FOSS is a joke

[Shadow Skill]

Maybe no one will read this, most of you probably wont agree with me either but I really could care less at this point.


After using Linux extensively for about a year or so, I have come to the conclusion that while the software is generally free and open the very minds of the people who USE the software are closed up real tight, thus rendering FOSS virtually pointless since no one will really innovate it because they are too steeped in what amounts to religion. When I say there will not be anyone innovating I don't mean that the Kernel won't get better, that some more hardware won't get supported, what I mean is that the real problems facing Linux the ones that we actually control will not be fixed because of the religiosity of the Linux world.

We have a major issue of lacking familiar applications to draw in primarily Windows users, yet when we finally get a port of a somewhat popular software the complaints against the software are not based on the actual performance of the software but rather on the simple fact that it is not free, and that it is not open source. While I don't think paying whatever the price of the Windows version of Nero to use the Linux version is worth it I do think it is very good, and very important that the software was in fact released. Yet I see so many comments [Not just here but elsewhere.] that just dis the port on its face without actually judging the effectiveness [including ease of use.] of the product.

What is more we don't have a customer niche outside of programmers which does not guarantee a windfall of new users since Windows is king. I look at the approach of Apple gearing itself more towards professionals not necessarily involved in the field of IT and all I can say is that it was a master stroke because it allows them to make an OS that is suitable for development while still being suitable for professional non IT use and home use. People like graphic designers need more than what the GIMP has to offer according to what some other Linux users have expressed on other boards I have been to. Yet we have users actually saying “We do not need photoshop ported to Linux.” which essentially is saying “People who need to do things with graphic design should not use low cost Operating Systems because they are not meant to offer complete solutions to peoples problems. They are only meant to serve the alleged needs of programmers and network engineers.” This way of not thinking is very disconcerting to me, as it is distinctly narrowing the scope of Linux as a solution which automatically dooms the whole thing to failure.

We Do need things like photoshop and Nero ported to Linux, we do need solutions that users of the other major OS will recognize, we do need to make things as easy or even easier than Windows while still maintaining the power of Linux. Its not the lack of hardware support that is keeping people away from Linux, it is not even the vast difference between Linux and Windows that is stopping more people from moving to Linux; its the lack of focus on user space that is stopping more people from switching to Linux entirely or further adopting Linux to their computing.

What we do not need in anyway is a culture that refuses to face the problems of Linux itself by constantly relying on forking which doesn't actually help anything. Linux has been around for some time and yet we still have no common way to install software aside from the use of the source code which in certain cases means that one looses quite a bit of productive time waiting for a solution to install. The binary solution is totally incomplete because distros that use binaries as the primary install medium promptly break when you mix source code and the binary packages. Plus not every solution is released in the proper binary format for your fork if it has a binary at all.

What is required if we are going to really [I don't mean to be overly dramatic here but bear with me.] cut through the darkness is a completely transparent method of installing solutions on all forks. We can't keep running around with broken as all hell rpm's apt, yum, smart rpm, Portage, etc. Yet what do I see when someone suggests that Gentoo have official repositories to allow users to choose whether or not to install a binary or compile from source; I see the members of the community find various excuses as to why this cannot be done or outright calls for the person suggesting this to go use a binary fork [These don't even work for the reason I outlined earlier, so what they are really saying is that the person suggesting official repositories should not use Linux at all.] which of course is not going to bring us any closer to fork transparency. Instead of getting behind expanding the Portage system to truly becoming the model for all of Linux when it comes to fork transparency, the vocal users are actually saying that Gentoo should not seek to address this issue of lack of choice and wasted time. If binary fork's don't really work when it comes down to it and those that develop the rpm format either don't know or don't care that the chance of breakage skyrockets when mixing source with their package format what is the point of Linux and the FOSS movement at all?

FOSS doesn't mean anything at all if the people who make up the user base try as hard as possible to not face the realities of the situation with the OS, I am personally so tired of hearing complaints about their not being enough big name games being ported to Linux, or crummy ati drivers, and somewhat lacking hardware support when these same people complaining about those things refuse to support the act of porting big name software to Linux even if it is not FOSS. We have to make the user space as inviting as possible in order to get the businesses and non tech professionals to pick up Linux the games, hardware support, and big name software support will come when we do that because those are the people who will really drive the corporations to support Linux in truly huge numbers. Even with all of the growth of Linux it will remain a third tier OS if we the users don't shed this “1337 H4X0R” mental state. This is really the one thing keeping Linux from really making a splash outside of the IT world, we already have the technology but no one is willing to make the call to actually use it.

[Shadow Skill]

Continued:

With all of that said I use Linux because I am trying to find something that I can use in my daily life that will not be an exercise in constantly worrying about getting hacked or furiously patching various security holes that should not be as bad as they are in the first place. I am not using Linux so I can be cooler than the poor Windows user who suffers with no end in sight with Windows security holes and general “brokenness;” nor am I using Linux to mess with relatively pointless [Outside of system space.] optimizations. Running around trying five, six, or seven different operating systems is not really the mark of a true solution to a problem. Linux needs to set itself up as a complete solution users don't need to presented with 1000000000000000000 different forks for the various things people need to get done.

[james_in_denver]

I'm certainly not against somebody offering products for $$$ that run on Linux.

The larger problem Linux faces is with MS-Windows being pre-installed on every retail PC sold.

If you were to take "Joe Citizen", who had never used a computer before, and handed him a set of disks and an instruction manual, then I think that a Linux install would not be very much more difficult than a Windows install. And in many cases it would be easier than the Windows "Driver Disk Shuffle reboot" thing.

Yes, windows has marketshare, and that alone is (I think) Linux's greatest single hurdle. Everybody who has used a computer has almost certainly been exposed to windows. From their perspective, why change?

I think it's funny/sad that so many windows users take virii and BSOD's for granted, most don't know that there is an alternative.

And those that have heard about Linux, are so afraid of computers in the first place, that most will never bother to give Linux a chance.

[awdac]

Originally Posted by Shadow Skill

Maybe no one will read this, most of you probably wont agree with me either but I really could care less at this point.

I'll bite, mostly because your post is actually much less trollish than its title.

What is more we don't have a customer niche outside of programmers which does not guarantee a windfall of new users since Windows is king. I look at the approach of Apple gearing itself more towards professionals not necessarily involved in the field of IT and all I can say is that it was a master stroke because it allows them to make an OS that is suitable for development while still being suitable for professional non IT use and home use. People like graphic designers need more than what the GIMP has to offer according to what some other Linux users have expressed on other boards I have been to. Yet we have users actually saying “We do not need photoshop ported to Linux.” which essentially is saying “People who need to do things with graphic design should not use low cost Operating Systems because they are not meant to offer complete solutions to peoples problems. They are only meant to serve the alleged needs of programmers and network engineers.” This way of not thinking is very disconcerting to me, as it is distinctly narrowing the scope of Linux as a solution which automatically dooms the whole thing to failure.

Why is it so disconcerting? The entire paragraph above compares the growth and direction of Linux (and lumps in F/OSS too, which really seems particularly out of place in this context) to the business models of distinct corporations. It doesn't seem elitist to me in the slightest to think that not every operating system (particularly *great* server operating systems) should strive to be the perfect system for absolutely everyone that needs a keyboard occasionally to do his or her job. That truly seems like a wasted and futile effort. It's really an entirely different way of thinking--Unix-like, that is. Do one thing and do it really well. There is not the same "we need more users to make more money to get more users to make more money" ad infinitum (or until the gubmint puts a stop to it, or there's a people's revolt, or whatever) kind of mentality. F/OSS development has resulted in some truly great things: Apache, PHP, Mozilla, MySQL, Linux, et al. These have really changed the face of the internet and the world. Many proprietary "innovations" were responses to these sorts of things. The innovation is *strongest* in F/OSS because it reacts to the true needs of people, and not to the marketplace. Sometimes those forces may coincide, more often not.

It has ceased to surprise me when someone writes an article that confuses his or her own problems with those of Linux or the F/OSS world and fills it with generalities and straw men. At least in your case, you're relatively specific. The funny thing about F/OSS software is that it works or it doesn't get used. That's pretty good incentive to meet the innovation/security/stability balance point. The natural evolution of the software *does* take care of its own problems eventually. Universal installation would be nice, as long as it doesn't take away any of the features I like from the way I do it, and it doesn't add any complications that I don't want. And it needs to be accessible from the command line. And have a nice GUI when I want it. And a few other things that I won't know until I use it.

I happen to think that the apt-synaptic installation system is great, but there are *so many* that would disagree that it isn't even funny. I got rid of gentoo on my main box simply because waiting for my damn 450MHz K62 to compile every damn thing I wanted was too much. I sure am glad I have the choice not to use it. And on another machine, I just may put it on.

The vast majority of my posts on here are attempts to help others along because I do believe that Linux is a good thing. I speak well of Linux every chance I get and often recommend it professionally, but in no way do I think that Linux should strategize to overcome corporate entities. As soon as that becomes the focus, the fundamental differences (and choices) that make F/OSS great will be gone.

[Shadow Skill]

its disconcerting because the OS will grind to a halt if it cannot provide professional grade applications that are not nessecarily geared towards programmers or network administrotors. I was just using photoshop and Nero Linux as examples of the problem. The reason I include FOSS in this is because part of the idea is to foster innovation by a limitless amount of users but in fact there is so much religiosity involved that the innovation is occuring in a haphazard way. What is occuring is this, an OS has been created that is more powerful than the current king OS, but the OS is not exactly useable by an incredibly large number of people ignoring the lack of hardware support that is as good as OSX or Windows I am not considering this in my opinion because we don't directly control that.

[awdac]

Originally Posted by Shadow Skill

its disconcerting because the OS will grind to a halt if it cannot provide professional grade applications that are not nessecarily geared towards programmers or network administrotors.

Well, first of all, it's not the OS's responsibility to do that. There are *many* professional-grade, industrial-strength applications on free operating systems, even if the majority of those are for developers et al., and these applications alone will keep the application from grinding to a halt as they have for years. Probably the majority of the Internet servers are still running Free web servers on Free operating systems and Free databases. It really sounds alarmist to me to say that because everyone doesn't run a Free system at home that F/OSS will die.

Frankly, I think what you should consider even more disconcerting than "forks" is the legislation being passed and proposed dealing with software patenting, reverse engineering, and the like. You want something that could *really* cause the F/OSS movement to grind to a halt? Many of these proposed laws would. The European Commission's vote last week, the DMCA, Microsoft's patent application for XML word processing documents, etc. The worst thing to happen to F/OSS software would be to get rid of freedom -- and there are many who would have it that way.

[Omega Blue]

Originally Posted by Shadow Skill

its disconcerting because the OS will grind to a halt if it cannot provide professional grade applications that are not nessecarily geared towards programmers or network administrotors.

::

The best network administration tools are either available for Linux, some may also be exclusively so.

As for programming Eclipe is hard to beat. There are also all sorts of other tools such as version control, etc.

[james_in_denver]

Actually, what I would like to see is fewer, not more, features for your average "Joe User". Think thin-client, with the bulk of the O/S and applications software running someplace else, and let THEM be responsible for managing software packages, tools, updates, hardware configuration, etc.

All "Joe-User" usually uses are a Media Player, Word Processor, Calendar/Schedular, Web-Browser, Email client, printer interface, and maybe a spreadsheet or lightweight DB.

Much more than that, and you aren't talking "Joe User" anymore, then you are in the "Power User" group, and that's an entirely different marketing audience.

[fpoole]

Originally Posted by james_in_denver

Much more than that, and you aren't talking "Joe User" anymore, then you are in the "Power User" group, and that's an entirely different marketing audience.

Enabling power users is probably more important because it doesn't "remove functionality completely". The trick is to have multiple system configuration defaults, so that the mundane user isn't confused and the power users and professionals aren't storming off in contempt.

[Shadow Skill]

It IS the Operating Systems job to provide a complete solution, do not think of the term OS in terms of its technical reality in which case you are totally correct. Try to think of it the way consumers might think of Windows if they were shopping for it in a store. You are still talking about developers and network admins, they are not going to be the ones that help us achieve better drivers for various things because they are not a large enough segment of the consumer population. We already have the technology what we need now are the non tech power users [business professionals, graphic designers architects etc.] to really break the whole thing open. If this never happens there will not be any large enough numbers to actually prevent the things that are going on in Europe with patents and things like the DMCA. There are more people who take BSOD's for granted than their are that know of and are brave enough to attempt to use something that is very good generally at not crashing for absolutely no reason.

[awdac]

Originally Posted by Shadow Skill

It IS the Operating Systems job to provide a complete solution, do not think of the term OS in terms of its technical reality in which case you are totally correct. Try to think of it the way consumers might think of Windows if they were shopping for it in a store.

I guess I must not be understanding you at all, because Windows is a terrible example of a complete solution by an OS. Most people cannot come close to doing their jobs with a basic install of Windows. It almost always requires the addition (and usually purchase) of office software, graphics programs, design programs, etc. It was only recently that you could even have *basic* cd burning functionality (and still no iso-burning facility that I know of) with Windows. It's fairly impotent as OS base installs go. I don't know of too many people that actually go shopping for Windows. It generallly comes preinstalled on their boxes (if they don't buy a Mac) and then they have to go shopping for individual applications to get pretty much *anything* done. So it seems to me in that case, it has little to do with the features (or lack thereof) in an OS and much more to do with the fact that few in the category of users you're thinking of want to think about an OS at all, making james_in_denver's comments about extorted manufacturers all the more relevant and lucid.

You are still talking about developers and network admins, they are not going to be the ones that help us achieve better drivers for various things because they are not a large enough segment of the consumer population.

So if we're not talking about developers, who's going to write the drivers and software again?

If this never happens there will not be any large enough numbers to actually prevent the things that are going on in Europe with patents and things like the DMCA.

This is not entirely untrue, but I think it would be more effective to get Dell or HPaq or IBM or Toshiba or whoever to start selling PCs with Linux minus the Windows tax (say $100 cheaper or whatever). That's how you'll get your driver support and create a market voice for the products you want.

There are more people who take BSOD's for granted than their are that know of and are brave enough to attempt to use something that is very good generally at not crashing for absolutely no reason.

Well, I haven't had this problem for the most part in my regular uses of Windows over the past couple of years, and certainly not with XPPro. What does bother me is generally poor peripheral support (at least out of the box -- I have to download and/or install drivers for several printers and scanners and such) and the fact that I have to reboot for non-transparent "fixes" and patches or what should be innocuous changes to say network settings or whatever, among several other things. It still seems like it's poorly designed for networking and multiuser setups, particularly remotely, which is why sys- and net-admins so often seem to prefer Linux, including me.

I think in a lot of ways we're on the same page, if thinking about it a lot differently.

[flyfishin]

You are focusing way too much on the zealots in your complaint. There will always be those who complain about anything that isn't free , as in beer, or free, as in speech. They generate a lot of noise but they also have some good points on occassion. Every OS has it's zealots.
I think you are completely wrong when you mention Linux being in the dark and needing look a like Windows applications. We don't need look a like applications. We need better applications and in many cases we have them. Have you seen how simple it is to burn a CD in Gnome 2.8? Drag items into an open window, select File/Write to Disc. Need to burn an iso? Right click and select Write to Disc. It doesn't get any easier than that. I haven't used Nero but I did look at the screenshots. It looks exactly like gToaster. I didn't care for gToaster and I don't like the looks of Nero. Have you seen gnomebaker? It is much more elegant than Nero. I've shown many Windows people how easy the CD creation is on Gnome now and every single one of them loves it. That's what we need in FOSS.
I haven't used Windows in over 3 years so I have no comparison but the latest versions of gThumb are superb for managing photos. It reminds me a lot of iPhoto with its focus on simplicity and basic functionality. That's the kind of software we need in FOSS.
Have you used a usb flash card reader under Gnome 2.8? Have you used one on Windows without adding drivers? On Gnome 2.8 in FC3 I can plug in my card reader, pop in the card, and a little window pops up telling me it has found photos and asks if I want to import them. I've seen a Windows XP home machine with no drivers and how it works with a card reader. Windows users loved how it worked under Gnome. That's what we need in FOSS.
Do we need Photoshop and other proprietary applications? In some cases yes. For me Gimp works perfectly. For those who want/need Photoshop on Linux it all comes down to economics for Adobe. If the benefits outweigh the costs of a port they will do it. Community opinions don't matter to Adobe. With any other proprietary application it comes down to economics. If they can make money with a Linux port they will. If they can't they won't. I have a scanner that isn't supported by sane, an Epson 4180. Vuescan, however, does support it and I'm perfectly happy shelling out $90 one time for lifetime upgrades to the software. It works great, makes perfect scans, and is a snap to use. The developer has obviously seen that making a cross platform solution will generate the most sales for him and it doesn't add a whole lot to his costs. It makes perfect economic sense for him.
So, I would hardly call FOSS a joke. It isn't perfect but it it isn't a joke.

[Thomas Howard]

Yah, I would be very happy indeed if there was a version of Photoshop CS for linux. Even happier if there was Flash MX 2004 and Adobe Illustrator for it too. I would gladly fork out the $1200 or so required to get Photoshop if there was a version that would run on linux without Wine.

As for most other stuff, I have Firefox and Gaim which I used before on windows, I never got into MS word much so I am fairly indifferent as to what I use to open word files, as long as I can read it, Im happy and The Gimp is capable of some image editing, far more than MS paint, so it will do untill I can get Photoshop for linux. Also, K3B seems like a wonderful CD burning program, very pretty and seems very effective too.

Another thing that Fedora core (I havnt used many other distributions, I tried Xandros and was thoroughly unimpressed, FC3 is far better) needs is better GUI configuration tools, many average users would probably rather not use the CLI or have to edit text files to configure things like Samba (the GUI tool has not worked properly for me in the past), or the Nvidia drivers, or set up a 5 button mouse properly.

[Shadow Skill]

Someone said on another board that if it is the "zealots" that speak out the most and are the loudest they are in fact the community. I would have said however that they frame the consciousness of the body of users. Its the loudest members of the community that are perpetuating the psychosis that seems to inundate the whole movement. I think that those that have responded are not understanding that the things that I have outlined are not nessecarily problems I have. I think the Gimp is actually too much for what I do with images all I need is smething with minimal functionality all I really ever do is take desktop screenshots, but that doesn't mean I close my eyes to the lack of power a graphic designer would notice real quick.

Thomas you hit of the few nails on the head with configuration I have no clue what fool is trying to go after Windows non power users when your OS still requires manual configuration as the first second and third line of defense for one thing. A friend of mine who I got to install fc3 [all went well for him. ] remarked to me today that Redhat is trying to move too fast in trying to go after the XP user base given the current state of Linux. I assured him that it will not be an FC model [ultra bleeding edge.] that will be used but rather it will be something more like RHEL that would be used, but I couldn't disagree with his thinking that if they went for it now it would have the effect of driving people away from Linux.

[nephila]

Agreed. The problem is that most of the manufacturers, I was speaking to someone at adobe, believe that there is no market for the linux platform, they think that people use linux because its free and thus want free software (some linux users are like that) but they fail to realize that there are many of us who use linux purely because it is better, the fact that its free is just a bonus! And besides, Disney is running photoshop on linux using a windows emulator, now if that isn't a market then I don't know what is!