KCLUG October 2007

kclug@kclug.org

43 participants
55 discussions

Response to the devil's advocate
by cragos＠gmail.com 09 Oct '07

09 Oct '07

>1. I realize the source is available, but I want my developers >developing OUR software not OS (Fill in your other FOSS software here) >software. Not relevant. The developers may alter open source code, but they may not alter the code received from the proprietary vendor, in most cases. Assuming your developers will develop the same breed of software in FOSS land as they would in proprietary systems, this statement has no bearing on the discussion whatsoever. More importantly, in the open source community there are more freely licensed libraries than are available in from proprietary vendors, and the same code and libraries are available for Windows as well. Competent developers that stick with LGPL licensed libraries and with more basic tools such as those commonly available for PHP and perl will have no issues whatsoever, given the most basic level of awareness of how to work with these licenses. The statement above seems to imply more a fear that your developers are incompetent and will plagiarize code incompatible with your company's desired license than it does anything else. Again, the same code is available for Windows as well, and would be equally applicable if you were working with something like Windows CE. This point is not all that terribly strong. 2. If I buy a piece of software that is closed-source, the company selling it to me has to support it. If something is wrong with it, they'll fix it, because that's where they make their money. This point is, but there's a major trade-off. You must choose between being locked in and supported by the author company or having free choice of several large firms that are each similarly well suited to remedy your problem. The major commercial distributions support developers that at the very least package and closely monitor and, at the other end of the spectrum, actively develop all the major packages in the operating system. If something goes wrong that can't be fixed without a software change, this means you're actually far more likely to be able to find the fix in the FOSS environment, due to third parties having greater access to the code and greater familiarity with the code. An argument can be made ( http://msuspartnerblogs.com/blogs/nealw/archive/2007/03/25/7708.aspx ) that Microsoft patches their code more quickly than Red Hat, Microsoft routinely has far more severe security holes to patch. Equally important, if you are aware of a bug that is affecting YOUR systems, it is far simpler to use your clout with an open source vendor to get the problem fixed than trying to steer the monopolist, for all the same reasons one could not hope to move Ma Bell, and one can only rarely hope to push Apple because they are run by space aliens. In the open source community, the numbers of third parties that are capable of fixing an application, library, etc that is broken in a way that effects you makes it far simpler and, if needed, far quicker than dealing with a closed source vendor. Furthermore, when dealing with applications, Microsoft might sell SQL and HTTP servers, but they aren't going to sell you your entire application stack, unless you're in a mind bogglingly boring company. A Linux distribution is, and will support it in its entirety. 3. If I buy [closed-source company]'s software I know it will work with their Database, Mail server, Office Suite, etc. because it is made by the same company. I'm not sure that we'll be able to get [open-source company]'s software to talk to our existing infrastructure, our to our partner's existing infrastructure. As stated above, yeah - Microsoft's Office is going to integrate with Exchange effectively, for the most part, and it is far more stable and mature than it was. Previous builds that I've seen were enough to drive me nuts, and I'm still far more comfortable and capable dealing with a Maildir mail store than their proprietary ones, but I can see the benefits. But again, those three applications and the OS are not all you're buying. Red Hat, SuSE, Ubuntu et al will actively support most every application and library that they ship. While they are the initial authors of little, they, again, are the authors of parts of most of the applications that they ship. They offer support for a broad, overarching range of applications and libraries that makes Microsoft pale in comparison, and, if you're displeased with their take on an issue, you can take your specific issue to another company with far greater ease. On the infrastructure point, however, you're making a permanent choice if you're going with a vendor that's going to lock you in to unpublished proprietary protocols to do something as mundane as mail transfer. Only one part of MS Office integrates in any meaningful way with Exchange - Outlook. Unfortunately, their ancient webmail application bundled with Exchange is still a crufty POS, and I'm not referring to points of sale. In Linux, you have many, many other options, but, if you want a full groupware suite, there only appear to be three or four that matter, counting the proprietary, cross-platform Lotus Notes. Each ships with a mail client just as tightly integrated with their server solution as Outlook and at least one shares developers and tight integration with Evolution. More importantly, the vast majority of these systems use open standards to perform the shared calendar tasks, to push and store their emails, etc. This means that you have far more choice.... or rather, you have SOME choice, unlike with the Microsoft groupware server, which is solely designed to work with Outlook. While Outlook may be slightly more refined than the others - I wouldn't know, I just use Thunderbird, and am aware that its scheduling system is still very much under development - it is just as important that that same choice also gives you many, many options for a webmail system that doesn't suck. Fancy AJAX mail clients that perform on par with Gmail are available for free or a pittance, and other mature mail systems that are far more user friendly. Full PHP groupware suites such as the Horde also exist, although I would not recommend them at present - seen our install compromised one two many times. More mature and stable mail systems such as iloha and Squirrelmail also exist, and suck much less than the one shipped with Exchange. The question you have to ask yourself, on a case by case basis, is does X proprietary vendor offer features L, M, & N that are so beneficial that they outweigh the benefits of: A: Having multiple available vendors that are able to support and, if need be, develop the application. B: Having vendors that are willing to support and, if need be, develop the application. (Ever tried to file a bug report with Microsoft? It isn't pretty - http://www.oreillynet.com/mac/blog/2002/06/mission_impossible_submitting.ht… ) C: Using published, open standards that will allow us to integrate products from other vendors and projects in the future, and allow us to develop our own related applications and systems in the future. D: Your personal experience and comfort levels with UNIX, which just happens to be FOSS. Retraining in the latest and greatest proprietary application costs an arm and a leg. It had better be worth it, if the boss is going to have to put you through that level of rigorous training or willing to pay the expense of training an already expensive new hire already familiar with that fledgling technology to work within your firm. -Sean

