[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

OT: In defence of ``newbie-picking'' (was:Re: MS Project 2003)



On Tuesday 26 July 2005 03:54, Michael Z Daryabeygi wrote:
> Anders Breindahl wrote:
> > Have you tried `less`?
>
> Why are you picking on (perceived?) newbies? That's not funny.
> I'm pretty sure he needs more functionality than that.
> And I know from his other thread that he is doing his best to get away
> from M$, so we should genuinely try to help him.

I am sorry, that you read it as me picking on newbies. That was not my 
intention; I merely (attempted unarrogantly) tried to state the not-always 
obvious.

I am also sorry to announce, that I am one of those, who will be ``jumping 
down peoples' throats'' in the case of not keeping to the net-etiquette. It 
really makes it less satisfying to be a part of the community. I suppose I 
don't belong on -user with this standpoint; but as it seems like the only 
place in Debian I may be of service, I stick around, keeping my annoyance to 
myself (mostly, that is).

In defence of my post, though:
It is my experience, that the Windows-community uses cleartext files more 
often than one assumes. (Opposite to arbitrary binary formats).
Often I have been able to extract the information I needed by treating the 
files as cleartext.
I am also convinced, that no one would want to run a Windows-only IDE on a 
GNU/Linux machine -- and I therefore assumed that Rajiv only wanted to do the 
``extracting information''-part, and therefore could cope with `less`.

> Project is a beast that I am afraid to learn.  But I would be interested
> to know if anyone has tried it in wine.

Not that I have the ability to command such development forces -- but wouldn't 
creating a Microsoft-compatible program be a misallocation of Free Software 
development ressources?
The trouble about .doc seems to prove that to me: The more we want a a 
FS-alternative to a Microsoft program, the harder they will make it to 
develop?

Regards, Anders Breindahl.

Attachment: pgpbELxKLzqfv.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: