Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
Corel

Corel Looking To Sell Linux Operations? 142

PySloth wrote to us with a link to InformationWeek that speculates about what Corel might be doing differently soon. One of the possibilities is the sale of their Linux operations, which would be odd concerning the .NET portion of their deal with Microsoft.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Corel Looking To Sell Linux Operations?

Comments Filter:
  • "Why would we want to beat our heads against the wall trying to get people to switch from Microsoft Word?"

    For the good of humanity as a whole I'd say.
  • Corel faces still competition on many fronts, office, graphics, and Linux. Back when their deal with Borland fell through I predicted that they'd be looking for more stategic partnerships, particularly in the Linux area. The only notable thing I've ever heard about Corel Linux is the ease of use of its setup program.
  • If they don't have any Linux operations, then they CAN'T port .NET to Linux.. Right ?
  • Selling their Linux division is only one option being considered by Corel. They are also thinking about making some Linux aquisitions. According to the CEO:
    "To be successful in the Linux market, you need a wider product offering. There's got to be some kind of acquisition,"

    Why is this? The above statement doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Corel is already generating 10% of revenues from Linux, according to the article, so why do they need to change?

  • This would truly be bad.

    I tried Corel Linux 1.0 when it first came out. There were a number of good features, like being able to authenticate (graphically) via a windows NT domain right out of the box.

    I think Corel missed their market with their distro though. Linux has simply not broken into the desktop market in mass yet... and that was one of the things that Corel Linux was hoping for. Give it a few years and a Corel Linux-like distribution will probably do very well.

  • Corel are selling Linux because Linux is not suitable for desktop use. Let me give my experiences - I have been reading all about Linux and how great it is and how bad Windows 9x/NT/2000 is. Well I use both. I use Windows when I want to get things done, regardless of the GPF's Blue Screens, of Illegal Operations I experience. I just use Linux to play and dream of the day when it fully comes of desktop age.
    Face it Linux is not ready for prime time. Why, because I can't sit my mother in front of a Linux box and expect for her to learn it and to like it. Truth be known (and you have all experienced the same) I have problems with her sitting in front of Windows, just like I have problems with 80% of the users that I support.

    Four main (Bullshit) reasons for using Linux over Windows 9x/NT/2000:
    1) Linux is free. Most users of Windows are pirates. A friend or family member has bootlegged a copy for them. Besides most you bought your distributions (That's not free). So Linux being free is not a good reason.

    2) You get the source code of the OS. So what, I have never looked at the source. I never plan on looking at the source. So having access to the source is not a good argument.

    3) Linux is stable. So is DOS. The Linux GUI is no stable. Software packages crash all the time. Stability is not a good argument either.

    4) Linux is customizable. Really?!. Most users, if given the opportunity, other than changing the background would never customize Windows or any OS. It's too much work. That's not a good argument either. It's only a choice.

    So why are we people using Linux? Because Linux is Cool; and they are elite and like doing things the hard way - it's like people reading advanced philosophy it will never appeal to most people, and 'desktop philosophy' won't have mass appeal.

    I have a problem with the following:

    Lack of Productivity Software. (Yes, I like Word and Outlook).
    Lack of Fonts.
    Lack of. Popular games.
    Lack of Drive support.
    And no easy way of doing things.

  • The box for Draw 10 doesn't have Greta Garbo on it anymore. Instead, it just has a colorful swirl on a white background. How boring.

    I fear that the next move by Corel will be a cancellation of a product line; perhaps WordPerfect (since the deal with Microsoft, that seems logical).

  • Corel have proved themselves able to port/develop Linux software. Far easy for someone like Microsoft to buy experience than build it up internally.
  • I always thought it was a little strange that a graphics company tries to jump into the desktop OS market. It's way outside their core competency and not in line with their other product offerings, just to throw in a few corporate buzwords. Their marketing department certainly dosen't seem up to it. It's nice to see major old school (for the computer industry andyway..) companies supporting Linux, but it realy should be someone with a little OS experiance.

  • 18.5 million people are using down-revs of their flagship software, including many on DOS versions...and they're going to solve that problem by adding better VB support to the product?

    Good grief, man! Has their new head man used the DOS versions of the product versus the latest release? The DOS versions are responsive, elegant, and run on the piddlingest hardware you can keep running.

    The Windows and Linux versions are slow, and I haven't found either version particularly stable. The users they're trying to target have the PC equivalent of vi, and a DVD's worth of extra features isn't going to address the reasons these people still use the old versions: compatibility, stability, speed, cost, and familiarity.

  • Maybe I'm just not seeing your logic here, so I'd like to give you the chance to explain what you were thinking a little more clearly to me. Why would Microsoft need to own their own dist to port .NET to linux? I cant see how this would be a requirement for them (or anyone) ... Could you please explain how it is that you came to this (somewhat strange) conclusion?

    ---
  • it's a sinking ship.. and they are trying to salvage as much as possible.. what better than to grab onto something as big and over-inflated, and full of air like MS! ;>

  • Well, I've got about $1.50 in my pocket... anyone want to pass the hat and make 'em an offer?

  • I've said it before, I'll say it again: life is best when you connect a Windows desktop to a *NIX server.

    Conversely, it's gotta be rotten when you connect a *NIX desktop to a Windows server, but I've never been in that situation; so I really can't say.

  • I would agree with some of your points, but really the key point is that Linux isn't ready for idiots (most people).
  • this either talks of lack of foresight or about complete lack of business acumen. Corel did not start its Linux work too lonng back and now they are wanting to sell it off. Why did they start it? the market has not changed so significantly in this time. The percentages for Linux based stuff has increased if at all - and now Corel suddenly sees the "light" and figures its not the end of the tunnel but an approaching train. duh!
  • by MartinG ( 52587 ) on Friday November 17, 2000 @06:56AM (#617692) Homepage Journal
    > And no easy way of doing things.

    Wow. You've hit the nail right on the head there. Most people when they complain about Linux simply give vague complaints and inaccurate statements. You however manage to get the message across perfectly with your insightful, succinct analysis of the problem.

    Only yesterday, I was trying to use linux to do things and it was really hard. I phoned my support line and said "I can't seem to do things with Linux"

    "We get that complaint all the time" they said. Better off with windows I say. Well, okay it's not as stable as Linux, but what good is enterprise class stability in an OS that cant even "do things" ?
  • by update() ( 217397 ) on Friday November 17, 2000 @06:57AM (#617693) Homepage
    The Linux world has a collective delusion that if we just keep repeating that there's a large market for commercial desktop applications, it will somehow magically become true. Meanwhile, CmdrTaco is booting into Windows to play Diablo and then wonders why software vendors Don't Get It.

    Unfortunately, the reality is that the impressive market share numbers are driven by servers, farms and Red Hat partitions that the owner means to get around to using some day. And the folks who are actually using Linux anywhere near full-time on the desktop have been conditioned to believe that paying for software is an unfair imposition on them. Yeah, there's a market for Linux productivity apps but it's nowhere near enough to keep a company like Corel going.

  • Their goal should not be to make a product which everyone will switch to. Instead, they should be offering a *choice* for consumers. We desperately need anything to make it into the marketplace as a viable competitor to MS Office, even if it's just for the sake of the improvements MS will be forced to make to Office if they have some competition out there.
  • Which DOS? MS-DOS does not run in 386 protected mode. Plus, you don't get the networking, and other high-tech stuff associated with an advanced OS.

  • >Lack of Productivity Software. (Yes, I like Word and Outlook).
    Do you like VBS worms?

    >Lack of Fonts.
    [blacksun:/usr/share/fonts/truetype]: ls *.ttf | wc -l
    433
    Please explain how I'm missing fonts.
    >Lack of. Popular games.
    Yes and no. Only proven windows winners make it, and the sleepers (Homeworld, for instance) aren't there and never will be.
    >Lack of Drive support.
    What,exactly, does that mean? Got 3 IDE drives in my desktop and a few dozen SCSI in various servers.
    >And no easy way of doing things
    See above. How fast can you count the # of true-type fonts you have installed?
  • Corel has no vision. It has been in downward spiral ever since it decided it could do more than create a good graphics package. It chose the wrong markets. By the time they picked up Wordperfect, Office had already won the war and they failed to see it. Scrambling, and with nowhere to turn, they decide to adpot Linux and once again battle the giant. Subsequently, they decide to port their deprecated Wordperfect stuff to Linux, but do it with an ugly, ugly hack using Wine. WP over Wine is a pig and buggy, so it's generally seen as inferior to other, *free* office suites for Linux. Now they can't beat the giant *or* please their newly adpoted user-base. Meanwhile, Photoshop surpasses Draw and becomes the defacto standard for Windows graphics editing and creation. Michael is charged with insider trading, and nothing is heard of the charges afterwards, but he does step down. In comes the newbie who decides that maybe Linux isn't the right way to go. ~Maybe we should just give up and jump in bed with Microsoft~, and ~Maybe we should just aquire a company that has a clue about Linux~ Maybe you should give your head a shake. Now the newbie stands in the lookout atop the mast of a 4/5 sunken ship, attempting to sail this ship out of trouble. And still now, he wonders publically how he should approach sailing it. ~Hmm, maybe we should buy someone who knows how to sail~. Maybe you should.
  • There could be consolidation in the Linux sector. Market down, lots of companies in trouble now. Time for the losers to look for lifelines, and the winners to prey on panic and fear.

  • Correl borrowing from Microsoft to add to Linux suite of applications, thus creating a transparent conflict of interest? Or concern that Microsoft might taint it?

    Perhaps it just doesn't make money and they feel it's not the direction they want to go and simply sell it off to someone who would care. I was part of a spin off, once. There are good and clear reasons when you are on the inside, some anxiety, but you'd rather be spun than shut down.

    --

  • According to this article [zdii.com] on zdnet, Corel corp is "refocusing" not relinquishing their Linux products and plans. In this article Burney is quoted as saying: Corel's Linux team is "segmenting" its product line in a new way so that it will offer tailored file-, Web-, and print-server configurations of its Linux distribution, which is based on Debian Linux
  • Face it Linux is not ready for prime time. Why, because I can't sit my mother in front of a Linux box and expect for her to learn it and like it.

    You know, I've heard this argument a thousand times, and it's just silly. Just because the bottom of the computer literacy curve can't understand Linux does not make it a bad OS. I'm not your mother, and I use Linux almost exclusively. Unfortunately I had to learn something along the way, which most of the users who make the argument that "Linux isn't idiot proof" are unwilling to do.

  • No box of CorelDRAW has ever had Greta Garbo on it. It was Hedy Lamarr that sued Corel over the box.
  • How fast can you count the # of true-type fonts you have installed?

    C:\>dir \windows\fonts\*.ttf

    Any other questions?

  • Lack of Productivity Software. (Yes, I like Word and Outlook).
    Lack of Fonts.
    Lack of. Popular games.
    Lack of Drive support.
    And no easy way of doing things.


    Try the new Linux Mandrake. First time I was able to imidiately use Linux out of the box and get something done. Office suite in KDE2 is MS compatable, networking is a no brainer and e-mail is just as good as always. Fonts?? big deal, they have plenty. Drive support? Like what???? they support everything I use and can think of.... Easy? KDE2 is very Windows like, so of course any idiot can use it.

  • What I meant was that Corel was given a (as part of the deal with Microsoft) license to port .NET to Linux. If Corel stops their distribution and development of Linux, then they won't be using Linux (and then won't be porting Linux).
    I mean, why would Microsoft want .NET on Linux ? If that happens, then who would use Windows 2000/Windows ME to do stuff with .NET ?
  • I think that quite possibly you have a lot of valid concerns about Linux, and its viability as a competator in the consumer desktop market, however for your own sake, please do yourself the following favor. Sarcasm is never taken well. Dont present what could otherwise be a very legitimate point and ruin it by pointless use of sarcasm (quote: "...customizable. Really?!") . Dont force your opinion on people as teh be-all end all (quote: "Face it linux is not ..."). Profanity wont help you, especially when referring to a quote in sarcastic context (quote: "Bullshit"). And lastly, dont present evidence as factual without having the factual proof to back them up (quote [slashdot.org]). Heresay never got anyone anywhere. I hope I can find some very interesting arguments form you in the future, but right now, I feel like I cant take your comment seriously because of the aggressive nature you put forth. You bring arguments from a personal level rather than from an industry global level, which I believe is where the aggression stems from. Maybe you can take this into account and come forth from an APersonal perspective. [CK]

    ---
  • (off topic, I realize)

    1) Linux is free. Most users of Windows are pirates. A friend or family member has bootlegged a copy for them. Besides most you bought your distributions (That's not free). So Linux being free is not a good reason.
    Bingo! Exactly how many users out there are actually using a legitimate licensed copy of Win9X on their home machines? I'd say about 60%.

    Reason: The other 40% know someone who knows someone who has a brother that works in an office that has access to the MS Select or MSDN software subscription and took it home and burnt multiple copies for his family and friends. Copies from Select and MSDN don't require a CD KEY making it even easier to distribute and worry free when using the auto-update feature.

    The same thing goes for MS Office.

    I really don't think that the big software companies are concerned at all about making money at the retail level. They get all they need via business/OEM licensing. They simply stock the store shelves because it keeps them in the public eye... pure marketing.

    What I can't figure out is why they just don't give the O/S away for home use anyways (or even $10) because there's no way they're making money on it. Though I guess that if they give it away in the store, then they have to give it away to the OEMs, which would really cut into their profits.

    BTW, This is the reason why they are so intent on getting a subscription service up and running.

    -- kwashiorkor --
    Leaps in Logic
    should not be confused with

  • Your considerations on Linux not being ready for desktop show also that you are not ready for Linux at all. No one in the developer community says you that Linux should be a Windows-II. Yes it is a hassle to build an office worksation. But that also depends on what you really wanna build. If you want a 20 minutes installation on a "lemedofoyou" style to do typesetting then choose Windows. If your concerns are far from this and concern document manipulation, automatising services like fax, file transfer/archiving. backup, encryption, small server tasks and secured Internet then you should choose Linux or even BSD (frankly here Linux is not unique).
    The only good point you make is lack of popular games. Yes that is still a thing that Linux lacks of. But it is also a ++++ for offices as it concentrates people in more concrete tasks. At least presently :).
    On the rest you are only doing flamebait.

    Note: I have people working on desktop Linuxes. Even financial directors. And they don't want to see Windows even in rosy clothes. All that is needed on Windows, they can get on Linux. And besides they don't dig on code nor are developers but their demands are much more complex since Linux came to their desktops.
  • What I don't understand is how Linux is so hard to use. I mean Windows 3.0 is easier, and had *far less* development on its GUI than Linux.

    1. I guess it just shows why one company should make the whole OS (or at least integrate other people's work).

    2. Linux tries to work over major problems - X, which from a UI point of view is slow and primitive, Unix security models, which are useless for home users - I mean just imagine the first user with Linux - they won't have a clue about not being able to write different directories, never mind chmod and file permissions.

    The fact is that Linux will *never* be as easy to use as Windows - no integrated configuration, caused by the many different companies working on it, Unix-style rules about devices (permissions to play mp3s anyone?), different toolkits and widgets - most users can't even manage to learn one, no cross-application interaction - e.g., can't cut and paste between two different types of application. No support for advanced hardware (e.g., 3d acceleration - in the cases where there are drivers, the Linux distros snootily refuse to use them because they're not open source - as if the company should give away its secrets.

    The fact is that Linux/Unix will never get more than 10% desktop share - most people do not define themselves as computer users, but rather as people who happen to use computers. For these people all the 'nerd' advantages of Linux do not exist, and so they will use Windows.

    Perhaps Linux has a role on crippled one-function boxes (web tv, etc.), but as a multi-function computer Windows will continue to reign in its fully integrated existence.

    Companies are starting to recognize this, and are getting out; however, companies like Eazel, Helixcode, the Kompany, etc., still delude themselves that they can make money - Eazel by charging for services no-one will use, Helixcode by no means, and the Kompany by giving most of its software away (no company can afford to give most of its software away).

    The fact that Corel is so badly fucked is due to Linux. It just happens that Corel used to work under realworld principles of making money, whereas the opensource companies have been fortunate enough to have opensource rules, where you'll make money for services about 10 years in the future, and now that it is losing money, it is judged by those principles; Corel should get out now before it gets screwed any more.
  • They fell into the usual "I want to be Bill Gates" scenario that killed WordPerfect, Ashton-Tate, Lotus and Netscape (in various versions)

    • Microsoft has desktop apps so we should too
    • WordPerfect is available cheap
    • Buy WordPerfect
    • Realize that there's a reason it was cheap
    • Bet on the "next great hope" to try to get sales (in this case Java)
    • Pump lots of remaining cash into a Java version
    • Oops, no product - must be the wrong buzzword
    • Bet on the "next great hope" to try to get sales (in this case Linux)
    • Pump lots of remaining cash into a Linux version
    • Oops, no sales - must be the wrong buzzword
    • Wait a minute - we're out of buzzwords!
  • >>Lack of Productivity Software. (Yes, I like
    >>Word and Outlook).
    >Do you like VBS worms?

    I use Eudora, and I disable macros and I have .js/.vbs/etc set to open in Notepad. No worms.

    But that's beside the point: *productivity* is. At this time, Windows maximizes my ability to be productive. And as a contractor, it's really important that I not waste my time not being paid.

    >>Lack of Fonts.
    >433
    >Please explain how I'm missing fonts.

    I currently have 1356 fonts -- and about 80% of them are high-quality Bitstream or Adobe fonts. How many of your 433 are professional fonts?

    >>And no easy way of doing things
    >See above. How fast can you count the # of
    >true-type fonts you have installed?

    Took me about 30 seconds. Goodness, do you know how much time I waste each and every day just counting fonts? My god, I really do need to start using Linux.

    But in important things -- creating professional-quality page layout using Ventura Publisher, diagrams using Visio, and client communications using Word97 (because, damn it, that's what they're all using) -- it seems that Linux would result in (a) my not being able to do my work or (b) doing my work a lot slower/less capably/less efficiently.

    Except for the rare geek who feels a need to count fonts quickly, Linux is an overall loser on the productivity front. It simple does not have the tools and applications needed by people like me.

