Slashdot Mirror
WSJ Interview with Linus
Thanks to several of our readers who noted the public version of the Wall Street Journal's interview with Linus, conducted by Lee Gomes. Some of the standard issues - 2.4, Linux on the desktop are talked about but the statements concerning ye olde Mindcraft tests are particularly interesting.
...just because they leave the office? Linus must think so, according to this: "Windows is still a no-brainer for most people," he said, adding it will take Linux "perhaps five or 10 years" to catch up, at least for home-computer users. But he said average business users might move to Linux sooner, perhaps by next year.
I don't quite understand how it can be as soon as next year, but then suddenly it will take at least 5 years. The users being discussed as *business* are the same people who go home at the end of the day. It would seem to me that it's more likely that if someone uses Linux at work that when they get home they will be familiar and proficient with it already and thus MORE likely to use it, not less. Naturally if they are more likely to use it, then they're more likely to use it *AT HOME* as well.
I think Linus is way off with his numbers.. It's either going to happen in the next year, or not - take your pick.
With RPM-based systems (RedHat, Caldera, SuSe, etc.), you can find out where a certain file comes from thusly:
I know what each system file does and where it is and how they interact, and how brain-dead certain things are.
Hmmm, but do you know what each and every registry key does?
If you want a simple-to-understand Linux, one route to go is to get Slackware and install only the "A" and "N" series, installing the minimum number of packages to get up and going on the 'net.
From an advocacy standpoint, I actually prefer the complexity of Linux. A desert is far simpler than a jungle, but a jungle has far greater diversity. Linux is a jungle, with different programs doing more the less the same task competing in the evolutionary pool of Linux users. Evolution may not always be neet, but it usually generates the most interesting results.
- Sam
The secret to enjoying Slashdot is to realize that it should not be taken too seriously.
First, all you've done is translated the command line tool to a graphical one. The only advantage is that all your options are laid out in front of you. Yes, that helps the user who is unfamiliar with the tool. But take a longer view of the user's lifetime interaction with the computer--it's foolish to optimize the entire machine for the first few minutes/days/months when the user doesn't know what's going on.
Why not do something like what SMIT does on AIX? Allow the push buttons, but also give access to the direct syntax to be executed? I actually like that a lot when dealing with rather complex commands that are potentially catastrophic.
This is an ex-parrot!
It's funny, I feel the same way about windows. I know how Unix systems work, I feel comparitively lost on a Windows system. It feels much less logical to _me_.
That's rediculous. How about this? Windows is a commodore automatic wagon (holden.com.au fer you yanks), and linux is an s2000, not a bloody porsche.
And an s2000 is useless where your granny needs it- in a carpark and between home and the local pokies. 6 speed, tail-happy if you don't know what you're doing, and easy to stall (light flywheel, revvy, and good clutch). The're both ready for the highway (or sitting-on-top-of-your-desk), but only one is ready for joe schmoe.
In short, when they say desktop, they mean people who want their computer to be as easy(?) to work as their vcr, and right well they should. I can put a sun ontop of my desk and use it as a desktop, but you go to dell, you buy it, you plug it in, and it works, and you can type letters and play games. That's what they mean by ready for the desktop.
Gfunk007
Send lawyers, guns, and money!
Absolutely. Upgrading Windows is like trying to move a Windows app from one dir to another. Theoretically, you should be able to just change a few registry keys and be done, but you're almost always better off just uninstalling starting from scratch. Oh well....
--o You're just jealous cause the voices talk to me and not to you! o--
though I've been a UNIX user for 12 years Piker. 17 years. Back in the days of 4.1BSD on a Vax 11/780. And Unix V7 on a PDP-11/70.
The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
Statments like the one above (and like the first and last sentence in the comment I'm replying to) have become far too common on Slashdot, when people express "controversial" (such as pro-MS) opinions. Almost invariably, the comment gets moderated to +4 or +5, regardless of its actual merit, as moderators bend over backwards to be "fair" to the poster and their views.
If a post is truly worthy of attention, even if it goes against the accepted wisdom around here, it will generally get moderated up - konstant, a member of the Microsoft Borg, often got +4's and +5's - and deserved them as he usually posted informative, articulate stuff.
I'd like to suggest a new moderation rule - comments containing the phrase "I'm going to lose karma for this" or similar stuff, regardless of their other merits, should be moderated down regardless of their other merits. Hopefully this might reduce the incidence of what appears to be a new form of karma whoring. If anybody agrees with me, I'd even propose altering the moderation guidelines to specifically recommend this.
I don't really like commenting on moderation at all, but this kind of thing is driving me crazy.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
Don't worry, you will get better :)
Be happy for what you have. I can assure you that things are not getting any better in an all MS shop. Oh wow! My NT box made 4 days of uptime! WEEEEEEE! BSOD.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
But I am praying for the day something that doesn't suck comes along.
Look no further!
Just use opera, fast small and very capable and it almost never crashes.
Albeit the unix version sucks horrible, but it is just beta there.... windows verson works like a charm though
I agree with nearly everything you said.
I think you thought that you were disagreeing with me when you said each has advantages and disadvantages. Actually
you were echoing my point. On desktops where Linux systems come out ahead in advantages, it is quite ready for the
desktop.
I have to disagree with the "average user" idea, though.
My Dad is an "average user," but he doesn't play games, and he doesn't watch video on his system.
He uses the browser, word processor, spreadsheet, a database manager (and several DBs) and SMB file and print
sharing. All of which can be done at least as well (and less expensively) on a GNU/Linux system.
Why doesn't he? Because the media (and now even Torvalds?!?) tells him he should keep shucking out the bucks to
Redmond!
He won't listen to me because "Open systems guys are a bunch of irresponsible longhairs."
Argh.
I think you also assume that I want Linux systems to "overtake Windows as a desktop OS". I don't want this any more
that I want Porsches to overtake minivans as highway vehicles. But I would object to them being portrayed as inferior, or
needing to "catch up" with minivans because of there lesser grocery toting ability. Especially if I drove one.
I also agree that "Linux" (actually XFree86) could stand to improve in performance related tasks (notably video and 3D)
This would make GNU/Linux (which, at this point might be better called GNU/Apache/XFree86/Linux) systems a more
well-rounded desktop. Not that it would benefit my Dad (the average user) any.
Unfortunately I agree. Ok, maybe I'm not as K-l33t as hardcore linux advocates, but I don't think Linux is ready for my desktop, for a few simple reasons. One, which is not Linux's fault at all, is games. The second, though, is the most important: give me standards or give me death! I'm a Unix _user_. I'm also a programmer. I don't think I'm dumb. But what annoys me to *hell* is the apparent (perception, if you want) disorganization, and non-standardization of Linux. Ok, this is probably a flamebait rant...
Sure, this isn't the kernel...the kernel is a breeze to recompile and modify...it's a joy. But the file system, the programs, are like somebody just dumped their totally messy desk overflowing with papers into your computer. How many damn formats and names of configuration files that need to be hand-edited are there? Where are they? How many damn binaries whose purpose are completely undecipherable are hiding in wierd places symbolically linked from some other strange place. How many different packaging mechanisms are there? Administration utilities? Things that can only be done by bizarre scripts that break when you install something new?
Maybe I'm just anal, and maybe I just don't have enough experience with it yet, but there is just too much damn stuff to try to cram into your head just to use the system. I mean, DOS and Windows suck ass, but at least I *understand* how they suck...it fits completely within my head - I know what each system file does and where it is and how they interact, and how brain-dead certain things are. Given any random Linux system and it's a Sherlock novel to try to figure out what the hell is going on. I mean, sure, the system works pretty well, whether or not you understand the arcane steps you are undertaking...but I'm just one of those people who *requires* themselves to understand what's going on. And I can't stand using a system that I don't comprehend.
Sure, this is probably not such an indictment of Linux as a whole...probably I just need to give it more time and everything will magically fall into place. But an ideal system would make sense from the start, and wouldn't give you hundreds of redundant and/or conflicting options or ways to do the same mundane thing.
Hopefully I put a non-luddite perspective on this. I'm not the elitest hacker, but I can recompile the kernel and applications, and administer servers etc. I'm just totally jaded at the apparent (whether it's real or not, that is the perception a new user gets) lack of standardization and clear ways to do things.
Or maybe I'm just overly disgruntled by wasting a week putting Linux on this Thinkpad (finally succeeded).
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
There is no Z5, but there is a BMW M5(sport sedan) and X5(SUV).
--
Don't lead me into temptation... I can find it myself.
that didnt stop Bill Clinton!
Buying a Dell computer is equivalent to dropping the soap in a prison shower.
Except for the fact that he mentioned the new kernel update being significant, not much was said that hasn't already been known.
I look forward to seeing the new kernel because Linus says "It is painful for me to go back and use the 2.2 kernel". Either thier have been some major significant updates, or some modifications have been made to make it easier. But just the same old stuff people like us have known for months. Pretty Redundant.
Just a tack on, people really shouldn't joke about Linus being the leader of "the linux movement", I've got a friend that was ready to rise up against the "evil oppressors of Linux" when we saw him speak at the Linux World Expo in NY in Feb. Hey there was enough of us to do it!
"Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality." -Jules de Gautier
He also said that, by not having a staff, he can ignore the sorts of routine administrative details that would bog him down.
I want a job where I don't need a staff because I can just ignore the stuff I don't like!
Am I the only one who considers Linus one of the most accessible leaders in the tech industry? The man is like the Finish brother in law I never had.
You have to get the WSJ's point of view here - Linus has never gone out of his way to speak to reporters, and probably never will; he is not a "good source" for the reporters as he doesn't need their approval, so won't pander to their needs for snappy soundbytes and copy they can edit however their editor wants the story slanted this week.
--
-=DaveHowe=-
Should have hung on for the Z5 though, less barbie & ken.
~ppppppppö
Finnish Karate Champion...and where would one come across this useful tidbit of info? For some reason geek gods and karate champions aren't exactly on the same end of the spectrum in my mind...but hey, more power to him :)
-=MeMpHiStO=-This may also be a symptom of the author thinking of Linux as an OS like Windows which comes in a nice shrinkwrapped box, containing everything (M$ thinks) you need.
But overall I think the article is very well-written. I certainly like to see things like this in the Wall Street Journal:
Meanwhile, his creation has become so popular with programmers that it represents one of the most serious competitive threats to Microsoft's influence of the software industry.
:-)
Every expression is true, for a given value of 'true'
Maybe because about 95% of secretaries are female? It may not be just but it is a fact (or at least a reasonable guestimation).
:wq
Yeah, getting it do do anything worthwhile is a real "brainer". Wanting to use it is a no-brainer in the sense of requiring no brain (as opposed to not requiring a brain) ;)
I'm still convinced that the Mindcraft benchmarks were rigged, in the choice of hardware if nothing else. Complaining doesn't do a lot of good, though, so best to fix things and get on with it.
Judging from his comment on 2.4 versus 2.2, I think Linux is progressing from hacker-class to enterprise-class. Maybe I'm reading too much between the lines, but it seems like Linux has gone from struggling to arrived, with the gratious comments regarding Windows placating someone who is no longer a contender.
Linus's wife, Tove, is some kind of european death-goddes karate champion, so don't talk bad about her or she'll kill you.
I remember a great interview with his parents, where his dad was talking about how all he ever thought about in school was getting laid.
Now THAT is the kind of guy I want heading up my OS development.
--
blue
i browse at -1 because they're funnier than you are.
Actually that would have been the only point of the article as to target a different audience. I really dont know why it made it to Slashdot. Esspecially under the context that it did. It was nothing special.
"Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality." -Jules de Gautier
He uses the browser, word processor, spreadsheet, a database manager (and several DBs) and SMB file and print sharing. All of which can be done at least as well (and less expensively) on a GNU/Linux system.
SMB, hell yeah. Not just as well, but better. But browsing? Better than IE on Windows? Is there some other Linux browser that I'm unaware of?
The cake is a pie
This was actually a very good article, despite what those nitpickers say. The simplifications in the article were necessary to give information about the current situation to the general (non computing public.)
A) When the guy said a new release of the Linux operating system was going to be released, he was correct in not talking about the kernel. People (specifically the target of the magazine, investors) have gotten to understand the term operating system, and while using kernel would be more accurate it would have detracted from the article.
B) When the guy simplified and said that MS tests showed Linux was better than Windows, he also had a point. Instead of talking about how pure TCP/IP throughput was less, he focused on exactly what these tests meant to the average investor. To them, it meant that Windows beat Linux, and was thus better. However, he correctly stated that Linus and the other had taken notice of those problems and fixed them.
C) When they said that Linus only concerned himself with the technical details, not the UI, he was correct, though not accurate. Most people consider the UI just as part of the OS as the kernel. To them, it would really complicate things (especially in an investment journal) if they talked about how X was a seperate library, and GNOME was the GUI and all. They simplified it, and just stated that Linus didn't deal with the GUI, which is in fact true.
Now many of the things stated in this article were inaccurate, but they all seemed to be correct. I would have gotten into more detail about the tests, and not blanketed by saying "Windows was better" but in the end, a lot of people precieved it that way. Though he didn't use the correct terms, or accurate details, the overall impression that he gave satisfied his intenets (to show prospectives for Linux companies to investors in rise of a new release) and gave the right impression about subjects like Linux's involvement with the GUI and the MS tests.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
It appears that it's impossible to exceed a karma of 50 points. And those fifty points are rapidly collected, often from the things that you feel are most inflammatory.
I'm relatively new to Linux; though I've been a UNIX user for 12 years (I was on the Internet before hypertext), my RH6 installation was my first ever experience as being logged in as root.
Teething into this thing for the past few months, I've got Apache running, Samba, Xwindows with AfterStep and Gnome, all the while firewalling my DSL connection from my home LAN. Now, I'm working on a webserver for my work, a division of Litton. I've been living and breathing Linux (RH6 and now 6.2) for this time.
It's had its ups and its downs, and I'm glad to see that someone else agrees with me. For my desktop machine, I'd be perfectly happy with Winodws 95B if it didn't crash all the time, and if I could make one window not steal focus from another. But Windows as a server? No way.
Linux on the desktop? Not yet. Soon, but not yet. Fortunately, Linux appears to have evolved the opposite way from most other operating systems, with sophisticated technical features in place, secure and fully developed, as the user interface and software base starts to mature.
As for the choice of Red Hat, well, for a Linux newbie, it has everything I need, all the support I need is just a few mouseclicks away, and hell, there are even books on RH6 in the discount bin at the computer book store. From everything I hear, SuSE and Debian are probably technically superior, but that does me no good if I can't figure out how to get my network cards working.
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
Now is the time to rise up brothers and sisters, the movement needs you :)))
~ppppppppö
The wall street journal wasn't meant for you. As far as an investor is concerned, GNU+KDE+X+kernel=Linux. All the development that has been going on behind the scenes really doesn't count. What matters is that a new version of the OS (which is a decent simplification of the concept of the kernel, especially in a monolithic system) is forthcoming.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Exactly. The freewheeling lack of centralized control that makes Linux such a hacker's paradise (and therefore gets it into servers everywhere) is also the number one liability blocking its adoption into a desktop environment.
Silly questions, like who will be the standard desktop - Gnome or KDE - serve to confuse new users, slow down developers and generally make the OS less attractive to users. Though you and I like the freedom.
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
How's he gonna find a honey, I mean isn't that how Bill found Melinda?
While I appreciate Mr. Torvald's writing the original kernel that ran one disk (kinda), the rest of the work has been done pretty much by the Community. I never used a computer until I was 40 (I'm 61 now) and so obviously am not a programmer, yet I use Linux exclusively on my desktop. From dos->win3.1->3.11->95->98->linux has been quite a trip. How any one could think that linux isn't ready for the desktop amazes me. They obviously either haven't used it, or have Microsoft's source code etched on the neurons in their brains. Sadly, Windows seems to have become some kind of benchmark in that all other OSes are compared to it. Hello there? Linux is different and can't be compared to Windows. As a working envirenment it is infinitely richer and more varied and my machine hasn't crashed since I relegated windows to the void several months ago. Running linux as opposed to running windows is analogous to a go-cart driver operating the space shuttle. It takes a little learning but more importantly, it takes a fair amount of unlearning. It's the operating system we should be teaching our kids in school. I dont much worry about the numers of users but if you're the type that gets antsy about the size of the crowd you hang with think about this: The third world isn't gonna pay Microsofts outrageous license fees if there is a superiour free OS available. Desktops in China will have KDE and Gnome desktops up, running on Red Star Linux. Windows releases have been simply bug fixes since 3.11 and the OS really has nowhere to go if it is to retain backward compatability, which is why Gates and Friends won't be unhappy to see Microsoft split. At least Billy won't. He's the new software honcho. Watch how fast the apps get ported to Linux after the split. Windows always left me with the feeling that I'd been wrestling pigs in the mud. Linux lets be feel that I'm on the edge of something new, exciting and special. The folks that devote their time to advancing our OS have my undying admiration and my heartfelt thanks. In a world of really tawdry commercial bullshit, Linux is a standout. Computers are for folks. So is Linux. We've won. Its just to good to believe, sometimes.
Lucky you!!
For the price you bought your coaster, I could buy a cool coffee table!
