f



Call for Faults of Linux & Linux Distributions

I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
only, please -- regarding Linux.  There are a few, most
of them rather technical, that I have personally, in no
particular order.

[1] Raw X seems to have problems with Unicode fonts.
Cairo and Pango are workarounds to this problem, and
they work reasonably well (especially since Cairo is now
an integral part of GTK/Gnome, apparently), but if one
attempts things like Xutf8DrawImageString(dpy, drawable,
fontSet, gc, x, y, "\xcf\x80", 2) (which should draw the
character pi) I mostly get odd output.  Obviously I may
need to dig deeper into the Cairo source code, and such
things as setlocale().  It's a head-scratcher.  (The
good news: Cairo and X work very well together, and I've
now coded a pseudo-widget set which I will ultimately code
into a replacement newsreader.  It's crude but should
serve my needs; I don't need lots of fancy GUI buttons,
just something that emulates the bits I use in SLRN (I
don't need everything) and can fire off vi as a subeditor.)

[2] I'm not sure Linux handles video switchover very well;
this might be part driver problem, part not quite getting
it right.  In other words, under certain conditions I can
get the video card darned messed up, visually.  (This is
mostly a problem on ATi, the few times I've tried it.
My nVidia unit doesn't seem to have this problem.)  Also,
I'm even less sure that X on Linux handles multiple servers
well, when there is insufficient video memory to support
all those servers.  A wish list: multiple screens showing
up in multiple vt devices as well.  Presumably dual-head
video cards are already covered (certainly the docs for
Xorg I've seen suggest such); I'll admit I wouldn't mind
that though I'm not entirely certain where the second
monitor will fit, even if I get dual flatscreens.  But my
rather cluttered desktop space is not a Linux problem. :-)

As a secondary note to this problem, it should be easy to
somehow reset/reload the video subsystem.  I can fly blind
for a short time; ideally the procedure would be:

- shut down X
- log in as root in a console
- reset the video subsystem somehow (ideally without
  messing up open file descriptors)
- press CR
- and start X again.

Things such as XVGASetMode aren't quite right but might
work for some.  I'm not sure if loading the console video
as a module makes sense or not.  (This is different
from loading things like radeon, nvidia, or fglrx.)

[3] I've had issues with UML.  Worked fine in the 2.4
timeframe, but with 2.6 it either doesn't complete the boot
of the virtual machine, or crashes.  I'll have to try it
again with 2.6.18 and see if I can get it to do something
reasonably intelligent.  Granted, UML is *not* something
the newbies will get into -- at least until they've had a
little work under their belt at such things as the loop
device, mkisofs, dd if=/dev/zero, and mkfs.ext2 -f on
a file.  Obvious stuff -- for those that know it already.
:-)  When it works, it's kinda cool; one sees a number
of xterminals (representing the ALT-Fn consoles) and a
machine-within-a-machine; there's even the ability to
network the machine out using TAP/TUN, if I'm reading the
documentation correctly.  IBM used to love this sort of
stuff (VM/CMS era).  The main thing missing is a method
by which one can have display-within-X, but if networking
is functional one can use remote X (with or without Xnest)
instead.

[4] I'm wondering what can be done about my microphone
inputs at this point.  Under OSS I was able to get
waveforms in no problem, but with ALSA I'm lucky to get
any gain at all.  Sound output isn't bad but I'm rather
disappointed; no voice-phones for me until I get this
sorted out.  (Not that I have that service, anyway.)

[5] SLRN is a naughty bastard when it comes to Unicode
characters.  I'm still not sure what the problem is.
Vim allows me to see the characters if I follow up a post,
but the actual viewing tends to truncate the line at the
point where the character starts.  Basically, if I put in
a character such as the 'ö' in Köhlmann, I see the first
quote and the rest of the line is blank.  I'm not sure
where the bug is precisely; it could be in slang, slrn,
or other such.  Granted, this is an SLRN-specific problem,
but it is a complaint, and in this newsgroup it can lead
to some issues, at least for me.  (Scott Nudd's response
of course might be to "get out of the 1960's".  This is
a dumb response for many reasons. :-) )

[6] The power control is a little inconsistent, and I'm
frankly not sure where to start except by building a bunch
of kernels.  Basically, I have to shut down, then hold down
the power button on my one Athlon machine for 5 seconds.
I say this is inconsistent because on a previous build of
the kernel it actually was able to power off the machine.
Again, not a very high priority but it would be nice.
(It's an ASUS A7S333 mobo, if that helps anybody out there.)

[7] I've had issues with nvidia and framebuffers.  It's an
odd issue too, apparently related to DRM; basically,
if I use nvidia with framebuffers, I can't start X for
some reason.  Without, there's not a problem.  That one
I put into "hmm, that's weird", mostly because I use X
a lot.  But on other systems, such as this work system,
I can have quite a high-resolution character display on
my framebuffer.  I've not had a real yearning to fiddle
with this ("if it ain't broke"), but it's a head-scratcher.

[8] This might be more a Gentooism than anything else,
but occasionaly upon restarting this one machine (it's
a Dell with a USB keyboard/mouse) has keyboard but no
mouse, and I have to unload and reload one of (I never can
remember which so I do all of them) uhci_hcd, ohci_hcd,
and ehci_hcd.  I've lost the keyboard while doing this,
if I'm sloppy about it; the best way is to e.g.

# rmmod uhci_hcd; modprobe uhci_hcd

and hope for the best.  If I do lose the keyboard, though,
I can ssh in from another machine, by switching a monitor
cable, so not all is lost -- but it is a little weird,
and an annoyance when it happens.  (As for *why* I have
to reboot, it's not a Linux problem; the APC unit I'm
connected to loves to beep at me after a week or so and
I have to power cycle the thing to get it to shut up
(otherwise it will beep at me every few hours), which
means *everything* has to go down.  I'm then good for
another week or so until I get to do it all again.)

Since I've not put any of these into
/etc/modules.autoload.d/kernel-2.6, someone else is loading
them, probably in the initrd "mini-root".

[9] Java could use some more capabilities in such things
as releasing RAM back to the OS.  (It now has the equivalent
of mmap(), though I've not had a chance to use it.  However,
once it grabs onto a hunk of memory it tends not to let go,
though said hunk can get swapped out if unused.)

That's my laundry list.  Any others out there? :-)

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Useless C++ Programming Idea #23291:
item *p; if(p != 0) delete p;
0
ewill5 (11075)
10/5/2006 3:00:10 PM
comp.os.linux.advocacy 124139 articles. 3 followers. Post Follow

71 Replies
649 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 48

"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in message 
news:66ifv3-epk.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
>I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
> only, please -- regarding Linux.
[...]
> That's my laundry list.  Any others out there? :-)

    A while ago (between 1 and 2 months), I wanted a quick and dirty router, 
and I had a "one generation old" Ubuntu CD (I think the latest was 6, but I 
had 5), so I installed that on a spare machine. The spare machine had 2 
ethernet ports on the motherboard. When I had installed XP on it, XP didn't 
ask about those. It just configured both of them silently for me. In the 
case of Ubuntu, it detected both of them, and then asked me which one was my 
"primary" one.

    There was no explanation about what they meant by "primary", nor any 
explanation of what the implications would be of choosing one or the other. 
What I *wanted* was for the gigabit ethernet port to connect to my LAN, and 
the 100mbps port to connect to the ADSL modem. So I arbitrary said that my 
gigabit port was the "primary" one.

    This confusing install question is my main complaint, but it lead to a 
bunch of other related "sub-complaints". It looks like as a result of my 
choice, the gigabit port was configured to be "up" upon boot, but the 
100mbps port was not. Therefore, I had no internet connectivity, and could 
not download updated packages. I had to go to a different computer to 
connect to the Internet to google for HOWTO documents. That meant I had to 
rewire my network, as the whole purpose of this exercise was for this Ubuntu 
box to act as the router for my whole LAN.

    Eventually, I managed to get both ethernet connections up, and the 
Ubuntu box connected to the Internet and hosting a DHCP service, but I was 
unable to get it to "share" the Internet to the other computers on the LAN. 
I wanted the Internet working by that night --I have roommates, and they 
were getting pretty impatient with the Internet being down for so long-- so 
after 4 hours, I gave up and used a hardware router.

    - Oliver 


0
owong (6177)
10/5/2006 3:35:20 PM
On 2006-10-05, The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote:
> [5] SLRN is a naughty bastard when it comes to Unicode
> characters.  I'm still not sure what the problem is.
> Vim allows me to see the characters if I follow up a post,
> but the actual viewing tends to truncate the line at the
> point where the character starts.  Basically, if I put in
> a character such as the 'ö' in Köhlmann, I see the first
> quote and the rest of the line is blank.  I'm not sure
....

I've mentioned that problem before.  I use slrn when I'm reading news
from a Linux box, and MT-NewsWatcher when reading news from a Mac.  On
that Mac, I see everything.  On Linux, several people have their posts
mangled.  It's funny that most of them are Linux advocates.
0
reply_in_group (13194)
10/5/2006 4:03:00 PM
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:00:10 +0000, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

> I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
> only, please -- regarding Linux.  There are a few, most
> of them rather technical, that I have personally, in no
> particular order.

Linux documentation sucks. In part I think this is because it's sucked so
long that nobody except the newcomers sees any problem with it.

0
none9 (349)
10/5/2006 5:18:05 PM
After takin' a swig o' grog, Tim Smith belched out this bit o' wisdom:

> On 2006-10-05, The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote:
>> [5] SLRN is a naughty bastard when it comes to Unicode
>> characters.  I'm still not sure what the problem is.
>> Vim allows me to see the characters if I follow up a post,
>> but the actual viewing tends to truncate the line at the
>> point where the character starts.  Basically, if I put in
>> a character such as the 'ö' in Köhlmann, I see the first
>> quote and the rest of the line is blank.  I'm not sure
> ...
>
> I've mentioned that problem before.  I use slrn when I'm reading news
> from a Linux box, and MT-NewsWatcher when reading news from a Mac.  On
> that Mac, I see everything.  On Linux, several people have their posts
> mangled.  It's funny that most of them are Linux advocates.

Why is that funny?

-- 
   Windows -- Microsoft's great gavage.
0
linonut2 (5242)
10/5/2006 5:22:50 PM
After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o' wisdom:

> On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:00:10 +0000, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
>> I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
>> only, please -- regarding Linux.  There are a few, most
>> of them rather technical, that I have personally, in no
>> particular order.
>
> Linux documentation sucks. In part I think this is because it's sucked so
> long that nobody except the newcomers sees any problem with it.

Can you be more specific?  Most of the times when I do man or info or
look at /usr/share/doc, I find pretty good documentation.

-- 
   Press "Any" key to continue.
0
linonut2 (5242)
10/5/2006 5:23:48 PM
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Tim Smith
<reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com>
 wrote
on Thu, 05 Oct 2006 16:03:00 -0000
<12iab5k7bohp09f@news.supernews.com>:
> On 2006-10-05, The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote:
>> [5] SLRN is a naughty bastard when it comes to Unicode
>> characters.  I'm still not sure what the problem is.
>> Vim allows me to see the characters if I follow up a post,
>> but the actual viewing tends to truncate the line at the
>> point where the character starts.  Basically, if I put in
>> a character such as the 'ö' in Köhlmann, I see the first
>> quote and the rest of the line is blank.  I'm not sure
> ...
>
> I've mentioned that problem before.  I use slrn when I'm reading news
> from a Linux box, and MT-NewsWatcher when reading news from a Mac.  On
> that Mac, I see everything.  On Linux, several people have their posts
> mangled.  It's funny that most of them are Linux advocates.

The main issue appears to be Unicode encoding.  If a special character
such as ö (this part of the line will be invisible on SLRN's viewer)
is in the newspost, I can edit the post fine but for some reason
viewing the post tends to delete anything after that character.

It also screws up the formatting of the tree display, just enough
to annoy me but not enough to render it useless. ;-)

And yes, ncurses, slang and slrn are all emerged with
'unicode' support in their USE flags.  Ncurses does
want to rebuild itself, though; apparently the Gentoo
guys tweaked something.  Don't know whether it will help
or not.

Don't know if I need a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
or some such either; SLRN doesn't bother to put it in by default.

Grump.

Otherwise, I like SLRN; it's simple, doesn't require a lot of GUI
resources, and does what I need. :-)

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
GNU and improved.
0
ewill5 (11075)
10/5/2006 6:00:05 PM
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:00:10 +0000, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

> I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
> only, please -- regarding Linux.  There are a few, most
> of them rather technical, that I have personally, in no
> particular order.

Haven't you been reading comp.os.linux.advocacy the last few years?

Linux has no faults.

0
flatfish4 (6248)
10/5/2006 6:59:24 PM
After takin' a swig o' grog, flatfish+++ belched out this bit o' wisdom:

> On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:00:10 +0000, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
>> I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
>> only, please -- regarding Linux.  There are a few, most
>> of them rather technical, that I have personally, in no
>> particular order.
>
> Haven't you been reading comp.os.linux.advocacy the last few years?
>
> Linux has no faults.

Looks like we're damned if we do, damned if we don't, as far as flatso
is concerned.

-- 
   "I'm going to f'in *kill* Google!"
     -- Steve Ballmer, CEO Microsoft
0
linonut2 (5242)
10/5/2006 7:38:47 PM
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Linonut
<linonut@bone.com>
 wrote
on Thu, 05 Oct 2006 12:23:48 -0500
<d4ednZM7YfI5orjYnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d@comcast.com>:
> After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:00:10 +0000, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>
>>> I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
>>> only, please -- regarding Linux.  There are a few, most
>>> of them rather technical, that I have personally, in no
>>> particular order.
>>
>> Linux documentation sucks. In part I think this is because it's sucked so
>> long that nobody except the newcomers sees any problem with it.
>
> Can you be more specific?  Most of the times when I do man or info or
> look at /usr/share/doc, I find pretty good documentation.
>

There's a few issues I could see regarding documentation;
one rather interesting one is the man/info split.  There's
a fair number of base utilities that suggest using 'info'
if I pull up their man page; this is more annoying than
a real problem for me, though I'll admit to wondering
how to accommodate everybody (including hardcore Unix
traditionalists :-) ).

Once in info, it's fairly clear what to do though "C-x 0"
is not that intuitive in order to close the help window.
Tools such as "tkinfo" might help there; certainly it's a
little more GUIfied.  (For some reason info doesn't have
gcc in the top node, although 'info gcc' or 'tkinfo gcc'
works.)

[tk]info likes to present things using nodes.  This makes
for a bit more interactivity than some might like, as one
clicks through the node tree to dig out what they want.

On Gentoo, /usr/share/doc is a bit of a grab bag, though
it may depend on whether one compiles with the 'doc'
switch on.

Man pages have a difficulty, in that one cannot interrelate
steps in a pipeline and/or determine certain procedures
by just using the man pages.  Apropos helps on occasion.

Of course man pages and info pages have no style, except
perhaps the ability to show things in bold.  There are
also no figures or images.

I'm not sure Microsoft docs are much better in this regard,
frankly, and the Microsoft commands and APIs are more
complicated.

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Useless C++ Programming Idea #104392:
for(int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) sleep(0);
0
ewill5 (11075)
10/5/2006 9:00:02 PM
"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in message 
news:dh5gv3-dtg.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
>
> There's a few issues I could see regarding documentation;
[...]
> [tk]info likes to present things using nodes.  This makes
> for a bit more interactivity than some might like, as one
> clicks through the node tree to dig out what they want.

    Ah yes, I had forgotten about this little annoyance. I prefer man 
because of this, though as you've said, sometimes all the man says is to go 
look at info. And so I prefer google to either man or info. Except sometimes 
google brings up pages which contain a forum post which contains "rtfm", 
where "m" stands for "man page".

[...]
>
> I'm not sure Microsoft docs are much better in this regard,
> frankly, and the Microsoft commands and APIs are more
> complicated.

For the command line stuff help, I think Microsoft is much better designed. 
First of all, how could anyone guess to type "man", or "apropos" or even 
"info" in order to get help at the command line? In the distributions I've 
used, typing "help" gives the bash equivalent of "Bad command or file name", 
though I'm told some distributions use "help" as a macro/alias/whatever to 
apropos. In MS cmd.com, "help" brings up a list of every command, and a one 
line description of what it does. Here's a small extract:

<quote>
For more information on a specific command, type HELP command-name
ASSOC    Displays or modifies file extension associations.
AT       Schedules commands and programs to run on a computer.
ATTRIB   Displays or changes file attributes.
BREAK    Sets or clears extended CTRL+C checking.
CACLS    Displays or modifies access control lists (ACLs) of files.
</quote>

To be fair, cmd.com supports a much smaller set of commands than the typical 
*NIX machine, so to get something equivalent in usability, you'd probably 
have to start up an interactive program and sort the commands available by 
topic. Which I suppose would means that when you install a new program, it 
would have to register itself with the central help repository, like it does 
with man/info/whatever, and additionally specify what topic to put itself 
under.

The documentation that came with MS QBASIC was excellent, and one of the 
best documentations I've seen ever, for any product, computer-related or 
otherwise. I learned programming as a pre-teen child (circa 11 year old?) 
with zero programming experience prior to then, just by reading through the 
QBASIC help topics which seemed interesting, pouring through the bundled 
demo programs (most memorable of which was a game in which gorillas would 
throw explosive bananas at each other), and experimentation. I was doing 
simple text based games, and 320x240 256 colour VGA "screensavers" without 
ever reading a tutorial on the web, or reading an article in a magazine or 
anything like that.

Not all of MS' documentation is great, of course. I don't particularly like 
MSDN much, and I wish it were more like Sun's JavaDoc.

    - Oliver 


0
owong (6177)
10/5/2006 9:33:20 PM
Linonut :
> After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:00:10 +0000, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>
>>> I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
>>> only, please -- regarding Linux.  There are a few, most
>>> of them rather technical, that I have personally, in no
>>> particular order.
>>
>> Linux documentation sucks. In part I think this is because it's sucked so
>> long that nobody except the newcomers sees any problem with it.
>
> Can you be more specific?  Most of the times when I do man or info or
> look at /usr/share/doc, I find pretty good documentation.

Man sudoers. That page sucks when I try to parse it. I needed a little
handholding for that (and I HATE having to be led).

-- 
JESUS HATES ME

http://www.websterscafe.com
0
jason3015 (1054)
10/5/2006 9:36:38 PM
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Linonut
<linonut@bone.com>
 wrote
on Thu, 05 Oct 2006 14:38:47 -0500
<Sb-dnakZPf_awrjYnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@comcast.com>:
> After takin' a swig o' grog, flatfish+++ belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:00:10 +0000, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>
>>> I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
>>> only, please -- regarding Linux.  There are a few, most
>>> of them rather technical, that I have personally, in no
>>> particular order.
>>
>> Haven't you been reading comp.os.linux.advocacy the last few years?
>>
>> Linux has no faults.
>
> Looks like we're damned if we do, damned if we don't, as far as flatso
> is concerned.
>

Probably.  Of course flatfish's complaints, if memory
serves, revolve around high-end audio equipment.  I do
not have such equipment (though I do note my microphone
mishaps).

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Been there, done that, didn't get the T-shirt.
0
ewill5 (11075)
10/5/2006 10:00:06 PM
After takin' a swig o' grog, Oliver Wong belched out this bit o' wisdom:

> For the command line stuff help, I think Microsoft is much better designed. 
> First of all, how could anyone guess to type "man", or "apropos" or even 
> "info" in order to get help at the command line?

For source installs, README is the first clue.

I dunno, somehow one eventually groks what to do.

> The documentation that came with MS QBASIC was excellent, and one of the 
> best documentations I've seen ever, for any product, computer-related or 
> otherwise. I learned programming as a pre-teen child (circa 11 year old?) 
> with zero programming experience prior to then, just by reading through the 
> QBASIC help topics which seemed interesting, pouring through the bundled 
> demo programs (most memorable of which was a game in which gorillas would 
> throw explosive bananas at each other), and experimentation. I was doing 
> simple text based games, and 320x240 256 colour VGA "screensavers" without 
> ever reading a tutorial on the web, or reading an article in a magazine or 
> anything like that.
>
> Not all of MS' documentation is great, of course. I don't particularly like 
> MSDN much, and I wish it were more like Sun's JavaDoc.

I remember Microsoft's FORTRAN manual (circa 1984) being very good.

Microsoft documentation is actually pretty good for developers.  For
users, it doesn't seem quite as good.

-- 
   Windows -- Microsoft's great gavage.
0
linonut2 (5242)
10/5/2006 11:35:57 PM
After takin' a swig o' grog, Handover Phist belched out this bit o' wisdom:

> Linonut :
>>>
>>> Linux documentation sucks. In part I think this is because it's sucked so
>>> long that nobody except the newcomers sees any problem with it.
>>
>> Can you be more specific?  Most of the times when I do man or info or
>> look at /usr/share/doc, I find pretty good documentation.
>
> Man sudoers. That page sucks when I try to parse it. I needed a little
> handholding for that (and I HATE having to be led).

Yeah, the BNF notation is tough to parse:

    User_Spec ::= User_list Host_List '=' Cmnd_Spec_List \ (':' User_Spec)*

But that man page ends with a lot of samples.

-- 
   "Developers!  Developers!  Developers!"  -- Steve Ballmer, CEO Microsoft
0
linonut2 (5242)
10/5/2006 11:38:03 PM
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Linonut
<linonut@bone.com>
 wrote
on Thu, 05 Oct 2006 18:35:57 -0500
<xYKdnV15MNtAC7jYnZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@comcast.com>:
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Oliver Wong belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> For the command line stuff help, I think Microsoft is much better designed. 
>> First of all, how could anyone guess to type "man", or "apropos" or even 
>> "info" in order to get help at the command line?
>
> For source installs, README is the first clue.
>
> I dunno, somehow one eventually groks what to do.

Or one types in 'help'.  For Bash it spits out the following:

$ help
GNU bash, version 3.1.16(1)-release (i686-pc-linux-gnu)
These shell commands are defined internally.  Type `help' to see this
list.
Type `help name' to find out more about the function `name'.
Use `info bash' to find out more about the shell in general.
Use `man -k' or `info' to find out more about commands not in this list.

A star (*) next to a name means that the command is disabled.

JOB_SPEC [&]                       (( expression ))
.. filename [arguments]             :
[ arg... ]                         [[ expression ]]
alias [-p] [name[=value] ... ]     bg [job_spec ...]
....

Darned good start.

>
>> The documentation that came with MS QBASIC was excellent, and one of the 
>> best documentations I've seen ever, for any product, computer-related or 
>> otherwise. I learned programming as a pre-teen child (circa 11 year old?) 
>> with zero programming experience prior to then, just by reading through the 
>> QBASIC help topics which seemed interesting, pouring through the bundled 
>> demo programs (most memorable of which was a game in which gorillas would 
>> throw explosive bananas at each other), and experimentation. I was doing 
>> simple text based games, and 320x240 256 colour VGA "screensavers" without 
>> ever reading a tutorial on the web, or reading an article in a magazine or 
>> anything like that.
>>
>> Not all of MS' documentation is great, of course. I don't particularly like 
>> MSDN much, and I wish it were more like Sun's JavaDoc.
>
> I remember Microsoft's FORTRAN manual (circa 1984) being very good.
>
> Microsoft documentation is actually pretty good for developers.  For
> users, it doesn't seem quite as good.
>

It had better be good; the Windows API is complex and rather picky. :-)

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Useless C++ Programming Idea #104392:
for(int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) sleep(0);
0
ewill5 (11075)
10/6/2006 1:00:05 AM
In article <d4ednZA7YfL3orjYnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d@comcast.com>,
 Linonut <linonut@bone.com> wrote:
> 
> Why is that funny?

It's funny because to read the posts of certain Linux advocates, I need 
to use my non-Linux system.  They are trying to argue that Linux is 
better than Mac and Windows, yet their posts are better read on 
non-Linux.  That's hilarious.

-- 
--Tim Smith
0
reply_in_group (13194)
10/6/2006 1:18:58 AM
Oliver Wong wrote:
> "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in message
> news:66ifv3-epk.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
> >I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
> > only, please -- regarding Linux.
> [...]
> > That's my laundry list.  Any others out there? :-)
>
>     A while ago (between 1 and 2 months), I wanted a quick and dirty router,
> and I had a "one generation old" Ubuntu CD (I think the latest was 6, but I
> had 5), so I installed that on a spare machine. The spare machine had 2
> ethernet ports on the motherboard. When I had installed XP on it, XP didn't
> ask about those. It just configured both of them silently for me. In the
> case of Ubuntu, it detected both of them, and then asked me which one was my
> "primary" one.
>
>     There was no explanation about what they meant by "primary", nor any
> explanation of what the implications would be of choosing one or the other.
> What I *wanted* was for the gigabit ethernet port to connect to my LAN, and
> the 100mbps port to connect to the ADSL modem. So I arbitrary said that my
> gigabit port was the "primary" one.
>

You have a motherboard with one builtin gb and one builtin 100 mb
ethernet ports?

0
10/6/2006 1:29:55 AM
"spam" <gtdavies33@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1160098195.307990.131940@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> You have a motherboard with one builtin gb and one builtin 100 mb
> ethernet ports?

    Yes.

http://www.chaintechusa.com/tw/eng/product_spec.asp?MPSNo=13&PISNo=144

    - Oliver 


0
owong (6177)
10/6/2006 1:33:33 PM
"Linonut" <linonut@bone.com> wrote in message 
news:xYKdnV15MNtAC7jYnZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Oliver Wong belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> For the command line stuff help, I think Microsoft is much better 
>> designed.
>> First of all, how could anyone guess to type "man", or "apropos" or even
>> "info" in order to get help at the command line?
>
> For source installs, README is the first clue.
>
> I dunno, somehow one eventually groks what to do.

    I suspect someone told them what to do. That's how I found out about 
man, apropos and info (someone told me).

    And for the "first" someone, (s)he probably designed the system, and so 
knew what to do.

    - Oliver 


0
owong (6177)
10/6/2006 1:35:19 PM
"Linonut" <linonut@bone.com> wrote in message 
news:xYKdnV15MNtAC7jYnZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> Microsoft documentation is actually pretty good for developers.  For
> users, it doesn't seem quite as good.

    I suspect this is the case for most software (e.g. note the use of BNF 
in the man page for sudoer, mentioned in another branch of this thread). For 
small hobby projects, the documentation is usually written by the 
programmer, which means that it may take a very developer-friendly oriented 
tone. Bigger projects (perhaps with the backing of a corporation like IBM or 
RedHat) can afford to hire professional technical writers who are probably 
more skilled and experienced at writing end-user targetted documentation 
than a typical programmer.

    Then again, this probably isn't so big of a problem, as most people 
don't bother to read the manuals of products they buy anyway. If you're the 
type of person who *would* read the manual, you're probably intellectually 
minded enough to work through the technical level of discussion a programmer 
would typically use.

    - Oliver 


0
owong (6177)
10/6/2006 1:49:46 PM
EWill wrote:

[...]

>That's my laundry list.  Any others out there? :-)

Most annoying thing for me with the new LiveCDs, besides little things
like color, is the cursor drift on my laptop's touchpad (I don't know
what this is called properly so can't find any information on it).  The
border area inside which the cursor runs away from its current position
appears to be very wide...  on the old SuSE 6.2 it is narrow in the
sense you have to be touching right at the edge of the pad to get the
cursor to run.  I've been all over the KDE menus but can't find anything
on this.  Anyone have an idea?

-- 
ciao,
Bruce

drift wave turbulence:  http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/

0
Bruce
10/6/2006 4:43:01 PM
Tim Smith wrote:

>I've mentioned that problem before.  I use slrn when I'm reading news
>from a Linux box, and MT-NewsWatcher when reading news from a Mac.  On
>that Mac, I see everything.  On Linux, several people have their posts
>mangled.  It's funny that most of them are Linux advocates.

Same problem on Solaris with trn.  I just read around it.  If I can't, I
move on to the next post.  The German newsgroups are particularly
bad... lots of non-standard Windows things out there in addition to the
usual coding for Umlaute.

-- 
ciao,
Bruce

drift wave turbulence:  http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/

0
Bruce
10/6/2006 4:45:17 PM
someone with an alias wrote:

>Linux documentation sucks. In part I think this is because it's sucked so
>long that nobody except the newcomers sees any problem with it.

For me it used to be better than it is now...  but then there is a lot
more "candy" on Linux now than there used to be.

-- 
ciao,
Bruce

drift wave turbulence:  http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/

0
Bruce
10/6/2006 4:47:15 PM
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 12:23:48 -0500, Linonut wrote:

> After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o' wisdom:
> 
>> On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:00:10 +0000, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>
>>> I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones only, please --
>>> regarding Linux.  There are a few, most of them rather technical, that
>>> I have personally, in no particular order.
>>
>> Linux documentation sucks. In part I think this is because it's sucked
>> so long that nobody except the newcomers sees any problem with it.
> 
> Can you be more specific?

Multiple help systems each with its own conventions, information scattered
all over the hard drive, instructions written for some radically different
distro, explanations that only an experienced sysadmin can understand,
poor installation/configuration instructions, poorly documented
configuration options, too few examples (if any at all).

A proper help system uses a single point of entry. The first thing the
user would see there would be a standard index for the application,
something like:

  [Search]
  installation for beginning users
  installation for advanced users
  configuration
  config files and settings
  usage for beginning users
  usage for advanced users
  examples
  manpage
  useful web pages
  contacts and mailing lists
  sources
  index

All the information that the user requires to install, configure, and use
the application should be available from that single point without having
to go on a lengthy search for documents on their hard drive and the web.

IMO the documentation system has failed if people have to turn to the web
to find solutions to common problems.

> Most of the times when I do man or info or look at /usr/share/doc, I
> find pretty good documentation.

Of course. Those were designed for technical users. Sit down with a
nontechnical user sometime and watch them struggle to parse the very same
instructions that seem crystal-clear to you. If you want a good
application for this project, have them install and configure libpam-encfs
on Ubuntu and set up an encrypted home directory, entirely on their own.
A persistent user may get it eventually, but I bet you see them
experience a lot more frustration than should be the case with a
user-friendly distro.


0
none9 (349)
10/6/2006 7:05:18 PM
On 2006-10-06, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 12:23:48 -0500, Linonut wrote:
>
>> After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>> 
>>> On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:00:10 +0000, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>>
>>>> I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones only, please --
>>>> regarding Linux.  There are a few, most of them rather technical, that
>>>> I have personally, in no particular order.
>>>
>>> Linux documentation sucks. In part I think this is because it's sucked
>>> so long that nobody except the newcomers sees any problem with it.
>> 
>> Can you be more specific?
>
> Multiple help systems each with its own conventions, information scattered
> all over the hard drive, instructions written for some radically different
> distro, explanations that only an experienced sysadmin can understand,
> poor installation/configuration instructions, poorly documented
> configuration options, too few examples (if any at all).
>
> A proper help system uses a single point of entry. The first thing the
> user would see there would be a standard index for the application,
> something like:

	Sounds suspicously like the HELP menu item in GNOME.

[deletia]
> All the information that the user requires to install, configure, and use
> the application should be available from that single point without having
> to go on a lengthy search for documents on their hard drive and the web.

	That's a bit of a paradox actually.

	If it were a common problem in time for the docs to get put into
the distro then the distro itself should have fixed the problem. OTOH,
the nice thing about the web is that documentation doesn't have to remain
fixed.

>
> IMO the documentation system has failed if people have to turn to the web
> to find solutions to common problems.
[deletia]
> application for this project, have them install and configure libpam-encfs
> on Ubuntu and set up an encrypted home directory, entirely on their own.

	That's a task that's outside the domain of the user you're trying
to champion anyways.

> A persistent user may get it eventually, but I bet you see them
> experience a lot more frustration than should be the case with a
> user-friendly distro.


-- 
	Sure, I could use iTunes even under Linux. However, I have       |||
better things to do with my time than deal with how iTunes doesn't      / | \
want to play nicely with everyone else's data (namely mine). I'd 
rather create a DVD using those Linux apps we're told don't exist.
0
jedi (14754)
10/6/2006 7:27:31 PM
"JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message 
news:3aniv3-fma.ln1@nomad.mishnet...
> On 2006-10-06, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:

>> All the information that the user requires to install, configure, and use
>> the application should be available from that single point without having
>> to go on a lengthy search for documents on their hard drive and the web.
>
> That's a bit of a paradox actually.
>
> If it were a common problem in time for the docs to get put into
> the distro then the distro itself should have fixed the problem. OTOH,
> the nice thing about the web is that documentation doesn't have to remain
> fixed.

    Documentation isn't just for problems that are fixable in code. They're 
also for giving the user information like "What does this program do?" or 
"How do I turn on setting foo?" or "What's the difference between having 
setting Foo 'on' or 'off' anyway?"

    - Oliver 


0
owong (6177)
10/6/2006 8:36:13 PM
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, arachnid
<none@goawayspammers.com>
 wrote
on Fri, 06 Oct 2006 14:05:18 -0500
<pan.2006.10.06.19.02.40.158582@goawayspammers.com>:
> On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 12:23:48 -0500, Linonut wrote:
>
>> After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>> 
>>> On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:00:10 +0000, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>>
>>>> I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones only, please --
>>>> regarding Linux.  There are a few, most of them rather technical, that
>>>> I have personally, in no particular order.
>>>
>>> Linux documentation sucks. In part I think this is because it's sucked
>>> so long that nobody except the newcomers sees any problem with it.
>> 
>> Can you be more specific?
>
> Multiple help systems each with its own conventions, information scattered
> all over the hard drive, instructions written for some radically different
> distro, explanations that only an experienced sysadmin can understand,
> poor installation/configuration instructions, poorly documented
> configuration options, too few examples (if any at all).
>
> A proper help system uses a single point of entry. The first thing the
> user would see there would be a standard index for the application,
> something like:
>
>   [Search]
>   installation for beginning users
>   installation for advanced users
>   configuration
>   config files and settings
>   usage for beginning users
>   usage for advanced users
>   examples
>   manpage
>   useful web pages
>   contacts and mailing lists
>   sources
>   index

Erm, is this purpose-oriented or just a repackaging of the
existing stuff that "sucks"?  The latter doesn't help much.

A more purpose-oriented possibility might be along the following lines:

GoozNossie: advances one's chi while tripping the snark
  --> Purpose
  --> Requirements for use
  --> Options
  --> Examples
  --> Configuration files and settings
  --> Requirements for installation
  --> Installation
  --> See Also
  --> Contacts
  --> Index

'Installation' is admittedly a bit oddly-placed but most
users will be using GoozNossie and most of its neighbors
when it's already installed on a system.

One might also attempt a deeper menu:

GoozNossie: advances one's chi while tripping the snark
  --> Usage
      --> Purpose
      --> Requirements
      --> Options
  --> Examples
  --> Configuration
      --> Files and settings
      --> Runtime
  --> Installation
      --> Requirements
      --> Installation procedure
  --> Related documentation
      --> Other commands (See Also)
      --> Contacts
  --> Index

Admittedly one could quibble endlessly about how this
should be presented, what should be included, and where the
actual docs should be stored, but it's clear that there
should be a quick way to determine where the relevant
information is for:

- the casual user who knows nothing about the system
  and is trying to find a capability
- the more experienced user who knows the command exists
  and is looking up specifics
- the experienced user from a different system who is trying
  to find the Linux equivalent ("erm, what's the Internet
  Explorer on this system?"  "How do I read Excel files?")
- the installer who needs to know what prerequisites are needed
  and the procedure for setting up the given command

Packages of commands lead to some interesting conundrums; for example,
OpenOffice is a highly comprehensive, integrated office
document/spreadsheet/editor.  I'm not at all sure how some parts of
OO's documentation might fit into this package, as there are items
shared amongst all of its parts.  Ditto for Mozilla, which has a few
derivatives (Galeon, Epiphany, Kahehakase).

And of course there's some danger of pigeonholing.

Even then, all I've done here is more or less standardized
the manpage (which is pretty standardized anyway); one
should also document basic concepts such as:

- what is a file
- what is available for manipulating files
- the display
- the GUI (title bar, side bar, resizing, clicking, dragging, typing,
  etc.)

and of course a built-in index/search facility would be helpful.

This appears to be a far different focus from the one
presented by http://www.tldp.org/, mostly because it's
more comprehensive; TLDP limits itself to guides, howtos,
manpages, and FAQs -- none of which really address the
issue of how one communicates, though manpages at least
might be somewhat useful if one already knows the given
command exists.

>
> All the information that the user requires to install, configure, and use
> the application should be available from that single point without having
> to go on a lengthy search for documents on their hard drive and the web.

I'd say use, configure, and install; installation is not something one
is going to do every day. :-)

>
> IMO the documentation system has failed if people have to turn to the web
> to find solutions to common problems.
>
>> Most of the times when I do man or info or look at /usr/share/doc, I
>> find pretty good documentation.
>
> Of course. Those were designed for technical users. Sit down with a
> nontechnical user sometime and watch them struggle to parse the very same
> instructions that seem crystal-clear to you. If you want a good
> application for this project, have them install and configure libpam-encfs
> on Ubuntu and set up an encrypted home directory, entirely on their own.
> A persistent user may get it eventually, but I bet you see them
> experience a lot more frustration than should be the case with a
> user-friendly distro.
>

An allegedly user-friendly distro.  Admittedly, I'm
probably the wrong sort of user to be judging distros;
Ubunto wasn't too bad for me but then I cut my teeth on
System6 way back in 1980, and had plenty of experience on
a number of computers in high school, and even junior high.

In short, I'm no n00b. :-)

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Does anyone else remember the 1802?
0
ewill5 (11075)
10/6/2006 9:00:04 PM
On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 14:27:31 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:

> On 2006-10-06, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 12:23:48 -0500, Linonut wrote:
>>
>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>>> 
>>>> On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:00:10 +0000, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones only, please --
>>>>> regarding Linux.  There are a few, most of them rather technical, that
>>>>> I have personally, in no particular order.
>>>>
>>>> Linux documentation sucks. In part I think this is because it's sucked
>>>> so long that nobody except the newcomers sees any problem with it.
>>> 
>>> Can you be more specific?
>>
>> Multiple help systems each with its own conventions, information scattered
>> all over the hard drive, instructions written for some radically different
>> distro, explanations that only an experienced sysadmin can understand,
>> poor installation/configuration instructions, poorly documented
>> configuration options, too few examples (if any at all).
>>
>> A proper help system uses a single point of entry. The first thing the
>> user would see there would be a standard index for the application,
>> something like:
> 
> 	Sounds suspicously like the HELP menu item in GNOME.

