[News] Funny Article Advocating Linux - Linux

This is a discussion on [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux - Linux ; ____/ Kier on Saturday 29 September 2007 07:06 : \____ > On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 00:58:23 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote: > >> ____/ chrisv on Friday 28 September 2007 18:40 : \____ >> >>> Roy Schestowitz wrote: >>> >>>>____/ ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 72

Thread: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

  1. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    ____/ Kier on Saturday 29 September 2007 07:06 : \____

    > On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 00:58:23 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> ____/ chrisv on Friday 28 September 2007 18:40 : \____
    >>
    >>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>____/ chrisv on Friday 28 September 2007 14:54 : \____
    >>>>
    >>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>But if it's not exactly like Windows, then it's behind right? Some
    >>>>>>reviewers will give high score to those who mimic mistakes, e.g. Xandros,
    >>>>>>Linspire...
    >>>>>
    >>>>> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now. Works
    >>>>> for him...
    >>>>
    >>>>It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open source. It's
    >>>>aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're back were we started --
    >>>>another Windows.
    >>>
    >>> He's not locked in. He could switch tomorrow to another distro, if he
    >>> wanted to.

    >>
    >> Okay, you do have a point here, so while my comparison to OS X stands,
    >> the "lock-in" part of an analogy does not translate well. However, do bear
    >> in mind that Linspire put shackles on Linux _as a whole_, so in that sense,
    >> it punishes the (Linspire) Linux user no matter where s/he goes.

    >
    > HOw? I don't use Linspire, never have used Linspire and don't plan to use
    > Linspire. Linspire has no effect on me at all. Explain.
    > what you mean.


    I was talking about the patent thing.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Minesweeper Consultant and Solitaire Expert (MCSE)
    http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    Mem: 515500k total, 445668k used, 69832k free, 2244k buffers
    http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms

  2. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    Peter Köhlmann espoused:
    > Mark Kent wrote:
    >
    >> Jim Richardson espoused:
    >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>
    >>> On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 16:40:22 +0100,
    >>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>> ____/ chrisv on Friday 28 September 2007 14:54 : \____
    >>>>
    >>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>But if it's not exactly like Windows, then it's behind right? Some
    >>>>>>reviewers will give high score to those who mimic mistakes, e.g.
    >>>>>>Xandros, Linspire...
    >>>>>
    >>>>> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now. Works
    >>>>> for him...
    >>>>
    >>>> It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open source.
    >>>> It's aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're back were we
    >>>> started -- another Windows.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> How is someone using Linspire "locked in"?
    >>>

    >>
    >> Didn't they sign some kind of limited cross-licensing deal with
    >> Microsoft,

    >
    > So what? This amounts to "lock in" exactly how?


    I don't know exactly, which is why I was asking the question. If you
    don't know the answer, why did you respond?

    >
    >> whilst not quite admitting what it was the customer was
    >> really getting?
    >>

    >
    > Might it be a linux distro? With source code?


    Roy was just saying that they try to impose some restrictions on usage
    which they should not be doing.

    --
    | Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

  3. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    Roy Schestowitz espoused:
    > ____/ chrisv on Friday 28 September 2007 18:40 : \____
    >
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>
    >>>____/ chrisv on Friday 28 September 2007 14:54 : \____
    >>>
    >>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>But if it's not exactly like Windows, then it's behind right? Some
    >>>>>reviewers will give high score to those who mimic mistakes, e.g. Xandros,
    >>>>>Linspire...
    >>>>
    >>>> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now. Works
    >>>> for him...
    >>>
    >>>It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open source. It's
    >>>aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're back were we started --
    >>>another Windows.

    >>
    >> He's not locked in. He could switch tomorrow to another distro, if he
    >> wanted to.

    >
    > Okay, you do have a point here, so while my comparison to OS X stands,
    > the "lock-in" part of an analogy does not translate well. However, do bear in
    > mind that Linspire put shackles on Linux _as a whole_, so in that sense, it
    > punishes the (Linspire) Linux user no matter where s/he goes.
    >


    Ah, so few people really understand how lock-in works. Let's try again:

    Lock-in is an economic exit barrier. If you've paid several £1000s for
    software on Microsoft and want to move to OSX, then there's a very good
    chance you'll have to spend the same money again. Thus you have an exit
    barrier of several thousands.

    Sometimes, the exit-barrier can be through secret formats and protocols,
    though. If all you data is saved in an Apple secret format, then the
    exit barrier is equivalent to doing all your work again, or paying in
    some way for a tool to try to unpick the problem.

    In both cases, you are *locked-in*.

    Moreover, this is the point which nobody seems to grasp, which is that
    *everything* has a degree of lock-in; the reason to use open-source is
    to minimise the exit barrier, it can never be zero. Economists know the
    "opportunity cost" argument all too well.

    --
    | Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

  4. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    "Non scrivetemi" espoused:
    > chrisv wrote:
    >
    >> >> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now. Works
    >> >> for him...
    >> >
    >> >It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open source. It's
    >> >aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're back were we started --
    >> >another Windows.

    >>
    >> He's not locked in. He could switch tomorrow to another distro, if he
    >> wanted to.

    >
    > That's sorta like saying you're not locked into Windows because you can
    > switch to OSX/Linux/BSD.
    >
    > Bad driving is bad driving even if it's not Micro$oft at the wheel.
    >


    I quite agree. I don't know if you saw my other posting, but I was
    highlighting that lock-in is about an exit barrier. That might be the
    cost of replacing packages you've already bought, or the cost of
    replacing hardware, or the cost of redoing work which is stuck in
    proprietary formats, or the cost of paying for tools to unpick those
    proprietary formats, and so on.

    The point being that there is always lock-in, it's a question of how
    large the exit barrier is.

    --
    | Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

  5. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 22:20:25 +0100,
    Mark Kent wrote:
    > Jim Richardson espoused:
    >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >> Hash: SHA1
    >>
    >> On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 16:40:22 +0100,
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>> ____/ chrisv on Friday 28 September 2007 14:54 : \____
    >>>
    >>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>But if it's not exactly like Windows, then it's behind right? Some reviewers
    >>>>>will give high score to those who mimic mistakes, e.g. Xandros, Linspire...
    >>>>
    >>>> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now. Works
    >>>> for him...
    >>>
    >>> It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open source. It's
    >>> aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're back were we started --
    >>> another Windows.
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >> How is someone using Linspire "locked in"?
    >>

    >
    > Didn't they sign some kind of limited cross-licensing deal with
    > Microsoft, whilst not quite admitting what it was the customer was
    > really getting?
    >


    Doesn't answer the question of how someone using Linspire is somehow
    "locked in".

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFG/hDrd90bcYOAWPYRAgnfAKCbWUzSIhWM0+NMOUTf8PmPdWNpWwC g62Jq
    /2snukGn7bQ7KBcpx6oBY78=
    =2tO8
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --
    Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
    As practiced by computer science, the study of programming is an unholy
    mixture of mathematics, literary criticism, and folklore.
    -- B. A. Sheil, 1981

  6. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    Jim Richardson espoused:
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 22:20:25 +0100,
    > Mark Kent wrote:
    >> Jim Richardson espoused:
    >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>
    >>> On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 16:40:22 +0100,
    >>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>> ____/ chrisv on Friday 28 September 2007 14:54 : \____
    >>>>
    >>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>But if it's not exactly like Windows, then it's behind right? Some reviewers
    >>>>>>will give high score to those who mimic mistakes, e.g. Xandros, Linspire...
    >>>>>
    >>>>> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now. Works
    >>>>> for him...
    >>>>
    >>>> It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open source. It's
    >>>> aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're back were we started --
    >>>> another Windows.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> How is someone using Linspire "locked in"?
    >>>

    >>
    >> Didn't they sign some kind of limited cross-licensing deal with
    >> Microsoft, whilst not quite admitting what it was the customer was
    >> really getting?
    >>

    >
    > Doesn't answer the question of how someone using Linspire is somehow
    > "locked in".
    >


    I agree, but I thought it could be related.

    --
    | Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

  7. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    ____/ Mark Kent on Saturday 29 September 2007 09:31 : \____

    > "Non scrivetemi" espoused:
    >> chrisv wrote:
    >>
    >>> >> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now. Works
    >>> >> for him...
    >>> >
    >>> >It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open source.
    >>> >It's aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're back were we
    >>> >started -- another Windows.
    >>>
    >>> He's not locked in. He could switch tomorrow to another distro, if he
    >>> wanted to.

    >>
    >> That's sorta like saying you're not locked into Windows because you can
    >> switch to OSX/Linux/BSD.
    >>
    >> Bad driving is bad driving even if it's not Micro$oft at the wheel.
    >>

    >
    > I quite agree. I don't know if you saw my other posting, but I was
    > highlighting that lock-in is about an exit barrier. That might be the
    > cost of replacing packages you've already bought, or the cost of
    > replacing hardware, or the cost of redoing work which is stuck in
    > proprietary formats, or the cost of paying for tools to unpick those
    > proprietary formats, and so on.
    >
    > The point being that there is always lock-in, it's a question of how
    > large the exit barrier is.


    Linspire supports OOXML (translators). If that's not a lockin, I don't know
    what is. It also enabled Microsoft to pretend that OOXML is supported by other
    companies, which fills our world with even /more/ vendor lockin. Let's not
    even go into Linspire's proprietary codecs...

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Holey (sic) Cow! Longhorn is full of holes...
    http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    Cpu(s): 27.0%us, 4.9%sy, 1.0%ni, 61.9%id, 4.7%wa, 0.3%hi, 0.2%si, 0.0%st
    http://iuron.com - semantic engine to gather information

  8. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:21:01 +0100,
    Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    > ____/ Mark Kent on Saturday 29 September 2007 09:31 : \____
    >
    >> "Non scrivetemi" espoused:
    >>> chrisv wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> >> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now. Works
    >>>> >> for him...
    >>>> >
    >>>> >It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open source.
    >>>> >It's aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're back were we
    >>>> >started -- another Windows.
    >>>>
    >>>> He's not locked in. He could switch tomorrow to another distro, if he
    >>>> wanted to.
    >>>
    >>> That's sorta like saying you're not locked into Windows because you can
    >>> switch to OSX/Linux/BSD.
    >>>
    >>> Bad driving is bad driving even if it's not Micro$oft at the wheel.
    >>>

    >>
    >> I quite agree. I don't know if you saw my other posting, but I was
    >> highlighting that lock-in is about an exit barrier. That might be the
    >> cost of replacing packages you've already bought, or the cost of
    >> replacing hardware, or the cost of redoing work which is stuck in
    >> proprietary formats, or the cost of paying for tools to unpick those
    >> proprietary formats, and so on.
    >>
    >> The point being that there is always lock-in, it's a question of how
    >> large the exit barrier is.

