9:46 p.m.
The article comes from here.
http://www.tuxmachines.org/node/16894
"Fedora 7, a.k.a. "Moonshine," released on May 31, is an odd duck. On
the one hand, it's hugely popular. If you need to be convinced of that,
take a look at the number of people viewing the officially-sanctioned
FedoraForum.org at any given time - as I write this, it's almost 7,000
people. Visit your local Barnes & Noble Booksellers (that's a big
bookstore chain in the U.S.) and you'll see quite a few books about
Fedora on the shelves. (This, by itself, is a big plus for Linux newbies
— Fedora may be the best-documented distro available)."
12:47 a.m.
On 6/2/07, Marc Wiriadisastra <marc(a)mwiriadi.id.au> wrote:
The article comes from here.
http://www.tuxmachines.org/node/16894
"Fedora 7, a.k.a. "Moonshine," released on May 31, is an odd duck. On
the one hand, it's hugely popular. If you need to be convinced of that,
take a look at the number of people viewing the officially-sanctioned
FedoraForum.org at any given time - as I write this, it's almost 7,000
people. Visit your local Barnes & Noble Booksellers (that's a big
bookstore chain in the U.S.) and you'll see quite a few books about
Fedora on the shelves. (This, by itself, is a big plus for Linux newbies
— Fedora may be the best-documented distro available)."
I'm not so sure if the following statement was necessary in conclusion
of this Fedora review. It just seems the author is recommending other
OS over Fedora. :(
"However, since the distro I blew off my spare partition in order to
install Fedora 7 was PCLinuxOS 2007, it's impossible not to compare
the two. PCLinuxOS definitely comes out the winner. Configuring
hardware on Fedora is more challenging than configuring hardware on
PCLinuxOS, which does most of it for you. PCLinuxOS doesn't require
the manual addition of third-party repositories in order to get
proprietary software; most of it is installed out of the box. In
short, PCLinuxOS is simply less time-consuming and less frustrating to
install and configure than Fedora."
Regards,
--
Thomas Chung
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ThomasChung
12:52 a.m.
On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 22:47 -0700, Thomas Chung wrote:
On 6/2/07, Marc Wiriadisastra <marc(a)mwiriadi.id.au> wrote:
> The article comes from here.
>
> http://www.tuxmachines.org/node/16894
>
> "Fedora 7, a.k.a. "Moonshine," released on May 31, is an odd duck.
On
> the one hand, it's hugely popular. If you need to be convinced of that,
> take a look at the number of people viewing the officially-sanctioned
> FedoraForum.org at any given time - as I write this, it's almost 7,000
> people. Visit your local Barnes & Noble Booksellers (that's a big
> bookstore chain in the U.S.) and you'll see quite a few books about
> Fedora on the shelves. (This, by itself, is a big plus for Linux newbies
> — Fedora may be the best-documented distro available)."
I'm not so sure if the following statement was necessary in conclusion
of this Fedora review. It just seems the author is recommending other
OS over Fedora. :(
"However, since the distro I blew off my spare partition in order to
install Fedora 7 was PCLinuxOS 2007, it's impossible not to compare
the two. PCLinuxOS definitely comes out the winner. Configuring
hardware on Fedora is more challenging than configuring hardware on
PCLinuxOS, which does most of it for you. PCLinuxOS doesn't require
the manual addition of third-party repositories in order to get
proprietary software; most of it is installed out of the box. In
short, PCLinuxOS is simply less time-consuming and less frustrating to
install and configure than Fedora."
It goes with the standard of Fedora isn't good because it doesn't
install propietary formats from the get-go. They seem to not read or
understand that Fedora does not come with propietary software.
Cheers,
Marc
1:38 a.m.
On Sun, 2007-06-03 at 10:46 +0800, Marc Wiriadisastra wrote:
The article comes from here.
http://www.tuxmachines.org/node/16894
In the second Big Point Against Fedora is this (mis)statement:
"Fedora doesn't even include support for read-only access to NTFS
partitions."