Unix is simple. It just takes a genius to understand its simplicity. -Dennis Ritchie
You should use BeOS if you want low audio latency.
Wah!
He has no trouble admitting the shortcomings of Linux, nor any trouble touching on its strengths.
Indeed, although he admits to spending some time "in denial" after Mindcraft <grin>
It is certainly refreshing, and an indicator for an attitude the linux community as a whole seems to have drifted slightly away from - if linux doesn't do a task as good as $FOO, then either fix linux, or accept that $FOO is specialised to do that task and Linux is a general purpose OS. Yes, the fact that Linux wasn't really multi-processor ready for IP-heavy tasks, as the TCP/IP stack could use but a single processor. No, the correct solution isn't to flame the testers, or to stick your fingers in your ears and hope it will go away - Linux can and *will* have those abilities given enough work, so you should either do the work or support those who can.
--
-=DaveHowe=-
He. For me, Windows is often a "brainer". A real sick, twisted, and somehow retarded brainer, that is. ;^)
main(O){10<putchar(4^--O?77-(15&5128 >>4*O):10)&&main(2+O);}
Accually audio folks that I know of want linux for a more inportant reason: it doesn't crash.
for those who don't know, music has magical moments where everything clicks and works. The recording of the 73rd time through the same song might be as much as 1000 times better then the previous times. If you don't get the song recorded that time you missed the magic. Sure you might get it again, but not for a few hundred more times.
Check out this link.
I don't want this to come out all "Linux R00lz" or anything but....
Linux in the OS dept. is like women in the workplace. They have to be better than the competition. If they are as good as the competition or even only a little bit better, that's not good enough. (which is the current situation IMO). Unfortunately, being a little bit better than Windows doesn't cut it. Linux must be spectacularly better in every way. Linux already has faster and smoother installation, nicer looking widgets, and much better "back-end" stuff. But it's not good enough, because if Linux is going to be recognized as a leader in the OS space, then it *must* be ~astoundingly~ better in every area, including in ease of use. Being just as good or even only a small amount better than the rival is not good enough.
my US$0.02
Check out this page for details. This page is a little out of date and doesn't have the latest on Andrew Morton's new patch. But it will tell you a little about the project.
It's sad to see Avery Brooks sell out to Big Blue. Considering that IBM makes NT4 and Linux workstations with USB ports. One operating system never supported USB, the other guarantees never to support it correctly.
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
You know, right after I hit submit, I realized I forgot to add the disclaimer of "please correct me if I'm wrong, etc, etc..." ;-) Thanks for the updated information, this is certainly exciting news. Has this stuff been tested under relatively high loads? With Linux 2.2, I can still fairly easily interrupt simple audio output when a couple processes decide to eat CPU or thrash the disk for a bit. Not that you would run critical realtime stuff on a highly loaded machine, as you point out below.
As for cron, it's a DDT (Don't Do That!). There's no need to run cron on a DAW, so disable it.
True, I'd certainly want to kill off (or not start to begin with) any non-essential processes on a DAW. (I wonder if MacOS X will have anything cron-like running by default that could interfere with realtime stuff) I guess my point was with preemptive multitasking, the user has to do some work to be sure nothing is running in the background that might wake up and disrupt realtime processing. Of course, maybe someone could come up with a Linux-DA distribution or something with all background services, etc turned off. But the one thing I still love about cooperative multitasking in this situation is that I don't have to worry if I forgot to kill a couple background processes. They just won't get any CPU until I'm done. It's just the peace of mind of knowing that nothing will interrupt me, without having to doublecheck. ;-)
Say hello to zMac.
Let's talk browsers.
They all suck ass. Netscape is SUCH a memory hog. I am very disappointed the way Mozilla has bloated. I just hope that
it will fork and someone will strip it down to a nice, standards based engine and a decent interface. Or maybe Konq will
save the world.
But as for IE, it is often prettier, and supports more crappy proprietary extensions, but it sure crashes a lot. I run it on Win2k
sometimes, Win2k is a lot more stable than Win98.
All told, I think they all suck more or less equally. But I am praying for the day something that doesn't suck comes along.
Let me downlaod HotJava . . .
-Peter
Yes. Benno Senoner's latencytest finds that even with 80% CPU usage, we get no drop-outs. I just realized that Benno has put up a page at www.linuxdj.com with an Audio-Quality FAQ. Just look under the Dropouts section.
Of course, maybe someone could come up with a Linux-DA distribution or something with all background services, etc turned off.That would be nice. Once ALSA and the latency patch are solidified and make it into the official kernel, perhaps this will happen. There is also the news of Cubase seriously considering porting VST over. Being able to run VST plugins under Linux would be nice!
Yes, it's true, see for yourself: My Geek of the Week page
I tried using Linux; all I could manage to do was get it to play Quake (I tried to network it with my other win2k computer, but it refused!)
Windows 2000 is just plain easier to install on many computers at once. You can make an "unattended" install file to set most of the preferences. This way, you can sit through less of the install process! I haven't even seen Linux do that, and its installation procedure is so inefficient, having to uncompress thousands of files taking 7 seconds per tarball while Win2k zips along, 50ms per file on average (excluding DRIVER.CAB, which is a lifesaver sometimes!)
As far as being mistreated (pulling the plug), if the two OSes were statues, Win2000 would be steel and Linux would be ice. Linux HATES to be shut off without unmounting filesystems. As for Windows 2000, it GIVES YOU THE OPTION to check file systems, and any missing driver files are automatically restored (I once saw someone delete NTOSKRNL from the /system32 directory. When the folder was re-opened, there it was, back again! As for Linux, god forbid if someone deletes your /etc/fstab or anything else in there!)
Just to recap:
Linux: Ice statue; melts under any heat; need an LCSE just to edit your /etc/fstab file.
Windows 2000: Steel Statue; takes the heat; MUCH easier to set up.
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
As someone who supported desktops for Dell I can testify that most users are dumbasses. There is, however, a significant
number of "non-hackers" (or whatever) who would be better off running Linux, but don't because PC magazine (which is
horribly misnamed) keeps saying that it is "not ready for the desktop."
So, if "desktop" is a euphemism for "dumbass" I apologize for being obtuse. If not, I can attest that in many cases installing
and using Linux (say, Red Hat or Mandrake) is easier than installing and using Windows.
I also have to say you picked a poor example with the VCR. I have managed to bang a "not ready" Linux distro into a quite
useable desktop system for me and for my wife (Jo Schmoe) yet my VCR insists that it is 12:00 (blink, blink) (I may have
found the only acceptable usage of the blink tag, but cant use it on slashdot! argh!)
It's all pretty simple. One of the main reason I run Linux is so that I can know and understand *everything* that's happening on my system.
Pick up a copy of "Red Hat 6 Unleashed" at your local bookstore. Read it. It gives an extensive overview of the operation of most of a Red Hat Linux system. Other systems are similar.
-- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
I've used opera a few times.
Couple of problems.
1. Can't stand nagware. Won't shell out for software unless it is pretty damn good (Opera is about an 8, I won't pay for less
than I 10) (Great, now I can never run for public office, because that will be quoted out of context.)
2. No Java. Now Java ain't no friend of mine, but I really can't get along without it at this point.
3. As you say, UNIX versions suck.
-Peter
No, they're not. When you open a file in Microsoft Office 97, you get the Office 97 file requester, even if you're running Windows 2000. When you open a file in Office 2000, you get the Office 2000 file requester, even if you're running Windows NT 4 or Windows 95.
The situation you have described is the UI guideline that Microsoft expects you to follow, so that a well-behaved app written for Windows 3.1 could look and feel more like a Windows 95 (or 98, or NT, or 2000) app. Microsoft Office does not obey this guideline. Try it.
For more information, click here.
A Dick and a Bush .. You know somebody's gonna get screwed.
War is necrophilia.
I think what he meant is that more businesses will realize the potential for Linux in the next year, but it will take sometime before "joe-blow" goes to thier local computer and pick up Linux and not be afraid to use it. Plus people aren't messing around with settings and customizations in the office (most aren't anyways), it is set on some generic setup and they use it as a tool. At home they try to use different fonts, install thier own software, put that picture up, post this thing on Slashdot (*grin*), etc, etc...
In Windows, it isn't hard to botch something so that your font is 4 times as big and your stuck in 16 colors, at 640X480 and for some reason you can't get on the internet, and your viewing size on your monitor has been resized to the size of a deck of cards (hey, I work in tech support, beleive me I have seen it happen).
Just think what happened when they introduced Windows 95? We just don't have some cheezy "Start Me Up" jingle to advertise Linux.
Maybe we should get one? Can anybody recommend a song?
(Just a tac-on, Don't call tech support if your 13 years old, been surfing all night and can't remove cache of your computer by yourself. It isn't my problem your mom has to use the computer in the morning.)
"Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality." -Jules de Gautier
Give me a linux distro, a roll of electrical tape, one of those Clockwork Orange type rooms, and a computer, and this can all change.
Even the samurai
have teddy bears,
and even the teddy bears
Even the samurai
have teddy bears,
and even the teddy bears
get drunk
OK, now this is a good idea. At least it solves one of the big problems: Migration from simpler UI to a more powerful UI. It still has some problems though: Like why should that jump be discontinuous?
In some ways it doesn't have to be. I wrote a fair number of "write-only" shell scripts for administering a mailing list back in the late 80's. A GUI tool that would display the commands and most especially the linkage between them graphically, by interpreting the script file, could have been very helpful in making that a less painful process.
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
Women in the workplace: nicer looking widgets, and much better "back-end" stuff. Faster and smoother installation? Uh-oh...
(Was the pun intentional, or is my mind twisted on sex? Or both?)
:-)
So multimedia will finally be good, how about movies then (mpg,avi, severel others)
KDE The Real Desktop
Plus, he has a secretary or at least someone who takes messages for him. Such horse manure.
Plus, there are clearly places where Gomes blindly rattled on and on about how Torvalds is the leader of the Linux movement. This is pure hype and even Torvalds doesn't buy into it. He knows that there are hundreds doing more work with Linux each week than him. He's working hard at an ultra secret startup, not a company that shares its source. Sheesh.
It's all hype.
Translation: Officially, I'm saying that I expect the post to be moderated into the lower regions of Hades but in reality I know that the moderators will see this and I'm expecting to get moderated to +5 immediately. ;-)
--
Have fun: Join D.N.A. (National Dyslexics Association)
I'm probably atypical, but I upgraded my thinkpad about 3 months ago to Windows 2000, and the process worked beautifully. Not only that, the built in modem which had mysteriously stopped working some months before started working after the upgrade. Much, much easier than nt35 to 40...
I totally agree, when Linuxis as consistent as MS is for its user interface guidelines and they have as much standards and documentation on how to write software then maybe the big players will adopt. If I want to create an Windows based app and I want to follow user interface guidelines on how to do so there is documentation that will allow my document to be standard and act and play like all the other MS apps just tomes of (THAT IS NOT A TROLL/FLAME!!!) ways to design an application.. Linux?????? Could someone get a clue? Thank you (Yes I klnow about Gnome foundation)
One of the major tenets of a big application and its development is full and complete documentation of it before you even write the first line of code... Why do you think things struggle with the interface so much, people tend to just hack code before really considering globally the implications of somethings.. anyways im digressing the point is things are just being done backwards and people are learning the hard way... We have all these non uniform apps. whereas if there was a document for people to follow on User Interface maybe we would have a bit more uniformity and apps taht wernet uniform could be shunned, if you guys want a cool toy then by all means keep Linux going in the direction it is but if you want to really take over the world. (who doesnt?) Then we have to keep things more structured.... anyways
Jeremy
Windows has it's place
:)
I can't agree more! The Windows 2000 CD makes an excellent coaster for my coffee mug
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
IANAKH (kernel hacker), but the big change I have seen discussed is removeing system "races." Up until 2.2, sometime two process could "compete" for the same "resource," mucking things up.
Hopefully a real kernel hacker can do a better job explaining.
"one treats others with courtesy not because they are gentlemen or gentlewomen, but because you are" --G. Henrichs
I've been waiting years for linux to be my music platform. It's very embarrasing to inform a client that the excellent performance they just did got toasted by the BSOD. Been there too many times.
A slight bit off topic: this morning I was checking out the New Products Preview section in the latest Mix Magazine (Aug 2000). The first item is an ADAT interface, and listed in the supported platforms: Linux. Wow! I wonder if they make something for my DA-88 based setup? If so, I'll write the check right now! (For those interested, it's the Delta 1010-AI from M Audio.)
Are you listening Opcode, Cakewalk, Sek'd, Digidesign, and all the rest? If you make it for Linux, and I need what it does, you'll have my money. Clear enough?
"That's where I see Linux in a few years: good front end for the end (l)users who were weaned on Windows, but with the same old shell that you can get to with ctrl-alt-f1 for when you need some real power at your fingertips."
I see the same thing...unfortunately. Why should the "real power" be limited to those who know how to use the old UI? You are implicitly assuming (and you aren't alone--even people creating UIs are doing this) that a UI needs to somehow shield people from the Power In The Box. No no no! Don't shield, harness.
I wish I could give examples of what I mean, but I just haven't spent the time necessary to firm up these concepts in my mind. All I know is this: The power is in there but most people can't get at it. That's not right and I blame the UI.
--
Linux MAPI Server!
http://www.openone.com/software/MailOne/
(Exchange Migration HOWTO coming soon)
Oh, I'm not trying to defend their actions. I believe that they have engaged in monopolistic acts, that they've quelled any sort of small (commercial, mind you) operating system from gaining any sort of wide-spread acceptance (OS/2, for instance). But there's just this fact: Their friends use Windows 9x. Their businesses use Win9x. The best games are released (first) for Win9x. This only contributes more to the no-brainer aspect.
------
I'm using kernel 2.4.0-test6 as my primary kernel on my home machine (Athlon 700, originally Mandrake 7.1). It's pretty stable for me, much better than the "inode count wrapped" errors that would fill my screen and prevent me from booting most of the time. It even has built-in support for USB (haven't tested it) and the Sound Blaster Live! card I use. Compiled in under six minutes, too. :)
:)
Oh, and about the flutes, they're only playing by themselves because their backup hasn't arrived yet.
For more information, click here.
Even if there was the "perfect" desktop, Linux still needs to be administered. There's just too much complexity built into the system to be able to make it easy for these dullards to use.
However, I'm not a masochist .. I do like the easy installation, nice GUI desktops, etc, but why should we sacrifice power to appease Windows users?
You make some good points, but when you say linux is not ready for the desktop, what desktop are you refering to? There are so many people out there with different needs, you can't expect to encompass them all. Why is everyone's attitude to try to beat microsoft out of the desktop market? (Don't get me wrong, I hate microsoft as much [or more] than the average linux user. I, for one, do not want to see more of the same shit. (i.e. homogeny). I do not want to see one big OS for everything. I hate windows, I find it too primative after growing up on Unix.
.. feeding the MSCE bullshit as there are more "Microsoft Certification schools" than gas stations now. Batman and other freaks use BeOS. Artsy dickweeds and publishers use Mac. Smelly bearded bikers and fat hairy bondage masters run *BSD. Old timers have PDPs and shit in their dungeons. Big corporations still use mainframes from the 70's. And us, in the land of peter pan and free speech, run Linux. Unfortunately, nobody cares. Linux would have to downgrade to start taking over the desktop market of Joe Shmoes.
.. Linus Torvalds
Look at how the world is now. Beginners use mac or windows. The sheep and hardcore gamers are using windows. The "power user" yuppy corporate assholes are all using windows and dumping trillions of $$$ into "NT solutions"
I run linux on my laptop, which suits me just fine. It could be a lot better, but I don't have much of a choice. The damn thing doesn't come back from suspend most of the time, and I've had problems with pcmcia cards. But is this linux's fault? No. I could go back to windows and put up with crashes, data loss, and do without all the services I've come to feel comfortable having.
I run a heterogenious network at my office. I have a windows NT server (yech.) a couple linux servers. A few windows 98 machines, a couple linux desktops, a windows 2000 machine... and guess what, they all suck. I'm not knee deep in problems here, but I do not have 100% reliability with any of them. Linux has been the best for me, but I've had a few problems with X and nutscrape. (this doesn't have much to do with linux.)
After all this rambling, I believe that the development of linux needs to progress along the same path. Make linux visable, help it out. If it will work on the desktop, then it will take over the desktop. Microsoft, monopolies, predatory marketing aside.
When am I going to find the OS???
Do I need to start writing my own? Hasn't someone else already done that? Oh yeah
Thank you for linux, sir. It may not be the best at everything... but for me, it is the best.
thank you.
There are a couple of tidbits from kernel traffic which may be helpful. One is a discussion on Joe Pranevich's DRAFT of his The Wonderful World Of Linux 2.4. The other is the DISCUSSION of the DRAFT of a PROPOSED press release which highlights the big features for when 2.4 comes out.
If you're into finding out things before they are final and are an early adopter, these may be of use to you. They are certainly not finished documents and should not be treated as such. They may contain misleading statements, misunderstandable statements, misunderstood points, mention of features that don't make it, and/or outright lies with the intention of deceit.
But for those of us who wanted to tinker with DOS, we still could. We could hop back out to the DOS prompt, re-arrange the RAM space of all the drivers from the autoexec.bat and config.sys to squeeze just that much more memory (usually to play the latest version of Wing Commander).
