BTW
http://linux-beta.slashdot.org/story/14/09/05/1711243/why-munich-will-stick-with-linux
Not over?
My point was features-convenience do not conflict with freedom-power, if
the constraining elements of closed source are removed, and solely the
functionality is achieved. The two are not mutually exclusive.
I'm not ignoring the trend, which is obvious. My point is these things
I'm not especially religious, but my point was exactly that, the false
gods will be phased out over time, not incorporated. There is no reason
someone could not create a program that handles flash securely for example.
From the looks of it, unfortunately, that's doesn't seem to be happening
the false gods will be phased out over time, not incorporated
Depends which branch of Christianity you're talking about. Catholicism, which
was born in Imperial Rome, took from the Roman tradition the practice of
incorporating local gods and saints into the Catholic hierarchy, as well as
salparadise
Very well compare and spoken with fortitude and certitude.
the false gods will be phased out over time, not incorporated
Let's agree to disagree, then.
Sorry, I can't stand this anymore.
I will tell you one of the reasons why the free software movement remains
tiny even after the biggest spying scandal in history:
Because its main leader is running around, telling non-technical persons to
visit https://gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html
and
You could always ask him personally: r...@gnu.org
I do think that BLAG shouldn't be listed, because frankly the latest release
is horribly out-of-date and broken. (It's still listed because the BLAG
developers are supposedly working on the next release; I don't think a
general supposed
If only Ruben had chosen a name that started with A, or a number.
Most GNU/Linux users have never heard of GNU. Like Ishamael, they say they
are Linux users. They praise the features in the operating system, its
security, etc. And yet, as you write, the free software movement remains
tiny even after the biggest spying scandal in history. If people still do
I want to stress the main point of my disagreement:
Once a user acknowledges she has fundamental freedoms that deserve to be
respected, she never goes back.
This statement is wrong. It's just not true for the average user.
The sacrifices she has to make are much too high.
I wish the fsf
I believe that statement is true. Even if sacrifices are to be made, the user
who understands she deserves freedoms will keep on going front, towards
software freedom. The user who goes back does not value her freedoms. She is
the average user you are talking about. She has never heard of
Em 2014-08-31 13:06, shiret...@web.de escreveu:
I want to stress the main point of my disagreement:
Once a user acknowledges she has fundamental freedoms that deserve to
be respected, she never goes back.
This statement is wrong. It's just not true for the average user.
The sacrifices she has
I read your links Banana.
If freedom was really as important to everyone who claimed it was as they say
(Debian Devs for example) I would be able to raise my WIFI above 30 dBm
without recompiling my CRDA. Also people who asked about the problem (other
than myself) would not be treated
I do not know what CRDA is but you apparently have the source code and are
free to modify it. If freedom 3 is available as well, you can distribute
copies of your modified version to others. By doing this you can give the
whole community a chance to benefit from your changes.
Freedom has
I think an important technique is improving functionality, and features.
Linux is not limited in any way compared to closed source alternatives,
which create their own limitations, and baggage. The list of constraints
closed source places on itself are endless, as is the potential of
If you don’t think Linux is about creating a secure environment, then
find me one Dev who thinks allowing third party executables to be installed
with a double-click should be permitted in their distribution. I would argue
that security is a core tenant of the free software movement.
Those are the core tenants of the free software movement:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
Discover them. You will hopefully acknowledge that you, like any user,
deserves essential freedoms that are above any convenience.
If you don’t think Linux is about creating a secure environment, then find
me one Dev who thinks allowing third party executables to be installed with a
double-click should be permitted in their distribution
With that logic Genesis, Yes, ELP, and Jehtro Tull are all only about the
money.
Considering iTunes had an unpatched phin-phisher back door in it for over
four years, any employees installing it on corporate hardware could cause
huge problems for a company.