Uh, I thought we had that one resolved and did offer ro access to NTFS?
Certainly put it into the release announcement and TalkingPoints.
- Karsten
--
Karsten Wade, 108 Editor ^ Fedora Documentation Project
Sr. Developer Relations Mgr. | fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject
quaid.108.redhat.com | gpg key: AD0E0C41
////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
3:19 a.m.
On 03/06/07, Marc Wiriadisastra <marc(a)mwiriadi.id.au> wrote:
On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 22:47 -0700, Thomas Chung wrote:
> On 6/2/07, Marc Wiriadisastra <marc(a)mwiriadi.id.au> wrote:
> > The article comes from here.
> >
> > http://www.tuxmachines.org/node/16894
> >
> > "Fedora 7, a.k.a. "Moonshine," released on May 31, is an odd
duck. On
> > the one hand, it's hugely popular. If you need to be convinced of that,
> > take a look at the number of people viewing the officially-sanctioned
> > FedoraForum.org at any given time - as I write this, it's almost 7,000
> > people. Visit your local Barnes & Noble Booksellers (that's a big
> > bookstore chain in the U.S.) and you'll see quite a few books about
> > Fedora on the shelves. (This, by itself, is a big plus for Linux newbies
> > — Fedora may be the best-documented distro available)."
>
> I'm not so sure if the following statement was necessary in conclusion
> of this Fedora review. It just seems the author is recommending other
> OS over Fedora. :(
>
Is it possible we're not doing enough to make the reason for their not
being proprietary software obvious enough? I think we've talked about
this before...but obviously we're not or it would (or at least should)
have been mentioned in that article!
Jon
> "However, since the distro I blew off my spare partition in
order to
> install Fedora 7 was PCLinuxOS 2007, it's impossible not to compare
> the two. PCLinuxOS definitely comes out the winner. Configuring
> hardware on Fedora is more challenging than configuring hardware on
> PCLinuxOS, which does most of it for you. PCLinuxOS doesn't require
> the manual addition of third-party repositories in order to get
> proprietary software; most of it is installed out of the box. In
> short, PCLinuxOS is simply less time-consuming and less frustrating to
> install and configure than Fedora."
It goes with the standard of Fedora isn't good because it doesn't
install propietary formats from the get-go. They seem to not read or
understand that Fedora does not come with propietary software.
Cheers,
Marc
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
3:32 a.m.
On 6/2/07, Marc Wiriadisastra <marc(a)mwiriadi.id.au> wrote:
The article comes from here.
http://www.tuxmachines.org/node/16894
"Fedora 7, a.k.a. "Moonshine," released on May 31, is an odd duck. On
the one hand, it's hugely popular. If you need to be convinced of that,
take a look at the number of people viewing the officially-sanctioned
FedoraForum.org at any given time - as I write this, it's almost 7,000
people. Visit your local Barnes & Noble Booksellers (that's a big
bookstore chain in the U.S.) and you'll see quite a few books about
Fedora on the shelves. (This, by itself, is a big plus for Linux newbies
— Fedora may be the best-documented distro available)."
BTW, it's over "93,000" members as of today in FedoraForum.org
It can't be "7,000" members even if the article was written a month ago.
Perhaps, the author meant to say "70,000" members instead. :)
Regards,
--
Thomas Chung
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ThomasChung
3:34 a.m.
On 03/06/07, Thomas Chung <tchung(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
On 6/2/07, Marc Wiriadisastra <marc(a)mwiriadi.id.au> wrote:
> The article comes from here.
>
> http://www.tuxmachines.org/node/16894
>
> "Fedora 7, a.k.a. "Moonshine," released on May 31, is an odd duck.
