OK, so my shiny new PC has /finally/ been set up in my bedroom, rather 
than on the kitchen table. That means that at last I can plug in all my 
stuff.

Trying to set up my printer was necessarily difficult. You would /think/ 
I could just go to the HP website and download the necessary driver 
software. And you would be wrong. HP insists "you do not need a driver 
for this device; Windows already has one". So I have to manually run the 
printer wizard, and hunt through a list of several thousand printers, 
only to confirm that no, my printer is /not/ in the list. So then I have 
to click the Windows Update button, and wait 35 minutes for Windows to 
download a complete list of every printer ever manufactured by any 
company rich enough to pay Microsoft to host their driver. And /then/ I 
have to hunt through an even bigger driver list to find my printer. 
(Even though Windows has successfully detected the make and model of the 
printer already.)

...or HP could have just given me the right ****ing driver. :-P

On top of that, once I've managed to guess which "port" the printer is 
on, and configured it, now the printer shows up twice. The new printer I 
just configured shows up as working, but the original "unknown device" 
still shows up. In the end, I had to delete the printer I just created, 
unplug the USB cable, and plug it back in again. Because the 
corresponding driver is now installed, the printer is auto-configured. 
Sheesh! God knows how I'd have managed to get all that to work if I 
didn't know anything about computers...

But that's nothing compared to what happened when I tried to get my 
expensive outboard sound card to work. Because you know what? It turns 
out that this premium-grade pro-audio device DOES NOT HAVE 64BIT DRIVERS 
AVAILABLE. Yes, you read that correctly. It's 2012, the device is still 
in production, and the makers haven't bothered to write the necessary 
drivers yet. There isn't even any indication that they /intend/ to write 
such drivers. WTF?

After hours of Google searching, it appears that 80% of posters just 
/never/ got their device to work in any way, shape, or form, and another 
20% claim that the 32-bit drivers work perfectly. On my system, I've 
tried installing every version of the drivers that I can find, and under 
no circumstances can I make the device function.

If you buy some cheapo laptop USB soundcard, you could maybe understand 
the no-name manufacturers not bothering to provide modern drivers. But 
we're talking about a supposedly "pro audio" device from a big-name 
brand. You would think that for the exorbitant price I paid, it would 
damn well work. But, apparently, you would be wrong...

I am really quite shocked that in the 21st century, running a 64bit OS 
is all it takes to completely disable a piece of hardware. WTF?

Post a reply to this message

Le 22/02/2012 10:18, Invisible a écrit :
> But that's nothing compared to what happened when I tried to get my
> expensive outboard sound card to work. Because you know what? It turns
> out that this premium-grade pro-audio device DOES NOT HAVE 64BIT DRIVERS
> AVAILABLE. Yes, you read that correctly. It's 2012, the device is still
> in production, and the makers haven't bothered to write the necessary
> drivers yet. There isn't even any indication that they /intend/ to write
> such drivers. WTF?


Consider the producer point of view: the premium-grade pro-audio is made
in China, at low cost, since the design has been made in some marketing
office with a quick validation. The 32 bits driver came from a long line
of evolving model (hint: now it's the hardware which customised to map
to the previous model emulation). In fact, the driver might be claiming
compatibility with (aka knowledge of) 2000 & XP (they are not aware of
the internal change in Vista & 7, but that's not important as long as
the OS does the adaptation to use an XP driver).

Providing a 64 bits driver, even just copying actual functionality of
the 32 bits one, would mean investing in a new development and no
warranty of success (some API changed so well in 2008/Vista/7, it might
be more complex to be as safe as expected by the new OS... ).

Icing on the cake, delivering a 64 bits driver for Window make it
mandatory (unless the user are happy booting with F8 to disable driver
authentication) to provide a signed installation set of files (the
catalog file(s) must be signed, and this prohibit any update to the dll
as well as the inf file). Self-signing is no go. It must be delivered by
a CA trusted by MS. And that costs money (at least about $1000 per year).

Cherry on the top of the cake, the installation directories on 64 bits
windows are named with strange concept in mind (C:\Windows\system and
C:\windows\system32 are not containing what you might expect for a 64
bits system...)

