Ben Okopnik wrote: > On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 04:29:39PM -0500, ken wrote: > >> I myself use dual boot. One reason is the _professional_ CAD CAM program >> I use won't run on Ubuntu. Neither will the _professional_ PCB design >> programs I use. >> > > [laugh] You and I have different standards of professionalism, Ken. The > people that I teach are running the computers at the Federal Depository, > Los Alamos, NASA, and the US stock exchange, among others. Not sure I understand. Are you saying YOU are more "professional" than ME because you teach these folks or are are you saying THEY have 'higher standards" of professionalism than ME because of who they work for? "I" am basing it on how the programs are used by me (.) Should be enough to merit the descriptor, I think.
And BTW I use one of the most if not the most used CAD CAM program around. Maybe there are folks who use it on Linux, I don't know, my Nephew who is doing a PHD in Nuke science/engineering doesn't use HIS on Linux, so obviously it isn't exclusive. In ANY case, MINE won'trun on Ubuntu. > >> So Ubuntu has a ways to go before "I" could really use it in a >> _professional_ manner. >> > > I'm afraid you're not qualified to render an opinion on the professional > capabilities of Ubuntu or any other OS, Ken. Out of curiosity, are you > actually familiar with _any_ OS beyond Windows and (to some minimal > degree) Linux? > If the end user is not qualified to pass judgment on the performance of the OS to his satisfaction then...well never mind the rest of it, that statement is just plain absurd! Clearly, I was not trying to render an opinion on the "professional capabilities" as regards the intricacies of the operating system only noting that for MY uses with some "professional" programs doing what I do to try to eke out my meager existence it was not useful as regards those programs. I would not attempt any evaluation of it further than that and I think my intent regarding my usage was clear. Do the folks you mentioned all 'twiddle with its innards' in a "professional" way as a routine and continuous manner as a programmer might do or do they only use it to run "professional" programs as I indicated I tried to do? I hope you aren't making the rather too common mistake of believing that only someone who is an actual "programmer" is "qualified" to decide if an OS is "doing what it is supposed to do". Mind, I agree whole heartedly that I know very little about "programing" per se although I HAVE worked on many types of computers oer the decades some down to the component level and that DID require some knowledge about some programs (why we have books, right?), but nonetheless I am really not in any way shape or fashine a "software engineer". As for me regarding operating systems at a "professional" level my talents lie elsewhere. Technical, yes, software, no. Technical; I USED to be a technician for others, now mostly retired but lately I am working on a new type of very fast actuating valve of my own design and a totally new concept in mechanical CVTs. Also I design electronic stuff of various types now and again. This to put forth the argument that in fact I am NOT stupid. Ignorant, may be, and fair enough, but stupid, no. However I have a brother who is almost forty years in the software eng. field, a nephew who spent lots of collage dollars studying it among other things, and a sister in law with two many degrees in it to hang on the wall so I have lots of resources to draw upon if I need to. BUT, interesting that NONE of them are big Ubuntu fans! My brother is the one who got me started with it, that is it was his suggestion that it would let me copy my own pictures from the net and download my own music from my subscription web site (old out of copyright stuff mostly so there is a DRM/XP problem those idiots) and his thoughts that it would be more stable and secure were all shown to be true. He USED to use it a bit, now seldom does. But I don't need their expertise to decide for me if Ubuntu lives up to its rep, I can sure as heck tell if the thing is doing what is needed and compare how well it does that with other operating systems. > > >>> If they ignore it, /dev/null >>> (the bottomless trash pit) is always waiting. >>> >> Regarding the above statement, a refusal to take on board legitimate and >> relevant criticism >> > > But you see, that's the whole point. You're not equipped to give valid > criticism: you don't know enough. I am quite sure I know more than enough about my own fields of enterprise to be able to decide if Ubuntu performs in a favorable manner given other operating systems to compare it to. Esp. when for the most part it doesn't. Or is that not a valid criticism? Your position here is kinda like saying that unless I have an engineering degree in automotive mechanics I can't really decide if a particular vehicle is more or less useful to me than a different one. It seems to me that would be an irrational and illogical viewpoint in the extreme! > What you _can_ give is a report of the > things that have upset you and annoyed you... but why would you think > that anyone would be interested? > Well. "I" would have been interested to know about some of the problems I was likely going to encounter before I did. And I see by the forums that many also are having problems and at least part of the time if not often the troubles they have are not successfully resolved or not fully anyway. At the time I decide to try it I found mostly glowing reports of praise about Ubuntu and little else and as I have had occasion to see since I find that nearly all the time those who do openly criticize it are nearly always given a scathing and contemptuous brush off. When someone wants to ask for information about something that I have some first hand experience with at times I like to try to lend my two cents to the pile. So I did. > >> (and >> if that counts as not being "pleasant to be around" as far as behavior >> goes or "whining and screaming" that how on earth will ANY criticism >> EVER be acceptable?) >> > > See, Ken, this statement falls very neatly into the category I've > described: you believe that you either have to stay completely silent OR > you have to scream abuse at the top of your lungs (and the latter is > "honest" and is "useful criticism".) Gee. Was that how you took it? That seems rather thin skinned to me. I just went back and reviewed my first posting and for sure don't see what I said that could have elicted that feeling, would you mind pointing out what most made you feel that way? In fact I thought it was rather a moderate if brusque missive. Came across wrong I guess. > By contrast, people who provide > useful feedback to the community are aware of a broad range of behaviors > that lie between those two endpoints. They submit bug reports, add > suggestions to wish lists, and submit patches In fact I have done some of those things myself. Of course not submit patches. I'm not that smart. ;-) > (proposed software > changes) to improve the things they want. They participate in forums - > e.g., Ubuntu hosts a number of lively and well-populated ones - and > coordinate efforts to improve the things they see as necessary, whether > these changes are technical, social, or philosophical. > Ah yes the forums. > That, you see, is how open source works. And your lack of understanding > of that is what disqualifies you completely from rendering useful > criticism. > > Hmmm...because you believe for some reason that I do not understand the forum concept (even though I thought I had made clear I did make use of them) that must necessarily mean that I am not qualified to pass judgment on whether or not Ubuntu lived up to its hype in my opinion or it means that my judgment on its relative performance when compared to XP is therefore flawed? I fail to understand the logic. >> I would rather discuss the whys and wherefores of the issues instead >> of if I am a nut, retard, incompetent, liar, cry-baby or whatever the >> next adjectives de jour may be for mentioning any criticism. I may be >> all of those things (been called much worse) but calling folks you >> have never met and don't know names simply because you disagree with >> some of their opinions they have had the termacity to publish in a >> public forum doesn't in any conceivable way help solve the issues with >> Ubuntu. >> > > To misquote Frank Herbert: I've displayed a general garment, and you > claim it's cut to your fit? I was speaking of the whiners and the > screamers that pop up around the Linux community and are laughed at for > their pains. If you can find where I specifically included you in that > list, Ah, but the implication was quite clear. And I never "claimed membership" only noted I was being characterized that way and never have I claimed to be insulted at all. But, if in fact that was NOT your intent that is you were NOT trying to include me in that group in a back handed manner, well, then thanks for that and I do apologize for assuming such. I certainly am not setting out to try to offend anyone. And in fact unless you try to kill my dog or sink my boat I am pretty thick skinned and tolerant. But I am not about to change my views about the relative and claimed merits of Ubuntu without a darn good reason, either. -Ken > > > _______________________________________________ Liveaboard mailing list [email protected] To adjust your membership settings over the web http://www.liveaboardnow.org/mailman/listinfo/liveaboard To subscribe send an email to [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] The archives are at http://www.liveaboardnow.org/pipermail/liveaboard/ To search the archives http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] The Mailman Users Guide can be found here http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/mailman-member/index.html
