-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Monday 2006-12-25 at 10:45 -0500, Mike McMullin wrote:

...

In a word: install those things from packman, or compile them yourself.

Perhaps some of us ought to sit down and write this stuff up for the openSuSE wiki, then people can be pointed to the site which will show them where to get faster and proven answers to the more common questions.

I'm afraid it can't go there. Even explanations on how to bypass those "limitations" can not go to the site where Novell is responsible and could be sued. At least, so I understood. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFFj/WYtTMYHG2NR9URAr6XAJsFnp+eXzV7LFOuvNfFBDIvRlcsEACcCwWi NpOTtpI9PLI+JaCwsDtd3Vg= =yuA1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Monday 2006-12-25 at 16:05 -0000, John K Masters wrote:

On Mon, 25 Dec 2006 17:00:14 +0100 (CET) "Carlos E. R." <> wrote:

...

I'm afraid it can't go there. Even explanations on how to bypass those "limitations" can not go to the site where Novell is responsible and could be sued. At least, so I understood.

I am afraid it's goodbye to the Suse mailing list for me. I have never come across a more hostile list and I subscribe to Mutt, Postfix, Procmail, Debian and CentOS. In future I'll work around my own problems but I hesitate to post the solutions here due to the general attitude.

Hostile? In what way have I been hostile? :-OOO :-/ Begone! - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFFkDbGtTMYHG2NR9URAmqdAJwLMLeKgYtPhgPZ9yBs1F+Ts4g91wCeNywu KzeJSX1BCJCqNcMnNVqQ2xk= =SHKS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Tuesday 2006-12-26 at 11:38 -0500, Mike McMullin wrote:

On Mon, 2006-12-25 at 16:05 +0000, John K Masters wrote:

...

On Mon, 25 Dec 2006 17:00:14 +0100 (CET) "Carlos E. R." <> wrote:

...

...

...

Perhaps some of us ought to sit down and write this stuff up for the openSuSE wiki, then people can be pointed to the site which will show them where to get faster and proven answers to the more common questions.

I'm afraid it can't go there. Even explanations on how to bypass those "limitations" can not go to the site where Novell is responsible and could be sued. At least, so I understood.

Please note that I'm not complaining about Carlos' reply to me. He's raised a valid concern and I'm trying to think of alternatives, including a non-official site, user sponsored.

I didn't intend my remark as a rebuke or anything of the sort; I just tried to mention an unfortunate (for us) fact, that Novell can not include in their site (I suppose they are legally responsible somewhat for what appears in the opensuse site) not only software bypassing licenses and patents (even if questionable) of others, in order to enjoy a "full multimedia experience", but even they can not include links nor explanations on how to get that needed software. We may be angry or mad or distressed or whatever, but Novell can't do otherwise: they could be sued. Even a threat to be sued can be damaging for them, they are a USA company. That's my understanding; how do you say? Ah, IANAL. So, that information has to go elsewhere. You mention another non official site: that could be a possibility.

...

Peace and goodwill to all men (and women)

Do I detect a note of humourous irony? :)

I didn't. Being accused by John of being hostile is in itself hostile. And replying to a mail with text quoted from me, with my name above, is not a general accusation, but an accusation pointed at me directly. That's my feeling, and he hasn't given excuses yet. I don't feel that as "humorous", sorry. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFFkXdmtTMYHG2NR9URAo6RAKCAjTknjOV/+aUM8QvbDSlJQkfaKwCePUYD 3e5mY7obd/eKDMRk+6W3kGU= =JnVI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Pascal Bleser wrote:

Carlos E. R. wrote: (snip)

...

We may be angry or mad or distressed or whatever, but Novell can't do otherwise: they could be sued. Even a threat to be sued can be damaging for them, they are a USA company. That's my understanding; how do you say? Ah, IANAL.

...

So, that information has to go elsewhere. You mention another non official site: that could be a possibility.

That non-official site is here: http://opensuse-community.org

Did I just mention it often enough that people finally have a look at it ? ;)

Well done Pascal. Now if we only could induce Henne to put the following line below all e-mails of opensuse.org: "Novell Inc. is neither responsible for nor does it endorse the contents of the site http://opensuse-community.org" :-) Regards, -- Jos van Kan registered Linux user #152704 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Carlos E. R. wrote:

The Tuesday 2006-12-26 at 22:12 +0100, Pascal Bleser wrote:

...

...

...

So, that information has to go elsewhere. You mention another non official site: that could be a possibility. That non-official site is here: http://opensuse-community.org

Did I just mention it often enough that people finally have a look at it ? ;)

No, you didn't :-P

[...]

Mmm, finally I can tell people to RTFM! ;-)

How about referencing the opensuse restricted format page from there (http://en.opensuse.org/Restricted_Formats), so that they can read the explanation there of what and why they are restricted?

Done, added a link (to opensuse.org on opensuse-community.org -- I'm afraid the opposite won't be possible). cheers - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFklwhr3NMWliFcXcRAqeeAJ9phO4RHVvLbb/6e9yZSba1gXhqDgCgnQKC dLu762kqx8CvECaFlFhHpwk= =Z5KU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Pascal Bleser schrieb:

Have a look at this: http://opensuse-community.org/Restricted_Formats and suggest how we could enhance it (i.e. make it easier to understand and apply).

I looked, I found it easy enough to understand. If THAT is too complicated for someone, maybe that person should not try to operate complicated machinery (like, a bottle opener). I'm not trying to be offensive here, but the internet is in it current sorry state (1 out of 2 windows machines backdoored and/or trojaned, hence abused for mailing spam or phishing attacks, and for ddos-ing and dictionary attacks) exactly because it's the "in" thing to be online, even if you dont actually know why, where, or how, and if you don't have the slightest clue about security, who cares. Gates and Ballmer said that you dont have to know, so everything is fine, isn't it? Now, imagine an internet where all users know what they're doing... bye, MH -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Monday 25 December 2006 07:19, Mathias Homann wrote:

...

Now, imagine an internet where all users know what they're doing...

How much do you know about the fabrication and / or the internal function of these ordinary things or systems: - Automobiles - Farms - Food production - Medicine - Bridges, Buildings and Towers - Highways - Printing - Telecommunications - Shoes - Electric Power - Potable Water - Sanitation - Fuel - and on and on and on and on... Hell, the lowly bicycle is now a high-tech device! The same is true for very many objects and infrastructural elements. If you happen to have access to The Science Channel (http://science.discovery.com/), check out a program called "How it's Made" (http://science.discovery.com/fansites/howitsmade/howitsmade.html) and you'll realize that specialization of knowledge in fabricating "ordinary, everyday" objects and consumables has reached an astonishing level. At least 99% of the things we take for granted as well as a whole lot of stuff we don't even know is involved in providing our comfortable everyday life are things about which most of us know next to nothing. What do you suppose would happen if some sort of plague wiped out one in every ten humans? Could we go on as we live now, or would it imply so much loss of working knowledge that we'd be set back a hundred years or more? The point is, that it is _not_ up to users to posses in-depth knowledge of a technology they're using. They cannot be ignorant of the consequences of those technologies, lest we end up...oh, I don't know, rendering the planet uninhabitable...but every little detail should not be the responsibility of a technology consumer. That's the engineer's job. It's a sad fact that right now computing is so immature and yet so undeniably useful that people have adopted it far and wide, often unwittingly exposing themselves to all manner of risk and hazard. If the risk took the form of computers exploding, we'd never tolerate the risk, but the abstractness of the medium of information and computation leads people to wander into realms that can do them and others real harm. Shame on us! (By which I mean us programmers and software developers!)

bye, MH

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

On Monday 25 December 2006 11:23, Mike wrote:

On Monday 25 December 2006 20:16, Randall R Schulz wrote:

...

