"Collin" <collinyeung@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:B104k.749$kx.292@pd7urf3no...
> jim wrote:
>> I have been chatting with people about my frustration with getting simple
>> stuff to work "out-of-the-box" with Linux.
>>
>> Things like simply plugging into a network and being able to browse XP
>> folders on a peer to peer XP network (that means no server and no
>> authentication needed) that are not password protected. Still don't have
>> an answer to that one....
>>
>> But, yesterday, I ran into a shining example of one reason that FOSS will
>> never work for small business (which is MUST to be able to legitimately
>> challenge Microsoft's monopoly).
>>
>> While I was testing some software in a Linux environment, I came across
>> an area in which it would not work as advertised by the authors. I
>> raised some polite concern (really...I was polite) about the problem in a
>> user forum specific to this software, only to be told politely to rtfm.
>>
>> I re-rtfm. The problem persisted, so I raised my concerns again. Again
>> I was told to rtfm. Again I re-rtfm and returned with the same questions
>> that were unanswered by the manual.
>>
>> This time I was politely informed where I could reach the authors of the
>> software. I went there and we went through the whole rtfm, re-rtfm loop
>> another 2 or three times until they finally asked to see my data. I sent
>> them my data files.
>>
>> In about an hour, they confirmed that there was a problem. Great! Now
>> they'll jump right on it - because everyone wants their code to work like
>> they say it will, right?
>>
>> Well, not really. I offered to help where I could (sacrificing a goat,
>> providing beer or money) but was told that the only help needed was to
>> fix the code. Unfortunately for me, I don't know C coding - so I am SOL.
>>
>> Small businesses (which are 90+% of all businesses) are called "small
>> businesses" because they are small. This generally means no in-house
>> programmers. So, small businesses are at the mercy of the coders that
>> provide the software that they run on.
>>
>> In this instance, I am at the mercy of these coders.
>>
>> As nice as they are, this "I'll get to it when I can" attitude is just
>> not acceptable to small businesses. They lose market share. They lose
>> customers and they lose money when software doesn't work as advertised in
>> tfm.
>>
>> This is why FOSS just doesn't work for the majority of businesses (which
>> are small businesses).
>>
>> While I move on to look for proprietary sources to replace the broken
>> open sourced software, I am again reminded that the FOSS movement still
>> "just doesn't get it" where small business is concerned.
>>
>> If it doesn't affect your earning a living or some other important aspect
>> of your life, FOSS may be just fine. But, if its important, its
>> important enough to pay to have it done right and supported.
>>
>> jim
> Honestly, with the way you've been insulting Linux on the Linux newsgroup,
> and with the amount of topics you have, just shut up, troll.

"Insulting Linux"?

Are you serious? Can you "insult" a piece of software?

What in the hell do you think Linuxx is?

And, just in case you haven't noticed, I lay into Windows bloated ass when
needed too.

jim

jim wrote:

> Things like simply plugging into a network and being able to browse XP
> folders on a peer to peer XP network (that means no server and no
> authentication needed) that are not password protected. Still don't have an
> answer to that one....

As far as I can recall Microsoft by default set XP to require
authentication, and there been quite many sites covering this thing, how
to change settings for samba on the Linux box and how to adjust the
microsoft XP register to allow proper authenticationless connection as
it was for microsoft 98.


> While I was testing some software in a Linux environment, I came across an
> area in which it would not work as advertised by the authors. I raised some
> polite concern (really...I was polite) about the problem in a user forum
> specific to this software, only to be told politely to rtfm.
> This time I was politely informed where I could reach the authors of the
> software. I went there and we went through the whole rtfm, re-rtfm loop
> another 2 or three times until they finally asked to see my data. I sent
> them my data files.

You usually get an answer to read the manual if you don't provide enough
information about your problem, it's kind of like calling your car
repair man and tell him, "my car don't start, what is wrong?", there is
a quite long list of problems that can cause the car to not start and
it's impossible to give a 100% sure answer.
It's far better if you provide too much information, telling
distribution, version of kernel, glibc, gcc, the software that you are
using and so on...


> In about an hour, they confirmed that there was a problem. Great! Now
> they'll jump right on it - because everyone wants their code to work like
> they say it will, right?
> Well, not really. I offered to help where I could (sacrificing a goat,
> providing beer or money) but was told that the only help needed was to fix
> the code. Unfortunately for me, I don't know C coding - so I am SOL.

As I don't know which program you been trying, but i wouldn't be
surprised if they code on their spare time, after they been at work for
8h, shopping food, cooking, cleaning and so on and they most likely have
a list of things that they will be working at, with the feature most
required on the top...


> Small businesses (which are 90+% of all businesses) are called "small
> businesses" because they are small. This generally means no in-house
> programmers. So, small businesses are at the mercy of the coders that
> provide the software that they run on.

you can always buy a distribution with support, then the distribution
will be making patches if the developers aren't fixing the bug. I would
say this works a lot better than using say something microsoft does, as
you in those cases has to wait at least to the next SP is released in
six months time and that only if microsoft would think the bug is big
enough to be fixed.


> In this instance, I am at the mercy of these coders.

You will be in the mercy of coders even if you run proprietary programs
too, and even if you knew C/C++/C#/Basic/... you won't be able to fix
the bug yourself when you get to know that your bug won't be fixed with
in the following 18 months.


> This is why FOSS just doesn't work for the majority of businesses (which are
> small businesses).

Seems to work for quite many small businesses, but of course it depends
on what you are working on, if you are a company making annoying flash
advertisements, then it may be better to use OSX with expensive software
instead of Linux, running a proper file server then there ain't any
question which is better to use.



--

//Aho

"Tobias Brox" <tobias@stud.cs.uit.no> wrote in message
news:g2q60g$15lc$1@news.uit.no...
> [jim@home.net]
>> But, yesterday, I ran into a shining example of one reason that FOSS will
>> never work for small business
> (...)
>> In about an hour, they confirmed that there was a problem
> (...)
>> Small businesses (which are 90+% of all businesses) are called "small
>> businesses" because they are small. This generally means no in-house
>> programmers. So, small businesses are at the mercy of the coders that
>> provide the software that they run on. In this instance, I am at the
>> mercy of these coders.
>
> So goes the argument, that for proprietary software you have paid for
> a product, you have someone to blame when things go wrong, and you
> have a warrancy. In reality, the warrancy is usually worthless, and
> in reality it's more important to fix the problems than to find
> someone to blame.

We agree completely on that point.

> It's sometimes possible to find companies offering
> paid support or warrancy on free software.
>
> For proprietary software, you are _really_ at the mercy of the company
> that made the code. This company may go bankrupt, and then the
> software most likely won't be maintained anymore. They may not have
> the resources to priority to fix your problem - or maybe you're
> representing such an insignificant part of their market that they
> don't bother to priority it at all. Have you tried to enter the
> forums and offer money for someone to fix the bugs or help you with
> your problems? In most cases, this is possible with FOSS, but
> impossible with secret-source software.

I offered money and free beer (as in free beer) to the maintainers of the
code base. They were not interested.

> FOSS developers are different, some do it just for the pride of it,
> others have a commercial interesst, yet others may barely be
> maintaining some "legacy" software that they don't care much about
> anymore. In most cases, when pointing out a reproducable bug in some
> open source software product, it is fixed quite fast and completely
> for free. Of course, one cannot rely on this - but that applies for
> proprietary software as well!

At least with proprietary code-based busineses you have a barganing chip -
your business. They fix it or lose you as a stream of revenue. With FOSS,
you don't even have that.

>> As nice as they are, this "I'll get to it when I can" attitude is just
>> not
>> acceptable to small businesses.
>
> "I'll get to it when I can" is better than "then you're out of
> luck"...

They bot have the same impact on my current project.

jim

On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 01:14:19 -0400, jim wrote:

> "caver1" <caver1@inthemud.org> wrote in message
> news:48508a2d$0$4262$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>> jim wrote:
>>> "caver1" <caver1@inthemud.org> wrote in message
>>> news:485084a4$0$4250$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>>> jim wrote:
>>>>> I have been chatting with people about my frustration with getting
>>>>> simple stuff to work "out-of-the-box" with Linux.
>>>>>
>>>>> Things like simply plugging into a network and being able to browse
>>>>> XP folders on a peer to peer XP network (that means no server and no
>>>>> authentication needed) that are not password protected. Still don't
>>>>> have an answer to that one....
>>>>>
>>>>> But, yesterday, I ran into a shining example of one reason that FOSS
>>>>> will never work for small business (which is MUST to be able to
>>>>> legitimately challenge Microsoft's monopoly).
>>>>>
>>>>> While I was testing some software in a Linux environment, I came
>>>>> across an area in which it would not work as advertised by the
>>>>> authors. I raised some polite concern (really...I was polite) about
>>>>> the problem in a user forum specific to this software, only to be
>>>>> told politely to rtfm.
>>>>>
>>>>> I re-rtfm. The problem persisted, so I raised my concerns again.
>>>>> Again I was told to rtfm. Again I re-rtfm and returned with the
>>>>> same questions that were unanswered by the manual.
>>>>>
>>>>> This time I was politely informed where I could reach the authors of
>>>>> the software. I went there and we went through the whole rtfm,
>>>>> re-rtfm loop another 2 or three times until they finally asked to
>>>>> see my data. I sent them my data files.
>>>>>
>>>>> In about an hour, they confirmed that there was a problem. Great!
>>>>> Now they'll jump right on it - because everyone wants their code to
>>>>> work like they say it will, right?
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, not really. I offered to help where I could (sacrificing a
>>>>> goat, providing beer or money) but was told that the only help
>>>>> needed was to fix the code. Unfortunately for me, I don't know C
>>>>> coding - so I am SOL.
>>>>>
>>>>> Small businesses (which are 90+% of all businesses) are called
>>>>> "small businesses" because they are small. This generally means no
>>>>> in-house programmers. So, small businesses are at the mercy of the
>>>>> coders that provide the software that they run on.
>>>>>
>>>>> In this instance, I am at the mercy of these coders.
>>>>>
>>>>> As nice as they are, this "I'll get to it when I can" attitude is
>>>>> just not acceptable to small businesses. They lose market share.
>>>>> They lose customers and they lose money when software doesn't work
>>>>> as advertised in tfm.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is why FOSS just doesn't work for the majority of businesses
>>>>> (which are small businesses).
>>>>>
>>>>> While I move on to look for proprietary sources to replace the
>>>>> broken open sourced software, I am again reminded that the FOSS
>>>>> movement still "just doesn't get it" where small business is
>>>>> concerned.
>>>>>
>>>>> If it doesn't affect your earning a living or some other important
>>>>> aspect of your life, FOSS may be just fine. But, if its important,
>>>>> its important enough to pay to have it done right and supported.
>>>>>
>>>>> jim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why don't you preach to you're believers. After all you really don't
>>>> want the truth.
>>>> I have no problem with Linux cooperating with MS. But try to get MS
>>>> to cooperate with Linux that's another story.I really think you need
>>>> to talk to Dennis, Hadron, and Jeff Glatt. I do have my own "small
>>>> business" and have had for 30 years. Go some where where someone
>>>> wants to listen to you. caver1
>>>
>>> I'm willing to listen and I have tried everything I have been told to
>>> try.
>>>
>>> Do YOU have the answer to getting a clean install of Linux to connect
>>> to XP shares (that are not passworded) on a peer to peer XP network?
>>>
>>> I'm listening.....
>>>
>>> jim
>>
>>
>>
>> Why don't you ask MS why they won't cooperate with Linux. The only
>> times I had problems was with MS sharing with Linux not Linux sharing
>> with MS. I have always found it easier to share between Linux machines
>> than between MS machines. Connect a MS machine to a Linux network and
>> Linux lets MS see the network. Connect a Linux machine to a MS network
>> and you have to work to get the MS network to let the Linux machine in.
>> So is it Linux or MS?
>> Go preach to your own believers. :Q
>> caver1
>> caver1
>
> You could have just said that you didn't know.
>
> jim

smbclient -L host (list shares)
nmblookup -SM--workgroup <YOUR-WORKGROUP> (list master browser)
mount -t smbfs -o user="usernam",password="password" \\host\share /mnt/
point (mounts windows share if you can mount it as cifs)
....

"goarilla" <kevin.paulus@skynet.remove-this.be> wrote in message
news:4850bcac$0$2789$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be...
> On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 01:14:19 -0400, jim wrote:
>
>> "caver1" <caver1@inthemud.org> wrote in message
>> news:48508a2d$0$4262$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>> jim wrote:
>>>> "caver1" <caver1@inthemud.org> wrote in message
>>>> news:485084a4$0$4250$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>>>> jim wrote:
>>>>>> I have been chatting with people about my frustration with getting
>>>>>> simple stuff to work "out-of-the-box" with Linux.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Things like simply plugging into a network and being able to browse
>>>>>> XP folders on a peer to peer XP network (that means no server and no
>>>>>> authentication needed) that are not password protected. Still don't
>>>>>> have an answer to that one....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But, yesterday, I ran into a shining example of one reason that FOSS
>>>>>> will never work for small business (which is MUST to be able to
>>>>>> legitimately challenge Microsoft's monopoly).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While I was testing some software in a Linux environment, I came
>>>>>> across an area in which it would not work as advertised by the
>>>>>> authors. I raised some polite concern (really...I was polite) about
>>>>>> the problem in a user forum specific to this software, only to be
>>>>>> told politely to rtfm.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I re-rtfm. The problem persisted, so I raised my concerns again.
>>>>>> Again I was told to rtfm. Again I re-rtfm and returned with the
>>>>>> same questions that were unanswered by the manual.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This time I was politely informed where I could reach the authors of
>>>>>> the software. I went there and we went through the whole rtfm,
>>>>>> re-rtfm loop another 2 or three times until they finally asked to
>>>>>> see my data. I sent them my data files.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In about an hour, they confirmed that there was a problem. Great!
>>>>>> Now they'll jump right on it - because everyone wants their code to
>>>>>> work like they say it will, right?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, not really. I offered to help where I could (sacrificing a
>>>>>> goat, providing beer or money) but was told that the only help
>>>>>> needed was to fix the code. Unfortunately for me, I don't know C
>>>>>> coding - so I am SOL.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Small businesses (which are 90+% of all businesses) are called
>>>>>> "small businesses" because they are small. This generally means no
>>>>>> in-house programmers. So, small businesses are at the mercy of the
>>>>>> coders that provide the software that they run on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In this instance, I am at the mercy of these coders.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As nice as they are, this "I'll get to it when I can" attitude is
>>>>>> just not acceptable to small businesses. They lose market share.
>>>>>> They lose customers and they lose money when software doesn't work
>>>>>> as advertised in tfm.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is why FOSS just doesn't work for the majority of businesses
>>>>>> (which are small businesses).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While I move on to look for proprietary sources to replace the
>>>>>> broken open sourced software, I am again reminded that the FOSS
>>>>>> movement still "just doesn't get it" where small business is
>>>>>> concerned.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If it doesn't affect your earning a living or some other important
>>>>>> aspect of your life, FOSS may be just fine. But, if its important,
>>>>>> its important enough to pay to have it done right and supported.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> jim
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Why don't you preach to you're believers. After all you really don't
>>>>> want the truth.
>>>>> I have no problem with Linux cooperating with MS. But try to get MS
>>>>> to cooperate with Linux that's another story.I really think you need
>>>>> to talk to Dennis, Hadron, and Jeff Glatt. I do have my own "small
>>>>> business" and have had for 30 years. Go some where where someone
>>>>> wants to listen to you. caver1
>>>>
>>>> I'm willing to listen and I have tried everything I have been told to
>>>> try.
>>>>
>>>> Do YOU have the answer to getting a clean install of Linux to connect
>>>> to XP shares (that are not passworded) on a peer to peer XP network?
>>>>
>>>> I'm listening.....
>>>>
>>>> jim
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Why don't you ask MS why they won't cooperate with Linux. The only
>>> times I had problems was with MS sharing with Linux not Linux sharing
>>> with MS. I have always found it easier to share between Linux machines
>>> than between MS machines. Connect a MS machine to a Linux network and
>>> Linux lets MS see the network. Connect a Linux machine to a MS network
>>> and you have to work to get the MS network to let the Linux machine in.
>>> So is it Linux or MS?
>>> Go preach to your own believers. :Q
>>> caver1
>>> caver1
>>
>> You could have just said that you didn't know.
>>
>> jim
>
> smbclient -L host (list shares)
> nmblookup -SM--workgroup <YOUR-WORKGROUP> (list master browser)
> mount -t smbfs -o user="usernam",password="password" \\host\share /mnt/
> point (mounts windows share if you can mount it as cifs)

OK, let's try this again....and this time pay attention......

There are # of XP machines all connected to one router. This is called a
peer to peer network. There is no server.

The XP machines share folders that ARE NOT PASSWORD PROTECTED.

The Linux user does not know the names of all PCs on the p2p network, nor
does he know the names of all of the shares.

An XP installation can detect all PCs and shares and display them, and
access them via Windows Explorer with no input from the user as to machine
names or folder names or share names. It is as easy as pluging into the
network and opening explorer and network neighborhood.

Show me how to make a Linux box do THAT out of the box.

jim

jim wrote:

> I have been chatting with people about my frustration with getting
> simple stuff to work "out-of-the-box" with Linux.
>
> Things like simply plugging into a network and being able to browse XP
> folders on a peer to peer XP network (that means no server and no
> authentication needed) that are not password protected. Still don't
> have an answer to that one....
>
> But, yesterday, I ran into a shining example of one reason that FOSS
> will never work for small business (which is MUST to be able to
> legitimately challenge Microsoft's monopoly).
>
> While I was testing some software in a Linux environment, I came
> across an
> area in which it would not work as advertised by the authors. I
> raised some polite concern (really...I was polite) about the problem
> in a user forum
> specific to this software, only to be told politely to rtfm.
>
> I re-rtfm. The problem persisted, so I raised my concerns again.
> Again I
> was told to rtfm. Again I re-rtfm and returned with the same
> questions that were unanswered by the manual.
>
> This time I was politely informed where I could reach the authors of
> the
> software. I went there and we went through the whole rtfm, re-rtfm
> loop
> another 2 or three times until they finally asked to see my data. I
> sent them my data files.
>
> In about an hour, they confirmed that there was a problem. Great! Now
> they'll jump right on it - because everyone wants their code to work
> like they say it will, right?
>
> Well, not really. I offered to help where I could (sacrificing a
> goat, providing beer or money) but was told that the only help needed
> was to fix the code. Unfortunately for me, I don't know C coding - so
> I am SOL.
>
> Small businesses (which are 90+% of all businesses) are called "small
> businesses" because they are small. This generally means no in-house
> programmers. So, small businesses are at the mercy of the coders that
> provide the software that they run on.
>
> In this instance, I am at the mercy of these coders.
>
> As nice as they are, this "I'll get to it when I can" attitude is just
> not
> acceptable to small businesses. They lose market share. They lose
> customers and they lose money when software doesn't work as advertised
> in tfm.
>
> This is why FOSS just doesn't work for the majority of businesses
> (which are small businesses).
>
> While I move on to look for proprietary sources to replace the broken
> open sourced software, I am again reminded that the FOSS movement
> still "just doesn't get it" where small business is concerned.
>
> If it doesn't affect your earning a living or some other important
> aspect of
> your life, FOSS may be just fine. But, if its important, its
> important enough to pay to have it done right and supported.
>
> jim

So far all your complaints seem have been concerned with software that
you appear to have obtained by downloading it. You have assumed that
the 'Free' part of "Free and oOpen Source Software, refers to the
ability to acquire it at no cost other than that you expend in
downloading it.

You have a problem with the software you have chosen to run your
business, the answer is to do as you would do if your business had a
problem with its plumbing, pay a plumber to mend it, in this case you
need to pay someone to fix the software. 'Googling' software
consultants/engineers/coders should provide you with the help you need.
You will of course have to pay for it. You also have to pay for your
stationery supplies, electricity, gasoline, furniture, business
premises, etc., etc., You seem not to have grasped the concept of 'Free
Software' , try looking here,
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

You may be able to obtain help using one of the various newsgroups
concerned with the specific GNU/Linux distribution or the specific
software, however as it is usually written by volunteers in their spare
time, you will have to wait until they have the spare time to help you.


--
Nemo
"Feather-footed through the plashy fen passes the questing vole"

"caver1" <caver1@inthemud.org> wrote in message
news:485084a4$0$4250$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

> I have no problem with Linux cooperating with MS. But try to get MS to
> cooperate with Linux that's another story.I really think you need to talk
> to Dennis,

Well thanks, if it is just some simple C/C++ I can probably fix it, at a
cost.
I am sure there are other places that jim could pay to have the code fixed.
Why not provide a solution rather than a worthless answer?

> Hadron, and Jeff Glatt.
> I do have my own "small business" and have had for 30 years.
> Go some where where someone wants to listen to you.

Don't include me in your troll answers.
Run along and play with Dan.

> caver1

"caver1" <caver1@inthemud.org> wrote in message
news:48508a2d$0$4262$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...


>
> Why don't you ask MS why they won't cooperate with Linux. The only times I
> had problems was with MS sharing with Linux not Linux sharing with MS.
> I have always found it easier to share between Linux machines than between
> MS machines. Connect a MS machine to a Linux network and Linux lets MS see
> the network. Connect a Linux machine to a MS network and you have to work
> to get the MS network to let the Linux machine in.
> So is it Linux or MS?

That is an easy question to answer..
XP is old, about five years old..
If linux doesn't talk to it now it isn't because XP has changed to stop it.
It is because the developers got it to work well enough that /they/ were
satisfied and went on to do other things.

> Go preach to your own believers. :Q

You include me in this thread so now you will have to put up with the truth.

> caver1
> caver1

"jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
news:Pz34k.3177$3F5.2675@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
>
> "goarilla" <kevin.paulus@skynet.remove-this.be> wrote in message


>> smbclient -L host (list shares)
>> nmblookup -SM--workgroup <YOUR-WORKGROUP> (list master browser)
>> mount -t smbfs -o user="usernam",password="password" \\host\share /mnt/
>> point (mounts windows share if you can mount it as cifs)
>
> OK, let's try this again....and this time pay attention......

That is the wrong attitude!

>
> There are # of XP machines all connected to one router. This is called a
> peer to peer network. There is no server.

There is a "server", its the machine providing the share.
M$ may call it something else but in this context it is a server.

>
> The XP machines share folders that ARE NOT PASSWORD PROTECTED.
>
> The Linux user does not know the names of all PCs on the p2p network, nor
> does he know the names of all of the shares.

What's P2P got to do with your previous posts?

"jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
news:xn24k.3147$3F5.3058@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
>
> "Tobias Brox" <tobias@stud.cs.uit.no> wrote in message
> news:g2q60g$15lc$1@news.uit.no...
>> [jim@home.net]
>>> But, yesterday, I ran into a shining example of one reason that FOSS
>>> will
>>> never work for small business
>> (...)
>>> In about an hour, they confirmed that there was a problem
>> (...)
>>> Small businesses (which are 90+% of all businesses) are called "small
>>> businesses" because they are small. This generally means no in-house
>>> programmers. So, small businesses are at the mercy of the coders that
>>> provide the software that they run on. In this instance, I am at the
>>> mercy of these coders.
>>
>> So goes the argument, that for proprietary software you have paid for
>> a product, you have someone to blame when things go wrong, and you
>> have a warrancy. In reality, the warrancy is usually worthless, and
>> in reality it's more important to fix the problems than to find
>> someone to blame.
>
> We agree completely on that point.
>
>> It's sometimes possible to find companies offering
>> paid support or warrancy on free software.
>>
>> For proprietary software, you are _really_ at the mercy of the company
>> that made the code. This company may go bankrupt, and then the
>> software most likely won't be maintained anymore. They may not have
>> the resources to priority to fix your problem - or maybe you're
>> representing such an insignificant part of their market that they
>> don't bother to priority it at all. Have you tried to enter the
>> forums and offer money for someone to fix the bugs or help you with
>> your problems? In most cases, this is possible with FOSS, but
>> impossible with secret-source software.
>
> I offered money and free beer (as in free beer) to the maintainers of the
> code base. They were not interested.
>
>> FOSS developers are different, some do it just for the pride of it,
>> others have a commercial interesst, yet others may barely be
>> maintaining some "legacy" software that they don't care much about
>> anymore. In most cases, when pointing out a reproducable bug in some
>> open source software product, it is fixed quite fast and completely
>> for free. Of course, one cannot rely on this - but that applies for
>> proprietary software as well!
>
> At least with proprietary code-based busineses you have a barganing chip -
> your business. They fix it or lose you as a stream of revenue. With
> FOSS, you don't even have that.
>
>>> As nice as they are, this "I'll get to it when I can" attitude is just
>>> not
>>> acceptable to small businesses.
>>
>> "I'll get to it when I can" is better than "then you're out of
>> luck"...
>
> They bot have the same impact on my current project.
>


If you have a working system using another product it is seldom worth the
effort of changing it.
If you are google and want thousands of machines and you can employ
engineers then its fine to switch to OSS if there is a business case.
You haven't done a business case or you would stick with what's already
working.
No small business will save enough to make a switch worthwhile whether its
between windows xp to vista or windows to mac or to linux for a working
system. The costs savings on the software just aren't enough. You need
another reason to do it. Like increased functionality, some "odd" hardware,
etc.

Go and do a business case and if it still says linux then pay someone to fix
it.
Don't say linux can't support business because it can't for *you*.

On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 20:34:23 -0400, jim wrote:

> I offered to help where I could (sacrificing a goat, providing beer or
> money) but was told that the only help needed was to fix the code.
> Unfortunately for me, I don't know C coding - so I am SOL.

If you really want to get it fixed and working,

http://www.rentacoder.com/

will enable you to put your money where your mouth is.

"dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote in message
news:g2qik8$gku$1@news.datemas.de...
>
>
> "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
> news:Pz34k.3177$3F5.2675@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
>>
>> "goarilla" <kevin.paulus@skynet.remove-this.be> wrote in message
>
>
>>> smbclient -L host (list shares)
>>> nmblookup -SM--workgroup <YOUR-WORKGROUP> (list master browser)
>>> mount -t smbfs -o user="usernam",password="password" \\host\share /mnt/
>>> point (mounts windows share if you can mount it as cifs)
>>
>> OK, let's try this again....and this time pay attention......
>
> That is the wrong attitude!

Wrong attitude?!

Dude, I have simply been looking for answers. And, I have been accused of
being a troll, mocked, lied to and generally told to piss off by people that
either (a) don't have a clue as to what the answers may actually be or (b)
are simply Linux Zealots who are too busy hating to offer a hand to someone
trying to make the switch to Linux.

There is definitely a wrong attitude in these Linux NGs....but it didn't
arrive with me.

>
>>
>> There are # of XP machines all connected to one router. This is called a
>> peer to peer network. There is no server.
>
> There is a "server", its the machine providing the share.
> M$ may call it something else but in this context it is a server.

In this context, as it was assummed by other Linux supporters in previous
posts that authentication must tale place via something like Active
Directory or a central server, I was trying to convey that there was no
central authority with which you needed to authenticate on the XP peer to
peer network.

>>
>> The XP machines share folders that ARE NOT PASSWORD PROTECTED.
>>
>> The Linux user does not know the names of all PCs on the p2p network, nor
>> does he know the names of all of the shares.
>
> What's P2P got to do with your previous posts?

A simple contraction of the term "peer to peer" as mentioned when describing
the ad hoc network earlier in the post......try and follow along please.

jim

"Mark Madsen" <mark.s.madsen+news******.com> wrote in message
news:4850d2c1$1_1@news.bluewin.ch...
> On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 20:34:23 -0400, jim wrote:
>
>> I offered to help where I could (sacrificing a goat, providing beer or
>> money) but was told that the only help needed was to fix the code.
>> Unfortunately for me, I don't know C coding - so I am SOL.
>
> If you really want to get it fixed and working,
>
> http://www.rentacoder.com/
>
> will enable you to put your money where your mouth is.

That's what I've been saying all along.

Linux is not ready out of the box to play well on a Microsoft network
without installing something like Samba and gathering info that Windows
users would normally never need to know.

jim

On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 04:05:46 -0400, jim wrote:

> "Mark Madsen" <mark.s.madsen+news******.com> wrote in message
> news:4850d2c1$1_1@news.bluewin.ch...
>> On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 20:34:23 -0400, jim wrote:
>>
>>> I offered to help where I could (sacrificing a goat, providing beer or
>>> money) but was told that the only help needed was to fix the code.
>>> Unfortunately for me, I don't know C coding - so I am SOL.
>>
>> If you really want to get it fixed and working,
>>
>> http://www.rentacoder.com/
>>
>> will enable you to put your money where your mouth is.
>
> That's what I've been saying all along.

Make sure to let us know what the fix was, how long it took, and what it
cost.

Posting a link here to your bid may also attract those who would be
interested in working on the fix for you.

> Linux is not ready out of the box to play well on a Microsoft network
> without installing something like Samba and gathering info that Windows
> users would normally never need to know.

The strangest part of your logic is that you seem to think it is a
shortcoming in Linux that Microsoft products don't work very well with
anything else.

Those of us who don't bother with that MS stuff don't feel any of your
pain. In fact, from this perspective it looks perversely masochistic.

jim wrote:
> Linux is not ready out of the box to play well on a Microsoft network
> without installing something like Samba and gathering info that Windows
> users would normally never need to know.

On the flip side, Windows is not ready out of the box to play well on an
all-Linux network (NIS, NFS, etc) without installing Windows Services
for Unix. It's all relative in the end.

-acp