On 23 Feb 2013 at 13:17, Tim wrote:
Subject:Re: Custom Partition Fedora 18
From: Tim
To: Community support for Fedora users
Date sent: Sat, 23 Feb 2013 13:17:31 +1030
> Tim:
> >> My first computer only had 16k.
&g
On Fri, 2013-02-22 at 12:10 -0800, Mike Wright wrote:
> I wasted more than one afternoon re-coiling a dropped role of paper
> tape. When we finally got a "fan-fold" tape reader we thought the
> rapture had arrived !D
And those of us who've had to deal with 500 metres of 16mm movie films
coming
Tom Horsley:
>> Ha! Punched cards! We would have thanked God for
>> punched cards! The Data General Nova in the engineering
>> lab at FAU only had an ASR-33 tty with a paper
>> tape attachment :-).
Joe Zeff:
> You have no idea how happy I am that I never needed to mess with that
> stuff. Still,
Tim:
>> My first computer only had 16k.
Michael D. Setzer II:
> Or even older. My first computer was an IBM 1130 with 4K of core
> memory and punch cards. No monitor, but a typewriter like
> display.
You owned a computer that used punch cards? ;-)
I was referring to the one that I owned. I t
On 22/02/2013 20:08, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 22.02.2013 21:01, schrieb Joe Zeff:
On 02/22/2013 11:53 AM, Tom Horsley wrote:
Ha! Punched cards! We would have thanked God for
punched cards! The Data General Nova in the engineering
lab at FAU only had an ASR-33 tty with a paper
tape attachment :
02/22/2013 11:53 AM, Tom Horsley wrote:
On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 11:45:41 -0800
Joe Zeff wrote:
Ah, yes, core memory, punched cards and a typewriter.
Ha! Punched cards! We would have thanked God for
punched cards! The Data General Nova in the engineering
lab at FAU only had an ASR-33 tty with a pa
Am 22.02.2013 21:01, schrieb Joe Zeff:
> On 02/22/2013 11:53 AM, Tom Horsley wrote:
>> Ha! Punched cards! We would have thanked God for
>> punched cards! The Data General Nova in the engineering
>> lab at FAU only had an ASR-33 tty with a paper
>> tape attachment :-).
>
> You have no idea how ha
On 02/22/2013 11:53 AM, Tom Horsley wrote:
Ha! Punched cards! We would have thanked God for
punched cards! The Data General Nova in the engineering
lab at FAU only had an ASR-33 tty with a paper
tape attachment :-).
You have no idea how happy I am that I never needed to mess with that
stuff.
On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 11:45:41 -0800
Joe Zeff wrote:
> Ah, yes, core memory, punched cards and a typewriter.
Ha! Punched cards! We would have thanked God for
punched cards! The Data General Nova in the engineering
lab at FAU only had an ASR-33 tty with a paper
tape attachment :-).
--
users mailing
On 02/22/2013 03:46 AM, Michael D. Setzer II wrote:
Or even older. My first computer was an IBM 1130 with 4K of core
memory and punch cards. No monitor, but a typewriter like
display.
Ah, yes, core memory, punched cards and a typewriter. I cut my teeth on
an IBM 1620 Mod 2 in the late '60s.
On 02/22/2013 03:27 AM, Tim wrote:
On Thu, 2013-02-21 at 10:44 -0800, Joe Zeff wrote:
Try using CP/M, with a memory limit of 64K.
Only once, I think... ;-) It was a computerised teleprompter.
My first computer only had 16k.
Yeah; I too had (and loved) a TI-994A.
--
users mailing list
use
On 22 Feb 2013 at 21:57, Tim wrote:
Subject:Re: Custom Partition Fedora 18
From: Tim
To: Community support for Fedora users
Date sent: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 21:57:38 +1030
Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users
On Thu, 2013-02-21 at 10:44 -0800, Joe Zeff wrote:
> Try using CP/M, with a memory limit of 64K.
Only once, I think... ;-) It was a computerised teleprompter.
My first computer only had 16k.
