Bridging Unix and Windows At NASA

OS X... by bgarland · 2002-12-23 21:09 · Score: 2, Troll

Why don't they just get some Macs? Then they can do Word/Office in a native environment instead of some Wine-like UNIX hack.

Ben

Re:OS X... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 21:11 · Score: 0

*cough* ... OpenOffice ... *cough*
Re:OS X... by D+iz+a+n+k+Meister · 2002-12-23 21:15 · Score: 2, Interesting

Maybe it has to do with the cost of OSX + hardware vs the cost of Linux + hardware.

--

He painted a unicorn in outer space. I'm askin' ya, what's it breathin'?
Re:OS X... by robbyjo · 2002-12-23 21:21 · Score: 4, Insightful

Bear in mind that the "government-mandated Microsoft apps" are not just Word/Office.

--

--
Error 500: Internal sig error
Re:OS X... by binarie · 2002-12-23 22:12 · Score: 1

perhaps... a PC(x86) machine compatibility
Re:OS X... by pacific_fury · 2002-12-23 22:44 · Score: 1

As far as the price/performance sweet spot goes, OSX may be able to do justice to the performance part of it, but not to the price part. Linux Rulz on this ground. It is just a matter of time before we have almost complete compliance of windows apps on Linux.
Re:OS X... by transiit · 2002-12-23 22:54 · Score: 3, Interesting

Why should they get a Mac? What would the greater cost of hardware + software get them?

Better multimedia performance?
A simpler GUI?
Proprietary crap masquerading as open source?

This is NASA. These are scientists and mathematicians and people that are smarter than the average visual basic programmer that think that the success of the computer is by slapping on as much meaningless cruft as possible! People that have been using mainframes for years. Scientists.

What does the average mac advocate usually present as the case for the mac since the release of OS X? "It's Unix! Really! We think so! We never use the terminal because we've got crap like iTunes and iMovie and iChat and iBlow! These are innovative apps that aren't at all like winamp, xmms, windows media player, gqmpeg, the numerous windows apps that get bundled with hardware (ulead), broadcast 2k, or any of the players like mplayer, xine, videolan, etc. These are innovative! They've got skins! Just like all those others, but it's got Quartz and displaypdf. We don't know what it does, but damn, does it sound cool! Don't you want to be cool? I've got a TiBook. I'm cool. Some teenage girl on allergy meds says I'm cool. Isn't that what computing is about?"

Ok, so I've gone way overboard into the land of flamebait. But still, why are all the people that claimed any technical merit a year or so ago now collectively creaming their jeans over eyecandy and pretending it to be the greatest contribution to the advancement of technology ever?

My problem with OS X is that it presents so little to the core while trying to slap on a pretty facade. They failed on both accounts. I find aqua to be pretty darn ugly, and beneath the whitewash, nothing that would make me shell out the money to move away from LinuxPPC on the same hardware.

-transiit
Re:OS X... by Corporate+Troll · 2002-12-23 23:14 · Score: 2, Interesting

Strange... what you say is that we Mac users just stay in the graphical comfy part of the OS and never touch the terminal? Hmmmm.
That's kind of strange because my terminal is about always open, often in an SSH to one of my *BSD boxen. You want to know what was the selling point for a Mac for me? It was (and still is) OS X, I don't have to use the mess that Windows is, but I don't have the hassle of managing a Linux system. (I prefer BSD anyway) I may not be a typical Mac OS X user, and you will never hear me say "it comes bundled with flashy apps" because I hate that, you'll never hear me say a Mac is faster because it's not. I couldn't care less about "displayPDF", and I know only about displayPDF because I read it on slashdot: I guess the "standard" Mac user doesn't know and doesn't care.
No, you're right. Your comment was flamebait. If you don't like Macs, buy yourself a Dell with bloated XP and shut up. Besides, you claim to run LinuxPPC. Okay, that is very 31337, I have reserved a 5 Gig partition for it on my iBook. Yet strangely enough I am very satisfied with what OS X offers. LinuxPPC... I'll think about it when my iBook cannot cope OS XI, or I could just stick with OS X 10.1.5 as I do now.
Re:OS X... by sql*kitten · 2002-12-23 23:21 · Score: 5, Insightful

Why don't they just get some Macs? Then they can do Word/Office in a native environment instead of some Wine-like UNIX hack.

