the occasional web image now and then.

> I snipped the rest of your ignorant assessment of Free software. You are
> simply wrong.

you only snipped it because you can't refute anything i said.

very typical.

> Sure, some proprietary packages are "best of breed" in their categories.
> Nonetheless, you're very like to find an acceptable, and even excellent
> selection in the world of Free software, spam.

there's the occasional exception, but it's rare.

[nospam]

In article <lkuasb$avg$3...@dont-email.me>, Chris Ahlstrom

<OFee...@teleworm.us> wrote:

> Amazing, isn't it, the bald-faced lies they will tell about Free software.
>
> Why do they need to *lie*, if Free software is as bad as they claim?

nobody is lying.

if the free software was so wonderful, then people would be using it.

nobody wants to pay money when they don't have to.

the reality is that the free software is often not that good and
commercial software often pays for itself and ends up being cheaper in
the long run.

[Savageduck]

On 2014-05-14 03:11:44 +0000, Alan Browne

<alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> said:

> On 2014.05.13, 18:13 , Eef Hartman wrote:
>> In alt.os.linux nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>> than the free apps and does so without any hassles
>>
>> Like MS Internet Explorer having a _serious_ security hole for
>> the last 13 (THIRTEEN, since IE 6 all the way in 2001) years ???
>
> Personally I haven't used IE since Firefox came out - for that matter I
> used the old Mosaic, then some IE, then Firefox, then Chrome. That was
> back when I used (due to work) mostly Windows.
>
> Occasional use of Safari (where Chrome has some issues).

I haven’t used IE on my home Macs. I started out using Mosaic, various
generations of Netscape & Mozilla. Then on to Safari, Firefox, and
Chrome.

I was compelled to use IE at work, so with my retirement in 2009 and MS
dropping OSX support for it, I haven’t seen IE for some 5 years now.
Even when I run XP under VMWare Fusion, I have chosen not to use it.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

[nospam]

In article <2014051320512248632-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,

Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

> I haven�t used IE on my home Macs. I started out using Mosaic, various
> generations of Netscape & Mozilla. Then on to Safari, Firefox, and
> Chrome.
>
> I was compelled to use IE at work, so with my retirement in 2009 and MS
> dropping OSX support for it, I haven�t seen IE for some 5 years now.
> Even when I run XP under VMWare Fusion, I have chosen not to use it.

internet explorer for mac was a completely separate product than
windows internet explorer, with a completely separate html engine and
written by a completely separate division within microsoft, the mac
business unit, based in silicon valley, california.

the only thing that was common between the two was the name and the
company who wrote it.

mac internet explorer was actually pretty good in its day and much
better than netscape was at the time.

when apple released safari, microsoft ceased working on the product.

[Aragorn]

On Wednesday 14 May 2014 04:45, Alan Browne conveyed the following to

alt.os.linux...

> On 2014.05.12, 21:15 , Aragorn wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday 13 May 2014 02:49, Alan Browne conveyed the following to
>> alt.os.linux...
>>
>>> On 2014.05.12, 18:15 , Aragorn wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tuesday 13 May 2014 00:07, Alan Browne conveyed the following to
>>>> alt.os.linux...
>>>>
>>>>> It just proves that Apple don't take Linux seriously as a personal
>>>>> computing environment. And rightly so. That is why they don't
>>>>> provide iTunes for Linux. Why Adobe don't provide photo/graphic
>>>>> editing for Linux. Why MS don't provide Office for Linux. And so
>>>>> on...
>>>>
>>>> No, that is incorrect. The reason why Apple refuses to support
>>>> GNU/Linux is because they know that GNU/Linux comes from an
>>>> entirely different social ecosystem, where software is usually free
>>>> in every sense, including the financial aspect.
>>>
>>> Apple are interested in selling content: Music, video. Guess what?
>>> Those producers and artists do expect revenue for their product.
>>
>> Yes, and like I said, the GNU/Linux ecosystem is slightly different.
>
> They expect producers and artists to provide free music and video?

They don't *expect* it, but it bears their preference when available.