Unfortunately it's not a universal help system. Wouldn't make a bad one,
though I'd like to see a few things done differently. Also I'd want a
command-line workalike that uses the very same database (which may exist,
I just haven't looked for it).

> [deletia]
>> All the information that the user requires to install, configure, and use
>> the application should be available from that single point without having
>> to go on a lengthy search for documents on their hard drive and the web.
> 
> 	That's a bit of a paradox actually.

No, it isn't.

> 
> 	If it were a common problem in time for the docs to get put into
> the distro then the distro itself should have fixed the problem. OTOH,
> the nice thing about the web is that documentation doesn't have to remain
> fixed.

What's that got to do with user questions concerning "installation,
configuration and use of the application"?
 
>> IMO the documentation system has failed if people have to turn to the
>> web to find solutions to common problems.
> [deletia]
>> application for this project, have them install and configure
>> libpam-encfs on Ubuntu and set up an encrypted home directory, entirely
>> on their own.
> 
> 	That's a task that's outside the domain of the user you're trying
> to champion anyways.

Why? Users with no technical skill are able to install and use encrypted
filesystems under Windows. You're not saying Linux is inferior to Windows,
are you? 

0
none9 (349)
10/6/2006 9:00:12 PM
flatfish+++ wrote:

> On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:00:10 +0000, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> 
>> I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
>> only, please -- regarding Linux.  There are a few, most
>> of them rather technical, that I have personally, in no
>> particular order.
> 
> Haven't you been reading comp.os.linux.advocacy the last few years?
> 
> Linux has no faults.


You mean Linux has greater choice.

The OP was fixated on combinations
that synthesize issues where alternatives exist,
or perhaps WIP is the best way to describe the issue
instead of calling it 'Faults of Linux', which any way
they are not, because these 'faults' refer to applications
built around Linux - Linux being just the kernel.

GPL'd Linux applications offers the choice
to look at other competing solutions.
Ultimately, source code exists to make software in your own image.

0
10/7/2006 12:26:02 AM
On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 21:00:04 +0000, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, arachnid
> <none@goawayspammers.com>
>  wrote
> on Fri, 06 Oct 2006 14:05:18 -0500
> <pan.2006.10.06.19.02.40.158582@goawayspammers.com>:
>> On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 12:23:48 -0500, Linonut wrote:
>>
>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>>> 
>>>> On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:00:10 +0000, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones only, please --
>>>>> regarding Linux.  There are a few, most of them rather technical,
>>>>> that I have personally, in no particular order.
>>>>
>>>> Linux documentation sucks. In part I think this is because it's
>>>> sucked so long that nobody except the newcomers sees any problem with
>>>> it.
>>> 
>>> Can you be more specific?
>>
>> Multiple help systems each with its own conventions, information
>> scattered all over the hard drive, instructions written for some
>> radically different distro, explanations that only an experienced
>> sysadmin can understand, poor installation/configuration instructions,
>> poorly documented configuration options, too few examples (if any at
>> all).
>>
>> A proper help system uses a single point of entry. The first thing the
>> user would see there would be a standard index for the application,
>> something like:
>>
>>   [Search]
>>   installation for beginning users
>>   installation for advanced users
>>   configuration
>>   config files and settings
>>   usage for beginning users
>>   usage for advanced users
>>   examples
>>   manpage
>>   useful web pages
>>   contacts and mailing lists
>>   sources
>>   index
> 
> Erm, is this purpose-oriented or just a repackaging of the existing
> stuff that "sucks"?  The latter doesn't help much.

Both. It would be some improvement to gather everything together, but
that's not sufficient in itself.

> A more purpose-oriented possibility might be along the following lines:
> 
> GoozNossie: advances one's chi while tripping the snark
>   --> Purpose
>   --> Requirements for use
>   --> Options
>   --> Examples
>   --> Configuration files and settings
>   --> Requirements for installation
>   --> Installation
>   --> See Also
>   --> Contacts
>   --> Index

I'm not particular, so long as information is better-written and
better-organized than it is now.

> Admittedly one could quibble endlessly about how this should be
> presented, what should be included, and where the actual docs should be
> stored, but it's clear that there

Yeah, that's part of the problem. I think there are plenty of developers
out there who perceive the need for a better help system, but the trick is
in getting all those cats going in the same direction... 

I'd like to see a wiki set up specifically as a standard documentation
source for all Linux applications. It would be designed so a utility
program could crawl the site and generate a local help database for
installed applications. For those who are online 24/7, an option would
allow their help system to access the wiki instead of the local database,
so they'd always have the latest help info.

Obviously submissions would have to be examined and approved, because you
don't want incompetents or bad guys telling people how to configure their
security!

> should be a quick way to determine where the relevant information is
> for:
>
> - the casual user who knows nothing about the system
>   and is trying to find a capability
> - the more experienced user who knows the command exists
>   and is looking up specifics

This is why I added the manpage category. Experienced users tend to prefer
the manpage system. As new users gain experience they'll begin shifting
towards manpages themselves.

> - the experienced user from a different system who is trying
>   to find the Linux equivalent ("erm, what's the Internet Explorer on
>   this system?"  "How do I read Excel files?")
> - the installer who needs to know what prerequisites are needed
>   and the procedure for setting up the given command
> 
> Packages of commands lead to some interesting conundrums; for example,
> OpenOffice is a highly comprehensive, integrated office
> document/spreadsheet/editor.  I'm not at all sure how some parts of OO's
> documentation might fit into this package, 

'tis indeed a mess. What about all the miscellaneous documentation that
comes with some packages? How do you handle all the different
distributions and kernel versions, or the feature changes between
all the successive versions of an application?

Still, what's the use of providing all those nifty options, settings,
and features, and then making it hard for people to find out that they
exist and how to use them?

> as there are items shared amongst all of its parts.  Ditto for Mozilla,
> which has a few derivatives (Galeon, Epiphany, Kahehakase).

Shared applications could be handled easily enough with hyperlinks.

> And of course there's some danger of pigeonholing.
> 
> Even then, all I've done here is more or less standardized the manpage
> (which is pretty standardized anyway); one should also document basic
> concepts such as:
> 
> - what is a file
> - what is available for manipulating files - the display - the GUI
> (title bar, side bar, resizing, clicking, dragging, typing,
>   etc.)
> 
> and of course a built-in index/search facility would be helpful.

Goes without saying. Also bookmarks and an automatic MRU list.

> This appears to be a far different focus from the one presented by
> http://www.tldp.org/, mostly because it's more comprehensive; TLDP
> limits itself to guides, howtos, manpages, and FAQs -- none of which
> really address the issue of how one communicates, though manpages at
> least might be somewhat useful if one already knows the given command
> exists.

I don't get to see tldp.org much anymore. I usually set my web searches
for recent results, and too many tldp documents haven't been updated in
too many years to show up in my searches. Wikis seem to have replaced
all those static documents anyway.

>> All the information that the user requires to install, configure, and
>> use the application should be available from that single point without
>> having to go on a lengthy search for documents on their hard drive and
>> the web.
> 
> I'd say use, configure, and install; installation is not something one
> is going to do every day. :-)

Installation is the first thing you do so it should be at the top of the
list. :~)

>> IMO the documentation system has failed if people have to turn to the
>> web to find solutions to common problems.
>>
>>> Most of the times when I do man or info or look at /usr/share/doc, I
>>> find pretty good documentation.
>>
>> Of course. Those were designed for technical users. Sit down with a
>> nontechnical user sometime and watch them struggle to parse the very
>> same instructions that seem crystal-clear to you. If you want a good
>> application for this project, have them install and configure
>> libpam-encfs on Ubuntu and set up an encrypted home directory, entirely
>> on their own. A persistent user may get it eventually, but I bet you
>> see them experience a lot more frustration than should be the case with
>> a user-friendly distro.
>>
>>
> An allegedly user-friendly distro.  Admittedly, I'm probably the wrong
> sort of user to be judging distros; Ubunto wasn't too bad for me but
> then I cut my teeth on System6 way back in 1980, and had plenty of
> experience on a number of computers in high school, and even junior
> high.

It seems nearly impossible for experienced technical people to get into
the heads of totally nontechnical consumers. A few can, but they're
underappreciated by the tech industry and not listened to very much.

> In short, I'm no n00b. :-)

Despite having used FreeBSD for 5 years my skill level is only about
10% of the way from n00b to sysadmin. I've been out of tech for some time
now, don't get paid for learning tech stuff and have better things to do
with my free time than study purely for the sake of learning. Debian
appeals to me but just trying to get a minimally useful install going was
wasting too much of my time. In years past I'd have enjoyed the challenge
and taken the opportunity to learn new things. Now all I want is a
functional system that does what I need with a minimum of fuss. Ubuntu
fills the need very nicely.





0
none9 (349)
10/7/2006 1:30:39 AM
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, 7
<website_has_email@www.enemygadgets.com>
 wrote
on Sat, 07 Oct 2006 00:26:02 GMT
<uuCVg.30507$r61.22394@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>:
> flatfish+++ wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:00:10 +0000, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>> 
>>> I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
>>> only, please -- regarding Linux.  There are a few, most
>>> of them rather technical, that I have personally, in no
>>> particular order.
>> 
>> Haven't you been reading comp.os.linux.advocacy the last few years?
>> 
>> Linux has no faults.
>
>
> You mean Linux has greater choice.
>
> The OP was fixated on combinations
> that synthesize issues where alternatives exist,
> or perhaps WIP is the best way to describe the issue
> instead of calling it 'Faults of Linux', which any way
> they are not, because these 'faults' refer to applications
> built around Linux - Linux being just the kernel.
>
> GPL'd Linux applications offers the choice
> to look at other competing solutions.
> Ultimately, source code exists to make software in your own image.
>

I said faults of Linux *and Linux Distributions*.
Perhaps I should have included "software commonly included
Linux Distributions" as well?  Say, can a subject line be
arbitrarily long? :-)

In any event, Linux and software designed to run using
Linux kernels has its faults, as demonstrated here.
However, other solutions have far more faults; I intended
this thread to be constructive criticism, and hope it
remains such. :-)

Given, say, a miscoloring of a widget and an outright
system failure, I'll take the miscoloring every time. :-)

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
New Technology?  Not There.  No Thanks.
0
ewill5 (11075)
10/7/2006 2:00:04 AM
After takin' a swig o' grog, Tim Smith belched out this bit o' wisdom:

> In article <d4ednZA7YfL3orjYnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d@comcast.com>,
>  Linonut <linonut@bone.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Why is that funny?
>
> It's funny because to read the posts of certain Linux advocates, I need 
> to use my non-Linux system.  They are trying to argue that Linux is 
> better than Mac and Windows, yet their posts are better read on 
> non-Linux.  That's hilarious.

Well, I think it's hilarious that you simply don't fix your locale
settings on your Linux box.

-- 
   :read ~/.signature
0
linonut2 (5242)
10/7/2006 2:33:07 PM
After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o' wisdom:

> Of course. Those were designed for technical users. Sit down with a
> nontechnical user sometime and watch them struggle to parse the very same
> instructions that seem crystal-clear to you.

Actually, I've sat down with users and watch them struggle with Windows
GUI interface items that seem crystal-clear to me.

"Build a system that is foolproof, and only fools will use it."  I
should find out who said that.  Probably Ben Franklin.

> If you want a good
> application for this project, have them install and configure libpam-encfs
> on Ubuntu and set up an encrypted home directory, entirely on their own.
> A persistent user may get it eventually, but I bet you see them
> experience a lot more frustration than should be the case with a
> user-friendly distro.

I'd like to see them do something similar on Windows, actually.

"Okay Granny, encrypt your files.  Chop-chop!"

-- 
   Apple executive Peter Hoddie asked Microsoft officials, "'Are you asking us
   to kill playback? Are you asking us to knife the baby?'" He said Microsoft
   official Christopher Phillips responded, "'Yes, we want you to knife the baby.'
   It was very clear." 
0
linonut2 (5242)
10/7/2006 2:36:16 PM
Linonut wrote:

> After takin' a swig o' grog, Tim Smith belched out this bit o' wisdom:
> 
>> In article <d4ednZA7YfL3orjYnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d@comcast.com>,
>>  Linonut <linonut@bone.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Why is that funny?
>>
>> It's funny because to read the posts of certain Linux advocates, I need
>> to use my non-Linux system.  They are trying to argue that Linux is
>> better than Mac and Windows, yet their posts are better read on
>> non-Linux.  That's hilarious.
> 
> Well, I think it's hilarious that you simply don't fix your locale
> settings on your Linux box.
> 

It is quite strange indeed that I have none of those "problems"
And my system is set up to use UTF-8 by default, as is my newsreader
-- 
Failure is not an option. It comes bundled with your Microsoft product.

0
Peter.Koehlmann (13228)
10/7/2006 2:51:04 PM
On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 09:36:16 -0500, Linonut wrote:

> After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o' wisdom:
> 
>> Of course. Those were designed for technical users. Sit down with a
>> nontechnical user sometime and watch them struggle to parse the very
>> same instructions that seem crystal-clear to you.
> 
> Actually, I've sat down with users and watch them struggle with Windows
> GUI interface items that seem crystal-clear to me.

Whereas Windows comes pre-installed, people who don't even know what a
partition or a boot manager are, are now trying to install linux, usually
by themselves, on hardware that wasn't made for it. They usually want to
do so while keeping the use of Windows and they're further hampered by a
mindset acquired through years of using Windows.

Nontechie installs work sometimes, if by sheer luck their hardware just
happens to be 100% compatible. When the hardware doesn't work, they're
lost in an alien operating system where they don't have the slightest idea
what tools are available or how to use them. A good documentation system
can make the difference between an insurmountable problem and a quick fix
that gets them using Linux.

> "Build a system that is foolproof, and only fools will use it."  I
> should find out who said that.  Probably Ben Franklin.

Or, "You can make something foolproof, but you can't make it damn-fool
proof". Which is my own attitude towards Linux. IMO we ought to leave the
Aunt Tillie crowed to Microsoft. Between technical and business users, we
can establish a solid enough beachhead to gain good hardware support and
be immune to Microsoft's dirty tricks.

But if you do want Aunt Tillie to try using Linux, then the system is
going to have to do a lot better job of holding her hand. Manpages written
by and for computer experts don't cut it.

>> If you want a good
>> application for this project, have them install and configure
>> libpam-encfs on Ubuntu and set up an encrypted home directory, entirely
>> on their own. A persistent user may get it eventually, but I bet you
>> see them experience a lot more frustration than should be the case with
>> a user-friendly distro.
> 
> I'd like to see them do something similar on Windows, actually.
> 
> "Okay Granny, encrypt your files.  Chop-chop!"

The typical Windows user is easily capable of installing and using a
filesystem encryptor under Windows. It's no more difficult than any of the
other pointy-clicky program. The hardest part would for Granny would be
remembering the passphrase. "Hmmm.... was that '100S3 11pS S1nk Sh1pS' or
'100S3 h1pS S1nk Sh1pS'? Damn this old-age memory loss!"

0
none9 (349)
10/7/2006 4:01:56 PM
arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> writes:

> On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 09:36:16 -0500, Linonut wrote:
>
>> After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>> 
>>> Of course. Those were designed for technical users. Sit down with a
>>> nontechnical user sometime and watch them struggle to parse the very
>>> same instructions that seem crystal-clear to you.
>> 
>> Actually, I've sat down with users and watch them struggle with Windows
>> GUI interface items that seem crystal-clear to me.
>
> Whereas Windows comes pre-installed, people who don't even know what a
> partition or a boot manager are, are now trying to install linux, usually
> by themselves, on hardware that wasn't made for it. They usually want to
> do so while keeping the use of Windows and they're further hampered by a
> mindset acquired through years of using Windows.
>
> Nontechie installs work sometimes, if by sheer luck their hardware just
> happens to be 100% compatible. When the hardware doesn't work, they're
> lost in an alien operating system where they don't have the slightest idea
> what tools are available or how to use them. A good documentation system
> can make the difference between an insurmountable problem and a quick fix
> that gets them using Linux.

According to the zealots, its all there. Except those of us who really
use Linux know this not to be true. Even Stallman has been pleading OSS
programmers to write documentation.

>
>> "Build a system that is foolproof, and only fools will use it."  I
>> should find out who said that.  Probably Ben Franklin.
>
> Or, "You can make something foolproof, but you can't make it damn-fool
> proof". Which is my own attitude towards Linux. IMO we ought to leave the
> Aunt Tillie crowed to Microsoft. Between technical and business users, we
> can establish a solid enough beachhead to gain good hardware support and
> be immune to Microsoft's dirty tricks.
>
> But if you do want Aunt Tillie to try using Linux, then the system is
> going to have to do a lot better job of holding her hand. Manpages written
> by and for computer experts don't cut it.

And that's the truth.

>
>>> If you want a good
>>> application for this project, have them install and configure
>>> libpam-encfs on Ubuntu and set up an encrypted home directory, entirely
>>> on their own. A persistent user may get it eventually, but I bet you
>>> see them experience a lot more frustration than should be the case with
>>> a user-friendly distro.
>> 
>> I'd like to see them do something similar on Windows, actually.
>> 
>> "Okay Granny, encrypt your files.  Chop-chop!"
>

Yup. On Ubuntu I have to recompile truecrypt for each & every kernel
update. Granny wont be able to do that.

> The typical Windows user is easily capable of installing and using a
> filesystem encryptor under Windows. It's no more difficult than any of the
> other pointy-clicky program. The hardest part would for Granny would be
> remembering the passphrase. "Hmmm.... was that '100S3 11pS S1nk Sh1pS' or
> '100S3 h1pS S1nk Sh1pS'? Damn this old-age memory loss!"
>

Good post : to the point, honest and balanced.


-- 
Who wants to remember that escape-x-alt-control-left shift-b puts you into
super-edit-debug-compile mode?
(Discussion in comp.os.linux.misc on the intuitiveness of commands, especially
Emacs.)
0
qadronhuark (2734)
10/7/2006 4:09:11 PM
On 2006-10-06, Oliver Wong <owong@castortech.com> wrote:
>
> "JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message 
> news:3aniv3-fma.ln1@nomad.mishnet...
>> On 2006-10-06, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>
>>> All the information that the user requires to install, configure, and use
>>> the application should be available from that single point without having
>>> to go on a lengthy search for documents on their hard drive and the web.
>>
>> That's a bit of a paradox actually.
>>
>> If it were a common problem in time for the docs to get put into
>> the distro then the distro itself should have fixed the problem. OTOH,
>> the nice thing about the web is that documentation doesn't have to remain
>> fixed.
>
>     Documentation isn't just for problems that are fixable in code. They're 
> also for giving the user information like "What does this program do?" or 
> "How do I turn on setting foo?" or "What's the difference between having 
> setting Foo 'on' or 'off' anyway?"

	...quite a bit of which falls under usual domain of the web and
dead tree reference in the WinDOS world.


-- 
	vi isn't easy to use.				 |||
							/ | \
	vi is easy to REPLACE.
0
jedi (14754)
10/9/2006 6:59:47 PM
On 2006-10-07, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 09:36:16 -0500, Linonut wrote:
>
>> After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>> 
>>> Of course. Those were designed for technical users. Sit down with a
>>> nontechnical user sometime and watch them struggle to parse the very
>>> same instructions that seem crystal-clear to you.
>> 
>> Actually, I've sat down with users and watch them struggle with Windows
>> GUI interface items that seem crystal-clear to me.
>
> Whereas Windows comes pre-installed, people who don't even know what a
> partition or a boot manager are, are now trying to install linux, usually

	I don't need to bother with either of these on a clean system.