Or run XWin-32, eXceed, or even VNC on ordinary PCs and share a large Unix machine? This is by far the best way to do things; rather than putting a Unix workstation on each desk, buy one much more powerful machine and share it among 30 people. For interactive use, from the machine's perspective, all users have a lot of idle time, whether between keypresses, or while reading what's on screen, etc. By sharing one powerful machine, everyone gets far more peak performance than a workstation can give them, for example for a compile, while getting the same processing power when averaged throughout the day because it's unlikely that all 30 users would want peak performance at the same time.

In such an environment, you just want the PC to run Word and Outlook, and be an X terminal for everything else. What they've done at NASA gives them no real advantage.
Re:OS X... by transiit · 2002-12-23 23:42 · Score: 2, Insightful

While my better judgement is trying to tell me that replying to someone who felt "Corporate Troll" was a witty username is a bad idea, I'll bite:

First, you've already shot yourself down by talking about how great OS X is, without stating a single thing that makes you stick with it...even if you do claim to agree that much of the flash isn't very useful.

Second, you've confirmed my assertion that the console/terminal (and thus the layer that most closely resembles unix) is largely unused by stating that you mostly use it to shell into another box.

Third, this was never about windows. I don't use it either.

Fourth, you pull the standard bsd bullshit of "managing linux is hard". I'll give the BSD's credit that they may have a lead on security over linux. (What's that motto? OpenBSD: less than a year without a remote root exploit?) However, the BSD's also cripple themselves by maintaining an "avoid the GPL" mindset and would rather maintain their own userland. I, on the other hand, enjoy what the GNU versions provide. I also won't budge on the utility of Debian's "apt" or Gentoo's "emerge". Even as a diehard slackware user, I'll still give apt the overall thumbs-up when it comes to maintaining a large number of machines.

Finally, you say the apple hardware is slower, that you hate the apps os x bundles, and yet you still paid more. Congratulations. You have achieved a higher level of consumerism.

-transiit
Re:OS X... by Corporate+Troll · 2002-12-24 00:13 · Score: 1

My nickname has nothing to do with this. I found it funny, you apparently don't.
Oh, indeed I often use the terminal to ssh to other machines. You are right, however it doesn't stop there. I usually use vi to code some html and C and compile it on my Mac. I use IRC clients on in the terminal and I saved my butt at work by having access to a Unix machine where Windows failed me (tons of small little files is not exactly the strong point of Windows) Oh, and I run Tomcat on my Mac... I do need the command line to control that baby.
The fact that I can switch from the command line to a game or browsing without having to bother about configuration issues like on Linux really is a big pro for me. As you can tell I'm not entirely a Mac fan because I do use other kind of machines (I'll get a second hand Sun soon). For me a Mac is a great desktop OS. That you don't like Aqua, well, is just yet again, a matter of taste.
I don't see what the license stuff has to do with it. I never ever mentioned licenses in my post. That OS X is a BSD does not matter to me, they might as well have built on AIX. What counts for me is the end-result. GPL might be superior to BSD in many respects, but I tend to prefer BSD. That again is a matter of taste.
I have tried Debian, yes I did, but I never got the hang of apt-get. You want to install an app and suddenly it wants to install perl? WFT? Perl? I don't need perl, but the app does seem to need it. That's one of the things I don't get about Debian. I thought it was supposed to be about being able to have a sleek-trimmed down system.
Yes, apple hardware is slower. So what? I still use 166Mhz machines (P-I class), I don't need speed. I didn't say I *hate* the apps that Apple bundles, well some are not to my liking, but a little move to the trashcan and it's all over. Do that with Windows Media player or Internet Explorer on a Windows box. Ouch! This has nothing to do with consumerism. I have a car, and it has an autoradio. Well this thing comes with tons of features I don't even know and don't need at all. I still bought the radio because I wanted to be able to play music. That's it. You tell me I should take EE classes, build my own carradio that just plays music and install it in my car. Hmmm, what's better? Buying something out of the box that works but has too many features, or learning to do it yourself investing probably a lot of money to get the parts and then build it yourself?
I might be a Troll, but you are a Flamebaiter.
Re:OS X... by curmi · 2002-12-24 00:22 · Score: 5, Insightful

Calm down Mate.