Incidentally, I *am* a musician and *my* music is free. I am also a
writer - albeit that I haven't officially published anything yet - but
anything I will publish will also in the public domain, and will be free
of charge.

>>>> Given that Apple is a proprietary software maker and that they
>>>> expect not to be able to make a single dime out of GNU/Linux, they
>>>> refuse to support it. It's that simple.
>>>
>>> They give away iTunes to Windows users. Of course those same
>>> Windows users buy music and video via iTunes (and sync their iThings
>>> with it too).
>>>
>>> If Apple thought their was a business prop. with Linux desktop
>>> users, there would be iTunes for Linux.
>>
>> Isn't that what I was saying, then?
>
> Confirming there is not enough community (desktop/home users) to
> bother with. Linux is not really meant for desktop use.
>
> It's an engine, not a car.

If you stick to the strict definition of Linux being the kernel, then
yes. That's why I speak of *GNU/Linux,* which is an operating system.

>>> (BTW: It's okay and moral to make money selling s/w and content.
>>> Really).
>>
>> Personally I disagree with that, but I will grant you that not
>> everyone in the GNU/Linux and FLOSS community feels the same about
>> that as I do.
>
> Dude: s/w and content are creative endeavours. I know people who make
> their living doing such. I used to program embedded and R/T systems
> and I was paid for it. There is no world in which toiling 60 - 80
> hours per week can go on without compensation.

I guess that's why the annual report by Coverity has consistently shown
Free Software as being of a higher code quality than proprietary
software for years on end already, and still does even in 2014.

Just for the record, there's a huge difference between doing something
because you like doing it and doing something because you're being paid
for it. The quality of your work will always be better in the first
scenario.

>>>>> Linux just blows as a personal computing platform and Linux fans
>>>>> can't get that through their heads.
>>>>
>>>> Shhh, don't tell my computer, and don't tell my friends who use
>>>> GNU/Linux as their day-to-day workstations. I've only been using
>>>> it for the last 14+ years, and I've never needed (or wanted)
>>>> anything else.
>>>
>>> Yeah, that sizzling 1.5 - 2% of the market is a real attractor for
>>> Apple.
>>
>> More like 5% at the least, and possibly 8%, which is not bad for an
>> operating system that doesn't have any marketing behind it at all,
>> and which is effectively being boycotted in the corporately
>> controlled mainstream media.
>
> In desktop use (based on web use statistics - A portion of Linux users
> do use the internet/WWW) it is about 1.58% at the current probing.

Which is a lie. The official number - which by far does not represent
the actual usage - lies around 5%. And it doesn't represent the actual
usage because people are commonly behind a NAT these days, and they may
have more than one machine running GNU/Linux - as is the case for me,
for instance - but those polls only count one machine per WAN IP
address, and they are based upon browser identification strings, which
are often spoofed to placate those "Windows only" websites.

>>>>> Linux is great for servers, databases, embedded, super-computing,
>>>>> some automation systems and so on.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just keep it away from unsuspecting, normal people.
>>>>
>>>> If your definition of "normal" means what an intelligent person
>>>> would construe as "brain-dead", then I agree with you.
>>>
>>> No - people who don't have time to waste on the nonsense that is the
>>> proliferation of poorly designed desktop environments and apps for
>>> Linux.
>>
>> You consider "versatile and configurable" a sign of poor design?
>
> As the saying goes, it's not finished when there is nothing left to
> add but when there is nothing left to take away[1].

Yeah, I guess that's the philosophy of the GNOME developers too, which
is why I hate GNOME. And it's also the philosophy of Apple, which is
why I don't like working with an Apple MacIntosh. Nor with Microsoft
Windows for that matter.

> Linux desktops are horrid. Recent ones with all the popping into
> transparency and back are the worst examples of "Look ma, I'm
> transparent" just for the sake of being clever. Horrid.

You can disable those effects if you are so inclined - it isn't rocket
science. But I still prefer my customized and usable KDE, which looks
and feels like what I want out of a desktop environment, not what some
bozo sitting at an expensive corporate desk thinks I want.

