Not about boats.... *is* about newsreaders....
 

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 12:09:11 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
.. .

As the code is readily available, you can go that deeply, but it is by no
means necessary. Open source has come a long way and allows many
choices.
It may not be your choice, but it is the choice of a growing number of
users.

Again, agreed. But if any software is only usable to a certain group
of people, then its functionality is specific to that group and only
that group. At that point, it becomes "closed".

Lynix is close to become exactly that - just like every other "open"
source system since day one.

Mozilla, too. Newsgroups and web sites are loaded with ideas for tweaking
the thing, and some of those tweaks are necessary in order to stop behaviors
that are annoyances to large numbers of users. Tweaks are fun, except for
one thing: I have this thing called a full time job.

Exactly. However, I have been convinced over the years that the
"tweakers" who constantly tweak have no lives. :)

Later,

Tom
S. Woodstock, CT
----------

"To the fisherman born there is nothing
so provoking of curiosity as a fishing rod
in a case."

Roland Pertwee, "The River God" (1928)

Not about boats.... *is* about newsreaders....
 

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:44:55 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


Ok, that maybe too strong and I don't mean to offend, but it is a
basic fact of human/software interaction - what my concept of a
particular problem is different than your concept.

Exactly, it's about choice. With Linux, I have the choice of several
different desktops, half a dozen window managers, perhaps a dozen
browsers, I could go on. The point is, one is far more likely to find a
better fit with open source, than Microsoft's one size fits all.

Again, agreed. But if any software is only usable to a certain group
of people, then its functionality is specific to that group and only
that group. At that point, it becomes "closed".

Lynix is close to become exactly that - just like every other "open"
source system since day one.

It may have been some time since you looked at Linux. Several of the
distributions produce a well functioned, easily installable, system, right
out of the box, *but* you can still tweak if you like. Look, we have all
used Microsoft products, as far as an interface goes, I would suggest *we*
have adapted to MS's way, rather than MS adapting to us. I'm just trying
to make the point, that if you find Microsoft restricting or inadequate,
there are other quality programs out there.

Not about boats.... *is* about newsreaders....
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...


Mozilla, too. Newsgroups and web sites are loaded with ideas for tweaking
the thing, and some of those tweaks are necessary in order to stop
behaviors
that are annoyances to large numbers of users. Tweaks are fun, except for
one thing: I have this thing called a full time job.

Exactly. However, I have been convinced over the years that the
"tweakers" who constantly tweak have no lives. :)

......and big, fat secretary asses. :-)

Not about boats.... *is* about newsreaders....
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 12:06:26 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 01:41:17 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

I sort of agree with you on that. However, what techheads might
think
of as being a good idea, isn't always a good idea. What techheads
might think of as perfectly comprehensible and/or intuitive is
gibberish to a user. And that is the real problem with open source
because you have the same technoids messing around with what should
be
a simple concept and all have differing ideas about how stuff should
work.

Yeah, but . . . Most open source software works quite well out of the
box,
being configurable is a major plus. Open source software may not be
for
everyone, but I love it. Anytime I am forced to use a Microsoft
product,
I find it very limiting and frustrating. With open source I can set up
my
system as I want to, not as Microsoft thinks I should.

It's also a somewhat concept becuase it is "open source" only to
those
who understand the coding structure - thus the end results will be
the
same.

As the code is readily available, you can go that deeply, but it is by
no
means necessary. Open source has come a long way and allows many
choices.
It may not be your choice, but it is the choice of a growing number of
users.


It's a cool idea. But I'll venture a guess and say that 90% of users have
absolutely no knowledge of programming. They shouldn't have to. No
different
than the way most people view their cars. Most people have no interest in
customizing, and have no clue as to how they work. They just want the
things
to run. Imagine if hammers, vacuum cleaners and lawnmowers behaved like
computer software. There'd be armed uprisings.

And that's an even more interesting point.

Of course. I never lie and I'm always right. :-) :-)


I read somewhere that in Explorer (since the advent of Explorer),
people only use 30% of the functions available to them - everything
else is overhead.

The reason was explained as "too complicated".

Strange, isn't it? Have you ever done a custom installation of MS Office?
I'm still using Office 2000, and I've installed it perhaps 20 times on
various machines. There must be 50 customization options in categories such
as text/graphics converters, languages, spell checkers, and mathematical
add-ins for Excel. You can eliminate the installation of that &$#%* paper
clip beast, and completely crush Find Fast, which is an abomination.

But, MS says it's too complicated to permit a custom installation of
Explorer? :-)


Your example of "save" and "save as" is a perfect example. Why do you
need two save functions? Why not just have save? A little "window"
pops up and the default is what the file was named offering you the
opportunity to change the name or not. Why "save as"?

"Save As" is very handy when you want to save an existing file under a
second name. I do that often when I need to send a file to someone who
thinks about file names differently than I do. My outgoing product offers
are sequential, like Offer_Kroger_Feb02_04.XLS. This makes too much sense to
the monkeys at my home office, who prefer a name like
OkRg-kelLog_revisedbobsSheet-8.xls. :-) Real example. Not kidding.

Sure, you can start Windows Explorer, find the file, and copy it, but most
of the time, I'm already running 9 programs, most of which are memory pigs.
If I start one more, Windows go boom.

Not about boats.... *is* about newsreaders....
 

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 08:27:07 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 11:44:55 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


Ok, that maybe too strong and I don't mean to offend, but it is a
basic fact of human/software interaction - what my concept of a
particular problem is different than your concept.

Exactly, it's about choice. With Linux, I have the choice of several
different desktops, half a dozen window managers, perhaps a dozen
browsers, I could go on. The point is, one is far more likely to find a
better fit with open source, than Microsoft's one size fits all.

Again, agreed. But if any software is only usable to a certain group
of people, then its functionality is specific to that group and only
that group. At that point, it becomes "closed".

Lynix is close to become exactly that - just like every other "open"
source system since day one.

It may have been some time since you looked at Linux. Several of the
distributions produce a well functioned, easily installable, system, right
out of the box, *but* you can still tweak if you like.

Well, we can agree to disagree on this. Once you start dealing with
packaged software and you go to "tweaking" you are venturing into
copyright land, patent vulnerabilities and a whole host of other
possibilities. And as Linux becomes more and more accepted and
mature, I'm guaranteeing that will happen.

Look, we have all
used Microsoft products, as far as an interface goes, I would suggest *we*
have adapted to MS's way, rather than MS adapting to us. I'm just trying
to make the point, that if you find Microsoft restricting or inadequate,
there are other quality programs out there.

No argument. And you make a good point.

Oh hell, we could discuss this all day.

So, it's about another four weeks here until my two hulls are wet.
:)

Later,

Tom
S. Woodstock, CT
----------

"To the fisherman born there is nothing
so provoking of curiosity as a fishing rod
in a case."

Roland Pertwee, "The River God" (1928)

Not about boats.... *is* about newsreaders....
 

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 14:41:52 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
.. .

~~ snippity do da ~~

I read somewhere that in Explorer (since the advent of Explorer),
people only use 30% of the functions available to them - everything
else is overhead.

The reason was explained as "too complicated".

Strange, isn't it? Have you ever done a custom installation of MS Office?

No, but my last computer experience, which caused me to retire in 1994
from over stress resulting in RA, was an installation in which I was
tasked as division manager to find and implement a "document" system
that needed to do a ton of stuff - interface between three different
software systems on machine tools, CAD graphics package, a visual
illustration package, word processing at an advanced level and the
ability to print documents, colate, staple, etc.

Six months of work I finally managed to get a system that worked - it
was perfect - the interfaces worked, the graphics package was amazing,
the CAD package was seamless and the major contractor for the project
came in 20% UNDER the budget and not only that, but installed it on a
half payment just to make sure the whole thing worked as we wanted.
The dea of a lifetime and I still talk about them as being the best in
the business - this was the best, almost perfect, system.

About about a month of shakedown, I get a call from the VP in the
mid-west - he's flying out east to look at our package. Great. He
arrives, we arrange a demo, did a really complicated graphics grab
using the three different milling machine controllers, finagled it
with the illustration package, join it all up, did a cover and
produced a finished product for him to look at. He's impressed.

Then he tells us that he has purchased a document system from another
manufacturer and that this deal was done - to have everything removed
from the building because the new equipment was coming in two weeks.

I screamed bloody murder - I even called the President of the company
and bitched to him for a half hour, but couldn't get him to interfer -
the deal was done.

What I am going to say is the honest to god truth.

The sales engineer was banging the VP AND the President and that's how
the sale was made.

Cost the company 42% percent more than the original equipment, it
couldn't do what they said it would, was constantly broken and just
generally sucked.

I quit the week it was installed.

I'm still using Office 2000, and I've installed it perhaps 20 times on
various machines. There must be 50 customization options in categories such
as text/graphics converters, languages, spell checkers, and mathematical
add-ins for Excel. You can eliminate the installation of that &$#%* paper
clip beast, and completely crush Find Fast, which is an abomination.

But, MS says it's too complicated to permit a custom installation of
Explorer? :-)


Your example of "save" and "save as" is a perfect example. Why do you
need two save functions? Why not just have save? A little "window"
pops up and the default is what the file was named offering you the
opportunity to change the name or not. Why "save as"?

"Save As" is very handy when you want to save an existing file under a
second name. I do that often when I need to send a file to someone who
thinks about file names differently than I do. My outgoing product offers
are sequential, like Offer_Kroger_Feb02_04.XLS. This makes too much sense to
the monkeys at my home office, who prefer a name like
OkRg-kelLog_revisedbobsSheet-8.xls. :-) Real example. Not kidding.

ROTFLMAO!!!!!

Sure, you can start Windows Explorer, find the file, and copy it, but most
of the time, I'm already running 9 programs, most of which are memory pigs.
If I start one more, Windows go boom.

Understood.

Well, I really don't care anymore and I don't understand how I got
sucked into this discussion. I have a love/hate relationship with
computers.

Oh well.

This winter has been too freakin' long.

Later,

Tom
S. Woodstock, CT
----------

"To the fisherman born there is nothing
so provoking of curiosity as a fishing rod
in a case."

Roland Pertwee, "The River God" (1928)

Not about boats.... *is* about newsreaders....
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

This winter has been too freakin' long.


Tell me about it. I actually signed up for a pottery class. Jeezis freekin
krist.... It was either that, or murder my landlord, just to have something
to do. :-)

Not about boats.... *is* about newsreaders....
 

Harry Krause wrote in message ...
Doug Kanter wrote:

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 07:19:01 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

Doug Kanter wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
...

I've watched a friend try to use his
Outlook as a news reader. What a mess.

A mess in what way???


Indeed. Probably too complex for John, even though it is the simplest of
newsreaders to use. I don't like it because it is too "Microsofty," but
it isn't messy, and it does allow for multiple accounts, which Agent
doesn't.

Not true - Agent does allow for multiple accounts - you just have to
open a seperate data file. It's actually as easy as OE to do.

What exactly do you mean by "open a separate data file"? My goal is to have
multiple accounts with messages from all of them downloading into the same
inbox, while I don't have to touch the keyboard. Possible or not?



Well, Outlook does that...but that's not a feature of outlook I like. I
prefer the messages to dump into their own folders, but without my
intervention.

Harry, use your rules wizard, it works nicely!

Not about boats.... *is* about newsreaders....
 

On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 20:55:06 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

John H wrote:
On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 06:55:10 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
...

I've watched a friend try to use his
Outlook as a news reader. What a mess.

A mess in what way???


He was trying to download a yEnc encoded binary. I don't know if he
ever figured out how to do it. We were on the telephone at the time. I
finally sent him Free Agent, which he upgraded to Agent.

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

Let's see. You and your friend couldn't figure out how to download a
file, or whether the software you were using could download a file, and
that makes that software a mess?

Is that an example of...Army think?

Harry, your lack of knowledge is showing.

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

Not about boats.... *is* about newsreaders....
 

thunder wrote:

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 01:41:17 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

I sort of agree with you on that. However, what techheads might think
of as being a good idea, isn't always a good idea. What techheads
might think of as perfectly comprehensible and/or intuitive is
gibberish to a user. And that is the real problem with open source
because you have the same technoids messing around with what should be
a simple concept and all have differing ideas about how stuff should
work.

Yeah, but . . . Most open source software works quite well out of the box,
being configurable is a major plus. Open source software may not be for
everyone, but I love it. Anytime I am forced to use a Microsoft product,
I find it very limiting and frustrating. With open source I can set up my
system as I want to, not as Microsoft thinks I should.

It's also a somewhat concept becuase it is "open source" only to those
who understand the coding structure - thus the end results will be the
same.

As the code is readily available, you can go that deeply, but it is by no
means necessary. Open source has come a long way and allows many choices.
It may not be your choice, but it is the choice of a growing number of
users.

Thunder, You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
Let them spread the virus' that you and I don't worry about.
My only suggestion would be, those that have kids that might want to let
them try a different operating system get a copy of Knoppix that runs from
the CD drive and puts nothing on their hard drive, just to see what the
difference looks and feels like. It's based on Debian Linux, that I'm sure
you know. I too like Pan as a news reader, but set up Knode on laptop.
What most people don't realize is they can install it on the same hard drive
(different Partition) that windows(tm) is on and boot to either system.
They could put a stop to many of the virus' by only using Linux to connect
to the internet for mail/news and surfing the net.
By the way, when I bought my laptop I had to argue with the tech that
checked it out before I recieved it, that I didn't want to put, or purchase
virus scanning software, because XP would never get connected to the net or
updated. I still don't have virus software, not had a 'puter virus. Three
'puters networked for file, printer and internet connection sharing.

I have ordered CD's from these folks without any problems if you or the kids
want to try Knoppix out. Keep in mind that it runs slow because of the
speed of the CD drive not being as fast as a hard drive and it is
decompessing about 2gb of software on the fly as it runs. The more RAM,
the better.

http://tinyurl.com/36yom

or Google, "knoppix"
Or download the ISO image and burn your own copy for the price of the blank
disc.

I read all the "been there done that" You should try it again. Not as hard
as it used to be.

If you want what I think is the easiest to install on hard drive get this.

http://tinyurl.com/2kaz2

Not the latest version, but easy to use.
I converted from windows(tm). I enjoy Linux and feel I know what "open
source" is really about.
--
__________m___~¿Õ____m__________________