Linux Format forums

Re: Linux and Opensouce, What do you think

jjmac — Mon Aug 01, 2005 11:30 pm

Author: jjmac

Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 11:30 pm

Arrrha, so thats what it means. Thanks for that Rhakios (grin). Babelfish came up with a translation of "more uber", and google just had some references to gaming/clan sites where the word seemed to be very popular.

jm

Re: Linux and Opensouce, What do you think

Rhakios — Mon Aug 01, 2005 9:38 pm

Author: Rhakios

Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 9:38 pm

I think hoping would be a more apposite word

Re: Linux and Opensouce, What do you think

towy71 — Mon Aug 01, 2005 9:13 pm

Author: towy71

Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 9:13 pm

Rhakios, you are surely jesting

Re: Linux and Opensouce, What do you think

Rhakios — Mon Aug 01, 2005 8:54 pm

Author: Rhakios

Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 8:54 pm

jjmac wrote:

(grin), i wish i had followed through with latin though, i did have the chance, but i was a kid at the time. Spent most of it planning escapes (grin). Oh-well ... the good 'ol daze. I did find LXF 68, July on the shelves over the week-end and it used the term. Going by the context i think it's positve,

Uber, or more correctly �ber, literally means "over" pretty much in all the same ways as this word in English, but more specifically as in "above". But it has more particular connotations, such as the word �bermensch, used in Nietzsce as meaning Superman (not actually the cartoon character, but an ideal human).
So putting �ber in front of anything is generally to suggest being at a higher level.

Quote:

Total hoot of an issue too But it will be a week at least before i start with the Gentoo install. Gotta read all the docs first, of course (grin).

jm

Reading all the docs eh? Perhaps you could give 1sf some lessons

Re: Linux and Opensouce, What do you think

jjmac — Mon Aug 01, 2005 11:00 am

Author: jjmac

Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 11:00 am

>>
I take it you didn't do German at school then?
>>

(grin), i wish i had followed through with latin though, i did have the chance, but i was a kid at the time. Spent most of it planning escapes (grin). Oh-well ... the good 'ol daze. I did find LXF 68, July on the shelves over the week-end and it used the term. Going by the context i think it's positve,

Total hoot of an issue too But it will be a week at least before i start with the Gentoo install. Gotta read all the docs first, of course (grin).

jm

Re: Linux and Opensouce, What do you think

Rhakios — Mon Jul 25, 2005 11:23 pm

Author: Rhakios

Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 11:23 pm

jjmac wrote:

Pleeese, pleeeeese reveal what the "uber" in "uber133t" means

jm

I take it you didn't do German at school then?

Re: Linux and Opensouce, What do you think

A-Wing — Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:55 pm

Author: A-Wing

Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:55 pm

I think uber is a bit like ultra. I'm too old for it all and I'm only 25

Re: Linux and Opensouce, What do you think

jjmac — Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:34 pm

Author: jjmac

Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:34 pm

Ok, granted, we is refering to the community in general, as does the original post.

Sounds like a good point though, and probably the same conversation, but, doesen't Ubuntu use X ... good grief, i'm gunna have to have a look at that (grin)

Pleeese, pleeeeese reveal what the "uber" in "uber133t" means

jm

Re: Linux and Opensouce, What do you think

A-Wing — Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:21 pm

Author: A-Wing

Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:21 pm

or:
Windows Explorer --> Nautilus
Internet Explorer --> Firefox
Outlook --> Evolution / Thunderbird
Office --> Open Office

Re: Linux and Opensouce, What do you think

nordle — Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:02 pm

Author: nordle

Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:02 pm

Just to throw in my 2 euros.

I don't think the community needs to pull in one direction unless it absolutely has to.
Some of the great things about oss, are surely, its flexibility, its ability to change quickly, the link between the users and the developers is pretty short ie the process of directly affecting a project is far easier, quicker and much more likely than with other models.

Some people (sorry its the car agin) who buy a car don't want to know anything about its mpg, bhp, torque levels, limited slip diff, whether its chipable etc They just want to know they can rely on it and that it looks good.
Other people want to be far more hands on, they even want to customize the vehicle, get it chipped, lowered, bored etc etc
The automobile industry does not all pull in one direction, there are markets and products created to fit those markets.
OSS should be the same, if people want easy linux there should be easy distro's ie Linspire, Xandros etc If people want techy, they have LFS, Gentoo etc

Also, since when do people not know about the components within an MS system anyway.
Windows Explorer --> Konqueror
Internet Explorer --> Firefox
Outlook --> Kontact
Office --> Open Office
People still learnt / picked up which app allowed them to do what they wanted, they still had to learn with MS.

The only real difference being that with MS, there are far fewer realistic options, so they did not have to learn five different names for the same thing.

But again, if people don't want to know want to know about the nuts and bolts then they can just pick up a copy of Linspire and stick with it, so they learn how to use Linspire rather than gnu/linux/oss etc

Re: RE: Re: Linux and Opensouce, What do you think

M-Saunders — Mon Jul 25, 2005 12:43 pm

Author: M-Saunders

Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 12:43 pm

jjmac wrote:

So, what's this "pushing", tying together is another way of looking at a mags role ... The idea of an article having to be promotional ... that must be the way you view them ...

I should point out here that I wasn't referring to LXF, or any magazine -- when I said 'we' I meant as a community

My overall belief is: Ubuntu, as an example, has succeeded because it doesn't offer GTK+Gnome+Mozilla+OOo+Evo+glibc+Xorg -- it's popular because it's a cohesive desktop, and is a good way to show newcomers 'Linux' without getting bogged-down in describing all the components. It's a desktop with office and internet tools rather than 'Gnome with Mozilla and Evolution' (which means nothing to the uninitiated).

So that's kinda my point, and perhaps I diluted it myself I agree with a lot of what you say, and I think we're kinda having two different conversations here (my fault)

M

RE: Re: Linux and Opensouce, What do you think

jjmac — Mon Jul 25, 2005 12:20 pm

Author: jjmac

Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 12:20 pm

M-Saunders, all respects of course, but just a few responses on your ideas

>>
Well, I was referring to actual Linux desktops (eg KDE) rather than the general concept of desktop Linux. You don't have a confusion with Linux's definition, because you know loads about Linux, but for newcomers we need to push forward a cohesive whole rather than bits'n'bobs.
>>

(grin) ... Yes, i do know you were referring to Kde (grin), and no, i wasn't referring to general desktop linux... And no, i don't know loads about Linux at all. All i know is what iv'e managed to experience, which is quite limited compared to the wider scope. Also, you don't need to push forward anything for new users, the main distros are quite capable of pushing forward their own agenders, on everything from the preferred packaging and system configuration systems they will employ, to the default desktop environment. And it is the cohesive whole that is the point. In the case of desktop environments ... The original poster is just drawing attention to the way the larger scope of applications that also run with the Linux kernel tend to be over looked by mags for the more popularist Kde/Gnome focus. The suggestion is that it has been over done. All the different distros, desktop expressions, applications etc, will have their sites, their documentation sets etc. There the places to go for in depth explanations on the facility concerned. Wouldn't "Linux", as in the community, be served better, if, when a new user coming to Linux, via a magazine they have seen on a shelf ... possibly with some cdroms or an included dvd with an installable image ... finds that the magazines focus is to provide an overview to all these facilities. With articles than run through them, just to set out some of the basic prerequisites involved. Such as associated jargon. And to invite opinion/discussion along these lines. Rather than just having a default focus on a couple. That isn't "bits'n'bobs" as you so put it. Quite the inverse The distros will all have their own agendas, which LT keeps a tight hold on in the kernels development team. Otherwise we would have a very different Linux kernel than the one we have now. Where specialist facilities can be provided via modules without imposing on the main tree. So, what's this "pushing", tying together is another way of looking at a mags role. I think the intelligence level of your average newbie to Linux would be quite capable of absorbing all these "bits'n'bobs" really (grin).

>>
but for newcomers we need to push forward a cohesive whole rather than bits'n'bobs.
>>

They way you draw that conclusion there. It does tend to deny the drawer any further progress really. As, obviously, the cohesive whole is your desktop which would be kde i would expect, and the <cough>bits'n'bobs</cough> would be the others that you seem to think are diluting (Good Grief !)

>>
By focusing on desktop environments (in the promotional sense) rather than Linux as a whole, we run the risk of confusing users even more. That's what I mean by dilution. If we advocate and promote Linux as being Linux, an open source operating system, we have a strong, varied base behind us -- despite all the different communities. Conversely, if we lessen mentions of Linux and focus more on KDE and Gnome, it complicates matters greatly
>>

Are you just trying to twist it around to suite or something (grin).

Focusing on the broader scope of Linux, rather than just a couple of desktops is exactly the point that the original post was trying to make When users make enquiries about other environments ... that isn't necessarily confusion ... basically it is purely an inquiry for info or pointers to info concerning them. Which a magazine can be very good at providing. Depending on the mags outlook of course. Your explanation for "dilution" is flawed. It is making assumptions. The idea of an article having to be promotional ... that must be the way you view them ... it is the way a merchant would. But that doesn't mean that everything that is being written about is necessarily being pushed for a sale (grin).

A mag should be tying together the various depths of Linux, rather than ignoring all that for the convieniance of two. XP is only so popular because it comes as default in the box for cricky sake (grin).

>>
If we advocate and promote Linux as being Linux, an open source operating system, we have a strong, varied base behind us -- despite all the different communities.
>>

Shouldn't that be "with all the different communities" or is that also prone to definition/redefinition (grin)

>>
Conversely, if we lessen mentions of Linux and focus more on KDE and Gnome, it complicates matters greatly.
>>

Beautifully said ... a fine expression of writers obscurity

>>
here've been loads of posts on here, and in other forums, from new users completely flabbergasted by all the talk of KDE, Gnome, Xfce IceWM etc. Diversity is a good thing and there'll probably never be One Linux Desktop, but it can (and does) put people off when they're dunked into all these terms. That's why I say, let's focus on promoting Linux as a whole OS (even though it IS spread out), rather than individual deskto environments
>>

Yeah, right (grin), flbergasted is a bit strong though, not to mention somewhat conclusive. "dunked in", i doubt it. All they are doing is, as usual, just enquiring but not finding, because those aspects are continually ignored in preference for Kde/Gnome. The way you finish that is a complete contradiction to the mag focus ... Like ... what was the Kde vs Gnome article all about, and the continuous rehashing of that kind of thing under different guises. The last line is exactly what you are doing !

>>
>>>>
not sure what you mean by the "uber" in "uber133t" (grin),

Thats not a put down of Fluxbox is it, if so, i'm somewha surprised to be reading it.
>>>>

Not at all I used Blackbox and Fluxbox for about six months on my laptop. It's excellent. My point was, those large companies switching to Linux desktops are almost entirely going with Gnome or KDE -- they're not giving users Fluxbox with snazzy dark themes like we see in screenshots. That kinda stuff is for us geeks; the enterprises want dull, boring and samey.
>>

ummm, what does the "uber" mean (grin), their going with Gnome or Kde because it's part of the RH, SuSE, Mandy default, and is preconfigured.

>>
the enterprises want dull, boring and samey.
>>

They want safe ... but thats business, and makes a lot of sense of course. But they don't need you guys to do the ground work familiarisations for them.

All this is easier said than done, and i do appriciate that, but a start is usually the first step is it not ... Commisioned specialist articles would be a way, or interview based articles an other. But, this thread could lose focus (so to speak (grin)) if it gets to thrashed out, so i bail for the moment. But an excellent and worthy topic none the less. And worthy of further exploration too.

jm

RE: Re: Linux and Opensouce, What do you think

Nigel — Sat Jul 23, 2005 10:59 am

Author: Nigel

Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 10:59 am

Well, a few years ago I would have classed myself as a VMS fan... and yes, security was good, IF you set it up and monitored it properly.
But it had it's holes, like any other system. When you listed out the users with their priveleges, it was supposedly easy to spot the priveleged (dangerous) accounts because they had a long list of priveleges against their username. On several sites I ended up with SETPRV privelege, which was very easy to miss when scanning a big list of users, but which allowed me to assign any privelege I wanted to any process on the machine, ie it was as good as having the SYSTEM (root) password.
And if you got access to the system console you could break into any VMS system if you knew what you were doing.

VMS was a truly great operating system in it's day. Which was the early 1980s through to the mid 1990s.

Re: Linux and Opensouce, What do you think

M-Saunders — Sat Jul 23, 2005 9:58 am

Author: M-Saunders

Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 9:58 am

A-Wing wrote:

I don't know any closed source systems that are more secure than Linux

If we had some VMS fans in here you'd probably get a few arguments about that But in general I agree -- of the mainstream OSes, Linux is doing very well. There's plenty of room for improvement in all the big OSes but we've seen that anthing with upwards of a million users is going to be targeted.

M

Re: Linux and Opensouce, What do you think

A-Wing — Fri Jul 22, 2005 8:03 pm

Author: A-Wing

Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 8:03 pm

coolclassic wrote:

We often talk about using Linux as the total experience for users but in reallity this is not the case. For most users there experience is KDE, Gnome or other desktops.Not Linux.

I would argue that most users are still server users that tend to use shell stuff more than GUI (I know more shell users than GUI).
Since Linux is running as a backend to KDE and Gnome apps I would argue that if there was a problem with Linux and it drivers then it would show in the stability and speed of Gnome and KDE based apps. If Linux was bad, so would be the total experience.

Quote:

Linux gives the choice which Microsoft does not. It gives different working enviorments to suit many individuals who vary in culture, ideals and race.

True, this is mainly due to the unique community behind Linux.

Quote:

So when we talk about Linux should we not be talking about the different desktops and interfaces and what they offer. After all we see many interfaces that run on Linux but on which the public are totaly unaware and this is what we should be talking about.

You are getting into the whole "you mean open source, not Linux" debate. Linux only really refers to the kernel but it is easier for newbies to think of the whole OS+apps as Linux.

Quote:

We also talk about the open source of linux and that it is free, that is great and this does contribute to having an alternative to Microsoft but does it really matter that the Desktop has to be open source, personally I don't think so. If by having a closed source desktop which allows companys, goverments and even the public to buy, giving security and guarantees and profits then Linux has done its job by providing an alternative Operating system.This does not take away the advantages of Opensource desktops but it does give the best of both worlds and gives a secure future for Linux.

I don't know any closed source systems that are more secure than Linux, and I haven't seen any closed source contracts give better guarentees than contracts based on open source. I don't call Open Source free, but is mainly because I develop and put things back into the open source community. If the buisnesses I run and work for used and paid for closed source products they would all go bust. Since we use open source we pay with the patches, mods and programs I develop and get a fast stable system to boot.