--
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public
On 2/21/2013 2:18 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 02/21/2013 11:06 AM, David wrote:
>
> I'll try one, last time to make this clear to you: he was talking about
> something that happened over a decade ago when Win2K *was* the latest
> and greatest, not something that happened last month. What you now
> c
On 02/21/2013 11:06 AM, David wrote:
On 2/21/2013 1:38 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 02/21/2013 07:09 AM, David wrote:
Win2K is 13 years old. No longer supported so no updates or security
patches. Since it cost in the neighborhood od $300 there is a strong
possibility it was a pirated copy. Which can
On 2/21/2013 1:38 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 02/21/2013 07:09 AM, David wrote:
>> Win2K is 13 years old. No longer supported so no updates or security
>> patches. Since it cost in the neighborhood od $300 there is a strong
>> possibility it was a pirated copy. Which can be a security problem.
>
> Th
On 02/21/2013 08:17 AM, Tim wrote:
And not there... On many personal computers, the limit to what you
could put into the computer could be quite low. Even on fairly recent
ones. I was given a 3 GHz 64 bit box that you can only put two one gig
memory sticks in. A very short sighted design.
T
On 02/21/2013 07:09 AM, David wrote:
Win2K is 13 years old. No longer supported so no updates or security
patches. Since it cost in the neighborhood od $300 there is a strong
possibility it was a pirated copy. Which can be a security problem.
The OP referred to it as "the latest and greatest,"
Am 21.02.2013 18:31, schrieb Gordan Bobic:
> Yeah, tell me about it. Even relatively recent Intel chipsets (e.g. X38/X48)
> only supported up to 8GB of RAM
consumer crap if after 2010
> Slightly earlier chipsets for the Core2 only supported up to 4GB,
> of which you only usually got 3.5GB (I
On 21/02/2013 16:17, Tim wrote:
On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 11:12 -0800, Joe Zeff wrote:
Back in the early days, programmers spent the time and effort to
optimize their code because time is money and RAM was expensive.
And not there... On many personal computers, the limit to what you
could put int
On 21/02/2013 15:46, David wrote:
I would have happily put the drive into another machine running Linux,
mount it and try to salvage any important data of it, yes.
Really? Ignoring the Linux part if the drive was bad it could damage
another computer no matter what OS it was using.
If the ma
On 21/02/2013 15:23, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 21.02.2013 16:20, schrieb Gordan Bobic:
On 21/02/2013 15:16, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 21.02.2013 15:55, schrieb Gordan Bobic:
Win2K is kinda' old.
No aero, no metro, relatively little bloat (by Windows standards)
and no security updates
The
On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 11:12 -0800, Joe Zeff wrote:
> Back in the early days, programmers spent the time and effort to
> optimize their code because time is money and RAM was expensive.
And not there... On many personal computers, the limit to what you
could put into the computer could be quite l
On 21 February 2013 15:46, David wrote:
> On 2/21/2013 10:17 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
>> On 21/02/2013 15:09, David wrote:
>>
>> Win2K3 64-bit is almost the same as 64-bit XP. The least bad version of
>> Windows to date, IMO (not that the bar is particularly high).
>
>
> XP was very similar to Win2
On 2/21/2013 10:17 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> On 21/02/2013 15:09, David wrote:
>
> Win2K3 64-bit is almost the same as 64-bit XP. The least bad version of
> Windows to date, IMO (not that the bar is particularly high).
XP was very similar to Win2K. However it was designed for home use.
Most, not
Am 21.02.2013 16:20, schrieb Gordan Bobic:
> On 21/02/2013 15:16, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>
>>
>> Am 21.02.2013 15:55, schrieb Gordan Bobic:
Win2K is kinda' old.
>>>
>>> No aero, no metro, relatively little bloat (by Windows standards)
>>
>> and no security updates
>
> There are for another y
On 21/02/2013 15:16, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 21.02.2013 15:55, schrieb Gordan Bobic:
Win2K is kinda' old.
