Some observations

[Arnold Maestre]

On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:26:57 -0500, jdodson <dlist at ubuntuforums.org> wrote:
> 
> Martin Alderson Wrote:
> > 1) First and foremost there is a real problem in that mp3 support
> > doesn't work out of the box. I was under the impression that you
> > didn't have to pay the patent fees if it was software and a decoder
> > (as opposed to hardware and a decoder for example). Have I got the
> > wrong end of the stick here?
> 
> mp3 is gummed up with patent restrictions, ubuntu is about making a
> completley free as in freedom OS.  i do not see them adding mp3
> playback because it is not "free."

True enough. But at the end of the day, this is not what matters.
People *do* have huge collections of mp3s that they have been
gathering for years, and they're not going to throw it all away just
because it's patent encumbered or not free or martian diseased or
whatever.

> it is easier to get most codec
> support in ubuntu than windows.  step 1. add repository support step
> two select a few packages in synaptic, click apply.  how to do that in
> windows?  go to website for codec, download, install, rinse repeat as
> many times as it takes whilst you install spyware as well(realplayer
> anyone)?  in the end you trade one set of tasks for another, its just
> that people are more used to going to a zillion sites and
> downloading/installing than using a tool such as synaptic and apt-get,
> and we know how likely people are to change.........

True again, but people are not used to getting all their software from
a single source (most people, I mean; we are used to it, and I would
not come back to the old way). Synaptic is nice and all, but it will
take some time and polish and design to make it usable by Joe Average,
who knows how to launch setup.exe and doesn't care what a "package" or
a "dependency" is. Not to rant about Mac OS or whatever (I don't have
a Mac), but we could learn from the way Mac apps are bundled
(downloadable disc images, nice packaging with pictures and
installation instructions, click and drag install), while preserving
our main strength: central repositories of freely downloadable
applications.

> i understand that some kid might leave ubuntu because an mp3 player
> crashes when they play some arbitrary mp3.  however people dont seem to
> leave windows when it crashes running some arbitrary program, or running
> some arbitrary virus or malware or worm or ........... people stick with
> what they know, if someone is going to leave because of one ubuntu
> hickup then they should not have even considered gnu/linux.  no
> migration is flawless and painless EVER.

Just because windows does it wrong doesn't mean we can, too,
otherwise, there's no point in what we're doing (developing and using
great, free software). I don't know jack about UI design or usability,
but it seems to me that applications should never crash, I mean
*never*. Lack an option, ok. Explain me that something is impossible,
fine. Explain me why and how I can enable it, better still. But don't
*ever* crash on me (otherwise I will replace you with a very small
shell script, as they say).
 
> i think it is worth noting that ubuntu is more productive, stable and
> secure than a vanilla xp install.  this should be apparent to everyone.
 
And with an installation time that defies all you can dream about for
comparable results, so you're right again. Unless the first thing you
do with your brand new system is try and play an mp3 play list, that
is.
-- 
Arnold Maestre