With our obsession for newness, those of us who work in the tech industry often fail to understand the historical roots of our technologies. Case in point: telegraph operators more than 150 years ago were sending short messages called "graphs" that were surprisingly similar in form and content to Twitter tweets.
One remarkable example was recently discovered in the Museum of Telegraphy in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. It is the transcript of a telegraph operator's comments during Abraham Lincoln's famed Gettysburg Address in 1863. The transcript was shared with me by a friend on the museum staff, and I'm pleased to reproduce it here:
=====
Still waiting for the Pres. to commence his speech. #gettysburg
Good heavens, I should have foresworn that fifth corn dodger for lunch. #gas #dontask #gettysburg
Starting now. Pres. waves to crowd. #gettysburg
Four score and... WTF is a score? 25? #pleasespeakenglish #gettysburg
Okay, it's twenty. So "87 years ago the country was founded." Why not just say that? Duh. #gettysburg
Heh-heh-heh. He said "conceived." Heh-heh. #gettysburg
"Now we are in a great civil war." More duh. #gettysburg
@zebekiah1134 I know, it's my own fault for buying lunch from a wagon. #gas #gettysburg
Hoping to get in two miles this afternoon. Depends on how long this speech goes. #gettysburg
"It is altogether fitting and proper that we should dedicate this cemetery." Ooookay. #gettysburg
Saw @matthewbrady this morning, taking pictures of guys with big beards. #muttonchopsrule #gettysburg
"The world will little note, nor long remember, what we say here." #nokidding #gettysburg
Hey you in the hat. Yes, you. Take it off, you're blocking my view. #gettysburg
"This nation shall have a new birth of freedom." Great, finally we'll get some details. #gettysburg
"Government shall not perish from the earth." Good to know. #gettysburg
Where's he going? #gettysburg
What, that's IT? I waited five hours in the sun for THAT?? #ripoff #votedemocrat #gettysburg
Maybe I'll make it four miles. #outahere #gettysburg
=====
Posted April 1, 2012
2011: The microwave hairdryer, and four other colossal tech failures you've never heard of
2010: The Yahoo-New York Times merger
2009: The US government's tech industry bailout
2008: Survey: 27% of early iPhone adopters wear it attached to a body piercing
2007: Twitter + telepathy = Spitr, the ultimate social network
2006: Google buys Sprint
Sabtu, 31 Maret 2012
Selasa, 27 Maret 2012
On brands, marketing and technical details
I have a few thoughts based on the yet another round of debate where marketing clashes with free software advocation and technical details. Nothing new in the debate itself, but I'm adding a couple of insights.
Marketing is not highly respected by many technical people, and neither by the people wanting more advocating than the messing up with facts and feelings that the marketing does. I'm all for advocating free software, but it's currently not something you can use for marketing to win big markets. If we advance to a world where free software is as wanted as the green values today are, it can be used in marketing as well similar to all the ecological (according to the market department at least) products today, but alas the benefits of free software are not yet as universally known. Since it doesn't say much that touches the masses, advocating has a negative marketing effect since it takes space away from the potentially "hitting" marketing moves, in those cases where you target the big masses in the first place. "Open" this and that has some marketing power in it nowadays, but it's a mess of different meanings that probably doesn't advance libre software freedoms as such. Wikipedia has probably been the biggest contributor to advancing general knowledge of software and culture libre. Disclaimer: I'm not a proper marketing person, some more professional might have better insights in this area. If I'd be a proper marketing person, I'd decorate this blog post with fancy pictures so that more people would actually read it.
Some of the marketing can be done without sacrificing any of the advocation. The fabulous Fedora campaigns, graphics, slogans and materials are a great example of those and do an important job, even though Fedora isn't reaching the big masses with it (and Fedora isn't targeted for OEMs to ship to millions either). But they do hopefully reach a lot of level people on the grassroots level. I hope as a Debian Developer that more people valuing the freedoms of free software would help also Debian as a project to reach more of its advocation potential and developers from the more proprietary world. But I'm happy that at least some free software projects have nowadays true graphical and marketing talent. Even though not as widely known, freedoms of the software users including for example privacy aspects are a potential good marketing tool toward a portion of the developer pool.
Let's not forget that Android conquered the mobile market without using the brand power of Linux. The 30+ million people who know Linux a bit deeper than just "I've heard it" already run a Linux distribution like Ubuntu, but we need hotter brands than a project name of a kernel to reach the bigger masses. Call it Ubuntu, Fedora, or something, but no matter do what it needs to ship it to millions. AFAIK mostly Ubuntu and SUSE are shipping currently via desktop/notebook OEMs, and more Ubuntu than SUSE. Others aren't concentrating on the market, which is a very difficult one. Ubuntu is doing a lot more mass population advocating for free software than Android has ever done. Note for example the time any user tries to play a video for the first time in a non-free format - Ubuntu will tell the user about the problems related to those formats and asking a permission to install a free software player for those (or buy licensed codecs), and the Ubuntu Help texts describe a lot of details about restricted formats, DRM et cetera. Not to mention what happens if the person actually wanders into the community, discovering Debian, other free software projects, free software licenses and so on. Meanwhile Android users never notice anything being wrong while watching H.264 videos or watching DRM Flash videos. Granted, like Boot2Gecko debate shows, it may be a partially similar situation on shipping desktop Linux variants as well, in order to actually ship them via partners.
Anyway, the best example of brands is MeeGo. Even the LWN editor does not get into dissecting the meaning of MeeGo on Nokia N9, because "there has been no real agreement on that in the past", but just uses the brand name as is. That is the power of brands. Technical people debate that it's not really MeeGo, it's maemo GNU/Linux with a special permission from Linux Foundation to use the MeeGo brand name, and then counter-argument with that the MeeGo is an API and maemo matches the MeeGo 1.2 API which is actually just Qt 4.7 API. And actually, as proven by the LWN example, it's not even "technical people". For most of technical people Nokia N9 is MeeGo as well. Only the people who have actually worked on it plus the couple of other people migrated from maemo and MeeGo.com communities to Mer project understand the legacy, history and the complete difference between the Maemo Harmattan platform and what MeeGo.com was. Yet at the same time like all GNU/FreeDesktop.org/Linux distributions, they are 95% same code, just all the infrastructure and packaging and polishing and history is different.
For 99.9% of people who know what MeeGo is, MeeGo is the cool Nokia smartphone, one of its kind and not sold in some of the major western markets, and/or the colorful sweet characters of meego.com shown at one time on a couple of netbooks. That is the brand, and the technical details do not matter even to the technical people unless they actually get into working on the projects directly.
To most people, the Linux brand is a mess of a lot of things, while other brands have the possibility at least to have a more differentiating and unique appearance.
Marketing is not highly respected by many technical people, and neither by the people wanting more advocating than the messing up with facts and feelings that the marketing does. I'm all for advocating free software, but it's currently not something you can use for marketing to win big markets. If we advance to a world where free software is as wanted as the green values today are, it can be used in marketing as well similar to all the ecological (according to the market department at least) products today, but alas the benefits of free software are not yet as universally known. Since it doesn't say much that touches the masses, advocating has a negative marketing effect since it takes space away from the potentially "hitting" marketing moves, in those cases where you target the big masses in the first place. "Open" this and that has some marketing power in it nowadays, but it's a mess of different meanings that probably doesn't advance libre software freedoms as such. Wikipedia has probably been the biggest contributor to advancing general knowledge of software and culture libre. Disclaimer: I'm not a proper marketing person, some more professional might have better insights in this area. If I'd be a proper marketing person, I'd decorate this blog post with fancy pictures so that more people would actually read it.
Some of the marketing can be done without sacrificing any of the advocation. The fabulous Fedora campaigns, graphics, slogans and materials are a great example of those and do an important job, even though Fedora isn't reaching the big masses with it (and Fedora isn't targeted for OEMs to ship to millions either). But they do hopefully reach a lot of level people on the grassroots level. I hope as a Debian Developer that more people valuing the freedoms of free software would help also Debian as a project to reach more of its advocation potential and developers from the more proprietary world. But I'm happy that at least some free software projects have nowadays true graphical and marketing talent. Even though not as widely known, freedoms of the software users including for example privacy aspects are a potential good marketing tool toward a portion of the developer pool.
Let's not forget that Android conquered the mobile market without using the brand power of Linux. The 30+ million people who know Linux a bit deeper than just "I've heard it" already run a Linux distribution like Ubuntu, but we need hotter brands than a project name of a kernel to reach the bigger masses. Call it Ubuntu, Fedora, or something, but no matter do what it needs to ship it to millions. AFAIK mostly Ubuntu and SUSE are shipping currently via desktop/notebook OEMs, and more Ubuntu than SUSE. Others aren't concentrating on the market, which is a very difficult one. Ubuntu is doing a lot more mass population advocating for free software than Android has ever done. Note for example the time any user tries to play a video for the first time in a non-free format - Ubuntu will tell the user about the problems related to those formats and asking a permission to install a free software player for those (or buy licensed codecs), and the Ubuntu Help texts describe a lot of details about restricted formats, DRM et cetera. Not to mention what happens if the person actually wanders into the community, discovering Debian, other free software projects, free software licenses and so on. Meanwhile Android users never notice anything being wrong while watching H.264 videos or watching DRM Flash videos. Granted, like Boot2Gecko debate shows, it may be a partially similar situation on shipping desktop Linux variants as well, in order to actually ship them via partners.
Anyway, the best example of brands is MeeGo. Even the LWN editor does not get into dissecting the meaning of MeeGo on Nokia N9, because "there has been no real agreement on that in the past", but just uses the brand name as is. That is the power of brands. Technical people debate that it's not really MeeGo, it's maemo GNU/Linux with a special permission from Linux Foundation to use the MeeGo brand name, and then counter-argument with that the MeeGo is an API and maemo matches the MeeGo 1.2 API which is actually just Qt 4.7 API. And actually, as proven by the LWN example, it's not even "technical people". For most of technical people Nokia N9 is MeeGo as well. Only the people who have actually worked on it plus the couple of other people migrated from maemo and MeeGo.com communities to Mer project understand the legacy, history and the complete difference between the Maemo Harmattan platform and what MeeGo.com was. Yet at the same time like all GNU/FreeDesktop.org/Linux distributions, they are 95% same code, just all the infrastructure and packaging and polishing and history is different.
For 99.9% of people who know what MeeGo is, MeeGo is the cool Nokia smartphone, one of its kind and not sold in some of the major western markets, and/or the colorful sweet characters of meego.com shown at one time on a couple of netbooks. That is the brand, and the technical details do not matter even to the technical people unless they actually get into working on the projects directly.
To most people, the Linux brand is a mess of a lot of things, while other brands have the possibility at least to have a more differentiating and unique appearance.
Jumat, 09 Maret 2012
The Real Significance of the New iPad
The reactions to the New iPad announcement this week were all over the map.
Some places said it was basically a yawner (link), while others bought into the "end of the PC" rhetoric (link) . Some people even warned all developers to stop programming for the keyboard and mouse, even for complex applications like computer-assisted design (link).
My take: I think the announcement was both more and less important than people are saying. Here's why:
This is not the end of the PC era
I'm sure I'll get some push-back from people who disagree, but I think the whole "PC era" meme from Apple is self-serving hype. Of course they want to convince you that the world is shifting away from a market where Apple has less than 10% worldwide share to a market where Apple has well over 50% share. I'd say the same thing if I still worked at Apple. And the iPad is shiny and sexy, while Windows PCs are old and boring, so I want to believe that the PC is dead. It makes me feel all Jetson-y. But think about it rationally for a minute.
First of all, what exactly was the PC era that is now supposedly ending? Was it the years when Windows was the dominant API for software innovation? That ended in the late 1990s with the rise of web apps. Was it the era when PCs outsold smartphones? That ended last year.
To many people, the end of the PC era seems to mean that tablets are starting to replace PCs as thoroughly as PCs replaced minicomputers. Or that the keyboard and mouse are going away. I don't buy it. We've been declaring the PC dead for at least 15 years, but we're still using them today because for certain tasks, PCs are the best way to get work done. It may be unsexy and it may seem old-fashioned, but if you're working on a big spreadsheet a mouse and numeric keypad are incredibly productive. And if you're writing a report, a keyboard is still the easiest way to input text (for now) and edit (for the foreseeable future).
Kind of like a steering wheel and pedals are still the best way to drive a car. I could do that with a multitouch tablet as well (three-finger swipe to the right means turn at the next corner, four fingers down means apply brakes), but sometimes direct control is the best approach.
And yes (comma) I have tried Dragon (pause) Naturally (pause) Speaking (pause) many times (period) (space) And I found that by the tame I went back and fixed all the types it created (comma) I had not saved any time (comma) plus it was difficult to speak in the sort of sentences I wanted to write because you know I kind of speak more casually than I write (period)
My point is not that touch and speech input and tablets are useless. I think they're great, and I've been playing with them for more than a decade. But I'm going to have the most productivity if I can choose the best tools for a particular job, and that means I still need a pointing device and keyboard for some sorts of work.
Now, if Apple were saying that the PC will be less dominant than it was in the past, I'd have no trouble with that. Although we're not seeing the overall death of the PC, we're definitely seeing a narrowing down of it. For tasks like reading or interacting with content, a tablet is far superior to a traditional PC, and if that's all you do with your PC, by all means get rid of it. But PC-like devices (or maybe mice and keyboards that connect to tablets) are going to linger for the sorts of work that they do best.
So if you have a touch-sensitive screen connected to a keyboard and mouse, do you call that hybrid device a PC or a tablet? I don't really care; it's a game of semantics at that point, and semantics are the playground of companies that want to score marketing points. Which brings us right back to Apple and its enormous tablet market share.
(Oh and by the way, the tablet needs a stylus for certain types of work. One of Steve Jobs' strengths was his willingness to revisit his assumptions when he was wrong, and this is one of those cases. I worry that since Jobs died, Apple may now get locked into his religious opposition to the stylus. That would leave Apple vulnerable to a competitor who does the stylus right by tuning the hardware and software to work together.)
What does matter about the new iPad
Two things stand out to me. The first is the screen. Yes it's very pretty, but that's not the point. The Retina display is a very nice feature in a smartphone, but in a tablet it's far more important because tablets get used more for reading long-form text like novels, textbooks, and magazines.
For displaying photos and videos, enormous screen resolution isn't actually all that important; what matters most is color depth. If you have millions of colors, the pixels blend together and most images look real even at 150 dots per inch. But for reading, where you have sharp contrasts between black text and white background, much higher resolution is needed. At 264 pixels per inch, the new iPad's screen is close to the 300 dpi resolution of the original LaserWriters, which most people found an acceptable substitute for printed text, and which drove a revolutionary change in publishing. I doubt Apple's display has the same contrast ratio as printed paper, which is also important for readability, but I still think it's likely to give a much nicer reading experience to all those students who are supposed to use iPads as their new textbooks.
Apple posted a clever widget that shows a magnified image of text on the old and new iPads. I pasted an image from it below. Yes, in real life the dots are tiny and it will be hard for some people to see the difference. But eyestrain hinges on little details like this, and as a longtime publishing guy, I can tell you that resolution matters.
On most other hardware specs, the iPad is very good but not overwhelming. Gizmodo has a good comparison here. It shows that the upcoming Asus Transformer matches up pretty well on a lot of the specs, although it's a bit pricier and has less powerful batteries. You could be forgiven for thinking that Android's within striking distance of iPad.
But then there's the software, and this is the second place where I think the new iPad stands out. As a systems vendor, Apple innovates in both hardware and software, so you have to look at both areas to understand the full iPad offering. Apple is innovating very aggressively on the software side. Speech recognition is now being bundled with iPad, and although as I just said I don't think it's ready for writing a long report, Apple has a history of tuning and improving its technologies over time, and I bet we'll see that happen with speech. The keyboard isn't dead, but if Apple makes speech work well, the tablet can more thoroughly displace the PC in a few more use cases (like creating short messages).
Then there are the new iLife tablet apps, which were probably the most compelling part of the whole announcement. I'm very impressed by the way Apple refactored photo editing for touch, and I can't wait to play with it.
Add together the high-res screen, the long-term path for speech, and the new apps, and the new iPad looks like a formidable product.
Hey Google, copy this
Think of it from the perspective of an Android tablet product manager. You don't just have to beat Apple on hardware, but you also have to figure out how to duplicate a rapidly-growing list of Apple-branded software features that are either bundled or sold at ridiculously low prices.
Yes, Google is working to copy any features that Apple adds, but how good is it at integrating UI functionality and crafting exquisite applications? Would you want to bet your product on Google's ability to craft end-user software?
And thanks to Apple's volumes and wickedly controlled supply chain, its prices are low enough that no products other than Amazon's subsidized tablets can get down under them. So as an Android cloner, you're stuck at rough parity on price, and you are increasingly falling behind on integrated software features. It's an ugly life.
And then there's Microsoft
It'll be interesting to see how Microsoft deals with all of this. Windows 8 is an effort to recast Windows for tablets, but will Microsoft be willing to go toe to toe with Apple on app pricing? Undoubtedly not; that would involve giving up most of the Microsoft Office revenue stream. So Microsoft has to walk a difficult line in which it embraces touch tablet functionality, but attempts to convince people that they still need to pay big bucks for good old Office. The first try in that direction, Tablet PC, demonstrated that you can't just cut the keyboard off a PC and call it a tablet. Windows 8 is much more tablet-centric, but if it makes people feel like they're buying a tablet, they may start looking for tablet-like pricing in their apps, and Office sales could collapse like a house of cards.
