 |
Descentforum.DE
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ben
OOTS
Joined: 10 May 2002
Posts: 2875
Location: Aachen / D
|
 Posted: 19.03.2008, 09:54 Post subject: |
 |
|
| Do_Checkor wrote: | ...
*seufz* |
Sieh's ihm nach, er ist noch jung und voller Entusiasmus. (Hat ja auch was Gutes) 
@King_Lo:
Dein Einsatz in Ehren, aber versuche wirklich mal ein wenig sachlicher und weniger empfindlich zu (re-)agieren.
_________________
Erkenntnis:
Wer abends gesoffen hat, kann morgens auch arbeiten" = FALSCH
weil
"Man kann morgens auch nicht fliegen, bloß weil man abends gevögelt hat" |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Munk
Forum-Nutzer
Joined: 30 Jun 2001
Posts: 2140
Location: Herzogenrath
|
| Posted: 19.03.2008, 10:44 Post subject: |
|
|
| King Lo wrote: | | Kommandozeilenprogramme lassen sich nicht manuell verwenden? oO habe ich was verpasst? Lerne erst Linux kennen, bevor du solche Aussagen machst. |
Mit Linux hat das ganze ja überhaupt nichts zu tun. Mein Statement ging um Automatisierbarkeit vs. Bedienbarkeit.
Kommandozeilenoptionen sind aus Maschinensicht deutlich billig um- und einzusetzen, dadurch lassen sie sich effizient in Skripten und Automaten einsetzen - keine Frage.
Für den Menschen in der Bedienung ist es aber sehr komplizierter - neben dem Programm selbst bedarf es noch ein Katalog aus aufgelisteten Optionen samt Erklärungen und Syntax, die der Bediener dann in abstrakten Grammatiken eintippen darf.
Allein die allgemeine ablehnende Reaktion der Großteil der Anwender auf Kommandozeilenprogramme bescheinigt doch am besten, daß sie sich nicht ergonomisch bedienen lassen.
Am besten überlegt man sich einfach mal, mit welchen Eigenschaften graphische Programme dem Bediener entgegenkommen. Mir fallen da spontan ein:
- logische Gruppierung von einander abhängigen Eingaben
- freie Reihenfolge der Eingabe
- Plausibilitätsprüfung während der Eingabe
- Anlehnung an Erfahrungswelt
Lo: Was soll ich dem Kaiser sagen? Das er nackt herumsteht ?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zico
Rebirther
Joined: 23 Nov 2005
Posts: 452
Location: Ebersbach
|
| Posted: 19.03.2008, 13:40 Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Für den Menschen in der Bedienung ist es aber sehr komplizierter - neben dem Programm selbst bedarf es noch ein Katalog aus aufgelisteten Optionen samt Erklärungen und Syntax, die der Bediener dann in abstrakten Grammatiken eintippen darf.
Allein die allgemeine ablehnende Reaktion der Großteil der Anwender auf Kommandozeilenprogramme bescheinigt doch am besten, daß sie sich nicht ergonomisch bedienen lassen. |
Das kann ich slebst bestätigen indem ich das auf DXX übertrage. Viele kommen mit den Kommandozeilenoptionen, welche auch über die INI einsetzbar sind lange nicht so gut klar. Für mich persönlich besteht da ein arger Bedarf an Nachbesserung. Dabei sollte man jedoch dann auch entscheiden, welche Optionen dafür in Frage kommen und welche nicht.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Lion
Forum-Nutzer
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 55
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: 19.03.2008, 14:44 Post subject: |
|
|
Okay... normally I don't get involved in threads like these because
it's pretty useless - but I was asked for some input.
Also, I didn't read all of it because it's a lot and German takes
long for me to read - sorry if I'm repeating things that were
already said.
Here's what to do if you want to argue on the matter: do your
research. For instance:
| zico wrote: | Dieser "Nur-Freie-Software-ist-gute/normale/humane/Software"-Gedanke sowas von dermaßen auf den Sack... GPL-Terrorismus kann mir gestohlen bleiben.