1 0

Re: Re: Speaking of Desktops
by Philip Dorr 08 Oct '07

08 Oct '07

> Jack wrote: > > It seems a bit flaky, it thinks all my apps are in > Desktop 1. I'm not sure why it is using that naming > convention. I may be missing something. I dragged > several now very rubbery apps (that's kinda creepy), > into different desktops. I then moved one app to a > different desktop via the menu, now I can't get it > back. Also all the rubbery motion effects have give > me a headache, so I don't think I'll be using Beryl > much. But then Quake makes me nauseous to watch, > motion sickness and all that. So YMMV. In "Beryl settings manager", make sure your "Number of Desktops" is 1, and your "Horizontal Virtual Size" is how many sides to the cube you want you can disable the "Wobbly Windows" via Beryl settings manager I followed the guide at http://liquidweather.net/howto/index.php?id=92 to make beryl bearable I receive around 60 fps using beryl but not using its "enhancements", and I receive from 15 to 30 fps when using the "enhancements"; the thing is i do not notice the change (except for using certain features) I get > I'll be glad to test out Beryl, on this PC for anyone > who want me to. > > Specs: > Compaq Presario V6000, > Intel Centrino Core2 Duo T5300 1.73GHz, > 2GB RAM, > Intel 945GM/GMS/940GML Express Integrated video, > rest of the Intel chipset, > other Bells and Whistles. the laptop I am using with beryl Specs: Dell Inspiron 1501 AMD Turion 64 x2 TL-60 (2.0 GHz), 2GB RAM, ATI RADEON(r) Xpress1150 256MB HyperMemory, Fedora 7

4 5

Exchange Admin
by Jonathan Hutchins 04 Oct '07

04 Oct '07

Ok, I've looked at two exchange servers with AD now and I'm not entirely comfortable. I couldn't see how to make our AD contact list available as a web mail contact list so we can do easy lookups without having to add everybody ourselves (I may not have had full admin access.) Can someone recommend a good "The Way Microsoft Intended" book on Exchange Administration for the experienced admin?

