On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 23:49, Manjul Apratim <email address hidden> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Martin Wildam <email address hidden>
>> Related to that there are issues using my
>> Ubuntu on a laptop with a docking station (and I only use Dell laptops
>> with official Linux support). Windows 7 is doing a superior job here
>> for example.
> I am surprised you had projector blues - I regularly connect from
> Ubuntu/Arch Linux to projectors, and they work with plug and play in
> seconds!

Strange - but maybe it has to do with the fact, that I do not use my
laptop monitor as a second monitor (most people I know do that) - I
leave my laptop closed when using with the docking station and indeed
that was and is (still) causing troubles.

Oh BTW: Sometimes my Ubuntu 10.04 laptop is very slow to respond when
return back and find the laptop screen locked. I discovered yesterday
only when that occurs: When the laptop runs on battery and the screen
locks (asking for password on mouse-move). At least that happens the
first time it locks after reboot while on battery the whole time and
without having been attached to docking station. I then need to close
the laptop-lid and reopen - then everything gets fast in a sudden.

I know that are stories to be discussed in the appropriate bug reports
- but those are just examples of problems that are still there and not
really acceptable for a desktop OS that is meant to be superior to
everything else. If you imagine "normal" business users trying out
Ubuntu - they will not take much time to investigate the problem -
they will get back to their Windows and telling that Ubuntu/Linux is
buggy. And there will be people immediately responding with the old
myth that it is understandable as Linux is developed just by hobby
developers.


> My Vostro V13 came with Ubuntu 9.04. I had heard that you can still order
> laptops with Ubuntu pre-installed, but the last time I tried to order a
> laptop from them on the phone, I was told they were unable to get me one
> with Ubuntu.

Yes, I had the same experience - but I have some direct contact emails
from Dell employees and if I insist I get everything I want. Just a
wild guess: Could it be possible that Microsoft put pressure on them
and is doing test calls sometimes, so everybody on the Dell-phone-line
is instructed to sell only Windows preinstalled?


> The problem is still, I insist, MS monopoly, and vendor lock-in for
> drivers, and software lock-in for proprietary stuff

Of course that is a big problem - but not the only one. If Ubuntu is
superior enough - I mean, if the gap of stability, features, usability
and coolness is large enough, more and more people will migrate.
Currently I see a very big issue in IT departments not thinking
long-term and urge their software vendors to offer platform
independent solutions. For long-term return of investment (ROI)
platform independent solutions are the best option but in many cases
that priority is not high enough when heading for new software
projects.


> I think the self-certified hardware phenomenon would be awesome if
> implemented

It would be nice to have a cool Ubuntu laptop with a cool design - but
of course it must be cooler than Mac to have more people buying it.
And it should be a good layout and quality keyboard integrated (that's
a thing, where so many laptop-vendors suck).


On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 01:42, Tom <email address hidden> wrote:
> MS doesn't aim for interoperability.  Even it's "Open" formats are designed to push people into
> buying their latest products.  Note that a DocX written in MS Office 2010 often doesn't display
> properly in MS Office 2007.

Indeed! And I often wonder how many IT people are accepting that. I
mean, that completely sucks. And guess what: I see people trashing
their Word-documents and even more crazy stuff like visio files into
their long-term-audit-proven archives! What the hack are they
expecting to get in 10 years out of it?

It is not only Microsoft - the companies are really accepting such
crazy situations. It often seems to me that nobody is ever seeing any
chance to put Microsoft under pressure to do a better job - so why
should Microsoft care?

And the cloud is not _the_ topic in IT only because of flexibility of
available resources - no, companies are tired of frickling around with
their unstable IT landscapes so they are happy about everything they
do not need to administrate themselves any more.


> At work i have set-up LibreOffice to be the package that opens by
> default when opening OpenDocument Formats but not when opening Doc, DocX
> and the rest of the MS formats.

When I was still working with Windows I was doing it similar. For the
last about 6 years I was writing every documentation created by me
with OO and only had one second guy who was co-authoring the documents
and he also was ok with using OO (but hated it the same way as MSO :-|
). This year things are different - all others are using MSO - even
intensively use MS OneNote. Co-authoring documents on my
Ubuntu-machine is quite impossible. I need to use a virtualbox machine
to edit their shitty Word documents. I do know the MSO products also
quite from their beginning and used them very intensively. I really
can tell you that the ribbon UI and several other changes in MSO 2007
and 2010 are full crap for one who knows how to write documentation
(intensive use of styles for example). Again M$ went for the default
dummy user when "improving" their GUI.

