On 2008-06-14, J.O. Aho <user@example.net> wrote:
> Jan Wielemaker wrote:
>
>> My scanner (Epson) died when moving to the
>> libusb stuff. That is annoying, but not much different from the
>> situation around major Windows upgrades. Other than that, I can't recall
>> I ever had to discontinue using something because the developer stopped.
>
> I did for a long time patch my kernel source to use the old module for
> my scanner, not for my scanner didn't work with libusb, but for it was a
> lot easier with setting up privileges when it came to the module.
>
> I didn't have to make any changes in the driver code itself, just add
> the files and see to that the option appeared in the menuconfig.

Thats a nice example where an educated user or a little OS business
around the corner can keep his/her things alive. I have the experience,
but I don't want to step outside standard build kernels as I don't want
to spent the time dealing with upgrades and in small business context,
buying a new scanner is a far more efficient option.

Cheers --- Jan

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

If it looks like a duck...and walks like a duck... and quacks like a duck...
IT MUST BE A TROLL...

To everyone that fed this one, you've been had.




--

Jerry McBride (jmcbride@mail-on.us)

On 2008-06-12, jim <jim@home.net> wrote:
>
> "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...

[deletia]

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

This nonsense is killing you right here. You're also too boneheaded
to listen to anyone willing to go to the trouble to correct you. If you
can't be bothered with the basics, why expect any thing else to go right
for you?

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

....this reminds me. The last time I tried to share an XP drive I got
an interesting message... "the server service has not been started".

I got a good chuckle out of that one.


> 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.

[deletia]


--
If you think that an 80G disk can hold HUNDRENDS of |||
hours of DV video then you obviously haven't used iMovie either. / | \

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

On 2008-06-12, jim <jim@home.net> 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....

[deletia]

Take it to COLA.

I don't really have a "good" answer for you since I can't replicate
your problem.

All you've really done is demonstrate for those of us hat have tried
how much better Linux is about this stuff than it used to be. A "small
business user" is going to have the equivlanet of their local Linux geek
do their Windows networking stuff anyways. So it really doesn't matter if
the Linux version of SMB is spiffy and gui driven or not.

The Windows userbase is terrified of anything new to the point of
being frightened of Macs. Even relative power users and users that are
or used to be professional engineers are like this.

So your glitches (assuming they are real) don't really mean much.

--
If you think that an 80G disk can hold HUNDRENDS of |||
hours of DV video then you obviously haven't used iMovie either. / | \

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.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

Jim,

Let me put the question this way.
Why do you want interoperability with windows file sharing?

If you have a business case, then can you not look at it from another
angle.. Use some other sharing mechanism, FTP or NFS (or something into
which microsoft hasn't folded any "extended" functionality to make people
umbilically dependent on their products.).

Let's accept it that samba isn't perfect (those guys have to reverse
engineer half of it, because most of the protocol is proprietary and hidden
as I understand). So we come to the question, what other choices do we
have..
What say? Would that not be a positive way of looking at it, rather than
bashing each other about something which exactly isn't in our hands?

My point is something like this..
Over time, I have learned that it's like using English and Malayalam.
Because I know English, I cannot gather all the vocabulary in Malayalam and
then try to use Malayalam. The grammar wouldn't work. You need to use
Malayalam the way Malayalam is supposed to be used.

Likewise, you need to learn to use linux the way linux is meant to be used;
not expect linux to work the way windows does. This process is rendered
more difficult than just learning linux, because you first have to unlearn
all that stereotype MS moulded into you and at the same time do the work of
learning linux. (I hope I'm not absolutely incoherent )

Now comes the big question..
"Then why bother to switch?"
The answer to that I believe is highly subjective. For me it's ethics.
Microsoft reeks of monopolistic malpractices, and policies which compromise
technology for market dominance. Plus windows has grown into such an obese
being almost incapable of ambulation (you know what I mean :D)

You can make a revised call about whether you want to switch to linux, now
that you have faced some issues on this side of the border too..
If you find persuasive reasons to switch, you're most welcome. In fact, you
are always welcome, because that is the greater philosophy of free
software.. (Forget all who come up with censorious remarks.)
But then, the ride will be tough as you know by now..

Personally, I recently made the switch to linux, and use windows only for
those rare instances where people make websites which don't work with
anything other than the MS IE. (Can you believe that the United States Visa
appointment booking website www.vfs-usa.co.in doesn't work properly on
firefox ! Part way through booking, you get an error message which doesn't
even give you a hint of what is the problem unless you know some good bit
of javascript and your correlation powers are particularly awake on that
day)

If one needs to get a serious hold on Microsoft, then what is most needed is
to reach out to the kids. I say this today because, every kid today grows
up neck deep in windows. (to the point where he actually believes windows
is in the hardware I suppose). Microsoft very well know this I guess, and I
believe that is the reason why
1. piracy is never given any serious attention
2. stuff like OLPC get them worked up real badly.
3. OEM licensing agreements are wrenched out of major laptop makers. (I say
makers, and not manufacturers.. I can call it the "Microsoft Tax" I
suppose.)

If GNU is what is introduced to kids first rather than windows, then
microsoft knows they're ****ed. That is why it's imperative to microsoft
agenda to make sure that kids grow up in windows.. the umbilical dependancy
I was talking about.

I know I've already digressed a lot.. let me stop lest I ramble to the point
of being called a troll..

/varghese

[follow up to alt.linux not followed]

Feverishly pounding upon a keyboard Varghese Mathew typed:

<snip>
> If one needs to get a serious hold on Microsoft, then what is most needed is
> to reach out to the kids. I say this today because, every kid today grows
> up neck deep in windows. (to the point where he actually believes windows
> is in the hardware I suppose). Microsoft very well know this I guess, and I
> believe that is the reason why

May be true, but my kid has known only Linux. When he *has* to use
Windows at school, he finds it "...clumsy, clunky and crummy. Window
sucks, Dad".

--
sk8r-365

sk8r-365 wrote:

> [follow up to alt.linux not followed]
>
> Feverishly pounding upon a keyboard Varghese Mathew typed:
>
Ah :)

> <snip>
>> If one needs to get a serious hold on Microsoft, then what is most needed
>> is to reach out to the kids. I say this today because, every kid today
>> grows up neck deep in windows. (to the point where he actually believes
>> windows is in the hardware I suppose). Microsoft very well know this I
>> guess, and I believe that is the reason why
>
> May be true, but my kid has known only Linux. When he *has* to use
> Windows at school, he finds it "...clumsy, clunky and crummy. Window
> sucks, Dad".
>
That supports my case :D
Adam has to be kept away from the apple.. If he eats it, his eyes will open
and he will become like god !

/varghese

Feverishly pounding upon a keyboard Varghese Mathew typed:
> sk8r-365 wrote:
>
>> [follow up to alt.linux not followed]
>>
>> Feverishly pounding upon a keyboard Varghese Mathew typed:
>>
> Ah :)
>
>> <snip>
>>> If one needs to get a serious hold on Microsoft, then what is most needed
>>> is to reach out to the kids. I say this today because, every kid today
>>> grows up neck deep in windows. (to the point where he actually believes
>>> windows is in the hardware I suppose). Microsoft very well know this I
>>> guess, and I believe that is the reason why
>>
>> May be true, but my kid has known only Linux. When he *has* to use
>> Windows at school, he finds it "...clumsy, clunky and crummy. Window
>> sucks, Dad".
>>
> That supports my case :D
> Adam has to be kept away from the apple.. If he eats it, his eyes will open
> and he will become like god !

.... having the knowledge of good and evil.

"Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old, he will
not depart from it." Proverbs 22:6

Hence, I have dutifully and properly trained my child to chose right
(Linux) over wrong (Windows) <big grin>. And, hey, Linux *IS* superior!

Later!
--
sk8r-365
But many that are first shall be last; and the last shall be first.
-- Matthew 19:30

["Followup-To:" header set to alt.os.linux.]
jim <jim@home.net>:
>
> In this instance, I am at the mercy of these coders.

Olive Oil's dad: "You owe me an apology." [Well, the devs, not me.]

Nobody told you to use it. If you don't know how (haven't learned
how), you shouldn't use it. I don't want unsecured FLOSS boxes on the
net anymore than I want unsecured $other boxes on the net.

BTW, the L in FLOSS means libre as in freedom. That's the real point
of FLOSS. Freedom to use your stuff as you see fit. The GPL applies
to distributors and developers, not users.

> 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.

That's where you hire someone who can to make it work, isn't it?

I contract for one of the biggest corps on the planet, and they love
this stuff. They have done a lot of research and learned everything
they can about it, and they know how to use it. You can too.


--
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*) http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html Linux Counter #80292
- - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html Please, don't Cc: me.

On Jun 13, 6:51*pm, ERACC <junkm...@eracc.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 11:02:17 -0400
>
> "jim" <j...@home.net> wrote:
> > I'll be honest with you TJ, I don't expect an honest answer in these groups.
>
> Thus you are seeing what you expect. Not that people are answering you
> dishonestly but that you expect it, so you perceive it incorrectly.
>
> Do not expect Linux to work with M$ proprietary networks "out of the box".. That
> is the wrong expectation unless the distribution you choose states that as a
> feature.

This is one problem most of us have to deal with. I have been using
since 2003, and of course I have through one form problem after
another. Eventully I learn to buy hard-ware that would work in Linux.
And I must say it though me to research first then spend.

This time however I did make a mistake. I bought this laptop (sony
Vaio) on sales and I bought it without doing a research. Although it
is working perfectly with Linux -- expect that pesky propriety wifi
card issue. Since this is my first laptop I am not that sad. I mean I
have few issues:

Tap thing doesn't turnoff during typing -- which makes impossible to
type something.
Screen is not anti-reflective
And of course Wifi card is propriety. Which sometime doesn't work
well.

Anyway -- assuming orginal poster is not a troll. I can understand
frustration some newbi go through. Our Linux Community need to create
few mp3 audio books for newbies -- put more emphasies doing research
on their computer hardware. Learing about open hardware -- and
propriety hardware etc...

Nevertheless, it's not wise to take out those who would be more then
wiling to help. They should remember that Windows Vista/OS that came
with latop/desktop doens't get any support by Micrsoft. They would
tell you to contact your OEM.

I will end my post with one positive note. Linux has come a long way.
Now we can buy Linux pre-install -- Eee PC is a fine exmaple. Perhaps,
this is what new user should do buy a pre-install Linux laptop it's
will safe them time, and few headache.