	On a "legacy" system, no amount of handholding will help. The
end user is going to need to understand what's going on so they can
make reasonable choices about what they are going to do and why.

> by themselves, on hardware that wasn't made for it. They usually want to
> do so while keeping the use of Windows and they're further hampered by a
> mindset acquired through years of using Windows.
>
> Nontechie installs work sometimes, if by sheer luck their hardware just
> happens to be 100% compatible. When the hardware doesn't work, they're
> lost in an alien operating system where they don't have the slightest idea
> what tools are available or how to use them. A good documentation system

	...kinda like Windows.

	People like that just need to buy Macs. If they are unwilling or
unable to deal with the mechanics of being... well, a mechanic, then they
should not even go there.

> can make the difference between an insurmountable problem and a quick fix
> that gets them using Linux.
>
>> "Build a system that is foolproof, and only fools will use it."  I
>> should find out who said that.  Probably Ben Franklin.
>
> Or, "You can make something foolproof, but you can't make it damn-fool
> proof". Which is my own attitude towards Linux. IMO we ought to leave the

	No. "foolproof" is about engineering and realizing that tight
vertical integration is really quite useful in this regard.

> Aunt Tillie crowed to Microsoft. Between technical and business users, we
> can establish a solid enough beachhead to gain good hardware support and
> be immune to Microsoft's dirty tricks.
>
> But if you do want Aunt Tillie to try using Linux, then the system is
> going to have to do a lot better job of holding her hand. Manpages written
> by and for computer experts don't cut it.

	It's no worse than Windows in this regard. It may not even be
any worse than a Macintosh. Some things simply require some conceptual
understanding from the end user. A general purpose computer is not
infact a toaster. It never was.


[deletia]

-- 
	vi isn't easy to use.				 |||
							/ | \
	vi is easy to REPLACE.
0
jedi (14754)
10/9/2006 7:07:44 PM
On 2006-10-07, Hadron Quark <qadronhuark@geemail.com> wrote:
> arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> writes:
>
>> On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 09:36:16 -0500, Linonut wrote:
>>
>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>>> 
>>>> Of course. Those were designed for technical users. Sit down with a
>>>> nontechnical user sometime and watch them struggle to parse the very
>>>> same instructions that seem crystal-clear to you.
>>> 
>>> Actually, I've sat down with users and watch them struggle with Windows
>>> GUI interface items that seem crystal-clear to me.
>>
>> Whereas Windows comes pre-installed, people who don't even know what a
>> partition or a boot manager are, are now trying to install linux, usually
>> by themselves, on hardware that wasn't made for it. They usually want to
>> do so while keeping the use of Windows and they're further hampered by a
>> mindset acquired through years of using Windows.
>>
>> Nontechie installs work sometimes, if by sheer luck their hardware just
>> happens to be 100% compatible. When the hardware doesn't work, they're
>> lost in an alien operating system where they don't have the slightest idea
>> what tools are available or how to use them. A good documentation system
>> can make the difference between an insurmountable problem and a quick fix
>> that gets them using Linux.
>
> According to the zealots, its all there. Except those of us who really
> use Linux know this not to be true. Even Stallman has been pleading OSS
> programmers to write documentation.

	Real end users don't bother with the documentation.

	Stallman is the sort of advanced power user & developer that would
actually bother to look at that sort of thing. The rest of the userbase
(especially on Windows) is never going to look at that sort of stuff.

	That's why stuff like the Mac was developed in the first place.


[deletia]
>>> 
>>> I'd like to see them do something similar on Windows, actually.
>>> 
>>> "Okay Granny, encrypt your files.  Chop-chop!"
>>
>
> Yup. On Ubuntu I have to recompile truecrypt for each & every kernel
> update. Granny wont be able to do that.
>
>> The typical Windows user is easily capable of installing and using a
>> filesystem encryptor under Windows. It's no more difficult than any of the
>> other pointy-clicky program. The hardest part would for Granny would be
>> remembering the passphrase. "Hmmm.... was that '100S3 11pS S1nk Sh1pS' or
>> '100S3 h1pS S1nk Sh1pS'? Damn this old-age memory loss!"
>>
>
> Good post : to the point, honest and balanced.

	You're both on crack.

	The average Windows user wouldn't even have any clue what a file
encryptor is for and may very well have problems downloading ANYTHING from
the web. 

	This is a key problem that both of you seem woefully out of touch
with. Granny will look at you when you tell her that she needs to encrypt
her files and her eyes will immediately gloss over.

	Nevermind the technical implemention details, you will lose her
as soon as you bring up the concept.

-- 
	vi isn't easy to use.				 |||
							/ | \
	vi is easy to REPLACE.
0
jedi (14754)
10/9/2006 7:11:42 PM
On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:07:44 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:

> On 2006-10-07, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 09:36:16 -0500, Linonut wrote:
>>
>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>>> 
>>>> Of course. Those were designed for technical users. Sit down with a
>>>> nontechnical user sometime and watch them struggle to parse the very
>>>> same instructions that seem crystal-clear to you.
>>> 
>>> Actually, I've sat down with users and watch them struggle with
>>> Windows GUI interface items that seem crystal-clear to me.
>>
>> Whereas Windows comes pre-installed, people who don't even know what a
>> partition or a boot manager are, are now trying to install linux,
>> usually
> 
> 	I don't need to bother with either of these on a clean system.

I'm not talking about installing on a clean system. Like the part you cut
out said, "...usually by themselves, on hardware that wasn't made for it.
They usually want to do so while keeping the use of Windows and they're
further hampered by a mindset acquired through years of using Windows."

> On a "legacy" system, no amount of handholding will help. The end user
> is going to need to understand what's going on so they can make
> reasonable choices about what they are going to do and why.

Then I suggest you delete all the documentation on your own system,
because either you know how to do something or you need your hand
held.

>> by themselves, on hardware that wasn't made for it. They usually want
>> to do so while keeping the use of Windows and they're further hampered
>> by a mindset acquired through years of using Windows.
>>
>> Nontechie installs work sometimes, if by sheer luck their hardware just
>> happens to be 100% compatible. When the hardware doesn't work, they're
>> lost in an alien operating system where they don't have the slightest
>> idea what tools are available or how to use them. A good documentation
>> system
> 
> 	...kinda like Windows.

But it happens less often with Windows because all of that hardware is
designed for Windows and rarely does a Windows home user need to do a
more-complicated multiboot install.

> People like that just need to buy Macs. If they are unwilling or
> unable to deal with the mechanics of being... well, a mechanic, then
> they should not even go there.

Hey, look! We're in agreement! I said I was ambivalent about tailoring
Linux for the Aunt Tillie crowd, and here you are agreeing that Aunt
Tillie should use something besides Linux.



0
none9 (349)
10/9/2006 9:05:41 PM
On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:11:42 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:

> On 2006-10-07, Hadron Quark <qadronhuark@geemail.com> wrote:
>> arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> writes:

> 
> [deletia]
>>>> 
>>>> I'd like to see them do something similar on Windows, actually.
>>>> 
>>>> "Okay Granny, encrypt your files.  Chop-chop!"
>>>
>>>
>> Yup. On Ubuntu I have to recompile truecrypt for each & every kernel
>> update. Granny wont be able to do that.

Yup. It's not hard if you're an experienced Linux user, but it's a
bit much to ask of a beginner. 

>>> The typical Windows user is easily capable of installing and using a
>>> filesystem encryptor under Windows. It's no more difficult than any of
>>> the other pointy-clicky program. The hardest part would for Granny
>>> would be remembering the passphrase. "Hmmm.... was that '100S3 11pS
>>> S1nk Sh1pS' or '100S3 h1pS S1nk Sh1pS'? Damn this old-age memory
>>> loss!"
>>>
>>>
>> Good post : to the point, honest and balanced.
> 
>  You're both on crack.

No, I'm just not an elitist geek snob. Most people have better things to
do with their lives than play with computers. I've met a few users who
are intentionally dumb, but most are reasonably intelligent and try very
hard to help themselves. If they can't use an ostensibly "user-friendly"
OS, then either the OS was misrepresented or whoever created it has
utterly failed.

> The average Windows user wouldn't even have any clue what a file
> encryptor is for and may very well have problems downloading ANYTHING
> from the web.

And yet, Microsoft has seen fit to include filesystem encryption as a
standard Windows feature. Not that I'd trust any encryption tools coming
out of Microsoft, but that's a different issue.

> This is a key problem that both of you seem woefully out of touch with.
> Granny will look at you when you tell her that she needs to encrypt her
> files and her eyes will immediately gloss over.

Maybe you're woefully out of touch with Granny's intelligence. Encrypting
one's files is not a complicated concept, nor is process especially
difficult under Windows. Even the third-party filesystem encryptors are
child's play to install - just the usual pointy-clicky wizard. In use they
look just like a directory, except when you try to access it you're
prompted for a password.

> Nevermind the technical implemention details, you will lose her as soon
> as you bring up the concept.

You must have a pretty dumb Granny to think so little of grannys.


0
none9 (349)
10/9/2006 9:31:09 PM
On 2006-10-09, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:11:42 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
>> On 2006-10-07, Hadron Quark <qadronhuark@geemail.com> wrote:
>>> arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> writes:
>
>> 
>> [deletia]
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'd like to see them do something similar on Windows, actually.
>>>>> 
>>>>> "Okay Granny, encrypt your files.  Chop-chop!"
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Yup. On Ubuntu I have to recompile truecrypt for each & every kernel
>>> update. Granny wont be able to do that.
>
> Yup. It's not hard if you're an experienced Linux user, but it's a
> bit much to ask of a beginner. 

	Granny is never going to update her kernel.

	Granny will never think to update her kernel.

	Granny will never need to update her kernel.

>
>>>> The typical Windows user is easily capable of installing and using a
>>>> filesystem encryptor under Windows. It's no more difficult than any of
>>>> the other pointy-clicky program. The hardest part would for Granny
>>>> would be remembering the passphrase. "Hmmm.... was that '100S3 11pS
>>>> S1nk Sh1pS' or '100S3 h1pS S1nk Sh1pS'? Damn this old-age memory
>>>> loss!"
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Good post : to the point, honest and balanced.
>> 
>>  You're both on crack.
>
> No, I'm just not an elitist geek snob. Most people have better things to
> do with their lives than play with computers. I've met a few users who

	No. You're on crack.

> are intentionally dumb, but most are reasonably intelligent and try very
> hard to help themselves. If they can't use an ostensibly "user-friendly"
> OS, then either the OS was misrepresented or whoever created it has
> utterly failed.
>
>> The average Windows user wouldn't even have any clue what a file
>> encryptor is for and may very well have problems downloading ANYTHING
>> from the web.
>
> And yet, Microsoft has seen fit to include filesystem encryption as a
> standard Windows feature. Not that I'd trust any encryption tools coming
> out of Microsoft, but that's a different issue.

	...odd then that I've never heard mention of it until now
from ANYONE. This includes all the Lemmings that love to harp on 
ANYTHING that Linux is percieved to be missing.

	Your rant also ignores the problem that encryption may be
crap and easy to break. Underestanding the technical aspects of
your encryption will allow you to determine whether or not it's
even worth your time.

	Even if the UI was made by Apple, you still wouldn't be
able to get away from that particular problem.

>
>> This is a key problem that both of you seem woefully out of touch with.
>> Granny will look at you when you tell her that she needs to encrypt her
>> files and her eyes will immediately gloss over.
>
> Maybe you're woefully out of touch with Granny's intelligence. Encrypting

	Not at all. I actually support users like that.

	You obviously do not.

> one's files is not a complicated concept, nor is process especially
> difficult under Windows. Even the third-party filesystem encryptors are

	The simplified version of it is easy enough. The problem of course
is that it completely glosses over any meaningful details. The end user
can't evaluate the product without understanding the concepts behind what
they are doing or at least a little bit of the jargon.

> child's play to install - just the usual pointy-clicky wizard. In use they
> look just like a directory, except when you try to access it you're
> prompted for a password.
>
>> Nevermind the technical implemention details, you will lose her as soon
>> as you bring up the concept.
>
> You must have a pretty dumb Granny to think so little of grannys.

	Granny is a PE with 30 years of practical experience and several
patents to her credit.

	She is however not a mathematician, publisher, graphic artist,
cinemetographer, network engineer, musician or many of the other things
that tend to get glossed over by shiny happy user interfaces in computer
programs.

-- 

	Nothing today, likely nothing since we tamed fire,     
	is genuinely new: culture, like science and              |||
	technology grows by accretion, each new creator         / | \
	building on the works of those that came before.

				 Judge Alex Kozinski
				 US Court of Appeals
				 9th Circuit


 Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------        
                http://www.usenet.com
0
jedi (14754)
10/10/2006 1:16:42 PM
On 2006-10-09, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:07:44 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
>> On 2006-10-07, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 09:36:16 -0500, Linonut wrote:
>>>
>>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>>>> 
>>>>> Of course. Those were designed for technical users. Sit down with a
>>>>> nontechnical user sometime and watch them struggle to parse the very
>>>>> same instructions that seem crystal-clear to you.
>>>> 
>>>> Actually, I've sat down with users and watch them struggle with
>>>> Windows GUI interface items that seem crystal-clear to me.
>>>
>>> Whereas Windows comes pre-installed, people who don't even know what a
>>> partition or a boot manager are, are now trying to install linux,
>>> usually
>> 
>> 	I don't need to bother with either of these on a clean system.
>
> I'm not talking about installing on a clean system. Like the part you cut
> out said, "...usually by themselves, on hardware that wasn't made for it.
> They usually want to do so while keeping the use of Windows and they're
> further hampered by a mindset acquired through years of using Windows."

	Installing ANY OS on hardware that already has an operating
system on it that you want preserved is no trivial task. A nice
shiny copy of MacOSX that wasn't nodelocked to Apple hardware likely
wouldn't even insulate you from this.

	You are trying to blame Linux for an inherently difficult
problem that requires the end user to understand their own requirements
in a framework that is generally hostile to the installation of other
operating systems.

>
>> On a "legacy" system, no amount of handholding will help. The end user
>> is going to need to understand what's going on so they can make
>> reasonable choices about what they are going to do and why.
>
> Then I suggest you delete all the documentation on your own system,
> because either you know how to do something or you need your hand
> held.

	You're a moron. It has less to do with how to do what needs
to be done than it does with understanding what needs to be done.
This basic conceptual gap is why Windows users are so damn helpless
and Mac users aren't despite the fact that the Mac users have the
better "easier" user interfaces.


>
>>> by themselves, on hardware that wasn't made for it. They usually want
>>> to do so while keeping the use of Windows and they're further hampered
>>> by a mindset acquired through years of using Windows.
>>>
>>> Nontechie installs work sometimes, if by sheer luck their hardware just
>>> happens to be 100% compatible. When the hardware doesn't work, they're
>>> lost in an alien operating system where they don't have the slightest
>>> idea what tools are available or how to use them. A good documentation
>>> system
>> 
>> 	...kinda like Windows.
>
> But it happens less often with Windows because all of that hardware is
> designed for Windows and rarely does a Windows home user need to do a
> more-complicated multiboot install.

	"less often" is meaningless for the unlucky user.

	The fact remains that it's a crapshoot. The fact that it is 
allegedly more unusual will be of no consolation to the user that is
stuck searching for their Windows driver disks...

	...which BTW "lower the bar" for Windows.

	Most Windows users are going to be lost even if their hardware
is fully supported unless that support CAME WITH THEIR WINDOWS DISTRIBUTION.

>
>> People like that just need to buy Macs. If they are unwilling or
>> unable to deal with the mechanics of being... well, a mechanic, then
>> they should not even go there.
>
> Hey, look! We're in agreement! I said I was ambivalent about tailoring
> Linux for the Aunt Tillie crowd, and here you are agreeing that Aunt
> Tillie should use something besides Linux.

	I would not be surprised if I have been saying that here in this
very forum for LONGER THAN YOU'VE BEEN USING COMPUTERS OF ANY SORT.

	There is also a big difference between Auntie Moron installing 
Linux herself and merely using it on a day to day basis. Auntie Moron 
probably would not be able to handle the Vista upgrade either, nevermind
installing WinFoo from scratch.

	Infact, the local variant of Auntie Moron needs me to wipe and
reinstall a machine for her: a windows machine. It's infested to the 
point of being unusable.

-- 

	Nothing today, likely nothing since we tamed fire,     
	is genuinely new: culture, like science and              |||
	technology grows by accretion, each new creator         / | \
	building on the works of those that came before.

				 Judge Alex Kozinski
				 US Court of Appeals
				 9th Circuit


 Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------        
                http://www.usenet.com
0
jedi (14754)
10/10/2006 1:26:38 PM
"JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message 
news:3qiqv3-foh.ln1@nomad.mishnet...
> On 2006-10-06, Oliver Wong <owong@castortech.com> wrote:
>>
>> "JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message
>> news:3aniv3-fma.ln1@nomad.mishnet...
>>> On 2006-10-06, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> All the information that the user requires to install, configure, and 
>>>> use
>>>> the application should be available from that single point without 
>>>> having
>>>> to go on a lengthy search for documents on their hard drive and the 
>>>> web.
>>>
>>> That's a bit of a paradox actually.
>>>
>>> If it were a common problem in time for the docs to get put into
>>> the distro then the distro itself should have fixed the problem. OTOH,
>>> the nice thing about the web is that documentation doesn't have to 
>>> remain
>>> fixed.
>>
>>     Documentation isn't just for problems that are fixable in code. 
>> They're
>> also for giving the user information like "What does this program do?" or
>> "How do I turn on setting foo?" or "What's the difference between having
>> setting Foo 'on' or 'off' anyway?"
>
> ...quite a bit of which falls under usual domain of the web and
> dead tree reference in the WinDOS world.

    Or the built-in help, which I think is the point arachnid was trying to 
make.

    - Oliver 


0
owong (6177)
10/10/2006 3:25:03 PM
"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in message 
news:66ifv3-epk.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
>I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
> only, please -- regarding Linux.  There are a few, most
> of them rather technical, that I have personally, in no
> particular order.

    I downloaded a VMWare appliance containing Zimbra on Fedora Core 4 over 
the weekend and tried to set it up, and ran into several frustrations. The 
VMWare configuration was set up by the team that developed Zimbra itself, so 
presumably they knew what they were doing. Each of the following paragraph 
represents one unit of frustration I experienced.

    After getting the thing running (which was pretty painless; just had to 
run the VM image), I logged into the web-based administration panel, and saw 
a bunch of junk accounts (e.g. fjhsifyens@localhost.localdomain) So I 
selected them all and deleted them so I could start creating my "real" 
accounts. Turns out one of the accounts listed there was the admin account, 
and so by deleting it, I've kicked myself out of the system, with no way to 
get back in except to reinstall. I'd have like a "Are you sure?" prompt, 
especially in the context of deleting the account you're currently logged in 
as.

    So I reinstalled, and deleted the junk account, but kept the admin 
account, and created a personal user account for myself. But I didn't see 
any way to actually get any e-mail onto this Zimbra appliance. After a 
couple of hours of googling, it started to *SOUND LIKE* I'm supposed to 
configure "fetchmail" as a daemon, but no site actually explicitly said this 
(and I haven't managed to do this yet, so I don't know if this is indeed the 
solution, or if I'm heading towards a dead end).

    Anyway, so I'm reading the man page, and it basically says that I should 
run this program to configure fetchmail, (fetchmailconf perhaps? Don't 
recall the name right now), but it's a GUI app, and I'm at the console. So I 
get out of the man-reading program, and type stuff like "x", "startx", 
"kde", "gnome", etc., but none of them work. It seems like no GUI is 
installed on this machine. So now I have to spend time looking online on how 
to install KDE.

    I'm googling with keywords like "fedora core 4 install kde", but very 
few of the pages are helpful. They seem to assume that you've ALREADY got 
KDE installed, or are installing from the original installation CDs (e.g. 
"to install KDE, just check the 'KDE' checkbox").

    Eventually, I'm trying commands like "apt-get", which don't seem to 
exist on my system. I stumble upon "rpm", and that works, except I spent a 
couple of hours on it only to find out it's not what I want, as it seems to 
only install programs from RPMs I've already downloaded, instead of getting 
them from the repository. What I want is "yum".

    So now I'm running yum, but it's not like other package managers I've 
used. It seems to want me to put everything as command line arguments, 
instead of showing me a list of all available packages, and letting me 
choose which ones I want to install. I try stuff like "yum list", but it 
gives me a huge list. I'm can't find "kde" anywhere in there, but I do see 
"audacity" and I know that's a GUI app. So I figure if I tell it to "yum 
install audacity", it'll do its dependency resolution smartness and install 
SOME gui in there (whether it's KDE or Gnome I don't really care at this 
point). Unfortunately, partway through it tells fails with an error like 
"HTTP 404 libvorbis". It's trying a couple dozen mirrors, but they all fail.

    So now I guess my repository list is inaccurate or out of date or 
something. I see the text file where all the URLs of all the repositories 
are, but I have no idea what to replace them with (i.e. what are the "good" 
URLs to use).

    Out of desperation, I try "yum install kde", despite the fact that "yum 
list" did not list KDE as one of the packages available, but yum seems to 
accept this and attempts to install kde. Partway through, it bails out with 
a bunch of HTTP 404 errors, as above.

    This is the point where I "gave up for now" on installing KDE. During 
all of this, the way the Zimbra app was configured was for there to be only 
one account, "root", with password "zimbra". I figured it might be a good 
idea to create a user account, so I'm man-ing random keywords like "man 
user", and eventually find "man adduser". Seems straightforward enough, so I 
create an account for myself. CONTRARY what the documentation says, the 
adduser command never prompts me for a password, so I have no idea what the 
password for this new account is. I figure maybe it's the same as the 
current user's password or something (i.e. "zimbra").

    Anyway, I use su to switch to that user, and I don't get prompted for a 
password. I guess the root account doesn't get prompted when it tries to 
switch to another user. Anyway, no big deal, so I type "chpasswrd" (or 
whatever the command is; tab-completion helped me there) and it gives me 
some cryptic error message which I don't remember now. I guess I can't 
change my password. So log out of this user, and log out of root, and try to 
log in as the user. None of the passwords I try work. "zimbra" doesn't work 
for this account, "" doesn't work, etc.

    So I log back in as root, and switch to the user again and try the 
chpasswrd (or whatever it is) again to get the error message, copy and paste 
it into google, and I find some archived discussions. There are plenty of 
theories, all contradicting each other, and I have no idea which one is the 
"right" one. There's stuff like the problem is that your /etc/password (or 
whatever) file doesn't match your shadow file. There's stuff like to fix it, 
you should use the configuration program. Another post says no, no, don't 
use the configuration file, instead edit the file manually with pico. Yet 
another poster says pico has a bug in which it truncates a file after 1500 
lines, so use an editor, but don't use pico, etc.

    So I go to the files they're talking about and "less" them, and I see 
that there's a bunch of accounts there, and only "root" has a password (I 
recognize the tell-tale sign of an MD5 hash). All the others accounts (the 
one I created, and the builtin ones like "sendmail", etc) don't have 
passwords. And I guess it's one of those rules that accounts without 
passwords can't log in (they can only be su-ed).

    Anyway, in a stroke of pure luck, I decide randomly to use the root 
account and chpasswrd on the account I just created. That worked. The 
account now has a password, and I can log into it using that password. But 
it makes no sense to me: Why can the root change the password for this 
account, but the account itself cannot change its own password?

    Okay, so that's the end of my complains (13 of them). This last 
paragraphs is to praise Zimbra. From my playing around with the calendar 
features, it looks like a really well polished Outlook-replacement. I 
haven't got to use its e-mail features yet though, as I couldn't get 
fetchmail to work, if indeed fetchmail even is the solution to my problems 
(and not just a dead-end, as I mentioned above). Basically, I want to 
"fetch" the e-mails from my ISP's POP3 account, and downloaded it to the 
local machine so that Zimbra sees it and displays it. So am I correct in my 
assumption that fetchmail is what I want?

    - Oliver 


0
owong (6177)
10/10/2006 3:53:55 PM
On 2006-10-10, Oliver Wong <owong@castortech.com> wrote:
>
> "JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message 
> news:3qiqv3-foh.ln1@nomad.mishnet...
>> On 2006-10-06, Oliver Wong <owong@castortech.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> "JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message
>>> news:3aniv3-fma.ln1@nomad.mishnet...
>>>> On 2006-10-06, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> All the information that the user requires to install, configure, and 
>>>>> use
>>>>> the application should be available from that single point without 
>>>>> having
>>>>> to go on a lengthy search for documents on their hard drive and the 
>>>>> web.
>>>>
>>>> That's a bit of a paradox actually.
>>>>
>>>> If it were a common problem in time for the docs to get put into
>>>> the distro then the distro itself should have fixed the problem. OTOH,
>>>> the nice thing about the web is that documentation doesn't have to 
>>>> remain
>>>> fixed.
>>>
>>>     Documentation isn't just for problems that are fixable in code. 
>>> They're
>>> also for giving the user information like "What does this program do?" or
>>> "How do I turn on setting foo?" or "What's the difference between having
>>> setting Foo 'on' or 'off' anyway?"
>>
>> ...quite a bit of which falls under usual domain of the web and
>> dead tree reference in the WinDOS world.
>
>     Or the built-in help, which I think is the point arachnid was trying to 
> make.

	The same is true of Linux, SunOS or VMS.

-- 
	The best OS in the world is ultimately useless         |||
	if it is controlled by a Tramiel, Jobs or Gates.      / | \
0
jedi (14754)
10/10/2006 4:29:10 PM
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 08:16:42 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:

> On 2006-10-09, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:11:42 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>

>>
>> Yup. It's not hard if you're an experienced Linux user, but it's a
>> bit much to ask of a beginner. 
> 
> 	Granny is never going to update her kernel.
> 
> 	Granny will never think to update her kernel.
> 
> 	Granny will never need to update her kernel.

That's why she can't use filesystem encryption under Linux.

>>>> Good post : to the point, honest and balanced.
>>> 
>>>  You're both on crack.
>>
>> No, I'm just not an elitist geek snob. Most people have better things to
>> do with their lives than play with computers. I've met a few users who
> 
> 	No. You're on crack.

No, you're an idiot.

> 
>> are intentionally dumb, but most are reasonably intelligent and try very
>> hard to help themselves. If they can't use an ostensibly "user-friendly"
>> OS, then either the OS was misrepresented or whoever created it has
>> utterly failed.
>>
>>> The average Windows user wouldn't even have any clue what a file
>>> encryptor is for and may very well have problems downloading ANYTHING
>>> from the web.
>>
>> And yet, Microsoft has seen fit to include filesystem encryption as a
>> standard Windows feature. Not that I'd trust any encryption tools coming
>> out of Microsoft, but that's a different issue.
> 
> ...odd then that I've never heard mention of it until now
> from ANYONE. This includes all the Lemmings that love to harp on 
> ANYTHING that Linux is percieved to be missing.

You'd have to live in a cave never to have heard of filesystem encryption
under Windows. Scramdisk was the first. It was written for Windows 98
and designed for everyday people to use. As I noted earlier Microsoft has
included filesystem encryption as a Windows feature, and some app or other
is mentioned almost weekly in alt.comp.freeware. About a half dozen
programs exist for Linux and demand is so strong they're even thinking
about building it into the kernel. If you've never heard of people using
it before that just shows how very poorly informed you are. 

> 	Your rant 

"rant" = me blowing gaping holes on your silly arguments

> also ignores the problem that encryption may be crap and easy to break.
> Underestanding the technical aspects of your encryption will allow you
> to determine whether or not it's even worth your time.

Then I guess there's no reason for browsers to use SSL unless the user is
an expert on encryption and secure programming.

> 	Even if the UI was made by Apple, you still wouldn't be
> able to get away from that particular problem.
> 
>>
>>> This is a key problem that both of you seem woefully out of touch with.
>>> Granny will look at you when you tell her that she needs to encrypt her
>>> files and her eyes will immediately gloss over.
>>
>> Maybe you're woefully out of touch with Granny's intelligence. Encrypting
> 
> 	Not at all. I actually support users like that.

I feel sorry for them.
 
> 	You obviously do not.

You're obviously the one on crack.

>> one's files is not a complicated concept, nor is process especially
>> difficult under Windows. Even the third-party filesystem encryptors are
> 
> The simplified version of it is easy enough. The problem of course
> is that it completely glosses over any meaningful details.

Nonsense. You can use most Windows filesystem encryptors with no
understanding of what's going on. The most complicated concept one has to
deal with is choosing a strong passphrase.

> The end user can't evaluate the product without understanding the
> concepts behind what they are doing or at least a little bit of the
> jargon.

More silliness. The end user doesn't have to evaluate the product. That's
what experts are for. I'm not in any way qualified to evaluate the
security of Linux, but I choose and trust it anyway because of what the
people who *are* qualified have to say about it.  

>> child's play to install - just the usual pointy-clicky wizard. In use
>> they look just like a directory, except when you try to access it
>> you're prompted for a password.
>>
>>> Nevermind the technical implemention details, you will lose her as
>>> soon as you bring up the concept.
>>
>> You must have a pretty dumb Granny to think so little of grannys.
> 
> Granny is a PE with 30 years of practical experience and several patents
> to her credit.

Then she should have no trouble installing and using filesystem
encryption under Windows whether or not she needs encryption (and I do
know at least one granny who does, plus several younger Windows users who
keep their personal finances on encrypted filesystems).

> 	She is however not a mathematician, publisher, graphic artist,
> cinemetographer, network engineer, musician or many of the other things
> that tend to get glossed over by shiny happy user interfaces in computer
> programs.

Shiny happy user interfaces are what allows nontechnical people to
efficiently learn to use a computer. If you don't see that then they'd be
better off without your kind of "help".


0
none9 (349)
10/10/2006 4:54:58 PM
After takin' a swig o' grog, Oliver Wong belched out this bit o' wisdom:

> "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in message 
> news:66ifv3-epk.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
>>I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
>> only, please -- regarding Linux.  There are a few, most
>> of them rather technical, that I have personally, in no
>> particular order.
>
>     I downloaded a VMWare appliance containing Zimbra on Fedora Core 4 over 
> the weekend and tried to set it up, and ran into several frustrations. The 
> VMWare configuration was set up by the team that developed Zimbra itself, so 
> presumably they knew what they were doing. Each of the following paragraph 
> represents one unit of frustration I experienced.
>
>     <list snipped>

So why don't you complain to the people who set up this image?

-- 
   The three Rs of Microsoft support: Retry, Reboot, Reinstall.
0
linonut2 (5242)
10/10/2006 5:37:31 PM
"Linonut" <linonut@bone.com> wrote in message 
news:6eKdnehoTrjGR7bYnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Oliver Wong belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in 
>> message
>> news:66ifv3-epk.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
>>>I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
>>> only, please -- regarding Linux.  There are a few, most
>>> of them rather technical, that I have personally, in no
>>> particular order.
>>
>>     I downloaded a VMWare appliance containing Zimbra on Fedora Core 4 
>> over
>> the weekend and tried to set it up, and ran into several frustrations. 
>> The
>> VMWare configuration was set up by the team that developed Zimbra itself, 
>> so
>> presumably they knew what they were doing. Each of the following 
>> paragraph
>> represents one unit of frustration I experienced.
>>
>>     <list snipped>
>
> So why don't you complain to the people who set up this image?

    What makes you think I didn't?

    - Oliver 


0
owong (6177)
10/10/2006 5:40:12 PM
"JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message 
news:q2jsv3-j69.ln1@nomad.mishnet...
> On 2006-10-09, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:11:42 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:

>>> The average Windows user wouldn't even have any clue what a file
>>> encryptor is for and may very well have problems downloading ANYTHING
>>> from the web.
>>
>> And yet, Microsoft has seen fit to include filesystem encryption as a
>> standard Windows feature. Not that I'd trust any encryption tools coming
>> out of Microsoft, but that's a different issue.
>
> ...odd then that I've never heard mention of it until now
> from ANYONE. This includes all the Lemmings that love to harp on
> ANYTHING that Linux is percieved to be missing.

    I don't know if you're implying that arachnid is lying or something, but 
he's not:

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/encrypt_overview.mspx?mfr=true

    On Windows XP, if I want to encrypt a folder, I right click on it, 
choose properties, click on the button labelled "Advanced", and check the 
box that says "Encrypt contents to secure data".

    I believe when you first install Windows XP, it asks you a question like 
"Do you want to prevent other users from accessing your documents? Note if 
you forget your password, you will not be able to recover your files" or 
something like that.

    I think the main reason you may not have heard people harp on it is that 
it's not a very sexy feature.

    - Oliver 


0
owong (6177)
10/10/2006 5:59:59 PM
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 08:26:38 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:

> On 2006-10-09, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:07:44 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>
>>> On 2006-10-07, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 09:36:16 -0500, Linonut wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o'
>>>>> wisdom:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Of course. Those were designed for technical users. Sit down with a
>>>>>> nontechnical user sometime and watch them struggle to parse the
>>>>>> very same instructions that seem crystal-clear to you.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Actually, I've sat down with users and watch them struggle with
>>>>> Windows GUI interface items that seem crystal-clear to me.
>>>>
>>>> Whereas Windows comes pre-installed, people who don't even know what
>>>> a partition or a boot manager are, are now trying to install linux,
>>>> usually
>>> 
>>> I don't need to bother with either of these on a clean system.
>>
>> I'm not talking about installing on a clean system. Like the part you
>> cut out said, "...usually by themselves, on hardware that wasn't made
>> for it. They usually want to do so while keeping the use of Windows and
>> they're further hampered by a mindset acquired through years of using
>> Windows."
> 
> Installing ANY OS on hardware that already has an operating system on it
> that you want preserved is no trivial task. A nice shiny copy of MacOSX
> that wasn't nodelocked to Apple hardware likely wouldn't even insulate
> you from this.

That's why people need good instructions.

> You are trying to blame Linux for an inherently difficult problem that
> requires the end user to understand their own requirements in a
> framework that is generally hostile to the installation of other
> operating systems.

I'm not trying to blame Linux for anything. I've already said that I don't
care if Grannie or Aunt Tillie can use it or not. It works for me and
that's all I ask of it.

All I'm doing is pointing out to those who want to attract such users,
that they need to improve the documentation system. 
 
>>> On a "legacy" system, no amount of handholding will help. The end user
>>> is going to need to understand what's going on so they can make
>>> reasonable choices about what they are going to do and why.
>>
>> Then I suggest you delete all the documentation on your own system,
>> because either you know how to do something or you need your hand held.
> 
> 	You're a moron.

You're an idiot.

> It has less to do with how to do what needs to be done than it does with
> understanding what needs to be done. This basic conceptual gap is why
> Windows users are so damn helpless and Mac users aren't despite the fact
> that the Mac users have the better "easier" user interfaces.

It's not the the Mac users you're trying to persuade to switch. It's those
windows users who have a certain way they want to use the computer. If
Linux doesn't offer it to them and Windows does, then they'll stay with
Windows.

>>>> by themselves, on hardware that wasn't made for it. They usually want
>>>> to do so while keeping the use of Windows and they're further
>>>> hampered by a mindset acquired through years of using Windows.
>>>>
>>>> Nontechie installs work sometimes, if by sheer luck their hardware
>>>> just happens to be 100% compatible. When the hardware doesn't work,
>>>> they're lost in an alien operating system where they don't have the
>>>> slightest idea what tools are available or how to use them. A good
>>>> documentation system
>>> 
>>> 	...kinda like Windows.
>>
>> But it happens less often with Windows because all of that hardware is
>> designed for Windows and rarely does a Windows home user need to do a
>> more-complicated multiboot install.
> 
> 	"less often" is meaningless for the unlucky user.

Which is totally missing the point. But I'm not surprised it's over your
head.

> The fact remains that it's a crapshoot. The fact that it is allegedly
> more unusual will be of no consolation to the user that is stuck
> searching for their Windows driver disks...

It's a crapshoot either way but given Windows' desktop dominance the odds
strongly favor the Windows user.

> 	...which BTW "lower the bar" for Windows.
> 
> Most Windows users are going to be lost even if their hardware is fully
> supported unless that support CAME WITH THEIR WINDOWS DISTRIBUTION.

Nevertheless, if you want to get Linux onto their existing systems then
they're usually the ones who are going to have to install it.

>>> People like that just need to buy Macs. If they are unwilling or
>>> unable to deal with the mechanics of being... well, a mechanic, then
>>> they should not even go there.
>>
>> Hey, look! We're in agreement! I said I was ambivalent about tailoring
>> Linux for the Aunt Tillie crowd, and here you are agreeing that Aunt
>> Tillie should use something besides Linux.
> 
> I would not be surprised if I have been saying that here in this very
> forum...

Well, then, why did you start this, since I made it clear from the
beginning that my comments were directed at those who want to attract new
nontechnical users?

> ...for LONGER THAN YOU'VE BEEN USING COMPUTERS OF ANY SORT.

Does "74154" ring a bell? If that's too early, how about "8008"?

> There is also a big difference between Auntie Moron installing Linux
> herself and merely using it on a day to day basis. Auntie Moron probably
> would not be able to handle the Vista upgrade either, nevermind
> installing WinFoo from scratch.

Provided her hardware is compatible, I've no doubt she could install a
distro like Ubuntu. The question is whether she can get Linux and its
applications to do the things she needs, using the current documentation
system as guidance.

> In fact, the local variant of Auntie Moron needs me to wipe and
> reinstall a machine for her: a windows machine. It's infested to the
> point of being unusable.

Yep, I know a few of those. However they're not representative of most of
the Windows users I know. Most, as I said before, are reasonably
intelligent people who try hard but just don't have a technical background
or any interest in acquiring one (nor is there any reason they should have
to). 

0
none9 (349)
10/10/2006 7:47:25 PM
On 2006-10-10, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 08:26:38 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
>> On 2006-10-09, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:07:44 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2006-10-07, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 09:36:16 -0500, Linonut wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o'
>>>>>> wisdom:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Of course. Those were designed for technical users. Sit down with a
>>>>>>> nontechnical user sometime and watch them struggle to parse the
>>>>>>> very same instructions that seem crystal-clear to you.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Actually, I've sat down with users and watch them struggle with
>>>>>> Windows GUI interface items that seem crystal-clear to me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Whereas Windows comes pre-installed, people who don't even know what
>>>>> a partition or a boot manager are, are now trying to install linux,
>>>>> usually
>>>> 
>>>> I don't need to bother with either of these on a clean system.
>>>
>>> I'm not talking about installing on a clean system. Like the part you
>>> cut out said, "...usually by themselves, on hardware that wasn't made
>>> for it. They usually want to do so while keeping the use of Windows and
>>> they're further hampered by a mindset acquired through years of using
>>> Windows."
>> 
>> Installing ANY OS on hardware that already has an operating system on it
>> that you want preserved is no trivial task. A nice shiny copy of MacOSX
>> that wasn't nodelocked to Apple hardware likely wouldn't even insulate
>> you from this.
>
> That's why people need good instructions.

	Entire BOOKS are written on this sort of thing.

>
>> You are trying to blame Linux for an inherently difficult problem that
>> requires the end user to understand their own requirements in a
>> framework that is generally hostile to the installation of other
>> operating systems.
>
> I'm not trying to blame Linux for anything. I've already said that I don't
> care if Grannie or Aunt Tillie can use it or not. It works for me and
> that's all I ask of it.

	That kind of user isn't going to be helped even by highly detailed
instructions and appropriately robust and easy to use tools. Even if they
had a dual partition Sony, it would be a bit of a stretch to expect them
of move everything off of the non-boot partition.

	People like that aren't going to use a computer in anything
other than a console/appliance mode. They won't do anything other 
than treat a PC as if it were a Mac, Amiga or Atari 800. They're simply
not interested or willing. Ablility doesn't even enter into the equation.

>
> All I'm doing is pointing out to those who want to attract such users,
> that they need to improve the documentation system. 

	Users like that don't even know the documentation system exist.

>  
>>>> On a "legacy" system, no amount of handholding will help. The end user
>>>> is going to need to understand what's going on so they can make
>>>> reasonable choices about what they are going to do and why.
>>>
>>> Then I suggest you delete all the documentation on your own system,
>>> because either you know how to do something or you need your hand held.
>> 
>> 	You're a moron.
>
> You're an idiot.

	At least I have firsthand experience with the subject at hand.

>
>> It has less to do with how to do what needs to be done than it does with
>> understanding what needs to be done. This basic conceptual gap is why
>> Windows users are so damn helpless and Mac users aren't despite the fact
>> that the Mac users have the better "easier" user interfaces.
>
> It's not the the Mac users you're trying to persuade to switch. It's those
> windows users who have a certain way they want to use the computer. If
> Linux doesn't offer it to them and Windows does, then they'll stay with
> Windows.

	It has nothing to do with what "linux offers". It's a matter of
what Apple offers or Dell offers or Gateway offers. They don't even know
what an OS is. Nor would they care. Even if they did, they would be 
terminally frightened by the prospect of not using what everyone else
is using.

	If they can't go to Best Buy, bring it home, uncrate it and 
then plug it in you've already lost them.

>
>>>>> by themselves, on hardware that wasn't made for it. They usually want
>>>>> to do so while keeping the use of Windows and they're further
>>>>> hampered by a mindset acquired through years of using Windows.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nontechie installs work sometimes, if by sheer luck their hardware
>>>>> just happens to be 100% compatible. When the hardware doesn't work,
>>>>> they're lost in an alien operating system where they don't have the
>>>>> slightest idea what tools are available or how to use them. A good
>>>>> documentation system
>>>> 
>>>> 	...kinda like Windows.
>>>
>>> But it happens less often with Windows because all of that hardware is
>>> designed for Windows and rarely does a Windows home user need to do a
>>> more-complicated multiboot install.
>> 
>> 	"less often" is meaningless for the unlucky user.
>
> Which is totally missing the point. But I'm not surprised it's over your
> head.

	For the given user, the sort that you presume to champion

	Windows is NOT 100% compatible.

>
>> The fact remains that it's a crapshoot. The fact that it is allegedly
>> more unusual will be of no consolation to the user that is stuck
>> searching for their Windows driver disks...
>
> It's a crapshoot either way but given Windows' desktop dominance the odds
> strongly favor the Windows user.

	Only if they are an expert. Otherwise, you are still left with
a situation that a novice is unable to deal with. Windows can still be
remarkably crude in this respect.

	...could blame the hw vendors I suppose.	


>
>> 	...which BTW "lower the bar" for Windows.
>> 
>> Most Windows users are going to be lost even if their hardware is fully
>> supported unless that support CAME WITH THEIR WINDOWS DISTRIBUTION.
>
> Nevertheless, if you want to get Linux onto their existing systems then
> they're usually the ones who are going to have to install it.

	Grannies don't install operating systems.

	Not Linux, Not Windows, & not even MacOS.

>
>>>> People like that just need to buy Macs. If they are unwilling or
>>>> unable to deal with the mechanics of being... well, a mechanic, then
>>>> they should not even go there.
>>>
>>> Hey, look! We're in agreement! I said I was ambivalent about tailoring
>>> Linux for the Aunt Tillie crowd, and here you are agreeing that Aunt
>>> Tillie should use something besides Linux.
>> 
>> I would not be surprised if I have been saying that here in this very
>> forum...
>
> Well, then, why did you start this, since I made it clear from the
> beginning that my comments were directed at those who want to attract new
> nontechnical users?
>
>> ...for LONGER THAN YOU'VE BEEN USING COMPUTERS OF ANY SORT.
>
> Does "74154" ring a bell? If that's too early, how about "8008"?
>
>> There is also a big difference between Auntie Moron installing Linux
>> herself and merely using it on a day to day basis. Auntie Moron probably
>> would not be able to handle the Vista upgrade either, nevermind
>> installing WinFoo from scratch.
>
> Provided her hardware is compatible, I've no doubt she could install a
> distro like Ubuntu. The question is whether she can get Linux and its

	...while destroying all of her data in the process.

> applications to do the things she needs, using the current documentation
> system as guidance.

	What makes you think she ever used the Windows documentation
system as a source of guidance?

>
>> In fact, the local variant of Auntie Moron needs me to wipe and
>> reinstall a machine for her: a windows machine. It's infested to the
>> point of being unusable.
>
> Yep, I know a few of those. However they're not representative of most of
> the Windows users I know. Most, as I said before, are reasonably
> intelligent people who try hard but just don't have a technical background
> or any interest in acquiring one (nor is there any reason they should have
> to). 

	Yeah, like Engineers and Doctors.

	People like this are lost once you start getting out OS install
disks. These are people that look at you with awe when you mention that
you're a computing professional and profess how they really are impressed
by that since they can't deal with the infernal machines themselves at all.

	Nevermind susie homemaker or some real estate broker.

-- 
	Linux: because everyone should get to drink the beer of their    |||
choice and not merely be limited to pretensious imports or hard cider.  / | \

 Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------        
                http://www.usenet.com
0
jedi (14754)
10/10/2006 8:40:51 PM
On 2006-10-10, Oliver Wong <owong@castortech.com> wrote:
> (and not just a dead-end, as I mentioned above). Basically, I want to
> "fetch" the e-mails from my ISP's POP3 account, and downloaded it to the
> local machine so that Zimbra sees it and displays it. So am I correct in
> my assumption that fetchmail is what I want?

Yes.  Your .fetchmailrc should look something like this, assuming the user on
your machine that will be running fetchmail is named localuser, and your
user name for your ISP's POP3 account is ispuser, with password isppass, and
that the POP3 server is mail.yourisp.com.

    set postmaster "localuser"

    poll mail.yourisp.com with proto POP3
        user "ispuser" there is localuser here
            password isppass
            ssl

Omit that last line if your ISP doesn't support SSL access to the POP3
server.

Set the permissions on .fetchmailrc so only you have access to it.  (I don't
recall for sure, but I think fetchmail will refuse to work if the
permissions are too loose).

Now when you run fetchmail, it should fetch all the mail from the POP3
server and deliver it to localuser.

When you are happy with everything,

    fetchmail -d N

will start it as a daemon, checking and fetching any new mail every N
seconds, and

    fetchmail -q

will kill the daemon.  Running fetchmail with no arguments while the daemon
is running will prod the daemon to check and fetch immediately.
0
reply_in_group (13194)
10/10/2006 9:39:43 PM
"JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message 
news:j3dtv3-gkh.ln1@nomad.mishnet...
> On 2006-10-10, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>>
>> All I'm doing is pointing out to those who want to attract such users,
>> that they need to improve the documentation system.
>
> Users like that don't even know the documentation system exist.

    I think the Windows XP users tend to know of the documentation system on 
WinXP. When you first log into your WinXP account, a balloon pops up 
inviting you to take a "guided tour" of XP. It's been years since I went 
through that tour, but I suspect it probably mentions that you can click 
"Start" and then "Help and Support" to reach the doc system.

    - Oliver 


0
owong (6177)
10/10/2006 10:04:58 PM
"Tim Smith" <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message 
news:12io4ov9otvlvd7@news.supernews.com...
> On 2006-10-10, Oliver Wong <owong@castortech.com> wrote:
>> (and not just a dead-end, as I mentioned above). Basically, I want to
>> "fetch" the e-mails from my ISP's POP3 account, and downloaded it to the
>> local machine so that Zimbra sees it and displays it. So am I correct in
>> my assumption that fetchmail is what I want?
>
> Yes.  Your .fetchmailrc should look something like this, assuming the user 
> on
> your machine that will be running fetchmail is named localuser, and your
> user name for your ISP's POP3 account is ispuser, with password isppass, 
> and
> that the POP3 server is mail.yourisp.com.
>
>    set postmaster "localuser"
>
>    poll mail.yourisp.com with proto POP3
>        user "ispuser" there is localuser here
>            password isppass
>            ssl
>
> Omit that last line if your ISP doesn't support SSL access to the POP3
> server.

    [more instructions noted, but snipped]

    Thanks. If I want to set this up for my housemates on the LAN, do I have 
to run an instance of the fetchmail daemon for each of their accounts, or 
can I put this under "root" and make one big file for all of us?

    - Oliver 


0
owong (6177)
10/10/2006 10:07:35 PM
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 15:40:51 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:

> On 2006-10-10, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 08:26:38 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>
>>> On 2006-10-09, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:07:44 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2006-10-07, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 09:36:16 -0500, Linonut wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o'
>>>>>>> wisdom:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Of course. Those were designed for technical users. Sit down with a
>>>>>>>> nontechnical user sometime and watch them struggle to parse the
>>>>>>>> very same instructions that seem crystal-clear to you.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Actually, I've sat down with users and watch them struggle with
>>>>>>> Windows GUI interface items that seem crystal-clear to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Whereas Windows comes pre-installed, people who don't even know what
>>>>>> a partition or a boot manager are, are now trying to install linux,
>>>>>> usually
>>>>> 
>>>>> I don't need to bother with either of these on a clean system.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not talking about installing on a clean system. Like the part you
>>>> cut out said, "...usually by themselves, on hardware that wasn't made
>>>> for it. They usually want to do so while keeping the use of Windows and
>>>> they're further hampered by a mindset acquired through years of using
>>>> Windows."
>>> 
>>> Installing ANY OS on hardware that already has an operating system on it
>>> that you want preserved is no trivial task. A nice shiny copy of MacOSX
>>> that wasn't nodelocked to Apple hardware likely wouldn't even insulate
>>> you from this.
>>
>> That's why people need good instructions.
> 
> 	Entire BOOKS are written on this sort of thing.
> 
>>
>>> You are trying to blame Linux for an inherently difficult problem that
>>> requires the end user to understand their own requirements in a
>>> framework that is generally hostile to the installation of other
>>> operating systems.
>>
>> I'm not trying to blame Linux for anything. I've already said that I don't
>> care if Grannie or Aunt Tillie can use it or not. It works for me and
>> that's all I ask of it.
> 
> 	That kind of user isn't going to be helped even by highly detailed
> instructions and appropriately robust and easy to use tools. Even if they
> had a dual partition Sony, it would be a bit of a stretch to expect them
> of move everything off of the non-boot partition.
> 
> 	People like that aren't going to use a computer in anything
> other than a console/appliance mode. They won't do anything other 
> than treat a PC as if it were a Mac, Amiga or Atari 800. They're simply
> not interested or willing. Ablility doesn't even enter into the equation.
> 
>>
>> All I'm doing is pointing out to those who want to attract such users,
>> that they need to improve the documentation system. 
> 
> 	Users like that don't even know the documentation system exist.
> 
>>  
>>>>> On a "legacy" system, no amount of handholding will help. The end user
>>>>> is going to need to understand what's going on so they can make
>>>>> reasonable choices about what they are going to do and why.
>>>>
>>>> Then I suggest you delete all the documentation on your own system,
>>>> because either you know how to do something or you need your hand held.
>>> 
>>> 	You're a moron.
>>
>> You're an idiot.
> 
> 	At least I have firsthand experience with the subject at hand.
> 
>>
>>> It has less to do with how to do what needs to be done than it does with
>>> understanding what needs to be done. This basic conceptual gap is why
>>> Windows users are so damn helpless and Mac users aren't despite the fact
>>> that the Mac users have the better "easier" user interfaces.
>>
>> It's not the the Mac users you're trying to persuade to switch. It's those
>> windows users who have a certain way they want to use the computer. If
>> Linux doesn't offer it to them and Windows does, then they'll stay with
>> Windows.
> 
> 	It has nothing to do with what "linux offers". It's a matter of
> what Apple offers or Dell offers or Gateway offers. They don't even know
> what an OS is. Nor would they care. Even if they did, they would be 
> terminally frightened by the prospect of not using what everyone else
> is using.
> 
> 	If they can't go to Best Buy, bring it home, uncrate it and 
> then plug it in you've already lost them.
> 
>>
>>>>>> by themselves, on hardware that wasn't made for it. They usually want
>>>>>> to do so while keeping the use of Windows and they're further
>>>>>> hampered by a mindset acquired through years of using Windows.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nontechie installs work sometimes, if by sheer luck their hardware
>>>>>> just happens to be 100% compatible. When the hardware doesn't work,
>>>>>> they're lost in an alien operating system where they don't have the
>>>>>> slightest idea what tools are available or how to use them. A good
>>>>>> documentation system
>>>>> 
>>>>> 	...kinda like Windows.
>>>>
>>>> But it happens less often with Windows because all of that hardware is
>>>> designed for Windows and rarely does a Windows home user need to do a
>>>> more-complicated multiboot install.
>>> 
>>> 	"less often" is meaningless for the unlucky user.
>>
>> Which is totally missing the point. But I'm not surprised it's over your
>> head.
> 
> 	For the given user, the sort that you presume to champion
> 
> 	Windows is NOT 100% compatible.
> 
>>
>>> The fact remains that it's a crapshoot. The fact that it is allegedly
>>> more unusual will be of no consolation to the user that is stuck
>>> searching for their Windows driver disks...
>>
>> It's a crapshoot either way but given Windows' desktop dominance the odds
>> strongly favor the Windows user.
> 
> 	Only if they are an expert. Otherwise, you are still left with
> a situation that a novice is unable to deal with. Windows can still be
> remarkably crude in this respect.
> 
> 	...could blame the hw vendors I suppose.	
> 
> 
>>
>>> 	...which BTW "lower the bar" for Windows.
>>> 
>>> Most Windows users are going to be lost even if their hardware is fully
>>> supported unless that support CAME WITH THEIR WINDOWS DISTRIBUTION.
>>
>> Nevertheless, if you want to get Linux onto their existing systems then
>> they're usually the ones who are going to have to install it.
> 
> 	Grannies don't install operating systems.
> 
> 	Not Linux, Not Windows, & not even MacOS.
> 
>>
>>>>> People like that just need to buy Macs. If they are unwilling or
>>>>> unable to deal with the mechanics of being... well, a mechanic, then
>>>>> they should not even go there.
>>>>
>>>> Hey, look! We're in agreement! I said I was ambivalent about tailoring
>>>> Linux for the Aunt Tillie crowd, and here you are agreeing that Aunt
>>>> Tillie should use something besides Linux.
>>> 
>>> I would not be surprised if I have been saying that here in this very
>>> forum...
>>
>> Well, then, why did you start this, since I made it clear from the
>> beginning that my comments were directed at those who want to attract new
>> nontechnical users?
>>
>>> ...for LONGER THAN YOU'VE BEEN USING COMPUTERS OF ANY SORT.
>>
>> Does "74154" ring a bell? If that's too early, how about "8008"?
>>
>>> There is also a big difference between Auntie Moron installing Linux
>>> herself and merely using it on a day to day basis. Auntie Moron probably
>>> would not be able to handle the Vista upgrade either, nevermind
>>> installing WinFoo from scratch.
>>
>> Provided her hardware is compatible, I've no doubt she could install a
>> distro like Ubuntu. The question is whether she can get Linux and its
> 
> 	...while destroying all of her data in the process.

Don't ever apply for a job on the Ubuntu crew.

>> applications to do the things she needs, using the current documentation
>> system as guidance.
> 
> 	What makes you think she ever used the Windows documentation
> system as a source of guidance?

Oh, I don't know. Maybe because I give other people more credit for
intelligence than you do?

>>> In fact, the local variant of Auntie Moron needs me to wipe and
>>> reinstall a machine for her: a windows machine. It's infested to the
>>> point of being unusable.
>>
>> Yep, I know a few of those. However they're not representative of most
>> of the Windows users I know. Most, as I said before, are reasonably
>> intelligent people who try hard but just don't have a technical
>> background or any interest in acquiring one (nor is there any reason
>> they should have to).
> 
> 	Yeah, like Engineers and Doctors.
> 
> 	People like this are lost once you start getting out OS install
> disks. 

So now everyone from Grannie to Engineers and Doctors is too incompetent
to install Linux?

You're pretty self-centered and you sure don't think much of other people.
That puts your psychological age at, oh, about 12 years old.

> These are people that look at you with awe when you mention that
> you're a computing professional and profess how they really are impressed
> by that since they can't deal with the infernal machines themselves at all.

"Awe" is overstated. Call it mutual respect - they're good at what
they do, I'm good at what I do. When I need their skills I call them. When
they need mine they call me. It's a pleasant arrangement.

0
none9 (349)
10/10/2006 11:33:45 PM
In article <HQUWg.7096$P7.1741@edtnps89>,
 "Oliver Wong" <owong@castortech.com> wrote:
> > that the POP3 server is mail.yourisp.com.
> >
> >    set postmaster "localuser"
> >
> >    poll mail.yourisp.com with proto POP3
> >        user "ispuser" there is localuser here
> >            password isppass
> >            ssl
> >
> > Omit that last line if your ISP doesn't support SSL access to the POP3
> > server.
> 
>     [more instructions noted, but snipped]
> 
>     Thanks. If I want to set this up for my housemates on the LAN, do I have 
> to run an instance of the fetchmail daemon for each of their accounts, or 
> can I put this under "root" and make one big file for all of us?

I don't know.  I've always done it with one instance of fetchmail per 
user.  You can have multiple "poll" sections in .fetchmailrc, so I'd 
*guess* that you could have one section for each user, but note that you 
then have to have each user's POP3 account information in that one file.
 (A quick Google found this: 
<http://www.linuxnetmag.com/en/issue2/m2fetchmail1.html> which seems to 
confirm that).

If you give each their own fetchmail daemon, then each can be in charge 
of his own .fetchmailrc, without you having to know their POP3 password.