I try to get everybody on the OO/LO ship, but very hard work and only
works where single persons or very small teams are co-authoring
documents. I personally try to write documentation with OO/LO and send
out only PDFs - when somebody asks for the original editable document
I first try to send the odt pointing to OO/LO download page. However,
in a larger company there are company standards (i.e. driven by ISO
9001 standardization strategies etc) given, everybody must follow -
which for many is .doc or .docx.


> When people are able to keep using MS Office but find that documents with images behave
> better in LO they are gradually using LO more.

Individuals usually have a free choice - employees in larger companies
do not. There you have to convince those who are taking the decisions
and those are often the people who are not using their PC so intensive
because they have employees for doing that...


On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 15:32, turbolad <email address hidden> wrote:
> Here's why Microsoft has the perfect monopoly with Windows and home users – this will sound
> very cruel but it is true: Windows assumes the home user is dumb and makes everything
> easy for home users.

From 9 to 5 the standard home user often is an employee in some office
with not more experience. The only difference: In the office there is
an IT department that manages the user's PC.


> Here's a good example:
> in Windows, you have a fully stealthing firewall enabled by default,
> but in Ubuntu you have to manually install a firewall AND manually
> edit a file (before.rules )

One Moooment: In Windows by default there are plenty of ports open - a
default Ubuntu desktop installation does not run services on public
ports ASFAIK. So you don't need a firewall if there is nothing running
that responds to the request.

If you are installing software that might open ports of course it is a
good idea to install a firewall. But i.e. gufw is dummy-simple I would
say.


> Things like parental controls are absent in Ubuntu and simple things are not included
> in the default install, such as "gnome-games".

Honestly I don't want to have any game installed by default. And
regarding parental control: You have that on your router or you can
forget about it. Local solution is useless. Apart from that: For 50
euros you get a mobile internet stick here in Austria - paired with
any Linux live CD and your parental control (wherever it was) is
overruled. Honestly: You are better off educating your children
accordingly (that is anyway necessary for a lot of other realms).

> Here's another frustrating issue: why doesn't Ubuntu alert the user that the "restricted extras"
> can be installed to use things like Flash Player, play mp3 files etc.?

It does (since 10.10 if I remember correctly)!


> Another thing that home users are familiar with and Ubuntu doesn't seem
> to care about: the user interface. Ever since Windows 95 – i.e. from
> about the time when people started using computers at home – Windows
> users have the familiarity of the single task bar at the bottom of the
> screen and it's been constant ever since.

Even in Windows XP it was possible to drag the taskbar to the left
side and have it vertical. And I know people who had it always that
way. In Windows 7 that is even better supported. I know people who use
their Windows 7 that way. With the increasing number of wide-screen
displays you want to save vertical space and so having the taskbar on
the left side is better. That said, of course unity should be
configurable in the way that I can drag it to the bottom.

BTW: AWN, Cairo Dock and others offer vertical and horizontal
alignment (as you like it) since years either. In general there should
be both options - fullstop.


> I would love to see more and more people use Ubuntu instead of
> Windows, but that won't happen until Ubuntu follows Microsoft's example
> of making everything very easy and always using the single "task bar" at
> the bottom of the screen like "Lubuntu" does.
> Finally – this IS a killer for Ubuntu...

I see more and more people switching from Windows to Mac. There are a
lot more serious differences, that just the position of the taskbar.
You are familiar with this after a week. On my work laptop I still use
10.04 (taskbar on the bottom as I am used to since at least 15 years)
and at home I already use 11.10 with unity. I don't have a problem
using this or that either.


> Users must upgrade the entire Ubuntu install just to: run newer programs, use newer hardware
> and still have their installed version of Ubuntu supported? Upgrading Ubuntu can break things,
> such as power management, drivers for wireless or other hardware devices.

This is a point that I have never thought about. You are right in this
and I wonder why I never considered this to be an issue. Maybe because
I never do manipulate my hardware other than inserting a new HD. I
don't build my hardware myself. I buy something where all components
work well together and I leave it that way. I neither add memory. And
if I install a new PC I usually use an up-to-date OS version. With
Ubuntu being supported for 5 years even on the desktop now, I find
this issue to get either less important - however, in general you are
right, this is easier to handle on Windows.


> This is where Microsoft wins again!

Of course there are still several issues where Microsoft wins.
Not so long ago there was a very, very long discussion on LinkedIn
about Linux on the desktop and why it's not used. Because interested I
tried to summarize and consolidate the reasons. Here are the results
if you are interested:
http://it-tactics.blogspot.com/2011/07/why-companies-do-not-use-linux-on.html


> Users don't have to upgrade Windows just to use a newer versions of most
> programs, except for some newer games, which require Windows Vista or
> Windows 7.

Not sure, but think, that .deb packages could also be quite version
independent, am I right?
I have some older .deb files that still work.


> I really wish I could print this whole comment and discuss it with the
> Ubuntu team and Mark Shuttleworth.

Yes, would also like to discuss that with Mark Shuttleworth. From
Linus I already read excerpt of an interview that he doesn't care how
many people are using Linux. I see it different because I want to use
Linux but with the constraints given by the world I am connected to
does not allow a flawless use of Linux/Ubuntu.


On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 16:09, Dave Stroud <email address hidden> wrote:
> I dont know what windows os your are referring to., Or what ubuntu you are
> using.Every windows os I used I have had to set up my own firewall and am
> stuck with the way windows is set up, even if I dont like it.

With Windows 7 or Windows 2008 Server the Windows firewall gets more
features but also gets much more complicated.


> I dont like
> unity either, but ubuntu gives me a choice to use some thing else . I dont
> have to set up my firewall on ubuntu either. It gives me the option to add
> or remove rules.I can pretty much set up my desktop to suite me. Why would
> anyone want to pay $ 150.00 or more for a system that is not theirs , when
> you can own one for nothing.  Linux will win hands down.

You are right for the power user and the one who wants to optimize his
PC experience and efficiency. The "normal" user isn't either
interested to change any setting - it just has to work. This is the
same as some people do handicraft work on their cars and others do not
- or some design and sometimes even build their house themselves and
other buy a "ready-made-standard-house".

There are power Windows users (when I was still using Windows I was
one of those), who can do a lot of tweaks to optimize their Windows
experience. And I remember, it was a very lot of work to redo
everything, when I had to reinstall Windows on a new machine. Ubuntu
is very superior here. 95 % of my tweaks follow me with copying my
profile folder.

On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 16:48, Manjul Apratim <email address hidden> wrote:
> People are used to the "taskbar" because that is what they had been given
> from the start, and had known nothing else. Unity, as well as Gnome-shell,
> are revolutionary interfaces designed to explore an entirely new paradigm
> that has not been explored before - the point of view is that things such
> as menus etc are irrelevant now - one can just search for what they want
> with a single click and typing, rather than wading through endless lists.

I think, the user should have both options as there are use cases for
both ways to work.


> MAC OSX also does system upgrades in the same manner as Ubuntu -
> incremental ones that you purchase. Upgrading an XP install to Vista is no
> different - there are dangers of breaking things all the time, and many
> recommend a clean install is better. The Ubuntu upgrade is designed to
> handle everything smoothly, and ever since Maverick, I have never had any
> issues with upgrades - I upgraded from Lucid -> Maverick, Maverick ->
> Natty, and Natty -> Oneiric, and still running strong!

Until upgrading to 10.10 I had problems several times (even in more
critical situations on servers) - never tried it again since then -
maybe I should. :-) - But you are right that Windows is not better in
this discipline.


On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 03:33, »John« <email address hidden> wrote:
> Oh and one more thing: some of you guys suggest that we need to become
> more like our proprietary competition in order to become more
> widespread - you do realize that would make us headed exactly for the
> same shit that made us refuse proprietary crap in the first place,
> right? Let's learn from their mistakes and embrace any good ideas they
> might come up with

Fully agree - never ever behave like those we lost confidence and trust in!
-- 
Martin Wildam

http://www.google.com/profiles/mwildam