    And that is the key: **for people like me**. For you, Linux might be great. For me, it sucks rocks.


    --
  • I couldn't care less if my parents can't use Linux. I've advised them not to, because it has a steep learning curve. Having said that though, a lot of very intelligent people ask me to help out with their Windows setups, so the conclusion I've come to is that Windows isn't paticularly easy either for the computer non-literate, it just has more software and prettier pictures.
  • Face it Linux is not ready for prime time. Why, because I can?t sit my mother in front of a Linux box and expect for her to learn it and to like it.

    Fuck traditional users. Seriously. I've stopped recommending Linux to Windows-using friends because most people are so used to getting things spoonfed to them, they don't stand a chance. These people don't even know how to do simple things. I have friends come to me and ask me about an error message they get in Windows. For the love of god, why not go to Google [google.com], put in your error message, and search for the answer yourself? It's like taking your car to the mechanic and telling him it's not working, when what's really happened is you ran out of gas.

    1) Linux is free. Most users of Windows are pirates. A friend or family member has bootlegged a copy for them. Besides most you bought your distributions (That?s not free). So Linux being free is not a good reason.

    I think all of my friends who run Windows have at least one piece of pirated software on their computer. But that's not the point, and I can't make the sweeping generalization that all Windows users are pirates based on that small sample space. Just like you can't make the argument that "most of [us] bought [our] distributions." I would think that the opposite would be true. So for those people with some morals, the fact that Linux is FAIB (Free As In Beer) is a very compelling reason to use it.

    2) You get the source code of the OS. So what, I have never looked at the source. I never plan on looking at the source. So having access to the source is not a good argument.

    I have never looked at the source code. But that doesn't matter. Other people look at the source code. Other people contribute. Just because I don't have the skills to hack out a driver for some unsupported sound card doesn't mean that Open Source Software is of no benefit to me.

    3) Linux is stable. So is DOS. The Linux GUI is no stable. Software packages crash all the time. Stability is not a good argument either.

    Stability is not a good argument? I think we place our priorities in different areas. I like knowing that a glitch in code won't bring my system to a halt, force me to spend 5 minutes rebooting, and possibly cause data loss. Sure, Netscape crashes too frequently. But a Netscape crash costs me maybe 10 or 15 seconds, whereas a MSIE crash that brings the system to a halt would cost much, much more than that (impacting other programs and data in the process).

    4) Linux is customizable. Really?!. Most users, if given the opportunity, other than changing the background would never customize Windows or any OS. It?s too much work. That?s not a good argument either. It?s only a choice.

    Again, fuck most users. I realize that most people think things like this are "too much work." But there are a lot of us who actually enjoy doing a little bit of work to manipulate something into the way we want it to work. I think most Windows users would think writing a script out to be tedious. I think a lot of Linux users would find it enjoyable.

    ...it's like people reading advanced philosophy it will never appeal to most people, and 'desktop philosophy' won't have mass appeal.

    Again, we're back to that "most people" issue. And again, I have to say fuck most people. They aren't me.

    I have a problem with the following: (snip)

    Then don't use Linux, it's not right for you.
  • Hmm.

    Linux is not newbie friendly, agreed, but you need to chill and take some of your own medecine.

    The reasons you give for not liking Linux are false (except the word and outlook thing If you like word so much, why would you even bother trying Linux? Or better yet, use vmware).

    There are hundreds upon hundreds of fonts available in Linux.

    Check Loki's site www.lokigames.com for some very cool games available under Linux. There are more too.

    Drive support? You are clearly not qualified to give an opinion on matters of 'drive support'.

    Anyways, you are right in one thing... Linux can be difficult, and it's not for those who are not technically inclined, except under very controlled circumstances.

    If you are interested in *how* an operating system or the software you use works stick with Linux. If you could care less about how it all works, and you never want to have to do things manually (or learn how to automate them), then run from linux while you still can.

    I won't bash your reasons for disliking Linux, because to you they are reality and valid.

    Don't bash my reasons for loving Linux, and dismiss the OS as 'not ready for prime time'.

    If Operating Systems were judged strictly by their ease of use, the little thing called the Internet would never have existed, and you would would not have had the opportunity to exercise your hipocricy.

    No need to thanks us users of the 'not ready for prime time' Operating Systems.

  • I don't think it's right to simply mod a comment as flamebait because it doesn't agree with your worldview. Linux users would benefit from listening to what is wrong with Linux and acting upon it, rather than simply burying their head in the sand in the face of overwhelming evidence that Linux is not as easy to use as Windows.

    I mean really - do you think an AOL user could use Linux? No

    Could they use Windows? Yes.

    You turn it on, you save your files, you browse the net.

    Linux requires a level of understanding about computers - Windows does not. With Windows you just work, but with Linux you've got to understand concepts - file permissions, root, etc.

    Imagine this:

    non-computer-using person with no science/computing background goes into Walmart and buys modem.
    Takes home.
    Plugs modem in. Attaches modem to computer.
    Turns on machine.
    Windows detects modem automatically.
    User can now browse AOL.

    Do you think they could do this under Linux?
  • Ok, let's take the "Who is Corel's Market?" test.

    Is it:

    1. Uber-hackers
    2. Power UNIX users
    3. 1337 k1dd13s
    4. Average "dumb" desktop users

    Well, it isn't the top three, that leaves 4: Average "dumb" desktop users. Who, by most Power Users or even 1337 k1dd13s standards are morons when it comes to "computers." You do realize that in life outside of the tech croud, a "power user" is someone who is simply experienced with the interface? Someone who understands the quirks and can get things done, without having to ask for much help?

    The first thing that is taught in my college's Human/Computer Interaction (HCI) course is that: You are NOT NORMAL.

    The users that Corel was attempting to target are the people who Microsoft is hiding the command line from. The users that Corel wanted to move to Linux are those who think that the desktop is the only interface - who shy away from "complicated" things like logging on, or having a password.

    The original poster (although the username ("buttfucker2000") strikes me as a troll name) is entirely right when he said that Corel is right to pull out - Linux isn't ready for the user market that Corel was targetting.

  • flame me if you want, but he's right.

    Our principle problem for Linux is that we, the current users, want different things from our OS than the faceless hordes want from theirs. (And, the author puts himself in the 'theirs' category)

    Let's look at his points:

    1. Linux is Free (as in beer) The author is correct. Most people get their OS with their system and do not consider the possibility of cost. We do, because we want to do stuff with our OS (modify it, customize it, change it) that we CAN NOT do with Windows. (Hey Microsoft, how about letting me release a distribution? Yeah, right.)
    2. You get the source code Again, the author is right, the average user doesn't care about the source code. Again, we do, because we want to know how it works and we want to change it.
    3. Linux is stable Most users have it ingrained into them that computers, by definition, are unstable.
    4. Linux is customizable. Most users haven't figured out how to program their VCR's...you think they want to TRY and figure out how to customize their OS? Please.

    So why are we people using Linux? Ah..well, now, that's a different question. Which people? We use Linux because some of us like to know what's going on, we like the ability to customize our systems and we like the flexibility.

    The faceless hordes? They want a simple way to check email and use productivity software, fonts, popular games and they want it easy. Think Playstation 2 and Palm Pilot built together.

    Would you, one of 'us', like to use this mythological Playstation 2 & Palm Pilot hybrid? I wouldn't.

    So, our basic problem is that "Linux for the Desktop" is flawed because it doesn't address what the target audience wants. I'm not saying that we cannot create such a creature, but rather that when such a creature is birthed, it won't be recognizable as Linux.

    Corel's problem is that they're developing software for this creature which doesn't exist yet. (And they don't seem intent on birthing it.)

    PS: Linux has a lack of drive support? Please.

  • That's not much of a business strategy though, is it? "We're going to spend millions of dollars developing something that's never going to sell, but might force the competition to improve their product" is likely to get shot down pretty hard by most executives, I suspect.
  • I can't seem to do things with Linux

    You can do things, just with sed, which you can't do with a full install of NT. Judging by your sig, I'd've thought you would know that. For example, get the last 10 lines of a 1 GB log file in a sensible amount of time. I have seen NT users trying hard to do that and not really being able to even using VB.
  • I'm too lazy to think of yet another example, so here's a part of a post I posted to my own post entitled "What do you guys use Linux for"

    http://www.quake3world.com/ubb/Forum15/HTML/0002 92.html

    ===============================
    Once again, I reckon it depends what line of work your in.

    Printing
    ========

    We've got a large epson A2 colour printer at work which can output Poster quality artwork if needs be.

    I've tried connecting to this printer using win32 with limited success - it's attached to a Mac. I've tried connecting to it via Linux (admitedly with limited experience) with not much success.

    All the software on that Mac is geared toward high-quality print design work - Graphics done in Quark Express or Freehand, drivers explicity written for these kinds of applications.

    All the printing companies in the industry of graphic design are on Mac (and some win32 i386) - linux is not something they've considered, let alone heard of.

    None of this software is open source at present.

    The best OS for the job of high quality print work ? - MacOS !

    If all you want is, for example, a print out of a website - heck, Linux can do the job just as well as win32 or MacOS !

    Sound
    =====

    It depends entirely what sort of 'arena' your in when you talk 'sound' - do you just use sound for games or mp3 files, are you an amateur musician or is sound editing and manipulation your job ?

    If it's your job, you are more than likely going to be using MacOS or Win32.
    If you just want to listen to MP3 files or play games, Linux is fine !

    Linux, imho, is more geared toward networking and programming
    That said, a default install of some of the latest Linux distros kick the win32 default installs butt in terms of options and power.
    ==========================

    Nuff said matey - get your facts right first or keep your cakehole closed.
  • OK, let's pick nits: Its a new machine and I just slapped on some fonts I had handy. The point is, the "there are no fonts on linux!" means your sysadmin is incompetent and can't install xfstt or any other alternative. Besides, when I want to do gfx, I move over to my G4, anyway.

    Re 30 seconds: what method did you use? Took me 1 second. I don't normally sit around counting fonts, of course. The point is, the shell is a powerful tool that saves time, because you can automate tasks.

    And it should be noted that the original post referred to general purpose use, and you name a number of specific uses, for which yes, Linux probably isn't the best tool. I'd argue strongly for a Mac in the instance you specifically describe.

    Also, I hate that productivity = writing memos and using Word. Productivity for me means writing CGI, working with databases, network and system administration. Why is it so bad when I counter that my "productivity tools" are nmap, ethereal, snort, inetd, Apache, mod_perl, and so forth?
  • Maybe they plan releasing a new XML thingiee, that seems to be a popular buzzword these days.
    BTW what will the next buzzword be????? SGML, nah, its too old; .NET, nah too confusing, there is already a .net, perhaps wetware (biological interfaces for computers) will be it, but I doubt that will happen
  • by Ektanoor ( 9949 ) on Friday November 17, 2000 @07:28AM (#617723) Journal
    Cool. Commercial desktop applications or playing Diablo? What should we choose from your argumentation? If you talk about commercial applications then you're wrong. Yes you don't have them at a click distance. But on a good Linux setup you've always to get your hands dirty.

    If you consider Diablo then you are correct. But then don't mess a commercial game with office apps or design tools. You are not paid for playing Diablo but for doing the real job.

    On what concerns any possible hassles companies, like Corel, face, then it is natural. The business model on Linux is not the same as Windows. You build systems fit for tasks and not tasks fit for systems as M$ does. If you don't understand this then try to dig on the last 15 years of computer development and tell me where 80% of apps went into. How many office systems you may get in the market? How many design tools are offered? What is the range multimedia tools today, compared to 5-6 years ago? How many compilers and development tools are offered to you? How far can you change system settings, desktop environments? And how flexible are all these things for you to modify, integrate, improve, implement and interact in a software/hardware system?
    Am I talking BS? Cool. Then why I can't choose between command line typping and mouse clicks anymore?
  • Its purely under the clout of Microsoft that Corel would be making their future decisions. It makes sense to M$ to discourage all further development on Linux other than the porting to .Net framework, because they dont need one more Linux flavor to compete with, they need an ally on the Linux side which would help them better integrate to their .Net framework. Another interesting thought would be that Corel maynot stop releasing any more versions for Linux, but they would do so by working with MS, and I presume Corel would be the first vendor who would have the .Net framework integrated with in.

    As for WordPerfect, I presume MS would love to tout that as an alternative to StarOffice, and to reduce Sun's impact on the Desktop Productivity Tools market. And once WordPerfect replaces StarOffice on the desktop market, I wouldnt be surprised if Microsoft phase it out gradually or move MS Office to other platforms.

    My two cents, might worth two million in a couple of years :)
  • Humanity would not benefit from a product designed to draw people away from Word. The should try to build a product that would stand up on it's own merits, and not try and sell it by pointing out Word's flaws.

    Obviously the world is doing just fine using Word right now. Besides, saying that imposing your point of view on people will be good for humanity smacks of the middle ages and the crusades.

    As long as there is a company that takes up the torch after Corel, I doubt anyone will cry about the deal.

  • Linux on the desktop is getting dam close. I admit, i'm not a newbie. I use Linux on my servers, with an NT desktop. There is a lot of buggy stuff, including my Red Hat 7.0 install at home (dual-boot win98).

    However yesterday i downgraded it to 6.2 + patches and installed:
    -> KDE 2
    -> Mozilla nightly build + Java + SSL
    -> WINE

    KDE 2 rocks, and using it is second nature for a windows user. Sound worked without me doing anything, beautiful high-color display, modern web browser. Plus i installed a WINE RPM file (first time using wine), and i got Quicken working, just like that! Plus, i found that KOffice could open and edit my MS Word files, pretty good. Plus using OpenSSH natively, w/ipchains firewall securing my DSL connection, i could pretty much do anything.

    Naysayers about Linux on desktop are going to have to shut up soon.
  • >I currently have 1356 fonts -- and about 80% of them are high-quality Bitstream or Adobe fonts.
    >How many of your 433 are professional fonts?

    Can be all of them, can be none. Ttf font is ttf font, does not matter what OS you use. It's just to install darn crap. Which BTW can be fully automatic operation, just like on your favorite platform. Currently the only M$ product I have in my office machine is Tahoma ttf font (I like it very much :-).
    On the side note, how long it takes for WinDos OS/WinDos apps to start up when you have over 1300 ttf fonts?

    Regards,
    kovi
  • The business model on Linux is not the same as Windows.

    Corel seemed to think it is - that's the whole point to the story.

  • >Lack of Productivity Software Word and Outlook are nice, however have you tried StarOffice? or AbiWord or Pathetic Writer... and I believe KOffice is coming out soon, if it's not already out. Lyx is also very nice. >Lack of Fonts I don't think I can disagree with you here, though i've never really lacked for a font. I guess for my particular needs a large variety of fonts is not essential. >Lack of Popular games. FreeCiv, Railroad Tycoon, Heavy Gears 2, (any other Loki game), Xboing :-), Warcraft, Unreal Tournament, Quake 3, ADOM, and, my personal favorite, Xbill. I'm sure there's more, I just haven't taken the time to list them. This is, of course exculding any of several console game emulators (SNES9x, Hu-Go, and DarkNES to name a few). >Lack of Drive support. I'm not quite sure what you mean hear, perhaps you had a problem with a particular configuration? >And no easy way of doing things. I strongly disagree. Once you've learned where everything is, it is quite easy to configure a system you are familiar with. Also, Linux has much more configurability than windows. It is simply a matter of knowing what you want to do, and then learning how. If you are unwilling to learn something then perhaps Linux isn't for you. Linux is not idiot-proof, the learning curve for using it effectively can be relatively steep, but i've found that the benefits outweigh the troubles. Linux is still rough around the edges as a desktop, but it is evolving quickly (just take a look at KDE and GNOME).
  • I currently have 1356 fonts -- and about 80% of them are high-quality Bitstream or Adobe fonts.

    AFAIK you can use those fonts on X if you want to.
    Except for the rare geek who feels a need to count fonts quickly, Linux is an overall loser on the productivity front.

    "All right! But apart from the sanitation, the medecine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system, and public health... WHAT HAVE THE ROMANS EVER DONE FOR US?" -- Monty Python


    I don't think the point was that y'd need to count fonts quickly. I think the point is that there are a million other little jobs which are like that. Ever been sent a document which was in a "weird" character set? (e.g. 8859-14 or VISCII) It would take about 15 seconds to convert it to the encoding of your choice on a Debian system, including the time to install the converter (assuming you have the CD in the drive, or a reasonable network connection).

  • Try the new Linux Mandrake.

    Um, Linux Mandrake would have exactly what to do with Corel's opperations? Stay on topic.

    Fonts?? big deal, they have plenty.

    Yeah, and they look like ass. Especially if you want them to be large enough to read - wow, reminds me of the Nintendo days - 8x8 pixel fonts! Oh joy. I finally got around to adding /C/windows/Fonts to my font path, after finally finding out that you can't mkfontdir it, and instead have to use the undocumented ttmkfdir. Now try telling me that was easy.

    Drive support? Like what???? they support everything I use and can think of....

    Drive support = Vendor supported drivers, I think. In other words, besides my NVidia module, I have no vendor drivers (although by net drivers I got through LinkSys, but they're repackaged OSS drivers).

    Easy? KDE2 is very Windows like, so of course any idiot can use it.

    I believe Corel's distro was/is using KDE1, and anyway, having to get through the logon process is still daunting to the average user - ask anyone who's watched a newbie try and figure out Win2K...

    Dunno, haven't used KDE in a while, so I can't really provide any arguments for or against that assertion. Didn't like KDE when I did try it, though - it was too slick :).

  • Also, I hate that productivity = writing memos and using Word. Productivity for me means writing CGI, working with databases, network and system administration. Why is it so bad when I counter that my "productivity tools" are nmap, ethereal, snort, inetd, Apache, mod_perl, and so forth?
    Because he/she doesn't believe that people really do that kind of work; many people can't imagine work different than their own.

    This goes both ways.
  • OK... On a sidenote here, just how many of your 1300+ fonts do you actually use? Perhaps 3 or 4. The rest are garbage taking up space. MOST people use, at most, 3 or 4 fonts at different times, NEVER looking at wingdings or the other odd balls. Let's see, times, times roman, helvetica or arial, perhaps symbols if you must do science or math writing. That about covers it. The rest is nonsense and it doesn't matter if you have 1300 or 500, they are garbage.

    You can get as many fonts as you want for linux, just like for doze. The question is, why would you WANT to? Practically NO ONE has ANY use for the vast majority of fonts that are installed by default (doze OR linux). What a weak "problem" you have with linux vs 'doze on this count.

    I would say this...you can find a gazillion math and scientific apps for linux that simply do not exist for doze (and they are free and they often derive from MIT, Princeton, Berkely, the NIH, etc)...those that DO exist for 'doze cost a buttload. You can't do proper science with 'doze. What a loser OS.

  • From graphics, to word processing, to Linux... Why buy a product from them, when I know that six months down the road, they'll be onto the next big thing?
  • Bingo! Exactly how many users out there are actually using a legitimate licensed copy of Win9X on their home machines? I'd say about 60%.

    What crack have you been smoking? I'd guess that the %age of win 9x home users who have a legit copy has got to be upwards of 97%. Do keep in mind that very few people ever upgrade their operating system. Even fewer build their own machine. If you didn't build your own machine it came with a legit (I assume that it's legit when you buy an e-machine or what have you) copy of win 9x. Now you've got a legit copy per machine, the only way that you could really start to pirate Windows is if you want to upgrade. The group that upgrades the OS is fairly small, the group that does it for free is a subset of that. It's just not very big.
    _____________

  • Yet another example of the marketing muscle of m$ that is so powerful and innovative that it's damn scary. Forget the fact that it's taken m$ 5 years to release a semi-stable OS out the box (win2k) to replace NT4 - it's the sheer force of the marketing that is so hard to stop - or, to put it another way, the $ in m$ They poke and pry into every single corner and opportunity they can find that may still return it's weight in $ Third world markets - m$ is there. Student courses - m$ is on the ball. Threats - m$ will eat try to make you eat your own shorts Emerging technologies - m$ want's to eat them too. Any sign of marketable weakness in the competition - yummy You've gotta hand it to the m$ marketing team - they're the S in scumbags, but the $ in dollars.
  • well, to tell the truth, when i installed Mozilla last night, i went through the thing where you click to install PSM for Linux, it went through the install. But when i went to an https:// url, mozilla crashed. It was working last week, so i think it will get fixed real soon.

    I just used Netscape instead, no big deal. Even used netscape mail to do IMAP over SSL.
  • It figures that an argument (presentation, not idea) like that comes from an AC.

    ---
  • I don't think that Corel is going to bounce back like Apple did after Microsoft was done giving them money. I think that Corel is going to become a puppet organization that Microsoft keeps around as a source of ammunition in their continuing fight against anti-trust action: "Look Janet, we're not abusing our power as a monopolist by proping up a dying competitor. Really!"

  • Most people ain't me either, but a company has to live and die by what most people do/think/buy. You fit among those who either don't want Linux used by the masses or gave up on it. However, companies trying to make money off of Linux can't "fuck most people".
  • Yeah, 10% of 36.4 million == 0 dollars.
  • I have friends come to me and ask me about an error message they get in Windows. For the love of god, why not go to Google [google.com], put in your error message, and search for the answer yourself? It's like taking your car to the mechanic and telling him it's not working, when what's really happened is you ran out of gas.

    Yeah, except with Linux, they don't give you a gas gauge.

    The problem here (and don't get me wrong, it's a Windows problem) is that the error message your friends are getting is practically worthless. Instead of having to root around the Web to find out what the message really means, the message should tell you in the first place.

    Apparently, in the new beta version of Visual Studio, Microsoft has added a "Lame!" button to some (all?) of their error notifications. Press it, and your web browser launches and takes you to a page on the MS site where you can tell 'em exactly why this message sucks. This isn't perfect, but at least they're *trying* to make things easier.

    Stability is not a good argument? [...] I like knowing that a glitch in code won't bring my system to a halt, force me to spend 5 minutes rebooting, and possibly cause data loss.

    Me too -- that's why I run Windows 2000 (aka NT 5). Glitches in my code, or MSIE, or my dev environment don't bring my system to a halt. If you're (and not -you- personally, but anyone) doing development work in Win95/98/SE/ME, you're an idiot.


    --
  • No, the problem is Corel isn't making money on anything. The fact that they're considering *selling* their linux operations (and not just tossing them) would suggest that there's something to be made from them.

    This is not to say that an open source or free software based business is going to make as much as Microsoft, but if they did make 3 million dollars from linux offerings this quarter, then there obviously is a market to be targetted for a company that isn't horribly mismanaged.
  • The point is, the "there are no fonts on linux!" means your sysadmin is incompetent and can't install xfstt or any other alternative. Besides, when I want to do gfx, I move over to my G4, anyway.

    Whoa! Where in hell did a sysadmin come from? This thread used to be talking about desktop computers! Where do you get this "sysadmin" you talk of for Corel Linux?

    Also, I hate that productivity = writing memos and using Word. Productivity for me means writing CGI, working with databases, network and system administration. Why is it so bad when I counter that my "productivity tools" are nmap, ethereal, snort, inetd, Apache, mod_perl, and so forth?

    Good for you - you aren't Corel's target market. Again, this thread used to be talking about desktop machines, where the average user uses it almost exclusively for this type of thing. The "normal" desktop user uses their PC to surf the web, to read e-mail, and to write various documents/presentations.

    Very few users are programmers - for the vast, vast (at least 90% of all users) majority, productivity means writing memos/presentations; not writing apps.

  • So you're saying they are the Titanic to Microsoft's Hindenberg? We could merge them, to form the Hindentanic*!

    *as previously seen on "Ducktales"

  • First off, Corel hasn't had a real direction in years. They were a specialty software company, then they caught the WordPerfect football after it had been kicked around a dozen times, then they came up with a Linux distro, then there was the NetWinder. I don't see a clear business objective in all this. If they dump the Linux distro, they can at least focus on their core business -- application software.

    And now for the conspiracy -- they get money from Microsoft in the form of "nonvoting" shares, but Corel's so strapped for cash that Microsoft gets some serious influence. They do the .NET deal, but Corel doesn't have the resources to do anything with in it Linux, and Microsoft doesn't want that anyway, so they get rid of the Linux distro, and keep the rights to do .NET in Linux. Linux support in their application SW will be left to wither on the vine, and they'll sit on the .NET porting rights.

    Don't laugh -- the same thing happened to the 100 mpg carburetor!!

  • Which means that they have tons of crap to deal with, like charging the GST (Goods and Services Tax) - paying outrageous amounts of employee taxes, collecting confiscatory amounts of income tax, etc.

    Kind of hard to compete internationally when you have a communist dictator for the leader of your country who seems to think any kind of profit you make should be siphoned off to fatten his home district.

    A lot of Canadian businesses are going under and/or being sold simply because of the crap economy to the North, and the level of taxation and red tape there is choking the life out of what's left.
  • ...instead have to use the undocumented ttmkfdir. Now try telling me that was easy.

    Oddly enough, the fs distributed with redhat has this file in /usr/doc/XFree86-fs-x.x.x called USAGE, with the line:

    "For TrueType font files, `fonts.scale' files are best built with Joerg Pomnitz' `ttfmkfdir' utility."

    Pretty damn tough, I'd say. There should be a splash screen when you boot up saying "USE ttfmkfdir", every linux site should contain those words somewhere on the front page and it should be printed under the instructions on a box of toothpicks, to insure that it's found by the people who need it.
  • This gets back to the issue of Linux not being easy enough for your usual desktop productivity suite users to work with. Here is where the "get around to using some day" folks come in... If they have it, but aren't using it - and I know this is common - there is a problem.

    One problem is that Linux is difficult and unfamiliar, even with nice installers, etc. like RedHat's it still takes a while to *configure* (especially since many of the graphical configuration tools are so unstable and slow - I generally do everything at the command line because of this, despite not being a command-line-only snob...)

    Another is that while StarOffice, Corel, and Applixware are all fine and well, M$ Office is still actually better. Linux developers find it sexy to work on the kernel, but where are all the Linux application developers making better apps for Linux? A handful of games, word processors, dbs and spreadsheets do not a useful desktop OS make... People, the ones who buy stuff and make the computer market a market, have come to expect a wide selection of software. Linux doesn't have it. UNIX is really great for developers, but somehow this hasn't translated into developers developing things on it that make it really great for everyone else. Almost everything on *nix seems to be required to have a dated look, feel half-finished (or BE half-finshed), and require strange (by desktop user standards) behaviors to make things work - I guess professional grade software other than kernels isn't "cool" enough for *nix developers to work on it...

    Also, don't forget, Corel's suite has competition from Applixware and Sun's free StarOffice... That is also probably part of their problem. While all three are sub-standard compared to Office, and Corel is the best of the three, Corel also has put more money into making themselves the best and many Linux people would rather have a mediocre program for free than a good piece of software they have to pay for.

    It's not suprising they're looking to sell their Linux business - I wonder who will buy? Maybe RedHat could take over the office suite, add a nice Outlook-like mail tool and a decent Web browser and go to town... Or maybe that's too much work for a Linux company...
  • I thought the whole nature of the .net strategy was to provide Windows services on a wide variety of platforms. Kind of like a universal server for data and applications.
  • Yeah, but flakey pieces keep showing. E.g., I just installed Mandrake 7.2. It went onto my home computer without problem, but when I put it on a partition of my machine at work .. well, first I had to tinker with the bootloader. Switching to LILO fixed that problem, but the other (grub, I presume, but it never got far enough to tell) hung. So now it's installed, but it doesn't recognize the CD drive. (That's actually why I'm in Win95 at the moment. I wanted to test the CD. Win95 recognized it without problem. Just to be certain, I didn't even eject the CD [it wasn't bootable]).

    So. I prefer Linux whenever I can use it. But it's got recurrent problems. And lots of updates, which means an occasional unexpected real problem. It also has tools that don't exist even under Cygwin. (Stability is a genuine plus, but this week it isn't the determining issue. Win95 has been stable for a couple of weeks now. OTOH, some weeks it makes me reboot 3-4 times per day. Sometimes more.)

    Caution: Now approaching the (technological) singularity.
  • They have plenty of productivity software, ie. Star Office.
    Lack of fonts? Ha.
    Popular games? Ok possibly..
    Lack of drive support? Such as...?
  • Oddly enough, the fs distributed with redhat has this file in /usr/doc/XFree86-fs-x.x.x

    [dpotter@whitestar dpotter]$ ls /usr/doc/XFree86-*
    ls: /usr/doc/XFree86-*: No such file or directory

    This is the standard desktop install of RedHat 7.0.

  • I recently converted my parents to using Linux, and it went without much of a hassle.

    Some of the things I did to the system are not exactly standard, but work for them(tm).

    Quick instructions:

    • Install your favorite Linux distribution (I used Red Hat Linux 7 + fixes)
    • Install KDE 2.0 (download RPMs [linux-easy.com])
    • Install autologin [linux-easy.com] so they don't need to handle users and permissions
    • Install StarOffice - anyone who has used M$ office before can learn to use it quickly, they're not that different UI-wise
    • Create a link to StarOffice on the desktop
    • Install wine and set up binfmt_misc to execute .exe files out of the box for some Windows applications they want to use


    Concerning the problems you're addressing:
    • Lack of Productivity Software: What exactly are you missing? StarOffice is at least as good as Word for normal use, KMail is at least as good as Outlook (and not vulnerable to VBS viruses)
    • Lack of fonts: Linux can use the exact same TrueType fonts Windows can use. At least any modern distribution can. XFree86 4.0 has TrueType support by default, Red Hat and Mandrake (and probably others) have shipped patched XFree86 3.x servers to handle TrueType fonts before that, SuSE has shipped xfstt (an alternate TrueType fontserver).
    • Lack of popular games: There are currently more Windoze games than Linux games, yes. But a lot of very good games ARE available for Linux. For the others, there's always wine [winehq.com] and dual boot.
    • Lack of drive support: Such as??? I've never had a problem with my drives on Linux
    • No easy way of doing things: What's hard about KDE 2.0? And what functionality do beginners need that KDE 2.0 doesn't provide?


    A couple of advantages my parents have from converting to Linux:
    • They can't mess up their system anymore (thanks to the fact that, unlinke Windows 9x, you don't work as root all the time in Linux)
    • Stability. No more bluescreens.
    • Much better net access (Last time I checked, Windoze couldn't share an ISDN connection between 2 computers. Did they fix this in ME?)
    • Easy way to get things fixed up - if they have a problem, I can just ssh in and fix it. Show me a way to do that with Windows without spending a lot of money on extra software.
    • It's free as in $0 - no need to waste money on buying updates to the OS and Office suite
  • I sure as hell hope they could do this under Linux, and I suspect that they can. I recall distinctly having to turn the automatic hardware change detection feature in Red Hat to "off" so that it would stop carping when I removed the keyboard and tried to reboot (I was testing system and network regeneration in case of power outage).

    Finally, the only problem with Linux distributions that make it difficult for newbies is not all the underlying Unixosity. It's the fact that most distros offer you choices like KDE or GNOME. It's the fact that they've never encountered an OS that was originally intended for multiple users connecting via terminals to a single large machine-- and the distro does nothing to cover up this situation by using single user mode as the default. It's the fact that none of these applications are likely the ones their friends have or they use at work. It's not a Linux problem per se, it's the fact that no one has made the difficult choice to dumb down the distributions.

    Also, replying to the moderation on your own post is lame. Really lame. Especially even more lame since your original post was written in such a way as to provoke argument, i.e. the clinical definition of "flamebait".
  • Jean Chretien? A Communist dictator?! That's pretty rich considering that he doesn't do anything, let alone dictate. (And that's why we love him so much. Let me guess, you think that a Bible-thumpin', Creationist, scientific ignoramus redneck would be better for Canada and high-tech in general, right?) Taxes? I presume you like all the nice stuff our taxes pay for, like roads, schools, infrastructure and hospitals--oh, wait, you probably make a gazillionK/year and don't have to worry about US-style hospital bills wiping you out in perpetua--and wouldn't feel it if you had to pay $800/month in medical insurance like some of my friends...

    And where's this "crap economy" of which you speak, sirrah? Though the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer, especially in IT times have hardly been better.

    Poor Corel. They really don't deserve all this shxt from people who don't know any better.

    Interrobang
    Who has been using WordPerfect since 1987 and still thinks it's the best because
    1) It shuts up and leaves you alone--the perfectionist's word processor.
    2) No lecherous paperclip
    3) No word processor can match it for putting together newsletters
    4) EASY to use formatting and no long hang times
    5) WP4.1 for the Amiga kicked hoop!
  • RE: Let me guess, you think that a Bible-thumpin', Creationist, scientific ignoramus redneck would be better for Canada

    That would be like describing Chretien as a Catholic, criminal, ineffectual do-nothing frog, but I don't stoop to that level of debate, nor would I show Mr. Chretien, irrespective of RCMP allegations against him and his ties to Cuba, that level of disrespect.

    Lower taxes would in fact help Canada GREATLY. It would certainly stop Canada's best and brightest from working in the US cause they're tired of seeing more than half their paycheque going to the HDRC, Sheila Copps' billion dollar "write in, get a flag" campaign, etc.

    Liberals have never understood that lower taxes leads to greater prosperity and better revenue. Don't believe me, believe the Nobel-prize-winning economist who says the CA IS RIGHT ON TRACK.

    Let me guess, you're a Web designer for the CBC. Well go back to kissing up to Jason Moskovitch.
  • "Free" health care ISN'T, and judging from cross-border hospital visits, it's falling apart. Also, it costs you in taxes. Note that under the Liberal government university tuition went up, payments for medicare went from the agreed-on and promised 50c on the dollar to 11c on the dollar. They're not paying for social security, medicare, education or anything else even though they're gouging the hell out of businesses and the middle class on up.

    The Liberals use the high taxes instead to bulk-move billions of dollars to their friends and influential supporters, (how many RCMP investigations of this being done illegally, never mind immorally?) building fountains in rivers, funding dumb blonde joke books, financing porn films, and giving undue assistance where the Prime Minister personally financially benefits.
  • "Took me one second"

    Rubbish! It took you *eons* to become fluent enough with the command line to be able to save time using the shell.

    Me? I clicked my four fonts folders in sequence, and noted what Explorer reported the number of files in the folder to be. Added them up.

    How long did it take you to learn all the intricacies of the LS command, the WC command and piping?

    How long did it take me to learn to click a folder icon?


    --
  • I remember when Slashdot was a site by Linux users for Linux users. Now all the winvocates have moved in and taken over.

    But, anyway, in reply to this particular winvocate.

    Linux is free. Most users of Windows are pirates.
    Yep. We get a lot of articles about how the RIAA is horrible for trying to stop people from stealing their music, and how the MPAA is horrible for trying to stop people from stealing their movies.
    You get the source code of the OS. So what, I have never looked at the source. I never plan on looking at the source. So having access to the source is not a good argument.
    Just because you have never had to use the source does not mean that other people have not. I recently chose to use a FTP server that did not have security problems, but had a problem with making uploaded web pages unreadable. It was a one-line source code change to fix. Another time, Qmail was giving me an obscure error message (since I was doing obscure things with Qmail) that a quick glance at the source code let me track down and fix.
    So why are we people using Linux? Because Linux is Cool; and they are elite and like doing things the hard way
    I do not think you can speak for me. The command line has a lof of powerful tools that make complicated tasks in Windows simple in Linux. More importantly, when something does break down, I can find out what is really going on, instead of installing software at random until the problem magically goes away.

    - Sam

  • by FFFish ( 7567 ) on Friday November 17, 2000 @09:56AM (#617770) Homepage
    It looks like I must, once again, re-iterate my point, because Linux bigots are too narrow-minded to comprehend it the very first time:

    *FOR ME* Linux *IS NOT* productive.

    For starters, it does not allow me to use Ventura Publisher. The only Linux software that comes remotely close to Ventura is a buggy beta of Framemaker. Using buggy beta software does nothing to increase my productivity.

    It doesn't allow me to use Visio, either. Linux does offer some Visio-like applications, but they're far from complete and, just as importantly, they're not compatible with the software my clients use. Using incompatible, incomplete software does nothing to increase my productivity.

    *FOR YOU* Linux may well be productive. But face facts: *you* are *not* Corel's target market.

    I *am* Corel's target market: I use Ventura, Photopaint, Draw and would, if my clients were more hip to quality software, use WordPerfect.

    Until Corel Linux supports those Corel products -- and Ventura is by far the most important to me -- then Linux is simply not a productive operating system *for me.*

    You, hacking in GCC or running a webserver or doing whatever it is you do, *are not* Corel's target market. You're the target market for Debian and RedHat.

    I wish the Linux bigots would grab a freaking clue: different people have different needs, and Linux *does not* satisfy the needs of *a lot* of people right now.

    Just as Windows doesn't satisfy the needs of *a lot* of Linux bigots. Hey, they're using Linux because it's best for them.

    Just please don't insist that it's best for me, too. It plainly is not.

    --
  • > Lack of Productivity Software. (Yes, I like Word and Outlook).
    Do you like VBS worms?

    Yet another nice, typical Linux-answer.
    - "I can't do my work using Linux because I need application XYZ"
    - "That's stupid and so are you, just use the same software I use. If it's good enough for me, it's good enough for the rest of the world".

    --

  • And the folks who are actually using Linux anywhere near full-time on the desktop have been conditioned to believe that paying for software is an unfair imposition on them.
    Oh boy, another Winvocate speaking for us full-time Linux users again. Why am I not surprised?

    Seriously, slashdot.org is, quite frankly, a software/media-pirate friendly site. So, you get a lot of people here who believe silly tripe like abolishing copyright laws. I do not think this represents the majority of Linux users.

    I once heard a story about someone who was at a swap meet. He was buying some Linux software, and wrote a check. The person who received the check did not even ask for the Linux user's driver's license. When the Linux user asked why, the seller responded "Linux users are very honest people. I can trust them."

    As for myself, I have bought a number of applications and even a couple of games for Linux. Word Perfect office, Applixware (two versions), Caldera's internet office suite (anyone remeber that), countless distributions (both as cheapbytes/linuxmall/lsl/linuxcentral CDs and as official CDs), Loki's Heroes of Might and Magic II, among other software.

    - Sam

  • A lot of Canadian businesses are going under and/or being sold simply because of the crap economy to the North

    Well, south of the border, I see massive internet market consolidation (that is, businesses being bought up). 130 US net firms have gone bankrupt since January, and November is moving along at a rate of more than one per day. Canadian businesses seem to be doing better than that, not worse.

    and the level of taxation and red tape there is choking the life out of what's left.

    The taxation scheme is different in Canada when compared to the US. The federal government's share of payroll taxes in Canada is much greater than the federal government's share in the US. When you compare combined state and federal taxes, to combined provincial and federal taxes, they're comparable.

    One might wonder why it's the high-tax jurisdictions in the US (MA, CA, NY) that have done so well with the new economy. Don't high taxes inhibit economic growth? Look at that barren wasteland of innovation, Silicon Valley.

    A study, released November 13, by Harvard University and the World Bank showed that Canada has the lowest level of red tape for startups of 76 developed and developing nations. The Report on Business also mentioned it November 15, 16 and 17. Perhaps you simply don't read the business pages, although I find that hard to believe with your oh-so-extensive knowledge of Canadian economics and business affairs.

    --
  • This is the same people backing HelixCode, CodeWeavers, MetroLink, others.
  • RE: Well, south of the border, I see massive internet market consolidation (that is, businesses being bought up). 130 US net firms have gone bankrupt since January, and November is moving along at a rate of more than one per day. Canadian businesses seem to be doing better than that, not worse.

    Cause Canadians never HAD that business to consolidate.

    RE: One might wonder why it's the high-tax jurisdictions in the US (MA, CA, NY) that have done so well with the new economy. Don't high taxes inhibit economic growth? Look at that barren wasteland of innovation, Silicon Valley.

    Funnily enough though, all these corporations are "a Delaware Corporation". There's no Canadian equivalent.
  • Delaware is a jurisdiction of convenience because of its nonexistent corporate taxes. You don't pay corporate taxes when you're losing money. Most net firms haven't come within a country mile of making money, so the Delaware incorporation is irrelevant.

    Nice try, though.

    --
  • How the hell did you know what "folder" to click? I guess it was intuitive, huh?

    However, font support on Linux sucks. Trying to argue otherwise is pointless and idiotic. I should be able to put a font in a directory and have it be immediately usable on my screen and printer (like Windoze except without the reboot).

    You should return to your original arguments, which made a lot of sense, you have allowed the Linux zealots to get you into a rather inane arguemnt about a very obscure area (counting fonts) where Linux obviously wins.

  • If you actually read their stuff, the only "multi-platform" support .NET has or is ever likely to is Win NT/98/CE.

    Win-something the only platforms MS ever wants to encourage anyoen to use.

  • No, this is a problem not an axiom. Your assertion 'a company has to live and die by what most people do/think/buy' is misleading and untrue.

    • Apple
    • Rolls-Royce
    • Harley-Davidson
    • Rickenbacker
    • Martin-Logan
    • Jadis
    • Cartier
    • Boeing
    • Caterpillar
    • Mack
    None of these companies pay attention to what 'most' people do/think/buy. In some cases they are providing boutique items, in others they are providing performance items at staggering cost, and in some they are just plain vertical market and the buyer is not 'most people', it is a specific target like an airline or a contracting company.

    It's always shocked and dismayed me that so many computer people assume the computer industry can be reduced to 'most people'. That's like saying Toyotas are equivalent to Mack Trucks and Caterpillar tractors. True, most people have no clue what the semi-trailer market is like: however, in the computer industry because of the greatly enhanced communication of the Internet and the public expectations for software companies (basically, 'be like Microsoft or be crushed by Microsoft), there is more of a risk of legitimate vertical markets being destroyed by the _expectation_ that they will be destroyed, since they are not mainstream. When it becomes an issue of standards and interoperability, this risk becomes still worse- sure you could make a nifty optical packet switch for vertical markets, but what if Microsoft controls the whole environment and would rather people used NT routers? If they could break the environment around your nifty switch they _create_ your destruction, artificially, in a way they couldn't do if you were, say, building trucks.

    The end result is either going to be a grudging acceptance of vertical markets and unorthodox needs (even on 'the desktop': people use desktops for many different things), or a wasteland, a 'Dark Ages' in which no innovation can happen because all needs are 'met' by very generic products which are expected to work perfectly for everyone- 'proved' by the fact that no competing products can arise. The assumption is that the generic, 'most people' product is therefore the best one. The reality is that the industry is a lot more sensitive to network effects than anyone bargained for, and this stifles genuine innovations for specialised purposes at birth. If you won't look beyond the 'dummy' rationalisation of 'it must be the best solution 'cos everyone uses it so logically nothing better has been proposed or tried', you won't ever get beyond a sort of Wal-Mart environment (physically and intellectually) and will be sharply limited in the tasks you're able to perform, without even knowing it.

    Basically, in order to get anywhere you have to reject network effects. You can't 'run everything' or be 'compatible' with everything. You have to make choices. If you don't or won't you just end up in Wal-Mart-land playing Diablo on WinME and waiting for other people to decide that your interests are 'most people' enough to provide.

  • I still have the WP5.1 for Windows floppies. It was a terrible product. WP5.2 was a very significant improvement. It was actually usable.

    But remember something else about the time period in which Wordperfect was dealing. This was the time of killer apps, and people on PCs usually ran only one application at a time. 1-2-3 and WordPerfect were great.

    At the time Microsoft had its own products which it was trying to sell. Windows was built around running Excel. It didn't have the complex memory limitations of 1-2-3 and it could run several tasks simultaneously. I've heard some rumoured compromises concerning the features of Windows which are supposedly related to Excel, but I've never been able to confirm them.

    Now think about Wordperfect and other application developers. Which GUI do you target? Desqview/X, which was showing remarkable promise, Do you feed into the hands of a ruthless competitor and develop for their GUI?, Do you target Geos?, MacOS?, or wait for something better?

    Then Microsoft saw that it had a unique advantage... they could bundle their OS with their GUI, and their Spreadsheet with their Wordprocessor. Undercutting everybody at every turn. If Lotus and Wordperfect merged, there may have been a very different outcome.

    5.2 was slow to market, but WP was still strong when Word was trying to take hold. Wordperfect didn't kill Wordperfect, Microsoft's tying and bundling killed Wordperfect. Yes, the GUI version of 5.1 sucked horridly, but so did many versions of Word.

    If doubt the diversity of platforms and the reluctance to be controlled by the likes of Microsoft, think about the control Microsoft exercised over Lotus, and think about the fact that over time WordPerfect has existed for DOS, OS/2, Linux, almost Java and even Windows.

  • Don't mind the zealots. The non-zealots are the ones building that application that you require as we speak. The zealots are the ones who spend too much time on Slashdot slapping each other on the back about how good their OS is.