If that happens, we'll all stop talking about the end of the PC era and talk instead about the end of the Microsoft era.
Some places said it was basically a yawner (link), while others bought into the "end of the PC" rhetoric (link) . Some people even warned all developers to stop programming for the keyboard and mouse, even for complex applications like computer-assisted design (link).
My take: I think the announcement was both more and less important than people are saying. Here's why:
This is not the end of the PC era
I'm sure I'll get some push-back from people who disagree, but I think the whole "PC era" meme from Apple is self-serving hype. Of course they want to convince you that the world is shifting away from a market where Apple has less than 10% worldwide share to a market where Apple has well over 50% share. I'd say the same thing if I still worked at Apple. And the iPad is shiny and sexy, while Windows PCs are old and boring, so I want to believe that the PC is dead. It makes me feel all Jetson-y. But think about it rationally for a minute.
First of all, what exactly was the PC era that is now supposedly ending? Was it the years when Windows was the dominant API for software innovation? That ended in the late 1990s with the rise of web apps. Was it the era when PCs outsold smartphones? That ended last year.
To many people, the end of the PC era seems to mean that tablets are starting to replace PCs as thoroughly as PCs replaced minicomputers. Or that the keyboard and mouse are going away. I don't buy it. We've been declaring the PC dead for at least 15 years, but we're still using them today because for certain tasks, PCs are the best way to get work done. It may be unsexy and it may seem old-fashioned, but if you're working on a big spreadsheet a mouse and numeric keypad are incredibly productive. And if you're writing a report, a keyboard is still the easiest way to input text (for now) and edit (for the foreseeable future).
Kind of like a steering wheel and pedals are still the best way to drive a car. I could do that with a multitouch tablet as well (three-finger swipe to the right means turn at the next corner, four fingers down means apply brakes), but sometimes direct control is the best approach.
And yes (comma) I have tried Dragon (pause) Naturally (pause) Speaking (pause) many times (period) (space) And I found that by the tame I went back and fixed all the types it created (comma) I had not saved any time (comma) plus it was difficult to speak in the sort of sentences I wanted to write because you know I kind of speak more casually than I write (period)
My point is not that touch and speech input and tablets are useless. I think they're great, and I've been playing with them for more than a decade. But I'm going to have the most productivity if I can choose the best tools for a particular job, and that means I still need a pointing device and keyboard for some sorts of work.
Now, if Apple were saying that the PC will be less dominant than it was in the past, I'd have no trouble with that. Although we're not seeing the overall death of the PC, we're definitely seeing a narrowing down of it. For tasks like reading or interacting with content, a tablet is far superior to a traditional PC, and if that's all you do with your PC, by all means get rid of it. But PC-like devices (or maybe mice and keyboards that connect to tablets) are going to linger for the sorts of work that they do best.
So if you have a touch-sensitive screen connected to a keyboard and mouse, do you call that hybrid device a PC or a tablet? I don't really care; it's a game of semantics at that point, and semantics are the playground of companies that want to score marketing points. Which brings us right back to Apple and its enormous tablet market share.
(Oh and by the way, the tablet needs a stylus for certain types of work. One of Steve Jobs' strengths was his willingness to revisit his assumptions when he was wrong, and this is one of those cases. I worry that since Jobs died, Apple may now get locked into his religious opposition to the stylus. That would leave Apple vulnerable to a competitor who does the stylus right by tuning the hardware and software to work together.)
What does matter about the new iPad
Two things stand out to me. The first is the screen. Yes it's very pretty, but that's not the point. The Retina display is a very nice feature in a smartphone, but in a tablet it's far more important because tablets get used more for reading long-form text like novels, textbooks, and magazines.
For displaying photos and videos, enormous screen resolution isn't actually all that important; what matters most is color depth. If you have millions of colors, the pixels blend together and most images look real even at 150 dots per inch. But for reading, where you have sharp contrasts between black text and white background, much higher resolution is needed. At 264 pixels per inch, the new iPad's screen is close to the 300 dpi resolution of the original LaserWriters, which most people found an acceptable substitute for printed text, and which drove a revolutionary change in publishing. I doubt Apple's display has the same contrast ratio as printed paper, which is also important for readability, but I still think it's likely to give a much nicer reading experience to all those students who are supposed to use iPads as their new textbooks.
Apple posted a clever widget that shows a magnified image of text on the old and new iPads. I pasted an image from it below. Yes, in real life the dots are tiny and it will be hard for some people to see the difference. But eyestrain hinges on little details like this, and as a longtime publishing guy, I can tell you that resolution matters.
On most other hardware specs, the iPad is very good but not overwhelming. Gizmodo has a good comparison here. It shows that the upcoming Asus Transformer matches up pretty well on a lot of the specs, although it's a bit pricier and has less powerful batteries. You could be forgiven for thinking that Android's within striking distance of iPad.
But then there's the software, and this is the second place where I think the new iPad stands out. As a systems vendor, Apple innovates in both hardware and software, so you have to look at both areas to understand the full iPad offering. Apple is innovating very aggressively on the software side. Speech recognition is now being bundled with iPad, and although as I just said I don't think it's ready for writing a long report, Apple has a history of tuning and improving its technologies over time, and I bet we'll see that happen with speech. The keyboard isn't dead, but if Apple makes speech work well, the tablet can more thoroughly displace the PC in a few more use cases (like creating short messages).
Then there are the new iLife tablet apps, which were probably the most compelling part of the whole announcement. I'm very impressed by the way Apple refactored photo editing for touch, and I can't wait to play with it.
Add together the high-res screen, the long-term path for speech, and the new apps, and the new iPad looks like a formidable product.
Hey Google, copy this
Think of it from the perspective of an Android tablet product manager. You don't just have to beat Apple on hardware, but you also have to figure out how to duplicate a rapidly-growing list of Apple-branded software features that are either bundled or sold at ridiculously low prices.
Yes, Google is working to copy any features that Apple adds, but how good is it at integrating UI functionality and crafting exquisite applications? Would you want to bet your product on Google's ability to craft end-user software?
And thanks to Apple's volumes and wickedly controlled supply chain, its prices are low enough that no products other than Amazon's subsidized tablets can get down under them. So as an Android cloner, you're stuck at rough parity on price, and you are increasingly falling behind on integrated software features. It's an ugly life.
And then there's Microsoft
It'll be interesting to see how Microsoft deals with all of this. Windows 8 is an effort to recast Windows for tablets, but will Microsoft be willing to go toe to toe with Apple on app pricing? Undoubtedly not; that would involve giving up most of the Microsoft Office revenue stream. So Microsoft has to walk a difficult line in which it embraces touch tablet functionality, but attempts to convince people that they still need to pay big bucks for good old Office. The first try in that direction, Tablet PC, demonstrated that you can't just cut the keyboard off a PC and call it a tablet. Windows 8 is much more tablet-centric, but if it makes people feel like they're buying a tablet, they may start looking for tablet-like pricing in their apps, and Office sales could collapse like a house of cards.
If that happens, we'll all stop talking about the end of the PC era and talk instead about the end of the Microsoft era.
Rabu, 07 Maret 2012
GNOME 3.4 Finnish translation weekend
Just a quick note that the merry Finnish localization folks are organizing an (extended) localization weekend, starting today. As a nice step towards ease of use, they're utilizing the long developed, maybe even underused Translatewiki.net platform, or to be precise a separate instance of it. Translatewiki.net is used by MediaWiki (Wikimedia Foundation), StatusNet and other high profile projects. Co-incidentally the main developer of Translatewiki.net is Finnish as well.
Anyway enough of the platform, join the translation frenzy at http://l10n.laxstrom.name/wiki/Gnome_3.4, but do make sure to read the notes at http://muistio.tieke.fi/IYZxesy9uc.
I've promised to help in upstreaming those to git.gnome.org on Sunday. There is additionally a new report about Ubuntu 12.04 LTS translations schedule (to which these GNOME contributions will find their way as well) at the ubuntu-l10n-fin mailing list by Jiri.
Ja sama suomeksi.
Anyway enough of the platform, join the translation frenzy at http://l10n.laxstrom.name/wiki/Gnome_3.4, but do make sure to read the notes at http://muistio.tieke.fi/IYZxesy9uc.
I've promised to help in upstreaming those to git.gnome.org on Sunday. There is additionally a new report about Ubuntu 12.04 LTS translations schedule (to which these GNOME contributions will find their way as well) at the ubuntu-l10n-fin mailing list by Jiri.
Ja sama suomeksi.
Langganan:
Komentar (Atom)