I believe it may be possible to override the convenience factor by providing
informative and free (actually as in gratis) classes with FREE software. This
could be foundation courses such as image manipulation, video/audio editing,
basic web development, and—importantly—computer programming
One can avoid paying Microsoft all they want, if it isn't dealt with moral
terms and the the idea of proprietary software isn't considered a 'major
issue' - then they will not see themselves get entrapped by the next big
company that is out to lock people in.
I have escaped Microsoft, now
Nothing but fud:
http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2014/08/munich-council-say-talk-limux-demise-greatly-exaggerated
See the screenshot date: 2004-01-21
And the info: Early LiMux linux prototype screenshot from 2004/2005
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiMux#mediaviewer/File:LiMux.jpg
OK, but it still uses KDE 3.5 and is based on the unsupported Ubuntu 10.04.
A problem with this is that whilst it's relatively easy to get all the
proprietary software for free from torrent sites, there is no motive to try
libre software other than from a moral point of view. So you could try to get
youngsters to try Ardour and free synths, but if they can get
I hope they will keep using GNU/Linux and not come back to proprietary
operating systems.
Would be good that others towns and cities adopt Trisquel. ^^
All of you, read this: http://techrights.org/2014/08/19/munich-astroturf/
Yes. Echoed here also..
.
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Munich-Switching-to-Windows-from-Linux-Is-Proof-that-Microsoft-Is-Still-an-Evil-Company-455510.shtml
http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2014/08/munich-city-linux-switching-back-windows
Its a shame because I feel that they are giving up and this will fall on the
backs of the tax payers. This is also why its essential to get younger people
educated about free and open source software at an early age
Let's not spread the FUD, shall we? The actual headline of the article is Is
Munich City About to Switch Back to Windows from Linux?, despite the
clickbait URL. And looks like the source for this rumor is Neowin, a
Microsoft news web site. This is exactly the kind of level of journalism one
I think the real reason is that people are so hung up on Microsoft Office and
used to the interface and the tools. Other than that, they can use the same
web browsers (Chrome, Chromium, Firefox) and have the ability to open and
save PDF files on the majority of GNU/Linux distros.
t3g said:
I had never heard of the OS they used for the deployment and it was
probably
not the best option to go with something that wasn't Ubuntu or at least
Ubuntu
based. What the hell is LiMux?
From Wikipedia:
LiMux is a project by the city of Munich to migrate their software systems
I first heard about this from this post:
http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/08/linux-on-the-desktop-pioneer-munich-now-considering-a-switch-back-to-windows/
It includes the following quote:
[Josef Schmid's] views aren't held universally, with the City Council
defending the 'LiMux' project
I think this comment pretty much sums up that Microsoft may have a hand in
this:
Microsoft, whose German HQ relocates to Munich in 2016, say they are 'ready
to talk' if and when things change.
Microsoft, whose German HQ relocates to Munich in 2016, say they are 'ready
to talk' if and when things change.
I think it pretty much explains the whole situation. Sad to say, but given
Microsoft's previous tactics I don't give Linux much of a chance in Munich in
the long term. It would
Why did they decide to make their own distro?
I don't know, but it's not like they built it entirely from scratch, and
other government projects to migrate to GNU/Linux have done the same thing.
Just look at the interface. It uses KDE 3.5.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiMux
Having worked in places like this, I get the feeling that some of the reasons
why the users complain can be extremely shallow, 'Doesn't run iTunes but I
don't want to tell the Boss that' kind of things.
Only anecdotal evidence here but it is a factor.
Yeah. What of it?
It looks really ugly, I don't think anyone would like to use such an
interface.
Sure. I think it's ugly, too.
It is characterless but functional, essentially what a government needs. :)
I get the feeling that some of the reasons why the users complain can be
extremely shallow
Yup, I can attest to that. And some will simply refuse to cooperate - they
will not try, they will not learn, they will make up problems and whine to
the wrong people, deliberately, they will do
45 matches
Mail list logo