> Even St-Torvalds finds them ridiculous.

Nonsense. In fact, one of the things Linus said when he switched to KDE
was that he was glad to have his wobbly windows back.

>>> (I'm running two different Linux systems here, BTW - I'm just
>>> not trapped in the Linux mind warp).
>>
>> Indeed not. It is *very clear* that you are trapped in the MacIntosh
>> mind warp.
>
> Yeah. Clear. Simple. Effective. Apps support from Microsoft (Office
> stuff) and Adobe (Photoshop, etc.) and much more.

You can keep your bug-ridden Adobe crap and Microsoft crap. I am very
happily using GIMP and LibreOffice.

> And of course superior integration with all the other Apple crap we
> have around (a couple laptops, iPhones).
>
> More expensive than a Linux life? In dollar terms, sure. In time
> lost terms, quite the opposite with heavy multipliers. And time is
> much more precious than a few bucks saved on an OS and freeware that
> isn't quite compatible with the rest of the world.

Free Software is not freeware. There is a *huge* difference. Freeware
is proprietary software which is given away free of charge, but in
binary form only, given that it's proprietary.

As for compatibility, GNU/Linux and Free Software are compatible with
all internationally agreed upon standards, as well as with a number of
proprietary technologies. Microsoft is notorious for being only
compatible with itself, and OS X is a perversion compared to the FreeBSD
it was based upon.

> LibreOffice? Nothing free about the time lost using that dog.

I don't have any problems with it at all, and it opens Microsoft Office
documents, and can save them again in Microsoft Office formats.

> BTW: The follow-up-to gag doesn't work, so save the mouse clicks ;-)

It's my newsreader which automatically inserts the follow-up crap. I
didn't do that myself. In fact, I dislike that functionality, but the
only way to override it is to manually delete the follow-up group that
it sets - it always picks the first group in the list anyway.
--

[William Poaster]

Marek Novotny wrote:

> On 2014-05-14, Alan Browne <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>> On 2014.05.13, 19:46 , Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

>>> Peter Kļæ½hlmann wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

>>>
>>>> nospam wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> libreoffice is sufficient for simple documents but it starts to show
>>>>> its limitations with medium and certainly complex documents, such as
>>>>> ones with tables.
>>>>
>>>> Pull the other one, lying imbecile
>>>
>>> Amazing, isn't it, the bald-faced lies they will tell about Free software.
>>>
>>> Why do they need to *lie*, if Free software is as bad as they claim?
>>
>>
>> Why do people and companies pay for MS Office (and even the Apple suite
>> which isn't quite as good as MS Office) when they have a chance to get
>> all that free software?
>>
>> Companies have incentive, often fiduciary obligation, to get the best
>> value in services and products for their companies - you would think
>> they would RUN to Libre Office.
>>
>> But they don't.

> Oh but they do.

They do indeed. Governments, universities & the private sector use
OpenOffice & LibreOffice.
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Major_OpenOffice.org_Deployments

The Macfanboi is just FUDding.

And also heavily relies on their ignorance.

> I've got Vim on everything
> now. Even my Android tablet runs Vim!


--

So much for Windwoes AV:
Antivirus products were developed to keep hackers out, but in todayļæ½s world,
Symantec only keeps about 45 percent of attempted breaches from ever making it inside.
http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/1113140089/antivirus-software-dead-technology-brian-dye-symantec-050714/

[William Poaster]

nospam wrote:

> In article <lkuasb$avg$3...@dont-email.me>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <OFee...@teleworm.us> wrote:
>
>> Amazing, isn't it, the bald-faced lies they will tell about Free software.
>>
>> Why do they need to *lie*, if Free software is as bad as they claim?

<snip drivel>

Crosspost snipped.
And another Macfanboi plonked.

