This is an FYI to those who find that they are no longer able to enable punkbuster in games such as Enemy-Territory, Quake3, etc.

1.17.30-3.2 of selinux-policy-targeted can disable your ability to enable punkbuster in those, and other games.

I've communicated with Evenbalance but they were no help in determining a work around for this. They state that the selinux policy updates are not compatible (supported) by punkbuster. Their response was indicative of a company that was aware of the problem but not 1) willing or 2) able to resolve the issue.

A workaround is to add to the grub boot command line "enforcing=0" (without the quotes). You can edit the /boot/grub/menu.lst (or /grub.conf) and add that part manually.

I just went to a terminal window, changed into the /boot/grub directory and typed:

joe menu.lst

Then I added the entry to near the end of the line where it loads the kernel.

I then saved and exited and then rebooted the computer.

That allowed me to boot into linux without selinux being enforced and it provided me with the option to play those games again.

This complexity is one of the reasons why linux is not ready for the desktop. The average folk would have no idea on what to do or how to do it. Nor should they.

Exactly what do you mean? That you don't expect them to know (or learn) such things? Or that they don't deserve GNU/Linux because they don't know / won't learn?

What I said was perfectly clear I believe.

Average folk will NEVER ever comply to the idea that complex computer tasks are for them.

I would believe everyone with their head on straight realizes that computers are there to help people. Someone that wants to use X program wants to use X program, not figure out why there's so much involved in resolving issues. A person that installs Enemy-Territory wants to play it, not figure out why Punkbuster and SELinux is creating problems so they can't play the game.

I think that's clear and obvious.

It would be ludicrious to even contemplate the idea that the average Joe or Jane should want to learn anything whatsoever to do with GNU what you mention, when their focus is just on their application. They want to use their computers, period. There's no reason to require or demand that they learn anything more than how to use the game they just installed if that's what's necessary. The linux development community needs to seriously reconsider what they are after. Linux is no longer your hacker OS. It is a desktop OS that requires access to it by the average Jane and Joe. That means the computer has to do more for them instead of Jane and Joe doing more for the computer.

It is that fundamental flaw that will keep Linux from succeeding on the desktop and it shows that linux is not ready for the desktop. Just as my example in the first post stated.

See how it is in Windoze?
You simple need to be ADMIN to play a PBug game

SELinux(security enhanced Linux) is maybe not the default way of using Linux ...

The problem is Punkbuster ...

I only know from AAO which needed admin rights(which by default are the most noobs on windoze by default installation settings)

Under Linux (not SE Linux ) I did not need any root neither to install nor to play the game ..

In AAO they had problems with GAMESPY that it would not be avaiable for MAC OS X ...
(for a version or like )

I think that is the problem ... Punkbuster ...
(btw - it is not very well working either)
and companies policies made the windoze way......
[see that as not a problem of the "Linux Community" ]

I only find it quite amusing that the "Linux version" is also coming with PBweb.exe (lol)
[which also is not needed...]


I think the "problem" is your way of security you get (and what let them made windoze PB run only as ADMIN in the end) is that you could "hide" in someway things if the "priority" of a user is higher - or in case of SELinux that it is the way of "securing process" before other processes.

So the concept of how they "intrude" your PC is not working if this SECURITY modell works appropriate - and therefore maybe a "no way" on SELinux

Let's first get straigh who Joe is (Jane is the same except for the gender):
He's never installed windows--it just came on his box.
He's never used the command-line interface.
He just wants to Get The Job Done.
He thinks of his box as, basically, a beige toaster (http://catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/B/beige-toaster.html and other articles).
Most likely, the right OS for him would be For The Rest Of Them (http://catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/F/f...est-of-us.html).
Finally, he might even not know the difference between an email address and a website.

Does that sound like the Joe you hand in mind, too? Good.

Then I think we basically agree:

The average user doesn't want to learn--they've got more (as far as they're concerned) important things to do with their time.

That also means they don't expect to have to learn, and, on finding out they were wrong, get frustrated and start yet another thread with the subject `Linux sucks'.

The best thing to do at the moment, imho, is to make those who consider switching to GNU/Linux aware (on a gut level, if possible) that they'll have to learn. Not because GNU/Linux is inherently more difficult to use(*), but because it's different.

(*) People who have never used computers before actually find GNU/Linux with GNOME easier to use than windows. I wish I could find the page--I think that a bfs traversal starting from www.gnu.org should come across it, though
I must admit, though, that it wasn't scientific--more like `anectdotal evidence'. In any case..

(note: I've inverteted the quote ordering of the following, because that fits better with my response)
It *is* ready for the desktop (I use it for that purpose and I'm very satisfied).
But it's not ready for Joe. Not today.

I think it's the reason that GNU/Linux isn't more popular among the Joes *currently*.
But I think it can become popular--although there is a long way to go.

Then again, using GNU/Linux is easy (even Debian )--it's the administration tasks that are too hard for Joe. If he didn't have to do those, I'm willing to bet that he won't find GNU/Linux hard.

--

Also, for those users who are a little more technical than Joe--those who *understand* computers without being interested in them per se--I think GNU/Linux is a reasonable choice.

Then again, I'm a hopeless optimist

--Jonas

OK, my $0.01, plus tax...

(And please forgive any typos -- when I finish LQ-mail, will down computer and replace fail-ED 'inland' keyboard... usually good brand, but "Ninglami buffak, Savikaam" ("Nobody's perfect, Mr. Savak")

<rant, politely, with suggesstions and observations >

Linux does indeed make a great Desktop OS for those who will learn, or, when the right distro is chosen FOR THAT PARTICULAR END USER"S INTENTS, and has been set up correctly -- and only then! Win4Lin (www.win4lin.com) (and possibly others) is a _big_ help in this.

