Fw: I swear to tell the truth

[Igor Gueths]

This is the reply that I got from Chris H. 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Chris Hofstader <ChrisH at Freedomscientific.com>
To: 'Igor Gueths' <igueths at attbi.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 5:32 PM
Subject: RE: I swear to tell the truth


> Hi,
> 
> My testimony was purely to the points that I did not want to see multiple
> versions of Windows kicking around.  To make JAWS and our other products, we
> need to remain narrowly focused on testing on a single version of the OS.   
> 
> I agree entirely that an increasingly large number of companies are using
> Linux.  The vast majority of our new users are people getting a job for the
> first time.  People with limited skills and education do not get jobs as
> sysadmins or working in a server farm.  Many of our users work in call
> centers with Windows based data entry screens.  Others in more professional
> environments lean toward jobs in health care, law and a vast array of
> non-technical positions where their companies have standardized on Windows.
> Sadly, guidance counselors in many parts of the US have steered blind people
> away from the technical professions as engineering skills aren't valued too
> highly by special education programs.
> 
> No where in my testimony do I make any claims on the quality or
> standardization of Linux or other open source projects.  I do state that
> there are many good accessibility aids for the Linux OS but that they depend
> upon the work of volunteers.  Microsoft has a large team of paid full time
> staffers working exclusively on AT projects.  I wish the people who make
> money on Linux distributions would commit a reasonable level of resources to
> the cause.
> 
> I don't need to be convinced of the value of open source projects or of the
> Linux OS.  I just don't want Microsoft's products to be made open source.  I
> understand how the dynamics of the Windows world works.  An open source
> Internet Explorer would not be published with the GNU General Public License
> but, rather, it would permit distribution of modified executables without
> requiring the source code to be shared.  Thus, many variants of IE would
> turn up with a variety of levels of accessibility built in.
> 
> I was simply addressing reality.  Most blind people don't have jobs (75% or
> so) this is the problem we need to solve today.  My own background has seen
> me as a strong advocate of Project GNU and as a co-founder of the LPF.  I
> still stand behind those efforts as well as I do my testimony.
> 
> Thanks for writing,
> cdh
> 
>    
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Igor Gueths [mailto:igueths at attbi.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 5:01 PM
> To: ChrisH at freedomscientific.com
> Cc: speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> Subject: I swear to tell the truth
> 
> 
> Hi Chris. As you can probably see, I am from the Speakup list. I am an
> active user of the Linux operating system, however I still rely on Win for
> some things, but am increasingly switching to Linux. Following the posting
> of your testimony to this mailing list, one person commented on the fact
> that Win98 especially, is unstable, therefore it will reduce output from a
> company because of crashes and/or rebooting. This is why I use Linux. It is
> a much more stable environment. I would also like to comment on your
> statement about Win being the most used OS in most companies. I believe that
> this highly depends on what job you take. For example, a lot of companies
> are now using Linux especially in their server architecture. So if you got a
> job there, you could very well find yourself working at a Debian Gnu Linux
> 2.2 or later system, Slackware, or Redhat. I also feel that it is necessary
> to comment on bugs in programs. Most Windows programs that I have used have
> a lot of bugs in them. As a result, they usually crash, giving some invalid
> page fault in some module, usually within the application. If you report the
> problem to the vendor of the product, I have found that the response is that
> "We are currently looking into this problem."
> 
>     They don't attempt to put fixes up for the bugs, and as a result you
> have to wait for the next upgrade. Then you possibly have to pay full price
> for the upgrade, and this can get rather annoying after a while. In my
> opinion, this is a case of developers making money off of software bugs, and
> purposefully coding buggy, untested software so it can get to market
> quicker. This is where Linux andthe OSDN become superior.
> 
>     You report a bug, and a patch for the program can come back to you
> within hours, not days. The developers have the code in front of them, a
> well as the end user. In other words, if the end user has knolige in C/C++,
> and the program happens to be written in either of these two languages, the
> user can very well modify the software to fit his/her needs, and also fixing
> the bug (s). 
> 
>     I also believe that your statement about open source programs being of
> different versions because different developers are working on them is
> wrong. This is where Cvs comes in. I'm not sure if you are familiar with
> this, it is a system which manages and tracks all versions of your programs.
> Once a developer which is working on the program submits his modified
> sourcecode with the new changelog, then it is there for other developers to
> download and work on and then recommit the code with their changes. In this
> way, there is no mistake about version information and features. 
> 
>     A lot of people from this list have been putting their two-sense in
> regarding your testimony. I just felt that I should sum up the opinions and
> include mine in as well.
> 
> Regards, Igor and Speakup Mailing List