On Wednesday 15 Jul 2009 00:06:55 Patrick Shanahan wrote:

* Peter Nikolic [07-14-09 18:48]:

...

Oh deary me i am so frightened of being plonked oh dear what shall i do bo hoo hoo der naughty man has plonked me He HE HE tara

Perhaps adopt an adult attitude, make an effort to use proper form, punctuation and capitalization in your ramblings, separate by paragraph different subjects and use the delete key on *most* of the quoted material.

:0

* ^From:.*p\.nilolic1\@btinternet\.com /dev/null Kerrrrrrrrrr c plonked tara On yer bike jimmy

you honestly think i am that botherd oh how sad When you all start growing up and developing a workable attitude then i will stop treating a lot of you like kids . Talk about ME throwing my toys out of the pram take a look at yourselfs first before you start calling in the kettlle black look at the pots . What this all boils down to in reality is it seems most of you are not too bothered about the quality of the product and are quite happy to just crawl along sucking in all the BS and going with the flow how utterly sad you must be a lot of you are i believe board members well start acting as and get things sorted I will not sit idely by and watch what was probably the best Linux distro vanish up it's own backside because of some johny come latley's that cant not be bothered to stand up and be counted so if you think all your pointless plonk lines have any effect other than a bit of amusement think again i will not back off till the quality of Suse Linux is back where it belongs at the top instead of crawling around the base of the heap as it is right now so if you dont like bieng told it is what it is then i courteousley suggest you find elsewhere to lurk untill it is right cus i am here to stay dev/null yourself into total infinity why dont you and let someone get on with trying to instill a bit of quality in this distro once again Pete . Pete

JB2 wrote:

On 15 July 09, Peter Nikolic wrote:

...

On Wednesday 15 Jul 2009 00:06:55 Patrick Shanahan wrote:

...

* Peter Nikolic [07-14-09 18:48]:

...

Oh deary me i am so frightened of being plonked oh dear what shall i do bo hoo hoo der naughty man has plonked me He HE HE tara

Perhaps adopt an adult attitude, make an effort to use proper form, punctuation and capitalization in your ramblings, separate by paragraph different subjects and use the delete key on *most* of the quoted material.

:0

* ^From:.*p\.nilolic1\@btinternet\.com /dev/null

Kerrrrrrrrrr c plonked tara On yer bike jimmy

you honestly think i am that botherd oh how sad

When you all start growing up and developing a workable attitude then i will stop treating a lot of you like kids . Talk about ME throwing my toys out of the pram take a look at yourselfs first before you start calling in the kettlle black look at the pots .

What this all boils down to in reality is it seems most of you are not too bothered about the quality of the product and are quite happy to just crawl along sucking in all the BS and going with the flow how utterly sad you must be a lot of you are i believe board members well start acting as and get things sorted

I will not sit idely by and watch what was probably the best Linux distro vanish up it's own backside because of some johny come latley's that cant not be bothered to stand up and be counted so if you think all your pointless plonk lines have any effect other than a bit of amusement think again i will not back off till the quality of Suse Linux is back where it belongs at the top instead of crawling around the base of the heap as it is right now so if you dont like bieng told it is what it is then i courteousley suggest you find elsewhere to lurk untill it is right cus i am here to stay

dev/null yourself into total infinity why dont you and let someone get on with trying to instill a bit of quality in this distro once again

Pete .

You had to deal with Patrick...the biggest hypocrite, spoiled brat and obnoxious pompous ass on the list. Now that he's plonked you, things should get better.

I second that -- replied once on a lengthy thread that had already been cut down to about 150 lines and three or four people. Replied briefly, for a change, only about five or ten lines. Got a nastygram from the same source that I should have taken time to further cut down the quoted material, even though it wasn't immediately obvious how to do so without losing the meaning. So I just left the 150 lines and bottom-posted, only to get a personal flame-o-gram that I wasn't following the rules, as I hadn't removed unnecessary text (a subjective, not an objective, exercise, at best.) And regardles of whatever else anyone else thinks about Peter's attitude and/or spelling and/or choice of style to express himself, he is advocating strongly for what all of should want, and what many of us perceive as an emerging issue -- the decline in quality of the distro, for whatever reason. And arguing that doing the things that negatively affect the quality of users' experiences, in order to improve the distro, is a totally false argument. If you can't improve your code by attracting enough volunteer testers, then that doesn't give you the right to press the rest of the community into service just because you believe, you KNOW, that what you are doing is going to be great. SuSE Linux has enjoyed a solid rep as a solid distro for a long time. And that perception is being threatened by a relatively small number of things that are being done "for the good of the whole" by a few. How come all the other devs of all the other packages don't find a need to automatically turn on their code and/or to entice people into using it in order to get more test results for improving quality? I am still using this distro, but I have become increasingly reluctant to recommend it to potential new Linux users, at least until a few of these quality of experience issues get resolved. Is having a few more testers for a package worth alienating potential and current users? I think not.... Quality NOW should always be the first point of reference for anything done with, for and by this distro...without it, all else is meaningless and self-defeating, as you will end up with only a small core of dedicated users, with others, current and future users, going RH or Ubuntu? A year ago I would have told my technically proficient friends who were considering Linux to go with Suse. Now I waffle -- tell them what I am using and why, but feel that I have to point out that certain decisions and knowledge need to be present up front, in order for the distro to work well for the average new user. Just because openSuSE usually doesn't come in a box, doesn't mean that the "out of box experience" is irrelevant. Instead, it is almost everything -- first impressions are hard to overcome. You cannot sacrifice quality now in order to obtain better quality in the future. If you do, you are risking the future, rather than building towards it. Notice: This communication, including attachments, may contain confidential or proprietary information to be conveyed solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or if you otherwise received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this e-mail, including attachments, without reading or saving them in any manner. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

JB2 wrote:

On 15 July 09, Dan Goodman wrote:

...

... I am still using this distro, but I have become increasingly reluctant to recommend it to potential new Linux users, at least until a few of these quality of experience issues get resolved.

Is having a few more testers for a package worth alienating potential and current users?

I think not....

Quality NOW should always be the first point of reference for anything done with, for and by this distro...without it, all else is meaningless and self-defeating, as you will end up with only a small core of dedicated users, with others, current and future users, going RH or Ubuntu?

A year ago I would have told my technically proficient friends who were considering Linux to go with Suse. Now I waffle -- tell them what I am using and why, but feel that I have to point out that certain decisions and knowledge need to be present up front, in order for the distro to work well for the average new user.

Just because openSuSE usually doesn't come in a box, doesn't mean that the "out of box experience" is irrelevant. Instead, it is almost everything -- first impressions are hard to overcome.

You cannot sacrifice quality now in order to obtain better quality in the future. If you do, you are risking the future, rather than building towards it.

Well said, Dan. I too find myself not really pushing SuSE like I once used to. Two years ago, it's all I talked about when anything 'computers' came up in conversation. Now....I say if they want to use Linux, they should try to find an older (10.3 or older) version of SuSE (openSUSE for you anal types out there) or I send them to distrowatch.com and tell them to look for something that looks like it might suit them, then explain the same points you and Pete and quite a few others have brung up in this thread.