    >
    > Linspire supports OOXML (translators). If that's not a lockin, I don't know
    > what is. It also enabled Microsoft to pretend that OOXML is supported by other
    > companies, which fills our world with even /more/ vendor lockin. Let's not
    > even go into Linspire's proprietary codecs...
    >


    So when there's an ooxml translator for OOorg, that means any Linux
    distro with OOorg is "locking in" their users?

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD4DBQFG/qvcd90bcYOAWPYRAprTAJ9yRRKn219XImitZnofy4a6LIXOsAC YgR4v
    F0Scgv6BKk8Y+ooDIG7bNw==
    =28I9
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --
    Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
    (Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.)

  9. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    ____/ Jim Richardson on Saturday 29 September 2007 20:47 : \____

    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:21:01 +0100,
    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >> ____/ Mark Kent on Saturday 29 September 2007 09:31 : \____
    >>
    >>> "Non scrivetemi" espoused:
    >>>> chrisv wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> >> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now. Works
    >>>>> >> for him...
    >>>>> >
    >>>>> >It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open source.
    >>>>> >It's aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're back were we
    >>>>> >started -- another Windows.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> He's not locked in. He could switch tomorrow to another distro, if he
    >>>>> wanted to.
    >>>>
    >>>> That's sorta like saying you're not locked into Windows because you can
    >>>> switch to OSX/Linux/BSD.
    >>>>
    >>>> Bad driving is bad driving even if it's not Micro$oft at the wheel.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> I quite agree. I don't know if you saw my other posting, but I was
    >>> highlighting that lock-in is about an exit barrier. That might be the
    >>> cost of replacing packages you've already bought, or the cost of
    >>> replacing hardware, or the cost of redoing work which is stuck in
    >>> proprietary formats, or the cost of paying for tools to unpick those
    >>> proprietary formats, and so on.
    >>>
    >>> The point being that there is always lock-in, it's a question of how
    >>> large the exit barrier is.

    >>
    >> Linspire supports OOXML (translators). If that's not a lockin, I don't know
    >> what is. It also enabled Microsoft to pretend that OOXML is supported by
    >> other companies, which fills our world with even /more/ vendor lockin. Let's
    >> not even go into Linspire's proprietary codecs...
    >>

    >
    > So when there's an ooxml translator for OOorg, that means any Linux
    > distro with OOorg is "locking in" their users?


    ODF is an international standard supported by a large variety of office suites.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | GPL - Global Programmer's Law
    http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    run-level 2 2007-09-10 01:53 last=
    http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine

  10. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 01:48:21 +0100,
    Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    > ____/ Jim Richardson on Saturday 29 September 2007 20:47 : \____
    >
    >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >> Hash: SHA1
    >>
    >> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:21:01 +0100,
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>> ____/ Mark Kent on Saturday 29 September 2007 09:31 : \____
    >>>
    >>>> "Non scrivetemi" espoused:
    >>>>> chrisv wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> >> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now. Works
    >>>>>> >> for him...
    >>>>>> >
    >>>>>> >It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open source.
    >>>>>> >It's aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're back were we
    >>>>>> >started -- another Windows.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> He's not locked in. He could switch tomorrow to another distro, if he
    >>>>>> wanted to.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> That's sorta like saying you're not locked into Windows because you can
    >>>>> switch to OSX/Linux/BSD.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Bad driving is bad driving even if it's not Micro$oft at the wheel.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> I quite agree. I don't know if you saw my other posting, but I was
    >>>> highlighting that lock-in is about an exit barrier. That might be the
    >>>> cost of replacing packages you've already bought, or the cost of
    >>>> replacing hardware, or the cost of redoing work which is stuck in
    >>>> proprietary formats, or the cost of paying for tools to unpick those
    >>>> proprietary formats, and so on.
    >>>>
    >>>> The point being that there is always lock-in, it's a question of how
    >>>> large the exit barrier is.
    >>>
    >>> Linspire supports OOXML (translators). If that's not a lockin, I don't know
    >>> what is. It also enabled Microsoft to pretend that OOXML is supported by
    >>> other companies, which fills our world with even /more/ vendor lockin. Let's
    >>> not even go into Linspire's proprietary codecs...
    >>>

    >>
    >> So when there's an ooxml translator for OOorg, that means any Linux
    >> distro with OOorg is "locking in" their users?

    >
    > ODF is an international standard supported by a large variety of
    > office suites.
    >


    Total non-sequitur. How does supporting ooxml mean a distro is "locking
    in their users" When OOrg on the distro you use can support ooxml, does
    that mean you are locked it?

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFG/wtRd90bcYOAWPYRAorkAJ98ltnmEdr7+URJlHQ3LNmZAs7YWgC fSexN
    fcJCwnehcC45T9TGvwKDo6w=
    =dcvE
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --
    Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
    Chaos, panic, & disorder - my work here is done

  11. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    ____/ Jim Richardson on Sunday 30 September 2007 03:34 : \____

    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 01:48:21 +0100,
    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >> ____/ Jim Richardson on Saturday 29 September 2007 20:47 : \____
    >>
    >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>
    >>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:21:01 +0100,
    >>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Saturday 29 September 2007 09:31 : \____
    >>>>
    >>>>> "Non scrivetemi" espoused:
    >>>>>> chrisv wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> >> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now.
    >>>>>>> >> Works for him...
    >>>>>>> >
    >>>>>>> >It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open source.
    >>>>>>> >It's aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're back were we
    >>>>>>> >started -- another Windows.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> He's not locked in. He could switch tomorrow to another distro, if he
    >>>>>>> wanted to.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> That's sorta like saying you're not locked into Windows because you can
    >>>>>> switch to OSX/Linux/BSD.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Bad driving is bad driving even if it's not Micro$oft at the wheel.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I quite agree. I don't know if you saw my other posting, but I was
    >>>>> highlighting that lock-in is about an exit barrier. That might be the
    >>>>> cost of replacing packages you've already bought, or the cost of
    >>>>> replacing hardware, or the cost of redoing work which is stuck in
    >>>>> proprietary formats, or the cost of paying for tools to unpick those
    >>>>> proprietary formats, and so on.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The point being that there is always lock-in, it's a question of how
    >>>>> large the exit barrier is.
    >>>>
    >>>> Linspire supports OOXML (translators). If that's not a lockin, I don't
    >>>> know what is. It also enabled Microsoft to pretend that OOXML is supported
    >>>> by other companies, which fills our world with even /more/ vendor lockin.
    >>>> Let's not even go into Linspire's proprietary codecs...
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> So when there's an ooxml translator for OOorg, that means any Linux
    >>> distro with OOorg is "locking in" their users?

    >>
    >> ODF is an international standard supported by a large variety of
    >> office suites.
    >>

    >
    > Total non-sequitur. How does supporting ooxml mean a distro is "locking
    > in their users" When OOrg on the distro you use can support ooxml, does
    > that mean you are locked it?


    There are two ways to look at this:

    1. A distro that supports OOXML (or proprietary codecs for that matter
    inhibits it.

    2. Support for OOXML has assisted attempts to make OOXML, which is
    vendor dependent and patent-encumbered, more widespread.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | INQredible Hacktivism
    http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    Tasks: 141 total, 2 running, 138 sleeping, 0 stopped, 1 zombie
    http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine

  12. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 04:57:48 +0100,
    Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    > ____/ Jim Richardson on Sunday 30 September 2007 03:34 : \____
    >
    >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >> Hash: SHA1
    >>
    >> On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 01:48:21 +0100,
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>> ____/ Jim Richardson on Saturday 29 September 2007 20:47 : \____
    >>>
    >>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>>
    >>>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:21:01 +0100,
    >>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Saturday 29 September 2007 09:31 : \____
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> "Non scrivetemi" espoused:
    >>>>>>> chrisv wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> >> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now.
    >>>>>>>> >> Works for him...
    >>>>>>>> >
    >>>>>>>> >It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open source.
    >>>>>>>> >It's aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're back were we
    >>>>>>>> >started -- another Windows.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> He's not locked in. He could switch tomorrow to another distro, if he
    >>>>>>>> wanted to.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> That's sorta like saying you're not locked into Windows because you can
    >>>>>>> switch to OSX/Linux/BSD.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Bad driving is bad driving even if it's not Micro$oft at the wheel.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I quite agree. I don't know if you saw my other posting, but I was
    >>>>>> highlighting that lock-in is about an exit barrier. That might be the
    >>>>>> cost of replacing packages you've already bought, or the cost of
    >>>>>> replacing hardware, or the cost of redoing work which is stuck in
    >>>>>> proprietary formats, or the cost of paying for tools to unpick those
    >>>>>> proprietary formats, and so on.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> The point being that there is always lock-in, it's a question of how
    >>>>>> large the exit barrier is.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Linspire supports OOXML (translators). If that's not a lockin, I don't
    >>>>> know what is. It also enabled Microsoft to pretend that OOXML is supported
    >>>>> by other companies, which fills our world with even /more/ vendor lockin.
    >>>>> Let's not even go into Linspire's proprietary codecs...
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> So when there's an ooxml translator for OOorg, that means any Linux
    >>>> distro with OOorg is "locking in" their users?
    >>>
    >>> ODF is an international standard supported by a large variety of
    >>> office suites.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Total non-sequitur. How does supporting ooxml mean a distro is "locking
    >> in their users" When OOrg on the distro you use can support ooxml, does
    >> that mean you are locked it?

    >
    > There are two ways to look at this:
    >
    > 1. A distro that supports OOXML (or proprietary codecs for that matter
    > inhibits it.
    >
    > 2. Support for OOXML has assisted attempts to make OOXML, which is
    > vendor dependent and patent-encumbered, more widespread.
    >


    I'd prefer you simply answer the question,

    When OOrg on the distro you use can support ooxml, does that mean you
    are locked it?

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFG/ypad90bcYOAWPYRAkYmAKC728GONSJD3SOnZdO0TAdzzPIjTQC eOf1C
    fXlaxIUiOZcWckQwfgTu9Lg=
    =401e
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --
    Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
    "A language, is a dialect, with an army, and a navy"

  13. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    ____/ Jim Richardson on Sunday 30 September 2007 05:47 : \____

    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 04:57:48 +0100,
    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >> ____/ Jim Richardson on Sunday 30 September 2007 03:34 : \____
    >>
    >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>
    >>> On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 01:48:21 +0100,
    >>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>> ____/ Jim Richardson on Saturday 29 September 2007 20:47 : \____
    >>>>
    >>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>>>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>>>
    >>>>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:21:01 +0100,
    >>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Saturday 29 September 2007 09:31 : \____
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> "Non scrivetemi" espoused:
    >>>>>>>> chrisv wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> >> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now.
    >>>>>>>>> >> Works for him...
    >>>>>>>>> >
    >>>>>>>>> >It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open
    >>>>>>>>> >source. It's aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're
    >>>>>>>>> >back were we started -- another Windows.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> He's not locked in. He could switch tomorrow to another distro, if
    >>>>>>>>> he wanted to.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> That's sorta like saying you're not locked into Windows because you
    >>>>>>>> can switch to OSX/Linux/BSD.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Bad driving is bad driving even if it's not Micro$oft at the wheel.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> I quite agree. I don't know if you saw my other posting, but I was
    >>>>>>> highlighting that lock-in is about an exit barrier. That might be the
    >>>>>>> cost of replacing packages you've already bought, or the cost of
    >>>>>>> replacing hardware, or the cost of redoing work which is stuck in
    >>>>>>> proprietary formats, or the cost of paying for tools to unpick those
    >>>>>>> proprietary formats, and so on.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> The point being that there is always lock-in, it's a question of how
    >>>>>>> large the exit barrier is.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Linspire supports OOXML (translators). If that's not a lockin, I don't
    >>>>>> know what is. It also enabled Microsoft to pretend that OOXML is
    >>>>>> supported by other companies, which fills our world with even /more/
    >>>>>> vendor lockin. Let's not even go into Linspire's proprietary codecs...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> So when there's an ooxml translator for OOorg, that means any Linux
    >>>>> distro with OOorg is "locking in" their users?
    >>>>
    >>>> ODF is an international standard supported by a large variety of
    >>>> office suites.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Total non-sequitur. How does supporting ooxml mean a distro is "locking
    >>> in their users" When OOrg on the distro you use can support ooxml, does
    >>> that mean you are locked it?

    >>
    >> There are two ways to look at this:
    >>
    >> 1. A distro that supports OOXML (or proprietary codecs for that
    >> matter
    >> inhibits it.
    >>
    >> 2. Support for OOXML has assisted attempts to make OOXML, which is
    >> vendor dependent and patent-encumbered, more widespread.
    >>

    >
    > I'd prefer you simply answer the question,
    >
    > When OOrg on the distro you use can support ooxml, does that mean you
    > are locked it?


    No.

    This question is rhetorical and you are not asking the right one. I believe I
    never suggested this and I don't know how it came to you cornering me with an
    implicit accusation that I consider OOo a lock-in.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine

  14. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > ____/ Jim Richardson on Sunday 30 September 2007 05:47 : \____
    >
    >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >> Hash: SHA1
    >>
    >> On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 04:57:48 +0100,
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>> ____/ Jim Richardson on Sunday 30 September 2007 03:34 : \____
    >>>
    >>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>>
    >>>> On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 01:48:21 +0100,
    >>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>> ____/ Jim Richardson on Saturday 29 September 2007 20:47 : \____
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>>>>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:21:01 +0100,
    >>>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Saturday 29 September 2007 09:31 : \____
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> "Non scrivetemi"
    >>>>>>>> espoused:
    >>>>>>>>> chrisv wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> >> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now.
    >>>>>>>>>> >> Works for him...
    >>>>>>>>>> >
    >>>>>>>>>> >It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open
    >>>>>>>>>> >source. It's aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're
    >>>>>>>>>> >back were we started -- another Windows.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> He's not locked in. He could switch tomorrow to another distro,
    >>>>>>>>>> if he wanted to.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> That's sorta like saying you're not locked into Windows because
    >>>>>>>>> you can switch to OSX/Linux/BSD.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Bad driving is bad driving even if it's not Micro$oft at the
    >>>>>>>>> wheel.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I quite agree. I don't know if you saw my other posting, but I was
    >>>>>>>> highlighting that lock-in is about an exit barrier. That might be
    >>>>>>>> the cost of replacing packages you've already bought, or the cost
    >>>>>>>> of replacing hardware, or the cost of redoing work which is stuck
    >>>>>>>> in proprietary formats, or the cost of paying for tools to unpick
    >>>>>>>> those proprietary formats, and so on.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> The point being that there is always lock-in, it's a question of
    >>>>>>>> how large the exit barrier is.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Linspire supports OOXML (translators). If that's not a lockin, I
    >>>>>>> don't know what is. It also enabled Microsoft to pretend that OOXML
    >>>>>>> is supported by other companies, which fills our world with even
    >>>>>>> /more/ vendor lockin. Let's not even go into Linspire's proprietary
    >>>>>>> codecs...
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> So when there's an ooxml translator for OOorg, that means any Linux
    >>>>>> distro with OOorg is "locking in" their users?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> ODF is an international standard supported by a large variety of
    >>>>> office suites.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Total non-sequitur. How does supporting ooxml mean a distro is "locking
    >>>> in their users" When OOrg on the distro you use can support ooxml, does
    >>>> that mean you are locked it?
    >>>
    >>> There are two ways to look at this:
    >>>
    >>> 1. A distro that supports OOXML (or proprietary codecs for that
    >>> matter
    >>> inhibits it.
    >>>
    >>> 2. Support for OOXML has assisted attempts to make OOXML, which
    >>> is
    >>> vendor dependent and patent-encumbered, more widespread.
    >>>

    >>
    >> I'd prefer you simply answer the question,
    >>
    >> When OOrg on the distro you use can support ooxml, does that mean you
    >> are locked it?

    >
    > No.
    >
    > This question is rhetorical


    No, it is extremely simple.
    Does OO with OOXML "lock-in" the users?

    > and you are not asking the right one.


    Ah yes. So you are defining now which questions are "right" and "valid" and
    can be asked. Naturally you will step down from the lofty heights you are
    in only to answer "right" and "valid" questions beforehand deemed "worthy"

    > I believe I never suggested this and I don't know how it came to you
    > cornering me with an implicit accusation that I consider OOo a lock-in.
    >


    It is very simple: You did, and now you refuse an answer

    You dance around an answer exactly like Snot when cornered and can't even
    post a simple "yes" or "no"
    --
    If you're right 90% of the time, why quibble about the remaining 3%?


  15. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 07:56:10 +0100,
    Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    > ____/ Jim Richardson on Sunday 30 September 2007 05:47 : \____
    >
    >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >> Hash: SHA1
    >>
    >> On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 04:57:48 +0100,
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>> ____/ Jim Richardson on Sunday 30 September 2007 03:34 : \____
    >>>
    >>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>>
    >>>> On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 01:48:21 +0100,
    >>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>> ____/ Jim Richardson on Saturday 29 September 2007 20:47 : \____
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>>>>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:21:01 +0100,
    >>>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Saturday 29 September 2007 09:31 : \____
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> "Non scrivetemi" espoused:
    >>>>>>>>> chrisv wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> >> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now.
    >>>>>>>>>> >> Works for him...
    >>>>>>>>>> >
    >>>>>>>>>> >It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open
    >>>>>>>>>> >source. It's aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're
    >>>>>>>>>> >back were we started -- another Windows.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> He's not locked in. He could switch tomorrow to another distro, if
    >>>>>>>>>> he wanted to.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> That's sorta like saying you're not locked into Windows because you
    >>>>>>>>> can switch to OSX/Linux/BSD.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Bad driving is bad driving even if it's not Micro$oft at the wheel.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I quite agree. I don't know if you saw my other posting, but I was
    >>>>>>>> highlighting that lock-in is about an exit barrier. That might be the
    >>>>>>>> cost of replacing packages you've already bought, or the cost of
    >>>>>>>> replacing hardware, or the cost of redoing work which is stuck in
    >>>>>>>> proprietary formats, or the cost of paying for tools to unpick those
    >>>>>>>> proprietary formats, and so on.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> The point being that there is always lock-in, it's a question of how
    >>>>>>>> large the exit barrier is.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Linspire supports OOXML (translators). If that's not a lockin, I don't
    >>>>>>> know what is. It also enabled Microsoft to pretend that OOXML is
    >>>>>>> supported by other companies, which fills our world with even /more/
    >>>>>>> vendor lockin. Let's not even go into Linspire's proprietary codecs...
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> So when there's an ooxml translator for OOorg, that means any Linux
    >>>>>> distro with OOorg is "locking in" their users?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> ODF is an international standard supported by a large variety of
    >>>>> office suites.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Total non-sequitur. How does supporting ooxml mean a distro is "locking
    >>>> in their users" When OOrg on the distro you use can support ooxml, does
    >>>> that mean you are locked it?
    >>>
    >>> There are two ways to look at this:
    >>>
    >>> 1. A distro that supports OOXML (or proprietary codecs for that
    >>> matter
    >>> inhibits it.
    >>>
    >>> 2. Support for OOXML has assisted attempts to make OOXML, which is
    >>> vendor dependent and patent-encumbered, more widespread.
    >>>

    >>
    >> I'd prefer you simply answer the question,
    >>
    >> When OOrg on the distro you use can support ooxml, does that mean you
    >> are locked it?

    >
    > No.
    >
    > This question is rhetorical and you are not asking the right one. I believe I
    > never suggested this and I don't know how it came to you cornering me with an
    > implicit accusation that I consider OOo a lock-in.
    >



    I was asking you to explain your claim that Linspire was locking it's
    users in, in responce, you stated that Linspire supported an OOXML
    translator for OOorg, I then asked if you considered any distro that
    supported an OOXML translator for OOorg to be "locking in" it's users?


    If you *don't* consider an OOXML translator for OOorg a lock in, why did
    you mention it in responce to a question about why you thought Linspire
    was locking it's users in?

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFG/2C9d90bcYOAWPYRAuQCAKCm6XTbTLcDn+w+da2U9k+RlmTAbAC fQaOj
    bonxrEg53CF6qaNxAQSeYLs=
    =pWCn
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --
    Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
    Focus on the goal, not the path.

  16. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    Roy Schestowitz espoused:
    > ____/ Jim Richardson on Sunday 30 September 2007 05:47 : \____
    >
    >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >> Hash: SHA1
    >>
    >> On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 04:57:48 +0100,
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>> ____/ Jim Richardson on Sunday 30 September 2007 03:34 : \____
    >>>
    >>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>>
    >>>> On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 01:48:21 +0100,
    >>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>> ____/ Jim Richardson on Saturday 29 September 2007 20:47 : \____
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>>>>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:21:01 +0100,
    >>>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Saturday 29 September 2007 09:31 : \____
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> "Non scrivetemi" espoused:
    >>>>>>>>> chrisv wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> >> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now.
    >>>>>>>>>> >> Works for him...
    >>>>>>>>>> >
    >>>>>>>>>> >It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open
    >>>>>>>>>> >source. It's aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're
    >>>>>>>>>> >back were we started -- another Windows.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> He's not locked in. He could switch tomorrow to another distro, if
    >>>>>>>>>> he wanted to.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> That's sorta like saying you're not locked into Windows because you
    >>>>>>>>> can switch to OSX/Linux/BSD.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Bad driving is bad driving even if it's not Micro$oft at the wheel.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I quite agree. I don't know if you saw my other posting, but I was
    >>>>>>>> highlighting that lock-in is about an exit barrier. That might be the
    >>>>>>>> cost of replacing packages you've already bought, or the cost of
    >>>>>>>> replacing hardware, or the cost of redoing work which is stuck in
    >>>>>>>> proprietary formats, or the cost of paying for tools to unpick those
    >>>>>>>> proprietary formats, and so on.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> The point being that there is always lock-in, it's a question of how
    >>>>>>>> large the exit barrier is.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Linspire supports OOXML (translators). If that's not a lockin, I don't
    >>>>>>> know what is. It also enabled Microsoft to pretend that OOXML is
    >>>>>>> supported by other companies, which fills our world with even /more/
    >>>>>>> vendor lockin. Let's not even go into Linspire's proprietary codecs...
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> So when there's an ooxml translator for OOorg, that means any Linux
    >>>>>> distro with OOorg is "locking in" their users?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> ODF is an international standard supported by a large variety of
    >>>>> office suites.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Total non-sequitur. How does supporting ooxml mean a distro is "locking
    >>>> in their users" When OOrg on the distro you use can support ooxml, does
    >>>> that mean you are locked it?
    >>>
    >>> There are two ways to look at this:
    >>>
    >>> 1. A distro that supports OOXML (or proprietary codecs for that
    >>> matter
    >>> inhibits it.
    >>>
    >>> 2. Support for OOXML has assisted attempts to make OOXML, which is
    >>> vendor dependent and patent-encumbered, more widespread.
    >>>

    >>
    >> I'd prefer you simply answer the question,
    >>
    >> When OOrg on the distro you use can support ooxml, does that mean you
    >> are locked it?

    >
    > No.


    Yes, it does, and as I keep pointing out, you are always locked-in to a
    point, the question being the height of the exit barrier, ie., how much
    will it cost.

    Jim seems unable to process this.

    --
    | Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

  17. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    Jim Richardson espoused:
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 07:56:10 +0100,
    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >> ____/ Jim Richardson on Sunday 30 September 2007 05:47 : \____
    >>
    >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>
    >>> On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 04:57:48 +0100,
    >>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>> ____/ Jim Richardson on Sunday 30 September 2007 03:34 : \____
    >>>>
    >>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>>>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>>>
    >>>>> On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 01:48:21 +0100,
    >>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>>> ____/ Jim Richardson on Saturday 29 September 2007 20:47 : \____
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    >>>>>>> Hash: SHA1
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:21:01 +0100,
    >>>>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>>>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Saturday 29 September 2007 09:31 : \____
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> "Non scrivetemi" espoused:
    >>>>>>>>>> chrisv wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>> >> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now.
    >>>>>>>>>>> >> Works for him...
    >>>>>>>>>>> >
    >>>>>>>>>>> >It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open
    >>>>>>>>>>> >source. It's aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're
    >>>>>>>>>>> >back were we started -- another Windows.
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>> He's not locked in. He could switch tomorrow to another distro, if
    >>>>>>>>>>> he wanted to.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> That's sorta like saying you're not locked into Windows because you
    >>>>>>>>>> can switch to OSX/Linux/BSD.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Bad driving is bad driving even if it's not Micro$oft at the wheel.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> I quite agree. I don't know if you saw my other posting, but I was
    >>>>>>>>> highlighting that lock-in is about an exit barrier. That might be the
    >>>>>>>>> cost of replacing packages you've already bought, or the cost of
    >>>>>>>>> replacing hardware, or the cost of redoing work which is stuck in
    >>>>>>>>> proprietary formats, or the cost of paying for tools to unpick those
    >>>>>>>>> proprietary formats, and so on.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> The point being that there is always lock-in, it's a question of how
    >>>>>>>>> large the exit barrier is.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Linspire supports OOXML (translators). If that's not a lockin, I don't
    >>>>>>>> know what is. It also enabled Microsoft to pretend that OOXML is
    >>>>>>>> supported by other companies, which fills our world with even /more/
    >>>>>>>> vendor lockin. Let's not even go into Linspire's proprietary codecs...
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> So when there's an ooxml translator for OOorg, that means any Linux
    >>>>>>> distro with OOorg is "locking in" their users?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> ODF is an international standard supported by a large variety of
    >>>>>> office suites.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Total non-sequitur. How does supporting ooxml mean a distro is "locking
    >>>>> in their users" When OOrg on the distro you use can support ooxml, does
    >>>>> that mean you are locked it?
    >>>>
    >>>> There are two ways to look at this:
    >>>>
    >>>> 1. A distro that supports OOXML (or proprietary codecs for that
    >>>> matter
    >>>> inhibits it.
    >>>>
    >>>> 2. Support for OOXML has assisted attempts to make OOXML, which is
    >>>> vendor dependent and patent-encumbered, more widespread.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> I'd prefer you simply answer the question,
    >>>
    >>> When OOrg on the distro you use can support ooxml, does that mean you
    >>> are locked it?

    >>
    >> No.
    >>
    >> This question is rhetorical and you are not asking the right one. I believe I
    >> never suggested this and I don't know how it came to you cornering me with an
    >> implicit accusation that I consider OOo a lock-in.
    >>

    >
    >
    > I was asking you to explain your claim that Linspire was locking it's
    > users in, in responce, you stated that Linspire supported an OOXML
    > translator for OOorg, I then asked if you considered any distro that
    > supported an OOXML translator for OOorg to be "locking in" it's users?
    >


    Yes, it is. How high is the exit barrier should be your question.
    Obviously, there *is* an exit barrier, but you seem to struggle to grasp
    the concept.

    --
    | Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

  18. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    Non scrivetemi wrote:

    > chrisv wrote:
    >
    >> >> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now.
    >> >> Works for him...
    >> >
    >> >It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open source.
    >> >It's aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're back were we
    >> >started -- another Windows.

    >>
    >> He's not locked in. He could switch tomorrow to another distro, if he
    >> wanted to.

    >
    > That's sorta like saying you're not locked into Windows because you can
    > switch to OSX/Linux/BSD.
    >
    > Bad driving is bad driving even if it's not Micro$oft at the wheel.


    No, because he's not using proprietary applications, and his data is not
    in proprietary formats.

  19. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 11:53:51 +0100,
    Mark Kent wrote:
    > Roy Schestowitz espoused:
    >> ____/ Jim Richardson on Sunday 30 September 2007 05:47 : \____


    >>
    >>> When OOrg on the distro you use can support ooxml, does that mean you
    >>> are locked it?

    >>
    >> No.

    >
    > Yes, it does, and as I keep pointing out, you are always locked-in to a
    > point, the question being the height of the exit barrier, ie., how much
    > will it cost.
    >
    > Jim seems unable to process this.
    >


    if *all* distros *all* lock you in, no matter what, then the term is
    meanigless, and Roy, singling out Linspire for that, is equally
    meaningless.

    OOorg supporting a proprietary format doesn't lock you in. If OOorg
    *defaulted* to a proprietary format, that could be lock in. But just
    supporting a format like .doc? no, that's not locking you in, in fact,
    that's something that helps you escape lockin by others.


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFHAAbXd90bcYOAWPYRArf0AJ9ede2B5BnblKd0tOuiJ8 vVXiY/4gCbBddD
    YSy2Hhx5ZGm9bNdXEiOpss4=
    =0AZW
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --
    Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
    Ignore the propaganda, focus on what you see

  20. Re: [News] Funny Article Advocating Linux

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 11:54:37 +0100,
    Mark Kent wrote:
    > Jim Richardson espoused:


    >>
    >> I was asking you to explain your claim that Linspire was locking it's
    >> users in, in responce, you stated that Linspire supported an OOXML
    >> translator for OOorg, I then asked if you considered any distro that
    >> supported an OOXML translator for OOorg to be "locking in" it's users?
    >>

    >
    > Yes, it is. How high is the exit barrier should be your question.
    > Obviously, there *is* an exit barrier, but you seem to struggle to grasp
    > the concept.
    >


    So when OOorg in your distro can support OOXML you will be "locked in"?

    kind of a wierd way of looking at it.

    Since OOorg already supports .doc, do you consider "tha" to be locking
    you in? if not, why not?

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFHAAXhd90bcYOAWPYRAkNVAJ0cPALYkM2ufKyl/f9PryfqUzqEmgCgvHdn
    fI+OYvs0GJVglA2YvejZ3J0=
    =pPvu
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --
    Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
    If you don't know how to do something, you don't know how to do it with a
    computer.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast