Dotan Cohen wrote:
Very common workflows (or playflows) include the following:
1) Web browsing: the viewing of HTML pages
2) Email: the downloading, display, and sending of electronic mail
3) Chatting: communicating with other humans via one (or more) or the
following chat protocols: yahoo, msn, icq
4) Listening to audio: the playback of mp3 files
5) Watching video: the playback of mpg, avi, and wmv files
6) Viewing pictures: the display of jpeg files
7) Word Processing: creating, editing, and display of text documents
in txt, rtf, and doc formats
8) Spreadsheet: creating, editing, and display of spreadsheets in excel
format
I'm sure there's more that I missed. But these are examples of the
most basic functions that any computer (and operating system) are
expected to perform. If an OS cannot do any of these, then it is not
adequate for general use. Fedora is thus bound by law to be inadequate
Your judgment is flawed: Windows Vista can't do a lot of those tasks out
of the box and need additional software which have to be downloaded or
purchased separately (to pick from your list: spreadsheets, video files
with certain codecs or in certain formats, some chat protocols).
You are also unfair with your criteria, the conditions are formulated to
fit your predefined conclusion:
- for chat you request "one or more of the" (BTW, you forgot
Jaber/Google Talk from the list)
- for video you request all formats (mpg, avi, wmv)
- for audio you request one specific format, MP3, but forget about AAC,
WAV, OGG, Audio CD - those are also audio (note that Fedora 7 should
have preconfigured OOTB a few OGG internet radio stations).
for general use out of the box. That is easily fixed by those in the
know, but not by a passer-by who downloads the distro (or LiveCD) and
plays around with it.
This could be said also for any other operating system
Again I ask: to whom is the official LiveCD aimed at? I do not think
that Redhat can (legally) produce a LiveCD suitable for the general
public. Rather, this is better left to the community, who are not
bound by such restrictive laws, and can legally create and distribute
such a disk. The only question for Redhat is should Redhat allow the
community to use the Fedora name on the disk.
There was a lot of talk about what can be a derived distro and still
keep the Fedora name, one of the ideas was that it have to be a subset
of Core + Extras, but I don't remember the conclusion.
You know, it can have a different name and put on the disk "gOldSense,
based on Fedora" - you know, as gNewSense is a freer version of Ubuntu,
gOldSense could be a less free version of Fedora :p
--
nicu :: http://nicubunu.ro :: http://nicubunu.blogspot.com
Cool Fedora wallpapers: http://fedora.nicubunu.ro/wallpapers/
Open Clip Art Library: http://www.openclipart.org
my Fedora stuff: http://fedora.nicubunu.ro
--
Fedora-desktop-list mailing list
Fedora-desktop-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-desktop-list
