Slashdot Mirror
Giant Linux Boost From Washington Post
You've seen Penguin Computing's "Tux stomps Microsoft HQ" ad, right? It's the one with the caption, "Good evening, Mr. Gates, I'll be your server today!" This morning, when I opened up my copy of the Washington Post, that ad, in full color, dominated the entire front page of the business section. Below it was a story headlined, Microsoft's Next Trials - Windows Case Could Open Doors for the Upstart Linux Operating System. This may be the most unabashed piece of journalistic Linux advocacy ever published in a major daily newspaper. The print edition, but apparently not the Post's Web site, also contained a sidebar story about how the article's author installed Corel Linux on his home desktop computer -- and found it fairly easy to do. Indeed, he says, the hardest part of his personal Linux foray was parting with the high-end Linux-loaded Latitude laptop Dell loaned him to test. "It will pain me to give it back," he said.
Hehe, I agree... To see Tux in a different light, check this out:
Linux Loving Sluts
Good clean fun!
Cheers
Costyn.
The Official Steve Ballmer Webpage
these tools pale in comparison to proprietary tools available on other platforms.
How so? Most proprietary tools available on other programs (not mentioning any names (Visual C++, Visual Basic) or anything) are severely broken in terms of supporting standards and proper syntax.
Those tools are good for slapping out broken, severely buggy bloatware quickly, but not much else. GNU development tools are cross-platform, based on open standards, and are extremely robust. For instance, I wouldn't trade gdb for the broken, crappy debugger built into VC++ any day.
My journal has hot
At least they say that they are "working" when they come here. Then again maybe not as Pegorano seems to indicate.
My summer employer, a scientific research group, wants to set up Linux on a bunch of PCs for use as a workstation.
The distribution they chose: RedHat.
Now, I'm very familiar with Debian GNU/Linux. If I were left to choose, I'd have potato running on all these systems. However, this group relies, unfortunately, on some non-free software. The vendors of this software can only guarantee that it will run on RedHat, and the people in the lab are scared that things won't work properly on any other distribution. The result? I'm going to spend the next few months cursing RPM.
And you think fragmentation isn't a problem at all? [1]
Daniel
[1] of course, it mostly affects proprietary programs, so may not be particularly relevant unless you're unfortunate enough to have wedded yourself to one.
Hurry up and jump on the individualist bandwagon!
They complain that MS doesn't innovate, it just repeats what's already out there; at the same time they bristle in anger at the suggestion that linux doesn't innovate, that it just refines what's already there in unix and other systems.
They complain that MS products are difficult to use; at the same time they dismiss people who complain linux is difficult to use as "ignorant newbies", or simply "low IQ users".
They think they have brought MS to its knees, or are just about to crush it; at the same time they complain of MS having a monopoly.
They want linux to beat MS by being successful commercially; at the same time they ridicule any linux company that succeeds commercially for abandoning its free software, grass-roots principles.
They ridicule MS for only paying attention to something that makes money; at the same time they want MS to pay attention to linux as a serious competitor.
They reject the claim that linux supporters aren't responsive to the needs of average users; at the same time they reject the criticism of average users that linux is difficult to use, or that the community is insular and filled with zealotry and thus won't make it outside the geek base.
LL.
- Robin
I use both Windows and Linux. My next machine was going to be a laptop with Win 2000 preinstalled. That was before MS started holding back the CDs for the O/S. That action has really given me pause. I muck about with my configuration a lot (read "reinstall a lot"). Do I really want to be in the position of purchasing a second Win 2000 license just to be able to reinstall my o/s? No. Currently the only feasible alternative out there appears to be Linux, so I might end up buying a laptop and configuring it w/Linux. MS seems to be doing a good job at driving customers away.
We're building a Linux embedded device. We think it's QUITE ready for the masses.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Incidentally... Penguin Computing has another Tux graphic rendered with Quake-style armor:
http://www.penguincom puting.com/graphics/gamingtux800x600.jpg
:wq
due to the rush to ASP (application service providers) means that there will only be one application -- the browser.
Yeah, but at that point, there is no operating system, so who cares what you're running? Now, you could argue that this gives Linux the advantage because it's free. Still, there is a lot more to a development platform than just the kernel. If Microsoft continues to give excellent developer support (versus Linux where you're on your own), then the total costs will favor Microsoft.
