Ex-Microsofter Rick Belluzzo Prefers Linux

keird writes "I'm sure you all remember Belluzzo being pushed out of Microsoft earlier this year. ComputerWorld has a short, but interesting interview with him where he talks about why his new employer, Quantum uses Linux in their appliances." From reading the interview, Belluzzo seems to be pretty amicable to whatever will get the job done, and in this case, it's Linux.

Comments

Make a Change :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

This makes for a bit of a change since a long time ago when he destroyed SGI by persuading them to drop MIPS and IRIX and move to Windows NT.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

Ha, and not just SGI...he was a big-time pro-Microsoftie during his time at HP.

If memory serves, I believe he was the one behind HP's humungo-blunder of saying that they were going to "dump HPUX in favour of Windows NT" (which was followed by the biggest backpeddle I've ever seen).

Re:Make a Change :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

Does it really matter?
The fact is that higher up microsoft people are defecting to companies where they can get away from windows. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

sheesh.
Let it be.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[BigBir3d]

What he tries to accomplish is based on where he works.

If he can only push a Microsoft product, then he will.

If he can evaluate each job and use what they specifically require, then he will.

No different than any of us. We do what we can when we can.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[tshak]

Not a change at all. If you read the article he clearly states, "I don't think Linux is going to be successful as a desktop replacement."

Re:Make a Change :-)

[ReelOddeeo]

What he tries to accomplish is based on where he works. If he can only push a Microsoft product, then he will.

Some of us actually have morals, ethics and values that don't change based on where we work.

It is enough for me, in my business, to be successful. I don't have any requirement that everyone else must also fail in order to measure my success by.

Let me put it differently with a hypothetical example...

Today, suppose I work for a church/charatible organization/etc. so I do good deeds. Tomorrow I get a job working for the mob, so I kill people.

What he tries to accomplish is based on where he works.

What I try to accomplish, helping people, or killing them, is based on where I work at the moment.

If he can only push a Microsoft product, then he will.

If I can only kill people today, then I will. (Or destroy other businesses, destroy competition, remove opportunity from an entire industry, etc.)

If someone can be so two-faced, then you probably shouldn't trust them. They probably have no genuine interest in your company if they work for you. Their interest changes at the whim of who they are whoring for at the moment.

Maybe it isn't this way with Rick Belluzzo, but on the face of it, but it is one plausible interpretation of the facts. So does this guy really prefer Linux?

Re:Make a Change :-)

[IndependentVik]

Here's a link from an old /. story about Belluzo's decision to move to NT. Here's the /. discussion on his resignation from SGI shortly thereafter.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

Some of us actually have morals

This has nothing to do with morality - this is FUCKING TECHNOLOGY you nut. Technology is not a RELIGION. He's not two-faced because he didn't "stand up for what is Right" when he was at Microsoft. Guess what, when the director of IT comes to me and says MS only, I get pissed, but it's not IMMORAL for me to install Windows. The real reason I'm pissed is that we aren't choosing what's best, we're just blindly choosing Windows. Many times, Windows WOULD be the best solution - I just want to consently evaluate other solutions.

I can't believe that you are so intellectually NULL that you compare buying Windows to Killing. You, Sir, need some serious HELP.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

All that proves is that he has at least six brain cells.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

This has everything to do with morality - this is FUCKING LIFE you nut. And it's called being a hypocrite when you selectively apply your ideals. Is that what you aspire to? Seems as though you are the one who needs help.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[ethereal]

Maybe morality is the wrong hook to hang this on, but there's definitely a flavor of "to thine own self be true". If you are a technology person, make decisions based on the best technology rather than on office politics. If your employer doesn't like it when you do your best to do your job, you may have to find another employer, but at least you didn't have to change who you were.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[frotty]

I generally TALK LIKE THIS when something is CRUSHING MY BALLS randomly.

That aside,
You're off base just a bit.

Here comes the trusty ol' Nazi/Volkswagen story.

The Volkswagen itself: neutral, technology has no 'moral ramification' itself, without use

Being the scientist/engineer team who invented the Volkswagen for the Nazis: "EVIL." (by majoritiy's opinion, at least) They did it to help the Nazis win.

Let's get specific:

Windows itself: neutral, technology

The team behind windows: Possibly EVIL. They support, to be polite, a questionable agenda.

So, this guy might be proving to be a slut for his local master.

We 'should' all quit our jobs if we really have problems with what are employer is doing, unless we think that the power & resources gained by working with something we don't like will fix the harm done by helping the possibly evil entity out.

IE, it'd have been ok to have become a nazi and done things to HELP them if you eventually used that power & proximity to overthrow them.

from the looks of it, this guy is just soft-shoeing whatever minstrel show fetches the most $$$$$$

Re:Make a Change :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

Amen.

Not only did he destroy SGI by trying to move to
Windows NT, but he gave away the graphics engineers
to Nvidia, gave OpenGL to Microsoft, and then went
to Microsoft to work on Xbox, which uses Nvidia graphics. Maybe coincidence, but I think not,
especially in this age of corporate management
wrongdoing.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

Is that why he was pushing Microsoft when he was at the company that did not run MS... Lets throw out our traditional unix systems and sell machines that cost 3x what others are selling in the cut-throat MS x86 market.

He tried to fuck HPUX (unix) to MS
He *did* fuck SGI (unix) with MS

Re:Make a Change :-)

[tealover]

morality ?!? this is an issue about morality?

some of you people need to get lives. there are real "morality" issues out there. why don't you fight those battles instead.

unfuckingbelievable, the shit that some of you people think.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[ReelOddeeo]

compare buying Windows to Killing

I did not compare Windows to Killing. I merely used a higher contrast example of what my entire point was about. Not having any beliefs in anything. Doing whatever is profitable at the moment.

this is FUCKING TECHNOLOGY you nut
Technology is not a RELIGION
it's not IMMORAL for me to install Windows

I'm not the one yelling and screaming.

The facts about what Microsoft has done speak for themselves to anyone who has been around longer than the dot-com boom. We're talking about a company that has been convicted of criminal conduct and upheld on appeal. This is NOT about technology. This is about people and ethics.

I have these conversations with a coworker of mine who defends Microsoft no matter how indefensible the particular point may be at the moment. Is there no limit to how people should conduct themselves in pursuit of profit? Is there no low too low? A company that will sign a contract that stipulates in writing that they will not alter certian api's, and then turn right around and violate the very letter (not just spirit) of that contract in order to kill Java.

This is a company that blatently rips off disk compression technology and bundles it into DOS, and is later called on it. Settle or pay a fine. Either way it's still the cheapest technology they ever stole. In the end, a profitable venture, so it must be okay.

You're right about one thing. This is not about technology. This is about people and their behavior. <insert silly name calling and insults here> That is the whole point of the thread beginning with the top level post. Finally, you said nothing that disputes my remarks about people, which was the entire substance of my post.

In case the point is lost on you, I'll repeat it, but without charged examples such as killing. Some of us have ethics, morals and values. If I work for company XX, who makes product xx, and then promote xx as being the best solution, I would not then go work for YY who makes product yy which is a direct competitor of xx, and then trumpet yy as being the best. One or both of my statements concerning xx and yy must therefore be a lie. Black and white. Some of us see conduct in terms of right and wrong, not profit or less profit. This was the entirety of my point.

An alternative hypothesis, but not one that seems warranted by the actual interview article, would be that a person became enlightened that xx was not the best and that yy was.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

it may have to do with principles, but it has nothing to do with morality.

i hate it uneducated people. you would think a good conversation could be had here, but instead we get people like you and the other moron.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[painkillr]

I'm riding along an early post to get an answer:

Are there 3rd party antivirus solutions for Quantum Snap file servers?

Thanks.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

Not having any beliefs in anything. Doing whatever is profitable at the moment.

Um, that is his job. If he does not attempt to make money, then he should be fired. This guy is not evaluating Linux vs. Windows on technological or moral grounds at all. He is evaluating it based on whether the company at which he works will make more money in the sort and long terms by choosing to use Linux. Nothing more, nothing less. This is business, and he is a business man. That's what they are supposed to do.

And, do not forget that this decision is in a completely different context than the others that have been mentioned. I am not even sure that I can draw a parallel between using Linux as an embedded OS vs. HPUX or IRIX as workstation OSes. So, it isn't even inconsistent.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[ghjm]

How do you talk when someone is crushing your balls in a deterministically ordered sequence?

-Graham

Re:Make a Change :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck off and die, you holier than thou git:

principle (prns-pl) n.

1. A basic truth, law, or assumption: the principles of democracy.
2. 1. A rule or standard, especially of good behavior: a man of principle.
2. The collectivity of moral or ethical standards or judgments: a decision based on principle rather than expediency.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[ReelOddeeo]

morality ?!? this is an issue about morality? some of you people need to get lives. there are real "morality" issues out there

You get upset and rant and rave but you never address what is wrong with having the following opinion.

If I work for company XX making product xx. I promote product xx and say it is best.

Now I go to work for YY using product yy, and say yy is best.

At least one of my two statements is a self serving lie.

Some people view telling lies as a moral issue. It is not a technology issue.

(Nevermind the fact that corporation XX's illegal or unethical behavior might open a whole other debate.)

Just because there are bigger moral issues mean that lesser issues are irrelevant? Therefore Microsoft's behavior is all okay. Nevertheless, this is off topic. The original thread was about individual self serving behavior, ala. the XX and YY example above.

unfuckingbelievable, the shit that some of you people think

You still leave unanswered why the simple XX and YY view stated above is so un...believable.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[pyrrho]

then it's ALL caps.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, not to mention, he is one ugly bastard.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[BigBir3d]

The company as a whole has been convicted. This does not mean all people that work there are evil, immoral bastards.

This is no different that saying all priests are homosexual, child screwing rapists.

Neither of the above statements is true. Our emotions might sway us to think otherwise, but our rationality is supposed over-ride that.

Unfortunately, the time for being on top of the ivory tower of ethics is gone. Most people are just happy to have a half-way decent job right now. Those of us that are the most adament about ethics are either students, or lucky enough to have kick ass jobs. Me, I am in the second group, but not in the tech sector.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[yomegaman]

Every product can be "the best product in its class", you just have to carefully choose the evaluation criteria. :-)

Re:Make a Change :-)

[Chris Johnson]

Actually, that would be Porsche :)

What happened there was more complicated: Ferdinand Porsche had always been hot for a 'people's car', way before Hitler. He came up with the Volkswagen design for personal reasons, because it was the car he most wanted to build, the coolest thing he could think of.

Hitler was hot to industrialize Germany- very few people owned cars, and he wanted to build roads, get lots of Germans into cars, basically modernize the country. This too was a personal reason- German industrialists did not always believe Hitler when he wanted 'cheap people's' this and that, but they learned the hard way.

Porsche had to bid for the contract to be the one to build the 'people's car' and he did it by selling Hitler on the Volkswagen design with an amazing half-jargon half-layman spiel which basically convinced Hitler that the future VW was a brilliant, unorthodox, superior design (which it was, as they learned when trying to improve it later)

Having secured Hitler's support, Porsche then totally ignored everything in politics and got back to his work- this would be the moral lapse, even though he did not actively support the Nazis. Things would happen, like Porsche getting a letter saying "The Fuehrer wishes the greatest German auto designer to become a German citizen" and shrugging and saying (translated) "Well, I suppose nothing can be done about it- see that this is taken care of" and ignoring politics again. Passive support and failing to resist in any way.

Hitler never got any Volkswagens built for the German people- the plant was bombed and the economy collapsed. The VW plant fell into the hands of the British, whose opinion of the matter was, "this is a great car, these are great workers and designers who aren't responsible for the sins of their leaders, this plant belongs to the German people and we are here to see that it is returned to them, and flourishes". With their determined support, the first VWs started coming out in spite of terrible supply shortages, technical problems (like shattering torsion bars in the suspensions) were solved, and the story of the VW was underway no thanks to Hitler (it wasn't his idea, it was Porsche's, it just played into his populist tendencies)

I have this very neat book, 'Small Wonder', about it all...

Re:Make a Change :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

If I work for company XX making product xx. I promote product xx and say it is best.

Now I go to work for YY using product yy, and say yy is best.

At least one of my two statements is a self serving lie.

Or

1. The technologies are applicable to different problem domains.
2. The context in which the technologies are being used has changed.
3. You have learn't something and changed your mind.

There is no moral issue here, you are creating one.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[flacco]

This has nothing to do with morality - this is FUCKING TECHNOLOGY you nut. Technology is not a RELIGION.

The design and/or use of a technology certainly can have a moral component. If you want to be lazy/amoral/uncaring about that, it's none of our business, but don't try to rationalize it away in your own mind by yelling at those who do make the effort to understand this fact. Dork.

Re:Make a Change :-)

[flacco]

How do you talk when someone is crushing your balls in a deterministically ordered sequence?

Like this:

"I'd just like to s- EEEEEAAARAGH!! AGGHHHH AGHHHHHH - AIIIIIII!!!!! OHGODOHGODOHGODOHGODOHGODOHGODOHGODOHGOD! YEEEARRRRUGHHHHHHH!"

Re:Make a Change :-)

[zoloto]

finally someone else says it. there is no such thing as moral and immoral in technology. I can't believe this either, that /.ers are so uneducated in the english language yet so well versed in code and byte. No wonder no one listens to us, when all our rants are "MS must die" and "You suck".

Congradulations you're now my friend!

Re:Make a Change :-)

[ReelOddeeo]

there is no such thing as moral and immoral in technology

But there is such a thing as moral and immoral in people's behavior.

Reread my original post. It is about people's behavior. I'm not going to work for XX and say product xx is the best and then the next day work for YY and say competitive product yy is the best. At least one of my two statements would have to be a lie for whoever I would be whoring for at the moment.

Re:MSNBC has it too

[Anonymous Coward]

Be careful about clicking on that link. I didn't, but take a look at it before you click on it. It appears as though it might redirect you to a site other than msnbc.com.

First Intelligent Post

[CastrTroy]

Wow, Linux is being used in a product that Windows isn't even targeted towards. I don't think that Microsoft cares too much if linux is used in these types of devices. Especially when they still own 95% of the desktop market.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[gazbo]

Also, the bit that was cunningly not mentioned in the excerpt:

I don't think Linux is going to be successful as a desktop replacement. But Linux is going to surround new appliances...

Exactly what the more rational and less rabid of us have said all along. Linux has its place, which for most people is not the desktop.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[ergo98]

Wow, Linux is being used in a product that Windows isn't even targeted towards.

Well that isn't entirely fair: Microsoft has made embedded operating systems for embedded and/or appliance markets for a while (at least four years), to mixed success. Personally I think they'll succeed eventually: Already PocketPC PDAs, a vision that was originally called bloated and overpowered, are absolutely storming the market (and the new ultra-low cost Dell ones pretty much ring the bell or doom for Palm and friend).

Re:First Intelligent Post

[saskboy]

It think you are onto something. The reason Linux is disapointing many, is because people say it is ready for home desktop use, and it is not as easy to install or configure as Windows is.

Everyone is so desperate for a Windows substitute that doesn't BSOD and run email worms, that we are willing to praise even lackluster software that makes us pull out our teeth.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[gilesjuk]

Companies will consider Microsoft embedded solutions when the cost isn't so high. I know a well known network company looked into using an embedded Microsoft OS and it would have increased the cost of the unit by ten times. I would imagine Linux would have been a bit cheaper than ten times but a proprietry or popular realtime core is still the best.

If by embedded you don't mean realtime then Linux or Windows would do, but you would be able to create a much nicer custom interface in Linux. You would be able to customise the OS not just create an application that sits on top of Windows.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't count Palm out just yet.
They have a great product which is a lot more reliable than windows. My wife swears by it.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[ZvlvLord]

.... pretty much ring the bell or doom for Palm and friend ....

What makes you believe that ? I've been coding Palm OS software for 2 years, I worked at Palm for 3 years before that. Let me tell you: new pdas just mean that: new pdas. The more, the better. There are 200000 Palm OS developers, some of them code for 5-10 other pdas/smartphones etc...

Re:First Intelligent Post

[ostiguy]

You are incorrect. IIRC, 35ish percent of all NAS devices are now "Windows Powered". MS has basically gone from 0-35% in this market in 2 years.

ostiguy

Re:First Intelligent Post

[doodleboy]

Exactly what the more rational and less rabid of us have said all along. Linux has its place, which for most people is not the desktop.

Well, I'm pretty sure I'm not rabid or irrational. But I still think linux will eventually take over, even on the desktop.

Why? Because most end users are cheap. Imho they don't care what operating system they're using, as long as they can get it to do what they need: writing, finances, websurfing, etc. Free software is rapidly improving, and it'll soon be (if it isn't already) usable enough that even Aunt Betty will balk at paying hundreds of dollars extra for Windows and Office. Especially once she realizes that without the expense of these two fifty cent CDs, she can get a computer that will do everything she needs for a measly couple of hundred bucks.

Corporations looking to cut costs will lead the charge. But eventually all non-specialized software will be commoditized and general users will not pay big dollars for it. Imho.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[fermion]

Exactly what the more rational and less rabid of us have said all along. Linux has its place, which for most people is not the desktop.
It depends on what desktop you mean. For many users, who need email, web browser, and simple office activity, Linux is very close to being an adequate desktop. It's installation is not simple, but if there were widely available Linux machines, that would not be a problem. The real issue is not the desktop, but MS licensing, Word and IE specific web sites.
If the monopoly remedies are successful at forcing MS to stop the anticompetive behaviors, and I have little confidence they will now that shrub has nuetered the procedure, I give it another year or so before linux is acceptable on business desktop machines.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[ergo98]

I completely agree that the more the better, but the problem is that Palm has traditionally been hanging on by the hairs of their chiney-chin-chin (even when absolutely dominating the market): How can the PocketPC making huge inroads help that? The turning point for the PocketPC, in my opinion, was the Toshiba e310 and e740 (there's an Audiovox I believe that's basically the e540), not only economical but very, very small. That article hints at the fact that in a single quarter Toshiba went from virtually no marketshare to 5.5% of the marketshare (and that was before the e740 with the xScale 400Mhz and integrated 802.11b was considered). Now the e310 is quite a bit cheaper, and the e740 is selling like hotcakes. I suspect that the PocketPC numbers will be much, much higher in the next survey. Secondary to that is the fact that Dell is entering the market with a $200 PocketPC. Again, these things can't be good against Palm that already was navigating dire straights.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[LiquidAsphalt]

I don't know about that, MS still has IIS and many people use IIS. Not to mention running WebSphere is a "cheap" solution for testing on an NT cluster.

You'd be surprised how many things Windows is used for. Not to mention exchange servers, file servers, print server, etc. etc.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[nametaken]

I agree with the others, in that the PalmOS is far from dead as it still has massive marketshare. That's where it stops. I've regularly found PalmOS to be frustratingly arcane... and agree that it's time for an old skool technology to die quietly. I'm no Microsoft fan... in fact I hate most everything of theirs, but if a product is superior and worth the money than screw everyone else. I'm not going to support an alternative just because it's an alternative. I have no sympathy for lame software.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Skweetis]

This does fit with what I have seen. Most low-end NAS devices (the 1U rackmount units with four IDE drives attached to a Promise controller) now run a semi-embedded Windows 2000 rather than a stripped-down Linux-on-a-chip. The biggest advantage the older ones had, IMHO, was that the system-on-a-chip was still installed if you changed all the disks, cutting time off getting the system back up. Oh, yeah, and there really isn't a need to have Outlook Express installed on a NAS.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Twirlip of the Mists]

Because most end users are cheap.

This is a common misconception. If most end users were cheap, they'd build their own computers from parts instead of buying a Gateway or a Dell or a what-have-you.

Most end users are impatient and lazy. (Not in the derogative sense; I, too, am impatient and lazy, and chances are you are too.) They run Windows or Mac OS for the same reason that they buy their computers pre-assembled: because they can get up and running faster and with less work.

Linux is not easy to use (making it unappealing to the lazy), and what's worse it's not easy to learn (making it unappealing to the impatient). Giant changes would have to happen before Linux could become any of those things. The people who work on Linux have no motivation to make those giant changes. So I don't see it happening.

I think there's one scenario in which Linux could become a viable desktop alternative. A large and profitable company could adopt Linux, base a business plan on it, and make the necessary changes to make it easy to use and easy to learn. The company would have to be large and profitable because Linux would require a great deal of work to get where it needs to be, and the company would have to be able to survive spending a fortune on Linux for a few years while they do what they need to do.

There's one big thing, I think, that will prevent this from happening: the GPL. Any company that does any proprietary work on Linux will be forced to give its source code away to anybody who asks for it, making it impossible for that company to have a competitive edge in the marketplace. That takes the wind out of the old business plan.

Of course, Apple already did exactly this. They just based their OS on FreeBSD instead of Linux. So the idea is sound; it's just that in GPL-land, there's no possibility of commercial motivation, which means no reason to invest the necessary time and work.

Server operating systems, naturally, don't have to be easy to use or to learn at all. That's why companies like IBM and SGI are shipping big servers that are built from the ground up to run Linux: they only have to make a few changes to the OS to get it to do what their customers need, and their competitive advantage is the hardware, so releasing the source code of their OS is no big deal to them.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Anonymous Coward]

I have little confidence they will now that shrub has nuetered the procedure

You disrespectful cocksucker.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[EvilAlien]

What accounts for the purchasing of systems from Dell or Gateway and the challenges of Linux on the desktop is that most end users are cheap and dumb. The "dumb" bit lets companies which provide services that do everything for you prosper.

Most end users are impatient and lazy. (Not in the derogative sense; I, too, am impatient and lazy, and chances are you are too.) They run Windows or Mac OS for the same reason that they buy their computers pre-assembled: because they can get up and running faster and with less work.

That is pretty much my point, "dumb", as I've used it, includes "lazy" and potentially includes "impatient", however I think the point that most end users don't want to learn something new and challenging needs to be made. Its just a fact, not a value judgement (well, not entirely).

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah but your wrong. Look at the desktop distros. They are increasingly trying to emulate windows' ease of use (with some success...mandrake is one of the easiest to transfer to from windows. What will mandrake 9.1 look like?) All that needs to be done is to make it increasingly idiot-proof. I mean, look at windows. How long did it take before it was really usable by just about everyone? Win 3.11 was a horror for net access. I say, now that the linux distribution community is looking at the interacting part as the most important, in a year or two linux will be comparable to windows. (Think of where Wine and CrossOver Office will be by then! Ok so wine may be evil to some people, but it is really advantageous if you have a windows app that will never be ported to linux)

Re:First Intelligent Post

[rseuhs]

Wrong, Microsoft cares very much because WinCE should become "the standard" on embedded devices and appliances.

After the recent filings from Microsoft, we can savely say that every project Microsoft has started after 1990 is losing money: WinCE, MSN, XBox, even Mice and keyboards!

Microsoft is losing everything they recently built up and is reduced to desktop-Windows/x86 and Office/Windows. Everything else is going down the drain.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[ilikehardhouse]

There's one big thing, I think, that will prevent this from happening: the GPL. Any company that does any proprietary work on Linux will be forced to give its source code away to anybody who asks for it, making it impossible for that company to have a competitive edge in the marketplace. That takes the wind out of the old business plan.

As the post above says, Apple took BSD and made it a core part of their business.

Will we see more distros based on BSD? Will someone make a Big Push to get it on the desktop?

I'd rather use that than Windows. Still don't know if I'd want to pay :)

Re:First Intelligent Post

[rseuhs]

I'm so tired of those prejudices.

What changes dammit?

The ONLY thing missing for desktop Linux is apps, especially games, but also some business apps.

There is NOTHING wrong with KDE/Linux itself. A good distro like SuSE or Mandrake will be as easy to use as Windows and even a mediocre distro like RedHat made huge progress lately in that department. There is no desktop-centric setting left that can't be configured with the mouse. That you have to mangle with text files is about as likely as having to mangle the registry in Windows (that means: It can happen in some cases but normally shouldn't)

Absolutely no big change is needed to Linux itself.

What we need is better marketing, less "Linux is sooo hard" prejudices and especially more apps.

In the end, Linux will go the same way as Windows NT, the home-desktop will be the last step, not the first.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[rseuhs]

MS DOS had about half of the embedded market in the 90's.

WinCE and Win-embedded are only getting a part of former DOS-users and almost no real new users, in sum they are losing marketshare.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[gazbo]

There is no desktop-centric setting left that can't be configured with the mouse

Well, if you're going to strictly adhere to graphical widgets then sure. But explain to me the process (and I know I've used this example already) by which I'd graphically set up my Alcatel USB ADSL modem. Please. Because I had to hunt around on google to find straightforward instructions (that weren't pages of commands) and eventually found a script to do it for me. Great. And then it still didn't work - fortunately the script author pointed me in the right direction; I needed to symlink /etc/resolv.conf to /etc/ppp/resolv.conf.

Yup, a flagship for easily setting up a desktop system.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[rseuhs]

So when the vendor puts the script on the CD and edits the script to make the symlink, it's desktop ready, right?

Wow, there was no change needed to be made for Linux.

Yes, 3rd party support isn't as good on Linux, but 1) it got a lot better lately and 2) that's not a technical or usability problem within Linux.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Twirlip of the Mists]

What accounts for the purchasing of systems from Dell or Gateway and the challenges of Linux on the desktop is that most end users are cheap and dumb.

Arrogant much?

Re:First Intelligent Post

[gazbo]

Well, if you're going to get stupid about it then fuck, Linux has been ready for years - after all, the kernel has been stable.

Drivers, X, apps...shit, they're all extra. GNU tools? Not Linux, so don't whinge about problems with them. The point is that these are all part of what the user sees. You can't say "Linux is ready for the desktop! Oh, sure there's loads of peripheral software and support missing making it unusable as an operating but it's not Linux's fault!"

Oh, and that script was for RH7.2 or greater. I'd like to see it written for all the other distros or user built systems...

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Stonent1]

Wow, Linux is being used in a product that Windows isn't even targeted towards. I don't think that Microsoft cares too much if linux is used in these types of devices.

I think they do...

I think they're interested.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[rseuhs]

No, it's not about the kernel. Linux itself is ready and usable, most standard hardware works out of the box and is configured graphically and easily.

Of course if you use some more exotic hardware, you might have to run an installer or manually do things - just like in Windows.

So, yes, Linux itself has been ready for (a few) years. We need 3rd party support, ie that stupid vendor needs to include the install-script on the CD (or homepage).

My point is:

Linux itself is ready, there is no change needed to Linux.

Oh, sure there's loads of peripheral software and support missing making it unusable as an operating but it's not Linux's fault!

Nonsense. Almost every hardware works right out of the box, missing Linux support has become the exception, not the rule.

And did I mention that Windows XP has also quite a fair share of unsupported hardware?

So according to your theory Windows XP is unusable because it doesn't support some hardware?

And never mind MacOSX, that must be the most unusable OS of all...

Re:First Intelligent Post

[gazbo]

Nonsense. Almost every hardware works right out of the box, missing Linux support has become the exception, not the rule.

Please read the line which you were responding to. Nothing to do with hardware, I was talking about software. As for the DSL example, it is hardly exotic hardware. 2 (more?) years ago the Alcatel SpeedTouch USB was the modem given out as standard for ADSL to home users. Oh, and before you blame Alcatel for not writing a good installer, let's consider that they did 'the right thing' by making a GPL driver. Oh, the absolutely lowest level core is distributed as a binary, but that isn't the problem. It is the open source, GPL driver that is lacking the configuration and installation features.

Oh, and I was surprisingly unable to use the GUI "Create Internet Connection" to set this up. In Windows All I did was install the driver and then set up a new Internet connection. The installation didn't set me up a connection, I did that myself using a handy wizard.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Anonymous Coward]

If most end users were cheap, they'd build their own computers from parts instead of buying a Gateway or a Dell or a what-have-you.

Um, that is a lot more expensive than just buying a cheap box. The last peecee that I bought cost around $650 and it was only that expensive because I wanted to buy it from the closest place not the most cost effective place because I needed it that night.

So, if I spend more than 3-5 hours building my peecee and choosing the parts then by my billing rate I have spent more than the cost of a new computer---not even including actually buying the parts.

Don't misconstrue appropriate cost benefit analysis with laziness, we each have tradeoffs to make in this life. And perhaps making more money is more important..

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Anonymous Coward]

> Microsoft has made embedded operating systems .. for a while (at least four years)

Closer to 20 - remember MSX ?

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Anonymous Coward]

> Wow, Linux is being used in a product that Windows isn't even targeted towards. I don't think that Microsoft cares too much if linux is used in these types of devices.

Windows (or MS in fact) is taggetted towards _everything_. From PDAs, phones, terminals, games consoles, through entertainment centres, ATMs, blades to server farms and data centers, MS wants it all.
There is not one segment of the market that MS isn't interested in and trying to move into. It needs them all in order to meet its revenue growth targets over the next few years and to keep all competition out.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Micah]

*sigh* ... this is starting to get tiring.

If most end users were cheap, they'd build their own computers from parts instead of buying a Gateway or a Dell or a what-have-you.

Until you remember that Gateway/Dell get volume discounts and can build a box cheaper than you can.

Linux is not easy to use (making it unappealing to the lazy), and what's worse it's not easy to learn (making it unappealing to the impatient). Giant changes would have to happen before Linux could become any of those things.

Complete BS. Linux is *not* inherently more difficult or harder to learn than Windows. It's a bit different, but not harder. OK, *some* things are harder in most current distributions, but no "big change" needs to happen in Linux. Areas where Linux might still be harder are dropping like flies.

The people who work on Linux have no motivation to make those giant changes. So I don't see it happening.

What "giant changes"? And sure they do. Do you know how many people are involved in KDE, Gnome, Gnucash, Mozilla, OpenOffice.org, various open source games? They all want to see Linux, or at least Open Source, succeed on the desktop, and are putting in tremendous effort.

There's one big thing, I think, that will prevent this from happening: the GPL. Any company that does any proprietary work on Linux will be forced to give its source code away to anybody who asks for it, making it impossible for that company to have a competitive edge in the marketplace. That takes the wind out of the old business plan.

You're assuming that they'll have to modify the kernel or other GPL software. That is unnecessary. You can make all sorts of changes to the Linux environment without doing that. And although I agree that companies putting effort into making Linux easier is useful, it is by no means the only way that Linux on the desktop could take off.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[DunbarTheInept]

Exactly what the more rational and less rabid of us have said all along. Linux has its place, which for most people is not the desktop.

No. The more rational and less rabid have been saying that MS existing on the desktop is fine SO LONG AS it doesn't do it in a way that precludes people who want to use Linux on the desktop from doing so also. The reason for the dislike of Windows on the desktop is because it has a virus effect that tends to spread - in order to use the files made by the guy who uses Windows, you too have to be using Windows. And then instead of just 90% or 95% of the desktops running Windows in the office you end up with 100% of them running Windows because the few who would work better with something else don't really have the option to do so.

We wouldn't have had to make defeat of Microsoft a goal if Microsoft hadn't made defeat of Linux a goal. They're the ones that threw down the gauntlet and said, in effect, "This town's not big enough for the both of us, one of us has to go."

Re:First Intelligent Post

[IamTheRealMike]

Exactly what the more rational and less rabid of us have said all along. Linux has its place, which for most people is not the desktop.

What, you mean, the less optimistic and more cynical of us have said?

Today people say, Linux has it's place, but it's not the desktop. Yesterday they said, Linux has it's place, and it's running servers, not on big iron or in embedded devices. The day before that, it was Linux is a cool toy for hackers, but the real world will never use it.

Look to the future my friend! Man, I'm glad the KDE and GNOME hackers don't take that approach, otherwise it'd be a self fulfilling prophecy.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Anonymous Coward]

I feel that linux on the desktop is a real possibility, and it is definitely a better candidate for power users than win32 or mac os?. If you are tied to applications that have fascist tendencies than you will have to use non-linux OS for your desktop needs.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[IamTheRealMike]

Actually, I'd say most users are cheap AND lazy. If they can get something as good as what they've got, for less, they'll go for it.

I think there's one scenario in which Linux could become a viable desktop alternative.

And why exactly does a big company have to do this? KDE and GNOME are building all we need to make an easy to use desktop. They are being helped by companies, and of course people like the guys at Xandros bring it all together and make it a cohesive whole, but the idea that after all that's been achieved, of course only a big powerful corp can make Linux workable on the desktop is ludicrous.

Never forget we're in this mess in the first place because big and powerful corps don't throw money into the black whole that is OS development. Not even Apple - if they didn't sell hardware with huge margins, OS X wouldn't even exist, and they're finding it hard going as it is.

There's one big thing, I think, that will prevent this from happening: the GPL

How many times does this have to be thrashed out on slashdot? It's worse than the "X is slow" thing - look at Xandros: XFM is entirely proprietary, yet they do not violate the GPL, and they still give code back to the community. The idea that the GPL makes something uncommercialisable should have disappeared 5 years ago, but still it persists, despite the existence of companies who've been around for years and make money out of free software.

Of course, Apple already did exactly this. They just based their OS on FreeBSD instead of Linux. So the idea is sound; it's just that in GPL-land, there's no possibility of commercial motivation, which means no reason to invest the necessary time and work.

Please, this is just pure FUD. IBM, RedHat, SuSE, Xandros, Sun, TiVO, Sharp etc are not basing their products on Linux because their top execs are all high on crack.

This whole post is just a total troll. Every point has counter examples. It rolls the Linux Desktop up with the BSD vs GPL, along with a healthy dollop of FUD as well.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Twirlip of the Mists]

This whole post is just a total troll.

This is out of character for you. I expect to hear unpopular opinions labeled "troll" by ACs and other bastards, but not by one such as yourself. Be ashamed.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[IamTheRealMike]

Answering only one throwaway sentance is out of character for you Twirlip - where are the responses to my actual points?

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Twirlip of the Mists]

I already answered all of your points the first time I posted. To go on would just be reiteration for the sake of reiteration. I just don't see any reason to get into a "nuh-uh" "uh-huh" argument with you over this. We each have valid opinions, but we don't agree.

All I really will say on the subject is this: Linux is not popular as a desktop operating system, and no big company is working successfully on making it into one. Of the small companies that are trying to do so, just as many have failed (remember Eazel?) as haven't. My opinion is that there must be some reason for these facts, and I told you what I think those reasons are.

Finally, I just don't appreciate a post that I spent a lot of time thinking about-- trying to see the issue from all sides, trying to be objective-- called FUD and a troll. That's just annoying, and I think you're better than that.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Anonymous Coward]

# The foolish and wicked practice of profane cursing and swearing is a vice so mean and low that every person of sense and character detests and despises it. -- George Washington

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Anonymous Coward]

...you cannot build a computer from pieces at the same price as Gateway or Dell. This is not even including the software (OS/apps) factor.

The $120 HD you buy retail costs Dell maybe $50 in lots of 10000. The $60 power supply we can buy costs Dell maybe $30, again, in large lots.

Add to that some time possibly spent putting things together and running them through some sort of basic quality check before boxing it up...
the automation of being able to build system installations from a ghost image instead of install OS, install video card drivers, install any applications, etc...

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Anonymous Coward]

...so the Alcatel dsl modem people didn't write a make file, ant file, or something similar to a Windows Installer program for you that CAN do all this stuff you expect, and you call that Linux's fault? It's Alcatel's...

Explain to me the process for setting up a VBScript custom action in InstallShield to delete a file left over from an application when it's deinstalled. The Windows Installer is where that magic you expect to happen happens. Similar to a well-developed make file or RPM file.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Anonymous Coward]

...and you think because it was Windows that the Windows version of the Alcatel installer just magically happened to work because it was on Windows?

Geez, I hope not.

There was probably a lot of time spent ensuring that the Windows installer worked like magic for 95% of the possible platform domain expected for their product.

It really does sound like Alcatel barely lifted a finger for Linux users. At least they did that...

Re:First Intelligent Post

[doodleboy]

This is a common misconception. If most end users were cheap, they'd build their own computers from parts instead of buying a Gateway or a Dell or a what-have-you.

It's a common misconception to think building computers is cheaper than simply buying Dells or Gateways. It isn't cheaper to build your own computers, and it hasn't been for a while.

Linux isn't as hard to use as you think; you should have a look at it sometime. And it doesn't need the handholding of a large corporation to become a viable alternative on the desktop. It's doing that on its own already.

The GPL is a good thing, as it prevents free software from being co-opted by commercial vendors. Recall the tanking of Nautilus. Because the code was GPL, development went on and users continued to use and improve the software. Compare that to PGP, which recently spent months in IP hell as the beancounters at Network Associates tried to figure out what to do with it.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Twirlip of the Mists]

Linux isn't as hard to use as you think; you should have a look at it sometime.

Linux has never been able to pass the Mom test. This is as true today as ever was.

Recall the tanking of Nautilus. Because the code was GPL, development went on and users continued to use and improve the software.

And this is a good thing why? The people who worked for Eazel lost their jobs because their company had no viable business plan. Two things will come of this: either companies with no viable business plan will continue to go out of business, or companies will stop trying to move ahead with non-viable business plans. Either option is very bad for those who advocate the GPL above all else.

Yes, the remnants of Eazel are still out there, like debris from a plane crash. That doesn't make the crash any less a bad thing.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[BroncoInCalifornia]

Microsoft has targeted this market. For a while Maxtor had NAS products that used a Microsoft OS. I think is was a stripped down version of Windows 2000 server. Maxtor lost too much money on it and dropped out of this market.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[doodleboy]

Linux has never been able to pass the Mom test. This is as true today as ever was.

I'm not so sure this is true anymore. Have a look at redhat 8 one of these days. The install does a very good job of detecting and setting up the hardware, and there are nice gui configuration tools so arcane cli incantations are largely a thing of the past. It defaults to a very polished desktop with good quality applications (mozilla, openoffice, evolution, etc.). Descriptive icons are front and center, so it's obvious which does what. It's true that linux is different than windows, but I honestly don't think it's harder to use.

About Eazel. They put a huge amount of work into Nautilus, and it all would have been lost if it wasn't GPL. This happens all the time in the world of commercial software. It's obviously better for folks to be able to continue using and improving the software.

I'm not sure about the business-above-all tack you're taking. Are profits the only measure of goodness? Well then: Hollywood rakes in billions from selling overpriced junk, and they're trying to destroy our culture's open technical / legal framework to preserve their enormous profits. How is this good for anyone, except them?

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Twirlip of the Mists]

They put a huge amount of work into Nautilus, and it all would have been lost if it wasn't GPL.

But what you're missing is that Eazel might have had a chance of staying in business if they hadn't given their software away. They still probably would have folded, because Linux users just aren't a big enough market to sell software to, but they would have at least had some kind of revenue prospects. Since they were bound by the GPL, Eazel essentially became a short-lived non-profit charity organization. In other words, a flash in the pan. The fact that the flash left residue in the form of GPL-licensed software doesn't change the fact that it was just a flash.

Are profits the only measure of goodness?

No, but when companies go out of business (like mine did) and people lose their jobs (like I and my employees did), it's a very bad thing. Companies that incorporate GPL-licensed software into their products, either through derivation or just simply through linking, find it much harder to stay in business. How long do you think Honda would last if it were legally forced to give its cars away for free?

How is this good for anyone, except them?

Your us-versus-them approach is fallacious. Hollywood, like Slashdot, Microsoft, and the state of Alabama, is made up of people. Those people deserve to have jobs. If a major movie studio goes out of business, people lose their jobs, and that's a bad thing.

Likewise, when a software company goes out of business, it's a bad thing.

Some Slashdotters love to hop up and down on the us-versus-them, little-people-versus-evil-corporations thing, but they're wrong. The "evil corporations" are just groups of people, and when those people lose their jobs, it's had for everybody.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[doodleboy]

With the advent of the net the cost of distributing software is essentially zero, and there is a rapidly growing pool of high quality free software, developed without the aid of corporations and all the corporate overhead that goes with it, that will inevitably commoditize all general purpose software so that its effective cost to us will approach zero. Your not believing it, or believing it and thinking it's a bad thing, will do nothing to prevent it from happening.

Your us-versus-them approach is fallacious. Hollywood, like Slashdot, Microsoft, and the state of Alabama, is made up of people. Those people deserve to have jobs. If a major movie studio goes out of business, people lose their jobs, and that's a bad thing.

Likewise, when a software company goes out of business, it's a bad thing.

Some Slashdotters love to hop up and down on the us-versus-them, little-people-versus-evil-corporations thing, but they're wrong. The "evil corporations" are just groups of people, and when those people lose their jobs, it's had for everybody.

The fact that you could make exactly the same argument for Union Carbide or Enron should give you pause. *Obviously* there are larger issues involved than the financial success of corporations, regardless of their ethics or their effect on the well-being of others. The root of it is: what should the balance of power be between corporations and the overall good of the people? They are not the same thing.

Re:First Intelligent Post

[Twirlip of the Mists]

With the advent of the net the cost of distributing software is essentially zero

Since when? I'll give you one concrete example from my experience. SGI distributes software updates and other things (freeware, etc.) over the Internet. They do this-- or did, up until recently-- through Genuity's San Jose data center. The cost of the service to SGI, including bandwidth and colocation and whatnot, is measured in the tens of thousands of dollars per month. SGI figures it's less than sending out lots of CDs, though, so it's worth it to them.

According to a guy I know who worked, until recently, for Genuity, Sun had the same basic deal, but on an even larger scale.

The cost of distributing software over the Internet is nowhere close to zero.

there is a rapidly growing pool of high quality free software... that will inevitably commoditize all general purpose software so that its effective cost to us will approach zero.

Consider MSC.Nastran. There's no free alternative for finite element analysis. The world of software is bigger than web browsers and email clients, okay? The cost of producing and distributing quality software will never approach zero.

The fact that you could make exactly the same argument for Union Carbide or Enron should give you pause.

It doesn't, though. I know some people, indirectly, through friends, who lost not only their jobs when Enron collapsed, but their savings, too. Most of their accumulated wealth was tied up in Enron stock, and when it lost its value, they lost their life savings. It doesn't matter whether Enron's executives were practicing unethical accounting or not. The collapse of that company was a very bad thing.

The root of it is: what should the balance of power be between corporations and the overall good of the people?

What does the GPL have to do with this?

Re:First Intelligent Post

[doodleboy]

The root of it is: what should the balance of power be between corporations and the overall good of the people?

What does the GPL have to do with this?

Oh my.

Rocket Rick

[sql*kitten]

I'm sure you all remember Belluzzo being pushed out of Microsoft earlier this year. ComputerWorld has a short, but interesting interview with him where he talks about why his new employer, Quantum uses Linux in their appliances." From reading the interview, Belluzzo seems to be pretty amicable to whatever will get the job done, and in this case, it's Linux.

"Rocket" Rick Belluzzo is also the man responsible for SGI's disastrous attempt to drop IRIX and MIPS in favour of x86 workstations running Windows NT. He also dropped the uber-groovy SGI cube logo for the lame "sgi". His "reward" for almost destroying a competitor was a cushy job at Microsoft. SGI have yet to recover and it's by no means certain that they will.

Does Linux really need supporters like this?

Re:Rocket Rick

[Runny]

Agree on the cube logo. However, they still have it on their website. See it spinning.

Re:Rocket Rick

[Ed Avis]

The 'going forward'-ometer registers a worryingly high reading on this article. Don't employ this man.

Re:Rocket Rick

[Gropo]

"Rocket" Rick Belluzzo is also the man responsible for SGI's disastrous attempt to drop IRIX and MIPS in favour of x86 workstations running Windows NT.

I don't think the decision itself was a disaster, rather the execution. I was freelancing for a predominantly sgi-centric printshop service provider at the time those workstations were announced. The engineers that attended the 'big unveiling' recounted that the presentation seemed completely unpolished. Apparently sgi had a troupe of lemurs for a marketing department at that time (still?). The architecture was pretty exciting, and they were even capable of running IRIX as an opt-out... In other words a $4500 fully capable sgi workstation - incapable of selling themselves.

Re:Rocket Rick

[asv108]

"Rocket" Rick Belluzzo is also the man responsible for SGI's disastrous attempt to drop IRIX and MIPS in favour of x86 workstations running Windows NT. He also dropped the uber-groovy SGI cube logo for the lame "sgi". His "reward" for almost destroying a competitor was a cushy job at Microsoft.

The dynamics of the corporate structure is such that one person cannot make major decisions without concensus or at least approval of the board of directors. One man can not bring down a company or make a decision without the approval of and participation of others.

Re:Rocket Rick

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, whatever. In this case the CEO set the direction and lemmings followed him off the cliff. Idiot Belluzzo wanted to match HP's success in Windows workstations a year earlier. Too bad there was no market. In the end SGI stood for nothing and could not differentiate itself in the workstation market.

Re:Rocket Rick

[GroovBird]

Yeah well, you're forgetting this guy.

Dave

Re:Rocket Rick

[Twirlip of the Mists]

The architecture was pretty exciting, and they were even capable of running IRIX as an opt-out...

I think you're thinking of the O2. The O2 was SGI's lowest-end MIPS workstation. It was always available for under $10,000 in the base configuration, and I think the lowest-end models dipped down toward $5,000.

But the NT boxes were completely different. They had Intel processors in them, and could not run IRIX. But they had a really proprietary architecture, which meant they could only run a special built of NT 4.0. That basically put SGI in the service pack business, which was a major distraction for them. Their next-generation NT workstations were designed to run out-of-the-box Windows, and they worked very well. No better than anybody else's, of course, and for considerably more money. But I had one under my desk for about two years, and I never had a complaint about it.

Re:Rocket Rick

[Gropo]

I think you're thinking of the O2

Nope, I was referring to the 320 and 540. After a little googling I couldn't find any evidence of their ability to run IRIX :\ I don't know why I was under that assumption - perhaps I confused it with the included NT UNIX tools when I read the initial specsheet, dunno.

Yeah, it was preposterous to think that 32-bit x86's could power a 64-bit UNIX - or that sgi would cobble together a 32-bit IRIX-for-x86...

Re:Rocket Rick

[groberts65]

The move to x86 and the rebranding were all underway before Bozo came to SGI. The only thing he did was get SGI to drop the ball on OpenGL's momentum in the PC market in favor of the ill fated Fahrenheit, which M$osft had no intention of ever delivering. And then M$oft gave him a fat paycheck and job for essentially ensuring that OpenGL remained a niche, in favor of DirectX/3D taking over the gaming community.

Re:Rocket Rick

[Avwar]

"The problem with democracy is that the will of the majority tends to take on the virtue of morality." -Dr. David Matthews; U.of Alabama. Same old story...sheep mentality. Not always bad, but always worth questioning. Maybe Belluzzo finally asked the right question.

Re:MSNBC has it too

[CaptainBaz]

It's not the interview. I hit 'stop' before it started loading the .jpg, but I think I can guess what it was.

Well, he might like Linux, not their web team

[deanj]

Try to go to Quantum and see th e nice little error message you get. You'd figure for a company that is using Linux in their work, they'd get the web guys on the stick and fix that.

Re:Well, he might like Linux, not their web team

[LinuxGeek8]

Heh, I didn't even get an error message in Konqueror. If I'd use Netscape I would have been redirected to http://www.quantum.com/browser_sitemap_page.html
With IE I would have gone to http://www.quantum.com/AM/default.htm (notice the .htm :-) )
Both pages render fine in Konqueror though...

Re:Well, he might like Linux, not their web team

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't get an error message but I did go to Netcraft and they are definitely using Windows 2000 and IIS5. Go figure.

Re:Well, he might like Linux, not their web team

[p00ya]

Yeah, obviously their web team cbf'd using an else, in addition to IE and Netscape. I use opera, so it was just a quick matter of reidentifying as MSIE6 and reloading. Actual pages render fine, just a poor detection script.

Re:Well, he might like Linux, not their web team

[Reziac]

Because some moron made the initial page javascript-ONLY. I have js turned off (like any sensible person :) so all I got was a blank page (not even an error message).

Tho I did extract http://www.quantum.com/browser_sitemap_page.html from the docsource, which seems to function in a more-useful fashion.

Re:Well, he might like Linux, not their web team

[khuber]

Me too. That sucked. I hate it when websites go out of their way to exclude certain browsers.

Not that I'd ever buy a Quantum drive, but hey.

-Kevin

The HOW2TROLL Trolling Workshop 1 - Profit

[Anonymous Coward]

PREPARE FOR THE HOW2TROLL TROLLING WORKSHOP
Dedicated to teaching quality Trolling skillz

STEP 1 : Pick a story and search through for a highly-rated or otherwise prominent comment in which someone uses a nubmered list. For example, you want to find something like this:

EXAMPLE:

1. Blah!
2. Blah!
3. Blah!

For example, I selected this post as a prime target. There are only a few things to keep in mind: pick an active story and a comment that'll be seen by a lot of people as the target of your troll. The comment MUST contain a numbered list, similar to the above, although the exact style of numbering can vary. Also, try to pick a comment that hasn't already been trolled this way. Every comment with a numbered list will eventually get hit, so you want to be quick.

STEP 2 : Take careful note of the method of numbering that your target post is using. It really doesn't matter, as long as it's numbered. For example, in this post I use text like "STEP 1", "STEP 2", etc. Note this carefully. This method of trolling makes the most sense when the list is a list of ordered steps (such as this vary document you are reading), BUT if the numbered list is something different, such as "REASON 1:", "REASON 2:", etc., hit it anyway! Your troll will be more esoetric and non-sequitur, but all the better: trolling doesn't always HAVE to make sense. Sometimes it's fun to confuse people.

STEP 3 : Now you'll put the information gained from step 2 to good use, as you attack the target you selected. This is where it gets complicated, so pay attention. This is easiest to explain with a couple of examples. Let's say your target looks like this:

TARGET POST:

• 1. I am a Slashbot!
• 2. Gosh, I hope I don't get trolled!
• 3. Blah blah blah, whore for karma!
• 4. In conclusion, I'm SO smart!

Now, to pull off your masterfult act of trollage, you'll want to sneak in, post a reply, and do this:

TROLL REPLY:

• 4. ???
• 5. PROFIT!

Let's say that the post you're replying to is a bit more complex:

TARGET POST:
Reasons Linix is so great!
*REASON 1: My allowance won't cover expensive software.
*REASON 2: Completely off-topic rant about Microsoft.
*REASON 3: I love Linix!!

Now you want to come in and do this:

TROLL REPLY:
*REASON 4: ???
*REASON 5: PROFIT!

Note what I did there: I emulated the exact style of his numbered list, and then added to it in order to cleverly troll him. THAT is the key. If he numbers his list using bold, use bold. If your target uses all caps, use all caps. If he uses Roman Numerals, use Roman Numerals (hint: I II III IV V VI VII VII IX X, then everything repeats from there), etc. Make YOUR list seem like an naturally-flowing conclusion to your TARGET's list. Then give him HELL! Here's the general key:

TARGET POST:
1. Blah!
2. Blah!
3. Blah!
...
X. Blah!

TROLL REPLY
X+1. ???
X+2. PROFIT!

I know it gets complicated when you throw in the algebra, but you should be able to do it. Keep track of the numbers on a piece of paper if you have to. It's vary difficult, but once you try it out, you'll get the hang of it. It's an aquired skill that can only be improved through hard work and practice. So get out there and troll!

Here's a summary:

STEP 1 : Pick your target (active, contains numbered list)
STEP 2 : Gather information (style of the numbered list)
STEP 3 : Nail the target by adding on to his own list!
STEP 4 : ???
STEP 5 : PROFIT!

See, I even did it to my own damn list! That's how easy it is once you become a master at this discipline of trolling! Good luck, young Jedi!!! Go out and troll the world, you motherfucking cuntrag bitches!!

Not on Linux for long

[tomk]

In the interview he states:

Do you think Linux will be an obstacle to an effective partnership between Quantum and Microsoft? If Microsoft gives us a better idea and a better alternative, we could change.

I'd say it's pretty likely that MS will use a carrot-and-stick approach to force him onto Windows. Quantum is looking for a big deal with MS and with a high-profile ex-microsoftie singing the praises of the competition, I'll bet there's a threat that the deal will fall through: that's the stick. MS will probably also offer Quantum a much-discounted price on embedded Windows NT: that's the carrot.

In the end, Quantum will do whatever they need to do to help their bottom line. (not that I blame them.) If the deal with MS is worth more than the cost of Windows licenses, they'll be on Windows before you know it.

Re:Not on Linux for long

[tshak]

I'd say it's pretty likely that MS will use a carrot-and-stick approach to force him onto Windows.

First of all, aside from the OEM deals which forced people to include Windows (this of course has been remedied by the DOJ), people are not forced to use Windows. Rick is a big boy, and makes decisions for himself. MS is not the mob that people make them out to be here. First and formost, he's a businessman. He's looking for the best solution for his business, not a religion. If he feels that Linux is best, it's not because of a bunch of zealots or RMS, it's because he feels it's the best technology. If he see's that MS can provide them with a better technology, it's not because he would have gotten a free yacht - trust me, he has enough of those anyway.

Re:Not on Linux for long

[Malcontent]

What are you saying? That MS does not bribe CEOs of corporations to use windows? If so you are sorely misinformed.

MS does indeed bribe CEOs and CIOs. Sometimes it's a yatch, sometimes it's a rolex, sometimes it's a free trip or two but MS knows how to spread the bribes.

Re:Not on Linux for long

[Dalcius]

I'm all up for being discontent with Microsoft's actions, they often earn it, but I doubt that Billy has a guy working for him named "Vinny" who specializes in "knee-cap work", or that he's known to buy yatchs for people.

Great deals is one thing. Unrelated merchandise is another.

Can you provide links?

Re:Not on Linux for long

[pavera]

A co-worker of mine experienced this first hand,
he was a network admin at Ford Motor Company,
and one day Microsoft invited the whole IT department, and CIO, CTO of Ford out to Seattle. (They used all *nix servers for email/web serving). They had a couple meetings expounding the greatness of win2k server, and then it was to the bars/strippers for the whole weekend, all on MS's tab, along with the 1000/night hotel room for each person... and guess what?? The next month, moved all their servers over to MS... of course the number of servers they needed went for 10 to 150, and the number of IT personnel they needed more than quadrupled... but hey, it was a fun weekend!

low life...

[johnliscombhotmail.c]

I was going to say, isn't this the guy who used to be CEO of SGI and sold out all kinds of IP to M$ and moved the company to NT shit a few years back? We all know the financial problems that surfaced for a once great company after that. I get the feeling that this guy would sell his own soul for a few extra bucks, much like Bill Gates has.

ooo ooo I've got a story for you

[Flamesplash]

Where I work we use Windows and Solaris, cause each provides something useful to us. Will someone please put a story on /. for us now? I think everyone should know this.

If it helps my credibility I interned at Microsoft twice.

short headline

[mirko]

He actually says that Linux offers him some good flexibility and modularity and does the job but he also adds he's open to discussing other solutions with Microsoft and he also points aout that, in embedded appliances, nobody cares about the OS being run.

He doesn't "prefer" it at all...

[Anonymous Coward]

Do the editors read the stories? Nice try.

Re:He doesn't "prefer" it at all...

[Lysol]

Exactly! Read the story and i think the prefer is kinda lame. He says in it he'll use whatever works and right now Linux works. How is that preferring? It's like saying Casio preferrs to use WinCE on their handheld XXX.

Re:Rocket Rick (slightly offtopic)

[schaefms]

Those definitely were some stupid things, but I remember SGI was trying to get into the big internet server market. At the same time, they were selling us buggy hardware and saying "well, if your running the bleeding edge, you're going to have some hiccups." In some ways, the move away from the ultra cool looking computer that's unreliable for everyday work to the servers they're putting out now that are more reliable was a good move. They weren't going to make money on the year they had before their super-cool, super-fast architectures became mainstream. At least selling the machines at 10x the price an equivalent machine would cost a year later.

Malda!

[HaloZero]

Aren't you supposed to be on your honeymoon? GET OFF THE COMPUTER, MAN! :-P

Re:OT: Signal to Noise Ratio = ~0

[ContemporaryInsanity]

Ralsky's revenge ?!?

Minimal friction

[pjmorse]

Sounds like that low-friction, win-win side of him coming out. Any bets that his new software geeks are /. Linux fans and he just didn't want to argue with them?

Re:OT: Signal to Noise Ratio = ~0

[purrpurrpussy]

Nice idea but I doubt even he is a big enough idiot for that! Seriously - ifd you go searching for this stuff you'll get thousands apon thousands of hits including a lot of apparent slashdot "parody" sites (not the right word but I was trying to avoid swearing!!!) smokedot.... blah blah... This really seems to be a concerted effort by (presumably) more than 1 person to just cause chaos.

I often wondered whether the internet would die this way - too many idiots launching automated attacks on each other until the signal disappears in the noise.... it's a frightening idea and doesn't even require intelligence. The code is written it just takes an irresponsible person to launch it. Like virii - fun to write... VERY BAD to let them out!

I wrote one for my QL. It tagged my boot menu to microdrive cartridges... very handy but I'm glad my machine was not on a network!

Exactly

[rgraham]

From reading the interview, Belluzzo seems to be pretty amicable to whatever will get the job done, and in this case, it's Linux.

Yes, use what will get the job done. People (pro-MS/anti-Linux, anti-MS/pro-MS, repeat for Solaris, Mac, BSD...) get so blinded by their allegence to one type of technology they don't realize or refuse to accept that there might be something better out there for a given use. Sitting on my desk right now I have machines running Win2k, OSX and RedHat 7.1 all of which I use for different tasks. Could I use just one OS for all my tasks? Sure, but I perfer to use what works best in a given situation.

Re:Exactly

[wesmo]

Yup! The right term for these type of folks, the ones that get so blinded by, or choose to be blinded by, their nearly religious following of one type of technology, is a "Technology Bigot".

An old colleague of mine used that phrase when referring to a newly hired Network Administrator who outright refused to work on anything other than a Cisco box as her theory was that if it wasn't Cisco, it wasn't worth it. She wouldn't even look at or administrate the Foundry, 3Com, or Nortel equipment.

IMHO, I think that we all have to ask ourselves if we are being a Technology Bigot when we are spec'ing out requirements for new equipment. Do that, and you will find that you purchase equipment that does the job well despite of any personal ties you may have.

Re:Exactly

[Reziac]

Kinda like those who have to jump on the latest and greatest bandwagon no matter what it is. Sometimes you're better off to stick with what you already know works.

In my stable, I've got M$DOS/DRDOS/Win9*/WinME/WinXP/Mandrake7.2, and programs in use dating from 1983 to last week. Whatever works for what I want at the moment.

ZDNet Video

[Anonymous Coward]

The same guy on tape at ZDNet talking about microsoft and why he...left.

http://zdnet.com.com/1601-2-976069.html

LP

Other Things Being Equal,

[Anonymous Coward]

Adequacy Still Sucks Ass!

Stop with this stupid milestones!

[ShwAsasin]

It gets rather irritating to see headlines every day about a couple of people converting. Must every little action in the Linux community be treated as a major milestone?

I like linux, but honestly it is not the best OS in existence. There is no perfect OS in this world, although some would have you believe different.

Rather then always point out the same ridiculous arguments that Linux is better, Windows sux, open-source is better then closed source, why not just accept that people use what they need to get the job done? Yes both OS's can do the same stuff, but I can do certain things 10x faster in Windows then linux, and vice versa.

Announcing every day that people some people are converting really seems pointless when almost all the desktops come with Windows. Consider this, if you wait till the end of the month and announced 10,000 people converted to linux, Microsoft could do the same and say that since there were 1,000,000 desktops sold in the month, 1,000,000 people chose Windows. My point of all this.

WHO CARES! Let people chose on their own, don't advertise every single person, because the general population doesn't give care.

Re:Stop with this stupid milestones!

[Anonymous Coward]

I like linux, but honestly it is not the best OS in existence. Well from that it sounds like OS's can be ranked, at there is indeed an OS that is THE BEST. Enlighten me.

Re:Stop with this stupid milestones!

[platypus]

You are very right, but if I'd do storage solutions, I could see a certain advantage of an os supporting 30 different filesystems out of the box, including some very proofen ones, and a shitload of ways serving files, compared to anything MS has to offer.

Therefore I'd say that indeed linux is better for quantum's applications.

Re:Stop with this stupid milestones!

[ShwAsasin]

In their case, they made a good choice, but Linux and/or Open-Source is not the answer to every question.

Re:Stop with this stupid milestones!

[stephenbooth]

There is no perfect OS in this world, although some would have you believe different.

At this years UK Oracle Users Group conference in one of the Q&A sessions the panel were asked which operating system they felt best for running Oracle on. The most popular answer was VMS with Tru-64 a close second for clustered systems.

I like Linux. I run SuSe 8.1 professional at work, I have to use Windows 2000 as well due to corporate stuff (although pretty much everything I do could also be done just as well if not better from the Linux box - everything could be done on Linux if Samba would work properly, and be easily configurable, and if our ITServices section would either allow HTTP access to the Lotus Domino servers or replace Domino with something like Oracle Collaberation Suite). We've also rolled it out to provide corporate DNS services through BIND 9 (a requirement for MAD but the M$ implementation of BIND 9 didn't work).

Stephen

Re:Stop with this stupid milestones!

[nick this]

How come everyone always forgets what this site is? It's a free site (or ad supported) that promotes its own agenda for its own purposes.

Don't like it? Don't read it. Start your own "ms-bashing free" site.

WHO CARES! Let people chose on their own, don't advertise every single person, because the general population doesn't give care.

... and that's why its not "news for general population". It's "news for nerds", or more correctly "News that Rob & Co find interesting".

Thats the whole premise. Get over it.

Re:Stop with this stupid milestones!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's called "advocacy" and "evangelism".

Think of Steve Ballmer as its largest example right now.

Re:OT: Signal to Noise Ratio = ~0

[droid_rage]

I think you're right. These things are coming out way to fast to be a real person. This is some script kiddie's bot.
I thought there was a way for the /. editors to block a specific IP... Maybe they haven't noticed yet?

So Much for Openness..

[gik]

"We have determined that your Web browser and/or computer's operating system may not support the navigation system of Quantum.com. We recommend that you either upgrade your Web browser to the most recent version or use our site map to browse our site."

That's Moz1.2 folks.

sigh...

Re:So Much for Openness..

[Tellarin]

hey, the parent post is not funny, it's a very serious issue

the problem here is not which OS or product is the best one, but sticking to standards!

Re:So Much for Openness..

[richie2000]

That's Moz1.2 folks.

What, you haven't updated to 1.2.1 yet? ;-)

Re:So Much for Openness..

[Reziac]

I just sent 'em this (first address is the webmaster, the next two are the listed toplevel corporate contacts):

To: online@quantum.com
CC: brad.cohen@quantum.com, leigh.nixon@quantum.com

You might be interested to know that your base page at http://www.quantum.com/ displays BLANK to anyone who does not have javascript enabled (which is about 30% of all users, including some behind corp firewalls that strip js like it or not); in some browsers, even with js enabled, all they get is an error message.

I had to dig http://www.quantum.com/browser_sitemap_page.html out of the docsource to reach a useful page.

To be blunt, js should NEVER be used for required navigation -- it shuts out too many users. For a company that's trying to change its basic direction in a difficult market, this does not strike me as a productive approach.

...oh yeah, ON WINDOWS

[gik]

...forgot about that.

Re:OT: Signal to Noise Ratio = ~0

[Gropo]

Aha! But isn't that the great thing about slashcode? The 'squelch' controls? I'm not too worried - 10 smarteygeeks can easily outmaneuver 10,000 idiotic trolls.

Microsoft's Style

[Mephie]

If you're familiar with Microsoft's culture, my style is very different from Microsoft's style... I'm less confrontational. I'm more win-win, working with people, working with partners. People outside the company liked working with me.

How's that for a candid look inside MS's culture? The guy likes to work with people, likes to talk to people and doesn't explode in an irrational fit when someone says "Linux." No wonder he didn't fit in.

Nah...

[hdparm]

If you really are a proponent of 'the best tool for the job' dogma, you would want to sort out your web site (isn't that a tool?), so it doesn't ask me to upgrade the latest version of the most advanced web browser. Ugrade to what - IE?

is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you just got 'pushed out' of your employer then is it any surprise that your giving them negative publicity?

That's GNU/Linux

[cocotoni]

Come on, Rick... You can pronounce it... GNU! GNU! GNU!...

It would be a great leap for mankind if ex-MS employee calls the OS GNU/Linux.

Re:That's GNU/Linux

[nonmaskable]

Or, maybe he finds GNU/Linux a unpronouncable, ego-driven powergrab whine of a name and prefers simply "Linux".

Or, maybe he said the more correct "XFree/GNU/BSD/Linux...." and the reporter couldn't keep up.

Re:That's GNU/Linux

[wilhelm]

It's pretty likely that since they're working on embedded systems, that they don't include any of the GNU tools. So Linux (the kernel) is the right thing to say.

Does this mean we will see commercials like this?

[one9nine]

"I'm Rick Belluzzo and I'm the former president and chief operating officer of Microsoft Corp."

www.linux.com/switch

Re:First Intelligent Post (doubtful)

[Daniel Phillips]

Wow, Linux is being used in a product that Windows isn't even targeted towards. I don't think that Microsoft cares too much if linux is used in these types of devices. Especially when they still own 95% of the desktop market.

Oh, Microsoft cares all right. But they are fighting an uphill battle against free-and-open in that space. MS has lost a lot of ground to Linux there, is continuing to lose more, and there's really no hope of a comeback.

Actually, those componentized versions of windows were very much the right idea, and Microsoft had an advantage there for a while.

You're mistaken.

[Anonymous Coward]

are absolutely storming the market (and the new ultra-low cost Dell ones pretty much ring the bell or doom for Palm and friend

the truth of the matter is that Pocket PC devices are much bigger and more expensive products because the operating system is bloated. It has a lot of stuff that is a holdover from the PC days that simply is not necessary in the enterprise or anywhere else.

Palm, Handspring and Sony control 81.1% of the market. Compaq, Casio, and Dell (newcomer) combined, control 12.6% of the market.

PocketPC is loaded with proprietary bullshit and makes the conversion of documents a living nightmare.

You lose, Microsoft fanboy.

Re:You're mistaken.

[ergo98]

Palm, Handspring and Sony control 81.1% of the market. Compaq, Casio, and Dell (newcomer) combined, control 12.6% of the market.

Firstly, Dell's PDAs just came out and lowered the bar to even or lower than Palms (for a much, much more feature rich system). Secondly, your numbers are a tad out of date (not really that surprizing). Here we can see that PocketPC currently has 30% of all sales (the "market", if you will), versus compared to 48% for Palm. A tad different from your numbers. This was before Dell virtually halved the price of a PocketPC PDA.

Secondly, the "bloated and more expensive" is an outdated argument as well. Firstly something like the Toshiba e310 or e740 represent among the smallest PDAs available, yet they offer tremendous power. Dell's new PDAs, starting at $199, offer incredible value. And what's with the "proprietary" nonsense, Palm fanboy? And Palm ISN'T? Oh, right, proprietary=Microsoft in Slashdot speak.

Re:You're mistaken.

[Anonymous Coward]

Both of you are idiots, Sharp with the new zaurus is the best. Its Linux based, and as a slashdotter i must go with anything linux based over microsoft. Besides, it is linux AND java based, anyone ever heard of "cross-platform"? So lets forget about both PocketPC and PalmOS and get with a real operating system, LINUX!

Re:First Intelligent Post (doubtful)

[Anonymous Coward]

They're also proof positive that MS can happily componentize windows when it wants to. The whole trial was a joke...

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;

[matthew.thompson]

Visiting www.quantum.com currently gives me:

[Close Window]

We have determined that your Web browser and/or computer's operating system may not support the navigation system of Quantum.com. We recommend that you either upgrade your Web browser to the most recent version or use our site map to browse our site.

Thank you,

--- The Quantum Web Team ---

If that's Quantum's support of alternatives to Microsoft I'm severely disappointed.

Re:Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;

[Troed]

I get a completely empty window. I'm running Opera v7 beta 2 on Windows 2000.

Re:Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;

[rsborg]

We have determined that your Web browser and/or computer's operating system may not support the navigation system of Quantum.com. We recommend that you either upgrade your Web browser to the most recent version or use our site map to browse our site.

Phoenix 0.5 and Mozilla 1.1 both seem to work fine for me (on Win2k). What version of 'Zilla/NS are you using?

Re:Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;

[tf23]

I just got that same message using Mozilla 1.2.1 with Windows XP.

Re:Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;

[seanadams.com]

www.quantum.com: blank screen for me in Mozilla/Linux

Re:Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm using NetBSD and phoenix, and it seems to come up fine.

Like, switch...

[Anonymous Coward]

I was writing code on the PC at Microsoft and it was like beep beep beep. And then, like, half my code was gone, and I was like, huh?

It devoured my code. It was really good code. Then I had to write it again and I had to do it fast, and it wasnt so good.

So, like, Bill fired me for that crappy code. It was kind of a ... bummer.

My name is Rick Beluzzo, and I'm a Linux user.

First Unintelligent Post

[Anonymous Coward]

What the fuck?

How is this informative? He doesn't have fucking numbers to back it up.

In an attempt to get modded up I will to spew general hype.

Microsoft Dominates the Web Server segments worldwide and is taking unices by storm. A vision that was originally called bloated and overpowered is proving otherwise. Linux as a webserver is nearly extinct, because there are only 2 people who use it. There is Carl in Germany, and some Dutch dude who works at the grocery store. The rest have dropped the Apache and switched to virus proof IIS.

Re:First Unintelligent Post

[ergo98]

It's called industry intelligence my moronic friend (backed by stats like this). Already Toshiba had captured virtually all of the presses hearts with the e series (because suddenly Pocket PCs weren't the "too-large" devices they had been), and now Dell has captured the hearts and minds of even more by offering sub-Palm pricing on far more powerful devices. Perhaps you're sitting in Palm headquarters fervently pretending that you're under no risk, but rest assured that sitting on your laurels for several years wasn't too wise.

As a sidenote, I find it absolutely hilarious that you try to pretend that I karma whored...in a post where I SAID SOMETHING PRO-MICROSOFT (or as another poster stated, I'm a "Microsoft fanboy"). Maybe you're near hear, but it's pretty much the opposite, and that usually ensures moderation obliteration. Indeed, I know that it's only a matter of time before some anti-Microsoft fanatics come in and stomp my post to -1, and I would honestly be disappointed if it didn't happen.

Re:First Unintelligent Post

[Tralfamadorian]

I didn't read your original post, but you should know that in these parts saying something pro-microsoft is a sure way to get yourself modded up. I know that sounds far fetched considering that this is /., but it's true.

Re:First Unintelligent Post

[Oliver Defacszio]

Ha! Man, you're either new around here (seems not), lying, or truly the most unaware human stumbling about this planet. I hope you're just lying.

Desperate Linux community

[Tomster]

Articles like this point out just how desperate the Linux community is for approval and validation. "Oooh look, an ex-Microsoftie is using Linux!! That must mean he thinks it's better!! We rock!!"

No. An employee of Microsoft, who may or may not have liked the company's software, is now working for another company, which happens to use Linux quite a bit. And he may or may not like the new company's software better. He'll use whatever gets the job done, be it Microsoft, Linux, or paper-and-pencil.

-Thomas

Re:Desperate Linux community

[Anonymous Coward]

"WIndows NT 3.51 workstation was approved for Orange book security by the NSA [as long as it's not hooked to a network]".

Windows NT 4.0: "Windows NT 4.0 is Orange book secure", but it was a little-publicized item that MS did not go through the entire certification process, but managed to finagle someone to accept that since it was "based" on so much Orange-book-certified stuff, it also must be inherently Orange-book-secure as well. They sure marketed it that way for awhile.

And they drove the guy who did the bulk of the work on it to death, essentially, because he tried to fight the MS Marketing Machine.

And you think that Linux people are desperate?

And before that, HP

[Anonymous Coward]

And before breaking Silicon's will to live, he "aligned" HP with Intel. Meaning: Starting HP down the slippery slope from PA-RISC to Itanic. This guy is a menace to UNIX!

I was hoping he would stay with Microsoft the rest of his days, but apparently they sent him out on another search-and-destroy mission. I bet that before long, he'll "align" Quantum with microsoft, switch their appliances to Windows, and bancrupt the company....

Short sighted..?

[marcushnk]

The guy seems a bit short sighted..
As he says.. linux is modular and goes great with embedded/prepackaged devices..

yet it wont make it as a desktop replacement..

to me it seems like all desktops will end up being embedded/pre-packaged devices (solid state thin clients?) so if thats going to be the case.. then LINNUX WILL BE the desktop of the future...

OT: High-five Video

[xanadu-xtroot.com]

Speanking of MS, does anyone know where I can DL that one video of BillyG and a few other folks at some press conference (or whatever it was) where this one guy makes a joke about BillyG making CTRL+ALT+DEL popular? I know it was posted here a while back, and I've googled for it, but I can't find it. Anyone know where it is?

(Yes, I'm using my +2 (a rare occasion) so more people can see this honest question. Also, yea, I know, I'll get modded down, I've been capped for a over a year, so...)

Not far enought back

[WindBourne]

Rick started at HP and at point ordered 350K engines from canon. He then later went to canon and apologized to the workers who were being laid off. For that screw-up, HP promoted him to being in charge of HP' desktop computers, where he merged the unix desktop and desktop system together. He managed to kill the Unix desktop, while saying that he would build it up. When his division was headed down, he went to SGI, where he did his best to destroy irix and SGI. He left MS when their numbers are starting down (yes profits are up, but numbers are down). Now, he is at Quantum, where he has sold off half the company, and it was running Linux. MS is knocking on the door. Guess which road rick will go down? I predict that Quantum will be gone in about 2 years or less.

what am i going to do now

[b17bmbr]

I don't think Linux is going to be successful as a desktop replacement.

damn, i've been using linux as my sole desktop for almost three years. well, maybe he's right. maybe linux isn't a desktop replacement, maybe it's just a desktop improvement!!! of course, if more people used linux, then maybe they need to buy prepbuilt linux appliances, they could install/configure on their own...hmmm.......

Re:what am i going to do now

[mla_anderson]

A Redhat 8.0 installation is about as easy as XP if not easier. The default installation comes with all the office and internet apps a user would want. It is the installable version of a Linux appliance.

Until large vendors start selling systems with Linux pre-installed the average PC user will think of Linux as a hard to use OS that doesn't work with his stuff. (Because his stuff is in MS formats.)

I'm all for people using what works best. For me at home Windows works best for gaming, for everything else Linux is my desktop. I use Linux not because I'm rabidly anti-MS, I use Linux because I don't have to spend so much time keeping the system running. At work Windows works best 90% of the time. For the other 10% I boot up in Linux.

*sigh*

[John_Renne]

All too much these discussions become one big linux-commercial (or even some kind of holy war between Microsoft and GNU/Linux users). I guess the man is right when he says use the right tool for the right job. If the GNU/Linux OS on one point will satisfy your needs better than a Microsoft OS use is. On the other hand if a Microsoft OS fullfils your needs, use it too

Why can't we all just get along?

Belluzzo was from SGI

[I'm just joshin]

He's from SGI, is it any surprise he likes *nix better than Windows? I still don't know why MS hired him. The guy was a personality-less bozo that did sqat in his time at Microsoft.

Re:Belluzzo was from SGI

[Dionysus]

Well, considering he introduced the NT line at SGI and pretty much ran the company to the ground before jumping ship and moved to Microsoft, yes, it's a surprise.

Subtle Motivations

[RTMFD]

Maybe the real motivation behind his comments to the press is to influence any of the negotiations that may be ongoing between Microsoft and Quantum. Remember that only a couple of weeks ago, there was a story on how Microsoft gave subsidies to people who mentioned Linux while haggling over software licenses. Maybe these comments are in the same vein?

Netcraft Says !!!!!

[ultraslide]

The site www.quantum.com is running Microsoft-IIS/5.0 on Windows 2000. FAQ

So much for his Linux support or "right tool for the right job approach".

Can you say lip service ???

Re:Netcraft Says !!!!!

[Meorah]

yeah, because apache on linux is the only viable option for arguably the simplest server in existence... a web server.

They're using linux just to have something that their hardware management tools can run on for their appliances, ala IBM.

Quantum is still going to use tons of MS applications and server products if that's what their IT managers are most comfortable with. They're just exploiting linux because licensing is free, kernel is configurable, and performance is tweakable.

Re:Netcraft Says !!!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Right tool for the right task does not mean "use linux for everything." Maybe there is some feature of IIS that they need. Get your head out of your ass. Oh wait, this is slashdot, it's stuck there permanently.

More BS stories

[gordgekko]

Wow, a ex-M$ using Linux...what a non-story. We going to see any stories about Linux users who dual boot over the lack of quality Linux apps or would that be too controversial? Yeah, mark it as a troll...consistency is worth it.

This is news?

[Call Me Black Cloud]

If I worked for Ford and drove a Ford, then Ford fired me what do you think I'd be driving?

Re:This is news?

[Boone^]

A Mazda? (40% owned by Ford)

He prefers Linux because...

[waltc]

he's being paid to prefer it. Hopefully, no confusion exists on that point.

Re:He prefers Linux because...

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod parent up... One sentence captures the gist...

You think that's good?

[coopaq]

Well I heard that the former CEO of Linux just
declared she likes Windows better since it's an
American operating system and not a terrorist's
first choice.

-J

Re:You think that's good?

[user32.ExitWindowsEx]

former CEO of Linux...she.....
Is Linus getting a divorce? :p

It was a good paper...

[roman_mir]

I was working for Microsoft and I made a ton of money. It was good money but then I realized I could make even more money by working for Quantum. So now I work here. I think they use Linux here. I had a rough discussion with Steve Balmer before leaving. ... bummer....

I am Rick Belluzzo and I am the former chief operating officer of Microsoft.

Re:Ex-Microsofter, Ex-SGIer, Ex-HPer

[Bob Bitchen]

This guy has too many "x" marks. At HP he was selling printers. How hard is it to sell HP printers. At SGI he made a feeble attempt to sell NT workstations. (that idea started before he arrived BTW) His main claim was to change the logo and the name. Wow! The branding study cost $10 million. Nice job if you can get it. On to MS. Initially he was involved in selling cars on the internet. (internet used car salesman) They booted him up and then out. So he's the chameleon and will say anything. If it was OS/2 he would say the same thing. He's reading from a script.

WTF?

[destiney]

[Close Window]

We have determined that your Web browser and/or computer's operating system may not support the navigation system of Quantum.com. We recommend that you either upgrade your Web browser to the most recent version or use our site map to browse our site.

Thank you,

--- The Quantum Web Team ---

I wonder...

[aclarke]

I wonder if anybody who ever worked for a "linux company" now either uses a Microsoft product or works for Microsoft. Wouldn't THAT be crazy??

Re:First Intelligent Post (doubtful)

[ergo98]

But they are fighting an uphill battle against free-and-open in that space

One thing that should be pointed out is that with Windows PocketPC, for instance, the Platform Builder basically includes the source code for the entire platform, and you tailer the build to target your device/system (and of course you can change anything in the code that you want). Open source, in that you can modify it, but not free.

However it should be noted that this idea that Windows had the market and Linux is not taking it is incorrect: A slew of `proprietary' OS' owned embedded devices, but then Windows, and pretty much at the same time Linux, decided to get in it. Microsoft has had a hard time mostly because they're Microsoft: A lot of companies won't partner with them because they are branches of companies that compete with Microsoft in other areas (one of those pitfalls for both companies in that their strategy open remains static across the organization).

You know that points out one of the best companies for avoiding those sorts of constraints on their decisions: IBM. IBM has always impressed me in that they're looking out for IBM (which is what all companies should be doing): They push Linux from one side while building high end Windows servers in another. They'll partner with Microsoft for .NET, while on the other end they're pushing Websphere and J2EE.

Re:Rocket Rick (slightly offtopic)

[Twirlip of the Mists]

I remember SGI was trying to get into the big internet server market.

In those days, and somewhat before, SGI already had a big chunk of the Internet server market. Not for small sites, or for providers who host small sites, but for giant sites like Travelocity. As far as I know, Travelocity still runs on IRIX.

The NT thing was an attempt to get into the broader desktop workstation market. SGI saw which way the wind was blowing, but they reacted the wrong way. They sold complete PCs-- clunky, overpriced, and incompatible. That business model completely failed for SGI, just as it failed for Intergraph a couple of years later. (And it then failed for SGI again when they bought Intergraph's workstation business. What goes around comes around, I guess.)

It's a shame that SGI couldn't have figured out a way to put Infinite Reality on a PCI card-- and sell it for $5,000-- in 1997. They might have owned the professional workstation graphics market, and maybe even the low-end gamer market, by now. Instead, though, they got the idea in their heads that system bandwidth was more important on a PC than interactive graphics performance. Which just turned out not to be true.

Ironically, SGI now has the ability to put Infinite Reality-class graphics on a PCI card. The Fuel uses V12 graphics (which are comparable to IR in a lot of ways) on a modified PCI bus. Unfortunately, the world has moved on, and it's too late.

There's always more to it than "getting it done"

[Chris Burke]

Yes, use what will get the job done.

No, don't just use what will get the job done. That's engineering at its most primitive, but you can do better. What about the next job, that may be similar? Will it get that job done easily? Is it maintainable? What about when it stops getting the job done in a couple years, after you're gone? Can it be fixed? What if the "job" changes? Deciding whether or not these are issues, and whether or not a solution addresses these issues, is something engineers should think about.

All that is still just things related to the specific computational task you expect the solution to perform. There are tradeoffs beyond that space that, despite being an engineer, are valid to consider.

Other questions, like is the ability for the solution to get the job done dependent on one company? What are the costs of dealing with that company? Will I be locked in to using that one company's products? If that company stops supporting my solution, what are my options?

I'm not saying you're wrong that people should consider more than one solution, and use what is appropriate. I'm just arguing that "getting the job done" is not the only thing that should be considered, and that as a result what appears to be blind allegience may not be.

For example, Venezuela's government is considering more than just "getting the job done" when they decide to use Open Source. The mandate to use it across government is based on those non-technical aspects of their situation that can only be satisfied by open products. It's not blind allegience, it's pragmatism -- the same engineering tradeoffs made in our jobs every day -- based on more than just technical aspects.

Or for myself, I simply value Free in my software where I will take a Free solution over non- even if the Free doesn't -technically- perform as well.

Again, I'm not disagreeing with your main point, that each situation may be different and the decision should be made not on what tech you like, but on what is best. I'm just saying "best" can be based on more complex things which seemingly drive out other solutions as if they are not considered.

Actually thats not what he said

[Vicegrip]

He did in fact say he thinks Linux is a better fit for his company because in his view, it is extremely modular, can be modified to do whatever they need it to do, and it is free.

I think it's safe from that comment that he thinks Linux is good, don't you think?

He also said if Microsoft offered him something that met his needs better than what linux could do, he'd re-consider their products then.

Also, with all the FUD coming from Microsoft these days about Linux, I don't think it's uncalled for to point out that not everyone who comes from there toes the Ballmer line like a Borg drone. Linux is an exceptional fit for solving many problems; reminding people of that is a necessary thing to do since Microsoft is increasingly resorting to below-the-belt tactics to try to slow down its adoption.

Re:Actually thats not what he said

[Tomster]

Here are the relevant paragraphs:

"Q:Would you consider yourself a Linux advocate now? A:I consider myself an advocate of whatever allows us to achieve our goals most effectively. And today, for us, that certainly is Linux because it's free; it has a good modular design; you can modify it to meet your needs. There is nothing else that can meet our needs like that.

Q:Do you think Linux will be an obstacle to an effective partnership between Quantum and Microsoft? A:If Microsoft gives us a better idea and a better alternative, we could change. Our customers, by and large, don't really care what the operating system is. That's what's different about an appliance -- the customer really doesn't care what the components are."

It doesn't say he prefers Linux or thinks it is inherently a better solution; it says they're using Linux right now for certain (very valid) reasons and nothing else has those advantages, but if a better idea or alternative shows up from Microsoft they could change. Which is exactly how he should act: technology-agnostic.

My point wasn't that he doesn't think Linux is a good solution, but that Linux-ites want to hear how great Linux is and how it is much better than Windows. So this rather mundane piece gets spun to make it seem more like he's a Linux advocate/convert.

Good points in your last paragraph, and I agree -- it is important to remind people that Linux is a good solution.

-Thomas

Re:Actually thats not what he said

[Vicegrip]

Q.Would you consider yourself a Linux advocate now? A.I consider myself an advocate of whatever allows us to achieve our goals most effectively. And today, for us, that certainly is Linux because it's free; it has a good modular design; you can modify it to meet your needs. There is nothing else that can meet our needs like that.

I think we mostly agree, however, I still feel that this is usable as an advocacy piece simply because of the fact he is asserting that Linux is best solution for his company. But, I admit part of the interest I derived from this story was definitely due because of whom the comments were attributed to. Which, addmitedly, is mostly sparkle value.

I personally like hearing stories like this, since they help me in my efforts to promote to my company Linux solutions.

Re:Actually thats not what he said

[Meorah]

I think that's what tomster was trying to point out. This guy claims he wants to use the right tool for the job at hand, which happens to be linux for this job. You take that information, and try to proselytize your company to linux as a solution in and of itself.

I would say you need to take into account whether an intel server is sufficient for the job first, then if it is, find out what the best application is for the tasks at hand. From there, figure out the OS you want to use and then finally the hardware that fits the task while stably talking to the OS. It seems linux's biggest pitfall is still the "best application for the task at hand" stage. Obviously if they are going to create the app from scratch, Linux is an easy solution for the OS.

Is he already in negotiations for his next job?

[marian]

This is the same guy who became CEO of SGI and was in negotiations with MS almost the entire time he was there, then gave no notice to SGI when he quit.

This is the same guy who supposedly told the SGI board of directors that "It's too hard to be CEO of SGI" after running the company into the ground in an amazingly short period of time.

This is the same guy who "helped" SGI lose a significant part of their already niche market by forcing the company to switch platforms away from what they did best.

I wonder how much MS is paying him for what he's doing now? But I'm not bitter.

What the hell of a company...

[Anonymous Coward]

is this? If you try to access the Quantum website anything else that MSExplorer, you get a nice popup: "We have determined that your Web browser and/or computer's operating system may not support the navigation system of Quantum.com. We recommend that you either upgrade your Web browser to the most recent version or use our site map to browse our site." As Explorer is not available for Linux -thanks god ;D- that means that Quantum workers cannot access their own website...

Re:First Intelligent Post (doubtful)

[Sj0]

I think this proves they were lying in every concievable sense. There is already a product available which will componentize Windows 98/98SE/ME, and the same company is working on doing the same with 2k/XP.

If I could get away with as much prejury as Microsoft, I'd be able to do all sorts of fun stuff.

"I accuse you of robbing the bank!"

"It's impossible for me to have robbed the bank!"

"Oh. Very well. Here's a slap on the wrist(With a healing rod) and a few bucks for your troubles."

Re:First Intelligent Post (doubtful)

[Sj0]

D'oh! My HTML is gone!

www.litepc.net is the evidence.

Linux: scream-inducing at Microsoft

[commbat]

From the interview, when asked how his style, while at Microsoft, was different from others:

People outside the company liked working with me. For example, if someone raised the subject of Linux, I didn't jump up and scream. I said, "Talk to me about why you like Linux, and let's talk through this."

This is telling. IMO, if 'linux' is a scream-inducing word at Microsoft, then the company must be really scared. After all, screaming is an irrational, emotional response that doesn't lend itself to effective problem-solving.

Re:Linux: scream-inducing at Microsoft

[skidrash]

>After all, screaming is an irrational, emotional response that doesn't lend itself to effective problem-solving.

Never read "Barbarians Led by Bill Gates", have you? Screaming, pissing, hissy fits are SOP at MS.

Some of those guys may even do it every day to keep in practice.

Re:Linux: scream-inducing at Microsoft

[Chris Johnson]

Actually, this is more of a glimpse into why Belluzzo is a more adaptable businessman than anyone at Microsoft, apparently. It seems he has the capacity to negotiate and build relationships. That's valuable, and it also seems like Microsoft thoroughly lack this quality.

It's like, if you don't do what Microsoft wants, on some level they will throw a fit- their basic response is screaming and ranting like a two-year old. They are not in the slightest bit interested about why you might want something non-Microsoft- not on an emotional level- their only real interest is in making you behave according to what they want, and you are to succeed and thrive on THEIR terms and in the way they expect. This is limiting.

Belluzzo seems more inclined to be inquisitive- more likely to figure out what a customer's real terms are. That does not mean that he has more clout or power than Microsoft, because Microsoft's approach is geared to a straight power struggle in which they can generally win by sheer force. Belluzzo is more likely to win people's loyalty, and build relationships.

It's rather telling that the qualities of building loyalty and relationships are sorely devalued in modern-day corporate capitalism: in fact, the way things work today, Belluzzo's skills are 'worthless'. Yet at the same time this same value system is producing a self-destructive downward spiral of reduced functionality (see the thread on worsening consumer electronics!) which is unstoppable under the corporate capitalist 'rules', and to a point will continue to be rewarded just as, to a point, the dot-com excess was rewarded.

Belluzzo apparently adheres to an older school- one that has difficulty competing in the winner-take-everything corporate capitalist arena, but which has hidden advantages.

Basically, this is the guy who winds up with all your customers- when you push the profit motive too far and slip up. You can go corporate Darwinist and produce junk and rig the market so there's no choice and get yourself in an IBM-like position where you're the only option, but all this really does is starve potential competitors of the ability to thrive with largish marketshares. Instead they become like Apple, thriving with a splinter. When you slip up, or your contempt for your customers becomes too great, guys like Belluzzo are there building loyalties and relationships and they are positioned to capitalize on your mistakes.

The next guy who comes around leveraging the market and jumping up and down on tables screaming when he doesn't get his way- that guy might well grab those customers away from Belluzzo again. But not for long- only until he too screws up.

suure.

[kguilber]

Yet Quantum's site launches a popup window to tell Mozilla users their browser may be incompatible. If they are going to use Linux, shouldn't they support the popular Linux browser?

Re:Re: First Intelligent Post - NOT

[Anonymous Coward]

That is pretty much my point, "dumb", as I've used it, includes "lazy" and potentially includes "impatient", however I think the point that most end users don't want to learn something new and challenging needs to be made. Its just a fact, not a value judgement (well, not entirely).

You just made a judgement that has no value!

The "dumb" bit lets companies which provide services that do everything for you prosper.

Actually they are smart to so this. Unless the person will profit in some resonable way, why should that person spend their free time fighting with a unsupported hardware,software when they could spend that time doing somthing with their family, promoting or working on their business, etc, etc. Like you said, they buy software, hardware that the company did everything for them.

Re:small correction

[abigor]

http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?mode_u=off&mo de_w=on&site=travelocity.com

The site travelocity.com is running Netscape-Enterprise/4.1 on Solaris 8.

Some more info about Quantum

[Outland Traveller]

I just looked at a Quantum Guardian 4400 NAS device recently.

It's a 1U rackmount system with four IDE drives, a custom motherboard that sports a 1Ghz PIII and two onboard gigabit ethernet controllers, usb, a serial port, and two onboard promise IDE controllers.

The NAS boots linux (a 2.4.18 variant) off of some kind of flash chip and then uses linux's software raid and LVM to manage the drives. The drives are formatted using the XFS filesystem

You use a small self-contained java application to initially set the IP address, and thereafter you can use a web browser to administer it. It has features up the ying-yang, including various backup options, automated updates, failover, load balancing, and synchronizing with peer NAS devices. It supports a full suite of filesharing protocols and has quota support, access control, etc.

You can even enable an SSHD server and log in, although I haven't been able to find the root password yet. I don't know if quantum will provide it willingly or if you will have to aquire it yourself.

I benchmarked it's NFS performance against similar configurations we've built in house and it is well optimized for latency and bandwidth in the ranges allowed by gigabit ethernet. In particular there were no lengthy pauses that we sometimes see on ext3-based systems.

I was impressed with how well they were able to polish the box and make it appear that so many different, complex filesharing subsystems and features were seemlessly integrated.

On the desktop

[krygny]

Another one spewing the mantra that Linux will never be successful as a desktop OS. Many have said it, and I don't know who uttered it first but ...

"Linux is inevitable."

Yet another person who fails to understand the GPL

[Jimithing DMB]

Apple certainly could have used the Linux kernel and much of the GNU software rather than BSD. Which by the way, you are incorrect in stating that it was based on FreeBSD. Only with the newest darwin release (used by OS 10.2) is it actually based on FreeBSD code. Previously it was based on a much older branch of BSD and Apple brought in some features from FreeBSD.

In any case, the point is that if Apple had used Linux and GNU then they would have to release their modifications to GNU utilities and Linux under the GPL rather than taking BSD licensed code, modifying it, and releasing the changes under the more restrictive APSL. They would still have been completely free to run their own windowserver and other proprietary software on top of Linux.

What exactly is it about the GPL that seems to just scare the shit out of most commercial developers? Please quit spreading FUD about how we should all make our code "free in the truest sense of the word" under a BSD license. The arguments have been gone over several times, and the only thing I've ever gotten out of them is that as a free software developer I'm supposed to be a charity to everyone in the world. Sorry, that's not how it works for me-- I expect in return for showing you some of my code that you show me some of yours.

Sensational Hyped Title!

[peterpi]

Ex-Microsofter Rick Belluzzo Prefers Linux

And I prefer a microwave oven, if the task at hand is warming up some food.

Settle down guys, prefering unix for a task that unix is good at is not newsworthy.

Re:small correction

[Twirlip of the Mists]

The site travelocity.com is running Netscape-Enterprise/4.1 on Solaris 8.

The HTTP server, sure. The actual applications are running on lots and lots of SGIs. If I remember correctly, Travelocity was buying a few new 32-processor SGI systems every quarter for several years.

Belluzzo kills everything thing he touches.

[Anonymous Coward]

Or atleast hurts the company he works for/owns somehow. Just google hime for some lovely tales about him nearly destroying SGI, F*$%ing HP up, lowering Microsoft's sales.

ex-microsofter

[Anonymous Coward]

Now, bigger and harder

Another Misleading Headline

[Ringwraith]

He never actually says he likes Linux better. He says: " consider myself an advocate of whatever allows us to achieve our goals most effectively. And today, for us, that certainly is Linux ..."

Of course, the /. headline says he "prefers Linux." I'm sure it will say that same thing when this story is posted over the weekend....

Re:Yet another person who fails to understand the

[Twirlip of the Mists]

What exactly is it about the GPL that seems to just scare the shit out of most commercial developers?

The part about how you have to give away your source code for free to anybody who asks for it, even if you so much as link to a GPL-licensed library at compile time. I'm pretty sure that's it.

Besides, who needs the headache of working with the GPL when there are perfectly good BSD-licensed alternatives available? That's why you see commercial (and widely used) operating systems incorporating BSD code, but not GPL code.

Hmm... OT...

[cr0sh]

This is interesting - maybe you know something or can point me to a link.

I know that Ford has a stake in Mazda - but I wondered how it worked. I own a 1994 Ford Ranger. Now, when I bought the truck, Mazda small pickup trucks looked different, but yet still similar enough to Ford Rangers that you could easily confuse the two (the main tipoff was the third brakelight). Later, Ford introduced the Ranger Splash and other "curvy" Rangers (and trucks across thier whole line - personally I think it makes them look stupid, but that is my opinion) - the Mazdas remained the same. However, in the past couple of years or so, Mazda pickups seem identical to 1994-1995 Ford Rangers - I mean, if you sat my truck next to a 2001-2002 Mazda Pickup, you would swear they were the same vehicle. I am sure there are differences (perhaps mainly under-hood, and elsewhere), but they seem similar enough that you could swap-parts, etc.

I just want to know if Mazda and Ford is more closely related than I think - or do they swap designs, etc - plus, whether I could "upgrade" parts in my current truck with "new" Mazda parts, etc (and before you bash the Ranger - yeah, I have heard horror stories, but - my Ranger has 114k miles on it, and is still running great)...

Re:Hmm... OT...

[Boone^]

I own a 2002 Mazda Protege5, and supposedly in 2004-5 the MP5 will share the Ford Focus ZX5 platform (frame, etc), but the fit & finish will still be pure Ford or Mazda. They'll share where it doesn't make sense to differentiate, but I doubt it'll turn into a GMC Truck vs. Chevrolet truck (identical except for the badges).

Re:Yet another person who fails to understand the

[drive]

this is just my understanding of the grandparent's post and the GPL versus the BSD license. i don't intend to start a flame war, ok? if i'm wrong, correct me. it's the only way i'll learn... if a large company was to do what with linux (under the GPL) what Apple did, they would invest a signifigant amount of cash into development costs to produce a desktop focused, user-friendly OS. under the GPL they would have to release their source. this would put competitors at an advantage and also allow a free release of their OS making it difficult to profit. for free software and open-source developers the GPL is great. it allows us to learn and grow from the existing codebase. but for a publicly traded company, it simply does not make sense. why would i spend money on OS X if i could get all the source for free? or for that matter if another company could get Apple's source (Apple is only an example) and produce a similar product which they release for free. again, if am i wrong correct. but this is why i think the BSD license is more attractive to commercial developers.

Why oh why does this idea continue?

[UncleRage]

Sorry, I know this is way off topic... but I've gotta get this off my chest.

Why do so many people hype the idea of Linux on the desktop? Linux has survived (and grown for nearly 12 years) simply by appealing to a niche market of computer enthusiats who didn't want to play ball w/ the big guys.

In those (nearly) 12 years, non-enthusiasts have seen that they could put this particular product to use as a development/admin/server tool. Meanwhile, the enthusiasts have continued to tinker, modify and play w/ their "toy" (I do not use the term "toy" in a derogative sense!) to the point that it has become an alternative to computing standards (i.e. Windows/Mac OS).

But, that does not mean that the burden of responsibility to change YOUR feelings of computer use falls into the hands of the Linux development community.

If you don't like the way Windows works -- contact Microsoft. If you think that the Mac OS is too/not enough something or another -- contact Apple. Vote w/ your credit cards. Don't demand that Linux eradicate your unhappiness with whatever system you've chosen to use in the past. It 'aint gonna happen.

Look, in the long term, 12 years is an awfully small amount of time for a hobby project to become what it is today: A very robust operating system w/ practical applications for software development, systems administration and networking solutions. It also happens to make a damn fine desktop for someone willing to put the time and energy into it. But it's completely unfair to expect the hard working development community (who rarely sees any compensation -- other than kudos from their colleagues) to create a perfect desktop environment for every technophobe on the planet.

If you want the perfect Linux Desktop solution -- Take the time to learn to do it; that's the beauty of Linux. If you don't have the inclination to do that, then hire a (team of) Linux developers to design one for you. Otherwise, sit back and enjoy the show.

Computers should be useful. Using computers should be fun. Linux is useful and fun. Where's the problem?

----

Re:Why oh why does this idea continue?

[jmorris42]

Because the smart ones among us know that if we can't get a critical mass of users in the next couple of years the game is over. Microsoft IS going to try closing the platform which means we won't be able to 'free ride' on the commodity hardware market which built up around DOS/Windows. If we don't have enough users willing to fork over hard currency to keep the Taiwainese and Chinese board makers going we are all hosed.

Sorry, forgot to add this qoute to my reply:

[UncleRage]

>>I think there's one scenario in which Linux could become a viable desktop alternative.

Re:Yet another person who fails to understand the

[Anonymous Coward]

You would have to release the source to any modifications to GPL'ed files (or files directly derived from GPL code). You woudn't have to give away the kitchen sink though, if you made a proprietary window manager you could keep the code fro that, so long as you developed it from the ground up.

For an example see NVida, they make driver level programs and they have avoided the GPL thus far.

Slashdot moderation

[Anonymous Coward]

Hilariously some moderator with an inflated sense of self-worth and a serious anti-Microsoft axe to grind went through and marked one of my posts redundant, one offtopic, and one flamebait (all the same person). What a waste of moderation points.

Re:Yet another person who fails to understand the

[Jimithing DMB]

Thank you! Finally someone around here who just wants to know what the deal is instead of spouting off ill-informed opinions.

You are partially correct and partially wrong, just like the parent to my post (the great-grandparent of this post). Yes, the GPL requires that one release the source under GPL to anyone who receives a binary (in practice that means everyone, including competitors). But you have to understand that the GPL specifically stops at the linking level. That is, if I combine my code with GPL code then my code falls under the GPL. Now the LGPL is a bit different. The LGPL actually will allow me to link non-LGPL code with the LGPL library/libraries so long as the end user can replace the LGPL portion with a newer version such that he can fix bugs in it. In practice this usually turns into dynamic linking, although technically one could provide an archive file of everything except the LGPL library and allow users to link that with a newer version of the library to produce their own executable with the newer version included.

So, let's say I start a company called Orange computers and I take GNU and other free software, make it into an easy to use desktop system and sell it. The big question is: Do I have to release my code? The answer is actually REALLY simple. /IF/ my code links with GPL code, yes. If I link with LGPL cdoe I must allow the LGPL portion to be replaced. If I don't link with any (L)GPL code, I can do whatever the hell I please. So let's say I improve some GNU utilities like "ls" and "find". I'd have to then release my modifications under the GPL. And if I improve glibc (the GNU LGPL C library) then I must release those modifications. But if I write software /using/ glibc or gtk or gnome libraries or any other LGPL libraries then I do NOT need to release my code. So in short I merely need to release code that I have built other code upon. I do not have to release the code for the entire system just because I included some (L)GPL software along with it. In fact, Apple (and friends)'s claims that they use BSD because they are afraid of GNU is a complete and total lie. Hmm.. does anybody remember which compiler the BSDs use? Oh yeah.. GCC which is GPL software (and the earlier versions were in fact written mostly by RMS). Indeed, the original NeXT system used GCC as well.

Did Apple release their changes to gcc? You bet! Did the fact that they built everything using gcc and included gcc along with proprietary software on the developers CD require them to release all their code as GPL? NO IT DID NOT.

So in short, I am extremely sick of the BSD bigots claiming the GPL is viral and evil and that we should all switch to BSD. I don't doubt at least some of these (supposed) BSD supporters are Microsofties trying to give the GNU project a bad name. The sad reality is that GNU is the only chance that programmers and users have left. Look at the alternatives. A bunch of people spreading lies about how the GPL requires all software to be free of cost and how the only way to make money on software is to bet the farm on Microsoft. Look at how many software developers now have to retool from VB to C# because Microsoft on a whim has decided they should move from one really really shitty quiche-eater language to a halfway decent quiche-eater language. At least with GNU you aren't fucked when MS decides they don't like you or that MS needs to change its strategy.

It's like Dennis Leary says. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors wife? Fuck that, you covet his wife, his car, his house, because you know what pal, he's coveting every INCH of your shit. The GPL provides a way to ENFORCE sharing of code where a company would normally consider it a potential loss of property. I just hope people wake up and smell the maple nut crunch!

Re:Yet another person who fails to understand the

[dschl]

Not to anybody - only to those you distributed a binary to. Modify to your heart's content, but you only have to make source available to those you sell a binary. Of course, they can then release it freely, but you still only have to provide a written offer to give source at cost (ie, CD reproduction plus shipping and handling) to anyone who receives a binary.

Peter Wallin II prefers Linux

[PW2]

News at 11

Can't wait...

[Bilbo]

Can't wait to see the MS "spin control" on this one. "Well, when you factor in long term preferences and TCO, you see that what he really meant to say was..."

Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA

[Anonymous Coward]

You're gay, Penfold!

Remove them from Microsoft

[flacco]

This proves that you must remove Microsoft employees from the Redmond campus, with their families, to a safe, neutral location if you want to get truthful answers from them regarding Linux.

A hired gun will say...

[Anonymous Coward]

whatever the new situation demands.
A big believer in the when in Rome...he appears
to be.

Regarding Linux on the Desktop vs appliances

[einhverfr]

OK, in the interview, Rick said that he doesn't see Linux as giving Microsoft competition in the desktop. And you are right-- most users are impatient and lazy, but I still disagree about Linux on the desktop, although I agree that for now most desktops will remain with Windows.

The basic problem is that although the core operating system is quite capable on the desktop, several obstacles remain--

1) lack of really easy installation/dependency resolution/deinstallation of software. RedHat and Debian have been making great advancements in this area but there is still a gap with Windows. Basically-- if I want to install some application I should not have to go out to sourceforge, search for, and download several packages-- this should all be able to be handled automatically by the installer.

2) Lack of familiarity-- for a basic end-user unfamiliar with any computer, Linux is not any harder today to learn (except for installing software) than is Windows. My parents use Linux and neither has much computer knowledge. Almost everyone I have set down in front of a computer running KDE or GNOME can perform basic tasks, but they feel uncomfortable and don't really know what they are doing. I am sure everyone here can relate to the last time you decided to do something new, and panicked when you realized it was beyond what you knew.

3) OU-based policy enforcement (similar to GPO's in Windows 2000). Linux as it stands right now is probably better for the corporate desktop than NT4. But for a large enterprise, being able to administer all users in an OU, forcing the installation of a set of software packages on next login can be very helpful.

In the end, a corporate desktop is, to its user, just another appliance. Of course that appliance is built inhouse by the IT department.... But the fact remains that it is not poorly suited to that environment.

I suspect that once more corporations start to move to Linux desktops, OEM's will start offering it as an alternative OS. And then it will be strong in the consumer world too.

Re:Regarding Linux on the Desktop vs appliances

[Twirlip of the Mists]

lack of really easy installation/dependency resolution/deinstallation of software

Oh, yes, I agree completely. The best possible solution for this would be Apple's approach: most applications don't require any installation at all. You just drag a package (which is actually a directory full of stuff, but acts through the UI like a single object) to wherever you want to keep it. Double-clicking the package launches the program.

Daemons, OS components, and other non-application software is a little more complex, but it doesn't necessarily have to be.

Lack of familiarity

See, this is the difference between easy to use and easy to learn. A computer that's hard to use but familiar to the user becomes easy to use. (Did that make sense?) So a computer that's hard to use but easy to learn can still make it on the desktop. But Linux is neither. It's neither easy to use-- that is, familiar-- nor easy to learn.

Re:Regarding Linux on the Desktop vs appliances

[Anonymous Coward]

1) lack of really easy installation/dependency resolution/deinstallation of software. RedHat and Debian have been making great advancements in this area but there is still a gap with Windows. Basically-- if I want to install some application I should not have to go out to sourceforge, search for, and download several packages-- this should all be able to be handled automatically by the installer.

agreed, but the process of downloading new applications is not fundamentally any different with Windows. Ever dealt with the "install this patch. Download new drivers for video card.", etc.
There might be a few more places to have to go on Linux to get some of the more miniscule dependencies, but they're there almost as much for Windows.

Maybe InstallShield or Wise will make an installer that can have a magic transform on them to use whatever is available on the system - RPM, aptget, tar, to unload an application, run a configuration script, etc.

There are some very well-made Make files out there, but they are much harder to develop than an InstallShield installer, even with several dependencies in InstallShield.

Point taken.

[UncleRage]

It's possible I haven't really considered the larger picture here. After reading your post -- and taking looking around (from a different view point), I suppose I can see what you're talking about.

Of course, I also view it from a slightly different point anyhow (running YDL on PPC) -- so I don't often pay heavy attention to the angst of the x86 world. Maybe I should open my eyes once in awhile, eh?

*Opens eyes for the first time*

OMG! Bill Gates is a dick!

----

Re:Point taken.

[jmorris42]

Yup, you had better. Do you really think Apple can afford to be left out of Palladium when you MUST have it to download any copyrighted content or buy anything with a credit card? Especially after Steve Jobs showed the world he is Bill Gate's bitch with the whole bundle IE for $100Mil and a new version of Office/Mac deal.

The only thing that will stop that scenario is a few million refusniks who decide to give Palladium the DIVX treatment and let it sit on the shelf. The only way that happens is continued availability of an alternative. Generic PPC boards would be just as workable as x86 if the pricing is viable.

Re:Yet another person who fails to understand the

[drive]

thank you for an informative post. man, slashdot would be so much nicer if everyone (or at least most people) was/were like this.

Rick Belluzzo, the companies assassin

[Alex Belits]

Rick Belluzzo at different time was a head, and had destroyed Silicon Graphics/SGI and HP. Then he went to Microsoft, did nothing of value but was paid a giant amount of money as a "loan" that was promptly "forgiven", and Rick himself was gently kicked out when the "loan" story became widely publicized.

Both HP and SGI were Microsoft's major indirect competitors -- they were producing large servers along with Sun and IBM, and now neither HP nor SGI have a working servers division, their native architectures are abandoned, their servers are not anymore significant players anywhere. SGI also was a direct competitor to Microsoft in workstation business, now workstations are no longer produced, after a major fiasco with an attempt to produce a Windows-based workstation using SGI technology. Also I am not sure what role Rick Belluzzo played with selling SGI patents and software to Microsoft that is now being used to prevent the development of OpenGL, and leave Microsoft at the controls of pretty much everything 3D.

All this looks like he either was Microsoft's puppet from the very beginning, or that he is clueless moron who can't make a single business decision without being influenced by Microsoft. Since at Microsoft he did precisely nothing, "loan" looks suspiciously like a payoff for this shining example of service that he did for Microsoft while being a trojan horse in other companies.

I have no idea what mentally deficient people can place him into a CEO position anywhere -- and I should better steer away from anything that Quantum will produce under the management of this crook.

News Flash!

[istartedi]

One guy who used to work for Microsoft prefers Linux for some applications. In related news, a former salesman for Pfizer likes to save money buying generic drugs, a retired Ford line worker drives a Toyota, and RMS uses BSD sometimes (yes, the last one is true and verifiable).

IN SOVIET RUSSIA ....

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux prefers Ex-Microsofter. couldnt stop posting ... :)

Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA ....

[voidnet]

they helps to break curtain

php and mysql open source will always win

[chrisranjana.com]

Yes sooner or later everyone needs to come to the open source platform ....

Good points - stay away from the hemlock

[Sean Clifford]

First, you clearly illustrate the fallacy of the parent poster's argument with the mob/church scenario. Glad to see someone's awake out there.

Second - I do not to comment on moderation. However, in this case I feel it's important to make an exception. Reducing an argument to absurity is a tool of discourse going back to the days of Plato - hardly troll material.

Re:Yet another person who fails to understand the

[Anonymous Coward]

What exactly is it about the GPL that seems to just scare the shit out of most commercial developers?

Oh, speaking from experience, it is the conversation with your lawyer about the consequences of it.

Wow!

[trons]

Wauw, how leet! Another anti-microsoft being on this planet, and this one even came straight from microsoft! That's so great! Another one that hates microsoft but loves linux! The shitty microsoft-alternative that's a fucker to install! It just rocks my desktop! Yup, making some nice progress here! Bunch of kids..

Tipping effect. Where is the Point of No Return?

[SgtChaireBourne]

Why? Because most end users are cheap. Imho they don't care what operating system they're using, as long as they can get it to do what they need: writing, finances, websurfing, etc. Free software is rapidly improving, and it'll soon be (if it isn't already) usable enough that even Aunt Betty will balk at paying hundreds of dollars extra for Windows and Office.

MS-Windows and MS-Office currently bring in about 5 times what they would in a free market due to monopoly rents. Each desktop on Linux or OS X counts as one for Linux or OS X, but MS-Windows currently counts as 5 economically. As the monopoly erodes, Microsoft will only be able to overcharge 4 times, then 3, then 2.

The rate at which Free and Open Source desktop applications, suggest that unless business models change or vendor lock-in can be ported over to .NET, Microsoft's ability to charge may diminish non-linearly.

It would be interesting to know the right math to predict when the tipping effect will occur.

Last Post!

[alpg]

Since everything in life is but an experience perfect in being what it is,
having nothing to do with good or bad, acceptance or rejection, one may well
burst out in laughter.
-- Long Chen Pa

- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...