Hell, the lowly bicycle is now a high-tech device! The same is true for very many objects and infrastructural elements.

Naa. I've still got an old single speed wide handlebar, saddle seat bike that I ride frequently.. It still works, and I can still buy tires for it. I mainly use it when I need a real workout.. ;-)

Being able to buy the stuff is not the point. When you do that you're relying on knowledge you don't possess. Could you fabricate any of those replacement parts or even minimally functional substitutes? Do you even know how a coaster brake works? Could you create ball or roller bearings for the wheels and bottom bracket? Could you produce a drive chain? What about the seat cushion? An inner tube? A spoke? If you're seriously denying that something as mundane as a bicycle, even if it's a single-speed, mass-market kids bike from 30 years ago is not a high-tech device whose continuing operation is heavily dependent on items whose creation involves a wide range of technical specialties and raw materials from all over the world, then you're deluding yourself.

Mike

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

On Dec 25 2006 11:16, Randall R Schulz wrote:

On Monday 25 December 2006 07:19, Mathias Homann wrote:

...

Now, imagine an internet where all users know what they're doing...

How much do you know about the fabrication and / or the internal function of these ordinary things or systems:

- Automobiles

I'll answer: "Not much". (What do I care how things are designed?) However, I _know_ how to use a car, getting from A to B. I have almost no clue about the internal guts (C code) of Linux Memory Management, yet I almost instanly wrote a BSD kernel driver. The LDAP API is horribly undocumented, but maybe one day I manage to get done what I want. Have you ever tried the "Inferno OS"? Do so. Learn to play around while not screwing up. I have not driven a bus yet, but it's probably not fundamentally different. To run a helicopter, I might need to do a lot more RTFM and practice, but it can be mastered. What people lack is methodology.

If you happen to have access to The Science Channel (http://science.discovery.com/), check out a program called "How it's Made" (http://science.discovery.com/fansites/howitsmade/howitsmade.html) and you'll realize that specialization of knowledge in fabricating "ordinary, everyday" objects and consumables has reached an astonishing level.

howstuffworks.com also has lots of data.

The point is, that it is _not_ up to users to posses in-depth knowledge of a technology they're using. They cannot be ignorant of the consequences of those technologies, lest we end up...oh, I don't know, rendering the planet uninhabitable...but every little detail should not be the responsibility of a technology consumer. That's the engineer's job.

If my water supply is out of order, I gotta call some technician to fix it. Right. So should users when they are unable to use the Internet. -`J' -- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Dec 26 2006 20:20, Per Jessen wrote:

Jan Engelhardt wrote:

...

If my water supply is out of order, I gotta call some technician to fix it. Right. So should users when they are unable to use the Internet.

How very accurately put! This is the situation in a nutshell. People believe a computer is easy to use/fix/maintain, and does not need an expert, yet they'll call for the TV-repairman, the dishwasher-repairman etc. ... where's the logic in that?

Hah ok maybe I left an ambiguous grammar, so here goes: If xyz broke, I gotta call the xyz-technician. And users unable to use the Internet should call the Internet-technician --- NOT the xyz-technician! :-) -`J' -- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Randall R Schulz wrote:

On Monday 25 December 2006 07:19, Mathias Homann wrote:

...

...

Now, imagine an internet where all users know what they're doing...

How much do you know about the fabrication and / or the internal function of these ordinary things or systems:

- Automobiles - Farms - Food production - Medicine - Bridges, Buildings and Towers - Highways - Printing - Telecommunications - Shoes - Electric Power - Potable Water - Sanitation - Fuel - and on and on and on and on...

Yes, and if any of those break or don't work, I need to get a service person and *pay* them for repairing it or making it work. For example, if I buy a new heating system for my house, that saves energy, I need specialists to put it in and configure it. If I want changes in my electric power or water system, I need some service person as well. If I don't want to spend this money, I have a lot to learn myself and have to put real effort in.

Shame on us! (By which I mean us programmers and software developers!)

I don't agree with that sentiment. How about: If someone buys a computer and/or needs a setup to use that "Internet thingy", he or she must either spend effort to learn it or pay money to buy the setup service. Thus, if you don't know how to install a Linux computer -- or a Windows computer, for that matter, go out to your friendly neighbourhood computer shop and ask them to do it for you, against money. Most of them are eager to sell you services, strange as it may sound -- it's more revenues for them than simply selling computer boxes. Thus the tip for those with setup and install trouble is: Buy service, just like you need to do with most of the other technologies that Randall cited above. Computing is not different to that. Why should it be? Joachim -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Joachim Schrod Email: jschrod@acm.org Roedermark, Germany -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Tue, Dec 26, 2006 at 10:38:10AM -0600, John Pierce wrote:

Back about 1998 I was a newbie, I remember my first install and the fun I had. I installed Redhat downloaded and did the rpm install. I got the the log in prompt and logged in as root. I had no clue how to do even a simple directory listing. I went back to windows and surfed the web, i found some documentation about the man command and one suggested to type man ls. Imagine what I learned.

Heh... memories. Before the www and Linux was around, I had been running FidoNet BBS systems on DOS and OS/2. I got laid off from my job and decided I wanted to learn something completely new (to me), so I decided to install Unix. A friend had a set of Esix floppies... 54 1.44MB floppies that made up a basic install of Everex's brand of AT&T SystemVR4 Unix. I installed it. Aside from the fact that it took 18 hours to do from floppies (and I had to do it three times because of random floppy read errors), when it was finished and I logged in, all I saw was "$". X? GUI? You've gotta be kidding, this was a text mode only install. Not encouraging. I had read somewhere that the "ls" command worked like DOS's "dir", and I had also learned about the "man" command. But for a while, all I could do was log in and type "ls", and "man man", "man ls"... Eventually I learned how to set up uucp networking, downloaded X, compiled it (what a nightmare!) and got twm running. My roommate and I set up a lan. We heard rumors about this thing called Linux, it would actually boot and run off a single floppy. I didn't believe it, so I downloaded it. It was version 0.98something, IIRC. It worked! Along came a distribution... Slackware. From there things started progressing nicely, through RedHat, and Mandrake, and a short detour into FreeBSD. I am amazed these days when I do something like a SUSE 10.2 install, and pretty much everything comes up configured and working. We've come a long way. -- If a kid asks where rain comes from, I think a cute thing to tell him is "God is crying." And if he asks why God is crying, another cute thing to tell him is "Probably because of something you did." San Francisco, CA -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Michael Nelson wrote:

Heh... memories.

Before the www and Linux was around, I had been running FidoNet BBS systems on DOS and OS/2. I got laid off from my job and decided I wanted to learn something completely new (to me), so I decided to install Unix. A friend had a set of Esix floppies... 54 1.44MB floppies that made up a basic install of Everex's brand of AT&T SystemVR4 Unix.

I installed it. Aside from the fact that it took 18 hours to do from floppies (and I had to do it three times because of random floppy read errors), when it was finished and I logged in, all I saw was "$". X? GUI? You've gotta be kidding, this was a text mode only install.

FWIW you got the easy end of the stick - you should have started with me on IBM, NCR and Burroughs mainframes in 1984. X? GUI? Mouse? Nah, everything was 80x25. We moved up to 80x32 a couple of years later. Now that was progress! (a typical airline reservation system today will still support the IBM 4505 terminal (the manuals went out of print in 1974) which does only 45x15).

I am amazed these days when I do something like a SUSE 10.2 install, and pretty much everything comes up configured and working.

We've come a long way.

Hear hear. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - managed email security. Starting at SFr4/user/month. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Tuesday 26 December 2006 13:55, James Knott wrote:

The oldest "computer" I worked on didn't even have a display. It was a special purpose machine, made by Teleregister and installed at the Toronto Stock Exchange in 1952. It used vacuum tubes, relays and a memory drum. It was older than me!