--
So much for Windwoes AV:

Antivirus products were developed to keep hackers out, but in todayοΏ½s world,

[William Poaster]

Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> Peter Kļæ½hlmann wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

>
>> nospam wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> libreoffice is sufficient for simple documents but it starts to show
>>> its limitations with medium and certainly complex documents, such as
>>> ones with tables.
>>
>> Pull the other one, lying imbecile
>
> Amazing, isn't it, the bald-faced lies they will tell about Free software.
>
> Why do they need to *lie*, if Free software is as bad as they claim?

A] Because they're ignorant, & talking out of their collective asses.
or
B] Because they're simply trolling & spewing FUD.
C] Maybe both of the above.

Oh, & wanna bet they come up with something like:
"I've used GNU/Linux / OpenOffice / LibreOffice etc, blah blah..& it's no
good.."
It funny how all trolls come out with something like that at some point in
their FUDding.

--
So much for Windwoes AV:

Antivirus products were developed to keep hackers out, but in todayļæ½s world,

[William Poaster]

<chuckle>

Ah, the trolls trotting out the old discredited browsing figures. Whatta
surprise.

> Which is a lie. The official number - which by far does not represent
> the actual usage - lies around 5%.

Even M$ put GNU/Linux usage between 7% & 11%, & admitted to the US SEC that
GNU/Linux can be damaging their sales etc..

> And it doesn't represent the actual usage because people are commonly behind
> a NAT these days, and they may have more than one machine running GNU/Linux
> - as is the case for me, for instance -

And for me too, in two different houses. So how *exactly* can anyone tell

> but those polls only count one machine per WAN IP address, and they are
> based upon browser identification strings, which
> are often spoofed to placate those "Windows only" websites.



>>>>>> Linux is great for servers, databases, embedded, super-computing,
>>>>>> some automation systems and so on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just keep it away from unsuspecting, normal people.

Like this Macfanboi, for example. <chuckle>

>>>>> If your definition of "normal" means what an intelligent person
>>>>> would construe as "brain-dead", then I agree with you.
>>>>
>>>> No - people who don't have time to waste on the nonsense that is the
>>>> proliferation of poorly designed desktop environments and apps for
>>>> Linux.
>>>
>>> You consider "versatile and configurable" a sign of poor design?
>>
>> As the saying goes, it's not finished when there is nothing left to
>> add but when there is nothing left to take away[1].
>
> Yeah, I guess that's the philosophy of the GNOME developers too, which
> is why I hate GNOME. And it's also the philosophy of Apple, which is
> why I don't like working with an Apple MacIntosh. Nor with Microsoft
> Windows for that matter.

+1.

>> Linux desktops are horrid. Recent ones with all the popping into
>> transparency and back are the worst examples of "Look ma, I'm
>> transparent" just for the sake of being clever. Horrid.
>
> You can disable those effects if you are so inclined - it isn't rocket
> science. But I still prefer my customized and usable KDE, which looks
> and feels like what I want out of a desktop environment, not what some
> bozo sitting at an expensive corporate desk thinks I want.

+1

>> Even St-Torvalds finds them ridiculous.
>
> Nonsense. In fact, one of the things Linus said when he switched to KDE
> was that he was glad to have his wobbly windows back.

And in G+ & some forums, he's said the same thing.

>>>> (I'm running two different Linux systems here, BTW - I'm just
>>>> not trapped in the Linux mind warp).
>>>
>>> Indeed not. It is *very clear* that you are trapped in the MacIntosh
>>> mind warp.

+1,000

>> Yeah. Clear. Simple. Effective. Apps support from Microsoft (Office
>> stuff) and Adobe (Photoshop, etc.) and much more.
>
> You can keep your bug-ridden Adobe crap and Microsoft crap. I am very
> happily using GIMP and LibreOffice.

+1,000

>> And of course superior integration with all the other Apple crap we
>> have around (a couple laptops, iPhones).
>>
>> More expensive than a Linux life? In dollar terms, sure. In time
>> lost terms, quite the opposite with heavy multipliers. And time is
>> much more precious than a few bucks saved on an OS and freeware that
>> isn't quite compatible with the rest of the world.

So in other words, this macfanboi does *not* know the difference between
Free Software & freeware. Why am I not surprised.