In any case, I think we'll see some ASP-style business models have some success. But I don't think that it will replace the power of having native applications on a local machine.
--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
I think there are (at least) two schools of thought regarding ethics. One says that arguments about ethics merely rationalize our biologically (or otherwise) pre-determined gut feelings. A civilization which rests on this assumption about the relationship between reason and ethics is one in which action is valued more highly than words. Such societies will shoot first and ask questions later, so to speak.
The second type of view is one which holds that the justification for and consequences of ethical stances need to be clearly thought out. I think liberal democracies have traditionally tended towards the latter view of the ethical debate. In democracies, we (ideally) solve public problems by public debate rather than by civil war.
When you say something like "X is THE ethical (morally right) stance" you are saying, in effect, that such a position needs no argument in its defence. That is an approach that I'm sure won't be welcome in a forum like this which places great emphasis on vigorous debate over ethical issues. The very idea that there ought NOT to be differing viewpoints is frightening to many people. The analogy of the homicidal maniac differs from the MS vs. Linux debate in an important way. The unwillingness to listen to ethical debate and reason is the very definition of insanity, at least in legal terms. So the homicidal maniac story doesn't have another side PRECISELY BECAUSE the killer didn't have any justification for his actions. If he did, there certainly would be another side to his story.
What story is so antithetical to civil society that it should NOT be told? Denial of the Holocaust? Racist diatribes? How does it help the cause of Jews to silence critics like Ernst Zundel? It's not OK to hate people just because of their skin colour or religion, but it's also not OK to prevent people from speaking because their words might offend someone. Inciting violence or conspiring to do injury to someone is a criminal offense, so we already have laws that can protect citizens against physical threats. We don't need to limit speech any more than that.
This seems off topic, I know, and many people have said these things better than I. Still, the importance of free speech cannot be overstated. It only damages the cause of Free Software to limit debate about alternatives.
That being said, I'm a Linux user and advocate and I too disapprove of some of the things that MS has done. But to prevent alternatives from being discussed would be to steal a page from Microsoft's own playbook.
How many people have just had a guts-full of anti M$ BS? IMHO that Pengiun ad just makes us look lame....
--
Full plate and packing steel! -Minsc
You want to know who is really getting ripped off by Microsoft's quest to make money. The small businesses...
Believe it or not, they are starting to catch on. I'm starting to have people ask me out of the blue to help them convert. It's scary.
And law offices in particular have always tended to stay away from M$ Office and preferred WordPerfect and the like. Among other things, Office has had security problems way beyond the worms and VB scripts, like the way a single document file contains multiple drafts of a document... I've heard of law firms using that hole against people they negotiate with, to look at their first draft of a proposed contract. All that needs to be done to make sure Linux succeeds, IMHO, is to make sure they run into a friendlier version of Linux than Red Hat, which seems to have problems.
(currently testing something about signatures here)
And what exactly is wrong with 30-person companies full of geeks? What exactly is wrong with allowing a little attitude in your purchasing? I suppose your preference is a cold corporate just-the-facts approach, where companies trot out bogus benchmarks a-plenty, and marketing means deciding once again to make the cases putty-colored. Penguin Computing gives their T-shirts away with purchases instead of solely at trade shows where half the browsers are there for the free stuff.
As long as they put together excellent products, (and Penguin Computing does, IMO,) a company gets many bonus points with me if they have an attitude and a sense of humor.
--
And you probably won't as most of the bugs are hardware compatibility bugs. So as long as you stay with your base system you should be good. :)
(You have a dell don't you?)
Until Linux gets some applications that are clearly superior to the ones in Windows, it will never get any significant penetration. People need a really good reason to switch, and there just isn't one when it comes to Linux -- but there are a whole slew of negatives.
Isn't it obvious? Linux' killer application, right now, is development tools. The development tools, right now today, are clearly superior to anything offered on any other platform. Why do you think Linux has been able to attract so many software development geeks?
<soapbox mode: on>
Remember, Windows didn't always have superior applications to other alternatives. When Windows 3.0 was first introduced, the superior applications were on the DOS and Macintosh platforms (which is why Windows 3.0 beat out OS/2; better DOS compatibility). The fact that M$ developed what were then superior development tools to what was on DOS or Macintosh is exactly what M$ claims is the reason for the flocking of developers to its platform, and thus, ultimately the development of large numbers of applications, and the eventual superiority of those applications.
(While this claim is not entirely true, there is some element of truth to it.)
The point is, folks, that we're there. We've arrived. Now its time for the developers in the open source community to stand up and write those superior apps. There are a lot of things going on this arena (KOffice, GNUOffice, etc.) and its going to take time before we stop playing catchup, but if, and only if, we are willing to stick with it, and continue the fight, these superior applications will come.
My belief is that the key area where Linux developers need to concentrate on, once we get the basic office apps out of the way, is in the area of Internet-enabled apps. This is where MS and everyone else is headed, this is where we need to head as well. But we have the key experience that no one else has: many open source developers were on the Net before there was an HTML or a World Wide Web. This is an area where we have a chance to shine. Furthermore, developments in mobile technologies and embedded devices are equally as important, and we have some key players in these areas already, with Transmeta and others doing stuff for mobile and embedded devices...
My point is that the future is not as bleak as many who are not forward-thinking might expect. We won't be chasing MS forever, and eventually, we will succeed in "total world domination, but in a good way."
<soapbox mode: off>
My journal has hot
How many people have just had a guts-full of anti M$ BS? IMHO that Pengiun ad just makes us look lame....
The first part of this message is just flamebait, and I'll take as much anti-MS material as I can get. However, I agree the Penguin ad definitely has issues. Although it may be amusing because everybody just loves the penguin (I actually don't), it's rather ineffective (not to mention a cliche). Using a giant Penguin is an exercise in preaching to the choir. It doesn't really attract a new audience because you have to know something about Linux to get the "joke."
If the Linux is interested in displacing MS for business products and services, there's going to have to be a more effective approach. The suits won't get anything out of such an ad.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
I think the article underestimated Linux's potential as a client workstation operating system. Though I don't think it will achieve 'world domination' anytime soon- I could see it in maybe 10 years or so. Don't forget that Microsoft didn't build they're monopoly over night... in fact they have been gaining momentum for some 20 years.
Why does linux have a chance?? Heres why. One reason is mind share... Linux is an enormous hit amoung the college crowd- some of the best minds out there are cutting their teeth on Linux. There is little to do in Windows that hasn't been done already (or is too big for new programmers). On the other hand Linux is a work in progress which attracts people who like to program. It was the same in DOS's early days... it was grossly inadequate so 'hackers' started writing tools to make it better. Unfortunately in the case of DOS... Mickysoft absorbed the improvements and called it their own "innovation".
Another reason is that peoples needs for a computer are really quite basic. People think they need Word & Excel... but they really don't... they just need a good word processor and spreadsheet. Linux already has a few good choices for that (Corel Office is what I use... works awesome!), StarOffice & Applixware. People want web access... Still waiting on this one (Netscape is a piece of ****) but Konqueror looks very promising with it's support Java and netscape plugins. Lastly what they need is a fairly intuitive desktop environment. KDE2 looks like it will be a huge step forward in that direction (or Gnome if your into that kind of thing). The recent success of Apple computers and (WebTV perhaps) somewhat reconfirms my theory on this, that if a computer fullfills a users basic needs- it really doesn't matter which software it's running. Therefore- if Linux continues to improve as fast as it has, and it stays at it's great low price- It is quite possible that it will achieve World Domination in time.
Blender And Linux Fan
certainly, that's part of the appeal, but it seems that linux is being pigeonholed as nothing more than an inferior alternative for people who hate microsoft.
I'm not sure of a good way to do it, but I'd think Linux would benefit greatly if we could find a way to change the image from "not microsoft" to "a kickass operating system you'll love" it seems the second message is more important, but it's usually drowned out by the first.
maybe this is obvious to everyone, but I'd like to see a way to accomplish it. Most of the more "high profile" linux people have already taken this position. Perhaps when we all talk about how great linux is, we shouldn't always try to mention how much windows sucks (hell, it's already known by most people that windows hasn't improved at all since 1995, other than crashing a bit less than it used to.)
