Discussion:
Elephant in the room -- utility value.
(too old to reply)
Martha Adams
2018-10-16 05:09:18 UTC
Permalink
I was just reading the nearby Gimp vs Photoshop thread. I think
it moves all around something central. Namely, that interest and
using some software does not require that it be the latest, most
elaborated, largest, most expensive, greatest, and etc. What
counts is its *utility*. Which detail is too often lost and by
being lost leaves the door open to unending elaboration.

"Utility" to me is, can it do what I need in some way that is
accessible and comfortable to me? And for the Photoshop user
in the Gimp vs Photoshop thread, the question is, if she goes
over to Gimp then can she still do the things she needs to do.
If some purchaser of her work *requires* Photoshop then that
settles the question. Else, Gimp may be "inferior" to Photoshop
according to some people by their thinking, but that's actually
off-topic. Which topic is, Gimp's *utility* for the work at
hand.

This Elephant is on my mind now because I've been thinking about
it lately. It has two or more sides. I've been thinking why
don't we have a small fixed Linux that never changes? If I
think about that another side emerges immediately: that such
a Linux gives the several very useful periodicals about Linux,
nothing to do. Etc etc.

Thus the Elephant is there and I think including it in discussions,
would improve the discussions. And I don't think that in the
process, you can throw-out the Luz...Windows, because 1) so very
many people use it; and 2) there's a lot of talent over there and
it's unwise to shut it out. But that's another topic....

Titeotwawki -- Martha Adams [Tues 2018 Oct 16]
Joe Rosevear
2018-10-16 06:47:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Martha Adams
I was just reading the nearby Gimp vs Photoshop thread. I think
it moves all around something central. Namely, that interest and
using some software does not require that it be the latest, most
elaborated, largest, most expensive, greatest, and etc. What
counts is its *utility*. Which detail is too often lost and by
being lost leaves the door open to unending elaboration.
"Utility" to me is, can it do what I need in some way that is
accessible and comfortable to me? And for the Photoshop user
in the Gimp vs Photoshop thread, the question is, if she goes
over to Gimp then can she still do the things she needs to do.
If some purchaser of her work *requires* Photoshop then that
settles the question. Else, Gimp may be "inferior" to Photoshop
according to some people by their thinking, but that's actually
off-topic. Which topic is, Gimp's *utility* for the work at
hand.
This Elephant is on my mind now because I've been thinking about
it lately. It has two or more sides. I've been thinking why
don't we have a small fixed Linux that never changes? If I
think about that another side emerges immediately: that such
a Linux gives the several very useful periodicals about Linux,
nothing to do. Etc etc.
If I understand what you're saying, and I think I do, then I believe
you have touched on a somewhat odd truth. That truth is that we cannot
always hold onto the past technology.

It is really odd, because very often, I believe, we move forward too
readily. Linux, in general, is something of an antidote to that
poison, but not a perfect one. It is great the way that you can still
use software (like tin, which I'm using now, for example) which is
really old and not much changed for a long time. There is such a
comfort in familiarity and stability. And, of course, Slackware Linux
is perhaps the best in this regard.

Yet some changes, sadly, seem to be necessary. Pulseaudio is an
interesting example, but perhaps not a good one. I was so mad when I
was forced into learning to use pulseaudio. I was comfortable doing
things the old way. Well, I'm gradually learning to use it. I'm not
sure if I'll ever like it. This mostly depends on the programmers. If
they do a good job, then maybe there's hope for it. It *does* seem to
complicate things, but the subject of sound management is complex by
nature, or perhaps it is *becoming* complex.

This is somewhat like what happened with udev which is another thing I
struggle with. Once upon a time we probably didn't need it. Then
suddenly the world was immersed in USB devices. I've got to say, udev
is a deep mystery that I'm only beginning to get a little comfortable
with. Often I deal with it by turning it off (I render it in-operative
by replacing the /etc/udev/rules.d directory with an empty file).

Now Akonadi, on the other hand, I think should just go away. I do not
understand its usefulness. All I know about it is that it is
responsible for generating many Gigabytes of data. This is definitely
not the way I want to use my storage devices. So I wipe the files that
it generates. (See Akonadi link at
http://joeslife.org/links/computing/unixes).

My point I was trying to make was that some change is needed, even
though it is painful. Bummer.

But is there an elephant in the room? Perhaps so.
Post by Martha Adams
Thus the Elephant is there and I think including it in discussions,
would improve the discussions. And I don't think that in the
process, you can throw-out the Luz...Windows, because 1) so very
many people use it; and 2) there's a lot of talent over there and
it's unwise to shut it out. But that's another topic....
Titeotwawki -- Martha Adams [Tues 2018 Oct 16]
--
http://joeslife.org
Sarcastic Fringehead
2018-10-16 12:26:05 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 06:47:41 +0000, Joe Rosevear wrote:

(snip
Post by Joe Rosevear
Yet some changes, sadly, seem to be necessary. Pulseaudio is an
interesting example, but perhaps not a good one. I was so mad when I
was forced into learning to use pulseaudio.
Suppose you're throwing a party at your estate this weekend. You want
all the computers, in the main house, the guest house, the boathouse,
etc. to all play the same music at the same time from a central music
server. That's the problem pulseaudio was designed to solve.

What's that? You say you're not throwing a party at your estate this
weekend? Then maybe pulseaudio is not for you (or me). I never had any
problems with audio via ALSA.

(snip)
Post by Joe Rosevear
Now Akonadi, on the other hand, I think should just go away. I do not
understand its usefulness. All I know about it is that it is
responsible for generating many Gigabytes of data.
Agreed. Nepomuk too. KDE4 has driven away many users, like me.
Programmers scratching their own itch. There are products at the drugstore
for problems like that.
jrg
2018-10-16 16:05:33 UTC
Permalink
On 10/16/2018 05:26 AM, Sarcastic Fringehead wrote:
<snip>
Post by Sarcastic Fringehead
Programmers scratching their own itch. There are products at the drugstore
for problems like that.
post needs a C&C :)

Richard Kettlewell
2018-10-16 07:55:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Martha Adams
I was just reading the nearby Gimp vs Photoshop thread. I think
it moves all around something central. Namely, that interest and
using some software does not require that it be the latest, most
elaborated, largest, most expensive, greatest, and etc. What
counts is its *utility*. Which detail is too often lost and by
being lost leaves the door open to unending elaboration.
"Utility" to me is, can it do what I need in some way that is
accessible and comfortable to me? And for the Photoshop user
in the Gimp vs Photoshop thread, the question is, if she goes
over to Gimp then can she still do the things she needs to do.
If some purchaser of her work *requires* Photoshop then that
settles the question. Else, Gimp may be "inferior" to Photoshop
according to some people by their thinking, but that's actually
off-topic. Which topic is, Gimp's *utility* for the work at
hand.
This Elephant is on my mind now because I've been thinking about
it lately. It has two or more sides. I've been thinking why
don't we have a small fixed Linux that never changes?
There are long-term support branches of several distributions. But they
need maintenance effort - if you just abandon them then the collection
of known vulnerabilities will gradually grow and hardware support will
get out of date. Moreover that effort increasingly falls on the
integrators as upstream developers lose interest in old versions of the
code (they only have finite capacity, after all).

And if the feature you need isn’t in an LTS release, then it’s no use to
you...
--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
Loading...