If Linux-xyz is set up right, total-n00b Joe or Jane can learn Linux about as fast as they could learn MonopleSoft WhinedoZZZe -- Probably a little faster, due to less crash/recover time.

(I name it thus due to company and product behavior; I am *not* a member of the "kill ms" crowd; I just want them trimmed and it *FIXED*, while I use Linux as much as I can.) (My current WhinedoZZZe: W98SE.)

What Linux now mostly needs to 'get there' is DOCUMENTATION that does NOT assume you are an expert or intending to become one "in the next 21 Days."

Yes, we need an attitude change.

It is an **Eternal** __Fact__ of human behavior that most people over 13 do not want to learn any more than they must. Period. End Of Discussion.

(".......... !/?")

I said *"most"*; pay attention, it really *is* free, and it prevents Toe-&-Heel Breath.

If Linux is *ever* going to be a real and substantial part of the general market, it positively, absolutely, utterly, written-in-stone-on-the-mountain, *MUST* accep tthis fact and *DO* something about it, and that 'something' does *NOT* include making users quote-smarter-unquote. Period and end of discussion.

My current suggested distros for n00bs are:

1) Mandrake (now: Mandriva) because I know it personally, and it is good. (Usually!)

2) Xandros, Linspire, Ubunu, and Knoppix, based on *quality* reports that I have read for n00bs.
Ubuntu seems to be *designed* for n00bs, and Knoppix may share in this. One of that group at least has a version that comes with Win4Lin (I use W4L, and, EXCEPT FOR (HIGH) GAMES, VIDEO, and ADVANCED sound, It Is Great!).

3) FCx moves too fast for n00bs; too many fixes per week required, IMHO. And RH themselves cost a little too much, *But*, might be a fine choice anyway.

(4)) I am down on SuSE at this time, for poor support (part of what I paid for!) and non-cooperation with my hardware, which is *not* 'strange', and this is *Not* *Acceptable*.

Others:I do not know them, nor have what I count as reliable reportage; "no comment."

(I use Gentoo, which, in my Advanced knowledge, is *N*O*T* suitable for n00bs, unless set up For That User's Specific Intended Use, and which Gentoo ~expert will be close by and ~always available. I use it because I am knowledgeable and intend to get more so, AND, It Compiles To Work With My [Mulitple-Deleted!] Hardware! Note: *Not* average Joe/Jane.)

</rant, politely, with suggesstions and observations >

best!,

There's no need to attempt to demean or humiliate the average Joe and Jane. They are the pragmatists of the world and they make the world go round. Any attempt to say that linux isn't for them is a loosing argument and it is untennable.

Linux is a desktop OS and it is not for the techie geek who thinks everyone needs to learn every in and out of an OS, programming, utilities, etc.

Contrary to some people's belief, but linux is for the masses. It is for the average Joe and Jane, period. It is just that it has taken 10 years to get where it is because of the techie geek. If you wanted that you should have stayed with your Amiga 1000. Any attempt to postulate otherwise is ludicrious. Linux has changed from its meager beginnings and lots of people have contributed. We are all thankful for that.

Linux is going into every conceivable device, and it is on the desktop, and as such it must be available for the average Joe and Jane. At this point in time Linux is marking a change. That change is that the techie geek is not the primary focus of the OS. The main focus is now on the user, and it is the *users needs* that are king. Any attempt to thwart that will result in an even more progressive push to make it meet the needs of the average Joe and Jane.

There's no longer a need to try to make linux the realm for you and only you. Pandora's box is open now and any attempt to close it will be as futile as attempting to put out a burning building by pissing onit.

Get used to it. The user is king and linux is now for the user, no longer just the techie geek alone.

BTW, and yes, the problem is punkbuster. But you can't honestly tell everyone here you didn't understand the point. It is irrelevent whether you agree.

<Rant>
<OT pointless='true'>

:O

really.
:O

I mean, I'm I <word>ing special? Well, I am, but--is this another area where I'm special? Recently I learned a few bits of OCaml; some Texinfo; a wee bit Japanese; the next thing in ~/plan is learning to use a database (probably MySQL or PostgreSQL). And go more in depth with the first three. And, for the longer term, really understand \TeX{} (i.e. find out if it's Turing complete and how to do the hanoi).

Besides majoring in Computer Science, of course.

And I simply love it. The exhilarating thrill when I feel how my mind just grows. And grows. And grows.

And I think one of the greatest gifts one can be given (besides recognition of intellect/skill) in of being taught--someone spends their time on *making you smarter*.

And you're telling me most people don't like to learn?

Now I'm even more glad that I'm not normal (and being glad that one isn't normal isn't normal either--another reason for me to be glad that I'm not normal).

</OT>

<Slightly_OT>
Note that I'm not saying `And you're telling me most people don't like to learn about computers?'--I'm talking about learning in general.

Then again, coming down to earth: I try to minimize the time I spend on balancing my checkbook, doing taxes, and generally anything that deals with money (including spending them).

with that in mind, it's ironic that my gf wants to be an accountant

</Slightly_OT>
</Rant>

--Jonas

Jimbo99,

(typing on nice, new (inland!) keyboard; typos are now mine, not the keyboard's fault.)

I haven't yet got around to doing much playing games in Linux; haven't found enough time yet, but I d***-sure intend to!! This of course means that I cannot comment on Punkbuster, which was (part of?) the point of this thread, I believe.

And by the way, I should have said in the previous message, but didn't (possibly due to distraction of failed kbd), and so apologies for forgetting this!: It was a good deed for you to point out to the public that a certain combination of things does not work, and thus people shouldn't waste their time trying it. Now, if only more people would do that... ( I have done this, and I will do more of it.)