I'm one of the deluded linux fans who really thinks linux has a very good chance at the desktop market. In fact, I'm counting on it. Not all of us only use linux for servers... hell linux already has mastered the server market, it'd be a waste to stop there.
________
1995: Microsoft - "Resistance is futile"
They fail to realize that two posters can have constrasting viewpoints; at the same time they blast "linux supporters" for having splits in the community
They think that because one person says something it is representative of the whole community; at the same time they just do not understand that it is possible for two people out of the thousands to see things a different way.
SATIRE=OFF
Seriously, some people think that MS _does_ need to be punished, while others think that free market forces will destroy it anyway.
Don't you get the fact that two people can have opposing viewpoints? By labeling a whole mass of unique people as "linux supporters", one overlooks the wide range of opinions contained therein. It is easy to mock a community by pointing out contradictions, ignoring the fact that there are always differences in the opinions of the community.
nuclear cia fbi spy password code encrypt president bomb
Friends don't let friends misuse the subjunctive.
I recognize at least one of those photos from Vogue magazine, or maybe it was Glamour. I bought one of those the other day for my daughter. You know, a magazine published for and popular with millions of women readers. Of course the model didn't have the penguin tattooed on her in the orginal photo. That's an overdub or palimpsest or whatever.
Nor was it originally captioned as she was a "slut." That's rather tasteless, but jeez, you should see the rest of the site. No, maybe you shouldn't. "Good morning, I have syphilis."
Yours WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net
... but you're assuming the current audience.
Plenty of people seem to think that Linux can take over from Windows and MacOS within the foreseeable future. While this sort of issue remains, it's not even close.
If an OS is going to suceed, it has to be usable by a total technophobe who thinks Macs are complicated. Sure, you or I may not have a problem routing through an RPM and installing it manually, but your average Clueless Wonder Newbie isn't going to even think of that. If it doesn't just work, it's broken and useless. As for recompliling to your machine, forget it - unless the installation system does it automatically, which we have discussed in KOSH.
In practice, they may not actually be incompatible. You may well be able to make it work properly without too much effort. But, for your generic newbie - or experienced user at that level of knowledge, who's surprisingly common - it's incompatible, end of story.
Greg
(Inside a nuclear plant)
Aaaarrrggh! Run! The canary has mutated!
He is an imposter, and I believe he has been "bitchslapped", meaning all his posts start at -1.
--
A better list was quoted in the very same Washington Post Business section in the article directly beneath the Linux article:
"Responded Ellison: 'Microsoft has four stages in stealing someone else's idea. [The article details the Internet appliance (read Network Computer) battle, specifically Oracle-bankrolled NIC Co. vs. the gaggle of devices now shipping, including M$oft's] First is "This is really stupid." Then it's "This is stupid, but there are interesting things about it." Third is "We have a version, and ours is better." And the fourth is "What are you talking about? We invented it." That's what Bill calls innovation.'
(sigh)Oh does anyone read this far down and moderate anyway ?
Some of the nicest people I've ever played Koricky with were Microsoft PMs and coders, and if any of them still worked there...
...well they, better than anyone, knew it was over years ago.
I flee dead people.
"When we set out, our goal wasn't to convert the 400 million PC users from Windows to Red Hat Linux," Young said. "There are 6 billion people on the planet. Our goal is to build technology for the other 5.6 billion."
Perfect quote, sums up my feelings except for one thing: I'm sure glad that *I* was one of the 400 million Windows users that got converted in the slipstream.
--
Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
However, here's something to think about: KDE 2 has a built-in office suite, and it is able to import MS Office documents. When KDE 2 is ready for release (probably later this year), it will represent a threat to Microsoft on the desktop to some degree, no doubt about it. It is super easy to use, and even uses some simplified terminology, for average Joes.
Now I realize that you're just trolling for Bill, but I hope others that begin to buy into your BS, will take a look at KDE 2, as it really makes Linux simple enough to use for just about anyone.
--
RedHat, Mandrake, TurboLinux, Suse, blah, blah, blah
With 150+ distros, you don't call this fragmentation? Programs that only run on 1, 2 or 3 of the 150+ distros is not fragmentation?
Fragmentation comes from a desire for market differenatation, the desire of a company to take a commodity product and make it unique. And, lo and behold, given software only works on a few versions of Linux, I'd say the fragmentation has already happened.
If it was said on slashdot, it MUST be true!
Hopefully that standard doesn't last. Linux is a decent free Unix implementation. Many will argue (with merit) that any of the BSDs is a nicer implementation, but nonetheless Linux is pretty decent.
Still, if you've looked at *any* of the research OSes in the past ten years or so, you'll see that Unix is pretty crippled. Linux is fine for the here-and-now people, but it if it ever becomes the standard, it won't last for long. Eros looks like it might be user-usable within the next five years (assuming the developers don't get bored with it); the Hurd is fairly usable right now (I can vouch for this because I use it every now and then...now if only my network card worked in it *grumble*), and Debian GNU/Hurd might hit 1.0 within two or three years; Plan 9 (does this count as a "research OS"?) looks pretty cool, and I understand it is definitely usable, too. There are others (including an exokernel from MIT (?) that looks pretty neat).
The point is: Unix is OK, but it's not great. It's inflexible; it's inconsistent; it's illogical in parts (a large part of it seems to be quick hacks without much thought). The only thing it has going for it is that it's more flexible, more consistent, and more logical than the popular OSes in many respects. And it's free, of course. If it ever becomes a standard, though, you'd better hope it's short term.
One thing the author of the article forgot to discuss is that he did not have to install, or configure it. Now, I know for almost everyone on here, that wouldn't be a problem, but you can't tell me it is as easy as WinNT to setup...
/all/ of our hardware, led us through the simple steps of setting it all up (including our dialup account). When we were done, our network was working, the sound card worked, the video was perfect, the mouse was running...even the Epson Stylus Color 740 was auto-detected and the appropriate apsfilter and ghostscript packages installed. This one is definitely ready for consumers.
As others have pointed out, he did try to install Corel Linux and found it to be easy.
I just wanted to jump in here and mention that, a few weekends ago, my wife and I took some time and tried lots of different operating system installs just for the heck of it. We performed the installs on my computer, which normally runs SuSE 6.4 quite well. Epson Stylus Color 740 printer, 3Com 3C905B ethernet, external modem, SoundBlaster AWE64 sound card, Sony 100GS monitor, and Diamond v550 video card. Pretty mainstream, boring hardware (except maybe the printer).
The OS's/distributions we installed were:
- Debian GNU/Linux
- Corel Linux Deluxe
- Red Hat Linux 6.2
- Slackware 7.0
- SuSE Linux 6.4
- OpenBSD 2.6
- FreeBSD 3.3
We just went through the installs of each, accepting the defaults and pretending we knew nothing of UNIX, but did know the names of our hardware devices. We were going for typical consumer knowledge level.
Using that methodology, Slackware didn't install - it bombed out trying to write LILO to the floppy, then said it couldn't write it to the hard drive either. Said there wasn't space on the floppy or the hard drive (16GB hdd). I fooled with it a bit and eventually got it installed, though I had to use more than general consumer knowledge to do so. Once installed, it was OK, but it didn't detect any of my hardware. Not a good consumer distribution.
Debian installed OK, but all those questions after it's copied the packages to the disk were horrid. Of course, Debian doesn't try to be a consumer OS, so this probably isn't a fair assessment of the distribution itself. The fact remains though that a consumer would have a horrible time with it.
Corel Linux seemed pretty slick, but it didn't detect much more than our monitor, mouse, and video card for us. Setting up the printer, modem, and ethernet was our problem after installing, and no consumer's going to know how to do that. Oh, and it left us with a blank root password, which is really bad. Again, not something I'd recommend for consumers.
Red Hat was about the same as Corel (although it spontaneously spit out the CD and rebooted during the package install phase the first time around; I had to re-start the process thereafter and it went smoothly). It detected what Corel Linux did, and again left it to us to figure out printer configuration and so on after the install. Again, not for your average consumer.
SuSE Linux 6.4 was the best. We'd been upgrading right along, so hadn't used yast2 at all. Well, I'd tried out 6.3 at work, and hadn't been impressed with it. But 6.4 does it right: it detected
OpenBSD's install was elegant...if you're a UNIX afficianado. Following the examples in the little booklet that comes with the CD would be fine, but the result would be an install that gives you no pre-setup hardware beyond a network card. You'd have to run XF86Setup yourself to do monitor, video card, and mouse. And as for printers, well, you'd have to roll your own filter/driver setup. Same with the sound card. Definitely not for consumers. (I love it as a server OS, though, and as I mentioned in a previous post, we use it there now.)
FreeBSD was pretty much like the average Linux install. No recognition of the sound card, printer, or even the modem, but the normal setup does give you an opportunity to get the X stuff going. It's not automated, though, and would be very confusing for the average consumer. Again, not a consumer level OS.
So, of those we checked out, the only one I'd recommend for consumers is SuSE 6.4. It does it right. Of course, after it's installed, the user will have to learn some UNIX admin stuff over time, but out of the box he or she will get a very usable workstation.
As for me, I ended up switching to FreeBSD. As someone who knows UNIX well enough (and who enjoys learning new things), it was the ideal OS for me. I ordered 4.0 and the Handbook, and I've been happily using it since then.
You lost me when you claimed Linux has lost the stability advantage. Time between blue-screen crashes in Windows NT: approx. 2 days. Time between blue-screen crashes in Windows 2000: approx 2 weeks. Time between OS crashes/any kind of instability in Linux: ... still waiting for one . . . .
It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
" In other words, total world domination.
But in a good way."
This is exactly the atraction to Linux and open source in general. Companies competing to add features while making all the source available back to users to prevent lock in. Users can't loose.
Right now, you can get the same thing from ms, but everything they do is a "trade secret" protected by the never ending patent called DCMA (Digital Copyright Millenium Act). This locks in users to the ms way, like it or not.
This will be the second big shift in the computer industry in recent years. IBM lost share in the 80s and ms will loose share 2000 and beyond and the timing of Linux and open source couldn't have been better.
___
You know, when you make posts like this and use terms like "windoze", it makes you sound like a mindless zealot who refuses to see reality.
What's the ''killer app'' in Windoze for the desktop?
Oh, innumerable games, Photoshop, Illustrator, printing that works right for complex docs, IE (which is far superior to anything -- if you can't admit that, that's a sure sign that you aren't facing reality), Quicken, Quickbooks (or Peachtree, take your choice), Filemaker, Quark, Pagemaker, and yes, Office, which is far superior to any other suite on Linux (unless you're writing a letter to grandma, in which case StarOffice is fine). Do I really need to go on?
And as you admit, all the Gnu tools run fine on Win2K. I use them all the time, in fact.
Face it, when it comes to desktop productivity, you are not using Linux because it's better. You are using it because it's not Microsoft. That's fine if that's a good enough reason for you. But at least be honest about the reason.
Personally, I choose whatever tool works the best. Unix for the server (Linux is not even the best version of Unix, by the way), Win2K for the desktop apps. I have to say, it's nice to see clearly rather than waste time with inferior software (e.g., Netscape).
--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
You make some damn good points. I upgraded from NT4 to Win2k about a week ago, and was PISSED when it hosed my LILO installation and I could no longer boot into Linux (the Release Candidates of Win2k didn't do this, so I wasn't expecting it to.)
:-), and Microsoft Access (for work only... stupid secretaries and stuff need access to the main campus Oracle database and I'm the one who has to create the Access/VBS interface... argh, I hate VB). Until there are versions of these for Linux (at the very least, 3D Studio MAX, Bryce, Painter, and either IE or a finished Mozilla) I'm going to have to use Win2k as my main desktop.
Anyway, I decided I'd play around with Win2k for a bit and then get LILO working again and go back to Linux for real work. I haven't yet though - no need to. Win2k does everything I need for a desktop (besides development, but I do that mostly on my Alpha anyway.) I use 3D Studio MAX, Bryce 4, Photoshop (although I like Gimp better), Illustrator (Linux's Illustrator-wannabees are terrible - ever try KIllustrator? Ugh), Poser, Painter 6, Internet Explorer 5, Microsoft Word (occasionally... I prefer vi with LaTeX or DocBook though
Until I upgraded from NT4 to Win2k, working in Windows was painful and I did it as infrequently as possible, but Win2k is very pleasant to work with, and relatively stable too.
Don't get me wrong - I love Linux, and I use it for all my server tasks (all my data is stored on my Alpha running Samba, I can't risk letting Win2k fuck it up. Windows is only for running Apps, IMHO, storing important data under Windows is a mistake), and my email and web server is running on the Alpha as well, but Win2k definately stomps Linux in the desktop area. Even for me, a hardcore Unix user.
--
What programs are those? I've seen software that's marketed as only RedHat, for example, but that doesn't mean it doesn't work on other distributions. I haven't had any problems with software being distribution-specific.
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
It's odd... the Slashdot readership seems to be changing. This site has always been pro free software and open standards, and anti proprietary software and closed standards. That's the ethical stance to take, and there's no more necessity to present the other side of the story than there would be to present "the other side of the story" than the mainstream media would do when reporting on the arrest of a homicidal maniac.
Objectivity in media is, in any case, a lie, invented by wire services so that they could sell their canned reports to both left and right wing newspapers. Every publication is informed by the views of its management and staff ; it's more honest to do as Slashdot does, and just declare your biases up front.
So I wonder what draws all these trolling incoherently pro-MS people here, with their extremely thin arguments, and studied reluctance to ever engage an interlocutor by responding to a refutation. It frightens me to think that people might be such dupes as to actually think that MS has been a force for good (other than MS employees, who have plenty of motivation to deceive themselves, or who take comfort in the positive efforts of their own ethical group within the belly of the beast (remember though the admonition that it is impossible to do good within an evil system - this is what i try to live by, though i realise that many sincere and intelligent people disagree))... so, in order to avoid the yawning chasm of that thought, i prefer to believe that these pro-MS trolls are one guy at an IP-spoofed terminal at Redmond Marketing.
Please let it be so.
[ hypermedia | virtual worlds | human interface | truth | beauty ]
Hypermedia, virtual worlds, human interface, truth, beauty.
Corporations operating in a capitalist economy don't walk on egg-shells, tap on the shoulder, smile, and nicely elbow each other out. They ruthlessly cut each other down. This is known as "hostility", and is commonly seen in all industries (except the tobacco lobby, where they are all buddies fighting the evil govt.).
Now...lies. When companies make products, they generally hire a bunch of people whose job it is to say that the product does good things, and not say that it does anything bad. These people are known as "marketing dudes". It is their job to tell lies, and they use space on printed paper and short intervals of time between predictably formulaic TV programmes to say how good the product it. These are known as "advertisements", and are a sophisticated and more entertaining form of lies. (Sometimes these go on forever, and these are known as "infomercials", and were invented by Ross Perot).
Sometimes, a company gets a brilliant idea - they can make their product in a certain way, so that other products can interact with their products only as they like it. These are called "standards". Companies battle over these to the death (see "beta vs. VHS", "AC vs. DC", "viagra vs. rhino horns") and the winner makes lots of $$$. The loser gets nothing.
Now, let's consider 2 scenarios.
1) All companies in the software industry were hostile and have always ruthlessly lied and cheated to gain the upper hand, using the techniques described above.
Or...
2) Before Microsoft came along, the software industry was veritably like the garden of eden. Companies cooperated and followed standards, and never tried to use their dominance (example - IBM with its mainframes, DEC with their servers). Everything was cheap and plentiful, and all the companies lived in harmony. There were no lies and hostility. Then came along evil Microsoft. It introduced an atmosphere of fear and hatred and hostility and lies. Companies started HATING each other and trying to DESTROY one another. And that's when the rot began. If Microsoft had not been around, none of this would have happened, and we would have lived in a wonderful world of magical soft music and nicely interacting software and hardware that meshed flawlessly to create a universe of little red LEDs and undying bliss.
I wonder which of these is true.
On the desktop, people use applications, not operating systems, to get work done.
Until Linux gets some applications that are clearly superior to the ones in Windows, it will never get any significant penetration. People need a really good reason to switch, and there just isn't one when it comes to Linux -- but there are a whole slew of negatives.
I mean, what's the "killer app" in Linux for the desktop? There are no end-user apps that I can get that are better under Windows. With Win2K, Linux doesn't even have the stability advantage anymore.