Does a long distance telephone switch/router system qualify as a "computer"? If so, AT&T had some downright ancient stuff that stayed in service until the maintenance costs forced them to upgrade. Stuff that used perforated rectangular metal plates for programming. After working there a while, one could tell how well the system was performing by the background noise made by all those relays (and those damned plates getting shuffled in and out). Now all you hear is the air flowing through the vents. Take it from one who had to learn solid state electronics after graduating: I wouldn't trade those experiences, but I wouldn't go back, either. One final serious note: It is really discomforting to see all the "engineers" nowdays that haven't a clue as to how things work. Take any piece of modern technology say, the i-pod, for example. How many people outside of Apple's labs really understand it's internals? Forget for a moment that one does not need to know how a watch works to be able to read the time, just consider the question. <snip a long rant> </soapbox> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Tuesday December 26 2006 2:55 pm, James Knott wrote:

...

FWIW you got the easy end of the stick - you should have started with me on IBM, NCR and Burroughs mainframes in 1984.  X? GUI? Mouse? Nah, everything was 80x25.  We moved up to 80x32 a couple of years later. Now that was progress!  (a typical airline reservation system today will still support the IBM 4505 terminal (the manuals went out of print in 1974) which does only 45x15).

 

The oldest "computer" I worked on didn't even have a display.  It was a special purpose machine, made by Teleregister and installed at the Toronto Stock Exchange in 1952.  It used vacuum tubes, relays and a memory drum.  It was older than me!

Man...........that IS old! ;) Fred -- MickySoft, the ultimate corporate parasite. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Michael Nelson wrote:

On Tue, Dec 26, 2006 at 08:17:41PM +0100, Per Jessen wrote:

...

FWIW you got the easy end of the stick

Stick? We had sticks too! When I first started with computers there were no computers, no keyboards, no monitors, no LEDs. We used the sticks to scratch 1s and 0s in the dirt!

Dirt? You guys had DIRT? Why, when I started with computers.....

<grin>

Michael

PS: I used to stay after work to play Dungeon on the company DEC PDP11/70 on a character mode terminal. Maybe it wasn't called Dungeon.. "You are in a maze of twisty passages, all the same" was a key line where I frequently got stuck.

The game is called "Adventure" and comes with SUSE. You have to install bsd-games IIRC. "Welcome to Adventure!! Would you like instructions? y Somewhere nearby is Colossal Cave, where others have found fortunes in treasure and gold, though it is rumored that some who enter are never seen again. Magic is said to work in the cave. I will be your eyes and hands. Direct me with commands of 1 or 2 words. I should warn you that I look at only the first five letters of each word, so you'll have to enter "northeast" as "ne" to distinguish it from "north". (Should you get stuck, type "help" for some general hints. For information on how to end your adventure, etc., type "info".) - - - This program was originally developed by Will Crowther. Most of the features of the current program were added by Don Woods. Address complaints about the UNIX version to Jim Gillogly (jim@rand.org). You are standing at the end of a road before a small brick building. Around you is a forest. A small stream flows out of the building and down a gully." -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Tuesday 26 December 2006 14:26, James Knott wrote:

...

...

PS: I used to stay after work to play Dungeon on the company DEC PDP11/70 on a character mode terminal. Maybe it wasn't called Dungeon.. "You are in a maze of twisty passages, all the same" was a key line where I frequently got stuck.

We had it, too. I can't remember if it was on the systems at the University of Wisconsin or at Locus Computing Corp where I first used it, but that was it. And definitely it was the "all alike" maze that was the problem. I seem to recall something about dropping objects to distinguish which passage or junction you were in at any point that allowed you to get out.

The game is called "Adventure" and comes with SUSE. You have to install bsd-games IIRC.

Oh, my god! That's it!! It's actually there!!!

"Welcome to Adventure!! Would you like instructions? ... - This program was originally developed by Will Crowther.