> Free Software is not freeware. There is a *huge* difference. Freeware
> is proprietary software which is given away free of charge, but in
> binary form only, given that it's proprietary.
>
> As for compatibility, GNU/Linux and Free Software are compatible with
> all internationally agreed upon standards, as well as with a number of
> proprietary technologies. Microsoft is notorious for being only
> compatible with itself, and OS X is a perversion compared to the FreeBSD
> it was based upon.

+1,000

And in fact OS X is only about 80% of FreeBSD with 20% of Apple's
proprietaary crap bolted on. And it's interesting to note that any attacks
on OS X have come via vulnerabilities in the 20% Apple's SW rather than
the established 80% FreeBSD part.
"Go figure" as they say.

>> LibreOffice? Nothing free about the time lost using that dog.
>
> I don't have any problems with it at all, and it opens Microsoft Office
> documents, and can save them again in Microsoft Office formats.

As do I, & pass the documents on to people who use M$ Office. No complaints
from them.

>> BTW: The follow-up-to gag doesn't work, so save the mouse clicks ;-)
>
> It's my newsreader which automatically inserts the follow-up crap. I
> didn't do that myself. In fact, I dislike that functionality, but the
> only way to override it is to manually delete the follow-up group that
> it sets - it always picks the first group in the list anyway.

--

So much for Windwoes AV:

Antivirus products were developed to keep hackers out, but in todayοΏ½s world,

[Peter Köhlmann]

nospam wrote:

> In article <lkuasb$avg$3...@dont-email.me>, Chris Ahlstrom
> <OFee...@teleworm.us> wrote:
>
>> Amazing, isn't it, the bald-faced lies they will tell about Free
>> software.
>>
>> Why do they need to *lie*, if Free software is as bad as they claim?
>
> nobody is lying.
>
> if the free software was so wonderful, then people would be using it.

They do. Ask the city of Munich for a change.
They run linux. And OpenOffice

> the reality is that the free software is often not that good and
> commercial software often pays for itself and ends up being cheaper in
> the long run.

The reality is that Closed Source software is often not that good.
Just look at windows. It is a malware ridden piece of junk

[Sandman]

In article <lkvatj$qm2$1...@dont-email.me>, Peter Köhlmann wrote:

> > > Chris Ahlstrom:

> > > Amazing, isn't it, the bald-faced lies they will tell about Free
> > > software.
> >
> > > Why do they need to *lie*, if Free software is as bad as they
> > > claim?
> >

> > nospam:

> > nobody is lying.
>
> > if the free software was so wonderful, then people would be using
> > it.
>
> They do. Ask the city of Munich for a change. They run linux. And
> OpenOffice

Wow, all 1.353 million people of Munich??

> > nospam:

> > the reality is that the free software is often not that good and
> > commercial software often pays for itself and ends up being
> > cheaper in the long run.
>
> The reality is that Closed Source software is often not that good.
> Just look at windows. It is a malware ridden piece of junk

If malware is your concern, I would stay far away from Windows and Android
(Linux) and only use Mac OS X and iOS.

The entire malware angle isn't working out for Linux advocates any longer,
especially those that really want to include Android units in market share
numbers.

--
Sandman[.net]

[Chris Ahlstrom]

Aragorn wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Wednesday 14 May 2014 04:45, Alan Browne conveyed the following to
> alt.os.linux...
>>

>> Yeah. Clear. Simple. Effective. Apps support from Microsoft (Office
>> stuff) and Adobe (Photoshop, etc.) and much more.
>
> You can keep your bug-ridden Adobe crap and Microsoft crap. I am very
> happily using GIMP and LibreOffice.

Same here. Well, not quite so happy with LibreOffice; I'd rather share
documents using something like LaTeX, where I can use my favorite text
editor, rather than a clumsy GUI. (Microsoft Office is, in my opinion, in
some ways an even clumsier GUI. The Ribbon is a space-wasting abomination
that is now even used in the file explorer in Window 2012.)

