[vox] Reasons you might not want to use OpenOffice

[jimbo]

I'M GONNA TELL MOM ON YOU GUYS!!!

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ruben Safir" <ruben at mrbrklyn.com>
To: "LUGOD's general discussion mailing list" <vox at lists.lugod.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 5:24 PM
Subject: Re: [vox] Reasons you might not want to use OpenOffice


> >
> > You really fail to understand. Its OK.
>
> Pot.  Kettle.  Black.

Yeah .. ok

> >
> >
> >> Sorry, but for me, arguing free/proprietary is like the editor wars,
> >> pointless and stupid.
> >
> > That would not be an appropriate comparision.
>
> Really?

Yes o Really

> I see the the same level of fanaticism

No name calling please.  I did not call you names, and I expect the same
curtosy in return...

> between advocates of a
> single philosophy and those who start flamewars over a single
> application.

Things can be discussed only when two individuals care to listen as well
as talk.  We've been listening to this theory for over decade now and
by this time there is enough empirical evidence to prove it wrong.

All the largest and most productive computer uses at this juncture, from
Facebook, to Google, to IBM, to the financial markets, to Hollywood and all
completely dependent on Free Software.  Now this is not the intent of
free software, but this is the result of Free Software.

All other systems end up like bitkeeper...

Aside from the technical specifications that seperate VIM from EMACS,
you comparing too completely dislike things.  Chosing an editor, or a
word processor or a raster program has nothing to do with the choice of
using software which is Free and opposed to non-free software.

Free Software benifits even the noncoders, and it is the only form of
software that will not end up on the scrapheap of history as the need
for uninhibited creativity and education, the foundation of a healty
free society, demands that the systems used to be Free if long term
development (and as a side affect...profitability) is to be maintained.

One is a political issue...whether software that is used is Free and
provide Freedom to users, or if you choses to use software that is
designed to my users dependent, designed to control users.

A better analogy, if you need one, is like the difference between
illegal "recreational" drugs, and drugs used for healing.  One is
designed enable the patient to be free of illness and productive, the
ither is designed to enslave the user, and to make them addicted to a
cheap fix.

> >
> >> I like emacs, my last girlfriend liked vi. I,
> >> and I think most users will use what they like, or what is actually
> >> better for *them.* GIMP can't do what I need, full-stop.
> >
> > That is probably not true
>
> s/probably//
>
> Do you do digital photography/graphics at a semi-pro level?

I don't really care.  I've heard this argument for decades now, and all
the "photoshop" jocks have been out of work while people are beating
down the door for Free Software developers and users.

I've already told you the facts.  You can accept it or not.  That is up
to you.  You do not have enough experience to make the broad statements
that your making.

> Both I, and someone else elsethread pointed out where proprietary
> tools are strongest.  I see that you failed to address my dealbreaker
> issues with GIMP.  Okay, here's a primer in digital imaging.  Every
> single change you make degrades the image.  Data is lost, quality
> suffers.  16 bits/channel gives you more information to work with.
> When one eventually converts to 8 bits/channel, there is far less of a
> quality loss than if one was working in 8 bit colour the entire times.
>  I'll give GIMP another try once they have adjustment layers and 16
> bit colour.  Until then, it's a non-issue.  An essential feature
> simply isn't there.  I hear they'll address the bit depth issue in the
> next major release, and I'll give it another try then.  Glad to see
> that they finally added support for ICC Profiles.
>
> > and I know design studios that use ONLY free
> > software and do superior magazine advert work in the fashion industry.
>
> What's the publication?

Why don't you research it.  You might learn something.


> Colour on the web is so dodgy that I don't
> trust anything published online.  I'll have to pick up a dead tree
> copy.  Sources please.
> >
>
> > But that is aside the point. Your just not understanding >what your 
> > doing.
>
> Another ad hominem.  Why am I not surprised?
>
> >> Linux is
> >> far superior for me than Windows,
> >
> > And if it wasn't? SO what?
>
> Then I'd use the appropriate tool for the job.
> >
> >> and slowly getting me off the
> >> iCrack. Right tool for the right job and all.
> >
> > You do relize that your used to thinking about computer usage as its
> > defined by software venders who are intentionally mani[ulating your user
> > experience in such a way to make their method of usage seem to be the
> > only "correct" way....
>
> So you're psychic now?

No - there is a science to human interface design.  You should study it.

> It's not like I trust vendors, I know how they
> attempt to achieve lock-in.  I'm just not a masochist.
> I'm willing to deal with a learning curve if it works better for me in
> the long-run, or is less frustrating once I've learnt how to use it.
> >
> > Now THAT is a "Dead Stop".
>
> No, it really isn't.
> >
> >> And I'd much rather
> >> spend my time showing people that there *are* alternatives out there,
> >> than pointless arguing.
> >>
> >
> > There is more to Free Software than being an "Alternative". Perhaps it
> > is the only alternative.
>
> Even when it doesn't do what I can do with proprietary software?  Yes,
> that makes sense.

Most graphic inovation is happening on Free Software systems at this
time...just in case you didn't know.


> I'll do without in order to prove an ideological
> point.  I'll fuck around for hours getting my wireless/gfx card to
> work.  Oh, wait.  No, I'll just use *buntu and the closed-source
> drivers.
>
>  But that would be of no real consequence
> > either. It is the proprietary computer systems that catch up to Free
> > Software, not the other way around.
> >
> Sometimes yes, sometimes no.  *nix is the strongest in the server
> space, and there are by and large no proprietary vendors that can even
> match that.  Even Solaris got knocked off it's pedestal.  But even
> most places that are running *nix on the backend have a VM running
> Exchange, because as bad as it is, OSS is still a bit behind.
>

This is very untrue, and shows a lack of fundemental understanding.


Step into the light Will..

Regards,

Ruben

> Regards,
> Will
>
> --
> "The first discipline of education must therefore be to refuse
> resolutely to feed the mind with canned chatter." -- Aleister Crowley
> _______________________________________________
> vox mailing list
> vox at lists.lugod.org
> http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox

-- 
http://www.mrbrklyn.com - Interesting Stuff
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software

So many immigrant groups have swept through our town that Brooklyn, like 
Atlantis, reaches mythological proportions in the mind of the world  - RI 
Safir 1998

http://fairuse.nylxs.com  DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 
2002

"Yeah - I write Free Software...so SUE ME"

"The tremendous problem we face is that we are becoming sharecroppers to our 
own cultural heritage -- we need the ability to participate in our own 
society."

"> I'm an engineer. I choose the best tool for the job, politics be damned.<
You must be a stupid engineer then, because politcs and technology have been 
attached at the hip since the 1st dynasty in Ancient Egypt.  I guess you 
missed that one."

© Copyright for the Digital Millennium
_______________________________________________
vox mailing list
vox at lists.lugod.org
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox