devnet, Author at Yet Another Linux Blog

Debian Moves in, Servlets, and Usability

I’ve moved the server here at work to Debian Stable with Tomcat Jakarta installed. I’m currently experimenting with servlets from various corners of the web. I have only one problem with many CMS’s though….there is a hugely steep learning curve.

I count myself as pretty experienced when it comes to content management systems. I picked up on Zope/Plone within a few weeks. I picked up joomla! in days. I work pretty well inside wiki’s and have no trouble with forge software. So I find it completely baffling that some content management systems (even the free ones) do things so odd.

One of the CMSs I’m working with currently is Mesh CMS. They’re better than others I’ve looked at (Alfresco, Contenido) but why, oh why, does every single java servlet CMS have to have a directory tree with collapseable trees? This is so annoying! Take this for example…when someone opens ‘My Computer’ in Linux OR Windows…they’re presented with a list of folders. Now unless you set it up to show you the directory tree in your viewing options…you’re seeing folders on the top level. That’s not the way many servlet CMS’s do business. It may be good to see how deep things go and it may be good for admins who control ALL their content…but when you want to setup 10 users with write access and have to train them on how to use the CMS…IT’S NOT GOOD.

Most users have never seen the folder tree style menu and get confused quickly. Perhaps there is a setting that can remedy this that I’m not aware of. Please be advised that I’m taking a high level look at these things and I’m not diving in so deep that I’m examining the code yet…so I could be overlooking something. I just figure that things make more sense if you do things in the comfort zone of the standard user.

It’s odd how software companies, programmers, and coders try to re-invent the wheel on many projects. They toss out simple usability to do things more complex. The problem is that with each successive version of their software, things normally get harder and harder to operate. This is fine for someone who has used the previous version and is comfortable with its operation…but not so fine for new users.

This is often my point when discussing Linux as well. Usability should be key when a distro is popular…and Ubuntu has made VAST strides in making Linux usable for new users…but it’s not the best out there which is a complete mystery to me as to why it is THE most popular on the planet.

All of this talk on usability in software systems puts me in the mind of an article I read a few years ago: Ronco Spray-on Usability. It was a funny article about ESR not being able to configure his printer in Linux…which is kinda laughable when you think about it. But the author brings up a valid point…that is, that Joe Schmoe (referred to in the article as Aunt Tillie or A.T.) who is a common user can’t be the intended target for usable systems until the ESR’s are able to accomplish the task. You can’t spray on Usability with a handy spray can…it has to be reached successively. Not to mention that the UI for a program should be the last part developed after the program is in place…but seldom is. Hence all the usability problems.

Although I don’t agree with EVERYTHING the author of that article states, I do agree with many of the parts on usability. I definately don’t think you have to have proprietary, paid software to have good usability…because usability is an art form as the author states…and if it is, some of the best artwork comes from starving artists right? So money is irrelevant…it matters not. What matters is that not everyone who is a programmer is a UI developer and UI developers can’t always be the best programmers. The idea is to marry both into something. That’s what I’m looking for in a CMS. Something that has usability for standard users and something that can do the whiz bang things I need it to. It’s probably a pipe dream…but its a good dream to have. Not just in CMS software…in all software. Maybe someday right?

Is Ubuntu CE Needed?

I read a review of Ubuntu CE (Christian Edition) over at tuxmachines.org. If you take a look at the comments, you’ll notice that the reviewer, srlinuxx, received an email from the developer of Ubuntu CE and posted it. You can also read my response to that email. What it boiled down to was that the author thought the review was a bit unfair…but I’ve got to tell you, if there is one place on the face of the planet that I go for FAIR and BALANCED Linux reviews, it’s Tuxmachines.org. I go there before I go to madpenguin.org, desktoplinux.com, newsforge.com, anywhere.tv. It’s my number one stop to see what new distros are like and what old distros new releases are doing. It’s also a great stop to see the latest alpha builds from the heavy hitters in Linux. Never have I seen srlinuxx give praise where it wasn’t deserved, nor criticism where it wasn’t needed. In this case, she stated:

“I can’t see how a wallpaper, a script, and one app can warrant a whole
separate distribution, but there ya go. (I guess it’s three apps –
should we count automatix and gnucash too?) It worked well and
performance of the system in general was above average. It works good,
I just can’t see the point of a whole distribution for this. Why didn’t
they just send in the two packages for inclusion in Ubuntu’s software
repository?”

I must agree. Despite good intentions and an so called “apparent need,” I’d say that the developers and supporters are going in the wrong direction…they’re trying to repackage an already great distro and re-brand it with a label and an idea. It’s not working and it’s taking away from what they originally set out to accomplish.

Continue reading “Is Ubuntu CE Needed?”

InfoWorld Employs Ignorant Journalists

NOTE: ComputerWorld Senior Online Projects Editor, Ian Lamont, has contacted me and asked that I provide a correction to the information contained in this post. The original article by Neil McAllister did not originally appear at Computerworld. It was first published by InfoWorld…however, there was no originating link published with the Computerworld posting of the article linking back to this original posting…so assumption was justified but wrong. Thus, Computerworld is not the employer of ignorance, rather, InfoWorld is 🙂 It is important to note that Compturworld is a subsidiary (is that the right word?) of http://idg.net of which InforWorld is as well. Unfortunately, due to syndication, the title of this article is the URL and has been passed around at many, many different places.

So, I’ll be retitling and editing the article accordingly to provide seamless redirection. I apologize to Computerworld if in any way, shape, or form for my mistake did any character damage or incurred the rath senior editors and/or caused anyone to lose face or get made fun of (unless they’re dressed in horrible attire or didn’t brush their teeth this morning, in which case, they should apologize to everyone else). The original Computerworld syndication of Mr. McAllister’s article is located here. A copy of the original article I penned is available upon request via the comments section of this article. Thanks!

Articles like this one are so misguided. Giving you a brief overview what the article from InfoWorld says: Open Source supporters build fortresses around them that make them unapproachable and have infinite animosity toward Microsoft. Yep, that about sums it up. I’ll show you below how this article was written by an ignorant journalist…one that probably is too prideful to ask for help when writing his garbage. Next time you go to write something, why don’t you ask someone? Heck, ask me…I’d help you not to make a fool of yourself and stay accurate with the facts. Instead, InfoWorld shows mud on its face while pretending they’re subject matter experts.

I’d expect it from say…a standard blog discussing technology or perhaps a publication site that only has a technology section with a writer or two that pens just enough to wet the appetite of the computer savvy portion of its demographic. But InfoWorld? Come on! These guys should do a bit more research…afterall, they’re part of IDG which is the leading distributor of computer and technology based magazines and newspapers on the entire planet…you’d think that they might hire someone with a bit more knowledge in the arena of open source. They lead off the entire article with the following:

“If you support open source, one of the initial things you learn is that you must bash Microsoft.”

Well, I missed that memo. Last I checked on Sourceforge, there were around 6,000 pieces of open source software available for Windows and the Microsoft platform. Perhaps the author is confusing the term Open Source with Linux as many people do. They sit there and think that Linux and Open Source are synonymous. That just isn’t so. Linux is just one of many Open Source programs available…and one of many that can be said contain a philosophy biased against Microsoft Software. I always take note that some of the best programs out there that have a GPL License make my job eaiser on the Microsoft Platform at work. When you generalize things like this, you should at least get the generalization correct. In this instance, he didn’t.

Now…perhaps the author just opened up with the wrong sentence right? Let’s give him the benefit of the doubt and take a look at the second sentence:

“It’s understandable; of all the
proprietary software companies in the world the one in Redmond takes
the cake for ill-will towards the open-source community. Just look at
the famed “Halloween documents” to see the extent of the bad blood”

Uh…last I checked the Halloween Documents were penned by Microsoft which was why they were so damning. So, the benefit of the doubt was given but shouldn’t have been. The author is implying that the Halloween Documents were somehow written by Open Source supporters in an attempt to bring ‘ill-will’ toward Microsoft. Funny isn’t it? This means that the author didn’t even read the Halloween Documents enough to know this simple fact. The author probably didn’t even read the Halloween Documents FAQ. Does it get any better later in the article?

Nope. Read on for the full digression.

Continue reading “InfoWorld Employs Ignorant Journalists”

Inside MyPCLinuxOS

I’ve been extremely busy during the last month supporting and starting projects for PCLinuxOS. For those of you who may not know, I am the webmaster for http://mypclinuxos.com. What I desired when creating the site was a place that the community could come to help make PCLinuxOS better. Not that it wasn’t good on its own…it does just fine. Just that I wanted the community to feel more a part of development and to have them take pride in the distro.

I’m really impressed with the way the community has responded, not only to the creation of mypclinuxos, but also to the organization of the site. I’ve tried very hard to provide any open source tool available for web based project development for everyone that I could provide in a shared host environment. Heck, I’d even configure tomcat on my home Linux box and put it out there if they needed it. Why do I do this? Why do I do this for free? How do I do this for free?

Well, let’s get into it shall we? Inside the start of MyPCLinuxOS…

I started Yet Another Linux Blog a few years back to chronicle my search for the perfect desktop distribution and to house many tips and tricks that I had in my arsenal and also that I had run across on the web. I found PCLinuxOS after my wife determined that it was the best Linux desktop available last year while participating in my Linux experiment. It completely replaced the SimplyMEPIS install I had on every computer in my home and it also replaced the disks I hand out to friends.

I laid low in the PCLinuxOS community, checking out the pulse by forum lurking. I hung out in IRC using an alias that no one could trace to TKS (the nick I used at the time) nor my current nick of devnet. I tried to really grasp what community I had got myself into. After I determined that the community was fantastic…I was ready to give back.

See, I started a fan site for SimplyMEPIS and had my efforts dashed by various sources. I had been an active member of the MEPIS community in the early days of the distro and it was amazing how fast those I considered my ‘community family’ turned on me when my opinion differed from theirs. So when I decided to support PCLinuxOS, I was VERY careful about what I was getting myself into. I couldn’t be happier with where I am at and where the distro is at today. I see the popularity for this distro going through the roof and I’m in for the ride. So it’s very nice to be a part of something like PCLinuxOS and to have gotten in on the ground level as a contributor.

One of the areas that I see PCLinuxOS hurting the most is in the internationalization arena. I truly believe that if we made PCLinuxOS available for install in as many languages as Ubuntu or OpenSuSe does, we’d be right up there with them in popularity and userbase. As it is now, PCLinuxOS is released in English only. MyPCLinuxOS has many people forming teams right now to change that. If you’d like to see PCLinuxOS in different languages both for the installer and LiveCD, head over to MyPCLinuxOS and join up with our team to help us do so. That’s it for now. I’ll have more updates about MyPCLinuxOS and what’s going on there in the future.

PCLinuxOS Magazine Releases Initial Issue!

Normally, I don’t like to rehash the news. However, in this case, I’m a member of the contributors and the admin/webmaster of both development sites for the magazine…I feel a bit inclined to let everyone know about it 😀

“It is my privilege to announce on behalf of the team members of the PCLinuxOS Magazine Project sponsored by MyPCLinuxOS.com, the September 2006 introductory issue is available for download! We’ve put a lot of
effort into producing a quality magazine made for the community, by the community.

Contained inside are many articles written for the
PCLinuxOS community and a few for those interested but not yet using
it. Some highlights include:

An interview with Susan Linton of Tuxmachines.org
An RPM Tutorial for beginning users
Hunting rootkits with Rootkithunter on PCLinuxOS
Much, Much more!

Please note that the magazine is released under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 license unless otherwise stated on the articles themselves. By
downloading this magazine you must acknowledge and accept this license agreement.

We’ve released the magazine in two versions in pdf format. We designed the magazine for viewing in KPDF but other viewers will work as well. The two formats of the magazine are Viewer Default (VD) and Presentation Mode (PM). Viewer default will display the magazine in the default mode your reader is setup with and Presentation
Mode starts in full screen.

PCLinuxOS Editor-In-Chief, Archie, has further explanation of the downloads:

“The following files are best viewed in KPDF. Other readers, such as Adobe Reader, Ghostview, XPDF can also be used. The following instruction is based on using KPDF.

PCLinuxOS_Mag_200609_PM.pdf is initially in presentation. Moving pages forward is as easy as clicking the left mouse button. To go back a page, the user just right-click the mouse button. And exiting the Presentation Mode is not harder than pressing the ESC key.

A user can also hover the mouse cursor on the top of the screen and there will appear some navigation buttons. On the top left-hand side are the blue forward and back buttons; on the right-hand side is the exit button.”

Head over to the downloads section to download the latest issue of the magazine. Thanks for your interest in PCLinuxOS! If you feel you’d like to contribute to future issues, please check out the contribute link in the main menu. You can also drop us a line via the contact link in the main menu. If you have any suggestions, comments, or letters to the editor feel free to submit them this way or send an email to mag@mypclinuxos.com. Thanks and enjoy!

PCLinuxOS Magazine Download

Digg this Announcement!

Cipherfunk.org, the GPL, and Ubuntu Contributors

Why oh why do people jump to conclusions without properly investigating things? I haven’t ranted in a while because, well, there’s really nothing to rant about as of late. However, this morning, I read this news article on violation of the GPL by a site called Cipherfunk.org. If you take a look at the article, it goes on to explain that Cipherfunk was offering patches to various bug reports in Ubuntu because Ubuntu hadn’t fixed the bugs (bugs listed: #36596, #38802…possible fixes for: #16873, #38181, #47775) quick enough for the likes of Cipherfunk. Interestingly enough, this is the beauty of Open Source right? If you don’t like how something works, you have the right to get the source code and fix it yourself! In this case, that is just what Cipherfunk.org did. So what’s the big stink about? Source Code and $$$.

The problem is that two Ubuntu contributors asked for Cipherfunk.org to comply with the GPL by removing cost associated with distribution of source code. This is harmless in itself and applauded by many in the community. However, it’s not the why they did it that is wrong…it’s the HOW they did it. How they did it is by first informing the Cipherfunk.org that it was wrong to charge $$ for the source, and second by touting various sections of the GPL where they believed Cipherfunk was in violation. Why is this wrong? Let’s examine things a bit.

The big stink everyone brought up is not that Cipherfunk WASN’T distributing the source code…but that Cipherfunk WAS CHARGING for the source code which they believed was in violation. However, having seen this same case (where Warren Woodford and MEPIS distribute their sourced code for a cost) I know for a fact that the GPL allows one to do this. But let’s take a look at the GPL shall we?

Does the GPL allow me to charge a fee for downloading the program from my site?

Yes. You can charge any fee you wish for distributing a copy of the program. If you distribute binaries by download, you must provide equivalent access to download the source–therefore, the fee to download source may not be greater than the fee to download the binary.

Continue reading “Cipherfunk.org, the GPL, and Ubuntu Contributors”