On Thu, 2004-02-26 at 00:09, Derek Martin wrote:
But as members of the community, we can not forget that many people
who use computers can not effective do what they need to do in Linux,
and in some cases can't do it at all.
Exactly. To draw an analogy, I drive a Subaru coupe. I love the
The Switching people from a windows desktop to a linux desktop has
been argued before. Just s/linux/macintosh/g.
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
--- Jeff Kinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Telling people Oh, you gotta learn all new applications...
But you already proved this to be wrong at the library. It doesn't matter that they
*thought* they were using MS Word. They weren't. And they had no complaints.
=
The power of accurate
On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 07:35:29AM -0500, Travis Roy wrote:
I'm not saying a commercial software package can't work for Linux,
but in the past it hasn't for many Linux game companies,
The only company I know of who falls into that category is Loki, and
as I mentioned elsewhere, they failed
--- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Often, the existence of an alternative is inadequate. Many people,
believe it or not, live in MS-Office all day long. If the documents
their co-workers produce don't import 100% correctly into whatever
alternative they use, then it's no alternative
On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 08:17:55AM -0500, Tom Buskey wrote:
The Switching people from a windows desktop to a linux desktop has
been argued before. Just s/linux/macintosh/g.
It's not the same argument at all. The players, and their
philosophies and goals, are in general totally different.
--- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, that's exactly my point: it's not convincing at all.
I think that perhaps you misunderstand.
Mozilla is
an application that looks and acts enough like its MS counterpart to
be passed off as IE to the uninitiated. OO is another. Evolution
--- Jeff Kinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You have it backwards. It shows that a completely random and untrained
population sample will be able to use Linux when it looks and acts
exactly like what they already know, Windows.
I don't believe you are the only one allowed to draw conclusions. Nor
--- Jeff Kinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, I understand. You're ignoring the obvious for the purposes of making
a point of vocabulary or splitting a semantic hair that has absolutely
no meaning in the real world.
I see it this way: you're telling me, in essence, that for all wants and
Anyway I think you guys all made your points (better than I did),
and I'm dropping out of this, now clearly non-profitable thread.
These threads can be profitable?! :)
I think it got pulled quite far afield from Maddog's original query.
and
that's too bad. He was looking at something
On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 12:43:26PM -0800, Michael Costolo wrote:
I see it this way: you're telling me, in essence, that for all wants and purposes
OpenOffice Writer and MS Word are the same program because a particular class of
users can use the two interchangeably.
Nope. Application !=
--- Jeff Kinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike is obviously going to stand here and say that the slightest
difference means the user is learning a new application. (And he's
accusing Derek of being pedantic. :-) )
I would argue you've oversimplified things *just* a bit. And perhaps putting words
On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 01:20:03PM -0800, Michael Costolo wrote:
--- Jeff Kinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike is obviously going to stand here and say that the slightest
difference means the user is learning a new application. (And he's
accusing Derek of being pedantic. :-) )
I would
On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 10:38:27AM -0800, Michael Costolo wrote:
--- Jeff Kinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So - You are saying that using OpenOffice writer, a clone of MS-Word,
constitutes 'Learning a new application for a Microsoft Word user?
Yes.
Ok, I understand. You're ignoring the
--- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's complete nonsense.
I disagree.
learn v. tr. gain knowledge of or skill in by study, experience, or
by being taught. --OEAD
So, if they have no experience with OO, and spent no time studying or
being taught about OO, then they clearly
On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 08:15:52AM -0800, Michael Costolo wrote:
--- Jeff Kinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You have it backwards. It shows that a completely random and untrained
population sample will be able to use Linux when it looks and acts
exactly like what they already know, Windows.
On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 06:33:22AM -0800, Michael Costolo wrote:
But you already proved this to be wrong at the library. It doesn't
matter that they *thought* they were using MS Word. They weren't.
And they had no complaints.
A single example of anything is not a basis for a
--- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 05:40:55AM -0800, Michael Costolo wrote:
--- Jeff Kinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Telling people Oh, you gotta learn all new applications...
But you already proved this to be wrong at the library. It doesn't
matter that
Fair enough. But my impression is that you often have a lot of
negative things to say about Linux, almost whenever the opportunity
arises to say them. I'm not suggesting that Linux is perfect, or that
everyone who participates on this list should be totally gung-ho about
it. But your posts
It took a little work to get the video card to work right (nVidia's
problem, really) and the VPN to my job was slow getting started, but
once set up the only things I found lacking are game and some
proprietary multimedia support.
We most also not forget that the average home user does not want to
On Wed, 2004-02-25 at 23:59, Derek Martin wrote:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 11:00:17AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That is true, but there is also a problem with the Linux comunity in that
they think everything should be free.
There are certainly some people in the community who feel
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
You know why linux will fail on the desktop for most families..
Travis,
You are right that Linux will fail on most at-home desktops in 2004-2005
because of a lack of cool software.
It will also fail because the normal support line of at-home desktops
(the church, the
It will also fail because the normal support line of at-home desktops
(the church, the club, the nextdoor neighbor) will not be there in
2004-2005 because it is not being used at work in 2002-2003. But as
people start using it at work two things will happen:
o that alternate support
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
That's what Apple thought too by putting Macs in Schools. That didn't really
work for them.
You said schools, I said businesses. That's apples and oranges (pun
intended).
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
That is true, but there is also a problem with the Linux comunity in
--- Jon maddog Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are right that Linux will fail on most at-home desktops in 2004-2005
because of a lack of cool software.
Would you define cool software? Frankly, I am of the opinion that Linux comes
with lots of cool software. Or at least, lots of cool
Linux has been a failure in the server room and
somehow it has recovered very well. What does not
kill it only makes it stronger.
It may be a failure for the home desktop now, but,
to embrace and extend another's famous quote,
Linux [on the desktop] is inevitable.
We are on the very brink of
Jon maddog Hall wrote:
You are right that Linux will fail on most at-home desktops in 2004-2005
because of a lack of cool software.
I, for one am VERY happy to see Sierra porting Unreal Tournament to
Linux. Open Source it's not, but the UT2004 demo runs amazingly well on
my Mandrake system.
Michael Costolo wrote:
Would you define cool software? Frankly, I am of the opinion that Linux comes
with lots of cool software. Or at least, lots of cool software runs under Linux (my
apologies for the pedantry). But being a physicist, I suppose my geek factor is
pretty high. What cool apps
--- Richard Soule [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Everquest, World of Warcraft, Halo, Call of Duty, Civilization, Grand
Theft Auto, etc.
Games are a driving force in the home market. Saying that there are
games for Linux
is accurate, but if you don't have the game that I want to play right
On Wed, 2004-02-25 at 11:52, Michael Costolo wrote:
--- Jon maddog Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are right that Linux will fail on most at-home desktops in 2004-2005
because of a lack of cool software.
Would you define cool software? Frankly, I am of the opinion that Linux comes
with
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 12:10:45PM -0500, Andrew W. Gaunt wrote:
Linux has been a failure in the server room and somehow it has
recovered very well. What does not
kill it only makes it stronger.
I'm very curious why you say that Linux has been a failure in the
server room, when it appears to me
Everquest, World of Warcraft, Halo, Call of Duty, Civilization, Grand
Theft Auto, etc. Games are a driving force in the home market.
I agree. I miss Loki badly. :-( Still someone else will step into this
market -- games are essential for the home market -- and Loki's already done
a lot of
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 08:52:28AM -0800, Michael Costolo wrote:
--- Jon maddog Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are right that Linux will fail on most at-home desktops in 2004-2005
because of a lack of cool software.
Would you define cool software? Frankly, I am of the opinion that
--- Jeff Kinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Based on what I've seen - Quicken
Linux equivalent: GnuCash. It is quite nice, actually.
and an Outlook/Exchange replacement.
These utilities are part of KDE at least, if not part of other desktop environments.
Email, calendar, contacts, etc.,
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 12:10:45PM -0500, Andrew W. Gaunt wrote:
It may be a failure for the home desktop now, but,
to embrace and extend another's famous quote,
Linux [on the desktop] is inevitable.
I had a whole rant prepared where I was going to argue that
Linux will have a real hard
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 12:57:36PM -0500, Chris Brenton wrote:
On Wed, 2004-02-25 at 13:41, Jeff Kinz wrote:
Linux equivalent: GnuCash. It is quite nice, actually.
Yes it is, but its not Quicken. My mom, and several other people won't
consider changing, so its got to be Quicken on
masses. Debianwell...debian won't be a desktop distro.
This leaves SuSE and Mandrake really. Any idea how good they
are as a desktop distribution?
I'm happy to report that, far from being the only
remaining choices, SuSe and Mandrake still have
lots of company:
Mark Komarinski wrote:
This leaves
SuSE and Mandrake really. Any idea how good they are as a desktop
distribution?
If it wasn't obvious before, I'm a Mandrake lover. It's got the
functionality of a basic RedHat system with a LOT of ease-of-use
features built in. On a standard machine, the
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 12:13:20PM -0800, Michael Costolo wrote:
--- Jeff Kinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes it is, but its not Quicken. My mom, and several other people won't
consider changing, so its got to be Quicken on Linux.
Nothing personal, but I honestly don't understand that
--- Jeff Kinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 12:13:20PM -0800, Michael Costolo wrote:
--- Jeff Kinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes it is, but its not Quicken. My mom, and several other people won't
consider changing, so its got to be Quicken on Linux.
Nothing
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 02:26:35PM -0800, Michael Costolo wrote:
I understand resistance to change. I don't understand the mentality that someone
will only operate within artificially narrow conditions. It is as if someone would
refuse to drive if they couldn't drive a particular brand of
From: Mark Komarinski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
snip
But my little sister IM'd me a little while ago. Seems her XP
is giving her grief. Her printer doesn't work and she has no idea
where the problem is. If I could ssh or have her get some logs out
of the system, I might be able to tell her what the
On Wed, 2004-02-25 at 14:17, Jeff Kinz wrote:
And as I stated before, Quicken runs quite nicely on Linux if you use
CrossOver Office. Its only $40 and allows you to run a ton of MS apps (I
just loaded MS Visio this week and its running great).
Also gotta work w/Intuits tax software
--- Jeff Kinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Based on what I've seen - Quicken
Linux equivalent: GnuCash. It is quite nice, actually.
GNUCash is NOT a replacement for Quicken, it has at least half of the
features missing, if not more.
___
gnhlug-discuss
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 06:43:11PM -0500, Chris Brenton wrote:
Dude, sounds more like you've made up your mind that Linux on the
desktop sucks and nothing anyone is going to say is going to change
that. That's totally fine, but for many of us who have given it a
chance
it works just fine.
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 09:29:18AM -0800, Michael Costolo wrote:
--- Richard Soule [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Everquest, World of Warcraft, Halo, Call of Duty, Civilization,
Grand Theft Auto, etc. Games are a driving force in the home
market. Saying that there are games for Linux is
On Wed, 2004-02-25 at 19:44, Jeff Kinz wrote:
Nothing I love more than someone who decides they know what I'm thinking
and gets its completely wrong,
Its not what you're thinking but what your writing. You seem focused on
ignoring posts from people like myself who are trying to tell you this
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 12:42:52PM -0500, Randy Edwards wrote:
Everquest, World of Warcraft, Halo, Call of Duty, Civilization, Grand
Theft Auto, etc. Games are a driving force in the home market.
I agree. I miss Loki badly. :-( Still someone else will step into
this market -- games are
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 11:00:17AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That is true, but there is also a problem with the Linux comunity in that
they think everything should be free.
There are certainly some people in the community who feel that way...
But I don't think that statement
On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 12:38:01PM +0900, Derek Martin wrote:
It is a little known fact that this is not why Loki went down; they
were in fact profitable.
Sorry, I need to correct myself here... I don't know this for a fact.
But they wre solvent, until the embezzling is accounted for.
--
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 12:15:14PM -0500, Brian Chabot wrote:
Everything I need to do I can do in Linux.
But as members of the community, we can not forget that many people
who use computers can not effective do what they need to do in Linux,
and in some cases can't do it at all.
It took a
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 09:57:09AM -0800, Michael Costolo wrote:
games. But there are alternatives to that. But what applications
do Mom and Dad use at work that do not have *equivalents* on a Linux
box?
Often, the existence of an alternative is inadequate. Many people,
believe it or not,
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 10:17:18PM -0500, Chris Brenton wrote:
On Wed, 2004-02-25 at 19:44, Jeff Kinz wrote:
Nothing I love more than someone who decides they know what I'm thinking
and gets its completely wrong,
Its not what you're thinking but what your writing. You seem focused on
(nb, I use FOSS and Linux interchangably herein)
Derek Martin wrote:
Often, the existence of an alternative is inadequate. Many
people, believe it or not, live in MS-Office all day long. If
the documents their co-workers produce don't import 100%
correctly into whatever alternative they
Travis Roy wrote:
You know why linux will fail on the desktop for most families..
When Matt comes home with his new copy of Grand Theft Auto from the
store and can't play it because they're running that weird linux thing
rather then windows.
I agree; this is a huge hurdle to overcome. It can
Randy Edwards writes:
I've talked with quite a few end users whose attitudes are that
they don't want to be bothered downloading software. They'd
*rather* go to Best Buy and buy it -- after all, it's only $20
or $40. It's the same mindset that allows idiots to rationalize
On Mon, 2004-02-23 at 09:15, Kevin D. Clark wrote:
What about people with low-speed or non-existant network access --
these people *can't* download huge software distributions. Are these
people {de facto} idiots?
Or the people who _could_ download it but _choose_ to buy it in order to
dump
Do you really mean to imply that people who pay money for software are
idiots? [...]
What about people with low-speed or non-existant network access --
these people *can't* download huge software distributions. Are these
people {de facto} idiots?
Umm, no -- to both questions. As plainly
You know why linux will fail on the desktop for most families..
When Matt comes home with his new copy of Grand Theft Auto from the
store and can't play it because they're running that weird linux thing
rather then windows.
Same thing for any other cool software the family is looking for..
Today, my company doesn't run Linux on any of its client hardware and I
understand the main reason is that the learning curve is too steep for
Windows users.
This is a surprisingly complicated question.
First, define users. I have found that, for your average user, the
learning curve for
I'm guessing this message was supposed to go to the greater new
hampshire linux user's list at large. Jenny, the list is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] There's a barrel full of people there to help out
Anyone have info on lycoris? I'm unfamiliar with it.
-- Forwarded message --
Date:
I've heard that Lycoris has a distro designed by former Microsoft
employees. Does anyone know if it looks or operates much like
Windows XP? Is there a link available for an eval copy?
I don't know much about Lycoris but you could
check out www.lycoris.com. One thing they don't
make
62 matches
Mail list logo