We've actually been able to replace AdLib (document conversion software),
for example, at work, with code that spawns an OpenOffice server and
spawns ImageMagick, to convert a wide range of document types to PDF.
Works at least as well as AdLib did, and costs a lot less.

Weird, isn't it, Aragorn, how every pro-Linux venue we go to starts getting
overrun with anti-Linux, anti-Free-Software propagandists and with seeming
corporate shills who claim everyone ought to pay top dollar for apps that
may or may not be the "best-of-breed" in their categories?

One thing that GNU/Linux has taught me over the years is how much can be
done with Free software, on a Free operating system. I enjoy using it and
do all of my play on it and almost all of my work on it. So when someone
comes to the place I hang out to dismiss it, I will object.

I don't go to their hangouts and rail about the expense and other defects of
the products they love. Why do they go out of their way to come here?

In any further correspondence on this issue, I will try to make sure
rec.photo.digital is snipped.

--
Down that path lies madness. On the other hand, the road to hell is
paved with melting snowballs.
-- Larry Wall in <1992Jul2.2...@netlabs.com>

[Chris Ahlstrom]

Alan Browne wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

>

*plonk*

You k00k!

--
Power corrupts. And atomic power corrupts atomically.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

nospam wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> In article <lkuapi$avg$2...@dont-email.me>, Chris Ahlstrom
>>

>> It has nothing to do with quality or lack thereof.
>
> it has everything to do with that.
>
> if the quality was there, people would choose free. why pay money when
> yo don't have to?

Because, spam, there are very few people who have the confidence to install
their own operating system. It's as simple as that.

As for apps, I've already explained the reasons: lack of knowledge;
thinking they'll miss some unknown key functionality; brand fixation; and a
cavalier attitude to "pirating" software.

I use Windows and its software on an almost daily basis in my job. I don't
see any big leap in quality over the Free software I use. Microsoft Office
is bloated, slow, and sometimes quite grotesque. Adobe Reader is bloated
and slow, and Adobe, while nominally supporting PDF as a "standard", insists
on adding its own proprietary extensions to it. Flash is a routine source
malware warnings. I've never used Photoshop; GIMP covers my needs quite
well, and it eventually will cover the handful of functions that it lacks
over Photoshop. Microsoft's media player is big and grotesque. IE is okay,
and sometimes necessary due to bad programming practices by the makers of
training sites. And don't get me started on Visual Studio. Takes up more
time and disk space to install than a full Linux desktop distro, and runs
like a fat dog.

What do I use on the Linux side?

LibreOffice for reading documents and some document generation.
Doxygen for PDF generation; very simple markup with easy tables of
contents and indexing.
Evince for reading PDF and XPS files.
GIMP for graphics, ImageMagick for batch conversion.
Seq24, Rosegarden, LMMS, Ardour, Audacity for MIDI and DAW work.
Firefox and Chrome/Chromium for browsing.
GCC, gdb (with my favorite front end), and valgrind for building and
debugging code. If I really wanted an IDE, I think I'd go with
NetBeans over Visual Studio.
mpd (and various front ends) for music management and streaming audio.
Roxterm, xfce4-terminal, or urxvt running bash for console work; they
beat the SNOT out of Microsoft's pathetic DOS and slow (if capable)
PowerShell.
Gkrellm or conky for system monitors.
Xsane or skanlite for driving my Canon USB LIDE scanner.
vim/gvim for editing code and text.

And there are a lot more apps that I use. And that doesn't even get intot
the desktop paradigms, virtual desktops, shading, and other things that, if
they exist on Windows at all, are kind of crappy in their implementation.

And, guess what? I am extremely happy to use them, and prefer them over the
conventional favorites on the Windows desktop. When I discovered Linux,
years ago, it was a breath of fresh air in the stale world of Windows. And
I still find Windows quite slow and confining, and lacking in features.

--
Adam was but human--this explains it all. He did not want the apple for the
apple's sake, he wanted it only because it was forbidden. The mistake was in
not forbidding the serpent; then he would have eaten the serpent.
-- Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar"