Alan, there's a confusion a bit here.<br>the thing is that the letter where i was "barking" about<br>compiling, etc was my letter after a harsh exchange of emails<br>before (about the MHT issue). i just can't post the letters of my lecturer<br>
without asking him, as u understand.<br><br>about being bastian of open source. o believe me,<br>i am. sometimes even to extremes. but this case is a bit<br>different - because very large proportion of music students<br>use Macs (because of Logic Pro), and i wasn't speaking<br>
only on my behalf there. <br>even worse - it is no longer all about one OS being <br>disadvantaged (say, Linux), but anything else other than Windows.<br>well, that's extremely not fair, IMHO.<br><br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 06/03/2008, <b class="gmail_sendername">Alan Pope</b> <<a href="mailto:alan@popey.com">alan@popey.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 03:47:15PM +0000, Neil Bothwick wrote:<br> > On Thu, 6 Mar 2008 15:26:32 +0000, Alan Pope wrote:<br> ><br> > > Alternatively you could have just looked at the name of the file and<br> > > figured out that it's an article saved from The Guardian website:-<br>
> ><br> > > <a href="http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22Copying+music+legally+in+the+digital+age%22">http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22Copying+music+legally+in+the+digital+age%22</a><br> > ><br> > > The first hit:-<br>
> ><br> > > <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/09/copyrightlaws">http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/09/copyrightlaws</a><br> > ><br> > > Whilst I agree that using non-free formats is bad, I think you could<br>
> > possibly have approached this in a somewhat less confrontational manner.<br> ><br> > I disagree. Firstly, you have no way of knowing whether the file is that<br> > article, just because the title is the same.<br>
<br> <br>Whilst this is indeed true, the reason I mentioned it was because there was<br> a lot of rant and rhetoric in the mail sent to the originator of the mht<br> file. The "you're singling me out" "discriminating against me" type of<br>
response in my experience is less effective than a _polite_ request to make<br> the file available in an open format. I was in no way advocating using<br> non-free formats, merely pointing out that it's self destructive to the<br>
cause to rant at people who in all likelyhood are just doing their job with<br> the tools they're given.<br> <br> Fact is that in all likelyhood the file _is_ a copy of the Guardian article<br> which may well have been originally been supplied with text such as "Take a<br>
look at this Guardian article". To suggest that you should bother googling<br> _because_ the file is supplied in a non-free format is being bloody minded<br> IMO.<br> <br><br> > Secondly, what happens next<br> > time an article is made available in this format? If you're going to try<br>
> to change things, sooner is better than later.<br> ><br> <br> <br>Which could be effected much quicker if you were to show the originator the<br> error of their ways in a polite manner. Barking at them about WINE this and<br>
compiling that isn't the right way to go about it. Getting hold of the<br> document in html format with the attached web collatoral, and feeding back<br> to the originator in an open format such as a zip file might yield better<br>
results. Perhaps with a note saying "In the future I and other people would<br> appreciate it if you take this approach to the distribution of files".<br> <br><br> > Making any data available as an exe file is a terrible idea, particularly<br>
> for Windows users. Forcing people to download and run executable files is<br> > an easy way to infect their machines.<br> ><br> <br> <br>I never advocated otherwise. I merely attempted to assist someone in<br>
unpacking what was originally suggested to be self extracting zip archive.<br> <br> I have to say I find it somewhat ironic that the complainant here is making<br> a big deal about file distribution in open formats then brazenly states that<br>
the file opened fine on an Apple Mac running Quicktime. Not exactly the<br> bastian of open source products is it? :)<br> <br> Cheers,<br> Al.<br> <br><br> <br> _______________________________________________<br> Liverpool mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Liverpool@mailman.lug.org.uk">Liverpool@mailman.lug.org.uk</a><br> <a href="https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/liverpool">https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/liverpool</a><br> </blockquote>
</div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Support Underground!