Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on May 26, 2006 02:48 AM
This may go beyond the FOSS plug-ins debate supporting this dialogue, but here goes.
Desktops and Apps are ever-changing. And FOSS tools will at least apply a chess-like strategy in analyzing the patterns and poor design of one or proprietary tools marketed to tech writers that are pretty much outdated once they hit the market -- and often gather dust when the user realizes that it won't do their job for them.
FOSS tools also work toward true solutions that actually solve problems while building on its established foundation. Which may explain their somewhat crude appearance and Command-line interface (as things change either inside or outside of its scope), which I believe is the driving force behind the familiarity argument. (What, no Windows?)
Meanwhile, the software behemoths continue writing more lines of code to justify the worth of their bloated, overpriced -- yet well-supported -- product. And supply the costly upgrades to patch the holes.
In defense of the unwashed tech writer masses, there are a lot of FOSS tools and combinations with many specific goals and objectives. Writers need to go beyond the interview a techie for the page of text they need to produce today and partner-up with them to help sort out the what's and the how to's of FOSS offerings. Once a system is analyzed and fortified, and the info. sources are reconciled, a script-driven GUI can run some of the redundant Command-line strings to produce the desired output using all those oh, so familiar buttons, checkboxes, drop-downs.
Yes, it takes time, but so does the mundane copy-paste, search-and-replace, yadda-yadda.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:Familiarity Is Important!
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 26, 2006 02:48 AMDesktops and Apps are ever-changing. And FOSS tools will at least apply a chess-like strategy in analyzing the patterns and poor design of one or proprietary tools marketed to tech writers that are pretty much outdated once they hit the market -- and often gather dust when the user realizes that it won't do their job for them.
FOSS tools also work toward true solutions that actually solve problems while building on its established foundation. Which may explain their somewhat crude appearance and Command-line interface (as things change either inside or outside of its scope), which I believe is the driving force behind the familiarity argument. (What, no Windows?)
Meanwhile, the software behemoths continue writing more lines of code to justify the worth of their bloated, overpriced -- yet well-supported -- product. And supply the costly upgrades to patch the holes.
In defense of the unwashed tech writer masses, there are a lot of FOSS tools and combinations with many specific goals and objectives. Writers need to go beyond the interview a techie for the page of text they need to produce today and partner-up with them to help sort out the what's and the how to's of FOSS offerings. Once a system is analyzed and fortified, and the info. sources are reconciled, a script-driven GUI can run some of the redundant Command-line strings to produce the desired output using all those oh, so familiar buttons, checkboxes, drop-downs.
Yes, it takes time, but so does the mundane copy-paste, search-and-replace, yadda-yadda.
#