So, from a seller point of view: market is gamers and alike, 99% of the
game are 32 bits (maybe 100% ?), so market is 32 bits. And that come at
no extra cost. Developing 64 bits would cost edge-competence, initial
money and recurring money, and is not required by market share (less
than 1% ? 64 bits people are not in gaming, so no need for a sound card).

Choice was:
 * invest nothing, gains 1
 * invest a lot, gains 1.01

Your bet ?

Post a reply to this message

On 22/02/2012 10:25 AM, Le_Forgeron wrote:

> So, from a seller point of view: market is gamers and alike

No, it isn't.

This is a specialist audio interface for music production. It features 
special low-latency ASIO drivers (something that games don't give a fig 
about).

It actually performs quite poorly as a general-purpose sound card. When 
you start playing a sound, the first half-second gets cut off - 
presumably because that's how long it takes for the sound hardware to 
switch on. But for proper music production, it works much better; with 
the motherboard's sound card, there's far too much delay between 
pressing a key and hearing a note.

> Choice was:
>   * invest nothing, gains 1
>   * invest a lot, gains 1.01
>
> Your bet ?

I wouldn't mind, but some of the /other/ models from the same 
manufacturer /do/ have 64-bit drivers. Just not /my/ model. >_<

Well, if the manufacturer can't be bothered to support the hardware that 
I've purchased, I guess that means it's time to take my money elsewhere...

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Trying to set up my printer was necessarily difficult.

  What do you need a printer for?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Am 22.02.2012 10:18, schrieb Invisible:

> If you buy some cheapo laptop USB soundcard, you could maybe understand
> the no-name manufacturers not bothering to provide modern drivers. But
> we're talking about a supposedly "pro audio" device from a big-name
> brand. You would think that for the exorbitant price I paid, it would
> damn well work. But, apparently, you would be wrong...

Yes. It's pro equipment, i.e. something for people who know well enough 
to not change a running production system.

For such customers, upgrading often means buying a brand new system, 
comprised of new computer hardware, new audio hardware, new OS, and new 
production software, in a combo that is reputed to work, from some 
people who give them a guarantee that the combo will work.

Such customers may also do partial upgrades, but in that case they'll 
also by that upgrade from - and have it installed by - people who give 
them a guarantee for the fitness of the resulting combo.

As a result, there is obviously less pressre on pro-equipment 
manufacturers to make their equipment more-or-less compatible with each 
and every OS version, hard- and software imaginable; a beneficial side 
effect is that they can concentrate on making it fully compatible and 
well-tested with a selection of reference systems.

Post a reply to this message

On 2/22/2012 2:18 AM, Invisible wrote:
> OK, so my shiny new PC has /finally/ been set up in my bedroom, rather
> than on the kitchen table. That means that at last I can plug in all my
> stuff.
>
> Trying to set up my printer was necessarily difficult. You would /think/
> I could just go to the HP website and download the necessary driver
> software. And you would be wrong. HP insists "you do not need a driver
> for this device; Windows already has one". So I have to manually run the
> printer wizard, and hunt through a list of several thousand printers,
> only to confirm that no, my printer is /not/ in the list. So then I have
> to click the Windows Update button, and wait 35 minutes for Windows to
> download a complete list of every printer ever manufactured by any
> company rich enough to pay Microsoft to host their driver. And /then/ I
> have to hunt through an even bigger driver list to find my printer.
> (Even though Windows has successfully detected the make and model of the
> printer already.)
>
> ...or HP could have just given me the right ****ing driver. :-P
>
> On top of that, once I've managed to guess which "port" the printer is
> on, and configured it, now the printer shows up twice. The new printer I
> just configured shows up as working, but the original "unknown device"
> still shows up. In the end, I had to delete the printer I just created,
> unplug the USB cable, and plug it back in again. Because the
> corresponding driver is now installed, the printer is auto-configured.
> Sheesh! God knows how I'd have managed to get all that to work if I
> didn't know anything about computers...
>
Snort. Got a similar problem. The "scanner" software for something Win7 
detected shows two versions. One doesn't work, and the other crashes, 
but *only* when using the companies own on-scanner button configuration 
thing, which Windows couldn't auto-install. Using someone else's 
application, and picking the correctly installed "version" of the device 
lets me copy direct to printer, but only at low resolutions. I haven't 
bothered to even try to fix the problem... Bloody stupid OS.