Scheisse echt ma (Sorry für die Ausdrucksweise). Wenns hier um Freiheit geht, sollte ich auch die gottverdammte Freiheit haben, auch Closed Source verwenden zu DÜRFEN. |
They are not forcing you to avoid "Closed Source", zico. If anything,
people who write proprietary software are trying to force it onto
you. Consider the amount of people all over the world complaining
that they're using Windows "because they don't have a choice".
The GNU project was created so that people who wanted freedom
could actually have it. Its essence was first described in the GNU
manifesto, which was published in 1985 and which I'm betting
none of you has fully read. Better things to do? Then why are you
posting here?
The Open Source Initiative did not exist until sometime in 1998,
and the term "open source" in its current definition was coined by
people who did not care about their freedom, but who noticed that
GNU software is generally more reliable than its proprietary
counterparts, and wanted to use this property to market it to the
corporate world.
Since such software gains its reliability through review and
contributions from its users, it's usually initially released in a
rather buggy, incomplete, and hard-to-use form - providing the
"evidence" that free software / open source rarely matches up to
commercially developed software, which is usually proprietary.
As for the GUI vs commandline war: each has its own merits. GUI's
are easier because it presents you with a fixed list of options; you
just choose. A commandline environment is more flexible; you are
given a set of individual specialized tools which you can combine
in order to do the job you need to do. It comes with the heavy
requirements of (1) knowledge about those tools and (2) problem-
solving intelligence, which usually results from a `hacker attitude' -
the desire to learn and mess around with things.
Most of the rest just boils down to personal preference. There's
one major reason for choosing what to use which we all share, and
that's the force of habit and acquaintance. We use what we're used
to and what we know best.
Hopefully this will give everyone the insight needed to clear
things up...
Edit: added link to GNU manifesto.
_________________
☕
Last edited by The Lion on 19.03.2008, 14:46; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Munk
Forum-Nutzer
Joined: 30 Jun 2001
Posts: 2140
Location: Herzogenrath
|
| Posted: 19.03.2008, 15:05 Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks Lion.
I'm a huge GNU fan, all projects I published where licensed under GPL. Partly out of idealism, partly just for reusing other GPL-tools/code I would need to reimplement otherwise.
But as GNU claims about "freedom", GNU fans must respect the very same freedom of NOT choosing GPL for licensing.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zico
Rebirther
Joined: 23 Nov 2005
Posts: 452
Location: Ebersbach
|
| Posted: 19.03.2008, 15:05 Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | They are not forcing you to avoid "Closed Source", zico. |
I didn't said anything against the GPL in general. But this, what you've quotes by me is the feeling many OpenSource "fanatics" are trying to submit "in my personal" feeling and experience - like: "If you are *not* using GPL'ed software, you are not normal." This has nothing to do with the GPL *license*, even if I have the feeling, that rms thinks the same way.
| Quote: | | If anything, people who write proprietary software are trying to force it onto you. |
For me this is no valid argument in *in general* since for me this:
| Quote: | | using Windows "because they don't have a choice". |
is just wrong for me as well *in general*. I am not trying to say yes or no to everything. In some terms it's right, in some it's not. No one *can* force you to use Closed Source software but in some cases you may have no other choice. It's just the generalization that drives me mad. And again: I am NOT trying to pull this for just everyone on this whole planet. This is ALSO highly subjective.
EDIT:
| Quote: | | But as GNU claims about "freedom", GNU fans must respect the very same freedom of NOT choosing GPL for licensing. |
That just expresses my feeling. Full ACK Munk.
Last edited by zico on 19.03.2008, 15:06; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Lion
Forum-Nutzer
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 55
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: 19.03.2008, 16:24 Post subject: |
|
|
They do, they just recommend the GPL for practical reasons because
copyleft licenses tend to be incompatible with each other.
| Quote: | | If anything, people who write proprietary software are trying to force it onto you. |
Ok, let me explain this further: they do it for selfish reasons
(money), or because they're ignorant (freeware). Yeah, no-one
can force you to use their software, but in some cases you're
strongly compelled to. Windows is the biggest and most obvious
example. Microsoft has a clear motive to get as many people as
possible to use their software, and they will do whatever they
can get away with to achieve that goal.
What rms has a problem with is the results of this behavior; again
and again and again, read the manifesto to learn more about this.
If you use proprietary software, you are supporting its authors, so
you should expect to be frowned upon by people who are aware of
its problems, even though they do let you decide what programs
and licenses you use. Stop trying to excuse yourself and consider
that the GNU folks may just be trying to inform you about these
problems instead of trying to force their ways upon you.
_________________
☕ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zico
Rebirther
Joined: 23 Nov 2005
Posts: 452
Location: Ebersbach
|
| Posted: 19.03.2008, 16:36 Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Stop trying to excuse yourself and consider
that the GNU folks may just be trying to inform you about these
problems instead of trying to force their ways upon you. |
They may try to
| Quote: | | may just be trying to inform you |
where in *my experience* (TM) it feely many times like
| Quote: | | trying to force their ways upon you. |
Again, again and again, I am not speaking for anyone and yes, I have read the manifesto several years ago.
This:
| Quote: | Microsoft has a clear motive to get as many people as
possible to use their software, and they will do whatever they
can get away with to achieve that goal. |
can also be used for arguments sounding like: "If you are not using, GPL, you are evil since you force ppl to do soemthing."
And this is just wrong if spoken IN GENERAL.
Last edited by zico on 19.03.2008, 16:41; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Munk
Forum-Nutzer
Joined: 30 Jun 2001
Posts: 2140
Location: Herzogenrath
|
| Posted: 19.03.2008, 16:41 Post subject: |
|
|
| The Lion wrote: |
If you use proprietary software, you are supporting its authors, so
you should expect to be frowned upon by people who are aware of
its problems, even though they do let you decide what programs
and licenses you use. Stop trying to excuse yourself and consider
that the GNU folks may just be trying to inform you about these
problems instead of trying to force their ways upon you. |
Please accept that there exists very good reasons beyond the holy grail of GNU to use
software which happens to be not "open source".
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DDevil
Forum-Nutzer
Joined: 26 Feb 2001
Posts: 598
Location: Cape Vere Islands
|
| Posted: 19.03.2008, 19:44 Post subject: |
|
|
My 2 cents to the Topic 
OpenSource vs. ClosedSource for Games
I prefer ClosedSource. Why ? Sounds like that not many DF Users playing different Games. All Games that are in the Hand of the "Gamers" are mostly "hacked", e.g. someone with the amount of the knowledgement figured out how to cheat.
A OpenSource Game, IMHO, is more open too look into what possible to do then a Closed one.
If D4 where a OpenSource Project i guess that it will never be such a success as the Closed ones we know well.
SURE, OpenSource has the aibility to fix problems very fast. On the other side we can say, if the programmer is been sick, dead or is not in the mood for, a fix will be not longer so fast be done.
SH.. , my english is not good enough to bring enough arguments in a clear form to you.
Think all the time on the HUMAN Factor during a process.
E.G.
There are 20 People starting programming a D4. They open the work so that everyone can take a look and bring ideas/modifications to it.
We will see that the project will explode in its possibilities because 2 People = 2 Meanings
So long as someone tell what has to be go into the source and what not, could it be fine. But what if a guy bring up a lot of ideas / sources and they are all dropped ? I guess he will discontinue his work after a while.
Doesn´t matter you mean, there are more people out there that can go on ? Believe me that will not work at all. Especially after the project is half done or near end.
No one can go into such a source and bring it to an end.
In ClosedSource we have a different situation. There is a BOSS and there is MONEY. This both make enough pressure that the work will be done.
The customers will cry out LOUD for every Bug they find out. The press will be have an eye on the project ( Duke Nukem the self running Gag  )
Hopefully it is been undestand what i want to bring to you.
OpenSource is be fine for people that want to go into the system and want to bring themselve into too.
ClosedSource is for people that only want to use computers / programms depending on here needs.
_________________
DDevil |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zico
Rebirther
Joined: 23 Nov 2005
Posts: 452
Location: Ebersbach
|
| Posted: 19.03.2008, 20:39 Post subject: |
|
|
| About cheating: There ARE ways to prevent cheats - even in OpenSource games. Probably not all, but many. Nexuiz does a very good job there. Since all the traffic runs over the Server, it's very hard to modify something without get the attention.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Marix
Forum-Nutzer
Joined: 30 May 2001
Posts: 1016
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: 19.03.2008, 21:00 Post subject: |
|
|
| zico wrote: |
Das kann ich slebst bestätigen indem ich das auf DXX übertrage. Viele kommen mit den Kommandozeilenoptionen, welche auch über die INI einsetzbar sind lange nicht so gut klar. |
Aber ohne so Parameter wie -window wollte ich nicht leben.
_________________
„Der einzige Weg, die Grenzen des Möglichen zu finden, ist ein klein wenig über diese hinaus in das Unmögliche vorzustoßen.“
--Arthur C. Clarke |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Marix
Forum-Nutzer
Joined: 30 May 2001
Posts: 1016
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: 19.03.2008, 21:02 Post subject: |
|
|
| DDevil wrote: | | I prefer ClosedSource. Why ? Sounds like that not many DF Users playing different Games. All Games that are in the Hand of the "Gamers" are mostly "hacked", e.g. someone with the amount of the knowledgement figured out how to cheat. |
Security by Obscurity has never worked and will never work. In the computer security scene that is a well established fact.
_________________
„Der einzige Weg, die Grenzen des Möglichen zu finden, ist ein klein wenig über diese hinaus in das Unmögliche vorzustoßen.“
--Arthur C. Clarke |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dark
Forum-Nutzer
Joined: 15 Nov 2001
Posts: 1244
Location: Berlin
|
| Posted: 19.03.2008, 21:03 Post subject: |
|
|
ich finds immer wieder GEIL...
EIN englischer post und ALLE labern nur noch fremdsprachig - LOL
am besten mal abtrennen und in den englischsprachigen teil des forums verschieben
please
_________________
Dark
wo alle das selbe denken, wird nicht viel gedacht
Es kommt meistens anders wenn man denkt! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zico
Rebirther
Joined: 23 Nov 2005
Posts: 452
Location: Ebersbach
|
| Posted: 19.03.2008, 21:03 Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Aber ohne so Parameter wie -window wollte ich nicht leben. |
Ne ich auch nicht.
Daher sagte ich ja schon: Da muss man entscheiden, was am wie am besten passt. Obs nun einmalige Optionen sind, Optionen, die man vielleicht verändern möchte *während* der Laufzeit, ob sie im Profil gespeichert werden solen oder gar alle Möglichkeiten bieten sollen.
Last edited by zico on 19.03.2008, 21:04; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Marix
Forum-Nutzer
Joined: 30 May 2001
Posts: 1016
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: 19.03.2008, 21:10 Post subject: |
|
|
| DDevil wrote: | Think all the time on the HUMAN Factor during a process.
E.G.
There are 20 People starting programming a D4. They open the work so that everyone can take a look and bring ideas/modifications to it.
We will see that the project will explode in its possibilities because 2 People = 2 Meanings
So long as someone tell what has to be go into the source and what not, could it be fine. But what if a guy bring up a lot of ideas / sources and they are all dropped ? I guess he will discontinue his work after a while.
Doesn´t matter you mean, there are more people out there that can go on ? Believe me that will not work at all. Especially after the project is half done or near end.
No one can go into such a source and bring it to an end. |
Following this argument there couldn't be any successfull open source programs, but there are. On the other hand there are many failed closed source programs, evern for similar reason. But because they "don't publish early" you never get to know of them.
_________________
„Der einzige Weg, die Grenzen des Möglichen zu finden, ist ein klein wenig über diese hinaus in das Unmögliche vorzustoßen.“
--Arthur C. Clarke |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Lion
Forum-Nutzer
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 55
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: 21.03.2008, 02:44 Post subject: |
|
|
| Munk wrote: | Please accept that there exists very good reasons beyond the holy grail of GNU to use
software which happens to be not "open source". |
Only if I can find any...
I've seen people argue countless times that they use it because it
has superior quality. Yeah, that's a reason. But it's not an excuse,
and therefore it's not a good enough reason.
If you're being forced to use it, you can use that as an excuse -
- Someone is blackmailing you;
- Someone is putting a gun to your head;
- You're under time pressure and you need it because there
are currently no viable alternatives.
So, if this is what you meant, then yeah I'll accept that.
But whatever the reason is, as long as you care about your (and
other people's) freedom, it remains a problem that should be
dealt with. We do this by developing alternatives and putting a
copyleft license on it, and by trying to explain to other people why
we do it.
You guys respond to this by focusing on the criticism against the
use of proprietary software, disregarding the reasons for it, which
nobody in 23 years appears to have proven wrong so far, thereby
giving the impression of ignorance.
Personally I recognize the reasons for using proprietary software,
but I don't recognize that they are good enough to conclude it's
not a problem.
I'm pretty sure all of this boils down to a couple of
misunderstandings.
zico: what reason do you have for comparing Microsoft's motive
of making money with the FSF's motive of transferring power
over software and computers from the hands of software
companies/developers to the people who use the software and
who should therefore decide what it should do and what it
shouldn't (ie. who should actually have that power)?
_________________
☕ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zico
Rebirther
Joined: 23 Nov 2005
Posts: 452
Location: Ebersbach
|
| Posted: 21.03.2008, 03:08 Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | zico: what reason do you have for comparing Microsoft's motive
of making money with the FSF's motive of transferring power
over software and computers from the hands of software
companies/developers to the people who use the software and
who should therefore decide what it should do and what it
|
That's not what I said.
You say: Closed Source is a problem.
Sorry, that's ignorant.
So if *I* do a Closed Source program because I do not want someone to "steal" what I am so happy about and makes it look as his/her own work - is that also "evil"?
Is that Microsoft evil because I want to prtect my own work and force you to something like Microsoft does when we make theories about forcing someone to do something?
Before you begin with - I am STRICLTY against any Software patents. But I should still be left to decide IF I want to open my source of if i do NOT want to. Sorry I do not know if you really have the opinion, but you sound like I would act abnormal if I would close any of my work.
If not, why to blame Closed Source in general, then?
I don't get it... you compare ALL Closed Source software with an evil problem.
Software (both closed *and* open) seem to be like a religion: Someone makes some good rules, but ppl. (fans of one side) tend to not accept others opinions - let's go to a cursade -- yay!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zorc
Forum-Nutzer
Joined: 05 Jul 2001
Posts: 961
Location: Ratzeburg
|
| Posted: 21.03.2008, 13:41 Post subject: |
|
|
Love and peace, brothers.
I think we all agree in open source software being a good thing, making the world a better place.
However, having seen quite a few discussions concerning this topic, i tend to avoid them.
As Lion already stated, it´s pretty useless. Even worse, they usually get you nowhere else but leaving bad feelings among all persons involved. There´s little to gain, and much to loose in here. Let´s stay friends, please.
In deference to free speech, i propose not to close this thread unless things get totally out of control, although i don´t like where this is heading to. My suggestion would be to abandon it quietly.
Last edited by Zorc on 21.03.2008, 13:54; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zico
Rebirther
Joined: 23 Nov 2005
Posts: 452
Location: Ebersbach
|
| Posted: 21.03.2008, 14:12 Post subject: |
|
|
I love a good and heavy discussion. But a different opinion doesn't break a friendship for me.
So I agree on that for piece.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