Now....... :

(I am freely changing the order of, and even overlapping, quotes in here, to try to put my new comments in sensible order. Please forgive.)

I think you missed my point...

I agree with *most* of what you said there, and I am *GLAD* that it is "the *user's needs* that are king"; I *TOTALLY* agree with that. (But remember, us 'geeks' are *also* users!, thus *our* needs should get attention and expression too. Note: I did say **TOO**.)
Yes, finally, but only *al-most!*; please continue reading for more on this...
"period": also please continue reading...
Who, by the way, is who *CREATED* Linux in the first place, mostly for their own use and mostly for *NO* *PAY*, please remember! And therefore to be what *they* wanted. (And yes, Linux *has* come a long way in the last ten years. "Thank GOD!" -- I have been in Linux since ~1995, and if you think it sucks _now_ !!!!!) And yes, I agree that their *attitude* was and is holding Linux back; they are being as "MY WAY ONLY!" as you *appear* to be. Sorry, but true *as* *stated*.

I will, however, agree that what *can* be done, simply and even automatedly inside the GUI, should be *able* to be done there & thusly. Work Missing. Attitude, yes, but also Human Time, not being paid for. How many programs and fixes have *you* contributed? -- Be Civilized: Get Busy or Be Polite when complaining & asking for more. Or offer to *pay* someone for the time *of* *their* *lifespan* to do the work you want done.
Although one of the best things about the changes to Linux is that it *is* (finally!) getting to be for the masses, Linux also provides distros like Gentoo (& Slackware, et al), which serve the needs, greeds, tastes, and Power-Use of those of us who *are* experts and have been in computers since the notion of *owning* something with the ***AWESOMELY HUGE POWER*** (for then anyway) of the Amiga was nothing but a Wet Dream. Yes, a *Wet* *Dream*.

(And yes, this includes me -- if you think that the Amiga was a 'geeky' little thing, do some research on the Timex-Sinclair 1000; *that* was what I started with in 1982. I wrote several medium-powerful programs on it, and I 'invented' structured programming & (near-) Object-Oriented-Programming on it for myself, in about a month!, knowing only those names, but learning as I learned the TS1K itself, what they must be and why they were needed. I did this without any help at all, not even books & magazines. And if you think there was an internet or even a useful amount of modem-only, 300 bits per second AT BEST Bullitin Boards for those of us who were not in college, you're wrong; we hadda do it *ourselves*. And we did. So I guess I do qualify for the appellation "Geek." I got both right, but the TS1K and its Basic were somewhat lacking in 'oomph'. I could have nearly _killed_ for a Commodore64, much less the Amiga which came later.)

Having said all that, and maybe making you think that I am an old fuddy-duddy, key-geek, or whatever... While I certainly do have these skills in *gracious* plenty, I much prefer to work in the GUI; it is *FAR* more CIVILIZED than the dratted command-line. If I need the command-line, I'll use it like the old-pro that I am, but unless I *need* it, or am trying to save minutes when I only *need* to spend seconds and *time* *counts*, I am damned-jolly-well going to use the GUI, the GUI has every advantage there is except when cleaning up a mess or counting *seconds*. You can work faster in the GUI most of the time. It is CIVILIZED.

(Cleaning up a mess frequently, as a 'matter of physics,' does, alas, require the dratted command-line. If you can change the laws of the universe to make this not so, I'd be *very* greatful... So would a lot of other geeks -- remember, while we are being geeks, we also have to *USE* the dratted computer *As* *Users*!)

And I would ask you, whyinhell should *we*, who created all this wonderful stuff, now be denied the power that we created?
Or told that we are only allowed to use the tiny amounts that *you* can use?
And if so, whyinhell should we continue to work on Linux for you, for free, spending our lifespans for nothing but your thanks?

What would be ludicrous would be to deprive the people who *CREATED* Linux in the first place of being able to use it themselves; not least of all is: why then would they care about fixing it or adding to it for free just for your enjoyment, when they no longer get anything out of it. I hate to say this, but your statement here was itself ludicrous.
Then don't demand that, while they work on it to make it better for you -- mostly for free! -- they deprive themselves of *also* adding what *they* want in there *alongside* what you want. Strange way to show thankfullness!

Some distros are for you, some are for us, and some are working to be for everybody. Horrifyingly big job. Time is required, but it *is* being done. It is each of our personal jobs to make the right choice, as in anythng else. SELinux is for those who truly need the highest possible security. To accomplish that, it has, until some lifespan-spending breakthrough, to *not* do certain other things, which would break this, to accomplish that goal. The universe requires it. Their decision looks to have been, in your case, "We do security. We will not compromise security."

And there are USERS who need that; are you saying that *their* needs are to be de-throned and thrown out in the trash? Note: one these might be the ISP you use to get here with! -- do you want their lessened security to let your computer be wiped out by the anal output of some cracker?

Unfortunately for you, all this means that Punkbuster probably would break security. Bad choice for you. The only solution is to choose another distro and keep going. Which is what you said you did. Good Choice!

I repeat, part of *your* job, according to the universe itself, is to be sure that you choose the right distro. Admitedly, the labelling of who a distro is for needs lots and lots of work. This is why I talked a little about distros known to me -- to help anyone who reads this pick an appropriate distro for themselves, since distros differ to suit different needs and willingness-to-acquire-skills//I-don't-want-to-spend-the-time-learning. Linux is about having choices.

It. Should. Be. For. Both.
But you are right, for the Joe and Jane we keep discussing: No, it shouldn't require that.

I repeat, the geeks are users too, *BUT*, your point is entirely correct, and as it should be, *ALL* should be served.

Your third sentence is almost gibberish -- whoinhell is going to do the *programming* to meet 'Joe's needs if not the geeks? Some of the 'average' users will have to put in the *VERY* *LARGE* time to *become* geeks, at least in abilities, to be able to write the programs, or it can be done for pay -- this last will probably mean that the next, user-friendly, version of the OS and the apps & all will probably cost $100's of dollars per computer.

I will not ask who is "thwarting" this; it is the geeks with the "MY WAY ONLY" attitude, and I agree with you that their attitude stinks. But remember, most of them are NOT GETTING PAID to do this, so if they decide that the price of putting *your* stuff in is that they also get to put *their* stuff in, learn to live with it and be grateful that the price is so low, or pay them with money, or learn to do it yourself. Or choose your distro more carefully!


OK, new topic... USERS


And I dare you to say that my comment on human nature was wrong :
and from your very first post in this thread:
And from your second post in here:
There, you said this next yourself...

**YES!** *That* is _exactly_ why they don't want to have to learn new stuff all the time; it *takes* *time*, and they have a world to push around to try to get it where they *want* it and want that time to push! So do I, as a matter of fact! And I bet you do too!; Yes?
Look around you hard, and tell me I'm wrong. I dare you. I *dare* you!
No part of my previous message was a rant against 'average users', nor meant to "demean" them, it is an acknowledgement of the previous reality; by acknowledging the previous, it was a clue to getting Linux usefully into the hands of Joe & Jane, where it truly belongs!, and is *almost* ready to be... documentation again, sigh.

(I *personally* know several [ms] users who have tried in recent months to make the change to Linux; some succeeded, some failed... The majority of those who failed bitched about the GEEKY DOCUMENTATION! -- And the ones who succeeded were the ones who *were* willing to learn 'geeky' stuff, or already had, and I still hear for them that the documentation 'sucks!' A couple succeeded without being or becoming geeks; it is getting better.)

The "MY WAY ONLY" geeks are wrong. The "MY WAY ONLY" users are wrong. It needs to be for both, even if on a distro-by-distro basis. Which it mostly is at this time, that is a *huge* part of the advances made in 10 years. There are plenty of distros to choose from. Now if only the distros did a better job of saying whothehell they were for before you [fornicated] with them for days on end...

The loosing and untenable arguement is to demand restriction to only geeks or 'windowsers'; it should be for both.

It. Should. Be. For. Both.

Can I make that any clearer?

YIPPEEEEEEE!!!!!; LNUX DOES DO BOTH! -- and is still the same OS, so powerhouses like-&-above me can still interact with "average Joe" and we can both learn from each other! And the best Linii are moving towards having both in the same distro (something else that need improving, IMHO.)

But again, One More Time: It is the users' job -- yours! -- to be sure that you choose the right distro. After all, it is *your* lifespan that gets wasted if you don't.


**********************************************************
*However*, there is at least *some* hope for documentation:
Linux Cookbook, by the Linux Journal Press, and
Linux Desktop Reference, Prentice Hall PTR.
Both are command-line oriented, so they are not the day-to-day operational helpers that are mostly still needed (but 'there have been improvements'...); they are the support-structure for when-&-if, mostly if nowadays!, the user *has* to do something through the command-line.

The Cookbook is what you'ld think it is, from the title. The Desktop Reference (now slightly mis-named; 'desktop' will be thought of as the GUI, which is as it should be; as I said above, I *like* the GUI (when it works right)), is a good (but slightly dated) single-point reference to the command-line commands that the user *might* need to do something when something breaks.
Now what we need is the quality of these, for the GUIs. I'm looking.

This does still leave, however, a little more work on 'civilizing' certain tasks, and automating *Some* of those. Maybe soon now.......



There, do you know understand that I basically __agree__ with you? Except for your *apparent* notion that all geeks are to prevented from ever using Linux again...



Final question: would you now deprive us 'geeks', including the ones that created Linux in the first place, largely without pay!, of having the awesomely powerful OS that we/they created for you to have, now that we/they have made it suitable for you, by saying that we must now go and create another new one for our own use, just to prevent you from *EVER* needing a non-polite tool in there somewhere?

If the answer to that is 'no,' then there will be some distros that are for 'us,' and others that will be for 'you,' and yet others that do both.

If your answer is 'yes,' start the *long* learning process to become enough of a geek to do the programming yourself, because if you succeed in upholding this, you'll be the only one working on Linux anymore.

I hope that your answer is 'no,' or at least that you fail in upholding your 'yes,' because I want to continue enjoying Linux, without having to do it all myself, and only *for* myself (ugh!).

If what you *meant* to say is that Linux should be able to be for both of us, you failed; that was not what you actually said, but such faint apologies as are needed are hereby tendered, along with the admonition to please learn to speak better.

Robert G. Hays.

Jonas,

Yes you're obviously special, as you end up stating.

If Jimbo99's last message before this was aimed at you, then, form your last message, you are *not* one of the 'stink-geeks,' but appear to agree with me.
Did I get that right?

Assuming yes, your last message was well-written, but the previous did look _slightly_ like a 'stink-geek.'

I'm still learning to write what I mean better and clearer, Jimbo99 may need to learn to do better, and, just _maybe_!, you do too. Looks like you were learning between those two posts.

I'm sitting here wondering just exactly *how* many cookie-crumbs got mashed into the carpet in this thread.....??

Best, all,

(note: I will use `Linux' to mean `GNU/Linux' -- http://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html)

(Basically) yes:
Joe is more than welcome to use Linux, and we (non-Joes) would do good to consider his needs. What I ask of Joe is that he does not expect Linux to be a replacement for windows, but an alternative (see http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm).

... as long as Linux is still the thing *I* want it to be (and fell absolutely in love with in high school -- see, among others, `Linux does not do `form over function'' in LNW).

Thank you

You're a quite decent writer yourself, btw.

do you mean (
)?

Reading it again, then I can see how one can get the impression than I'm a `stink-geek'. That's not intended. I meant it as a probing question to find out whether Jimbo was arrogantly expecting Joe to be Joe due to to stupidity -- or non-arrogantly (and correctly) realising that Joe simply isn't interested in computers (think `It Gets The Job Done' and `It Just Works'). I got that clarified

Me? Noo...

Enough.

--

A Voltaire quote (as closely as I can remember) might be in order:
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend with my life your right to say it".

That's to say that we all have differing opinions(*), but we have an equal right to state them.
(*) It seems that they're not so different after all, only that we have some difficulties expressing our agreement

But I will claim that we (non-Joes) should also take it to mean that although we think Joe is a n00b, we should still welcome him with open arms to our world (but not bend over backwards for him).

--

What I consider a valid point, though, is that we're living in a free market. That means that Joe is free to trade, but he is also free to *not* trade if no offer suits him (just as we're to not trade with microsoft if that's what we want).

Which is not to say that we shouldn't listen to Joe.

--

Well said.

--Jonas

Jonas,
*Back!* -- Hi Guy!

OK, answers and general continuations...

Weeeelllllllllllllllll.......................
<.....?>
-Why- *Not* !!
After all, it should take no more than the drop of an option card (and no, thank you for -not- asking!, I don't go back *quite*that far!...) to decide between *at least* Winnish & Linnish behaviors, maybe other levels/modes...

-I- see this as perfectly acceptable & reasonable. After all, this is the dream isn't it? (And so is having a society full of rational, civilized people; and we sure ain't got *there* yet.) I have been in Science Fiction since I was 8 (~1965). (And no, Heinlein and Asimov are not the epitome of SciFi; though they *were* astonishingly good at times.)

I am personally thinking of taking on the *easily* delimitable task of doing voice-to-text (/commands?). It's already been done, just not quite well enough, and even _that_ was accomplished by some of the best minds around. This requires not only analyzing the sounds into words, and even having a dictionary, but to look in the dictionary you have to know where the words begin and end.
Not Trivial.
Think about it!: Listen to a recording of a *normal* *conversation* in a language you don't know at all! I am going to stop this part right here before I end up writing a book that will to big & heavy to make it through the internet. You think I'm joking. You're wrong. (And yes, I am a propeller-head; twin-engine as a matter of fact...) So back to Winnish...

If we think we can ever do that (voice), and we *have* actually gotten part-way there (I have such software), then Winnish, with a helluva lot less crashes than WhinedoZZZe although still some, should be doable.

Why *shouldn't* Joe & Jane & me & you & Jimbo99 & ....... be able to enjoy using that?

I am -certainly- willing to consider that I might be wrong; after all, this _does_ happen once every two or three years, and I'm about due.
( )

*Of Course* he Winnish mode will probably crash more often than the Linnish mode, but should still be less often than WhinedoZZZe, and when the users complain, which they will rightfully do until *The* miracle happens & Linux -- or anything else for that matter -- gets Perfect, 'we' point out that excessive automation causes it (which might be part of WhinedoZZZe's problem anyways!). We then, POLITELY point out to them that it is already (hopefully: FAR) better that WhinedoZZZe, but that if they *were* to decide to learn just a little bit more, even (almost! all) of those crashes will go away.

And we tell them The Truth About Computers: that all this is because a computer is far, far dumber than even a *real* village idiot, much less *any* computer user -- (current) cpus are approaching 100,000 transistors (gates), plus at least 8 more for every byte of RAM, plus..., +, +, etc^50th, but the whole total is still just a collection of knee-jerk reflexes (my phrase, quote it if you like: "The computer is the world's most incredibly fastestest, most utterly absolutestest, Complete Idiot.")(Makes your typical everyday run-of-the-mill, genetically determined, unfortunate, *real* village idiot look like Einstein looks to us.)

Yes, what makes the computer smart is the software. Now if only we could get a collection of maybe a coupe-or-several tens of thousands of Einsteins together and interest them in creating a real A.I., maybe we would have enough Brain-Power to do it. Then there'd be no more of what Jimbo99 fussed about -- and I've done my share, and as I tell users constantly: "I cuss 'em twice as often as you do, and probably more thoroughly than you do, and every word of my cussing counts at least twice as much as yours, because I'm a programmer and so I know what I'm talking about." No put-downs; I personally don't tell brain surgeons how to fix me; that's *their* special knowledge, not mine; mine is computers.

No one but maybe a few of the very best programmers in the whole, wide, -world- have even the "a" in 'a clue' as to the true complexity of this task. (Never mind how to start solving it.) Those of us that are the good to great programmers do at least know that we're looking for *something* ('a clue', of course), but have *no* idea of what it looks, smells, sounds, tastes, or feels like -- we just know that something we want (!) is out there somewhere...............-->

It takes a real *MIND* to make computers go where we all want them to, and we all are waiting for the biology, philosophy (headed wrong way, i think), and maybe even psychology peoples to tell us what *that* is, so we know what an 'a' looks like when we find one, and then we might eventually collect all the letters (& space) in 'a clue', after which we just +might+ be able to assemble them into our first small one!

<Taking *long* elevator down from top of high irish hobbyhorse, then removing no-longer-needed spacesuit.>
You're Welcome!
And Thank *You*!Well... basically I meant the total 'tone,' but:Looked a little, um..., derogatory? Like I said, it was more just the total gestalt, rather than any one thing.
( )Amen.
I've used that quote many times, from 13 to 48, and I still mean it.
Correct! (*) so it looks; or disagreements, but without fisticuffs, or worse --- if'n he ain't a-tryin' ta paint it on *my* fence, ner ta make me dance ta a dang tune I don't wants ta dance ta's, I's a-gonna walk away mostly quietly. I's -civilized-, dang it!
CORRECT ALL THE WAY.
Sigh... I wish we were. Monoplesoft deserves much of what it gets from us. BOTH WAYS! -- they *do* make something that most people *can* use to 'get the job done,' but it should be a helluva lot better, and their business practices stink.
OTHO, Linux needs to improve too.
And, ultimately, yes, even after bleeding a few dollars, we all do have the ability to walk away from one & towards the other.
Truth.Thank you again.

And please forgive my geek-mode twin-engine-propellerhead self-indulgence way above.
But I won't remove it ::
Points that need to be made to both sides of this; we do not need this [obscenity deleted] fence!

Later!,

Agreed^50.

I think the right question is why we shouldn't be able to *use* that--I don't think I'd enjoy anything windowsish as long as that means `talking to the lowest common denominator'.

Granted, it doesn't have to mean that. But today it does.

Get over yourself

Isn't that sorta' the situation we're in today--if Joe was willing to learn a little bit, he could get a much greater computing experience.

I would like to quote Peter Salus quoting (or paraphrasing) Brian Kernighan: "The toughest project I ever worked on was awk--because there were *three* of us."

Why do I think of my high school years now?

I think the `we all want <snip>' is... not right. Of course, we all want the computer to make it easier for us to get the job done, but we have *vastly* different jobs to do.

I program, scribble a little music, maintain and maldesign webpages and write GNU Texinfo tutorials (well, I'm still working on my first, but you get the idea). And looking at hardcore pornography

The CEO (PHB) of foocorp uses his computer to look at the graph plots produced by accounting in order to determine who to hire and/or fire, to send .doc emails to accounting thanking them for the clarity of the layout (`Even I can understand a computer now') and send .doc emails to tech support (`It went blue again'). While the secretary uses it for keeping track of $PHB's calendar and synchronizing it with the company-global calendar.

Other people do graphics, kernel hacking, games, XMoLogy, language design, (natural) language learning. Heck, there are even people who use it just for mail.

Then of course, there are those who use computers (stretch the word a leetle bit) to dial/SMS their friends, operate their toaster, TV, microwave oven, washing machine, ....

And those who use it to predict the weather; to simulate nuclear explosions; to render movies; to index the web; to compile gentoo.

(sorry).

My point being: we don't all want to go the same place. Very, very, very far from it.

Sigh... I wish we were.

We are--but most people don't know that, and they're so narrow-minded that the preclude any possibility of the existence of a non-microsoft way of doing things.

While I agree with you on a practical level, I disagree on the philosophical.

There's no *should*, other than M$ is a public company, and must as such take best care of the economic interests of its stockholders. Whether it does so by producing good software (like... I dunno... Erm... Gee... Ehh... Clippy, the worlds most vehemently hated paperclip) or by playing the `business game' (I wouldn't know the correct corporatese term, sorry) is essentially irrelevant.

Full, complete, utter agreement. They not only screw everybody over the most efficient and effectful way they can, they also falsify court evidence. And use FUD tactics. And spy on its users, and denies them fair use rights on the installment plan. I think--I'm not good with legalese either.

See http://www.arachnoid.com/boycott/index.html

Agreed--but not as badly as windows. Or as microsoft, when it comes to business practices.

Then again, my linux box is usable for nearly everything I want it to be, and much (much^n) more than I need it to be.

What I think is needed is not "mere" improvements, but a `leap'. Or a paradigm shift (or a new paradigm), if you prefer.

I think you should google for Peter Salus--you're bound to find his work interesting.

--Jonas

P.S. it's ~2 AM and I haven't slept for 42 hours. It might show--if so cut me some slack

(* various cuts, snips, omissions and wrong spellings are mine alone unless quoted--
but I reserve the right to do them to make my message more clear, readable, and logical (hopefully for all of those!) This includes using ellipses ("...") within and/or between (pieces of) quotes marked as such, for compactness. *)

(And you will please note, Jonas, that I not only accepted your declaration thereof, but also co-signed it! )

Done, happily! (I know the feeling.....)

"Picky, picky, PIC-KY!..." Tastes vary, and you *might* find -- I said *might*!, -- that when you have been using & playing with these things as long as I have, that there are times, when you are simply _using_ them, that the automation is nice. Maybe not...

Bottom Line: Tastes Vary! -- and everything but tellin <whomever> "dance!" when they don' wanna and fence-painting and other personal-&/or-property damage, is *ABSOLUTELY* *YOUR* *RIGHT* (but your neighbor does, sigh, have a right make you turn it down at 2AM -- much to my sorrow... I Like It Loud. At least usually. ("Ninglami buffak, Savikaam." ("Nobody's perfect, Mr. Savak" -- Mr./Captain Spock, from the movie 'Star Trek / The Motion Picture') )


Ok, I am now going to use those two paragraphs to segue [sic -- general American mis-usage: smoothly transition a-->b, based on actual meaning, since this _Fred_ _Flintstone_ language we use has no other word for that... And yes, I speak it natively, so I *do* have a right to say that.]--... ...
...-- A-hem!, to segue back to serious stuff. And please forgive me for that last pico-rant.

But that is exactly what is needed! -- !always remembering that the bottom is **W*A*Y** down, and given the realities of human-provider abilities, and costs, and that the true bottom -- of a bottomless pit! -- is so low that *that* accomplishment is beyond (current?) human abilities, thus only the approximate 'LCD.' And *that* is what is needed to empower the most people; what is also equally needed, is to not hamstring (disable, if you don't know that Americanism) the more powerful and willing among us by doing so, thus my 'option card' comment previously.

B.T.W., that particular option card is in the install, and will still be available afterwards, but lightly hidden, and is a master-switch:
1) I just want to get things done -- flips everything to winnish and GO!
2) I want to learn the computer, or be picky; pre-set the switches to the above, then let me change 'em as I see fit.
3) beany-cap propeller spinning madly, "geek!, geek!"; gimme those [deleted] switches, and don't you *DARE* set anything to winnish!

If you would like to explain in some little detail why or how I am wrong, I'm *certainly* listening!
To live is to learn, to learn is to live ("geek!, geek!"), and if I don't *quite* live to learn, I've *certainly* learned to learn, to live!
(And I so thoroughly detest being proven wrong, that I try to make certain I never get the same proof twice: I learn it the first time, and then hunt for anything else I need to change now. "I's CIVILIZED, dang it.")

Why?
Yes it is.

Partly, but only partly, because of the 'stink-geeks' scattered throughout every field of knowledge and/or ability. Also partly due to human nature. Period.

But maybe, if we provided a better starting point, and a faster and easier learning curve, that produces serious results!, more Joes & Janes would discover/decide that it is worth that smallish extra effort.

"Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it." The key words are 'study' versus 'doomed,' --and-- the 'versus' in there. I didn't learn to study history in school, but later, on my own, I did discover the value. (But what they were trying to teach me in school was *mostly* useless, and some was false.) Thus I *Have* studied history, therefore I discovered that:

History proves that if the investment -- in either money, time, or both -- which are after all the same thing: Human Lifespan -- is small enough, and the return is large enough, the overwhelming majority of people will invest. Here, invest in learning. I like that idea!

There is of course much truth in this logic chain; it is valid. (How painfully well I know from personal experience!)

My point was -- somewhat overstated(!), but still truthfully indicative -- that the problem is a truly enormous one, that, in ultima, will require the application of a truly *enormous* total intellect, and this will, by-and-large, be done by only the most powerful intellects available, who must find the problem both interesting and enjoyable (they *WILL* be geeks!), and, by-the-way, who are "standing on the shoulders of giants." (Already done, happening now, upcoming.)

Of course in the interim, we can get a helluva lot accomplished to use and (for some of us) enjoy, without such Brobdinagian Intelligence.

But I do suspect that the SciFi computers such as the ones in the "Star Trek" series-es [sic], which most of us would like to have, at least at times, can be done, but the requirements will start resembling my hyperbolic declaration. (I personally would love to have such an assistant. I would *NOT* like to *not* be able to do it for myself at times; it's fun, for me. ("Geek! Geek!"))

I will check up on Peter Salus... Sounds interesting...
Ok, I'll bite... Why? (Suspecting that I already know he answer personally!)
True, but The Ultimate Computer (Including its Software) will take each of us to those places we individually want to go to. Lesser computers will take some of us there even now. Even lesser computers can probably take geeks anywhere they want to go forever (as of 194x when they were first *actually* invented).

I am a geek. I am also a person with other interests, including that I have to earn a living, see what's on tonight & next week, & I like this type of movies, and ..... . (At which point a lot of True Geeks are shouting at me that I am *not* a Geek, since I like other things. [phonetically]: "say lah vee.") *And*, to top it all off, I have added to that list over the years. (Although *I* haven't removed anything, except that I cannot *do* some things due to a handicapped leg; I am still the person I was at 13.)

The Ultimate Computer might even be able to call my attention to mostly just exactly those things I would like to add. To some limited extent, so can what we have now. And of course all that is just part of the overall ability to answer any question I want answered, even to the level of answer I want, including leaving me the joy of doing some of the discovery myself. This (mostly) is a big part of what managers, planners, weathermen, ..., want.

It's the fundamental abilities that we *all* want. (Except geeks *while* actively being geeks doing geeky things. I repeat: there needs to be room for that **too**.)

This is sadly true. I would like to improve it, thus I want a Linux that (the lazy) Joe (s) can use, and thus maybe learn.

I almost don't know how to answer this one. Let me see if I can keep my foot out of my mouth while I try to espouse all my thoughts, moderately briefly, without figuratively shooting myself in the [family jewels]... (yes, both. Ouch.)

I am, to use Robert Heinlein's term, a 'Randite.' (Refers to Ayn Rand, author, q.v. if interested in political, economic, and ethical writings. Seriously capitalist.) (I have been one since ~13, and had never heard of any of that until I was 16 & a couple'a months.) Yes, a company, especially a stock-shared Incorporated Entity (American Law term), exists to make money (frozen form of productive parts of Human Lifespan) for its owners. As it should be. Period.

People need things (food, shelter, clothes, medicines,...). Things gotta be made. This takes Human Lifespan to make, of people who need things. Circle complete. Why shouldn't those who spent the extra lifespan learning the most valuable knowledge to do this with be well-paid? And why shouldn't those who spend a larger part of Their Lifespan *making* them, and/or take extra risks to do so?

OTOH, History does show a strong tendency for companies that behave in certain fashions -- of which 'M$'s behavior is certainly reminiscent -- to end up having a popular revolt against them, refusing to buy their products or those of other companies that deal with them, leading to the 'death' of the company. Government-granted monopolies are partially immune to this, usually to the ultimate detriment of that government, its people, and sometimes the company itself. Not always that last, true, and Big Banking does seem to have near-compleat [sic] immunity, but still essentially true.

