I’ve switched to the Ubuntu Hardy Beta as my main OS, which is also a switch from using KDE to using GNOME. However the DE switch didn’t really affect me much.
The main things I like about GNOME is the fact that firefox and compiz integrate well (the later is probably partly the ubuntu team’s work.
However, I do have a few issues with the system (which isn’t surprising for a beta).
- Firefox 3 can not handle apt: links properly without being told where the apturl binary is.
- Firefox plugins (ie. java and flash) do not load as expected and I had to do some jiggling to get it to work. (Firefox seems to look in /usr/lib/firefox-3.0 and /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9b4, but surprisingly not /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins or /usr/lib/firefox/plugins)
- The add user dialog box does not work (probably due to bugs in the new policykit integration)
And there a few things I would like to see added in future versions:
- The ability to restore items from the trash
- A passwordless login option for gdm (I solved this rather messily by using null passwords for non sudoer users)
- Policykit intergration into more apps. It would be great if the “permission denied” dialog in gedit would let me esculate to root, it would save me so much time.
I also found pidgin to be an annoyance. It does not show msn personal messages which for me, is quite important. In fact, I am now using Emesene, which is designed specifically for the WLM (aka msn) network so does the important things like personal messages, offline messages and even has a plugin for the Plus! colours. Also, it is quite similar to the layout of the official client without the ugliness that aMSN has. All in all, I would recommend it it as a drop in replacement for people who currently use the MS client, especially as it is still being actively developed.
I also had a mess about with the gnome themes, which despite what the KDE folk might say, was nicely customizable. I got interested in the application transparency that murrine can provide. Unfotunately, this is only available in the svn build. So, no problem - im confortable with compiling my own stuff. However, I wanted to try and install it via a deb package, to make future maintenance easier. So, I’ve been trying out packaging which isn’t all that hard, once you get the hang of it. Hopefully I’ll be able to put these skills to use. I’m building up a (very small) apt repository.
So, in the end after some “learning” (can be frustrating sometimes) I got murrine installed. So, a few plugins later and I have transparent apps (fwiw emesene has support built in). However, there were a couple of things bothering me:
- tbh, its not all that great - just the transparent gnome-terminal would have sufficed for me. It looks a bit messy at times (perhaps more blur is needed?)
- Why is this not in the distros yet? Vista has had this for a year! Where is the innovation of the open source community? Or is the answer see 1, is it just not a big deal to most people?
16 comments
Comments feed for this article
May 2, 2008 at 11:32 pm
PerfDave
I tend to say “GNU plus Linux” or just “GNU”. It’s generally thought that “GNU Linux” makes Linux sound like a GNU project, like “GNU Emacs”, which creates more confusion. On the other hand, I tend to have to explain what I mean no matter what I say, so perhaps it’s not that big a deal.
Refusing to use proprietary software in schools is an interesting idea. I’m not sure that a pupil has sufficient leverage for this to be effective though - they may just find themselves being flunked. If enough pupils in a class were to do it however, there might be sufficient momentum to force a change.
May 3, 2008 at 11:23 am
Ben Webb
Yeah, “GNU linux” does have its drawbacks, but as you say, none of them are clear to most people. I’m still not decided on what name exactly to use, but I do think GNU does deserve the recognition.
As for in schools, yes, it does require several people. Hopefully I’ll be able to create a group of us to do it - but first I will starrt the diplomatic way, asking the IT staff if we can dual boot some machines.
May 3, 2008 at 4:46 pm
libervisco
RMS definitely has a way of inspiring in some odd way. Whenever I listened to his talks (a couple of times live as well when he came to Croatia) I felt like I want to adopt something like gNewSense and purify my system of absolutely all proprietary software that may be left in it etc. etc.
However, especially after becoming a voluntaryist, I no longer agree when RMS says something like “proprietary software should be illegal” therefore implying that Free Software must be forced by law. As a voluntaryist I can’t accept that.
So my focus instead is on the awareness. It’s not about “making everyone use 100% Free Software”, but about “making everyone 100% capable of consciously choosing Free Software”. That said, I think RMS is doing an excellent job at spreading this awareness even if it so often seems like the former is the goal rather than latter.
He is, after all, the man who made so many of us think about this as an important issue. In fact I have largely him to thank for becoming involved in exploration of freedom in the first place!
About convenience vs. freedom, I think he’s right. However, people should be free to choose between the two, no matter how odd a choice that may be (since the little angel in many of us often says freedom is always the right thing). The point is, as long as you know what you’re doing, what rights are you forfeiting by choosing a particular program, and by using it DON’T actually encourage others to do the same, you’re solely responsible for it. And even if it’s a bad choice overall, you’re free to make it.
Of course, freedom to choose even a bad choice is obviously not something worthy of a campaign. It is a worthy side note. Freedom to choose Free Software and help spread it is the campaign because too many people already unconsciously choose proprietary software while certain corrupt parts of the industry try to even deny a legal existence to Free Software.
May 3, 2008 at 5:09 pm
Ben Webb
Yes, the best way is to raise awarness, because of course, many people do not know that free software exists; or even if they do, thety do not really understand what it is about.
One thing about the government thing though. I’m all in favour of using governments to further the cause - if we have them we might as well use them - but, I know that you strongly disagree with this.
But yes, the convenience vs. freedom thing is a personal choice. What I am mainly referring to in the post is how much inconvenience I am willing to accept in order to fight for freedom.
May 3, 2008 at 5:23 pm
libervisco
Well, we could use government to an extent to which we can without ending up imposing our will on others. For instance, abolishing software patents in law does not force anyone to anything, yet it removes an obstacle to Free Software. That kind of government related campaigning I can support.
Even voluntaryists would agree that while we have government, lessening the number and restrictiveness of laws is a step in the right direction and it helps empower the movement for liberty, making the end goal closer.
> What I am mainly referring to in the post is how much inconvenience I am willing to accept in order to fight for freedom.
I suppose it depends on how much inconvenience is necessary to accept. You can only know that once you know what your goal exactly is. Fighting for freedom is a pretty general thing to do actually - it can be done a whole lot of ways.
In some you can do more and in others less. Just the same, some require greater sacrifice than others.
Cheers
May 3, 2008 at 7:18 pm
Ben Webb
Yeah, I see your point really. And I must say, I don’t think governemnts should force people to use free software. However, stopping people from distributing propreitary software, is in a way stopping coercion, so maybe governments should do that. However, I doubt any of them will, so I’m not really bothered about debating the issue or even campaigning for it.
Therefore, I think we should concentrate on campaigns to, like you say, get rid of software patents and make copyright sane; but also encourage governemnts to adopt free sfotware themselves.
As you say, it does depend on the end goal. What I really want to do is “spread the word” to ordinary people, and for this the best method is probably compromise. For example, I have and will continue to, use the propreitary windows sytems at school to show people (and print off) materials relating to free software (that reminds me, I need to go and buy a HP printer).
May 3, 2008 at 7:34 pm
libervisco
Actually, I don’t think proprietary software is coercion itself. What makes a piece of software proprietary is the license and the unavailability of source code. But the user is not forced to buy or use that software by the software distributor. We can argue that circumstances created by near monopolies like Microsoft create some sort of a pressure, but this is market pressure, not really coercion, because there is no threat against your life and property if you choose not to use it.
And if you do, you actually voluntarily contract away some of your rights.
The only way coercion enters the game here is government enforcement of the copyright license you accepted, but something akin to that might exist even in a free market where there is no government - if you continue using something contracted in a particular way, yet you break the contract, you can be disputed and fined in a given court.
Cheers
May 3, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Ben Webb
Hmmmm, yes I guess that is true. Like I say, it doesn’t make much difference to me, as what I am doing is raising awsarness, so that people can make an infromed decision; and also making sure that I will always be free to use free software.
May 4, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Idde
You question what me and Alice took from the experience. I found it interesting, certainly. But it didn’t really inspire anything in me… he must have been doing that exact same talk for years now, and he didn’t strike me as a particularly good speaker despite all the practice he has had. I suppose this leads to Alice’s point that there is no way he is going to get this out to the masses if lectures to a room that is generally full of techies and takes the piss out of the others (business man). I like the ethos. But the free software community needs to spread the word better. Freeing webapps and that whole firmware malarky is all very well and good, but it’s offputting to most people. Freedom is good, but most people aren’t prepared to sacrifice convenience for it. Let’s raise awareness and change this
May 4, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Idde
Oh, and link to my blog!
May 5, 2008 at 10:31 am
jagadees
we can simply call the system GNU.
No need to include linux in that. becuse there are 18733 programs(big and small) in a Debian distribution. dont think one program is superior than another. Give respect to all programs. like giving respect to all the people, animals, plants etc in this universe.
http://jagadees.wordpress.com/2008/04/19/do-we-need-to-call-gnu-os-as-gnulinux/
May 5, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Tim Dobson
woo. ben!
your blog has gained some fame: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/fsuk-manchester/2008-05/threads.html
May 5, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Ben Webb
Oh, yeah, I’ll add you to my blogroll now - I wasn’t sure whether you wanted to publicise your blog, which is why I hadn’t add a link sooner.
Yes, I did question what you gained, I’m glad you found it interesting. I personally did find it inspiring, but I am the technical type of person he is aiming at. Like I was saying to Alice, rms’s audience is the techies and not the masses. Bringing the message to the masses is for other people (such as myself).
So indeed, how do we spread the word better? As you say, most people aren’t willing to accept much inconvenience (but I am which was what the blog post was mainly about). However, there are a few things I would like to point out:
1) Some people are willing to accept inconvenience. Human rights acitivists will go to great lenghts to fight for freedom. Therefore, it would be a great thing to find a way to bring the digital freedom message to them. In fact, I have already thought about this on a page on the ADFA wiki. Feel free to add your thoughts concerning this on the talk page there.
2) Doing your bit for freedom nowadays need not be so much of an inconvenience. In fact, some people are switching to apps like Firefox or even Linux, just because they are better! In a way, this is a good thing, but in a way it is not, because these people do not know the messsage of freedom behind these apps. Even in a world where everyone used Linux, propreitary software could still do its evil deeds. So, the most important thing is that people know about the fight for Digital Freedom, although that is not all there is too it. Going totally free does incurr a great amount of inonvenience (even I have not done it yet), but this is not necassary to support the free software movement. Even just switching to firefox *for ethical reasons* can be a great (although minor) contribution to the cause.
3) There is not really any such thing as the “free software community”. A lot of the community based around free software do not care so much about the ethics. This includes the open source group and the people who support linux for its technical merits. Although some of the efforts of these other groups benefit the free software movement (by increasing free software usage), they are not so eager to spread the message of the four freedoms. Thus, there is no real co-ordinated work to spread the FSF’s message. Atm, it is up to individuals, such as myself, to find a way to further the cause that works for them.
Not sure if that all made sense, but hey, eloquence and passion don’t often go together. Anyway, my main point is that there isn’t enough being done to bring the word to the masses. This is what I want to do. I would be very greatful if you could help me find the best way to convey the message to people.
May 5, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Alice
Hello, I’m alice for any readers interest. What baffles me Ben is why isn’t RM’s responisiblity to spread the word to ‘non-techies’? In my opinion the person who is best to do that is, obvousily RM. Its like having a prime minster who doesnt speak directly to the general public, I wouldn’t trust that party. In a way until you can get RM to speak to ‘non-techies’ , they wont trust GNU and the cause of freedom software. Even tho i personnally now think it’s a good cause.
My next point is that i agree with Libervisco that it shouldn’t be inforced by the goverment. Freedom is about choice and you should choose to inconvince your self for a cause not it being forced, or there is no point to it all in the first place, because then it’s not freedom. But just to clear things up it doesn’t make me a voluntaryist. This is going to make compliacations into getting it into schools but if the laws on copyright are eased to fit freedom software i think thats the route to go.
Ben I also understand your point for inconvince for freedom, but what the whole world knows about sacrafice.Is Martin Luther King’s sacrafice, The Pankhurst women’s sacrafice, but the freedom software sacrafice will never weigh up to that, and without a massive sacrafice that everyone can relate too like the examples i gave. Change will be slow coming and thats what you’ve got to have in mind.
I’m sorry to be pesimistic, i do think you are going to make a difference but i think with this cause you should think about the maxium you can do and the freedom software communitycan do .Then go on to thinking about the wider population and how to speak to them.
May 5, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Ben Webb
Note: His name is rms not RM (and yes, it shouldn’t really be capitalised, even though I write it in capitals).
Why should RMS not be lecturing to the non-techies? Well, I don’t think theres any particular reason why he shouldn’t, its just does he have the time? At the cmoment he spends all of his time going around the world giving talks. Although some of those people might be non-techies, most aren’t, since most of the people who go will be people who of heard of them.
Also, it is worth remembering that the Free Software Foundation is a charity, not a political party. True, political leaders do speak to the general public, but only because the general public knows about them to listen to them. We need to first raise awarness of who he and his cause are. How is he supposed to get his message to the public anyway? He does not have time to visit places like our school (for enrichment) and the mainstream media aren’t interested in covering him!
Yes, freedom is about choice. If governments do anything to kill propeitary software, it should just be to simply make copyright not apply to software (in fact, orginally, it didn’t). However, this is not going to happen, so I don’t think its worth discussing. I think it would be prefectly okay to make free software (or increased use of it) mandatory in schools (as has happened in Brazil). THe governemnt is the one who is paying for costs in public schools, so it is them who ca\n make the choice. But, this isn’t going to happen in the UK any time soon anyway. It will be much easier to work on an individual school level, because you do have a point in that each school’s individual needs are different.
As for changing copyright law, this is in no way easy. In fact, unless the the law worldwide changes at the same time, making copyright law not apply to software could actually be detrimental to free software (”copyleft” free software relies on copyright to prevent propreitary companies stealing the code and making it propreitary). Although I kind of understand what you’re saying, there are other laws that are much more important to change - such as those concerning patents and DRM (the two things that really do get in the way of free software).
As for your last point, true, inconvenience for digital freedom will never look as spectacular as the sacrifices of the people you mention. Change may happen relatively slowly, but it is happening, and will continue to happen, perhaps faster than you may think. Many south american and european (yes, european, try telling me they have not got much power) governments use quite a lot of free software. In fact only recently, plans to put linux in schools for *52 million* brazillain kids was announced. Thats almost as much as the population of the UK!
Like you say, we do need to talk to a wider audience, and I know that. Its not easy to take such a technical cause to the masses, although this is what I want to do. A lot of free software people are not the most socially communicative people, as I’m sure you can imagine. We need more people who understand both the importance of the four freedoms, and how to communicate best with ordinary people………. people like you Alice.
May 5, 2008 at 6:05 pm
fophillips
My school is seriously considering getting EeePCs for new students. Which is a step in the right direction I suppose.
I have applied for an official ICT position at school, making it clear in my application my views on free software. Hopefully I will be able to do something from there.