As an afterthought, I work professionally with SuSE Linux Enterprise Servers (SLES) 8,9 and 10, as well as "the other guy" (RH), as well as some "unbreakable" Linux, and find SLES to be far and away the best option in large-scale environments. And while there is SLED (Desktop), it requires $, so you lose one of the major distinctions from Windows if you recommend that route. Further, there needs to be a core group of individuals who are a bit ahead of the curve (openSuSE community), who can and do serve as a point of trust and reference for would-be new adopters...so if their experience declines, the front-end that leads to wider adoption becomes weakened, leading to a weakening of the entire effort. OPTIONAL EXAMPLE: You can skip this if you don't want to read more. But it gives what I think is a good example from PC history about how this has bitten other vendors. My example is Gateway, but there could be others easily. My first GW was in about 1990. Many people who adopted PC's over the next several years came to me for recommendations, and switched to purchasing GW after hearing my experiences and recommendations. Then, after I had archived a lot of material on a nice Colorado tape drive I had bought with my first system, I tried to buy a replacement with the same drive. Gateway's response: we found out that only a few people used tapedrives, so we have dropped it as even an option you can purchase. End results: I purchased a different machine. I never did get a satisfactory solution to my tape issues. And I stopped recommending Gateway, because of their unwillingness to take care of the needs of their technically oriented customers, as well as because of other attitude changes leading to a general decline in technical differentiation from their competition. And a few years later, they were in deep trouble, primarily because former repeat customers became non-customers, and led others away with them. Not just because of my experience, but because they began to get a reputation as just another vendor, and one who didn't get it, at that. I don't want to see that happen to this distro. But it must take care of its users such as yourself, David Rankin, Peter Nikolic, jdd, etc. (apologies if you are someone else who belongs in this category but who I may have omitted.) If the power-users become disgruntled, then the vast majority of new users begin to drift away from, instead of towards, this distro. And to whoever it was that suggested if I didn't like the install and upgrade experience in SuSE, I should switch to Gentoo and have some "real fun" -- at least with Gentoo I would have a community that was focused on trying to attract and retain users, and was willing to listen to their user base. Or so I have heard... and if not Gentoo, there are other communities that don't say "like it or leave it" -- "my way or the highway" whenever someone questions their decisions or their designs. OpenSuSE seems to be somewhere in the middle. But that is a step back from where it was, and the slope gets slippier as you get further down it. If the distro creates a few mistakes that are prominent, on the tail of some that have occurred, the slope will get quite slippy very quickly. Dan Notice: This communication, including attachments, may contain confidential or proprietary information to be conveyed solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or if you otherwise received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this e-mail, including attachments, without reading or saving them in any manner. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Adam Tauno Williams wrote:

...

You can skip this if you don't want to read more. But it gives what I think is a good example from PC history about how this has bitten other vendors.

I don't accept that this is comparable. Someone 'joe-six-pack' buying a PC more than a decade ago to selecting an alternative Operating System.

We need to be realistic, *zero* non-technical users wake up in the morning and think "I'll try an alternative Operating System today".

If that is true, Linux will never reach the average PC user.

They do go buy PCs. If you even know what an "Operating System" is you are in a small minority and at least a PC Jockey.

Some move on, some don't...you don't have to be technical to want to try new technologies. Most continue in the same vein out of habit, but some who aren't technical are changing at any point in time.

...

And a few years later, they were in deep trouble, primarily because former repeat customers became non-customers, and led others away with them. Not just because of my experience, but because they began to get a reputation as just another vendor, and one who didn't get it, at that.

I do not accept the correlation of your experience to the failure of Gateway. Gateway failed for an entire assemblage of reasons, a number of which were related to corporate governance. For one, they spent an enormous amount of their capital trying to buy into the enterprise market [they purchased ALR among other companies] an effort with failed catastrophically. Their initial success can also be attributed to [at the time] minimal competition.

Your point that there were many causes is true, and I agree. But it doesn't negate the fact that that was one of the things that contributed to experienced users no longer recommending them. And if you squint just a little bit, and shade your eyes from the sunlight, you can almost see a parallel between your analysis of GW and some of the things that are taking place now. What other relevant vendor can you think of that is spending a lot of money to buy into the enterprise marketplace? (Although I hope they are smarter and more successful than GW.)

Aside from that this entire argument seems centered around the notion "[openSUSE] is a step backfrom where it was," which is the part I just don't see or accept.

I think there is a vocal minority of 'minimalists' who don't like the direction of the modern desktop, but they'd dislike other current distributions for the exact same reasons. They wouldn't like OS/X or Windows Vista/7. How about the idea that there is a group that may be less than 50%, but

Bad experiences with new features that can't be easily controlled and selected or deselected "on the fly" are a step backward, just as a crack in the wing of a new jet is a step backward, even if the electronics are superior to every other jet. that is significant, that feels that modern desktop features should be options, rather than forcibly included, and who believe that both minimal and futuristic configurations should be supportable and selectable? And as an aside, it seems funny to me that KDE4 seemed to try to go out of its way to not provide certain Windows-like features on the desktop, such as a taskbar equivalent and the ability to place icons on the desktop, features that were originally rejected but later added as a configurable overlay on the base vision of the developers? It seems to me that a certain vocal minority of devs seems to believe that they can and must provide a better high end graphics experience than Brand X and Brand $, but at that same time, they reject some of the common user-control features that those companies have adopted to meet the needs and desires of their customers?

Some of them see adding modern features as "emulating" those [despised] platforms [which it isn't]. No, that is a straw man argument -- many of us see them as just unwanted and unneeded bloatware, at least for certain usages. And hence should be easy to turn off, even if they do meet the needs of 51% or more of the users. I have no issues with their choices I just disagree that their wishes should hobble the experience and usability for everyone else.

So you think that providing an option to make a browser the default, and the ability to turn off the paperclip assistant just by clicking on it and selecting an option, have hobbled the experience and usablility of Firefox, IE and M$ Office for everyone else? You seem to carve the world up into those who agree with your position, and the "few" who disagree are the wrong-headed vocal minority who wish to harm the rest of the community because they won't try the new features and/or buy bigger HW. Do you really believe that everyone who doesn't want new features on by choice is simply a misguided individual who doesn't understand what is best for everyone else? No wonder you refuse to entertain any suggestion that these features could, and should, be selectable by users...that allowing them easy on-off would ruin the experience for everyone else. And I just don't see how this is any different than the examples I gave of browser and help options. You tell me why turning Beagle on and off, or turning KDE4 on and off, or any other new feature, needs to use a model that is different from the one I am advocating, similar to the way browser defaults are now handled? It is easy to keep knocking down suggestions for change, by characterizing them as being unnecessary, but you have failed to show why they would do any harm for anyone, and why they couldn't and shouldn't be provided, even if only a minority ends up using them? After all, I am not asking for features that would add weeks or months to development. Just a design philosophy that doesn't say that once installed, you can assume that the user has committed to using and keeping a feature. This is the issue I'd like to hear your opinions on...not how you think the user community is divided up, but why a simple toggle with the default being off, shouldn't be the standard for ALL features that are not truly essential to operation. Please explain to me why any user would be significantly harmed by this being the norm for new features. And while you are at it, explain to me why you feel that a request for easy on-off shouldn't be implemented if only 5 or 10% would use it, but would benefit from not using your new feature. Thanks. Dan Notice: This communication, including attachments, may contain confidential or proprietary information to be conveyed solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or if you otherwise received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this e-mail, including attachments, without reading or saving them in any manner. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Adam Tauno Williams wrote:

On Thu, 2009-07-16 at 11:52 -0400, Dan Goodman wrote:

...

Adam Tauno Williams wrote:

...

...

You can skip this if you don't want to read more. But it gives what I think is a good example from PC history about how this has bitten other vendors.

I don't accept that this is comparable. Someone 'joe-six-pack' buying a PC more than a decade ago to selecting an alternative Operating System. We need to be realistic, *zero* non-technical users wake up in the morning and think "I'll try an alternative Operating System today".

If that is true, Linux will never reach the average PC user.

Ok. The only way LINUX will reach the "average" computer user is if it comes preinstalled on their hardware. In which case it isn't an "alternative" Operating System, it is "what was installed".

That is pretty much true of any technical product or gadget, I'll grant you that.

...

...

They do go buy PCs. If you even know what an "Operating System" is you are in a small minority and at least a PC Jockey.

Some move on, some don't...you don't have to be technical to want to try new technologies.

Yes, you do. Non technical people try out new *products*: TVs, MP3 players, game consoles. An Operating System just is not equivalent in the marketplace to those things.

