Hey, Buddy. I'm not sure those wysiwyg tools are so easy. In my office I hear a lot of cussing about what that Word thing just did to somebody's file. And I hear a lot about how people can't get it to print a certain way, etc., etc., etc. Buddy Brannan writes: > From: Buddy Brannan <davros at ycardz.com> > > On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 10:31:05PM -0400, jack mendez wrote: > > i guess what i am trying to say is that if you don't use the tools which > > you have available to you simply because of some idealogical and really, > > foolish motion that open source is better just because, you are a fool. > > Why not tell us what you *really* think, Jack? > > I hardly think, first of all, that the notions you mentioned are > foolish at all. They're just as valid as any other reasons one might > choose to use open-source (or more narrowly, free) software. And > people who choose to use, or not use, tools for what you consider to > be foolish reasons are only fools in your limited vision. (BTW, I > really think you might've worded your opinion in a more constructive > fashion, but that, in turn, is my opinion.) > > I could argue that people who don't use tools, for instance, such as > the tex typesetting language, preferring instead to use a WYSIWYG word > processor, are foolish for not using a tool that has the power to be > much more exact in its execution of typesetting of documents. They are > foolish because they don't want to take the time or energy to learn to > use these tools and instead choose to use something easy. Copping out > if you will. I won't say so, and I don't believe this is true. Sure, I > might think that the non-use of these tools is short-sighted (I don't, > necessarily). Or I might think a lot of things. Thing is though, we > have a choice, and we can make that choice based on whatever criteria > we like. Ideological, ease-of-use, power. But because someone's > choices and reasons are not yours, they are not fools, nor are their > reasons foolish. (Now if one chooses to support bloated, monopolistic, > predatory, short-sighted, sloppy, shoddy software companies, I > wouldn't say they're fools either. Short-sighted, maybe; ignorant of > all the facts, perhaps; lazy, could be; they don't see anything wrong > with this picture, possibly; but I don't know everyone's > motivation. But their ideology's not mine. Fools? Probably not.) > > Sure, I'll use something if proprietary and closed if an open > alternative is not available. I'll even use something that's open > source if something as useful isn't available as free > software. (Please understand the distinction.) However, > *ideologically*, and maybe in your eyes *foolishly*, I will use a free > software product if it is of as much utility--or close to as much > utility--as something that is not free. Heck, I'll even pay for free > (as in speech) software and support it over non-free software (even if > the non-free software is free (as in beer)). > > I, for one, look forward to the day--and it's coming--that I will no > longer require the use of proprietary, non-free software. And I'll > gladly ditch all of the proprietary, non-free software. Unfortunately, > being a realist, I recognize that there will always be some things > that will require some software that isn't free. Doesn't mean I have > to like it. > > BTW, at least some of the reason I love GNU/Linux is ideological, so > scuse me while I dust off my dunce cap. > -- > Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV/3 | "And if the ground yawned, > Phone: (814) 455-7333 | I'd step to the side and say, > Email: davros at ycardz.com | "Hey ground! I'm nobody's lunch!" > http://www.ycardz.com/ | --Eddie From Ohio > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup -- Janina Sajka, Director Technology Research and Development Governmental Relations Group American Foundation for the Blind (AFB) Email: janina at afb.net Phone: (202) 408-8175