    You know...your voice counts. There are any number of Free Software applications that could have the features you need in a few years. These projects tend to evolve from user input. In the past the users with the voice were the administrators, the web authors, and the software developers. But if you go to a project (KWord seems like a good start but if someone could post alternatives...) subscribe to their mailing list, and tell them frankly "Hi I need X, Y, and Z, features to move to GNU/Linux" and if they inquire, give them details about what exactly your needs are and why you need them. If the developers aren't interested, then just back away. It would be impossible to convince them. But a lot of developers of Free Software are explicitly trying to make GNU/Linux more useful for a broader class of users. A lot of times, they just need to know how.

    It kind of works different in the Free Software world. In order to get what you want out of the software, you have to get involved in the process of its development. Free Software isn't a spectator sport like propietary software sometimes is. Now...it could mean actual development of your own. But it could also be explaining to the developers exactly what your needs are.

    Also note that this isn't the right forum for getting actual changes. Its a good forum for opinion but it has nothing to do with actual progress.

    But I am curious...what exactly are your needs? What is in this application of yours that you couldn't achieve with TeX, Mozilla + CSS, or postscript? Yes, I know these are complicated tools...but it is a start.

    (Note, I haven't read all of the preceeding posts...sorry, no time.)
  • Linux has so many problems on the desktop it isn't even funny. Sure the basics are there, but it is all so poorly put together that it is quite obvious to anyone why Linux on the mass-market desktop isn't taking off. I think the best thing to do would be to work to polish Linux up. Forget about putting more nifty features in the DEs, creating four different filesystems, a browser that rivels Emacs in overkill factor and get the basics done. For example: 1) Polish up X. 4.0 was a huge leap forward for people in terms of usability, but it still needs work. First, get a GUI to configure it. Relying on a text file to configure something like inetd is one thing; it is so complex that a GUI would be very confusing. However, XFree86Config has so little in it, a GUI should be no problem! All it does is specify a list of modules, specify fontpaths, and set some options for input/output devices. It would be a piece of cake to totally wrap all the features of xf86config (XF86Setup still hasn't been updated yet, AIRC) into a nice GUI program. Second, make it as usable as every other GUI interface in existance. Every single GUI I've ever used, (BeOS, all flavors of Windows since 3.0, QNX Photon, OS/2) have let you choose an exact refresh rate. Why the hell can't X do it? (The sad part is that it probably can, but in the last hour that i've been trying, I can find neither the documentation that says so, nor does anything that comes with the X distro tell me how to do so. Maybe I should read the source?) Hell, even accelerated X lets you set the exact refresh rate! Why can't X change the resolution on the fly? You wouldn't believe how useful BeOS's seperate workspace/seperate res setting is. It helps when you're doing graphics work, when you're doing web work, and even when you're gaming. Set one of the 32 workspaces to a certain resoluation and just switch to that and load your 640x480 game. Lastly, speed it up. Again, 4.0 has made huge strides in this area, but it is still not good enough. The sad part is that the X guys are probably the ones who most "get" what is wrong with Linux on the desktop and are working to fix it. 2) Get a standard DE API. Its great that there are all sorts of UIs out there, that's not a problem. What IS a problem is that there are different APIs for them. All software should be coded for one GUI API, and the window manager should interpret that as necessary. It is totally horrible to anyone with any sense of cleanliness to see the mess that is the miasma of libraries that makes up a common Linux system. You've got TclX, KDE, GNOME, OpenStep, straight-X, Motif, FLTK, etc. That is ugly, ass-ugly. It also makes Linux take up as much RAM as Win2K. That is simply wrong. Not only that, it is confusing. Mandrake installs dozens of different apps that do the same thing, but use different UIs. For example, you can get XCDRoast (ugly UI), gnometoaster (I don't use GNOME) or cdrecord (CLI, hah!) In an ideal world, there would be one GUI API and no matter what desktop you used, it would work. I liked the way it was in the pre enlightenment era when apps weren't tied to DEs. All apps worked on WindowMaker, FVWM, MWM, etc without extra libraries, and with the same (butt-ugly) straight-X interface. Sure you can run a GNOME app in KDE, but it still quacks like a GNOME app, waddles like a GNOME app, and tastes like a GNOME app. (I dislike duck, chicken is best.) 3) Make the advanced features of Linux more accessible. All the cool features that make Linux worthwhile to switch too are often hidden to the average user. If you run KDE, the only thing you gain over running Windows is more stability. All the stuff that makes Linux cool is hidden to you unless you A) Learn the CLI, AND B) Give up the consistant interface of KDE. Yea, it takes work. Yea, it takes thinking. It means that instead of sitting down and just coding, the KDE and GNOME guys actually have to use their brains and decide how everything fits together. A user environment is a home for the user. People don't like poorly architecture/organized homes (no matter how solidly built) and people don't like poorly architectured DEs (most anyway.) Creating a user environment is like writing a sonnet or a novel. Everything has to have a purpose, parts shouldn't be redundant, everything has to harmonize together. That's the only good way to do it. With al the effor being expended putting useless features into GNOME and KDE, the Linux crowd could have taken AfterStep or WindowMaker long ago and have shaped Linux into a desktop-worthy OS today. Its a shame that people are working so hard to fix something that isn't the problem.
  • Good grief, /. changes the default posting mode every day? (Or is it just a concpiracy. Does /. detect NetPositive and go about screwing hapless BeOS users?)

    Linux has so many problems on the desktop it isn't even funny. Sure the basics are there, but it is all so poorly put together that it is quite obvious to anyone why Linux on the mass-market desktop isn't taking off. I think the best thing to do would be to work to polish Linux up. Forget about putting more nifty features in the DEs, creating four different filesystems, a browser that rivels Emacs in overkill factor and get the basics done. For example:

    1) Polish up X. 4.0 was a huge leap forward for people in terms of usability, but it still needs work. First, get a GUI to configure it. Relying on a text file to configure something like inetd is one thing; it is so complex that a GUI would be very confusing. However, XFree86Config has so little in it, a GUI should be no problem! All it does is specify a list of modules, specify fontpaths, and set some options for input/output devices. It would be a piece of cake to totally wrap all the features of xf86config (XF86Setup still hasn't been updated yet, AIRC) into a nice GUI program. Second, make it as usable as every other GUI interface in existance. Every single GUI I've ever used, (BeOS, all flavors of Windows since 3.0, QNX Photon, OS/2) have let you choose an exact refresh rate. Why the hell can't X do it? (The sad part is that it probably can, but in the last hour that i've been trying, I can find neither the documentation that says so, nor does anything that comes with the X distro tell me how to do so. Maybe I should read the source?) Hell, even accelerated X lets you set the exact refresh rate! Why can't X change the resolution on the fly? You wouldn't believe how useful BeOS's seperate workspace/seperate res setting is. It helps when you're doing graphics work, when you're doing web work, and even when you're gaming. Set one of the 32 workspaces to a certain resoluation and just switch to that and load your 640x480 game. Lastly, speed it up. Again, 4.0 has made huge strides in this area, but it is still not good enough. The sad part is that the X guys are probably the ones who most "get" what is wrong with Linux on the desktop and are working to fix it.

    2) Get a standard DE API. Its great that there are all sorts of UIs out there, that's not a problem. What IS a problem is that there are different APIs for them. All software should be coded for one GUI API, and the window manager should interpret that as necessary. It is totally horrible to anyone with any sense of cleanliness to see the mess that is the miasma of libraries that makes up a common Linux system. You've got TclX, KDE, GNOME, OpenStep, straight-X, Motif, FLTK, etc. That is ugly, ass-ugly. It also makes Linux take up as much RAM as Win2K. That is simply wrong. Not only that, it is confusing. Mandrake installs dozens of different apps that do the same thing, but use different UIs. For example, you can get XCDRoast (ugly UI), gnometoaster (I don't use GNOME) or cdrecord (CLI, hah!) In an ideal world, there would be one GUI API and no matter what desktop you used, it would work. I liked the way it was in the pre enlightenment era when apps weren't tied to DEs. All apps worked on WindowMaker, FVWM, MWM, etc without extra libraries, and with the same (butt-ugly) straight-X interface. Sure you can run a GNOME app in KDE, but it still quacks like a GNOME app, waddles like a GNOME app, and tastes like a GNOME app. (I dislike duck, chicken is best.)

    3) Make the advanced features of Linux more accessible. All the cool features that make Linux worthwhile to switch too are often hidden to the average user. If you run KDE, the only thing you gain over running Windows is more stability. All the stuff that makes Linux cool is hidden to you unless you
    A) Learn the CLI, AND
    B) Give up the consistant interface of KDE.
    Yea, it takes work. Yea, it takes thinking. It means that instead of sitting down and just coding, the KDE and GNOME guys actually have to use their brains and decide how everything fits together. A user environment is a home for the user. People don't like poorly architecture/organized homes (no matter how solidly built) and people don't like poorly architectured DEs (most anyway.) Creating a user environment is like writing a sonnet or a novel. Everything has to have a purpose, parts shouldn't be redundant, everything has to harmonize together. That's the only good way to do it.

    With al the effor being expended putting useless features into GNOME and KDE, the Linux crowd could have taken AfterStep or WindowMaker long ago and have shaped Linux into a desktop-worthy OS today. Its a shame that people are working so hard to fix something that isn't the problem.

"Regardless of the legal speed limit, your Buick must be operated at speeds faster than 85 MPH (140kph)." -- 1987 Buick Grand National owners manual.

Working...