On
> the one hand, it's hugely popular. If you need to be convinced of that,
> take a look at the number of people viewing the officially-sanctioned
> FedoraForum.org at any given time - as I write this, it's almost 7,000
> people. Visit your local Barnes & Noble Booksellers (that's a big
> bookstore chain in the U.S.) and you'll see quite a few books about
> Fedora on the shelves. (This, by itself, is a big plus for Linux newbies
> — Fedora may be the best-documented distro available)."
BTW, it's over "93,000" members as of today in FedoraForum.org
It can't be "7,000" members even if the article was written a month ago.
Perhaps, the author meant to say "70,000" members instead. :)
Regards,
Maybe he meant "Online Now"? Although it's not very clear if he did!
Jon
6:06 a.m.
Just my two cents' worth ($0.02):
There will always be people who will not like Fedora's position on leaving
the encumbered bits out of the distribution.
To quote from the article:
"Much of this can arguably be laid to rest at the feet of Fedora's
decision to stay
completely within the bounds of open-source, non-patent-encumbered (at least in
their opinion) software. (Keep in mind that Fedora isn't sticking to
this decision for
purely ideological reasons — it has a business to run and doesn't want to get
sued.) It remains to be seen how the struggle between the demand for
ease-of-use/proprietary formats, on the one hand, and a strict
emphasis on free-and-open-source software, on the other, will turn
out."
I find this is be a pretty fair, if somewhat cynical, view expressed
in this article.
Yes, I'm sure Red Hat, as the commercial sponsor of Fedora, doesn't want to get
sued. At the same time, I see a genuine commitment within Red Hat and
Fedora to promote unencumbered codecs and applications.
Purity doesn't guarantee invincibility in regards to lawsuits. It
always possible to
get sued for alleged infringements, also known as "frivolous" lawsuits. Some
individuals and companies sue, hoping to get an out-of-court, off-the-record,
settlement, because it would be cheaper to settle than go to trial.
The best thing is for any American concerned with the abuse of patent law, such
as the whole category of "software patents", to lobby for abolishment
of software
patents altogether.
In parallel, FOSS software and practices should be promoted as an
alternative means
of doing business and improving society in general.
My view is this:
"Better to a pragmatic purist, than a pure pragmatist".
John Babich
Volunteer, Fedora Project
6:17 a.m.
Le dimanche 03 juin 2007 à 14:06 +0300, John Babich a écrit :
Just my two cents' worth ($0.02):
There will always be people who will not like Fedora's position on leaving
the encumbered bits out of the distribution.
However we could spin it a lot better. "Fedora does not propose
proprietary software it can't provide user support for" or "Fedora
protects its users from lawsuits" sounds a lots better than "Red Hat
does not want to be sued" or "Fedora objects to IP-encumbered software
on principle" (even if all are true)
--
Nicolas Mailhot
9:19 a.m.
On Sun, 2007-06-03 at 13:17 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
However we could spin it a lot better. "Fedora does not propose
proprietary software it can't provide user support for" or "Fedora
protects its users from lawsuits" sounds a lots better than "Red Hat
does not want to be sued" or "Fedora objects to IP-encumbered software
on principle" (even if all are true)
There are a thousand ways to phrase it. But some considerations ...
1. The term "proprietary"** is not always a "bad word," so it's
good to
avoid using it in a way that throws that context.
**SIDE NOTE: As I've long argued from many different standpoints, the
majority of Microsoft software is _not_ even proprietary, but
Hostageware/Abandonware. Proprietary means the company actually gives
it genuine value and ensures its perpetual support.
2. The phrase "IP-encumbered" caters far better to corporations and
legal folk, and tells them "we've taken all your concerns -- patents and
other indemnification aspects -- into account."
3. The concept of "principle" can be a very positive aspect, and sends
the message that "with Fedora, you will be guaranteed X, Y and Z."
Just my $0.02, from a hardcore, American Libertarian and Capitalist and
long-time Red Hat product consultant at various organizations in North
America.
