[Eug-lug] Crappy Cow

[marbux]

On 5/4/07, roger <roger at eskimo.com> wrote:
> When the click & users being our parents (<-- will always be click &
> play fans) and other windows attached users just expect things to work.
>

As someone who spent a lot of years troubleshooting WordPerfect issues
on Windows on a volunteer P2P support web site, I can say definitively
that anyone who expects Windows to "just work" is in acute need of a
brain transplant. I've got way too much experience in dealing with DLL
Hell dependency issues to buy into that theory.

A lot of the "easy to use" expectations are the direct result of
flatly irresponsible software marketing hype. Bottom line: computing
isn't for people who don't know anything about computers and software,
at least in any system that allows tweaking/installation of different
software. There's an unavoidable -- and endless -- learning curve
otherwise. Computing is a bottomless pit in the valley of Knowledge.

That said, my transition to Linux after I retired from my law practice
and was no longer dependent on Windows has not been entirely a smooth
experience, but I didn't expect it to be. And I do see plenty of room
for improvement of Linux and the software that runs on it, not to
mention gaping holes in the Linux software map once you get outside
fairly basic computing needs into specialized niche markets like the
law office market.  (That's why I'm contributing to a FOSS project to
develop software needed in that market.)

I've been working with computers since the late 1960s. In that time,
I've had many acquaintances who came to me for advice soon after they
acquired their first computer and asked for help in learning how to
use the darned thing. Newbies tend to be overcome by the complexity of
even a well-functioning system. I've got a standard rap I give them
about computing being like any other complex subject. You've got to
approach it with the realization that you will never fully comprehend
the subject and bite off small hunks you can chew and swallow. E.g.,
RTFM and learn to do on your computer what you can already do with
your typewriter. Once you have that down, then start exploring what
else the thing will let you do. And expect to hit obstacles along the
way just like you hit obstacles when learning any other subject, like
how to live peacefully with a spouse. The rap usually gets them over
the initial shock of the complexity.

> I see no reason why Ubuntu couldn't provide an option during install to
> install 3rd party apps via the network.  I don't think Adobe is going to
> want to sue anybody wanting to make their format more popular..except
> for maybe microsoft for unknown Godly reasons.
>

I haven't checked again in the last few years, but it at least used to
be that anyone could redistribute Adobe's Acrobat Reader. What stops
some distributions from distributing it on their installation ISO's is
the fact that it is closed source and not licensed as FLOSS.  E.g.,
Debian has a hard and fast policy against distributing non-FLOSS
software. That isn't to say that there aren't legal barriers to
distribution of some packages, e.g., those encumbered by patent
claims. See e.g., my legal analysis of Microsoft's Open Specification
Promise, which governs copying and distribution of a lot of Microsoft
"open" software specifications, including the new Microsoft Office
Open XML schemas currently pending standardization at  ISO's JTC-1.
<http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections#Patent_rights_to_implement_the_Ecma_376_specification_have_not_been_granted>.

> As far as win32 codecs, again, I still say users should be prompted with
> an option during install and during first boot-up.  After the install,
> should still be as easy as installing an additional package.  Some good
> examples are Mandrake (Mandriva) and Gentoo.

I'd say there are strong legal reasons for them not to do so. There's
a vulnerability to a contributory infringement of patents/copyrights
claim, much like the roadblock the P2P distribution networks ran into
in the Supreme Court Grokster case. There are some pretty strong legal
reasons such software has to be downloaded manually by the user from
repositories outside the U.S. E.g., with the win32 codecs, Microsoft
could easily bankrupt any distribution with legal expenses long before
its infringement lawsuit came to trial. And once it sues, it's too
late to stop because the violations of the Microsoft IP rights have
already have already occurred, entitling Microsoft to damages. One of
FLOSS's big weaknesses is the lack of revenues needed to slug it out
with the big proprietary vendors in court. Avoiding litigation
exposure is the only option open to most FLOSS projects, forcing FLOSS
developers to steer clear even of questionable claims of IP rights.
E.g., Microsoft's claims that the Linux kernel infringes their patents
can't be tested because only the big boys like IBM could afford to do
so and they won't for fear of triggering Patent Armageddon amongst the
big players.

The latest Supreme Court patent decision involving Microsoft does
offer some hope, however. The way I'm reading it, the court is
inviting a case to test whether software is patentable. See my comment
here. <http://www.groklaw.net/comment.php?mode=display&sid=20070430121005424&title=Unfortunately%2C%20they%20didn%27t%20resolve%20the%20overall%20patent%20issue&type=article&order=&hideanonymous=0&pid=564772#c565148>

Best regards,

Marbux