Because the embedded documentation, (i.e. read-me files in various Aircraft folders and other installable things), is generated on non-Windows systems, the line-ending format produces documents that are - in essence - unreadable by Windows users unless they go to the trouble of installing some kind of formatting conversion program.
helijah wrote in Wed May 01, 2013 7:02 pm:Thorsten wrote in Wed Apr 17, 2013 8:30 am:Or you can install a text editor with actually deserves the name (like notepad++) under Windows
It's less of a generic Windows and more of a notepad-specific problem.
I absolutely agree with that. If a basic software is poorly designed and poorly written, it's not up to us to adapt our work to overcome that. It is at M$ to correct its mistakes. Do not reverse the problems. When we adapt our files for bad programs, they will never be corrected.
Pardon me, but this is exactly the kind of answer and attitude that prevents people from adopting operating systems like Linux, and software like Flight Gear.
If we assume for the moment that I was a total newbie at this, (which I am not, by the way), and I had come here with a simple and polite problem and question; an arrogant response like this would be a lead-pipe-cinch guarantee that, not only would I never darken the door of Flight Gear ever again, I would stay as far away from Linux as I possibly could.
It is not right for the users of any operating system, Linux, Mac, Windows, IBM-370 Mainframe, AIX, Solaris, or anything else for that matter,
to denigrate or belittle any other operating system or its users.
Saying that the Notepad program in Windows is a "bad program" simply because it implements the end-of-line terminator differently than Unix and its clones do borders on. . . . I'm not even sure how to say it and remain polite. Is Solaris a "bad" operating system because because it defines on-screen widgets differently than Gnome or KDE? Is Apache or Free BSD "broken" because they use a different licensing model than either Linux or Windows uses?
Claiming that Microsoft's implementation of the end-of-line terminator is a "mistake" is not only narrow-minded, it ignores much of the history and development of microcomputers.
Microsoft didn't even invent it, they just brought it forward from the code for CPM/MPM written by Digital Research in the 1980's, and Digital Research borrowed it from even earlier code written in the '60's, '70's and earlier '80's by other computer manufacturers who were writing for ASR-110 Teletypes and Centronics printers that used discrete carriage-return, (0x0D), and line-feed, (0x0A), ASCII control codes to return the carriage and advance the paper.
http://academic.evergreen.edu/projects/biophysics/technotes/program/ascii_ctrl.htmAs a Flight Gear user, I feel I have a responsibility to invite other computer users to try, (and if possible adopt), this excellent flight simulation program. As a computer user, I use both Windows (Win-7, 64 bit), and Linux, (currently Mint 14 64 bit with Cinnamon), for various things - and I use the operating system that "feels right" to me for the task that I use it for.
My original issue and question was based on my desire for the documentation to be more
inclusive rather than
exclusive, to allow a broader user base to understand and properly configure the excellent efforts that many people have put into this software.
Two choices were suggested before the idea of throwing the baby out with the bathwater took over:
- Create two copies of the text-based documentation files, one for 'Nix/Mac and one for Windows, with appropriate line-ending terminators for each.
- Create ONE standard document type that everyone can read with a minimum of trouble, (.pdf, etc.)
I am willing to support either of these possibilities, along with any other suggestion or possibility that is germane, sensible, and inclusive.
I
DO NOT, and I
WILL NOT support or endorse any name calling or operating system bashing, here or anywhere else on these fora.
What say ye?
Jim (JR)