[KLUG Advocacy] No OS immune to user attack (no matter how ill-posed)

[Robert G. Brown]

On 15 Sep 2003 22:21:27 -0400, magoo <mag00@voyager.net> wrote:

>I am hoping that distros do want to be popular 
>with the desktop folks!... The average clueless, dumb, and digitally 
>bewildered office worker. Someone like ME!!! 
>just the systems or network admins, the Apache wizards, 
>programmers, and database devotees!!!  
Actually, you want better packaging than Microsoft gives you; they
don't ship an OS with an office package at all. Do you make the 
same demands, or have the same expectations of Microsoft? If you
don't, this is not a good comparison.

Your comment is symptomatic of something that Microsoft has been VERY 
GOOD at doing, which is pushing the installation process as far up the
supply chain as possible. If Microsoft could get the hard drive 
makers to mold Windows right onto the media, they'd do it in a 
heartbeat, and there are a number of things that Microsoft has done
(along with 3rd-party package vendors) to make it very hard to wrest
control of one's own drives back from the clutches of the software.

They understand the value of being installed first, and getting the
user into the applications they want with a minimum of fuss.

Now imagine that you get a PC with Linux pre-installed, along with
an office suite or package... everything was pre-tested, everything
works, and does what you would expect. What would you think of that?

>Linus claims to be focused on the desktop (not necessarily for the 
>office user?) 
Which (as my previous post explained) does not mean the whole Linux
community picks this up as the priority, or that it will respond
well over the short term. 

>but then OO sits far from where it should be. 
You keep saying this as if the whole future of Linux on the desktop
somehow depends on this (IMO it does not), and without substantiating
it (IMO you need to do that or lose credibility).

>> Are we talking about applications or file formats? ...
>BOTH application function and compatible input/output file format 
>are important.  Yes, both are lacking in OO! 
there ya go again!

>Single standalone business workstations with applications 
>running (and data stored) on a local hard drive are a tough 
>mindset for network folks to grasp.
But not for mainframers, or general application developers.
Before you can be really well-rounded as a developer, you must
internalize this model in some form or another. 

>It is different... and Microsoft grew up in that environment.
Yes, and when they stepped into a more complex world, they blew
it completely, since they are coding on sand (see previous mes-
sages in this thread). It is so deeply ingrained in their
applications code, culture, and software designs that one can
see all kinds of vestiges (modal dialog boxes, gratuitous
alerts and notification boxes) of single-threaded, stand-alone
behavior on multi=thread, multi-tasking, multiuser systems.

>Linux developers are network oriented. 
Nah. Maybe some people who are hung up on networking and have
written a bunch of low-level stuff, perhaps. No one who does 
really serious or robust programming is going to expose the 
application to the network protocols or transports directly
(one might when writing some quick and dirty prototype or 
proof-of-concept code, but do that in production software and
you're looking for a career change), there is going to be AT
LEAST one layer of abstraction.

With good application coding, the guy who writes that code is
served best by not being aware of a lot of that structure. If
someone is not well-versed in writing software in this environ-
ment is cut loose, you can have some real problems. So much of
the difference between OS's is manifest in the programming
environment through the use of different libraries and API's.

Ah, next we actually get to something specific....
>OO_Writer - fine import/export superb 
OK, so what's the problem?

>OO_Calc -  all Excel functions are NOT supported 
>Imports bomb if a unsupported function was used. 
>[Note: GNUmeric DOES support all Excel functions.] 
So use Gnumeric.

>OO_Impress - fine import/export superb 
Again, what's he problem?

>MySQL  - user friendly GUI interface for dumb monkeys? 
Plenty of 'em. Maybe they don't ship (or they were not installed?)
with the one-stop shop set of CD's you relied on for Linux (but
not for Windows), but a quick look on Freshmeat will find a lot of
'em.

Remember the pre-installed Linux box I mentioned before? It has
at least one such front end for MySQL. Perhaps it's gmyclient,
or something else (see http://gmyclient.sourceforge.net). A bit
of downloading and testing will reveal the best one, there are
lots of them!

I know, you're going to say "But If I were using Microsoft, I would
not have to do all that..", and you're right. However, the great
majority of Windows users in the business world are not doing it
either. Their desktops are increasingly managed by professionals
who do the configuration and deploy the right tools for workers
in any case. This work will fall on the admin people at whatever
organization where you're working as a "dumb users".

The people doing the configuration management for your desktop will
also solve the Office problems you seem to be complaining about. 

>Bundle these together and try and convert the masses. 
>Then Linux developers can dazzle the evolutionary code 
>out of a chimps ear and give us better and better 
>everything!!!  
Well, as I've pointed out, it's not only developers, but other 
participants in the supply chain that work toward this end. By
looking to a distro to do this, you are in essence casting them
in the same role that Microsoft itself occupies. Why is that 
needed?

A better model is to consider that the Linux distributor is the
primary supplier of infrastructure, and is taking a good basic
shot at giving you everything you need to do something. There are
a lot more sources of software, and they can be exploited by 
your system admin people. Together they are responsible for giving
you the working environment you need to function well.

You are also aware that this is more or less how things work in 
the Windows world as well. If you're not, please be aware that
it is, only to a great degree Microsoft is the much more dominant
supplier of tools, special programs, utilities, etc.

>Of course, Open Source software is not free of charge any 
>longer but you have support and very good software.  :-) 
What does THIS mean?

>Paint me a M$ geek if you want... 
I wouldn't expend the pigment. 

>guess nobody was getting 
>my original point that Linux is NOT ready for the desktop 
>and tried to take every side road and diversionary leap 
>possible to avoid addressing the specifics.
No, I think the message is received. Some simply don't agree.
I also don't think counterargument is appropriately labeled
as either a "side road" or a "diversionary leap".

>> Have you used OO extensively?  I have, and there are (at least)
>>several companies in GR that do.  
.....
>> I'm curious what the specific issues with OO as an application that 
>> you've discovered....

>OK... I did!  Waiting for OO to be a player... not yet. 
Sorry, not specific enough, Ralph. There are also more import
filters available for OO, and a LOT more available for Star Office,
and there are other office tools available.

Instead of making a good case against Linux as a whole, you've 
written about two issues with import/export filtering in a specific
office suite, and since these point are already know to the devel-
opers, they will (and are, actually) being addressed now. This does 
not make the software worthless, unusable, or "not ready"; different
versions of MS Office have similar or more severe problems. MS-Office
and the document format is not cleanly compatible across versions, but
no one seems to complain a lot about that. More of a double standard.

>IBM said so, Adam... it MUST be true, right! 
>Not good enough for IBM... not good enough for ME! 
Also not specific enough. 

>I'll be ringing the firebell when I find a Linux distro and 
>functional and compatible office suite that lunges for the 
>office mass market and DA MONEY BABY, DA MONEY.  Billy'$ 
>billion$ came from meeting consumer demand.  OFFICE!!! 
Well, this is not a justified or valid comparison, sorry.
Your statements indicate that you do NOT understand the
reasons for Microsoft's success, or if you do, you have
not expressed it.

>Linux is better in many ways... ideal, model, code, etc. 
>Yes... managing a kernel project is much afield from managing 
>an office suite development army.  
That's right, and people who do one do not even try to do the
other. The above statement is based on some phony idea of what's
been said, and what's going on.

>Bill Joy is available... 
Oh, you know this is what he wants to do next?

>Some day Linux WILL arrive for the business mass market. 
Um, the train's pulling into the station now. Keep denying it 
and you'll just miss it when it really gets going! 

>Ximian Evolution has crashed twice while I was writing this.
>At least it kept recovering this twice lost response!  I get
>CORBA errors and have to restart about every other document
>I work on.  Flakey... nice, but buggy!
Well, this is part of what I wrote about your POV in a previous
message. You have not correct those statements, so I'm assuming 
that they are an accurate reflection of your position. As I have
asserted there, this is personal experience, perhaps from an install
that was messed up in one of several ways. It's not general exper-
ience, nor is it necessarily indicative of Linux behavior as a whole.

Instead of (or maybe in addition to) complaining about Linux, go
get your system fixed.

						Regards,
						---> RGB <---