And written in FORTRAN, if I'm not mistaken.

...

To quote C. Montgomery Burns: "Yes, I'm old." RRS -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Tuesday 26 December 2006 23:33, Tom Patton wrote: ...

Does anyone remember Lisa the analyst? That'll blow the kids minds! Or was it Elsie...durn can't remember now! ... Try Emacs. It has the module that works like Elisa, but don't ask me exact name, I still have no Emacs installed.

-- Regards, Rajko. http://en.opensuse.org/MiniSUSE http://en.opensuse.org/Portal -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Tue, 2006-12-26 at 21:54 -0800, Randall R Schulz wrote:

On Tuesday 26 December 2006 21:33, Tom Patton wrote:

...

There are lots of Eliza implementations out there. Here's an on-line version: http://nlp-addiction.com/eliza/.

It was really a pretty stupid program.

Agreed...but good for a laugh.

Weisenbaum wrote it to demonstrate how unintelligent computers were even when they seemed to be using language, but some people, notably his secretary, came to believe that it really understood them. Or so he claimed.

I do recommend "Computer Power and Human Reason." In fact, it's been so many years, I should probably re-read it, myself.

Thanks.

...

...

Tom in NM

How does it feel to be Tom in NM?

Enchanted...?

Randall Schulz

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

On Tuesday 26 December 2006 08:04, Joachim Schrod wrote:

Randall R Schulz wrote:

...

...

...

Shame on us! (By which I mean us programmers and software developers!)

I don't agree with that sentiment.

I'm really only criticizing the job that the software profession (of which I am and have long been a member) has done overall in producing reliable, predicatable, usable and useful programs.

How about: If someone buys a computer and/or needs a setup to use that "Internet thingy", he or she must either spend effort to learn it or pay money to buy the setup service. Thus, if you don't know how to install a Linux computer -- or a Windows computer, for that matter, go out to your friendly neighbourhood computer shop and ask them to do it for you, against money. Most of them are eager to sell you services, strange as it may sound -- it's more revenues for them than simply selling computer boxes.

Once you buy software, you should not be expected to also buy training in the use of that software. Not, at least, for consumer, end-user software and hardware. Buyers would rightly balk at such a scam. Doing so may make sense for certain classes of sophisticated software systems designed for specialists, but not for the ubiquitous computing needs that consumer systems satisfy. Basically, inscrutable software and hardware does not call for a coaching service for end users, it calls for redesign of the products to make them more usable. Suggesting that vendors should sell service plans to compensate for poor quality software and hardware is reminiscent of what caused the crisis in the U.S. auto industry in the eighties. At the time, Japanese cars were so much more reliable than their American counterparts that they took a big (and lasting) chunk out of the Bit Three auto makers' market share. Detroit got the message and improved (though they're still not up to the level of quality and reliability of the Japanese auto makers), but there was a lot of ill will generated before they did.

Thus the tip for those with setup and install trouble is: Buy service, just like you need to do with most of the other technologies that Randall cited above. Computing is not different to that. Why should it be?

I think you misunderstand my criticism. I'm not talking about service or maintenance or repair. I'm talking about simply using the software for its intended purpose. After all, software doesn't really break. The closest it comes is to become corrupted. Computing systems should detect such corruption themselves, not force a diagnostic procedure (or purchase) upon the user. And from the service perspective, buying it might be good advice if what you could buy was really useful, but for one thing, telephone support is and probably always will be a joke. A certain class of problems could probably be remotely diagnosed directly (via Internet connection), without requiring the owner in need of help having to be heavily involved, but some problems aren't amenable to that approach. If you could purchase real support, where the problem gets fixed, period, that would be great. And consider, too, that this would essentially be an insurance policy, and would only be affordable if the product quality was good enough to begin with. If problems were common, then the cost of the service policy would be prohibitive, and that's probably where we are now. It is because software today is intrinsically so failure-prone that vendors routinely disclaim any sort of warrantee for their products. [ As an aside, I'll mention that I was really shocked when my dad told me that when he switched from AOL (a six-month subscription was included with the computer by the person who gave it to him as a gift) to a local ISP and had some trouble, they sent someone to his home to investigate the problem! ]

Joachim

Randall Schulz -- ( R a n d a l l S c h u l z @ a c m . o r g ) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Tuesday 26 December 2006 09:14, jdd wrote:

Randall R Schulz a écrit :

...

Once you buy software, you should not be expected to also buy training in the use of that software.

when you buy a car, you may have a licence, and this mean you may have learned to drive it

Of course. But once you've learned to drive, the knowledge you have is pretty much equally applicable to all cars out there. They're very complicated devices, but the cockpit interface is highly standardized. And no one is required to know about how modern (or even primitive) automobile technologies really work. They rightly expect to buy a car, fuel it up, drive it around, give it periodic maintenance and occasional repair (it's a mechanical device, and wear and failure are inevitable) and that's it. We should subject our information technology to at least this level of expectation.

computers are particular things, because they can do simple things AND difficult things.

say you buy a smart little laptop to be able to surf the net and listen some mp3's.

any pre-installed computer, either OS, can do this. most windows users never do other thing

now imagine a friend say "why don't you use Linux! you could host your own server, mail agent, edit photos for free...". But did he say: "you have to learn how to do this".

in the usual life, free things are easy to manage, so a people paying a lot of bucks for photoshop can accept learning it, but people don't paying anithing for GIMP want to use it at once...

There certainly is an issue of expectations management, but remember, this all started out by me saying that I thought the software profession has not done a good enough job. And it hasn't. Are you, too, going to contradict that claim? Do you find software mostly acceptable in its usability, functionality, reliability, etc? I suppose it would be nice for you or anyone who finds it to be so, but I'm more demanding and ambitious than that, and I know that software is still in its infancy, both in the products it produces and in the process by which those products are created.

...

Basically, inscrutable software and hardware does not call for a coaching service for end users, it calls for redesign of the products to make them more usable.

not true. redesign is often a good idea and make life easier, but learning how things show work is invaluable. msword is a not so bad product, but the way most users use it is a nightmare :-( same for OOO.

It's only untrue if the software really is well designed and implemented. I just am not willing to give most software today, even software that is pretty good by today's standards, truly high marks. There's just too far to go, yet.

...

jdd

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

On Tuesday 26 December 2006 11:11, Per Jessen wrote:

Randall R Schulz wrote:

...

...

...

There certainly is an issue of expectations management, but remember, this all started out by me saying that I thought the software profession has not done a good enough job. And it hasn't.

I think that should be the software industry, not the profession.

Exactly what distinction are you drawing here? All the software we're using is professionally designed and developed by industrial programmers and programming teams, and that certainly includes open-source software. And even where the distinction between the corps of software professionals is meaningfully distinguished from the software industry, it's the professionals who must lead in the effort to make the output (software) of much higher quality than we have today.

/Per Jessen, Zürich

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

Randall R Schulz a écrit :

And no one is required to know about how modern (or even primitive) automobile technologies really work. They rightly expect to buy a car, fuel it up, drive it around, give it periodic maintenance and occasional repair (it's a mechanical device, and wear and failure are inevitable) and that's it.

do you know that "occasional repair" is much easier if you know a little about the car function, as not to wait extremely long is you see oil under the engine :-)

There certainly is an issue of expectations management, but remember, this all started out by me saying that I thought the software profession has not done a good enough job. And it hasn't.

the problem is what is "enough". Many programs are awfull. ls makes a very good job, grep also, as many unix utilities. when you see what people do with photoshop of GIMP, you can say these programs are very good. Many programms are good enough to drive the user to his limit.

...

msword is a not so bad product, but the way most users use it is a nightmare :-( same for OOO.