1 0

eBay: Botnets are Linux-happy | The Register
by Jonathan Hutchins 04 Oct '07

04 Oct '07

This is what happens when you can put a Linux webserver on-line without ever reading a single doc file or having to look at that horrIfying command line: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/03/ebay_paypal_online_banking/

3 2

[hutchins@tarcanfel.org: Re: Xming X Server for Windows]
by Ed Allen 04 Oct '07

04 Oct '07

> >On Wednesday 08 August 2007 11:05:16 am Billy Crook wrote: > >> A while back the topic came up either in the IRC or on the list about >> wanting to run an X11 app on a Linux server, and view it on a windows >> machine. > >There have been graphical X-terminal suites for Windows pretty much since >Windows came out. The stunning thing about most of them was the price - last >time I dealt with them they were around $250 per station. Most of the >applications I saw were simple text terminal applications, but most had >graphical capabilities as well. I know this is an old thread but I want to mention VNC as another alternative. Across slow links it can be a pain but anything above 128k works well enough for most things. Slower links can use eight bit mode, 256 colors is not graphically pleasing but can be ok for non-picture browsing, Using 8-bit I have run desktops over a dialup link, 33k, which were slow but good enough to get the job done.

2 1

How do you feel about Windows piracy?
by feba thatl 04 Oct '07

04 Oct '07

I'm curious as to what some of you think of Windows piracy. Do you think it's alright if it's only done to run software that only works on Windows due to MS's monopolistic tactics? Do you think it's alright if it replaces the purchase of a legit copy, as it hurt's MS's profit margin? Do you think it's always bad? Do you think that software should always be free anyway? Are your decisions about this based on law or morals? Personally, I don't pirate software anymore, and it pisses me off to see my friends downloading *yet another copy of windows* to reinstall with *again*, instead of trying linux, but that's more about their lack of a brain than it is piracy.

9 10

Re: OS CRM
by cragos＠gmail.com 03 Oct '07

03 Oct '07

> Message: 3 > Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 20:27:52 -0500 > From: Jonathan Hutchins <hutchins(a)tarcanfel.org> > Subject: OS CRM > To: "KCLUG (E-mail)" <kclug(a)kclug.org> > Message-ID: <200710012027.52791.hutchins(a)tarcanfel.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Got a friend looking for a good CRM/CMS system. He's familiar with Act, which > I've set up for clients before, but I seem to remember hearing that there was > a good OS project that had a lot of momentum. > > If you actually know of something like this, or someone who's using it, even > if it's a good Windows product as opposed to OS, please let me know. > > (Not being a coder or database guy, I'm not interested in suggestions as to > how such a program should be written, structured, licensed, or packaged.) No takers, huh? Well, the ones that I'm used to hearing about are SugarCRM and OpenCRM. I never use the thing, having had preexisting tools that were way, way, way too deeply integrated into our business practices to even contemplate a massive shift. That said, it's "supposed" to be decent. This might also be of interest: http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/12/1113220 Be interesting to hear if anyone can vouch for the one over the other, or an alternative over both. Sean Crago/MrZaius

1 0

Speaking of Desktops
by leenix 03 Oct '07

03 Oct '07

I've been looking at Beryl and Now Compiz Fusion. Both look very fun on You Tube, but I was wondering who on the list has used them and could give an opinion on which is better. Obviously, noone NEEDS fancy 3d desktops and flipping cubes, but it is fun! TIA ~Lee