--
Bryan J. Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance
mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------
Fission Power: An Inconvenient Solution
9:34 a.m.
New subject: The NTFS specifics -- WAS: Fedora 7 "Moonshine": Freedom vs. Ease-of-Use (Part 1)
On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 23:38 -0700, Karsten Wade wrote:
In the second Big Point Against Fedora is this (mis)statement:
"Fedora doesn't even include support for read-only access to NTFS
partitions."
Uh, I thought we had that one resolved and did offer ro access to NTFS?
Certainly put it into the release announcement and TalkingPoints.
I've noted the FUSE driver in Fedora Extras since version 6 (5?).
The FUSE (user-space) driver is the 3rd generation, which has solved
some (all?) legal issues, as well as the nasty SAM-SID** write issue
which still plagues NT itself**.
The NTFS kernel driver was the 1st-2nd generations, which has the nasty
SAM-SID issue**. That's why it is recommended you only mount read-only
with that driver.
-- Bryan
**NOTE: I'm a long-time NT admin (since the 3.1 beta) and 99% of MSCEs
are utterly ignorant of. It's getting worse now that external drives
are shipping with NTFS. NTFS should _never_ be written to by any system
_except_ those that created it, because of the local Registry's SAM
(System Accounts Manager) and its SID (Security ID) tie-ins. The
work-arounds are numerous (from the NT domain model with a
"network-wide" SAM-SID to the Dynamic Disks/LDM Disk label in NT5+ aka
2000+ that store select SAM-SID info in non-filesystem portions of the
disk). For the most part "home users" who run NT 5.1/6.0 "Home"
editions (Windows XP/Vista Home) avoid it because you can't apply ACE
(access control entries) to the NTFS filesystem from the GUI (only via
the CACLS command at the CMD.EXE CLI). But it's still a major issue
with "Pro users" who run NT 5.1/6.0 "Pro" editions (and, even more
so,
earlier versions like NT 5.0/2000).
Making matters worse, there is _no_ "read-only" NTFS driver in NT
itself. For NT 5.0 (let alone earlier) versions, you can quickly
_trash_ a NTFS. For NT 5.1+ (XP/2003+), if the system detects SIDs in
the NTFS filesystem it doesn't have it its local registry (or the
network-wide registry of a NT domain -- and that includes the same SAM
model stored in Active Directory Services, ADS), it often doesn't even
let you see the filesystem. Opening up Disk Manager in NT5.1+/XP+ will
show the NTFS filesystem there, but won't let you assign a drive letter
or anchor point (anchor = NT's "UNIX-like" mount point option).
--
Bryan J. Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance
mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------
Fission Power: An Inconvenient Solution
11:04 a.m.
The additional aspect that should be added is the fact that those who
redistribute Fedora or otherwise bundle it also benefit from that
added indemnification consideration, which is a very significant aspect.
--
Bryan J Smith - mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org
http://thebs413.blogspot.com
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
-----Original Message-----
From: "John Babich" <jmbabich(a)gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2007 14:06:26
To:"For discussions about marketing and expanding the Fedora user base"
<fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Fedora 7 "Moonshine": Freedom vs. Ease-of-Use (Part 1)
Just my two cents' worth ($0.02):
There will always be people who will not like Fedora's position on leaving
the encumbered bits out of the distribution.
To quote from the article:
"Much of this can arguably be laid to rest at the feet of Fedora's
decision to stay
completely within the bounds of open-source, non-patent-encumbered (at least in
their opinion) software. (Keep in mind that Fedora isn't sticking to
this decision for
purely ideological reasons — it has a business to run and doesn't want to get
sued.) It remains to be seen how the struggle between the demand for
ease-of-use/proprietary formats, on the one hand, and a strict
emphasis on free-and-open-source software, on the other, will turn
out."
I find this is be a pretty fair, if somewhat cynical, view expressed
in this article.
Yes, I'm sure Red Hat, as the commercial sponsor of Fedora, doesn't want to get
sued. At the same time, I see a genuine commitment within Red Hat and
Fedora to promote unencumbered codecs and applications.
Purity doesn't guarantee invincibility in regards to lawsuits. It
always possible to
get sued for alleged infringements, also known as "frivolous" lawsuits. Some
individuals and companies sue, hoping to get an out-of-court, off-the-record,
settlement, because it would be cheaper to settle than go to trial.
The best thing is for any American concerned with the abuse of patent law, such
as the whole category of "software patents", to lobby for abolishment
of software
patents altogether.
In parallel, FOSS software and practices should be promoted as an
alternative means
of doing business and improving society in general.
My view is this:
"Better to a pragmatic purist, than a pure pragmatist".
John Babich
Volunteer, Fedora Project
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
12:53 p.m.
Jonathan Roberts wrote:
On 03/06/07, Thomas Chung <tchung(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On 6/2/07, Marc Wiriadisastra <marc(a)mwiriadi.id.au> wrote:
> > The article comes from here.
> >
> > http://www.tuxmachines.org/node/16894
> >
> > "Fedora 7, a.k.a. "Moonshine," released on May 31, is an odd
duck. On
> > the one hand, it's hugely popular. If you need to be convinced of that,
> > take a look at the number of people viewing the officially-sanctioned
> > FedoraForum.org at any given time - as I write this, it's almost 7,000
> > people. Visit your local Barnes & Noble Booksellers (that's a big
> > bookstore chain in the U.S.) and you'll see quite a few books about
> > Fedora on the shelves. (This, by itself, is a big plus for Linux
> newbies
> > — Fedora may be the best-documented distro available)."
>
> BTW, it's over "93,000" members as of today in FedoraForum.org
> It can't be "7,000" members even if the article was written a month
ago.
> Perhaps, the author meant to say "70,000" members instead. :)
> Regards,
Maybe he meant "Online Now"? Although it's not very clear if he did!
That is pretty clear to me. Definitely a reference to number of online
users in the forum.
Rahul
2:29 p.m.
Le dimanche 03 juin 2007 à 10:19 -0400, Bryan J. Smith a écrit :
On Sun, 2007-06-03 at 13:17 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> However we could spin it a lot better. "Fedora does not propose
> proprietary software it can't provide user support for" or "Fedora
> protects its users from lawsuits" sounds a lots better than "Red Hat
> does not want to be sued" or "Fedora objects to IP-encumbered software
> on principle" (even if all are true)
There are a thousand ways to phrase it.
But there are only a few that are right for a home user review
--
Nicolas Mailhot
6:51 p.m.
I disagree. In fact, home users are far more picky than business users.
You can have 2 different statements that are mutually exclusive appeal
to different home users whereas businesses tend to focus on the same.
--
Bryan J Smith - mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org
http://thebs413.blogspot.com
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
-----Original Message-----
From: Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2007 21:29:49
To:For discussions about marketing and expanding the Fedora user base
<fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Fedora 7 "Moonshine": Freedom vs. Ease-of-Use (Part 1)
Le dimanche 03 juin 2007 à 10:19 -0400, Bryan J. Smith a écrit :
On Sun, 2007-06-03 at 13:17 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> However we could spin it a lot better. "Fedora does not propose
> proprietary software it can't provide user support for" or "Fedora
> protects its users from lawsuits" sounds a lots better than "Red Hat
> does not want to be sued" or "Fedora objects to IP-encumbered software
> on principle" (even if all are true)
There are a thousand ways to phrase it.
But there are only a few that are right for a home user review
--
Nicolas Mailhot
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
6165
days inactive
6165
days old
marketing@lists.fedoraproject.org
14 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
Bryan Smith -
John Babich -
Jonathan Roberts -
Karsten Wade -
Marc Wiriadisastra -
Nicolas Mailhot -
Rahul Sundaram -
Thomas Chung