No aero, no metro, relatively little bloat (by Windows standards)
and no security updates
There are for another year and a bit. Do actually read up on the facts
before spewing inacc
On 21/02/2013 15:09, David wrote:
On 2/21/2013 9:55 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
On 21/02/2013 14:31, David wrote:
On 2/21/2013 5:28 AM, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote:
On 02/18/2013 08:15 AM, jonc wrote:
On 02/18/2013 03:34 AM, Tim wrote:
On Sun, 2013-02-17 at 18:05 -0500, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wro
Am 21.02.2013 15:55, schrieb Gordan Bobic:
>> Win2K is kinda' old.
>
> No aero, no metro, relatively little bloat (by Windows standards)
and no security updates
> what's not to like? :) Newest and most bleeding
> edge isn't always the best
and use known vulnerable systems is always silly
On 2/21/2013 9:55 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> On 21/02/2013 14:31, David wrote:
>> On 2/21/2013 5:28 AM, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote:
>>> On 02/18/2013 08:15 AM, jonc wrote:
On 02/18/2013 03:34 AM, Tim wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-02-17 at 18:05 -0500, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote:
>> Am going t
On 21/02/2013 14:31, David wrote:
On 2/21/2013 5:28 AM, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote:
On 02/18/2013 08:15 AM, jonc wrote:
On 02/18/2013 03:34 AM, Tim wrote:
On Sun, 2013-02-17 at 18:05 -0500, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote:
Am going to look into thisas I want to "build" a server at home,
and
On 2/21/2013 5:28 AM, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote:
> On 02/18/2013 08:15 AM, jonc wrote:
>> On 02/18/2013 03:34 AM, Tim wrote:
>>> On Sun, 2013-02-17 at 18:05 -0500, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote:
Am going to look into thisas I want to "build" a server at home,
and see what I can do wit
On 02/18/2013 08:15 AM, jonc wrote:
On 02/18/2013 03:34 AM, Tim wrote:
On Sun, 2013-02-17 at 18:05 -0500, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote:
Am going to look into thisas I want to "build" a server at home,
and see what I can do with it.maybe some form of central
information repository?..I
On 02/18/2013 06:31 AM, Tom Horsley wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 21:50:22 +1030
Tim wrote:
On Sun, 2013-02-17 at 15:22 -0500, jonc wrote:
Still, FOSS has no reliable way to measure who likes what, or who uses
what...
Or who despises something, but still carries on using it, anyway. Nor
can you
On 02/18/2013 03:34 AM, Tim wrote:
On Sun, 2013-02-17 at 18:05 -0500, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote:
Am going to look into thisas I want to "build" a server at home,
and see what I can do with it.maybe some form of central
information repository?..I'll think of something!
Having a cen
On 20/02/2013 19:12, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 02/20/2013 05:20 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
The only conclusion I can make is that the quality of the code and
skills to write it has deteriorated even faster than the rate of
performance improvement of hardware.
Back in the early days, programmers spent th
On 02/20/2013 05:20 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
The only conclusion I can make is that the quality of the code and
skills to write it has deteriorated even faster than the rate of
performance improvement of hardware.
Back in the early days, programmers spent the time and effort to
optimize their c
On 20/02/2013 12:01, Tim wrote:
On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 19:56 +, Gordan Bobic wrote:
40 seconds vs 60 seconds to boot up really matters? Really? I find
my machines, laptops included, take longer to POST than they take to
boot up even with mechanical disks, let alone with SSDs.
I wouldn't hav
On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 11:29 -0500, jonc wrote:
> There's a problem with providing access to executables that no one has
> solved very well. A modern platform -- Linux, Windows, OS X --
> contains hundred, if not thousands, of executables that a user may, at
> some point, want to locate and launch.
On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 19:56 +, Gordan Bobic wrote:
> 40 seconds vs 60 seconds to boot up really matters? Really? I find
> my machines, laptops included, take longer to POST than they take to
> boot up even with mechanical disks, let alone with SSDs.
I wouldn't have thought drive speed would
On 02/19/2013 11:56 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
And 40 seconds vs 60 seconds to boot up really matters? Really? I find
my machines, laptops included, take longer to POST than they take to
boot up even with mechanical disks, let alone with SSDs.
Exactly. Computers today boot fast enough that it's
On 19/02/2013 19:08, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 02/19/2013 03:52 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
boot-up time fascination is not something for grown-ups to get hung up
about
Unless you're using a laptop/notebook/netbook or you keep your box shut
down when you're not using it,
As a matter of fact - I do.
b
On 02/19/2013 05:20 AM, jonc wrote:
I've never been wedded to any one interface. For me, Gnome 2 was just
another GUI. My hardware is more than adequate, and Gnome 3 has not
been particularly buggy for me.
For me, bugs were never the issue. The entire UI changed from something
I was comfort
On 02/19/2013 04:01 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
Given my experience of Fedora bugs being ignored until the EOL bot
closes them, it suggests that they don't even do that the vast majority
of the time.
Yes. Some of the bugs I reported for F16 ended up with three comments:
one when I reported them a
On 02/19/2013 03:52 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
boot-up time fascination is not something for grown-ups to get hung up about
Unless you're using a laptop/notebook/netbook or you keep your box shut
down when you're not using it, boot time isn't very important.
Certainly cutting a few seconds isn't
On 19 Feb 2013, at 17:17, Michael Hennebry
wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2013, jonc wrote:
>
>> partitions, no problems. If you read the docs and the help file, and don't
>> try to shoehorn it into working like old Anaconda, the new UI is OK.
>
> For those of us with *one* computer,
> that present
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013, jonc wrote:
partitions, no problems. If you read the docs and the help file, and
don't try to shoehorn it into working like old Anaconda, the new UI is OK.
For those of us with *one* computer,
that presents a fundamental problem:
We often discover what docs we need in the
On 02/19/2013 10:53 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
It's these "modally tiled UI" which do not meet my "menu-based/multi
workspace" dominated office-workflow and lack of customizability of
the DE. That's why neither Unity, Gnome 3 nor Cinnamon meet my demands.
Ralf
There's a problem with providing a
On 02/19/2013 02:53 PM, jonc wrote:
On 02/19/2013 08:26 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
How many other current distributions not based on Fedora actually use
Gnome 3?
Distos using a DE/distros shipping a DE != Enterprises actively
supporting, financing or actively development of a DE.
That said, fr
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 18:26:04 -0500 -- a long time ago --
Jim wrote:
> Fedora 18
>
> Why for HEAVENS did they change the custom partitioning in F18 from
> the F17 and previous versions ?
>
> Is there a Tutorial for Custom Partitioning for Fedora 18 ?
I gotta ask: Did you ever get your drive par
On 02/19/2013 09:07 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
In which case it's not unconstrained FOSS development, which you have
been using to justify the "you can have it in any colour as long as
it's black" attitude. You can't have it both ways.
Fedora/RH doesn't equal all of FOSS. Linux is obviously we
On 19/02/2013 14:04, jonc wrote:
On 02/19/2013 08:42 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
Yet they are constrained by whatever filters down from Fedora. By the
time it gets to the point of rolling a new EL release, it'd take too
much resources to reverse the course set in Fedora.
I've always assumed that
On 02/19/2013 08:42 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
Yet they are constrained by whatever filters down from Fedora. By the
time it gets to the point of rolling a new EL release, it'd take too
much resources to reverse the course set in Fedora.
I've always assumed that the experimentation in Fedora is
On 02/19/2013 08:26 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
How many other current distributions not based on Fedora actually use
Gnome 3? I haven't checked because I have no interest in using Gnome
3, but it might be an interesting thing to look into before drawing
any conclusions.
That I can think of? Ope
On 02/19/2013 08:15 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
And every system that gives the user a choice along the lines of "you
can have any partitioning you want as long as it's the default one" is
guaranteed to make a pigs ear of most installations, not least because
of file system alignment issues (espe
On 19/02/2013 13:33, jonc wrote:
On 02/19/2013 07:01 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
And now you touch upon another important issue. This is more of a
distro maintenance issue. It is also probably why Ubuntu maintainers
pay more attention to such things - because their users are their
_customers_. With
On 02/19/2013 07:01 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
And now you touch upon another important issue. This is more of a
distro maintenance issue. It is also probably why Ubuntu maintainers
pay more attention to such things - because their users are their
_customers_. Without those, there's no revenue.
On 19/02/2013 07:44, David wrote:
On 2/19/2013 2:34 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 02/18/2013 09:04 PM, jonc wrote:
On 02/18/2013 01:59 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 02/18/2013 03:31 AM, Tom Horsley wrote:
In fact FOSS has no way to tell if the passionate advocates of
nonsense like Gnome 3 are actuall
On 02/19/2013 02:12 AM, Tim wrote:
On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 16:24 -0500, jonc wrote:
Not that it matters, and no one is paying me, here's why I'm using
Gnome Shell on Fedora 18, after rejecting it previously:
1. It's fast and reliable.
2. I like the way it looks.
I'll stop here, because many
On 19/02/2013 04:06, jonc wrote:
On 02/18/2013 10:49 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 02/18/2013 07:32 PM, jonc wrote:
Your tone seems to suggest you think developers owe something to users
("very, VERY justified criticism"). I don't think they do, and I don't
think developers have any more reason to pay
On 19/02/2013 03:55, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 19:49:40 -0800
Joe Zeff wrote:
How about when they replace a program that works fine (anaconda) with
a new version that doesn't do as much and/or is much harder for most
people to use. Do you find that type of criticism justified?
On 19/02/2013 03:32, jonc wrote:
Should developers pay attention when someone says,"Hey! This is
broken!"? Of course.
Given my experience of Fedora bugs being ignored until the EOL bot
closes them, it suggests that they don't even do that the vast majority
of the time.
Should they pay att
On 19/02/2013 02:17, David wrote:
On 2/18/2013 8:55 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 02/18/2013 05:48 PM, David wrote:
And, after all of the negative, nasty, comments in places like
here/ They switched to some flavor of Ubuntu.
Or, for that matter, they've kept the same distro but switched to a
differe
On 19/02/2013 01:48, David wrote:
On 2/18/2013 7:48 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 02/18/2013 04:12 PM, jonc issued this missive:
On 02/18/2013 07:06 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
I don't think you can take comments on lists or forums to represent the
opinions and experience of average users.
I rather t
Am 19.02.2013 01:06, schrieb Joe Zeff:
> On 02/18/2013 03:57 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
>>
>> So your argument is that developers should focus on the feedback that is
>> rare to the point of non-existence instead of the feedback that is
>> arguable to be unreliable?
>
> Let me ask you two questions
On 2/19/2013 2:34 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 02/18/2013 09:04 PM, jonc wrote:
>> On 02/18/2013 01:59 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
>>> On 02/18/2013 03:31 AM, Tom Horsley wrote:
In fact FOSS has no way to tell if the passionate advocates of
nonsense like Gnome 3 are actually in the pay of evil
On 02/18/2013 09:04 PM, jonc wrote:
On 02/18/2013 01:59 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 02/18/2013 03:31 AM, Tom Horsley wrote:
In fact FOSS has no way to tell if the passionate advocates of
nonsense like Gnome 3 are actually in the pay of evil corporate
giants who want to see Linux destroyed and are de
On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 08:46 -0600, Aaron Konstam wrote:
> However, in the 12/12 issue of Linu Journal Reader's Review for
> Desktop Environments Gnome 3.4 got 21% of the vote to KDE 25%. KDE was
> the top.
Hmm, hardly a glowing endorsement, then.
With all due disrespect to how politics like to cl
On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 16:24 -0500, jonc wrote:
> Not that it matters, and no one is paying me, here's why I'm using
> Gnome Shell on Fedora 18, after rejecting it previously:
>
> 1. It's fast and reliable.
> 2. I like the way it looks.
