Slashdot Mirror
Is Linux Dead?
TunkeyMicket writes "It appears MSNBC is reporting that Linux has failed as an operating system. By citing the large Linux hype as reason for Linux to be dominating the market, they draw the conclusion that the "open source" alternative has flopped as an operating system. They briefly mention the success of Linux in the server community, but really the article gives Linux as little credit as possible."
I don't think that is what the article was saying. It praised how well Linux was doing in the server market, taking on the older more established *NIX big boys. The only failure the article mentioned was how it has not make a significant impact on the desktop at home. Well Duh! When a company such as Microsoft has a monopoly, I think it is going to take more than just a few years to crack a hole in that shell.
Who is John Galt?
Actually, read the article.
It clearly retorts its own headline, and explains that in fact linux is NOT dead.
"A recent survey of 800 companies in North America and Western Europe found that some 40 percent said they were either using or testing Linux, according to the research firm IDC. With some 27 percent of the market, Linux is now the second most popular operating system for servers, supplanting the decades-old operating system UNIX; Microsoft holds the top spot."
Some more thoughts along the same lines as the parent post. I have to wonder if the only way to get anything posted to slashdot is to submit flaimbait. The article is a well balanced assesment of where linux is today after all of the yesteryear hype. They don't say linux is dead, and the article actually hints around that more and more companies are moving to it for financial reasons. For all those slashdotters claiming that msbnc is biased, well isn't that the pot calling the kettle black?
I know this is a fantastically novel idea, but did anybody read the article instead of knee-jerking "OMG MSNBC IS GOING TO SUPPORT MS ALWAYS" ?
The first half the article praises Linux for being a low cost server solution that a LOT of companies are using. There is even a quote from a HP exec who says "Now Linux is becoming more mainstream every day."
The second half does go into the desktop area of Linux, which they say is lacking, and then it goes on to say it IS getting better with things such as Star Office and OpenOffice, but it still needs to overcome the problem of Windows being installed on pretty much every pre-built computer sold.
Nowhere in this article does it say anything about Linux being dead. It's more of a "What's Linux up to?"
If you read the article, the slashdot headline is crap.
If you read MSNBC alot, like I do, you'll find:
1. It's a hell of a lot more responsible, journalism wise, then abcnews.
2. They are not shy about printing articles that put MS in a bad light.
Sections like letters to the editor (where they frequently publish letters from people who sharply disagree with them) and their Ombudsman (currently the position is unfilled, the last guy moved on after a year) used to publically evaluate their journalistic practices and comment or criticize them, by their own employee, has caused me to respect them a great deal.
Say what you like about MS, but MSNBC is a great news site.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
Too bad the author of the article can't get his facts straight.
/. summary makes it out to be.
According to him, Evolution is a desktop environment and he implies that Lindows is in the office suite business. I'm not implying any malice here, but the guy really needs to do a bit more research before opening his yap.
But yeah, it's definitely not the intentional troll that the
Interestingly enough, though, he does allude to (albeit unintentionally) Linux's REAL "innovation" for desktop computers: price. Where else but WalMart can you now find a computer for a mere $299??!? This is a clear demonstration of why Linux desktops, should they continue to improve usability-wise, and gain more end-user software (and they will) will soon become a major market. Quite simply, they're just cheaper, making them more available. I'd argue that 99% of users DON'T CARE about "Tablet PC's" and all that crap. They want a regular PC for the web, email, and a little light "office" work, maybe play a few games, and balance their checkbook, and they want it all for *cheap*. Linux desktops aren't quite there on the feature front, but it'll always cost less than any version of Windows.
The Free desktop that Just Works
Everything you mentioned as a weakness of Linux goes double in Windows 2000. IIS still has holes that MS hasn't patched, and there are far too many people running IIS who haven't applied the necessary patches that do exist. I can think of vulnerabilities in W2K FTP, W2K DNS, W2K Telnet, etc. etc. etc.
.NET Server to know whether or not MS has fixed the problem in their new server OS. I hope they do, because most W2K Server installations are ticking time bombs.
You speak of how bad root is...most W2K servers are locally booted with the Administrator account, and most services run with the W2K System account, which is just as bad as running as Administrator.
W2K has all the vulnerabilities you speak of and more...because there are far more people developing worms, virii and whatnot for W2K. I don't know enough about
I know these things...I'm an MCSE.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.