This is not to say that Linux won't see more penetration in the server arena. I personally like Unix better when it comes to server apps. But for the desktop, there simply isn't an overwhelming reason to switch.
--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
I remember a quote Douglas Adams made during a developer conference at Apple: "We may have only ten percent of the users, but it's the top ten percent!"
"all kinds of ardent Linux lovers who are quite deluded about the readiness of Linux as a "mainstream consumer product"
Gee, thanks for that 'insightful' piece of M$ troll, Herbie J.
I'm glad you set me straight about my PC . SuSE 6.3 is the only OS on this box and it's running KDE 1.1 My scanner, zipdrive, printer, ADSL, etc., are all running perfectly. I have two office suites (Applix 5.0 and StarOffice 5.2), two graphics programs (gimp and Blender), QCad 1.0 (Autocad Lite replacement), XEphem (Astronomy), Quanta+ (Awesome HTML editor!), OCRshop, and tons of other high quality software, most free and many not available on WinXXX.
And, I haven't crashed ONCE since Linux became the only OS on this box!
Yup. You're right. I must be delusional to think that Linux is ready for the desktop.
NOT!
Go ask Bill for permission to troll someplace else.
Running with Linux for over 20 years!
http://www.washin gtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36124-2000Jun10.html
-------- This space intentionally left blank --------
As to Ballmer's first assertion: he is wrong. Sure, there aren't many client deployments of Linux yet. But that is slowly changing. Witness my company. Management is seriously showing signs of tiring of the TOC (Total Cost of Ownership) issues inherent with the Microsoft design. Not the least of which is the never-ending upgrade cycles. And many people in management are starting to understand that vendor lock-in is a Bad Thing. Sentiment towards ridding the Corporation of Microsoft lock-in is growing. The only real stopper? Dependence on Microsoft's office productivity suite. Which brings us to Ballmer's second assertion.
The way Microsoft thinks, and the way they would like to have it, of course there's nothing in there that looks like a good opportunity for them. But it's important to understand how Microsoft defines "good opportunity." To Microsoft, a "good opportunity" is one that ultimately results in absolute control by Microsoft and that locks the customer in to that control. So of course Microsoft doesn't see a "good opportunity" in Linux. The way Linux exists precludes any possibility whatsoever that MS will ever be able to achieve the control that they desire. Nay, that they feel they must have.
Microsoft made the mistake of grabbing a tiger by the tail once. That tiger was Java. They aided its market penetration--no doubt thinking that they'd "embrace and extend" it to death. The developer community nearly overwhelmingly rejected that attempt. And Sun proved not shy in taking MS to task for their transgressions. MS has effectively lost control of Java (as if they ever had it), and has thus lost the ability to either make it theirs or destroy it.
They are unlikely to repeat that mistake with Linux.
I predict that we will see no Microsoft applications, client or server, for Linux until and unless the company is backed into a corner. As they were when they found they could no longer ignore the Internet. With a little luck, we'll see just that happen.
> Puh-lease. Linux is good, but to some people its just another way to make money. That doesn't make them any better than Microsoft.
For my money [no pun intended!] there's a heck of a difference between "just another way to make money" and "screwing your customers because you've got 'em by the yang". In that light, it does make them better than Microsoft.
--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
that was once correct, but not any more. i have a "thing" with operating systems - they interest me very intensely, and so i try them out quite regularly. in the past few years, i've installed slackware 2.x, redhat 4.x, 5.x, 6.x, mandrake 5.2, 6.0, 7.0 and now 7.1, corel 1.1, windows nt server 4.0, windows 9x (probably 2-300 times), various versions of dos, freebsd, beos from 3.0 up to current... the beos installer was pretty simple, but i can *honestly* say that i have *never* seen a system better set up than the mandrake 7.1 system i installed a few days ago. it detected EVERYTHING it needed to and set them up accordingly. sound blaster live, crap onboard video, etc. win9x is relatively easy to set up, but this installer, quite honestly, put it to shame. you may prefer windows, and that's fine - to each his own. but please don't say things like this around easily influenced people and prospective linux users. it borders on propaganda...
--
DeCSS source code!
you must amputate to email me.
--
you must amputate to email me
i read all replies to my comments