It's worth spending some time with the fetchmail documentation, 
available at the main fetchmail site here:

<http://fetchmail.berlios.de/>

-- 
--Tim Smith
0
reply_in_group (13194)
10/11/2006 1:03:02 AM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 17:59:59 GMT,
 Oliver Wong <owong@castortech.com> wrote:
>
> "JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message 
> news:q2jsv3-j69.ln1@nomad.mishnet...
>> On 2006-10-09, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:11:42 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
>>>> The average Windows user wouldn't even have any clue what a file
>>>> encryptor is for and may very well have problems downloading ANYTHING
>>>> from the web.
>>>
>>> And yet, Microsoft has seen fit to include filesystem encryption as a
>>> standard Windows feature. Not that I'd trust any encryption tools coming
>>> out of Microsoft, but that's a different issue.
>>
>> ...odd then that I've never heard mention of it until now
>> from ANYONE. This includes all the Lemmings that love to harp on
>> ANYTHING that Linux is percieved to be missing.
>
>     I don't know if you're implying that arachnid is lying or something, but 
> he's not:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/encrypt_overview.mspx?mfr=true
>
>     On Windows XP, if I want to encrypt a folder, I right click on it, 
> choose properties, click on the button labelled "Advanced", and check the 
> box that says "Encrypt contents to secure data".
>

Funnily enough, I do the same on ubuntu, your point was? 

>     I believe when you first install Windows XP, it asks you a question like 
> "Do you want to prevent other users from accessing your documents? Note if 
> you forget your password, you will not be able to recover your files" or 
> something like that.
>
>     I think the main reason you may not have heard people harp on it is that 
> it's not a very sexy feature.
>

nor is it unique to Redmondware. 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFLEvKd90bcYOAWPYRApNKAKDQap9AE32Hm/GADP0rgAim3x+20gCfVeQf
iYVwL5YKYyVJ2PfJYjyNo7g=
=4hEm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
Jim Richardson     http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
"Hacking's just another word for nothing left to kludge." - Anon.
0
warlock (9522)
10/11/2006 1:41:30 AM
After takin' a swig o' grog, Oliver Wong belched out this bit o' wisdom:

> "Linonut" <linonut@bone.com> wrote in message 
> news:6eKdnehoTrjGR7bYnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Oliver Wong belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>>
>>>     I downloaded a VMWare appliance containing Zimbra on Fedora Core
>>>     4 over the weekend and tried to set it up, and ran into several
>>>     frustrations.  The VMWare configuration was set up by the team
>>>     that developed Zimbra itself, so presumably they knew what they
>>>     were doing. Each of the following paragraph represents one unit
>>>     of frustration I experienced.
>>>
>>>     <list snipped>
>>
>> So why don't you complain to the people who set up this image?
>
>     What makes you think I didn't?

You're ranting here.

-- 
   Windows XP. The operating system with a load in its pants.
0
linonut2 (5242)
10/11/2006 2:24:39 AM
Oliver Wong wrote:
> "Tim Smith" <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message 
> news:12io4ov9otvlvd7@news.supernews.com...
>> On 2006-10-10, Oliver Wong <owong@castortech.com> wrote:
>>> (and not just a dead-end, as I mentioned above). Basically, I want to
>>> "fetch" the e-mails from my ISP's POP3 account, and downloaded it to the
>>> local machine so that Zimbra sees it and displays it. So am I correct in
>>> my assumption that fetchmail is what I want?
>> Yes.  Your .fetchmailrc should look something like this, assuming the user 
>> on
>> your machine that will be running fetchmail is named localuser, and your
>> user name for your ISP's POP3 account is ispuser, with password isppass, 
>> and
>> that the POP3 server is mail.yourisp.com.
>>
>>    set postmaster "localuser"
>>
>>    poll mail.yourisp.com with proto POP3
>>        user "ispuser" there is localuser here
>>            password isppass
>>            ssl
>>
>> Omit that last line if your ISP doesn't support SSL access to the POP3
>> server.
> 
>     [more instructions noted, but snipped]
> 
>     Thanks. If I want to set this up for my housemates on the LAN, do I have 
> to run an instance of the fetchmail daemon for each of their accounts, or 
> can I put this under "root" and make one big file for all of us?
> 
If you want a single fetchmailrc file for everyone, create it in /etc.

i.e. /etc/fetchmailrc


Note the lackj of a . in front of the filename, that is important. You 
will still need to chmod it so that it is only writable by the user (not 
group).

You then just need multiple poll commands, one for each user/pop account 
you want to pull mail from.
0
usenet5048 (1061)
10/11/2006 10:14:02 AM
On 2006-10-10, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 15:40:51 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
>> On 2006-10-10, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 08:26:38 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2006-10-09, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:07:44 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2006-10-07, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 09:36:16 -0500, Linonut wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, arachnid belched out this bit o'
>>>>>>>> wisdom:

[deletia]

>>>> herself and merely using it on a day to day basis. Auntie Moron probably
>>>> would not be able to handle the Vista upgrade either, nevermind
>>>> installing WinFoo from scratch.
>>>
>>> Provided her hardware is compatible, I've no doubt she could install a
>>> distro like Ubuntu. The question is whether she can get Linux and its
>> 
>> 	...while destroying all of her data in the process.
>
> Don't ever apply for a job on the Ubuntu crew.

	Do-gooders rarely appreciate the help of experts.

	It typically gets in the way of their political agenda too much.

>
>>> applications to do the things she needs, using the current documentation
>>> system as guidance.
>> 
>> 	What makes you think she ever used the Windows documentation
>> system as a source of guidance?
>
> Oh, I don't know. Maybe because I give other people more credit for
> intelligence than you do?

	If you were paying attention, and honest (the real problem 
here), you would have seen where I stated that this wasn't a "problem 
of intellegence".

>
>>>> In fact, the local variant of Auntie Moron needs me to wipe and
>>>> reinstall a machine for her: a windows machine. It's infested to the
>>>> point of being unusable.
>>>
>>> Yep, I know a few of those. However they're not representative of most
>>> of the Windows users I know. Most, as I said before, are reasonably
>>> intelligent people who try hard but just don't have a technical
>>> background or any interest in acquiring one (nor is there any reason
>>> they should have to).
>> 
>> 	Yeah, like Engineers and Doctors.
>> 
>> 	People like this are lost once you start getting out OS install
>> disks. 
>
> So now everyone from Grannie to Engineers and Doctors is too incompetent
> to install Linux?

	The Linux install isn't the problem. Preserving their old data
in a system that more likely than not only has a single partition is the
problem.

	The fact that you seem eager to gloss over this seems to indicate
that you don't even really appreciate the problem.

	I guess you don't really care about "the customer's data".

>
> You're pretty self-centered and you sure don't think much of other people.
> That puts your psychological age at, oh, about 12 years old.

	No, I just realize that in this thing that we have here called
civilization that most people have tended to specialize in one thing or
another to the deteriment of many other skills. Some people may also have
no inclination or aptitude in some things.

	That's just the nature of "modern" society since about 7000 BC.

>
>> These are people that look at you with awe when you mention that
>> you're a computing professional and profess how they really are impressed
>> by that since they can't deal with the infernal machines themselves at all.
>
> "Awe" is overstated. Call it mutual respect - they're good at what
> they do, I'm good at what I do. When I need their skills I call them. When
> they need mine they call me. It's a pleasant arrangement.

	Nope.

	The current unreliable and constantly shifting nature of consumer
computers make them more difficult than is necessary to learn. The 
information hiding present in Windows machines actually make them LESS 
accessable to the common man since all the meaningful details are actually
made more arcane than they otherwise would be.

-- 

	Metallica is not worth the ruination of someone               |||
	who has pirated their music                                  / | \


 Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------        
                http://www.usenet.com
0
jedi (14754)
10/11/2006 1:33:33 PM
"Jim Richardson" <warlock@eskimo.com> wrote in message 
news:anutv3-i2a.ln1@dragon.myth...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 17:59:59 GMT,
> Oliver Wong <owong@castortech.com> wrote:
>>
>> "JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message
>> news:q2jsv3-j69.ln1@nomad.mishnet...
>>> On 2006-10-09, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:11:42 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>
>>>>> The average Windows user wouldn't even have any clue what a file
>>>>> encryptor is for and may very well have problems downloading ANYTHING
>>>>> from the web.
>>>>
>>>> And yet, Microsoft has seen fit to include filesystem encryption as a
>>>> standard Windows feature. Not that I'd trust any encryption tools 
>>>> coming
>>>> out of Microsoft, but that's a different issue.
>>>
>>> ...odd then that I've never heard mention of it until now
>>> from ANYONE. This includes all the Lemmings that love to harp on
>>> ANYTHING that Linux is percieved to be missing.
>>
>>     I don't know if you're implying that arachnid is lying or something, 
>> but
>> he's not:
>>
>> http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/encrypt_overview.mspx?mfr=true
>>
>>     On Windows XP, if I want to encrypt a folder, I right click on it,
>> choose properties, click on the button labelled "Advanced", and check the
>> box that says "Encrypt contents to secure data".
>>
>
> Funnily enough, I do the same on ubuntu, your point was?

    That arachnid was not lying. No need to get so defensive. I wouldn't be 
surprised if this were possible on most Linux distributions window managers, 
MacOSX, BeOS, QNX, and other "modern" OSes.

    - Oliver 


0
owong (6177)
10/11/2006 2:37:27 PM
"Linonut" <linonut@bone.com> wrote in message 
news:k62dnWs2ANV6yLHYnZ2dnUVZ_oadnZ2d@comcast.com...
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Oliver Wong belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> "Linonut" <linonut@bone.com> wrote in message
>> news:6eKdnehoTrjGR7bYnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Oliver Wong belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>>>
>>>>     I downloaded a VMWare appliance containing Zimbra on Fedora Core
>>>>     4 over the weekend and tried to set it up, and ran into several
>>>>     frustrations.  The VMWare configuration was set up by the team
>>>>     that developed Zimbra itself, so presumably they knew what they
>>>>     were doing. Each of the following paragraph represents one unit
>>>>     of frustration I experienced.
>>>>
>>>>     <list snipped>
>>>
>>> So why don't you complain to the people who set up this image?
>>
>>     What makes you think I didn't?
>
> You're ranting here.

I was replying to:

<quote>
"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in message 
news:66ifv3-epk.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
>I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
> only, please -- regarding Linux.
</quote>

    - Oliver 


0
owong (6177)
10/11/2006 2:39:25 PM
On 2006-10-11, Oliver Wong <owong@castortech.com> wrote:
>
> "Jim Richardson" <warlock@eskimo.com> wrote in message 
> news:anutv3-i2a.ln1@dragon.myth...
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 17:59:59 GMT,
>> Oliver Wong <owong@castortech.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> "JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message
>>> news:q2jsv3-j69.ln1@nomad.mishnet...
>>>> On 2006-10-09, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:11:42 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
[deletia]
>>> http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/encrypt_overview.mspx?mfr=true
>>>
>>>     On Windows XP, if I want to encrypt a folder, I right click on it,
>>> choose properties, click on the button labelled "Advanced", and check the
>>> box that says "Encrypt contents to secure data".
>>>
>>
>> Funnily enough, I do the same on ubuntu, your point was?
>
>     That arachnid was not lying. No need to get so defensive. I wouldn't be 
> surprised if this were possible on most Linux distributions window managers, 
> MacOSX, BeOS, QNX, and other "modern" OSes.

	It's a one liner actually.

	Plus, it's not restricted to a particular sort of file system (like ntfs)
and you can move the raw data around so you don't have to worry about decrypting
stuff just becuse you need to move it (like the ntfs option).

-- 
....as if the ability to run Cubase ever made or broke a platform.
                                                                  |||
	                                                         / | \

 Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------        
                http://www.usenet.com
0
jedi (14754)
10/11/2006 3:17:14 PM
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 14:37:27 +0000, Oliver Wong wrote:

> 
> "Jim Richardson" <warlock@eskimo.com> wrote in message 
> news:anutv3-i2a.ln1@dragon.myth...
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 17:59:59 GMT,
>> Oliver Wong <owong@castortech.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> "JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message
>>> news:q2jsv3-j69.ln1@nomad.mishnet...
>>>> On 2006-10-09, arachnid <none@goawayspammers.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:11:42 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> The average Windows user wouldn't even have any clue what a file
>>>>>> encryptor is for and may very well have problems downloading ANYTHING
>>>>>> from the web.
>>>>>
>>>>> And yet, Microsoft has seen fit to include filesystem encryption as a
>>>>> standard Windows feature. Not that I'd trust any encryption tools 
>>>>> coming
>>>>> out of Microsoft, but that's a different issue.
>>>>
>>>> ...odd then that I've never heard mention of it until now
>>>> from ANYONE. This includes all the Lemmings that love to harp on
>>>> ANYTHING that Linux is percieved to be missing.
>>>
>>>     I don't know if you're implying that arachnid is lying or something, 
>>> but
>>> he's not:
>>>
>>> http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/encrypt_overview.mspx?mfr=true
>>>
>>>     On Windows XP, if I want to encrypt a folder, I right click on it,
>>> choose properties, click on the button labelled "Advanced", and check the
>>> box that says "Encrypt contents to secure data".
>>>
>>
>> Funnily enough, I do the same on ubuntu, your point was?
> 
>     That arachnid was not lying. No need to get so defensive. I wouldn't be 
> surprised if this were possible on most Linux distributions window managers, 
> MacOSX, BeOS, QNX, and other "modern" OSes.

The function Jim was referring to just encrypts the file. It doesn't
set up an encrypted filesystem. I'm sure it's coming, though.

Anyway none of these issues have anything to do with my original point
vis-a-vis Linux beginners' need for a better documentation system.

0
none9 (349)
10/12/2006 12:58:45 AM
"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in message 
news:66ifv3-epk.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
>I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
> only, please -- regarding Linux.

See 
http://groups.google.ca/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/7c8a6c16a87f3a99

    It's an anecdote of how I converted my GF's laptop from WinXP to Ubuntu. 
It's mostly praises of Ubuntu, but there are a few complaints here and 
there. The main one being the recurring problem that Ubuntu didn't tell me 
when I had to restart to make the changes I had asked for take effect. (It 
happened for enabling Japanese Input support, for enabling internet time 
synchronizations via NTP, and also via changing the subtitle fonts in VLC, 
which I forgot to mention in that post).

    In Windows, you'd usually get a dialog saying "You have to restart 
[Windows/this application] in order for the changes to take effect. 
[Automatically Restart Now] [I'll manually restart later]"

    - Oliver 


0
owong (6177)
10/16/2006 4:04:44 PM
On 2006-10-16, Oliver Wong <owong@castortech.com> wrote:
>
> "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in message 
> news:66ifv3-epk.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
>>I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
>> only, please -- regarding Linux.
>
> See 
> http://groups.google.ca/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/7c8a6c16a87f3a99
>
>     It's an anecdote of how I converted my GF's laptop from WinXP to Ubuntu. 
> It's mostly praises of Ubuntu, but there are a few complaints here and 
> there. The main one being the recurring problem that Ubuntu didn't tell me 
> when I had to restart to make the changes I had asked for take effect. (It 
> happened for enabling Japanese Input support, for enabling internet time 
> synchronizations via NTP, and also via changing the subtitle fonts in VLC, 
> which I forgot to mention in that post).

	None of these should have required a full restart.

	At most, the whole lot of it should have been handled by logging
in and back out again if you really want to do things the Microsoft way.

>
>     In Windows, you'd usually get a dialog saying "You have to restart 
> [Windows/this application] in order for the changes to take effect. 
> [Automatically Restart Now] [I'll manually restart later]"
>
>     - Oliver 
>
>


-- 
     Apple: Because a large harddrive is for power users.
                                                                  |||
	                                                         / | \
0
jedi (14754)
10/16/2006 5:12:53 PM
"JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message 
news:l5rc04-5ci.ln1@nomad.mishnet...
> On 2006-10-16, Oliver Wong <owong@castortech.com> wrote:
>>
>> "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in 
>> message
>> news:66ifv3-epk.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
>>>I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
>>> only, please -- regarding Linux.
>>
>> See
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/7c8a6c16a87f3a99
>>
>>     It's an anecdote of how I converted my GF's laptop from WinXP to 
>> Ubuntu.
>> It's mostly praises of Ubuntu, but there are a few complaints here and
>> there. The main one being the recurring problem that Ubuntu didn't tell 
>> me
>> when I had to restart to make the changes I had asked for take effect. 
>> (It
>> happened for enabling Japanese Input support, for enabling internet time
>> synchronizations via NTP, and also via changing the subtitle fonts in 
>> VLC,
>> which I forgot to mention in that post).
>
> None of these should have required a full restart.
>
> At most, the whole lot of it should have been handled by logging
> in and back out again if you really want to do things the Microsoft way.
>
>>
>>     In Windows, you'd usually get a dialog saying "You have to restart
>> [Windows/this application] in order for the changes to take effect.
>> [Automatically Restart Now] [I'll manually restart later]"

    Okay, but my complaint was more about the fact that it didn't tell me 
what I was supposed to do, rather than that what I had to do was restart 
versus login/logout. For example, if it had said "You need to log out, and 
log back in, for these changes to take effect", then I would have known I 
didn't have to reboot, and would have saved myself some time. As it was, it 
didn't say anything, so I had no idea why it wasn't working, and wasted a 
lot of time, trying to google for an answer.

    - Oliver 


0
owong (6177)
10/16/2006 7:32:45 PM
Oliver Wong wrote:
> "JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message 
> news:l5rc04-5ci.ln1@nomad.mishnet...
>> On 2006-10-16, Oliver Wong <owong@castortech.com> wrote:
>>> "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in 
>>> message
>>> news:66ifv3-epk.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
>>>> I hope to solicit some complaints -- legitimate ones
>>>> only, please -- regarding Linux.
>>> See
>>> http://groups.google.ca/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/7c8a6c16a87f3a99
>>>
>>>     It's an anecdote of how I converted my GF's laptop from WinXP to 
>>> Ubuntu.
>>> It's mostly praises of Ubuntu, but there are a few complaints here and
>>> there. The main one being the recurring problem that Ubuntu didn't tell 
>>> me
>>> when I had to restart to make the changes I had asked for take effect. 
>>> (It
>>> happened for enabling Japanese Input support, for enabling internet time
>>> synchronizations via NTP, and also via changing the subtitle fonts in 
>>> VLC,
>>> which I forgot to mention in that post).
>> None of these should have required a full restart.
>>
>> At most, the whole lot of it should have been handled by logging
>> in and back out again if you really want to do things the Microsoft way.
>>
>>>     In Windows, you'd usually get a dialog saying "You have to restart
>>> [Windows/this application] in order for the changes to take effect.
>>> [Automatically Restart Now] [I'll manually restart later]"
> 
>     Okay, but my complaint was more about the fact that it didn't tell me 
> what I was supposed to do, rather than that what I had to do was restart 
> versus login/logout. For example, if it had said "You need to log out, and 
> log back in, for these changes to take effect", then I would have known I 
> didn't have to reboot, and would have saved myself some time. As it was, it 
> didn't say anything, so I had no idea why it wasn't working, and wasted a 
> lot of time, trying to google for an answer.
> 
At last, a legitimate complaint.  Something I get caught by sometimes.

Even though I know I need to stop/start a daemon to pick up a changed 
config, I sometimes forget to do it.  Then I spend a while trying to 
figure out why it doesn't work the way I want it to.

Then feel like an idiot when I figure out what I've done.

Of course the fix will only apply to GUI config routines, but even that 
would improve linux.