I'll stop here, because many complaints about how it works,
jonc:
>> Why is it not fair? What do developers have to lose if they annoy users?
Gordan Bobic:
> They stand to lose those users.
And, probably more to the point, their debuggers.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is
On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 13:52 -0800, Joe Zeff wrote:
> For some of the developers, their work is a labor of love and they
> don't care that much if anybody else uses it. For others,
> having their programs accepted by large numbers of people who like it,
> use it and (maybe) depend on it is what ma
On 02/18/2013 08:06 PM, jonc wrote:
The old Anaconda is easy only because we all used it so much. It's
little more than a wrapper around parted. So, if you don't already know
how to partition a system, it really isn't that easy. No installer that
exposes manual partitioning is, or can be.
AI
On 02/18/2013 10:49 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 02/18/2013 07:32 PM, jonc wrote:
Your tone seems to suggest you think developers owe something to users
("very, VERY justified criticism"). I don't think they do, and I don't
think developers have any more reason to pay attention to anecdotes from
user
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 19:49:40 -0800
Joe Zeff wrote:
> How about when they replace a program that works fine (anaconda) with
> a new version that doesn't do as much and/or is much harder for most
> people to use. Do you find that type of criticism justified?
Well, I'd suggest that it might be mi
On 02/18/2013 07:32 PM, jonc wrote:
Your tone seems to suggest you think developers owe something to users
("very, VERY justified criticism"). I don't think they do, and I don't
think developers have any more reason to pay attention to anecdotes from
users than users have a reason to pay attenti
On 02/18/2013 09:17 PM, David wrote:
Some stayed here. With Fedora. I did, Some changed changed their DE.
I moved to Fedora from several months with CentOS as a desktop.
Eventually I wanted to do things its ageing core doesn't want to do. I'd
tried every version of Gnome 3 since its release a
On 02/18/2013 07:48 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
On 02/18/2013 04:12 PM, jonc issued this missive:
On 02/18/2013 07:06 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
I don't think you can take comments on lists or forums to represent the
opinions and experience of average users.
I rather think you can, since that is where
On 2/18/2013 8:55 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 02/18/2013 05:48 PM, David wrote:
>> And, after all of the negative, nasty, comments in places like
>> here/ They switched to some flavor of Ubuntu.
>
> Or, for that matter, they've kept the same distro but switched to a
> different DE.
Some stayed her
On 02/18/2013 05:48 PM, David wrote:
And, after all of the negative, nasty, comments in places like here/
They switched to some flavor of Ubuntu.
Or, for that matter, they've kept the same distro but switched to a
different DE.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscrib
On 2/18/2013 7:48 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
> On 02/18/2013 04:12 PM, jonc issued this missive:
>> On 02/18/2013 07:06 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
>
>> I don't think you can take comments on lists or forums to represent the
>> opinions and experience of average users.
>
> I rather think you can, since that
On 02/18/2013 04:12 PM, jonc issued this missive:
On 02/18/2013 07:06 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
I don't think you can take comments on lists or forums to represent the
opinions and experience of average users.
I rather think you can, since that is where the average user is going
to go for help. If
On 02/18/2013 07:19 PM, Tom Horsley wrote
But if you read some of the articles where the justifications for
things like Gnome 3 have been presented, the developers are constantly
talking about how they are doing it all for "typical users". The problem
is that these typical users are all totally i
On 02/18/2013 04:12 PM, jonc wrote:
If developers want to join in and say who they are, I think that's
great. If they are *afraid* to tell users they are developers, that says
something ugly about those users.
I hadn't thought of that, but you're right. My thought was that they
might prefer t
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 19:05:19 -0500
jonc wrote:
> Since FOSS developers usually lack a way to find out what users really
> do so they can write software to make that easier, they might as well
> ignore anecdotal feedback, other than bug reports, and go with their own
> assumptions about how and
On 02/18/2013 07:06 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 02/18/2013 03:57 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
So your argument is that developers should focus on the feedback that is
rare to the point of non-existence instead of the feedback that is
arguable to be unreliable?