Post a reply to this message

On 22/02/2012 04:25 PM, Warp wrote:
> Invisible<voi### [at] devnull>  wrote:
>> Trying to set up my printer was necessarily difficult.
>
>    What do you need a printer for?

For... *gasp*... printing things?

Seriously. I actually use my printer for printing stuff. Unconventional, 
I know. But it's true.

Post a reply to this message

On 22/02/2012 11:17 PM, Patrick Elliott wrote:

> Snort. Got a similar problem. The "scanner" software for something Win7
> detected shows two versions. One doesn't work, and the other crashes,
> but *only* when using the companies own on-scanner button configuration
> thing, which Windows couldn't auto-install. Using someone else's
> application, and picking the correctly installed "version" of the device
> lets me copy direct to printer, but only at low resolutions. I haven't
> bothered to even try to fix the problem... Bloody stupid OS.

If a 3rd party driver won't install, I'm not so sure that's a problem 
with the OS.

Post a reply to this message

Am 23.02.2012 10:08, schrieb Invisible:
> On 22/02/2012 04:25 PM, Warp wrote:
>> Invisible<voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>>> Trying to set up my printer was necessarily difficult.
>>
>> What do you need a printer for?
>
> For... *gasp*... printing things?
>
> Seriously. I actually use my printer for printing stuff. Unconventional,
> I know. But it's true.

I guess that was an instance of Warp's Infamous Instant Humor(TM) - you 
know, the one that's so dry you need to add water (or an emoticon) 
before consumption.

Then again, you never know - the Finnish are a strange folk; maybe now, 
with the widespread use of flat displays, they prefer to copy their 
stuff right from the screen using tracing paper and pencil.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Disclaimer:
:-)

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> On 22/02/2012 04:25 PM, Warp wrote:
> > Invisible<voi### [at] devnull>  wrote:
> >> Trying to set up my printer was necessarily difficult.
> >
> >    What do you need a printer for?

> For... *gasp*... printing things?

  Well, that's obvious, but not what I was asking.

  Your answer is like "do you have the time?" "yes".

  I don't see what someone would use a printer for. It just sounds so
obsolete nowadays, in the same way as floppy disks or RS-232 ports.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 23/02/2012 1:57 PM, Warp wrote:
>    I don't see what someone would use a printer for. It just sounds so
> obsolete nowadays, in the same way as floppy disks or RS-232 ports.

Well I use my printer when I need to send a letter. You know something 
that used to be made of velum and hand written.
I will also print out notes that I cannot be bothered to transfer to 
another device or hand write them.

At work, documents that need an old fashioned signature need to be printed.


-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mcavoys_at@aoldotcom> wrote:
> Well I use my printer when I need to send a letter.

  That's what email has been for for the last 20 years.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 23/02/2012 3:01 PM, Warp wrote:
> Stephen<mcavoys_at@aoldotcom>  wrote:
>> Well I use my printer when I need to send a letter.
>
>    That's what email has been for for the last 20 years.
>

Longer than that, even. But sometimes snail mail is obligatory when 
dealing with banks and governmental offices.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mcavoys_at@aoldotcom> wrote:
> Longer than that, even. But sometimes snail mail is obligatory when 
> dealing with banks and governmental offices.

  I don't think any bank or governmental office would require a customer
to own a printer in order to deal with them.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 23/02/2012 4:28 PM, Warp wrote:
> Stephen<mcavoys_at@aoldotcom>  wrote:
>> Longer than that, even. But sometimes snail mail is obligatory when
>> dealing with banks and governmental offices.
>
>    I don't think any bank or governmental office would require a customer
> to own a printer in order to deal with them.
>

No, but you asked why Andrew would want to use a printer and I gave you 
a reason why I do. Also now a days printers double up as scanners and 
photo copiers. Another reason.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Am 23.02.2012 17:28, schrieb Warp:
> Stephen<mcavoys_at@aoldotcom>  wrote:
>> Longer than that, even. But sometimes snail mail is obligatory when
>> dealing with banks and governmental offices.
>
>    I don't think any bank or governmental office would require a customer
> to own a printer in order to deal with them.

No, of course they could just as well take out paper and pen, and write 
it by hand.

I personally prefer to send something legible though...


Print out forms to fill out by hand and/or sign, and then send via 
SnailMail or fax, avoiding the hassle of picking up the form somewhere 
in person?

Print out invoices for the clients of some freelancing business?

Print out stuff which freelancers are legally obliged to archive for 10 
years on paper unless they own a WORM drive for that purpose?

Print out something to read while traveling by train or lazing on the couch?

Print out character sheets, rulebook excerpts etc. for pen & paper 
roleplay gaming sessions?

Print out charts and then scribble some notes on them?


Been there, done all that with my private printer. Not that I use it 
frequently enough to keep inkjet cartridges from drying out, but that's 
why I bought a laser printer (which also happens to be a copier, scanner 
and fax machine).

Post a reply to this message

clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Print out invoices for the clients of some freelancing business?

> Print out stuff which freelancers are legally obliged to archive for 10 
> years on paper unless they own a WORM drive for that purpose?

  I doubt he runs a freelancing business.

> Print out something to read while traveling by train or lazing on the couch?

  That's what handheld devices are for. ;)

> Print out character sheets, rulebook excerpts etc. for pen & paper 
> roleplay gaming sessions?

  I have got the impression he doesn't play such things (at least not as
a DM).

> Print out charts and then scribble some notes on them?

  Charts of what?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Am 23.02.2012 18:38, schrieb Warp:
> clipka<ano### [at] anonymousorg>  wrote:
>> Print out invoices for the clients of some freelancing business?
>
>> Print out stuff which freelancers are legally obliged to archive for 10
>> years on paper unless they own a WORM drive for that purpose?
>
>    I doubt he runs a freelancing business.

I was listing uses that I have (or had) myself for owning a printer, 
presuming your statement to be a generic "nobody needs printers these days".

>> Print out something to read while traveling by train or lazing on the couch?
>
>    That's what handheld devices are for. ;)

I prefer printed A4 for certain texts. Not to mention that I currently 
don't have the money to buy a smartphone or the like (used to have one, 
but it got stolen quite some time ago), and actually don't need one 
anyway, because - guess what, I own a printer :-P

As long as handhelds don't allow you to just put your thumb between any 
pages you choose, and/or come at a price where you can own two or three 
of them to arrange in front of you, I guess I'm going to stick with 
paper for certain uses.

>> Print out character sheets, rulebook excerpts etc. for pen&  paper
>> roleplay gaming sessions?
>
>    I have got the impression he doesn't play such things (at least not as
> a DM).

I actually do that as a player. It helps with quickly looking up rule 
details for my character's abilities and magic items taken from some 
obscure extension rulebook, maybe with added notes about certain 
parameters as applicable to the character.

>> Print out charts and then scribble some notes on them?
>
>    Charts of what?

When I look at the left portion of my desk, I see a printout of the 
emission spectra of some typical RGB phosphors, with added hand-drawn 
lines & curves, and notes about how they might be approximated 
mathematically.

Similarly, a while ago I printed images of Penrose tilings, adding 
various colored lines to visualize how they could be defined 
recursively. Doing the same in Photoshop didn't quite cut it for some 
unknown ergonomic reasons.


As for Andy, one particular use I could think of would be to print out 
music sheets downloaded from the Internerds now and again.

Post a reply to this message

>    Your answer is like "do you have the time?" "yes".

I actually give people that answer from time to time. ;-)

>    I don't see what someone would use a printer for. It just sounds so
> obsolete nowadays, in the same way as floppy disks or RS-232 ports.

I am astounded that you would think that paper is obsolete.

I mean, sure, people have been /talking/ about going paperless for 
decades. And yet... we're still surrounded by paper. Heck, it's been 
possible to read documents on a computer since before I was even born, 
and yet book shops still sell thousands of paper books per day. Hell, 
today we even have specialised e-readers, devices which exist solely for 
the purpose of reading stuff. And yet, paper books are still vastly more 
popular. Because, you know what? Paper is more convenient than any 
computer screen.

As a side note, RS-232 /is/ obsolete. But do you have /any idea/ how 
much equipment literally isn't usable without RS-232? You might be 
surprised.

Post a reply to this message

OK, this is even stranger... Now that all my stuff is plugged in, the PC 
won't boot unless I cycle the power from the PSU. Then the machine boots 
and works perfectly. But next time I try to use it, it freezes at the 
BIOS screen, and I can't get it to do anything until I flip the switch 
on the PSU. I've never seen this before... what the heck?

To be clear, when it works normally, you get a BIOS screen, then some 
mumbo-jumbo about the RAID system that I'm not using, and then a second 
BIOS screen, and then it tries to load the OS. But now, it freezes on 
the first BIOS screen. No reason, it just does. Won't respond to any key 
presses. Won't respond to the power button. Won't respond to anything 
except turning the PSU off...

Post a reply to this message

On 22-2-2012 17:25, Warp wrote:
> Invisible<voi### [at] devnull>  wrote:
>> Trying to set up my printer was necessarily difficult.
>
>    What do you need a printer for?
>
We have been forced to think about that too in our hospital.
Today someone came and collected most of the printers in the staffrooms 
and half the printers used by the entire department. Collected as in 
taking without permission. He did it on orders of our board of 
directors. They have made a deal with a copier manufacturer to supply 
the hospital with multifunctional copier/printer/scanners*. Part of the 
deal is apparently to remove all competing printers from the entire 
hospital. Unless we can prove that we really really need them.

The reasoning why this 'theft' is allowed is that all (actually most) 
equipment is bought via the 'buying department' (if that is the english 
term) hence they are hospital property.

Note that the multifunctionals can only be reached via windows XP and 
you need IE to install it, FF does not work. We have a fair amount of 
Macs, Win7 and Linux machines**. I guess that is why they let us keep 
the big department printer for now.

Question: what 3 letter acronym is applicable here?

*) Scanning to USB stick is supported, but does in most cases not work. 
The copiers are slow as hell.

**) not many IPads or other tablets as the IT department does not think 
it is useful to have wireless in a research department.

-- 
tip: do not run in an unknown place when it is too dark to see the 
floor, unless you prefer to not use uppercase.

Post a reply to this message

On 23/02/2012 21:36, andrel wrote:

> They have made a deal with a copier manufacturer to supply
> the hospital with multifunctional copier/printer/scanners*. Part of the
> deal is apparently to remove all competing printers from the entire
> hospital. Unless we can prove that we really really need them.

> Note that the multifunctionals can only be reached via windows XP and
> you need IE to install it, FF does not work. We have a fair amount of
> Macs, Win7 and Linux machines**. I guess that is why they let us keep
> the big department printer for now.

I guess that is why all competing products have to be removed first. :-P

Post a reply to this message

On 2/23/2012 2:10 AM, Invisible wrote:
> On 22/02/2012 11:17 PM, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>
>> Snort. Got a similar problem. The "scanner" software for something Win7
>> detected shows two versions. One doesn't work, and the other crashes,
>> but *only* when using the companies own on-scanner button configuration
>> thing, which Windows couldn't auto-install. Using someone else's
>> application, and picking the correctly installed "version" of the device
>> lets me copy direct to printer, but only at low resolutions. I haven't
>> bothered to even try to fix the problem... Bloody stupid OS.
>
> If a 3rd party driver won't install, I'm not so sure that's a problem
> with the OS.
Well, in this case, it sort of is the OS. Its "installing" a driver, but 
not the software, and doing it wrong, when "automatically" doing so. 
Now, I agree, to a point, in that "most" drivers, like for video, for 
example, you install over the prior one, and since its not a new device, 
it simply replaces the old one, and fixes what ever is wrong. And, that 
*is* a problem with 3rd party, when it doesn't work.

In this case, its sort of a combination of problems. The "default" 
driver may/may not have been replaced, the system might have 
"redetected" it as new, when the correct one was added, or, who the hell 
knows. But, the original cause was Windows installing something that 
didn't work, and the update failing to fix the problem.

You get that *way* too often in Windows imho. lol

Post a reply to this message

On 2/23/2012 13:12, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> PSU. I've never seen this before... what the heck?

You have something plugged in that claims it's bootable but isn't. This 
happens (for example) if I leave my kindle or cell phone plugged into the 
usb when I reboot. By cycling the PSU, you're removing power from whatever 
is plugged in, and it's not ready to say "yes I'm bootable" before the BIOS 
gets past that point.

HTH!

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   People tell me I am the counter-example.

Post a reply to this message

>> If a 3rd party driver won't install, I'm not so sure that's a problem
>> with the OS.

> You get that *way* too often in Windows imho. lol

Well, I think it's just the case that since there's more software for 
Windows, more of it is naff.

Some people tell you that open source software is much higher quality. 
And then you have things like KLogic, which randomly crashes for no 
apparent reason, and /gives the wrong answer/ in some of the 
simulations, unless you save and then reload the file... So, yeah, naff 
software exists in the open source world too.

Post a reply to this message

On 24/02/2012 03:35 AM, Darren New wrote:
> On 2/23/2012 13:12, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>> PSU. I've never seen this before... what the heck?
>
> You have something plugged in that claims it's bootable but isn't. This
> happens (for example) if I leave my kindle or cell phone plugged into
> the usb when I reboot. By cycling the PSU, you're removing power from
> whatever is plugged in, and it's not ready to say "yes I'm bootable"
> before the BIOS gets past that point.
>
> HTH!

I can't imagine my printer, MIDI interface or soundcard claiming to be 
bootable. But then, those are the only things I've added, so it must be 
one of them.

Since this problem has never happened before, I can only imagine it's 
some sort of BIOS glitch. Who knows, perhaps there's an update for that? 
Otherwise, I'm going to have to try removing devices until I figure out 
what's causing it.

Post a reply to this message

Orchid Win7 v1 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> >    I don't see what someone would use a printer for. It just sounds so
> > obsolete nowadays, in the same way as floppy disks or RS-232 ports.

> I am astounded that you would think that paper is obsolete.

> I mean, sure, people have been /talking/ about going paperless for 
> decades. And yet... we're still surrounded by paper. Heck, it's been 
> possible to read documents on a computer since before I was even born, 
> and yet book shops still sell thousands of paper books per day. Hell, 
> today we even have specialised e-readers, devices which exist solely for 
> the purpose of reading stuff. And yet, paper books are still vastly more 
> popular. Because, you know what? Paper is more convenient than any 
> computer screen.

  You still didn't answer my question...

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Am 24.02.2012 13:11, schrieb Warp:

>> I mean, sure, people have been /talking/ about going paperless for
>> decades. And yet... we're still surrounded by paper. Heck, it's been
>> possible to read documents on a computer since before I was even born,
>> and yet book shops still sell thousands of paper books per day. Hell,
>> today we even have specialised e-readers, devices which exist solely for
>> the purpose of reading stuff. And yet, paper books are still vastly more
>> popular. Because, you know what? Paper is more convenient than any
>> computer screen.
>
>    You still didn't answer my question...

Oh, did he not? Do you really need him to rephrase that into something 
more personal, say, "I find paper more convenient than any computer screen"?

C'mon, Warp. You're just being a brick-head again right now.

Post a reply to this message

On 2/24/2012 2:00 AM, Invisible wrote:
>>> If a 3rd party driver won't install, I'm not so sure that's a problem
>>> with the OS.
>
>> You get that *way* too often in Windows imho. lol
>
> Well, I think it's just the case that since there's more software for
> Windows, more of it is naff.
>
> Some people tell you that open source software is much higher quality.
> And then you have things like KLogic, which randomly crashes for no
> apparent reason, and /gives the wrong answer/ in some of the
> simulations, unless you save and then reload the file... So, yeah, naff
> software exists in the open source world too.
True, but, at least in principle, you can figure out what the fuck went 
wrong, and submit a fix for it. MS and all their 3rd party cronies (and 
yes, slapping "Designed for XP/Vista/Windows 7" on the box makes you a 
crony), quite often won't even acknowledge that some problem even exist, 
or that your could possibly be having one, never mind fix it.

Post a reply to this message

>> Some people tell you that open source software is much higher quality.
>> And then you have things like KLogic, which randomly crashes for no
>> apparent reason, and /gives the wrong answer/ in some of the
>> simulations, unless you save and then reload the file... So, yeah, naff
>> software exists in the open source world too.

> True, but, at least in principle, you can figure out what the fuck went
> wrong, and submit a fix for it.

Yes - but only if you understand C and/or C++. :-P

> MS and all their 3rd party cronies (and
> yes, slapping "Designed for XP/Vista/Windows 7" on the box makes you a
> crony), quite often won't even acknowledge that some problem even exist,
> or that your could possibly be having one, never mind fix it.

Whereas if you submit a bug to an open source project (assuming there is 
a bug tracker or even a way to /contact/ the developers), they will 
either mark it as WONTFIX or reply with "patches welcome".

This /also/ does not fix the problem.

Post a reply to this message

>> MS and all their 3rd party cronies (and
>> yes, slapping "Designed for XP/Vista/Windows 7" on the box makes you a
>> crony), quite often won't even acknowledge that some problem even exist,
>> or that your could possibly be having one, never mind fix it.
>
> Whereas if you submit a bug to an open source project (assuming there is
> a bug tracker or even a way to /contact/ the developers), they will
> either mark it as WONTFIX or reply with "patches welcome".
>
> This /also/ does not fix the problem.

Exhibit A: Firefox (in fact, the Gecko renderer in the old Mozilla Suite 
before Firefox even had that name) has an 11 year old bug about 
character escaping not working in XML files. The developers first 
claimed that this isn't a bug, it's what the W3C spec requires. Then 
they just flatly said that they wouldn't fix it. The bug 29 duplicate 
tickets, and the main ticket has 129 comments, most of them being "OMG, 
TEN YEARS and you haven't fixed this yet? WTF? I'm using Opera now!!"

Yeah, open source development totally works. :-P

Post a reply to this message

On 2/25/2012 3:43 AM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>>> MS and all their 3rd party cronies (and
>>> yes, slapping "Designed for XP/Vista/Windows 7" on the box makes you a
>>> crony), quite often won't even acknowledge that some problem even exist,
>>> or that your could possibly be having one, never mind fix it.
>>
>> Whereas if you submit a bug to an open source project (assuming there is
>> a bug tracker or even a way to /contact/ the developers), they will
>> either mark it as WONTFIX or reply with "patches welcome".
>>
>> This /also/ does not fix the problem.
>
> Exhibit A: Firefox (in fact, the Gecko renderer in the old Mozilla Suite
> before Firefox even had that name) has an 11 year old bug about
> character escaping not working in XML files. The developers first
> claimed that this isn't a bug, it's what the W3C spec requires. Then
> they just flatly said that they wouldn't fix it. The bug 29 duplicate
> tickets, and the main ticket has 129 comments, most of them being "OMG,
> TEN YEARS and you haven't fixed this yet? WTF? I'm using Opera now!!"
>
> Yeah, open source development totally works. :-P
Snort.. Well.. Even in opensource, sometimes the bugs either end up "low 
priority", or they become so ensconced in how the thing works that 
fixing them actually breaks the product. Not an excuse, but its a better 
one than, "We refuse to even believe that our users notice how shitty 
the product is, so here are 8,000 non-bugs we won't be fixing." lol

Post a reply to this message

>> Exhibit A: Firefox (in fact, the Gecko renderer in the old Mozilla Suite
>> before Firefox even had that name) has an 11 year old bug about
>> character escaping not working in XML files. The developers first
>> claimed that this isn't a bug, it's what the W3C spec requires. Then
>> they just flatly said that they wouldn't fix it. The bug 29 duplicate
>> tickets, and the main ticket has 129 comments, most of them being "OMG,
>> TEN YEARS and you haven't fixed this yet? WTF? I'm using Opera now!!"
>>
>> Yeah, open source development totally works. :-P

> Snort.. Well.. Even in opensource, sometimes the bugs either end up "low
> priority", or they become so ensconced in how the thing works that
> fixing them actually breaks the product. Not an excuse, but its a better
> one than, "We refuse to even believe that our users notice how shitty
> the product is, so here are 8,000 non-bugs we won't be fixing." lol

With something like GHC, where there are approximately 5 developers 
world-wide, you can kind of understand there being a bazillion 
outstanding bugs all set to very low priority. But this is Firefox we're 
talking about, the so-called premier open source web browser. You'd 
think they have a few developers to go around...

But hey, I suppose that's better than "this is fixed in the next release 
of Windows. That'll be £500 please."

Post a reply to this message