To the extent that that is true, that implies that neither Linux or any distro has successfully reached the product stage. And it is my belief that one of the things that prevents this from happening is the relative lack of engagement of the end-user with the "personalization" of their configuration - that is, the ability to easily change options, features, etc., without having things break on them for doing so. Which is one of the reasons why I rail against the idea of "thinking for the user" instead of letting the user make the choices that fit for their HW, work style, etc.

...

Most continue in the same vein out of habit, but some who aren't technical are changing at any point in time.

I don't think so. Some non-technical users come to LINUX because they are frustrated, but they do so primarily by having a technical user present [advocate?] an alternative and take them there.

To the extent that the advocate path is the primary path for new adoptions, that should be all the more reason to stringently try to avoid some of new users' past frustrations with machines that come loaded with "everything", and that can be improved by turning off things that they can only do via seeking out further technical assistance. Yes, they might overlook some great new feature, but the other hand, they will have an optimized base and an easy way to experiment with what they want.

...

...

I think there is a vocal minority of 'minimalists' who don't like the direction of the modern desktop, but they'd dislike other current distributions for the exact same reasons. They wouldn't like OS/X or Windows Vista/7.

How about the idea that there is a group that may be less than 50%, but that is significant, that feels that modern desktop features should be options, rather than forcibly included, and who believe that both minimal and futuristic configurations should be supportable and selectable?

They are "supportable and selectable"; with the possible exception of KDE4. I don't know anything about KDE and haven't used it in years. But from the outside KDE4 looks to me like an issue for the KDE user community. KDE cut a new release and distributions followed suite; which is the entirely expected and reasonable thing for distributions to do.

That issue has been flogged to death, but that can lead to new releases being pushed out too early if distros just blindly accept dev's recommendations that code is ready for prime time.

...

And as an aside, it seems funny to me that KDE4 seemed to try to go out of its way to not provide certain Windows-like features on the desktop, such as a taskbar equivalent and the ability to place icons on the desktop, features that were originally rejected but later added as a configurable overlay on the base vision of the developers? It seems to me that a certain vocal minority of devs seems to believe that they can and must provide a better high end graphics experience than Brand X and Brand $, but at that same time, they reject some of the common user-control features that those companies have adopted to meet the needs and desires of their customers?

If your talking about "KDE devs" when you say "vocal minority of devs seems" please say "KDE devs". Otherwise I don't know if you are still in the context of the previous paragraph about KDE [which I don't see as a distribution issue] or speaking in general.

For the most part, I was talking in a general way, but based on some specific issues I have seen. But Beagle (and Mono) represent a somewhat special case, in that many users don't want desktop indexing, even though there are many others that do. And there are users that would prefer to avoid Mono and it's big brother down the street. I think it belongs in the distro, I just don't think it belongs turned on as a default.

...

...

Some of them see adding modern features as "emulating" those [despised] platforms [which it isn't].

No, that is a straw man argument -- many of us see them as just unwanted and unneeded bloatware, at least for certain usages. And hence should be easy to turn off, even if they do meet the needs of 51% or more of the users.

It is easy to turn them off, or at least to turn Beagle off. The same goes for Avahi and other services. Trivially easy. Disabling them is even well documented in the case of Beagle.

KDE4 is a KDE problem.

...

...

I have no issues with their choices I just disagree that their wishes should hobble the experience and usability for everyone else.

So you think that providing an option to make a browser the default, and the ability to turn off the paperclip assistant just by clicking on it and selecting an option, have hobbled the experience and usablility of Firefox, IE and M$ Office for everyone else?

For everything I've seen mentioned [aside from KDE4] this is ALREADY and equivalently simple way to disable the mentioned service.

...

You seem to carve the world up into those who agree with your position, and the "few" who disagree are the wrong-headed vocal minority who wish to harm the rest of the community because they won't try the new

Good gosh. You take it from "vocal minority" to "wrong-headed vocal minority" Surely you didn't think that those you characterized as a "vocal minority" were correct in their thinking, did you? and disagreement to an intent to "harm the rest of the community". That is just bogus. I never mentioned, anywhere, anyone "intent". OK, allow me to substitute "who have the effect" instead of "who have

I see a fair number of people posting that either that wasn't available at some point in time, that it didn't work, or that it was overly complicated. In particular, in my mind, if it was going to be turned on by default, it should not have required any kind of technical bulletin to turn it off. A simple help topic instructing you to run something like chkconfig should have been all that was required, and it should have been easy to find in the package itself. It is my understanding that that was not the case then, and still isn't. If I am wrong, I will stand corrected...but that is not what I hear most people saying was their beagle experience. the intent" of harming the community by not accepting these "advances" as being on by default.

I stated what I believe would be the outcome of that direction. Are you unable to discern the difference between those two statements?

And I disagree with your basic premise that leaving new features off by default would in all cases be of harm to a distro, that it would prevent users from benefitting and the distro from progressing.

...

No wonder you refuse to entertain any suggestion that these features could, and should, be selectable by users...

THEY ARE "selectable by users". This is/was a discussion as to the optimal *default* state of those features.

My whole point was that they should both be selectable and off in most cases by default. And the selectability should not require resorting to outside sources of information.

...

that allowing them easy on-off would ruin the experience for everyone else.

THEY ARE EASY TO TURN OFF, RIGHT NOW.

chkconfig avahi-daemon off [for example]

Does that work for beagle?

Having auto-configuration off by default is pretty pointless; especially since it has zero effect on the presence of manual configurations in 99.999% of situations. The same goes for every other feature mentioned [KDE4 isn't a "feature", it is a platform].

A straw man...it is user experience type of features, not basic system operations features, that I am talking about. No one has had any significant issues with HW detection and configuration by the system, when it works properly, so of course that type of feature would be a good candidate to be turned on automatically. But beagle, the subject of this thread, isn't such a clearcut improvement for every user, nor is it unobtrusive to all of those who don't need it.

...

It is easy to keep knocking down suggestions for change, by characterizing them as being unnecessary, but you have failed to show why they would do any harm for anyone, and why they couldn't and shouldn't be provided, even if only a minority ends up using them?

Options are provided. With the exception of KDE4 [maybe?] which is a problem for the KDE community releasing [maybe?] a release before it was ready.

...

After all, I am not asking for features that would add weeks or months to development.

In line behind all the other features that wouldn't add weeks or months.

But something as fundamental as turning an app on or off shouldn't be lumped in as just one of "all the other features"...it deserves to be a first-class feature as it is fundamental to users' experiences.

...

This is the issue I'd like to hear your opinions on...not how you think the user community is divided up, but why a simple toggle with the default being off, shouldn't be the standard for ALL features that are not truly essential to operation.

Toggles are provided for almost everything mention in this thread.

To the extent that they are, and are self-contained and easily discoverable within the package, I have no issues. But I was responding with a principle about whether to turn things on by default, and using what I had read were other people's difficulties with beagle, as a counter-example to this principle. And I still say that unless a feature benefits the majority and harms none, and unless it can be turned off and on without bad side-effects, and without the need to search elsewhere for how to do it, the feature should not be on by default. That is the entirety of my point. That, and the fact that I think beagle failed in that it harmed some (due to excessive slowness) and could not be turned off without a general knowledge search. Notice: This communication, including attachments, may contain confidential or proprietary information to be conveyed solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or if you otherwise received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this e-mail, including attachments, without reading or saving them in any manner. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Thursday 16 Jul 2009 19:15:38 Adam Tauno Williams wrote:

On Thu, 2009-07-16 at 11:52 -0400, Dan Goodman wrote:

...

Adam Tauno Williams wrote:

...

...

You can skip this if you don't want to read more. But it gives what I think is a good example from PC history about how this has bitten other vendors.

I don't accept that this is comparable. Someone 'joe-six-pack' buying a PC more than a decade ago to selecting an alternative Operating System. We need to be realistic, *zero* non-technical users wake up in the morning and think "I'll try an alternative Operating System today".

If that is true, Linux will never reach the average PC user.

Ok. The only way LINUX will reach the "average" computer user is if it comes preinstalled on their hardware. In which case it isn't an "alternative" Operating System, it is "what was installed".

...

...

They do go buy PCs. If you even know what an "Operating System" is you are in a small minority and at least a PC Jockey.

Some move on, some don't...you don't have to be technical to want to try new technologies.

Yes, you do. Non technical people try out new *products*: TVs, MP3 players, game consoles. An Operating System just is not equivalent in the marketplace to those things.

...

Most continue in the same vein out of habit, but some who aren't technical are changing at any point in time.

I don't think so. Some non-technical users come to LINUX because they are frustrated, but they do so primarily by having a technical user present [advocate?] an alternative and take them there.

...

...

I think there is a vocal minority of 'minimalists' who don't like the direction of the modern desktop, but they'd dislike other current distributions for the exact same reasons. They wouldn't like OS/X or Windows Vista/7.

How about the idea that there is a group that may be less than 50%, but that is significant, that feels that modern desktop features should be options, rather than forcibly included, and who believe that both minimal and futuristic configurations should be supportable and selectable?

They are "supportable and selectable"; with the possible exception of KDE4. I don't know anything about KDE and haven't used it in years. But from the outside KDE4 looks to me like an issue for the KDE user community. KDE cut a new release and distributions followed suite; which is the entirely expected and reasonable thing for distributions to do.

...

And as an aside, it seems funny to me that KDE4 seemed to try to go out of its way to not provide certain Windows-like features on the desktop, such as a taskbar equivalent and the ability to place icons on the desktop, features that were originally rejected but later added as a configurable overlay on the base vision of the developers? It seems to me that a certain vocal minority of devs seems to believe that they can and must provide a better high end graphics experience than Brand X and Brand $, but at that same time, they reject some of the common user-control features that those companies have adopted to meet the needs and desires of their customers?

If your talking about "KDE devs" when you say "vocal minority of devs seems" please say "KDE devs". Otherwise I don't know if you are still in the context of the previous paragraph about KDE [which I don't see as a distribution issue] or speaking in general.

...

...

Some of them see adding modern features as "emulating" those [despised] platforms [which it isn't].

No, that is a straw man argument -- many of us see them as just unwanted and unneeded bloatware, at least for certain usages. And hence should be easy to turn off, even if they do meet the needs of 51% or more of the users.

It is easy to turn them off, or at least to turn Beagle off. The same goes for Avahi and other services. Trivially easy. Disabling them is even well documented in the case of Beagle.

Well i have not seen anything that lists how you turn things on and off in any place a NON tech user would look i think you must have your own version of Opensuse cooked for you

KDE4 is a KDE problem.

...

...

I have no issues with their choices I just disagree that their wishes should hobble the experience and usability for everyone else.

So you think that providing an option to make a browser the default, and the ability to turn off the paperclip assistant just by clicking on it and selecting an option, have hobbled the experience and usablility of Firefox, IE and M$ Office for everyone else?

For everything I've seen mentioned [aside from KDE4] this is ALREADY and equivalently simple way to disable the mentioned service.

...

You seem to carve the world up into those who agree with your position, and the "few" who disagree are the wrong-headed vocal minority who wish to harm the rest of the community because they won't try the new

Good gosh. You take it from "vocal minority" to "wrong-headed vocal minority" and disagreement to an intent to "harm the rest of the community". That is just bogus. I never mentioned, anywhere, anyone "intent". I stated what I believe would be the outcome of that direction. Are you unable to discern the difference between those two statements?

...

No wonder you refuse to entertain any suggestion that these features could, and should, be selectable by users...

THEY ARE "selectable by users". This is/was a discussion as to the optimal *default* state of those features.

...

that allowing them easy on-off would ruin the experience for everyone else.

THEY ARE EASY TO TURN OFF, RIGHT NOW.

chkconfig avahi-daemon off [for example]

Having auto-configuration off by default is pretty pointless; especially since it has zero effect on the presence of manual configurations in 99.999% of situations. The same goes for every other feature mentioned [KDE4 isn't a "feature", it is a platform].

...

It is easy to keep knocking down suggestions for change, by characterizing them as being unnecessary, but you have failed to show why they would do any harm for anyone, and why they couldn't and shouldn't be provided, even if only a minority ends up using them?

Options are provided. With the exception of KDE4 [maybe?] which is a problem for the KDE community releasing [maybe?] a release before it was ready.

...

After all, I am not asking for features that would add weeks or months to development.

In line behind all the other features that wouldn't add weeks or months.

...

This is the issue I'd like to hear your opinions on...not how you think the user community is divided up, but why a simple toggle with the default being off, shouldn't be the standard for ALL features that are not truly essential to operation.

Toggles are provided for almost everything mention in this thread.

The documentation that explains how to turn them on and off is as elusive as fresh dinosaur droppings and as i stated before NOT in the sorts of places that normal NON techie users would find them no amount of wriggling in the world will get you out of that . After install first screen should be these services are available to switch on please select the services you want or need ,, Now THAT would make sense me i dont mind digging round in the guts of the system i have been using Linux since before some of the present users were even out of nappies but a lot have not you need to take them into consideration but not the Gnome way of that is what it is thats it no changes allowed Pete .

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, 2009-07-22 at 19:22 -0500, Rajko M. wrote:

On Wednesday 22 July 2009 05:27:57 pm Peter Nikolic wrote:

...

After install first screen should be these services are available to switch on please select the services you want or need ,,

What OS is offering such screen - functionality ? If you want to turn services off and on then you have to look in the system configuration.

Too many configuration options in the installer make the installer big, slow, and risky. Risky because there are more things that can fail: it is preferable to have the system installed and running, then configure things. If need be, don't configure sound, video, etc on initial install. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkpnrvAACgkQtTMYHG2NR9VGmACfTAT8M1tRuU0HWST198K9U6Y9 fzYAoJHFgK6E12SRbJNinYp8LK6rGQl+ =PBkI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 9:16 PM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:

...

What OS is offering such screen - functionality ? None, because it is a usability nightmare. Normal user response: "Eh? What is all this stuff?"

Then ask what level of user they are. Beginner, etc. Give the user the choice. If done right, it would be something else others would copy from openSUSE.

To disable Beagle: System / Filesystem / Search Settings / uncheck [if it is checked] "Start search & indexing services automatically" Seems pretty straight-forward to me.

Simple would be to click it and have it run a wizard with an explanation of what it is and asking if the user wants to use it. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 10:11 PM, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

Yes, and I can see people reading and responding to 1500 "run me" questions when installing their system, just like reading the leagleese acceptance notices.

I meant the first time you clicked on the Beagle icon on the taskbar. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 11:49 PM, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

Would you have *all* apps request permission to run initially?  Or just those that a few individuals deem undesirable, or all that *anyone* deemed less than what *they* wanted?

No, of course not. Just apps that can end up hogging the system's resources like Beagle.

And would *all* apps appear on the taskbar waiting permission?

Why would you even suggest such a thing? Does FrozenBubble have a taskbar icon? Or KPatience? HOW does installing Beagle by default and having it index help the average user who may not even know it's there(other than the fact that it's using resources)? Last time I checked, using Linux and openSUSE was about choice. Further, like I have also said, I thought that as part of this community, we all have the right to express out opinions on the distro and it's direction. Too many people have not only made up their minds, but feel that their decisions are more important and that anyone who expresses a dissenting opinion is just wrong. S.u.S.E. used to come with KPersonalizer installed and ran on the first login of KDE so that people could choice how much of the desktop effects they wanted. Part of that was probably because of hardware, but it's still a good idea because not everyone is interested in using desktop effects. That one single program is just an example of how you could do things. I dunno, maybe my opinion doesn't count. Supporting S.u.S.E. and openSUSE for 10 years and hoping to improve it. Why bother is what I am hearing anymore. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 12:51 AM, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

I cannot see that you have had any problem expressing your feelings.

Guess I'm just stubborn.

And now it comes with "Personal Settings"  :^).

Does this pop up during first login? On which version of KDE4?

I started with 5.x some time ago and continue to support it.  But I do not think you should cast aspersions on the programmers who mostly donate their efforts. <quote> That seems to be some programmer's mentality anymore. </quote> Just a recent uttering, many more are available.  It is one thing to express an opinion and another to address derogatory inferences toward individuals and/or to continually put them down.

These same programmers target a community of people who they want to see use their software. Further, as an example, until recently Trolltech charged for commercial implementation of Qt, so they weren't completely uncompensated(or some of them anyway) from my understanding.

You take expection to the way some things are being handled, are others not allowed to have some agreement with the direction and to disagree with you?

The real issue is that the KDE team felt they needed to do a complete rewrite(supposedly - it's been pointed out that some KDE3 bugs are in KDE4) and decided that the new way was it without regard for that fact that they had 10+ years of people who have used KDE. Even in an open source project, if you want people to use your code, you have to listen to their input. It's only now with KDE 4.3 that most people are willing to say it's finally the "promised" replacement for KDE3. And, I didn't start with the derogatory references. That started long ago when the lovers of the new way started telling us we were (insert reference here) for not "seeing the light". -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

You *must* remember that much of what you want included in the product, many others equally want excluded and vice-versa, ie: beagle.  Why not look for solutions that appease both sides rather than just ranting and throwing stones?

I'm not questioning it's inclusion(except for the fact that in MY experience, desktop search doesn't get any use, or the fact that KDE4 has it's own setup and that there shouldn't be 2 search tools installed - Although I see that alot on the M$ side as well). I was pointing out that the FIRST time someone clicks on it, it should pop up a window explaining what it is, how it works and then ASK the user if they want it or not. And that it doesn't index until this is done. Why is that asking too much or so hard? How is that taking away from the user? Last time I checked, if you did a standard install there was this little icon that looked like a beagle on the taskbar. Clicking it to see what it is seems to be what most people would do...... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

* Larry Stotler [07-23-09 19:13]:

I'm not questioning it's inclusion(except for the fact that in MY experience, desktop search doesn't get any use, or the fact that KDE4 has it's own setup and that there shouldn't be 2 search tools installed - Although I see that alot on the M$ side as well). I was pointing out that the FIRST time someone clicks on it, it should pop up a window explaining what it is, how it works and then ASK the user if they want it or not. And that it doesn't index until this is done. Why is that asking too much or so hard? How is that taking away from the user? Last time I checked, if you did a standard install there was this little icon that looked like a beagle on the taskbar. Clicking it to see what it is seems to be what most people would do......

Care to provide the bug report requesting this *feature* so others can vote for it? Else, this is just the wind. If you want something, the list does *not* provide that information, that is the function of the bug reporting system. -- Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA HOG # US1244711 http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://counter.li.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

...

No, of course not.  Just apps that can end up hogging the system's resources like Beagle.

Only it doesn't.  Aside from that *fact* I'd agree with you.  Run beagle and watch it with system-monitor,  when it starts to hog resources let us know.

I think the key here is... it doesn't hog resources *now*. When the majority of people formed a negative opinion about Beagle, it definitely did hog resources. This has colored their (and my) opinion of Beagle. Now that Beagle actually works as it should, a lot of people are not willing to try it again... first impressions stick and stick hard. C. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 7:24 AM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:

Only it doesn't.  Aside from that *fact* I'd agree with you.  Run beagle and watch it with system-monitor,  when it starts to hog resources let us know. If you are completely strapped for resources on legacy hardware then turn it off - but don't claim it hogs resources because you have insufficient resources.

I don't have those problems because I don't install it nor do I really honestly care when you get right down to it. I want an easy way to turn it off/remove it if I so choose. Beagle is removable. Evidently stringi won't be from my understanding. Further, again, isn't Beagle a GTK/Mono based app? If so, why is it/will it be installed with KDE when they have their own Nepomuk/stringi???

What does being about choice have to do with squelching new features and technologies?

It's not. It's about making it easy for the user to decide IF they want it or not. The user should be able to click the beagle icon and have a screen come up saying what it is, what it does, and ASK if they want it turned on. It should not start until that choice is made.

You do and you are.  Every time you say what I do not believe to be true [and in this case some of which are just factually not true such as beagle-hogging-resources] I'm going to use my right and point out that you are wrong.

Then we are at a stalemate and evidently both of us are wasting each other's time.

Nope, I disagree with most of the points in this thread, and think a select few of the points are "just wrong".

And others feel the same way about you comments and point as well.

But somehow there wasn't enough momentum to keep KPersonalizer included? Maybe that says something about the theory of hyper-customization.

No. It was one of those things that no one felt like porting I guess. There's been a lot of things that were only ported to KDE4 because the community complained that this or that which they had come to rely on had been dropped because someone somewhere didn't think it was useful. After the users complained, it was added back. That seems to be how the KDE development has went.

...

I dunno, maybe my opinion doesn't count.

Whatever, it counts as much as anyone else's.  Don't whine because people disagree with you.

Don't tell me I'm wrong because I disagree with you. That's what you've been doing. Everyone whose opinion has been different from yours has gotten that put to them. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

...

And would *all* apps appear on the taskbar waiting permission? These so called APPS are not so much apps as services and yes there is a core of you call them apps i regard them more as services that should be in a yes/no list after first install with an explanation of what is provided by each AND a list of the pro's and con's of each ie memory/CPU loading HDD space out line of if it would be usefull to you or not , In other words stop hiding configs bring them forward we have go to end this crazyness of hiding things making it next to impossible for some people to change things to the way they like/want that is microSloPs thats is not Linux and the sooner that is latched onto the better for ALL

Disabling Beagle in GNOME is straight-foward ad obvious. At least a couple of menu paths have already been presented. If it is hard to disable in KDE then maybe that is just a bug in KDE? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Wed, 2009-07-22 at 23:49 -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

...

On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 10:11 PM, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

...

Yes, and I can see people reading and responding to 1500 "run me" questions when installing their system, just like reading the leagleese acceptance notices. I meant the first time you clicked on the Beagle icon on the taskbar. Would you have *all* apps request permission to run initially? Or just

* Larry Stotler [07-22-09 23:39]: those that a few individuals deem undesirable, or all that *anyone* deemed less than what *they* wanted? And would *all* apps appear on the taskbar waiting permission?

The funny thing is that those accusing developers of "think on behalf of users" are.... "thinking on behalf of users" themselves claiming that users don't want these features [that come at essentially zero code] enabled. Hey, I don't use spreadsheets?!! Why is *&(*@ (*@*(@& Open Office Calc installed?! I don't print!? Why is CUPS running by default?! It is using 3.1MB of RAM? What a waste! -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Thursday 23 Jul 2009 22:30:22 Larry Stotler wrote:

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 7:15 AM, Adam Tauno

Williams wrote:

...

The funny thing is that those accusing developers of "think on behalf of users" are.... "thinking on behalf of users" themselves claiming that users don't want these features [that come at essentially zero code] enabled. Hey, I don't use spreadsheets?!! Why is *&(*@ (*@*(@& Open Office Calc installed?! I don't print!? Why is CUPS running by default?! It is using 3.1MB of RAM? What a waste!

So, you are basically saying that the end user shouldn't have control over his system? That if he wants or doesn't want some program/service, that's too bad? Nice mentality.

As someone who works on computers on a regular basis and who has spent YEARS working in the service industry interacting with end users/customers(1,000s of them), I have yet to see any want these things you feel should be installed once it is explained to them what it is and what the pros/cons are.

Last time I checked, the end user is supposed to have control over his/her system. Isn't that part of the philosophy of open source?

Are we sure this person is not an MS infiltrator after all they are the kings of like it or lump it , There seems to be a build up of people that are so hard and fast set on the path of making Linux as un-configurable as possible in fact hell bent on ensuring they get their perticular enviroment just they way they want it force that on the distro and bob's your uncle take it or leave it but dont dare to disagree with them cus you will instantly become the lowest of the low in fact according to some even that is not low enough Pete .

On Wed, 2009-07-22 at 22:11 -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

* Larry Stotler [07-22-09 22:06]:

...

Simple would be to click it and have it run a wizard with an explanation of what it is and asking if the user wants to use it. Yes, and I can see people reading and responding to 1500 "run me" questions when installing their system, just like reading the leagleese acceptance notices.

Exactly. I remember when installers used to ask way more questions than the current ones; everyone I know was rooting for the minimized/streamlined installers. Everything is easily adjustable post-install by anyone who cares [which is a small minority of users]. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 11:44 PM, Rajko M. wrote:

Problem with Beagle is that it really needs someone that will think very carefully what to search, when to search, how to store data, and more. I looked in TextCache and it has many files filled with character 20, ie. blank, very little text. Isn't that wasteful? When they didn't get this right, what else is not as it should be? Is it C# mentality, ie. rapid development of something that works, without regard how it actually works?

That seems to be some programmer's mentality anymore. If exist resources, then expand to fill all available. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 8:22 PM, Rajko M. wrote:

What OS is offering such screen - functionality ? If you want to turn services off and on then you have to look in the system configuration.

Sure would be nice. KDE used to have KPersonalizer. I've requested it be ported, but have heard nothing about it. Would do it myself if I could code.

Problem is that Beagle, Pulse Audio and maybe some more, are not part of KDE and Configure Desktop doesn't know about them. First is not system service so it doesn't appear in YaST, second is hidden in audio settings, but it should be no problem when kernel is fixed for desktop use.

I mentioned in another thread that Beagle shouldn't even be installed on KDE since it has Nepomuk/Stringi, but was told they were asking how to do it, not whether to remove it. Personally, I don't see much benefit in PulseAudio either. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 12:44 AM, Rajko M. wrote:

Both should be optional, when user attempts to use desktop search ask him what to do. Large number of problems in recent past was due to attempts to guess what user wants, instead to ask in as simple language as possible.

Agreed.

...

Personally, I don't see much benefit in PulseAudio either.

Once it works as designed, it may be interesting option for home entertainment oriented setup.

Which is a relatively small subset of users overall. That's like how during 11.0's development someone thought that the Thinkpad fingerprint reader should be a required dependency, and when you removed it, all of networking was removed. Fortunately, it was fixed after I caught it and filed a report on the list. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Thursday 23 July 2009 02:44:39 am Peter Nikolic wrote:

Does it MATTER if one is not right now i am saying the way to go IS TO offer this selection/ service or are you so stuck in the ways of this is what you get like it or leave it to reiterate i could not give a monkeys WHAT other OS's offer as far as confiuration goes i AM saying this is how i think we should go about it

While in general offering option to choose what service (that is installed) should run is overkill (why it is installed in a first place?), there should be clear mark for applications in experimental stadium that can create problems, and easy way to avoid them. The example how that can be done is kernel, where you have option to remove all experimental features from the configuration dialog that is presented to you. If you choose to see them, every feature is clearly marked experimental, and you can include one, or more of them, that you have interest in, and skip all other.

Then there is no question of how do i where do i ect it's there simple takes all the ambiguity out of it instantly .

Major problem with any release up to now was created when someone tried to play mind reader and guess what users want and what not. That was the reason to see new software that has to be tested pushed on new users, that just started to learn how to run Linux, and made things worse. -- Regards, Rajko http://news.opensuse.org/category/people-of-opensuse/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On 16 July 09, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:

...

You can skip this if you don't want to read more. But it gives what I think is a good example from PC history about how this has bitten other vendors.

I don't accept that this is comparable. Someone 'joe-six-pack' buying a PC more than a decade ago to selecting an alternative Operating System.

We need to be realistic, *zero* non-technical users wake up in the morning and think "I'll try an alternative Operating System today". They do go buy PCs. If you even know what an "Operating System" is you are in a small minority and at least a PC Jockey.

...

And a few years later, they were in deep trouble, primarily because former repeat customers became non-customers, and led others away with them. Not just because of my experience, but because they began to get a reputation as just another vendor, and one who didn't get it, at that.

I do not accept the correlation of your experience to the failure of Gateway. Gateway failed for an entire assemblage of reasons, a number of which were related to corporate governance. For one, they spent an enormous amount of their capital trying to buy into the enterprise market [they purchased ALR among other companies] an effort with failed catastrophically. Their initial success can also be attributed to [at the time] minimal competition.

Aside from that this entire argument seems centered around the notion "[openSUSE] is a step backfrom where it was," which is the part I just don't see or accept. I think there is a vocal minority of 'minimalists' who don't like the direction of the modern desktop, but they'd dislike other current distributions for the exact same reasons. They wouldn't like OS/X or Windows Vista/7. Some of them see adding modern features as "emulating" those [despised] platforms [which it isn't]. I have no issues with their choices I just disagree that their wishes should hobble the experience and usability for everyone else.

Nice set of blinders you have on there. That kind of thinking is no more help than those you accuse of not contributing. -- Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.” -Theodore Roosevelt -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Wednesday 15 July 2009 10:18:23 am Dan Goodman wrote:

And regardles of whatever else anyone else thinks about Peter's attitude and/or spelling and/or choice of style to express himself, he is advocating strongly for what all of should want, and what many of us perceive as an emerging issue -- the decline in quality of the distro, for whatever reason.

You know that style gives first impression.

SuSE Linux has enjoyed a solid rep as a solid distro for a long time. And that perception is being threatened by a relatively small number of things that are being done "for the good of the whole" by a few. ... I am still using this distro, but I have become increasingly reluctant to recommend it to potential new Linux users, at least until a few of these quality of experience issues get resolved.

You are not alone. I made yet another Ubuntu user because: - I can't solve bootloader installation problem, that didn't appear in Ubuntu. Bug is already filed and still NEW, but as it is on installation medium, there is no much point to do anything before 11.2 (or respin DVD), - Can't risk that simple update break Xorg (HP Laptop with everything Intel inside), like it happened on an earlier installation.

Is having a few more testers for a package worth alienating potential and current users?

I think not....

+1

Quality NOW should always be the first point of reference for anything done with, for and by this distro...without it, all else is meaningless and self-defeating, as you will end up with only a small core of dedicated users, with others, current and future users, going RH or Ubuntu? ... You cannot sacrifice quality now in order to obtain better quality in the future. If you do, you are risking the future, rather than building towards it.

+1 -- Regards, Rajko http://news.opensuse.org/category/people-of-opensuse/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Heinz Diehl wrote:

On 15.07.2009, Peter Nikolic wrote:

...

...what shall i do...

You shall not fullquote just for to add 2 lines :-) ...

And you shalt use correct grammar when writing, but frankly, I recognize that English isn't a first language for everyone, so I just overlook it. I am more concerned with substance than style. :-) But, having been personally flamed for having done something similar recently, I am curious as to whether or not it (fullquoting when adding a short bottom-post) is really an issue to most people, or just to a couple. And I am talking about 75-150 lines max, not 1000. Personally, I don't always have time to read everything that is here, and I'd rather have to scan through a bit I don't need, in order to get the context, than to have to trace back through the thread. After all, you can get to the bottom with a either a single mouse move or a short sequence of the same Page keystroke -- don't even have to count how many...just do a few and you are at the bottom. For me, the space bar will get me to the bottom in a fraction of a second. So is it really an issue, or just another way to do a "tat" in response to a "tit-for-tat"? After all, there is no objective or algorithmic method for conclusively determining what is relevant and what is not. So why not just leave a couple of pages there? I remember when download speeds were 30bps. And when a 10Mb hard drive was a big improvement. In those days, brevity was well worth the time it took. Today, time is in short supply for most people, and where simple work-arounds exist, neither storage or download should ever be an issue in a message of well under 10,000 characters. So why should we take the time to trim a relatively small bit of text? Just curious to find out if I am in fact out of step with the sentiment of the group, or if such nit-picking is considered the best way to maintain the readability of the list for the average reader? Notice: This communication, including attachments, may contain confidential or proprietary information to be conveyed solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or if you otherwise received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this e-mail, including attachments, without reading or saving them in any manner. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Dave Howorth wrote:

Dan Goodman wrote:

...

... I am curious as to whether or not it (fullquoting when adding a short bottom-post) is really an issue to most people, or just to a couple.

Well, I'd much rather you trimmed it and I'm equally curious to see whether I'm alone

...

After all, you can get to the bottom with a either a single mouse move or a short sequence ...

But you can't just go to the bottom, you have to scan every line because they may have put the comment at random in the middle. ...

True...hadn't thought about that.

...

...

... So why should we take the time to trim a relatively small bit of text?

Because there are more readers than writers and so it's the readers' time that should be considered.

Cheers, Dave

The most compelling reason, for me. And given the problem of discerning embedded replies, I am convinced. Will make more of an effort to trim in the future, even in shorter posts, including here. Likewise, Dan Notice: This communication, including attachments, may contain confidential or proprietary information to be conveyed solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or if you otherwise received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this e-mail, including attachments, without reading or saving them in any manner. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Wed, 2009-07-15 at 11:31 -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:

...

[H]aving been personally flamed for having done something similar recently, I am curious as to whether or not it (fullquoting when adding a short bottom-post) is really an issue to most people, or just to a couple. If you message is more than 80% quoted text and attribution, you haven't

In <4A5DF685.5090504@coat.com>, Dan Goodman wrote: trimmed enough. You should provide just enough context for users not to be confused about your meaning or the meaning of the quoted text. The older messages should have already been delivered to them and be available in the public archives.

My rule is: cut everything but what is required to get the context your reply. I'm really conscious of this because I use lists and list archives a lot. It is good to keep the archive in mind when composing messages so that someone coming to a message in the archive can read it [and understand] it easily. That is greatly facilitated by replying in-line (not just at the top or bottom) and trimming kruft.

You should do this because it is polite, and not everyone is "lucky" enough be using the same email setup you have. Plus, trimming shouldn't take significantly longer than reading the email again. We should cater to the varied needs of others on this list, since there are more of "them" then there are of "me". If I spend 30 seconds extra but it saves each reader of this list 1 second, the list as a whole has saved time.

Ditto. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, 2009-07-15 at 11:32 -0400, Dan Goodman wrote: ...

But, having been personally flamed for having done something similar recently, I am curious as to whether or not it (fullquoting when adding a short bottom-post) is really an issue to most people, or just to a couple.

It saves time, for the reader, just to see enough of the previous email, quoted, to recognize the context, not more. It also saves transmission and storage resources, even if now they are much more cheaper than they were. The key is saving time for the reader. And, if the reader wants to see more of the previous email, well, he should not have much trouble going to the preceding email in the thread to find the original, non quoted material. See? The rest of your email I remove, because I'm not replying to those parts :-) - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkpeHA8ACgkQtTMYHG2NR9WRSQCdEm3mAEFYuNC9eRSzYqtoXhaX 71oAn0SAKIgetld4/GZjshnBNqQr9j51 =Ey2N -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Peter Nikolic wrote:

On Tuesday 14 Jul 2009 20:10:22 Joachim Schrod wrote:

...

Peter Nikolic wrote:

...

On Tuesday 14 Jul 2009 16:52:30 Joachim Schrod wrote:

...

Peter Nikolic wrote:

...

On Tuesday 14 Jul 2009 14:53:02 Adam Tauno Williams wrote:

...

>> Disabling Beagle is well covered at >> Lets face it beagle is nothing more than an excuse for a poorly organised filing system not on the machines behalf but on the side of the user , IF the user was to have a sensible way of creating storing and sorting his files in the first place there would be no need for the unmitigated resource hog in the first place it just allows people to be lax and untidy

so there is no reason for it to be installed there is on the other hand a need to teach people to organise the machines .

Are you a troll, do you really believe that sh*t, or are you a superhuman?

At the risk of putting fuel on the fire instead of dousing the flames, I would like to say the following, after having followed this thread, as well as its subject, with interest for some time now.

From the sidelines, it looks to me like two very talented and active individuals have two entirely different ways of organizing their lives and their computers. Neither is wrong, and for some people, only one way will work, while for others, either could be made to work.

Point 1. This is why Beagle (or Nepomuk, or any "breakthrough" new technology should NOT be automatically turned on at install. However, it should probably install and be easy to toggle on (or back off, if it is found not to work for a user). If beagle was truly totally transparent, that would be different. But it is not -- it uses resources at times that conflict with the user's needs in some cases. Disk is relatively cheap, so putting the package(s) on disk at install time isn't really much of a problem for most people. If you want to put 11.x on a NEC Multispeed laptop with dual 720K floppies as its only persistent storage (OK, an exaggeration, but if you want to put it on a fairly old, barebones system...) then you should be willing to remove packages you don't need. Once you are in "the long tail" you should expect to have to do a few things special to get into the game. But why not offer an install config document, plus the kind of package selection that is available for SLES, so that the issue of installing the software can be handled with a technical, rather than a political, either-or, solution? Point 2. No new technology (that is not truly transparent to the end user) should ever install itself in a way that it is automatically turned on. The burden should not be on the user to discover and decide what to do about that new technology. If the devs want it adopted, get it in the core bundle, but please DO NOT turn it on and make me find it and turn it off if I don't like it. No matter HOW much you believe I will benefit from it and/or like it, once (and only after) I am forcefully exposed to it. (Yes, I am thinking of KDE4 as well as beagle. Coincidentally, both serve as pilot packages for new and significant technologies, which may be what is driving their desire to gain user base by any means. Plasma and Mono may both be interesting technologies, but some of us may not want to make the switch for a variety of reasons. Make them compelling to use, rather than compelling me to use them, PLEASE.) Point 3. Re: supposed beagle slowness. I can confirm that it was slow on a Thinkpad T61 at 10.3 even after initial indexing was done. However, as someone else pointed out, the issue is now reduced to severe slowness only when doing initial indexing, especially if certain excludes are configured. BUT, those excludes, if they improve the average user's experience, should be automatically set at install time, at least as an clearly defined option. For years, when forced to use Windoze (as well as several other OS's) in a business environment, I always disliked having the vendor or dev "do things for me" that were not necessarilary better for me, instead of promoting their new way, and letting me decide. Linux and openSuSE in particular, are no different...do NOT load and turn on things I don't need just because SOMEONE will benefit from them. Had beagle (and the hotly debated KDE4) been introduced on a buy-in basis, instead of being pushed out to meet the needs and/or desires of the developers, they might not have achieved as much acceptance as quickly as they have. But on the other hand, there would be a lot less frustrated users, and probably more people who gave them a real try on their schedule. Currently, I have configured certain excludes from beagle, and it is seldom noticeable as a delayer when I have it running. However, I have since turned it off, as I seldom need it. But I want it onboard (installed but not turned on) in case I ever have to locate "all my knives with blades between 1.5 and 3.5 inches", as a figurative example. In short, I want it there, but I don't want or need it on all the time. And I don't want it to run automatically, without having chosen that it do so. Form should follow function, and the form of the install should follow the functional idea that such new things should be easily accessible but not automatically turned on. The user should have the first, last, and all final says in what runs on their machine, and why. Period, no exceptions. That is (to me) precisely why Linux began and continues to thrive -- it puts control back into my hands, rather than making me a passenger on someone else's journey to the future. And please, don't throw out bug fixes as a counter-example. I am talking about packages only, and then only those that introduce new techniques at the expense of configuration and resource demands. They are what I am talking about when I say that they should be installable (as an option, preferably), but should NEVER be turned on automatically just because they are installed. Right now, Suse is my distro of choice, both because of personal preference and professional needs. But if it, or any distro, got to where it was dictating to me what my desktop "should" look like, or how my data is organized, I would drop it like a hot rock and find a distro that treats new things as options to be chosen by the user, not pushed onto the user by the "true believer" devs. That is precisely the reason I abandoned KDE4 for now, even though initially KDE (3) was my strong preference. I dropped it only after several frustrating weeks of trying to get it to work without problems. No matter how many people it helped, my experience made it more of a problem than a solution for me. And nothing I saw during those weeks was enough of a "killer app" to make me want to rush back to it. I suspect my experience parallels a sizeable percentage of users who were "guided onto" KDE4 in order to make it a better product. And no matter how many other users had no problems, or were able to overcome them, none of that provided the least bit of comfort to me, as I was stuck with MY experience of a package that was not ready for use in anything other than a VM. I can't get my work done on your machine... I appreciate all the effort that many dedicated devs put into this distro, and these packages. But please, let's not forget, as the saying goes "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar". And the easiest way to turn off a user is to give them headaches trying to work around what you think is the best thing since toast. Beagle is a solution to a problem for SOME, not ALL. That is why it should not be turned on automatically. Didn't anyone remember the backlash when Microsoft and Google both tried to "slipstream" in desktop indexing? I am curious about Nepomuk, but I sincerely believe that the right decision was made to install it but to leave it off by default, in 11.2. If only the same type of approach had been done with beagle and with KDE4, half the dissatisfaction expressed on this list would never have occurred. I would have liked to have been one of the early adopters of KDE4 -- but the experience was too much bleeding edge and too little leading edge, as first rolled out. So I will still try to be an early adopter of various packages, as part of my being a "citizen" of the open source community. But I doubt that KDE will be one of them, based on the way it was initially presented. Please, as a community, lets learn from the past, and lets stick to the principle that the user, not the developer, should decide what is best for the user -- what is installed, and when to turn it on. Even if that slows down development. Sustainable progress cannot be obtained at the expense of costing users time and effort that they have not signed up for. People contribute in various ways to open source based on "enlightened altruism", not unbridled, totally self-less altruism. As a dev, you may be smarter than the average user. But the only way you are going to win a base of users is to educate and convince them, not by corralling them and then hoping that they stick around once you have them running your package. That is a sure-fire formula for a way to "fork" the user bases, if not the code. After all, the ultimate "fork" is to simply find a different solution, and if you alienate a percentage of the available user base, you might as well have prompted a fork of the code -- those users are lost to you, probably for ever, or at least for a long time, and then only after you give them a compelling argument in the future, in order to overcome their past unpleasant experiences. That is why, for example, I now run Gnome after beginning on this distro with KDE, and after initially thinking that I would stick with KDE. I am only one user, but surely my experience, and its results, are not unique. Please, once more, for all its faults, this community is alive and active, and has lots of talented and committed individuals...let's try to start doing the things that tend to draw us together, rather than treating the community as a resource to be tapped when wider usage is needed by the devs. I really don't want to leave this distro, and I don't want it to become a boutique distro that works well out of the box only for the true believers and the lucky percent that don't hit problems when upgrading. I hope that this rant helps in some small way to achieve that end. Build the new tools, get them into the distro, publicize them, and wait for the user to turn them on, please...no more "we need to get them using it for their own good" mentality. --Dan Notice: This communication, including attachments, may contain confidential or proprietary information to be conveyed solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or if you otherwise received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this e-mail, including attachments, without reading or saving them in any manner. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 1:00 PM, Adam Tauno WIlliams wrote:

Not enabling new features results in a horrible user experience;  note that neither Apple or Microsoft adopt this approach.    New features should absolutely be enabled - otherwise the interloper thinks your product is backward crap, it is completely unreasonable to make users run around turning things on.

Yep. That's the same philosophy they have on the Windows side. Let's make sure our program is the MOST important program the user rarely uses, have it load at startup, run in the task bar, and never get used. After turning off about 10-20 of those programs at startup, Windows is actually usable. So, you think Linux and openSUSE should emulate that? If so, why are you using Linux?

And Beagle, at least, is hardly a "breakthrough" feature as it has been around for something like five years and many releases.

And it was still broken less than 2 years ago when 10.3 was released. Back in the day, S.u.S.E. included a lot of new technologies, but they made sure that they worked. Now, it's stuffed in and fixed with an update(like the infamous 10.1's broken package system in the released version. Cram a new package system into Beta3, have 6 MORE betas and 3 RC's and still released a broken system).

Ditto.  I'm an advocate of the rule "older than 5 years = onus on you".

So, how old's your car? How about your appliances? I'm glad you can afford to upgrade all the time. Some of us don't have the extra $$ or we just find our systems are still usable even at 8-10 years old. Linux has always been lauded as the system for older machines. Now we are moving away from that? If so, why not start removing support for legacy hardware from the kernel? Or, remove support for the Palm Pilot? It's OLD. etc., etc?

Most users don't use machines that way;  they use what is presented and readily available.  Use this approach and they will promptly install a distro that turns all the stuff on.   Making life difficult for the normal user (hardware < 5 years old) for the sake of the guy with dual-720k-floppy drives makes no sense.

When someone buys a new windows machine, they have all kinds of crap loaded they never use nor want. That's a great way to get people to use features. No one expects to run a modern distro on a 486 or Pentium with all the features. But a P3/500 with 512MB RAM is a useful desktop. A PowerMac G4/400 is fast as well for internet and writing a document. It's not for gaming or encoding tho.

I believe in either 10.3 or 11.0 (at least) it was mentioned right in the installer release notes how to disable it.  They pop-up in your face when installing.

http://www.suse.com/relnotes/i386/openSUSE/10.3/RELEASE-NOTES.en.html http://www.suse.com/relnotes/i386/openSUSE/11.0/RELEASE-NOTES.en.html http://www.suse.com/relnotes/i386/openSUSE/11.1/RELEASE-NOTES.en.html No mention of Beagle anywhere I could see.

There are some frustrated users, I've seen no evidence there are legions of them.   I'm no frustrated and clearly other people who have replied to this thread are not frustrated either.  I do not believe the majority of openSUSE users are frustrated.

How many users of openSUSE actually use these mailing lists? 5%? 10%? That's a statistically small sample to work with. Most of use are more computer savy and have used Linux for years.

X is a solution to a problem for some, not all.  Thus it should not be enabled by default.  Same with Avahi, Hot Plug, ACPI/APM, the screensaver, and DHCP.  Why should I have to be bothered to disable the screensaver?

Avahi is crap. Never used Bluetooth, Firewire, Palm Pilot, Irda, etc, but I am always required to install support for them. Part of being a "community" is that everyone is "supposed" to have a voice. However, you and others like you, seem to think that since you shout louder, that our opinions aren't relavent. Too many times nice, easy going debates on these lists degenerate and nothing is accomplished. I don't have any idea how to fix that problem, but I wish there was an answer other than get used to it or upgrade my hardware.(I'm not targeting you directly, but that seems to crop up a lot).

Nope, "Sustainable progress" is created by offer a fantastic state-of-the-art feature-on-par-with-OS/X-and-Vista desktop.  Which thankfully openSUSE does RIGHT NOW!   It is an awesome distro.

Why should we emulate them? I thought we had a better way. I don't need my desktop to wobble, rotate, bounce, or anything else to be productive. You'd be amazed at how well older hardware works once you turn a lot of that crap off. Sure, some people want that, but by no means does everyone want it. I could care less how much 3d performance my video card has. I run a 2D desktop. That's what's important to me. Please, always remember that the preceding is MY opinion, which may or may not be same as the person reading this. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

TEST, Please disregard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org