Let me ask you two questions: first, shoul
On 02/18/2013 03:57 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
So your argument is that developers should focus on the feedback that is
rare to the point of non-existence instead of the feedback that is
arguable to be unreliable?
Let me ask you two questions: first, should developers follow any
support mailing
On 02/18/2013 06:57 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
So your argument is that developers should focus on the feedback that
is rare to the point of non-existence instead of the feedback that is
arguable to be unreliable?
My argument is that regular, controlled, standardized user testing
should be par
On 18/02/2013 23:09, jonc wrote:
On 02/18/2013 04:50 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
fine - but it is not fair to build a large user base over years
and then thow all away and explain them "that is how you have
to work from now on"
Why is it not fair? What do developers have to lose if they annoy u
On 18/02/2013 22:57, jonc wrote:
On 02/18/2013 04:49 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
...the people who really do think that everybody should love Gnome 3
because they do are providing a disproportionate percentage of the
comments on it... and that some of the Gnome 3 devs (being human)
listen more to what
On 02/18/2013 04:50 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
fine - but it is not fair to build a large user base over years
and then thow all away and explain them "that is how you have
to work from now on"
Why is it not fair? What do developers have to lose if they annoy users?
We users get a lot of good
On 02/18/2013 04:49 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
...the people who really do think that everybody should love Gnome 3
because they do are providing a disproportionate percentage of the
comments on it... and that some of the Gnome 3 devs (being human)
listen more to what they want to hear than to anyth
On 02/18/2013 01:28 PM, jonc wrote:
The only thing linking the *perceived* interests of users and FOSS
developers is the good will of the developers.
Not quite. For some of the developers, their work is a labor of love
and they don't care that much if anybody else uses it. For others,
havin
Am 18.02.2013 22:28, schrieb jonc:
> On 02/18/2013 04:12 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>> What, exactly, is the connection in FOSS that is supposed to make
>>> developers care what users think?
>> because if they to not bother what users think they are also
>> free to develop THEIR pet and state tha
On 02/18/2013 01:24 PM, jonc wrote:
It's not that I don't like Gnome 2, and I don't begrudge anyone who
wants to use it, or MATE. Or anything else. But, I like using Gnome
Shell for legitimate reasons, not because I'm a member of a harping
minority ranting about some imaginary "Way of the Futur
On 2/18/2013 4:17 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 02/18/2013 12:45 PM, David wrote:
>> I chose path 1) myself but I avoided the step c).
>
> I also went with Path 1) but I went on to the last step because I
> sometimes get the impression that there are people out there who don't
> understand that using F
On 02/18/2013 04:12 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
What, exactly, is the connection in FOSS that is supposed to make developers
care what users think?
because if they to not bother what users think they are also
free to develop THEIR pet and state that it is only THEIR pet
Seems to me that's pretty
On 02/18/2013 03:48 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 02/18/2013 12:26 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
Nope, I think someone is paying a con-man to sucker the designers
into producing the worst imaginable interface (it is the only
theory I can come up with to adequately explain the result :-). More
of a pied piper
On 02/18/2013 12:45 PM, David wrote:
I chose path 1) myself but I avoided the step c).
I also went with Path 1) but I went on to the last step because I
sometimes get the impression that there are people out there who don't
understand that using Fedora doesn't mean that they must use Gnome.
Am 18.02.2013 22:02, schrieb jonc:
> On 02/18/2013 03:49 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>
>> Am 18.02.2013 21:45, schrieb David:
>>> I see two paths here.
>>>
>>> 1) (a) You don't like Gnome 3. (b) You find one of the many other
>>> Desktops out there and use that. (c) You publicly state your
>>> diss
On 2/18/2013 3:49 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 18.02.2013 21:45, schrieb David:
>> I see two paths here.
>>
>> 1) (a) You don't like Gnome 3. (b) You find one of the many other
>> Desktops out there and use that. (c) You publicly state your
>> dissatisfaction and move on
>>
>> 2) (a) You don
1 - 100 of 153 matches
Mail list logo