It's only untrue if the software really is well designed and implemented. I just am not willing to give most software today, even software that is pretty good by today's standards, truly high marks. There's just too far to go, yet.

it's always possible to do better job, but in many places we have really good stuff (really bad ones also, to say the truth) I was said as my first computer lesson: a computer do what you ask it to do, not what you hope it will do (un ordinateur fait ce qu'on lui dit de faire, pas ce qu'on voudrait qu'il fasse). most of the problem is in the users mind, and no computer can read this mind, neither his owner can do often :-). It's exactly the same as when you need to have a "cahier des charges" (written specifications?) for a given work. The client often even don't know exactly what he wants and you have to make him deliver his own ideas. some softwares are very good at this job, but not enough and not all. to be more precise, I think that the software is usually not at fault when there is a problem with the user, but the documentation is. programmers are often very good at coding, but not always as good as using the programm (and this is what you are saying, in fact, when you say that the program is not good enough), but often very bad documentation writers. I remember the manuals of my HP-41 scientific calculator. It's writing was done by two high level matematician and one programmer. The writing was done at the same exact time the calculator was built, and lasted the same time. extremely good manuals... rare... jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/mediawiki/index.php/GPS_Lowrance_GO -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Pascal Bleser a écrit :

Have a look at this: http://opensuse-community.org/Restricted_Formats

may be this very url should be setup on the list server to be on any mail bottom :-), it's far the most asked problem :-))) jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/mediawiki/index.php/GPS_Lowrance_GO -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Monday 25 December 2006 07:21, Jan Engelhardt wrote:

On Dec 25 2006 13:39, Niels Østergaard Kjær wrote:

...

many fine letters on the goodbye subject and the subject installs as a secondary desktop.

There is a third aspect too, the Linux wall.

As a newbie we have to fight the total lack of knowledge (it is X-mas

All newbies please read http://vtbsd.net/notwindows.html (also applies to Linux and quite any community projects) section 3, 3a and 3b, *ESPECIALLY* the lego analogy.

I've been instructed on numerous occasions to read this article. I find it annoying. I suppose I should write something to refute it, but have more interesting things to do. In any case, those of us who are complaining that Linux or BSD are not "like Windows" do so because we want to accomplish tasks like our friends, family and peers do. We want to write documents, play games, browse the intraweb, listen to music, watch videos, calcualate our retirement, pay taxes (okay, we don't WANT to do that, but...), share pictures, chat with friends/peers/family, and possibly do some programming. I seriously doubt most peeps care whether these tasks are done on SUSE 10.2 or Windows 3.1, but just want to make sure they are done. :) -- kai www.perfectreign.com || www.4thedadz.com a turn signal is a statement, not a request -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

Jan Engelhardt wrote:

On Dec 26 2006 08:54, Kai Ponte wrote:

...

In any case, those of us who are complaining that Linux or BSD are not "like Windows" do so because we want to accomplish tasks like our friends, family and peers do.

Then use Windows if you fail to do it on Linux. (This is what LNW and FNW all say).

Simple rule. Even I do just that for a few programs.

Absolutely and it is good advice too. I do the same, though I've recently also begun to use vmware. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- http://www.spamchek.com/ - managed email security. Starting at SFr4/user/month. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Dec 26 2006 10:58, Kai Ponte wrote:

I'm not sure what LNW or FNW are tho'.

The "Linux is not Windows" and "FreeBSD is not Windows" articles. -`J' -- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Dec 26 2006 19:55, Per Jessen wrote:

Jan Engelhardt wrote:

...

On Dec 26 2006 08:54, Kai Ponte wrote:

...

In any case, those of us who are complaining that Linux or BSD are not "like Windows" do so because we want to accomplish tasks like our friends, family and peers do.

Then use Windows if you fail to do it on Linux. (This is what LNW and FNW all say).

Simple rule. Even I do just that for a few programs.

Absolutely and it is good advice too. I do the same, though I've recently also begun to use vmware.

VMware is just a helper tool, in essence you still use the other OS. -`J' -- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org