I hope you submitted this to the various groups responsible for the 
software you noticed it in.
0
usenet5048 (1061)
10/17/2006 7:30:49 AM
"Jamie Hart" <usenet@jhart.ath.cx> wrote in message 
news:1161070251.25727.0@proxy01.news.clara.net...
> Oliver Wong wrote:
>>     Okay, but my complaint was more about the fact that it didn't tell me 
>> what I was supposed to do, rather than that what I had to do was restart 
>> versus login/logout. For example, if it had said "You need to log out, 
>> and log back in, for these changes to take effect", then I would have 
>> known I didn't have to reboot, and would have saved myself some time. As 
>> it was, it didn't say anything, so I had no idea why it wasn't working, 
>> and wasted a lot of time, trying to google for an answer.
>>
> At last, a legitimate complaint.  Something I get caught by sometimes.
>
> Even though I know I need to stop/start a daemon to pick up a changed 
> config, I sometimes forget to do it.  Then I spend a while trying to 
> figure out why it doesn't work the way I want it to.
>
> Then feel like an idiot when I figure out what I've done.
>
> Of course the fix will only apply to GUI config routines, but even that 
> would improve linux.
>
> I hope you submitted this to the various groups responsible for the 
> software you noticed it in.

    Unfortunately, no. I looked into it. I think this is more a feature 
request than a bug, and the features are supposed to be entered on a mailing 
list, rather than their bug tracker. I haven't had access to e-mail the last 
two weeks because I accidentally deleted my Outlook while trying to get 
Zimbra working (basically, I was resizing the NTFS partition to take up half 
the physical harddisk to dual-boot with Linux, and the computer crashed in 
mid-resizing, essentially thrasing the entire NTFS partition). I still 
haven't got Zimbra working yet, so no e-mail for me...

    Feel free to submit it for me, if you want and if you're using Ubuntu 
(so you can replicate the problem). It's the in Ubuntu 6.06, in the 
administration -> time and date configuration tool. If you check "sync with 
internet time server" (and assuming NTP isn't installed yet), it'll install 
NTP and it won't tell you that you have to restart gnome or X or whatever it 
is that you have to restart to get it to work. There are other problems like 
that, but I don't have a list of steps to replicate them.

    - Oliver 


0
owong (6177)
10/18/2006 4:41:47 PM
Oliver Wong wrote:

> "Jamie Hart" <usenet@jhart.ath.cx> wrote in message
> news:1161070251.25727.0@proxy01.news.clara.net...

>>
>> I hope you submitted this to the various groups responsible for the
>> software you noticed it in.
> 
>     Unfortunately, no. I looked into it. I think this is more a feature
> request than a bug, and the features are supposed to be entered on a
> mailing list, rather than their bug tracker. I haven't had access to
> e-mail the last two weeks because I accidentally deleted my Outlook while
> trying to get Zimbra working (basically, I was resizing the NTFS partition
> to take up half the physical harddisk to dual-boot with Linux, and the
> computer crashed in mid-resizing, essentially thrasing the entire NTFS
> partition). I still haven't got Zimbra working yet, so no e-mail for me...
> 
>     Feel free to submit it for me, if you want and if you're using Ubuntu
> (so you can replicate the problem). It's the in Ubuntu 6.06, in the
> administration -> time and date configuration tool. If you check "sync
> with internet time server" (and assuming NTP isn't installed yet), it'll
> install NTP and it won't tell you that you have to restart gnome or X or
> whatever it is that you have to restart to get it to work. There are other
> problems like that, but I don't have a list of steps to replicate them.
> 
Sorry, but I use Mandriva.  I don't even use gnome, so can't replicate the
problem.

Still, I'll bear it in mind as it's the kind of thing that crops up fairly
regularly, I'll report any of this type of thing I find.

0
usenet5048 (1061)
10/18/2006 6:14:50 PM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

Linux, Linux, Linux
Hi, Interested in trying Linux? Well you came to comp.os.linux.advocacy for some reason, and you probably won't stay long. Here's a list of Linux distributions to choose from. Ubuntu http://www.ubuntu.com Newbie friendly and good support forums. SuSE http://www.novell.com/linux Pay for some support if you're not opposed to spending a little money. Fedora Core http://fedoraproject.org If you're more comfortable with your computer, try this one out. If you get frustrated, don't give up so easy. There is a wealth of information online for whichever distro you choose....

My Linux is not your Linux
To the denizens of comp.os.linux.advocacy! So many people demonstrate in this newsgroup that they know only a Linux of Hatred and Greed, of paranoia, and of a selfish sense of entitlement. They seem always to be behaving like monkeys in reaction to human dissenters, throwing feces at one another and beating their chests pretending to know something. My Linux is not that Linux. My Linux is the Linux of Love, of sharing, friendship, community. It is a uniquely human Linux and not one for monkeys. When I speak with fellow Linux users in real life (i.e. not in the monkeyhouse of COLA) they remin...

Why linux is linux
We don't destroy, we create. We don't imitate, we build. We are not a network, we are a personal OS. -- http://www.texeme.com Hi John, Attempting to Speak for Linux, You wrote: << We don't destroy, we create. We don't imitate, we build. We are not a network, we are a personal OS. >> Linux is more like this: << Like everything else, we consume and are consumed. We exchange ideas with everyone, to the point where it's almost impossible to track. We are artisans, not mass producers. >> Jeff Relf wrote: > Linux is mo...

I have Linux! I have Linux!
Ok, after two days of trying to get Windos 1900 installed and working , I sat down an hour ago and installed Linux. In an hour. Smirk. Ok, I will be honest. I did have some problems, but I believe they were of my own ignorance. 0) I started with trying to install Suse. However, I couldn't get it to install. Why? Because I didn't read the menu. There is a startup menu and the first entry is boot to harddisk. I thought that was the thing to do so I did it about 4 times. Then I gave up. However, I went back to it and subsequently realized that I should have chosen the 2nd men...

Linux!! Linux!!
From http://groups.google.ca/group/comp.os.linux.misc/about This month 16 t...@invalid.invalid 15 ahlstr...@launchmodem.com 14 goldee_loxnbag...@gmail.com 10 jhas...@newsguy.com 9 mil...@yoyo.org 9 hel...@deepsoft.com 9 hadronqu...@gmail.com 8 ronb02nos...@gmail.com 7 secret...@lxny.org 7 ignoramus8...@nospam.8345.invalid All time 5421 p...@oboe.it.uc3m.es 4508 michael+use...@www.heiming.de 3530 j...@dhh.gt.org 3066 hel...@deepsoft.com 2991 nike_jordan_...@yahoo.com.cn 2651 jdbe...@exit109.com 2474 gra...@visi.com 2216 nikejordangoo...@hotmail.com 1890 rkiesl...@mainmatte...

[News] [Linux] PS3 Linux Gets a Boost with Improved Linux Distribution
Free simplified Linux distro for PS3 ,----[ Quote ] | Want to do more with your Playstation 3? HELIOS Software and Terra | Soft Solutions have made available for free download a modified | version of the Yellow Dog Linux (YDL) distribution. `---- http://www.tectonic.co.za/view.php?src=rss&id=1545 The press release seems exciting and it also contains a neat video: http://www.prweb.com/releases/linux/ps3/prweb529090.htm Related: PS3 Yellow Dog Linux Install Videos ,----[ Quote ] | Due to the demand on the PS3 forums I am making some install videos of | Yellow Dog Linux. Sorry about ...

[News] [Linux] Choosing a Linux Distribution, Staying with Linux, and Giving Back
You Can Switch to Linux! ,----[ Quote ] | Rather than a monolithic operating system vendor telling me that I'm | not allowed to do something, there's an entire community | of developers who are working to make whatever features I want | possible! To me, that's the essence of what computing should | be about--enabling choice. `---- http://www.maximumpc.com/linux Choosing And Testing A Linux Distro ,----[ Quote ] | A final consideration when choosing a distro is the community support. | Ubuntu has by far the best forums for this, as well as the greatest | worldwide net of mirror...

How were u introduce to Linux & what was ur 1st Linux OS???
my experience is available at http://groups.google.co.in/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/browse_thread/thread/6fb0ed2888acab2e?hl=en# v cube wrote: > my experience is available at > http://groups.google.co.in/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/browse_thread thread/6fb0ed2888acab2e?hl=en# You should try all the livecds. They are free to copy and boot up without having to install - saves you days of work when evaluating different distros. http://www.livecdlist.com free to copy and install on as many machines as you wish. PCs a heck of a lot cheap these days too. At least 3 different Linux PCs ...

Linux Brochure Project (LBP)--Linux Advocacy & Publicity
Your organization may be interested in the Linux Brochure Project hosted on SourceForge. This project was developed because the Victoria Linux User Group (VLUG) wanted to produce their brochure using open source tools rather than proprietary ones. We registered it at SourceForge so that any Linux LUG and other advocacy groups could use the software to produce their own brochure. This project has been written up by LWN (http://lwn.net/Articles/51938/). See below for project details. Barbara Irwin Publicity Coordinator, VLUG ------------------------------------------------------...

[News] [Linux] Yet Another Linux Distribution Approaches Carrier Grade Linux Compliance
NEP's Linux distro nears CGL 4.0 ,----[ Quote ] | The first network equipment provider (NEP) to roll its own Carrier | Grade Linux (CGL) distribution has launched a new version. | Performance Technologies, Inc. (PTI) says NexusWare version 12 | adds support for PowerPC processor architectures, along with | features aimed at CGL 4.0 readiness. `---- http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS2164884955.html Related: Open Source Development Labs' Carrier Grade Linux Working Group Joins the Mountain View Alliance ,----[ Summary ] | OSDL participation brings off-the-shelf platform OS to ...

Linux Brochure Project (LBP)--Linux Advocacy & Publicity #2
Your organization may be interested in the Linux Brochure Project hosted on SourceForge. This project was developed because the Victoria Linux User Group (VLUG) wanted to produce their brochure using open source tools rather than proprietary ones. We registered it at SourceForge so that any Linux LUG and other advocacy groups could use the software to produce their own brochure. This project has been written up by LWN (http://lwn.net/Articles/51938/). See below for project details. Barbara Irwin Publicity Coordinator, VLUG -------------------------------------------------------...

[News] [Linux] The Linux Foundation Improves Linux Printing
Linux Foundation Improves Printing Functionality in Linux With LSB Driver Development Kit ,----[ Quote ] | "The LSB DDK is a direct result of our workgroup efforts and will | make it easier to create distribution-independent printer driver | packages," said Till Kamppeter, OpenPrinting.org manager, The | Linux Foundation. `---- http://new.marketwire.com/2.0/rel.jsp?id=741867&sourceType=1 Related: Real-time Linux simulates toner motion for printer design ,----[ Quote ] | Concurrent reports that its commercial, real-time Linux | implementation for multi-processor AMD Opter...

Linux, linux, you mutter...
Vagrants, scaliwags and bums. That's what you advocates are. Drunk old men, wearing jute pants in the alley. LeeLee Sobiesky looks elegant in this picture: http://www.leeleesobieski.com/pics/lld/lld12.jpg -- Kent East Hill for Bush '04 Death to Kent West Hillians !!! DEATH TO KENT WEST HILL wrote: > > Vagrants, scaliwags and bums. > > That's what you advocates are. > > Drunk old men, wearing jute pants in the alley. > > LeeLee Sobiesky looks elegant in this picture: > > http://www.leeleesobieski.com/pics/lld/lld12.jpg > What is sh...

The non-Linux Linux
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Hurd http://www.archhurd.org/ The Hurd aims to surpass the Unix kernel in functionality, security, and stability, while remaining largely compatible with it. Can this compete with the now Google-backed Linux kernel? taka0038@gmail.com wrote: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Hurd > > http://www.archhurd.org/ > > The Hurd aims to surpass the Unix kernel in functionality, security, and > stability, while remaining largely compatible with it. > > Can this compete with the now Google-backed Linux kernel? Yes. In a...

[News] Everything in Mobile Devices is Linux, Linux, Linux....
Better Than Kindle? ,----[ Quote ] | While I'm thinking about all the things I'd do with it, this is what comes to | my mind: this thing cost around $400. There are few other devices that cost | that much these days: | | * Nokia N810 | * Asus eeePC 701 | * OLPC `---- http://justanystuff.blogspot.com/2007/12/better-than-kindle.html Here's a good early look at Android: Hands on with Android: XML Parsing ,----[ Quote ] | Here is an XML parser that I created to showcase Android’s UI. It retrieves | NBA, MLB and NFL scores off of my web server. The true beauty is ...

[News] [Linux] New Versions of Engarde Secure Linux, Core Linux, OpenTLE (Thai Linux)
EnGarde Secure Linux 3.0.14 Released ,----[ Quote ] | A fully functional secure Linux platform distribution, this release | features a vastly improved intrusion detection Attack Monitor. `---- http://www.linuxlookup.com/2007/may/04/engarde_secure_linux_3_0_14_released Core GNU/Linux 2.0 Released! ,----[ Quote ] | Core contains nothing beyond what is required to perform these tasks. | Core is primarily designed for experienced Linux users, though it has | found an audience with those looking to learn about the internals | and operation of a Linux system. `---- http://www.coredistro.org/ne...

[News] Linux, Linux, Linux at Acer (Phones and Tablets)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Acer CEO whips out iPad rival ,----[ Quote ] | Acer has shown off an Android-based iPad | alternative. `---- http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2010/05/27/acer_shows_ipad_tablet/ Acer Gets Official with ‘Stream’ ,----[ Quote ] | Acer has created a new 3D user interface that | features animations and a 'peeling' gesture to | unlock the phone. The lock screen lets users | read information without having to open | applications and a History panel provides quick | access to often-used apps. `---- http://www.androidg...

Linux Could NOT Have Invented Linux
The current view in Western technology is that Linus Torvalds invented Linux. Nothing could be further from the truth. The technical complexity and useability of Linux make it beyond the capability of what man could produce using the tools available in 1992. My theory is that Ancient Astronauts descended from the sky on 'Chariots of the Gods' and showed Linus *how* to write an Operating System. These alien visitors must have appeared as strange to the young Torvalds, and so he may have mistaken them for carpet vendors. -- w:04 On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 14:28:27 GMT, Erich Von ...

[News] Mainsoft Calls Mono with Linux "Linux 2.0"; Windows Becomes More Like Linux
Starting flag waved for Race to Linux 2.0 ,----[ Quote ] | In a bid to highlight the ease with which applications can be ported | to Linux, the Mono project IBM and Mainsoft will host the 'Race | to Linux 2.0'. `---- http://www.pcpro.co.uk/os/news/106826/starting-flag-waved-for-race-to-linux-20.html Shouldn't this be the other way around? Something like this... Linuxification of an XP desktop ,----[ Quote ] | His case is not the ideal one: keeping Windows for playing specific | games. Some other use cases are more legitimate though: | | * Having a Windows XP desktop at wo...

Another Blow To The So Called Linux Security
Read it and weep, Linux losers. http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105_2-5162348.html An analysis of hacker attacks on online servers in January by UK-based security consultancy mi2g found that Linux servers were the most frequently hit, accounting for 13,654 successful attacks, or 80 percent of the survey total. Windows came in a distant second with 2,005 attacks. A detailed analysis of government servers also found Linux to be more susceptible, accounting for 57 percent of all security breaches. On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 18:13:40 +0000, Dr Alw is a loser wrote: > Read it and weep, Linux lose...

[News] Mobile Linux Runs Palm OS Applications; New 3G Linux Phones; Open Linux Phone Made More Attractive
Mobile Linux running Palm OS apps demoed ,----[ Quote ] | Access hopes ALP and its Eclipse-based Developer Suite will | provide a long-awaited forward migration path for the many | thousands of "Garnet OS" (recently renamed from "Palm OS") | applications developed throughout the decades since "Palm-Pilot" | first became a household word, in the 1980s. `---- http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS2968683379.html Linux powers pair of 3G dual-mode phones ,----[ Quote ] | MontaVista says its device-oriented Linux operating system was | used in two new 3G business sma...

[News] A Look at GNU/Linux Distributions Igelle 1.0.0, Zenwalk Linux, Salix OS, and GoblinX
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Distro Hoppin`: Igelle 1.0.0 ,----[ Quote ] | Hey, people! Welcome to a brand new | installment of the Distro Hoppin` series! | I bet you've been waiting for this a long | time! Actually I KNOW you've been waiting | for this a long time. Not because you were | anxiously craving for my writing or | anything, but because it's been a friggin` | long time since the last hop. Be ashamed | of yourself, Danny. Promising to write a | post more often than once in a blue moon | and going ahead to extend that period to | once in an ic...

[News] Interviews: Linux Foundation Head on Linux Success; EnGarde Secure Linux Leader on Linux as Primary Solution
Q&A: Jim Zemlin touts the 'second phase' of Linux ,----[ Quote ] | The passion that Ubuntu generates is good for Red Hat and other vendors. We | need to keep our eye on that ball. Their success is ours. `---- http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9027838 The LXer Interview: Dave Wreski of EnGarde Secure Linux ,----[ Quote ] | Open source has slowly but surely shed its skin only as an "alternative" and | is now considered a primary solution. `---- http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/89907/index.html ...

[News] Linux is Linux is Linux, Not 'Cheap Windows'
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Reimagining The Desktop ,----[ Quote ] | KDE 4.1 goes a long way to solving that dilemma. `---- http://www.northdavisroad.net/2008/08/reimagining-the-desktop/ Linux should remain Linux ,----[ Quote ] | I disagree that Linux should concentrate on running native Windows apps. This | is exactly the opposite of what the community should be doing. If you notice | more and more companies are working to make Linux their base rather than | Windows. This frees them of paying tax to MS and stops MS from beating their | products with tighter Windows...

Web resources about - Call for Faults of Linux & Linux Distributions - comp.os.linux.advocacy

File:Distribution of Average Tax Rates (Individual Income Tax and Employee Payroll Tax) Buffett Rule.JPG ...
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government ...

Income distribution: Australia's highest earners think they are battlers
High income earners are reluctant to part with their tax breaks in part because they think of themselves as battlers, new research suggests. ...

Income distribution: Australia's highest earners think they are battlers
New research sheds light on why so many high income Australians are reluctant to part with tax breaks. It's because they don't think they are ...

Income distribution: Australia's highest earners think they are battlers
New research sheds light on why so many high income Australians are reluctant to part with tax breaks. It's because they don't think they are ...

eBay has no plans to fix “severe” bug that allows malware distribution [Updated]
Clever "JSF**K" technique allows hackers to bypass eBay block of JavaScript.

Global Venture Capital Distribution
Richard Florida published some stats on the distribution of global venture capital investment last week. His work focused on 2012 numbers so ...

Present day and historic distribution of lions
Present day and historic distribution of lions

Federal Judge Restrains Center For Medical Progress From Further Video Distribution
... and his ilk have more legal woes on their hands. This afternoon, U.S. Judge William Orrick issued a restraining order prohibiting the distribution ...

"Monthly Heroes" Partners with China Mobile for Digital Distribution
Crunchyroll News "Monthly Heroes" Partners with China Mobile for Digital Distribution Crunchyroll News Monthly Heroes, a manga anthology that ...

Disney/ABC Takes Over Distribution Of ‘RightThisMinute’, Clears It On ABC Stations
Viral videos show RightThisMinute , which has been airing in national syndication since fall 2013, distributed by MGM, has changed distribution ...

Resources last updated: 2/15/2016 10:09:03 AM