Times change. Needs change. Technology changes. Things appear elsewhere to challenge what exists now. If a company can get a Human-Universe-Wide monopoly, it could maybe last a *long* time, but if it falls, a *tunneling* electron microscope -- or whatever can see the smallest things by then -- probably won't be able to find any of the remains. Because!:

In obedience to 'the (perceived) interests of...', it will extract all the money it can, causing price-problems throughout the economy(s) it controls (yes, 'controls'). This will invite government control of that company and/or its industry(s), with a certain historically-shown possibility of becoming *extremely* onerous on that company. When-and-if a new <thing> appears that does/can eliminate the populace's need for that company's output, enough 'loud-mouths' will usually appear to guide the populace away from that company, thus forcing that company's demise, along with the destruction of the wealth of the 'top' of those involved with the company, and, possibly!, the descendants of those who used to be the 'top' thereof.

Some companies do survive! Not all that many, though. Do the research for yourself if you like, and if what you find is different from what I found, *PLEASE* tell me!

Meanwhile, back in <2005AD>, and especially with the new licensing that 'M$' is trying for, and their habit of quickly making 'old' versions of things quit working with the 'new' versions of something else, and their adding *just* *enough* new features-etc to something to force *one* upgrade which then forces every user to *have* to re-buy everything else, the amount of 'bugs' that users get mad at with each new release, and, lastly, their destruction of all competition (never mind the techniques), is it any wonder that the Linux market is trying to 'explode' all over them, or that so many Linux users are part of the "Kill 'M$'!" crowd, or that said crowd is gaining significant ground significantly quickly?

If 'M$' were to *earn* a monopoly by producing the best possible product, at a good price, and not be doing the shenanigans that I, based on evidence presented to me such that I, a thinker and capitalist, accept it, then: I WOULD NOT MIND 'M$' BEING A MONOPOLY AS LONG AS THEY KEPT DOING IT THIS WAY. That wasn't shouting, that was a four-meter-high-plus-columns billboard, and quite long, too.

I really wouldn't! Quality, Reliability, and Honor are all I ask. (Well, that and to please remember that we geeks who *created* the whole $DEITY-condemned computer world like to be able to 'tinker with the innards.')
All three seem to be too much to ask of 'M$.' (Along with #4.) Sigh!
(BTW: I got "$DEITY" from someone's posting on Gentoo.org. I like it. The usage here is mine; if it offends, lemme know & I won't do that any more.)
(I still use "The Divine"; this allows for multi-entity beliefs like Hindu; I'm not *quite* sure that $DEITY does.....??)

"And the saddest part of all" is that the Mac was never *really* a threat from since win3.1 came out to until the last two or three years, Linux the same, so since roughly '94, 'M$' had time to accomplish fixing just about everything in their code -- if for no other reason that to prevent true competitors! -- , but it didn't choose to do so; instead it chose 'the (perceived) interests of...', and thereby *itself* *created* the Linux presence, acceptance, and growth, as well as the recent growth of the Mac, which is of course heavily based on BSD-Linux. From their point of view, this must just about be 'a travesty of errors.' Last Laughs, anyone?

(I think Linux will become, soon, a real competitor across the board, including Joe's & Jane's desktops, at work and at home. I think 'M$' will survive; precisely *because* Linux appeared and [will become] a real competitor before 'M$' can get a world-wide monopoly with government support. This continued survival *might* be useful to keep Linux honest. It might. There's room for both. There is.)

I tagged the URL -- I'll look at it soon.

Two things...
1) What?, you think that you'll never add another <thing> to your brain?
2) You said "nearly," -- so:
2a) there is indeed more you would like it to do, and
2b) -- does that "nearly" answer #1 ?

Both.

We need the one for now, to "get the job done."

We need the other not only to improve upon that, but to do so in ways we haven't even thought of yet.

Both are levels of improving Human Lifespan, in the final analysis. A worthy goal.

(I think I am at 12 or 14 hours writing these -- I am a true parallel and matrix thinker, so creating readable linear writing is hard work for me. But. I need to learn this skill to much better levels than I previously knew it, and this is being a fun discussion, so, like all humans, and geek-that-I-am especially!, I am now learning. And enjoying the learning. Please lemme know if I went backwards here as a writer! (And why does English desire that I say "previously knew" when "knew" by itself says that; *why* am I supposed to insert the totally redundant (re-dunce-ant??) word "previously"????? (Do I hear a dinosaur?)))

You might not hear from me for a couple of days or so. This is being very interesting, but I gotta go 'push the world around' some and wear out a couple of grindstones against my nose -- it kinda tickles, and I seem to have a sunburn on my nose when I ain't got one nowheres else...

Later!,
Robert.

B.T.W., just did
http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm
and there are points in there.

But, if Linux starts angling for the WhinedoZZZe users, WhinedoZZZe will be forced to get better, which will keep the really, really *lazy* people away from Linux, and mostly, it will reduce time-loss (Human Lifespan!) due to crappy software, and reduce the amount of malware going around, which at least reduces the Linux-user's DoS problem, if nothing else.

(Yeah, yeah, fine, I know you can stop this at the firewall or router... Question:

Is this a separate computer?
-- Yes.: then you have to spend more money for that, including feeding (power & an occasional replacement part), that you now canNOT spend on something else, and it CAN still be slowed down by having to deal with the DoS.

--No: then your *working* (*playing*, etc) hardware gets slowed down.)

I repeat, why NOT get around to a winnish layer//group-of-daemons? Someone should go ahead and finish making all this, probably for a shelf-space distro, so they can get paid for it. & then all the rest of us can point Whine-ish users to that distro; go there and leave the rest of us alone.

No rudeness intended, just pain-in-the-ahem!-relief.

rgh.