That's what I'd like to see Linux head towards. Keep the same *NIX shell prompt there (for God's sake, that's the best feature of Linux!) but overlay a preferably small GUI on top of it for "all the rest" who still can't understand recursive acronyms (pine/GNU, I can't count the number of times I've tried explaining them to friends just to have them stare blankly at me). But, above all, give them a choice. If they don't like Linux, give them the option of running Windows / Mac OS X / Flavor-of-the-week. If, for some reason, Linux becomes the dominant desktop O/S of choice, I hope it retains the quality of choice.
P.S: Good analogy between evolutionary biology and the software market... A lot of parallels I hadn't thought about before
------
That's strange ... I've been running Windows 2000 Proffesional at home for several months (Dual boot with Mandrake!) with no problems. What hardware are you using? I'm running a Dual Pentium II Xeon 450Mhz with an AMI Megaplex motherboard, 512MB RAM, and it works like a charm (except for lack of software).
Or rather my Finish karate demon GF can completly slay the fuck out of your wealthy society demon GF kind of linux-microsoft rivalry
Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
Regarding the floating-point stuff, presumably the problem is things like divide-by-zero exception ... well, can't you mask that?
--
It's a
-- Danny Vermin
Okay, man, ya got me.
I did actually own a PDT-11 once, about ten years ago, shortly after I moved out on my own.
It had several serial ports on the back for connecting to terminals (and came with a DEC VT-100, which I still have) and teletypes (I did get rid of the DEC LA-36, it was too fscking big).
Two eight inch diskette drives. And when you flipped up the lid, there was a processor (I think it was an 8080) and 16 k of RAM. Circa about 1976.
I *think* it was a very small client/server computer setup, but I don't know for sure; I never was able to get it to fire up, and no one seems to know what the PDT (not PDP) was.
Thoughts?
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
We should start making a list of fake user agents, and visit some of the more obvious doubleclick sites with them. I wonder how much effort it would be to make the user-agent a configurable parameter in Mozilla? for that matter, I wonder if I could feed doubleclick some or all of the following:
user-agent Moz/4.0 (Compatable; IE 7.0 MS-internal only; Linux 2.2.13/FreeX86)l anning/corporate_targets_list.htm
username B.Gates@microsoft.com
referrer: http://internal.planning.microsoft.com/business_p
<grin>
--
-=DaveHowe=-
1) Microsoft can't buy Linux
2) Windows NT outperformed linux.
Microsoft notices competitors well before they are better than MS- that's why they're still on top.
>>"We had been arrogant," he said, adding it was painful for him to admit that Windows was better than Linux,
>>at least in the areas covered by the Microsoft test.
This is great. It takes courage to admit something like this. I like it!
Thanks, that's *exactly* what I want. The most minimal Linux system that can be called Linux, to which I can add things as I understand what those things are. Typically the install (no matter how little you check) dumps mounds of strange binaries around and you can't really tell if it is necessary or not. On a laptop with a 700 MB hard drive it gets annoying having 50-100 MB worth of unknown binaries.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
So, if you do any floating point in the kernel, you fill fuck any other process that also does floating point. Bad scene.
I have a positive modifier on Troll. When I mod someone Troll their karma should go UP!
Well, I have a Red Hat 4.2 Unleashed and it is basically a compilation of random information about installing and administration and then stuff like Tk/Tcl, Perl, etc.
Doesn't seem to really be a comprehensive guide to the system, just explains the points they think are "important" (obviously that include Motif and Tcl programming).
But I'll try to find a decent reference to get my head straight.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Linux is my "overseer"? That explains a lot...
2. No Java. Now Java ain't no friend of mine, but I really can't get along without it at this point.
:) )
:)
There is java support for opera, it just isn't included. You can download it separately from their website. I never used it though so I can't say how good/bad it is.. (but hey it is java so can't expect too much?
3. As you say, UNIX versions suck.
Yeah, but that means it can only become better
Of course: We can't expect a WallStreetJournal reporter to join linux-kernel@vger to get an interview, can we?
--- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
I guess the important bit is to find some useful documentation and actually read it. You have to read all the words on all the pages, in order. =)
-- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
user-agent Mozilla/4.72 [En] (X11; U; Linux Millenium; Pentium 4; Nav)
This will leave some naive web site administrators scratching their heads for a while...
Just remember one thing: How long did it take MS to create an end-user based
operating system? Windows 3.1 was the first time Microsoft made an end user
interface anyone could use, and it still lacked many fundamental design
intricasies that were necessary. 95 was their first real success; before 3.1,
the personal computer wasn't the "toy" for the masses it is now. Linus'
figures are extremely accurate [in my eye] concerning the end-user market
usability.
The current situation with X reminds me of the early days of Windows 2.0,
where Microsoft's advertisements blatantly say "It'll help you get ready
for OS/2!"
My first Linux experience was in 1997 (redhat 4.2). Since then the following have improved dramatically
:-)
:-)
- pre-install steps (shrinkin windows partition...etc, Mandrake (http://www.linux-mandrake.com) will do that for you)
- install (pop in Mandrake 7.1 (helium) CD and watch the install. I managed to amaze many of my collegues - NT users - with the ease of install)
- Apps : thanks to KDE / Gnome competiton. We have planty of apps in a very short period.
- Support : LinuxCare for example
- Hardware : I saw Dell & CompaQ (both giving out nice freebies) in San Jose LInux Expo. Need I say more
- Awareness : This struck me pleasantly. On Linux Expo Sun Solaris 8 had 'lxrun' which will run linux binaries un modified. When is the last time we heard a big player playing cool by his 'little brother'. It is typically the other way around for survivol purposes
ALso see the Linux IPOs. Pretty mucy every one know who RedHat are
Software growth/acceptance is EXPONENTIAL. Ie slow start rapid growth (think of e^x, x > 0). So Linux will grow more than it did in the last 3 years (I witnessed).
My take is *** 3 MORE YEARS ****
if linux doesn't do a task as good as $FOO...
Hmmm. I see now that Microsoft has adopted a new marketing ploy of using hexadecimal to represent prices, thereby conserving digits and thereby giving the false appearance of a lower price. I must say, though, $3,840 is a lot to pay per seat in desktop liscensing fees. Those wiley Microsoft bastards!
And yes, I too have perl rot on the brain.
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
Personally, benchmarks have never been my reason for switching to Linux. I could care less if Windows is faster or better. I use Linux because it is FREE (as in speech AND beer.) I Linux NEVER catches up or surpases Windows (which it WILL) I would still use Linux.
Brought to you by Frobozz Magic Penguin Fodder.
"Windows has its place..."
True.
"...its place is leading the software industry.
Unless you are using the word "leading" in some sense unfamiliar to me, this is just laughable. Windows leads nothing. At my most charitable, I would characterize Windows this way: "Makes stripped down versions of existing technologies available to the average Joe".
"Linux is absolutely not ready for the desktop."
This is only partially true. I think it would more accurate to say "Linux and the desktop are not ready for each other". What's the diff? Here: Most people just don't understand what a computer can do. It's more than just a way to edit a document or send an email. A computer is a universal machine simulator. Think of that! Any machine that can be built can be simulated on a computer. That's power! Once people understand that power they will really start taking advantage of their computers--and I don't think Windows (or Macs) are up to that yet.
OTOH, claims that Linux isn't friendly enough are valid. It is unreasonable to expect a person to remember that "grep -quiet" and "grep -silent" are two different things. But let's don't through the baby out with the bathwater and delete the options. A UI is about making the computer's power easy to exploit, not about making new users feel comfortable.
--
Linux MAPI Server!
http://www.openone.com/software/MailOne/
(Exchange Migration HOWTO coming soon)
It is fundamentally untrue that "Linux is not ready for the desktop."
I use Linux as my primary desktop OS.
I am not a programmer.
I understand that it is not appropriate for most (l)users, but that does not make it "not ready."
My grandmother does not drive a Porsche, it would be too much for her, and wouldn't carry groceries well, but that doesn't make it "not ready for the highway."
In the same way, Linux does not make a good platform for Word and AOL, but that does not make it not ready.
This whole "not ready for the desktop" idea revolves around the assumption that there is some ideal desktop for everyone, and that Windows (or MacOS) is closer to this that "Linux" (really, KDE or GNOME or Windowmaker, or something) and that "Linux" has further to go towards this ideal.
I disagree. For me, customizability is king, and "Linux" takes the prize in this field. (note: BeOS might, but HW support is too weak -for me-)
Windows is not ready for MY desktop.
-Peter
And I couldn't agree with you more. Here at work, down in the guts of it, we're still running Win NT 4.0 for some of the nitty-gritty stuff, mainly so we don't have to re-train employees or re-write software. We bought Windows 2000 Professional, and tried to upgrade some of the boxes. We tried 7, and NONE of them worked correctly. One of them installed fine, but at boot up, just after it gets past the splash screens to the login prompt, it freezes. Totally. No mouse, no ctrl-alt-del, only the large button labeled "reset" on the front of the box lets us do anything. Horrible software.
------
I have to agree with most things you said, much to my chagrin. The one thing I don't agree with, however, is when people make reference to Windows being easier to install than Linux. Installing Windows 98 is not an easy task. The last 3 times I have tried to install it on my machines it has taken literally more than one day before I actually got it installed, and in one case I couldn't get it installed and had to put Win95 on that machine instead. The truth is that most computers come pre-installed with Windows and most people never touch the Windows install disk let alone subject themselves to its painful install process.
Linux on the other hand is hardly ever pre-installed and therefore I think RedHat's install process is much smoother and installs more easily than Win98 in my personal experience. Of course it still has some gotchas wrt large modern day disk drives, much like the Windows installers, but I quickly found documentation on how to overcome such problems and never could find such help with Windows installs.
But, yes, my family is fairly computer savvy and none of them run Linux and maybe only my dad could handle a computer with Linux installed and even that would require a hefty learning curve. I believe that Red Hat has for some time been concentrating on trying to make Linux easier for Joe Schmoe and have made inroads with the install process.
I think for Linux to be successful on the desktop, someone will have to fork their own version. There are many distributions now, but they all rely on Linus's kernel. If a company decides to take the kernel and tightly integrate it as a complete operating system with a gui then they might reach the masses. I don't necessarily mean the gui has to be in the kernel, just that it must be integrated with the whole system.
The end result will be a system that totally sucks for some users and a delight to others. But Linux can't be all things to all people. I think there never will be, nor should there be, a Linux "standard". After all, Linux is just a kernel, which could be a point of departure for a totally new operating system that does not even resemble the current distributions.
You had me at "dicks fuck assholes".
I think that last statement is untrue. About a month ago, many of the audio engineers you spoke of released an "open letter" to the linux-kernel mailing list. They requested that the average and max latencies be reduced (for exactly the same reasons you mention). They suggested a set of patches created by Ingo Molnar, but not integrated into the main tree. This started a flame war on linux-kernel over the validity of the patches, but the views of Linus were well-stated: he believed that reducing latency was a "serious issue" and considered it very important.
As happens with many such requests/patches, the implementation details were shouted over at length, but most of the kernel hackers seemed to be in agreement that reducing latency was a big concern.
Kernel traffic (what a great resource!) has the thread here.
This is precisely why I don't think Linux will be a viable platform for serious multimedia development for some time to come. I love Linux, I've been running it on my main PCs for 7 years now. But realtime multimedia development demands realtime response, which is difficult if not nearly impossible to achieve, guaranteed, in a pre-emptively multitasking OS. I've never used BeOS but had heard good things about it in this regard, and SGI has some nice guaranteed-rate I/O stuff and realtime process priorities in IRIX. But Linux at this point isn't that close.
What happens when I've been working on a song all night, it's 4 in the morning and I'm in the middle of recording that once-in-a-lifetime perfect take, and all of a sudden the nightly updatedb cron job kicks in, thrashing the disk and losing sync? This is absolutely not acceptable. The beauty of cooperative multitasking in the current MacOS (and the reason I own a Mac) is that the sound/video/multimedia application can take over the entire machine if it wants, allowing no other process to screw it up. Sure, in everyday use I definitely want pre-emptive multitasking, but this is one instance where cooperative can be a good thing. When I'm laying down a track or capturing video or whatever, I don't give a crap if some background task wants to run. It isn't gonna get 1 CPU cycle til I'm done capturing my data. And that's the way I want it.
That said, I'm insanely curious how Apple plans to address this issue in MacOS X. I think if multimedia producers upgrade and then start getting bitten by occasional strange latencies due to Darwin's background processes, it may alienate a lot of them. I know I read somewhere that the QuickTime developers at Apple are pissed that they can't get full control of the CPU. This suggests that OS X won't have guaranteed realtime scheduling, so I wonder if the multimedia market will force Apple to maintain Classic MacOS for awhile to come...
Whoops, looks like I started to stray a little offtopic towards the end, oh well...
Say hello to zMac.
At any rate, he does appear to have some hope of this happening at some point.
Unfortunately, the media in general (minus a few exceptions) don't make the distinction between the OS, the kernel, or one particular distribution - let alone different kernel versions. Bloomberg was alive today with "A new version of the Linux operating system...", when new versions of the operating system are being released all the time. It's unfortunate in some ways, because a problem with one aspect of one kernel version in one distribution that gets mis-publicised brings makes the whole arena look bad (which certainly isn't going to help get it onto the desktop).
Aside from mass-education, I can't figure out a good solution for this, so I'll shut up ;-)
"one treats others with courtesy not because they are gentlemen or gentlewomen, but because you are" --G. Henrichs
Um ... there is no bmw Z5; only the Z3 (about USD40K) or Z8 (about USD140K if you could get one)
-- www.globaltics.net
Political discussion for a new world
I guess I'm viewing it differently than you. Here's what I see. Instead of having to do find / -iname xyz*, you could just have a nice looking, pretty box that will have those options as a checkbox (search path, all files containing this text, disregard case, etc). I don't consider that to be shielding the power from the end user: I consider that a graphical overlay so that people who don't want to deal with the (sometimes) obscure command line interface. Any thoughts? Are we arguing the same points, or is there something different in your view? Enlighten me, please...
------
It seems to me only the wall street jopuranl would make a point of that fact he is getting rich through stocks....
Every news source has a bias (wether they admit it or not). One of the reasons I like to get 'news' from places like The Wall Street Journal and Slashdot is that I usually have a preaty good idea what the biases are (Money in the case of the journal, and linux/open source/tech in the case of Slashdot).
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
Microsoft doesn't even follow its own UI standards, though. In every version of Office, for example, the file open/save dialog box works like the one in the next version of Windows. I do NOT need nonstandard rollout menus, menus that "pull down" from the left side of the screen (vertical menu bars are IMPOSSIBLE to read), and so forth and so on. Just click on the system menu (the top-left "e" page icon) in Internet Explorer. Notice how the system menu in IE doesn't pull down; it pops out like you right-clicked an icon. It's facts like these that make me suspect that Microsoft's UI guidelines don't apply to its own internal products.
I get enough calls from people complaining that they accidentally moved their taskbar to the left side of the screen because they clicked and dragged just a teensy bit next to the Start button. That's a largely undocumented feature, one that's discovered by accident. Other features, like the "Quick Launch" toolbar (which looks surprisingly similar to the tray, and can even be accidentally moved next to the tray) confuse users into needing to learn too much about the OS. Sometimes I wish that computers still shipped with a launcher like AtEase for the Mac, that completely hides the underpinnings of the system to all users except the administrator. Want to open an app? Click on it. End of story.
For more information, click here.
I know this will come across as paranoid delusion, but bare with me:
Maybe Linus' stance on "Linux not being ready for the desktop for another 5 to 10 years" is part of a greater plan? Maybe the intention behind that statement is to divert attention from what Transmeta is currently working on - an embedded Linux for set-top consumer devices.
In 5 to 10 years, Linux may be a ripe alternative to Windows; but if Transmeta has it's way, there won't even BE a 'desktop' by then. The computer will be in your wall, your TV, your microwave, your car dashboard... All of them happily running Linux, networking and making life easier - While on the "desktop", everyone will still curse the Blue Screen of Death, none the wiser that Linux keeps humming and running the world, not even earnestly aiming for the 'desktop' niche.
-- What you do today will cost you a day of your life.
WSJ? Next think you know Linus is going to be dressing up in the old "penguin suit"!
Funny?
"a powerful and unexpected ally..."
I mean, this is the obvious question right? Considering the whole my-dad(os)-can-beat-up-your-dad(os) feeling of the Linux-Microsoft rivalry...
Blar.
Thank you. It DID suck.
And I love the fact that some pimply-faced-never-kissed-a-girl-dork moderated it down to ZERO calling it "off topic". I directly addressed the WSJ article. How can THAT be off topic?
I must confess... Some of the moderating and meta-moderating over the last year is really going to turn me off and cause me to never return to this board again. And I know others feel that way, too.
I know, you don't care, and you don't have to.
Rich...
Ignore Alien Orders
In other words, yes, there's a potential for confusion there, but it's not the one you say it is.
Wish I have that kind of money :)
Michel
Michel
Fedora Project Contribut
Yeah, I'll rise up, I'll rise up and get me a multiprocessor mobo and then I'll get that 2.4 kernel with SMP and I'll rule with world with the great taste of fish...
"CUT!"
Vote Naked 2000
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
100% agreement, aratas (am I posting like a madman, or what?) In another vein, Linux also must be dramatically better than all its competitors just to get the attention of all the pointy-haired bosses out there. Only if Linux can outperform Windows in test after test after test, then they will get the media attention that makes paradigms shift. A few years ago (has it really been that long?) there was the Linux media hype. But a lot of people and businesses I talked to said they tried it out, found out that it was severely lacking in so many areas, mainly documentation and tech support (the same stuff we hear about everyday). Also, since Linux doesn't have the monetary backing to launch a full-scale media blitz (maybe RedHat's approaching that critical mass, time will tell) and so, since they financially can't influence the media with huge sums of money, we're going to have to rely on performance. Fortunately, that's something Linux has in spades.
------
This is actually surprisingly common among the truly great, at least among scientists, where I spend most of my time. I think that there are two facets to the fact that so many really great people are modest.
One thing is that part of what makes them great at what they do is maintaining an honest assesment of their strengths and weaknesses. This is very helpful because it means that, as in the case of the Mindcraft test, they're able to go back and correct genuine errors rather than completely blowing them off as unfair.
The other thing is that they're able to be if not exactly content at least pleased enough with what they have done that they have the self confidence to admit what they haven't. This can actually enhance ones public image if you do it well, since people who are aware of ones actual accomplishments and don't need to be reminded of them are often impressed by ones apparent nonchalance at such an impressive achievement.
There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.
The USB works pretty well. I have a USB ZIP drive that i use with and the USB cradle for Hnadspring works.
As for your final comment about making the power easy to exploit, I don't deny that it's the primary function of a good UI to let the user do whatever they want with the tools they have. I'm not suggesting getting rid of grep with its infinite options, just managing to hide it behind some flashy graphics. That's where I see Linux in a few years: good front end for the end (l)users who were weaned on Windows, but with the same old shell that you can get to with ctrl-alt-f1 for when you need some real power at your fingertips.
------
Nevertheless, this is about the media and linux, not about the new kernel.
icqqm [ICQ:11952102]
Since I have started arguing on a polish newsgroup devoted to computer advocacy three or so years ago (seems like an eternity...), my point was always: I don't want any world domination. I don't even want to be in majority. I just want to be able to keep those tools and this OS I like, which works *for me*. I keep hearing about the average user. The average use of the word "average" is a misuse of statistics: as anyone can tell you, it doesn't tell you the variance, or even whether the distribution is normal. I don't want to be put in the category of an average user. Although not a techie, but a mere biologist, I use computer as a tool much of the time at work. I want to have my niche. Linux gives it to me. For me, Linux was perfect as a desktop OS two years ago! It had all I needed (with one notable exception: the possibility to communicate with Microsoft Office users. This hasn't changed and looking at various efforts this will be the last thing that will, taking into regard the fact that various Office versions have very hard times trying to import each others documents).
In my opinion -- though I have read only the public version of the interview -- Linux is wrong if he sees those things so one-sided. Windows were a boom, and taking lessons from evolutionary biology what one could expect would be adaptative radiation. Computer for a scientist, home office computer, game computer... et cetaera. I definitely have very seriously different needs from the fellow game-addicted Ph.D. student sitting next to me. And they are more deep then just different software installed over the same, bloated, idiot-proof, easy-to-learn, hard-to-make-work, ugly OS. Divergence in place of competition: if we had Linux boxes instead of that Mac / Win98 / WinNT melee at the lab would save us many problems. Linux is good for someone used to read the documentation, willing to learn technical information or to invest some time in learning (that is, taking a steep learning curve) or to just finding the things out. Coincidentally, people who choose natural science are often like this. I want Linux as a scientific OS, not a user-friendly bloatware.
Joe Schmoe may bite his toe. I don't care. Or, rather, I do. I don't want him to get hands on my OS. May he stay with Windows as long I can use Linux. Forcing Linux to be the desktop OS for Joe Schmoe is harmful for both. I hate saying it, but I really don't give a damn about KDE / Gnome. One week of learnig bash saves you 1 GB of hard disk (via rpm -e kde). (Well.. I am exagerating... a little bit...). It is Joe Schmoes fault.
Best regards,
January
P.S. You didn't say pro-Microsoft things. You said pro-Windows things. That is worse. Microsoft is a large company. There are many IT companies. There is no need for Linux becoming Windows. We already have Windows. They *will* become better with a little competition. Linux should become better Linux.
P.S.2. I may sound as a 50 yrs old Unix hacker by saying "giving up man pages, command line options, and stdin/stdout capability is a sin and people who do this should burn in hell", but in fact I am 27, working on experimental biology, and free climbing in my free time.
I have two boxes. Both are K6-II's with 128 Mb RAM. One runs Win98. One runs Mandrake 7.1. With this, I feel I've got a good base to compare the two.
Both have their advantages.
Both have their disadvantages.
The advantages of Windows are exactly in some of those areas that "home" users are most interested in. It has a better web browser. Sorry, but it just does. Browsing on Netscape is a pain. It just plain sucks. Windows is also better for games. Windows also plays video media better. Windows also runs certain applications like Quicken that don't yet have equivalents under Linux. And, in general, the desktop is quicker than any Linux desktop I've tried.
Those are the sorts of things home users care about.
Yes, Linux takes the prize for customability. It is also a far better dev box. It is also more stable. More flexible. Less frustrating. It has more of the sort of software I'm interested in.
That's good for me. That's why I've got it.
But frankly, home users don't care about those things as much as they do about browsing the net and playing games.
When people say that Linux is "not ready for the desktop", they are talking about for the average user. They are not saying that it isn't ready for everyone. They aren't saying that it won't work for anyone. They are talking about the average user. That are saying that the average user, who doesn't give a good goddamn who makes the software, but just wants something that does what they want to do, who tends to do things like write letters to grandma, sell things on e-bay, and play Myst, find Windows an OS that better meets their needs.
And they are right about that. If you want to overtake Windows as a desktop OS, you need to admit that, then start working on changing that.
The cake is a pie
Boy, did this come as a shock! I could have sworn that they stopped developping it last year. D'oh!
Forget kernel mailing lists or Slashdot, I'm getting all my linux news from the Wall Street Journal!
icqqm [ICQ:11952102]
This interview was a real eye opener for me. I am happy to see Linus acknowledging that Linux is not perfect, that, in some cases, Windows is preffered to Linux, and using these facts to drive him to improve Linux, not to shout down any and all opposing viewpoints.
If the whole Linux community followed Linus' suit, the movement would gain much more credibility in the eyes of the IT establishment.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
I'm suspecting the problem is this: and tried to upgrade some of the boxes. Despite its reputation for ease of install, Windows really isn't, and I've found it to be particularly bad at upgrading. Every time I've upgraded, both in the Win95 and WinNT lines, I've regretted it. I've always found that I got a more stable system by installing from scratch and then reinstalling all apps.
The cake is a pie
-
He said the new version of Linux will run better on high-end computers, such as those containing more than one processor. Mr. Torvalds said tests show the new Linux compares "really well" with its rivals, including Windows and other versions of Unix. "It is painful for me to go back and use the 2.2 kernel," he said, referring to the current version.
Can anyone comment on the improvements that he speaks of? They must be significant, since it is "painful" for him to use 2.2. I'm especially interested because my workstation is a dual processor box.I am glad he did not let his ego get to him
they consider ANY feedback good this a sign of
a smart man
quote:
Subsequent tests, though, showed Microsoft was
right, and in his interview, Mr. Torvalds
conceded that he initially had been "in denial"
on the matter.
"We had been arrogant," he said, adding it was
painful for him to admit that Windows was better
than Linux, at least in the areas covered by the
Microsoft test.
He said he is also availing himself of some of the advantages of good fortune, such as buying a house for himself, his wife and two young daughters, as well as trading in his old Pontiac for a sporty BMW Z3. His fortunes may swell in coming months as Thursday, his employer, Transmeta Corp., filed to go public.
Plus, he's guaranteed a great retirement w/ speaking engagements, if he so desires. It seems to me only the wall street jopuranl would make a point of that fact he is getting rich through stocks....
I need a TiVo for my car. Pause live traffic now.
The normally inaccessible Mr. Torvalds spoke in an interview....
Am I the only one who considers Linus one of the most accessible leaders in the tech industry? The man is like the Finish brother in law I never had.
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
nah. the VM is still fucked to put it bluntly. VFS layers need to be rewritten..theyre screwed...al viro has also screwed up ext2 and is busy fixing it (major patches for BOTH 2.4 and 2.2)...elevator algorithm needs tweaking....latencies are really high and for a while there they were planning on scrapping the whole damn thing...although now it seems to have settled down. several hundred bugs were found by some guys at a uni somewhere using a hacked g++ and those problems are being fixed too....or at least they plan to fix em...in short - dont count on it. and dont use the first coupla versions.