9 12

Re: Kclug Digest, Vol 39, Issue 2
by gary hildebrand 03 Oct '07

03 Oct '07

Piracy happened when the cost of software (including o/s's) was prohibitive. Remember when a copy of Wordstar for cp/m was priced at around $500? Same thing happened with 8 track tapes in the 60's and 70's, and videos in the early 80's. Video rentals were created to combat the high cost of movie ownership. In the case of Micro$oft, their actual cost per copy (legitimate) is about $15 give or take a few clams. Then they charge $50-100 for the 'use' of that software. They're loosing not $15, but the retail value, and that being their cash cow, they prosecute hackers. If they would price their product at less than 100% markup, maybe they wouldn't have the problem of piracy. Then it would be cheaper to buy the legitimate version instead of a pirated copy. This is what happened with home videos. In layman's terms, a fast $5 is beter than a slow $80. Considering the D+ performance of Windows, and what you pay for it, I'd say $20 a copy is more than it is worth. Of course it is profitable to all those who have written spyware, virii, and trojans for Windows, making it emininantly simple for unknown people to electronically spy on your computer . . . where we store sensitive information, thinking it to be 'secure'. My two bytes worth . . . Gary Hildebrand St. Joseph, MO On 10/1/07, kclug-request(a)kclug.org <kclug-request(a)kclug.org> wrote: > > > On 9/30/07, feba thatl <febaen(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I'm curious as to what some of you think of Windows piracy. Do you think > > it's alright if it's only done to run software that only works on > Windows > > due to MS's monopolistic tactics? > > I generally do not bother with any piracy which is not for profit. > > > Do you think it's alright if it replaces > > the purchase of a legit copy, as it hurt's MS's profit margin? > > Not exactly the best rationale, but if that's what makes one feel better. > > > Do you think > > it's always bad? Do you think that software should always be free > anyway? > > There are few cases where i think _use_ of software should be free. > > > Are your decisions about this based on law or morals? > > I would say neither, more like my own personal conclusions. > > > Personally, I don't pirate software anymore, and it pisses me off to see > my > > friends downloading *yet another copy of windows* to reinstall with > *again*, > > instead of trying linux, but that's more about their lack of a brain > than it > > is piracy. > > Yah well, if Windows couldn't be pirated, it would have MUCH less > popularity. I haven't had to pirate a copy of Windows in ages, most > since I get free copies these days. Whenever I stop getting free > copies, I doubt I'll be too bothered about downloading it myself. The > bandwidth would be better used downloading the latest version of > Fedora or CentOS >

2 1

The drifted SCO thread has opened a new arena. "IS there a place for a de facto IP freedom realm"
by Oren Beck 03 Oct '07

03 Oct '07

All the rhetoric which has been beaten like dead horses aside, there is a new angle seemingly lacking intelligent discussion. It was claimed IIRC by Stewart Brand that "Information wants to be free" Then you know who introduced the Beer Vs Freedom meme. Yet what the hell is meant by those in our mundane world? Want in one hand and wish in the other if you want two empty hands was what I'd been told all my life. AkA "TANSTAAFL" So who pays the bills if all is free? Ah, there's the problem. Sadly one not answerable by 42. Allegedly the term "Copyleft" at one time literally was found on buttons at cons proclaiming "all rights reversed" Then again,in the DRM ethos all rights are denied absent the de minimus and even those are dubious. See the real purpose of HDMI for example. Or read most EULA of closed source origin. All this IS heading to a point. The succession of GPL versions have made varying approaches to rational handling of the disparate interests involved. I humbly offer a radically simpler reboot of the gaming.. Can we function under a guideline of honor as a bond? That means a declaration of mutual self respect for declared IP rights including their inalienable repudiation from another' profit? Yes, the applied fiction of repudiation is arguably incorrect legal semantics but it spotlights a gap I feel needs attention. Currently all the Diverse IP statues seem lacking in an instrumentality where an IP creator can declare their work as property of all while denying commercial interests from privatising in a restrictive manner such works. One proposal is for granting works their own incarnation. There is legal precedent for chattels being of limited yet real court standing. My closing example for now is a proposal for one symbol possible as denoting such . A circle surrounding a F. Simply put that denotes in a better future than we deserve an IP item could be used but not sold or profited from in a manner that would diminish it's freedom to others. DO please try to pick apart this concept but be mindful that history is trending to a fork. Either the F in the circle or another emblem in a circle of more grim history.

9 21

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

KCLUG October 2007