Last time I checked, none of the provinces were a controlled police state, where you had no freedoms. (which country is #1 to live in according to the UN?)
What the fuck are you talking about?
Maybe you should blow up a few school busses full of children like the Irish to enhance your meaningless message.
Lars -
I find it interesting after the furor over the Mindcraft benchmarks where everyone and his brother flamed, libeled and slandered Mindcraft for producing such an obviously purchased and false benchmark result, that no one here has commented on the fact that Linus admits the tests were valid and correct and that all of the juvenile responses by this community were unwarranted to say the least.
I am reminded of a scene in Jaws where Quint said something like "It proves one thing Mr. Hooper. You college boys don't have the sense to admit when you are wrong".
Whenever I have a hardware problem, I just upgrade to the latest Microsoft Windows platform, hoping that the autodetect plug and play will fix it. This is much cheaper and requires less thinking than actually finding out whats wrong and/or installing the correct drivers which can be found on the manufacturer's web site.
Windows2000 == computer technician in a box!
Lars -
I maintain a MPEG 4 Structured Audio decoder, sfront, that supports real-time low latency work -- MIDI and audio input and audio output, suitable for performance work (and people use it on stage today, under Linux).
Using the techniques described on linux-audio-dev, and using a machine pruned of some badly-behaving daemons, can make Linux work well for low-latency audio today, for some apps. Note that my app doesn't write or read to disk -- a lot of the remaining problem areas are for apps like hard disk recorders which need disk-I/O.
Considering that 95% of the installations of Windows 2000 are made up of CDR burned pirated copies, you can have a CD of it for less than a dollar. Here is what I found in less than a minute on IRC:
Windows 2000 Server Retail/Upgrade : s/n: H6TWQ-TQQM8-HXJYG-D69F7-R84VM
Windows 2000 Advanced Server Retail/Upgrade : s/n: WY6PG-M2YPT-KGT4H-CPY6T-GRDCY
Windows 2000 Professional : s/n: RBDC9-VTRC8-D7972-J97JY-PRVMG
Windows 2000 Professional OEM 1-2 CPU : s/n: RM233-2PRQQ-FR4RH-JP89H-46QYB
Windows 2000 Professional : s/n: F6PGG-4YYDJ-3FF3T-R328P-3BXTG
Windows 2000 Advanced Server Retail : s/n: MVVRP-KGRF9-87262-8JVTB-F37P8
Windows 2000 Server Retail : s/n: WVT66-XGD6D-9TPPK-WPCG3-K6KC8
Lars -
It was a conservative estimate.
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
Having just read the article, I must say that it is inaccurate in several of its statements. Forgive me if I'm wrong (and please correct me), but here are the problems I saw:
A major new release of the Linux operating system will be available in the fall
Ummm... no, not the Linux operating system, the Linux kernel. The 'Linux' operating system is made up of many parts, the kernel being one of them. An operating system is much more than just a kernel.
As a student in his native Finland a decade earlier, he created the basic components of the Linux operating system, then put it on the Internet to let others make improvements to it.
Again, Linus did not write the operating system. he only wrote the kernel. The operating system was mostly completed many years earlier, and was known as GNU. He just initiated design of the final component. And while he deserves credit for this, the people who worked hard to create the rest of the OS, many years before he even thought of writing a unix-like kernel, deserve as much credit as he does for creating the 'Linux operating system'.
Mr. Torvalds coordinates Linux in a somewhat detached manner. He concerns himself only with intricate, technical details of Linux, and won't take a stand on such issues as what sort of user interface the software should have.
Yes, Linus concerns himself with the kernel, because this is the part of the 'Linux operating system' that he wrote. It is true that if he did decree which type of interface people should use, then people would listen, but he should not be expected, or encouraged, to do this. He was instrumental in creating the final (and some would say, most difficult) part of the Free operating system we all know as 'Linux'. But it must be remembered that he did not create the entire operating system, so why should he have any more say to which GUI to use than any other major developer in the GNU project. The kernel and the GUI are as opposed as two elements of an operating system can be, so it would be illogical for a kernel developer, no matter what his status, to dictate which GUI to use.
I wish people would realize that Linus did not create the entire operating system, only the kernel. Many people, especially in business, see him as the person who is 'in charge' of the OS. The 'Linux operating system' (as WSJ call it) is developed by a community, nobody is in charge. A few developers of certain segments of the OS are figureheads, but no one central person is in charge of the OS. The contribution that Linus made to the development of a Free GNU-based operating system cannot be denied, but Linus is not the only developer of any importance, and, while he should be able to control kernel-based matters, he is not the one to consult on non-kernel related matters.
aka, Microsoft doesn't notice other competitors until they are better than them or they can buy them...interesting
-----
Cethiesus
"Ford," he said, "you're turning into a penguin. Stop it."
Well, from recent discussion on the linux-audio-dev list, I can safely state that many audio engineers and musicians are dying to start using Linux. They're sick and tired of the high latencies (even with DirectSound) under Windows; they're tired of the crashes. Between ALSA, Andrew Morton's new low-latency patch, the developing LADSPA, and more, Linux is a rising music platform. Unfortunately, Linus doesn't seem to be too interested in (or particularly cognizant of) these developments. But still, it's coming; and it's coming rapidly.
A good interview. I'm consistantly impressed with the candor and openness that Linus exhibits when he talks about a project that is, in a big way, his baby. He has no trouble admitting the shortcomings of Linux, nor any trouble touching on its strengths. His comments prove that it is possible to be a very strong advocate without resorting to extremism or flame warring. How many people who aren't nearly as involved as Linus can wade into the OS debate while maintaining some perspective? Linus Torvalds will convince more people of the virtues of Linux with his balanced take on the issue than any given hundred /. "M$ is the evil empire, windoze sucks, Linux roolz" posters.
"Sweet creeping zombie Jesus!"
Mr. Torvalds coordinates Linux in a somewhat detached manner. He concerns himself only with intricate, technical details of Linux, and won't take a stand on such issues as what sort of user interface the software should have.
That is one reason there are now two rival Linux interfaces. Mr. Torvalds also has no support staff; in fact, he doesn't even have a secretary.
Mr. Torvalds defended his habits. He said, for example, that not selecting an "official" Linux user interface allows the best one to emerge through competition.
I don't think I've seen someone throw Linuses secretary preferences in the middle of a Gnome/KDE discussion before.
I was skeptical when following the link to the interview; I figured it was going to be full of pro-Linux statements, advocating the crushing of Windows. But, from the mouth of Linus himself, "Windows is still a no-brainer for most people." And well it should be. Microsoft got to the position they're in today by being the best of what was out there (emphasis on was) and by catering to the end user. Yes, Windows 95 is buggy, crashes a lot, has the security of a single sleeping puppy trying to guard a mansion, but it's by far the easiest O/S to manage for the home user. Again, according to Linus, both his mother and sister still use Windows or Macintosh.
That's exactly it. Linux is absolutely not ready for the desktop. I have problems running it now at work, administering only 9 boxes. NFS filesystems drop, X freezes up with no recovery, and don't get me started on Netscape. Microsoft has the end-user market nailed right now. And Linus acknowledges it.
I got a new found respect for Linus today. It appears that he has not been blinded by the bright lights of the press and their attention. 5 or 10 years, he says, until Linux is ready for the home user. I would place that a little lower right now, from the latest releases of RedHat (the install process is slick compared to old Slackware installs). RedHat is moving Linux to the masses, and they should be commended. For Linux to be true competition, we have to have both sides of the fence; server AND workstation. Server is doing pretty damn well right now. Time to focus on Joe Schmoe, the average user.
Ok, moderators, since I said pro-RedHat and, even worse, pro-MS things, I expect to lose heaps of karma. Do your worst.
------
"Mr. Torvalds said tests show the new Linux compares "really well" with its rivals, including Windows and other versions of Unix. "It is painful for me to go back and use the 2.2 kernel," he said, referring to the current version.
"Mr. Torvalds [co-ordinates linux development], and won't take a stand on such issues as what sort of user interface the software should have.
That is one reason there are now two rival Linux interfaces."
They REALLY don't get it, do they?
I assume the editor had picked up from a piece on Sun's adoption of Gnome (and not KDE) that there were only two possible ways to use Linux. I am forced to assume the concept of a windows manager being interchangable is beyond him. As for the first quote, well, I suspect he is convince that there will be a shiny new "Linux Millenium" on the shelves for xmas, which would fit into his nice tidy microsoft-style image of "the linux product". The idea that the new kernel is already in use across the planet would astonish him.....
--
-=DaveHowe=-