If you are happy with Linux, fine. Some of us are happier with OS X. Accept it.

The way you react it sounds like you are threatened by OS X. Hopefully that isn't the case - Linux needs people willing to extend it beyond just bitching about the other operating systems out there.

By the way, I use the terminal for a large amount of my work - I'm a Java developer. Java on OS X is better integrated than on any other OS. The development environment (Project Builder) is superb. The fact that I have all the usual Unix utilities is great. The machine just works - I don't need to mess with configuration unless I want to. And I like the iApps - I run iCal, I run iTunes, I sync with iSync, and I've used iMovie on occasions to put together some home videos.

Perhaps the apps don't appeal to you. That's fine. But you can hardly call them crap - they are far superior than the offerings on Linux. Hey, I used to develop on Linux. I've been a Unix developer for over 10 years - I moved on to something I find superior. Deal with it.

You really need to calm down and realise that not everyone thinks like you. Some people are going to find they work better on OS X.
Re:OS X... by rseuhs · 2002-12-24 00:42 · Score: 2
Where to start?
- A primitive single-desktop environment?
- Primitive 1½ mouse mouse button support (at least the wheel works now without 3rd party software and some apps use 2 buttons)
- Single-vendor hardware? (Apple has killed all clones, remember?)
- No parts available. (Where can I get a new motherboard or CPU? Shall I buy a whole computer when something breaks?)
Sure, MacOSX looks great in a demo and feels great the first 2 hours you use it. But after that time all the nifty animations just get in your way and slow you down. But that of course is just my opinion. Yes I did try Jaguar.
Re:OS X... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 00:43 · Score: 0

Hear hear...

I'll be doing the Hubbard (replacing my FreeBSD workstation with a Mac OS X one) in january...
Re:OS X... by WindBourne · 2002-12-24 01:19 · Score: 1

Or run XWin-32, eXceed, or even VNC on ordinary PCs and share a large Unix machine?
and you now have the same set of problems. Expensive admin, buggyness, lots of security nightmares, extreme high costs. And you still can not say that you have the easiest system (I think most reasonable ppl would agree that it still belongs to mac). BTW, if you try to make the argument that Windows is easy enough, then linux is also, since it is at least as easy as win95 or win4.0. Even better yet, as it is a great deal cheaper for remote admin.
As to shareing resources, consider using openmosix on the linux desktop systems. While I would not want to migrate my oowriter, there are plenty of other apps that run on a different system (perhaps a server devoted to just mosix serving).
In such an environment, you just want the PC to run Word and Outlook, and be an X terminal for everything else. What they've done at NASA gives them no real advantage.
Actually, I can not imagine a worst situation. You now have 2 very different operating systems, when either 1, or 2 very simliar and cooperative OSs could do the job. There is a lot of advantages to using Linux as it will play very nicely with the super computers, the mainframes, and the Unix. MS has made a long history of starting nicely and then kicking you in the face.
Finally, few admins are capable of admining decently on 2 radically different systems, even though a Sun person can admin HP, AIX, and Linux without screwing up Security (they will grumble the whole time, but they will get the job done correctly). For that matter, any unix person can admin anyother *nix box.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Re:OS X... by sporty · 2002-12-24 01:21 · Score: 2

Of course, you know you are in heaven when an MS App goes berserk, you can open a term window and do a "ps auxwww | grep Word" and "kill -9" it out right.

--
-
ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only
Re:OS X... by mackstann · 2002-12-24 01:32 · Score: 1

ugh.
A primitive single-desktop environment?
You can have multiple desktops with a 3rd party app.
Primitive 1½ mouse mouse button support (at least the wheel works now without 3rd party software and some apps use 2 buttons)
Primitive? Perhaps you're just accustomed to other environments where things are done by right clicking. Is there something wrong with most Windows PC's because they don't use 5 buttons for normal usage? Did the mouse god declare that all mice shall operate by the left and right click paradigm? Macs are designed to not need right clicking often. This is your habit, and a problem you are creating.
Single-vendor hardware? (Apple has killed all clones, remember?)
Hard to say what is really the best. Sure, it sucks paying lots of money for a "pretty fast" machine. Then again, the build quality is superb, support, etc is all good, they retain value, yadda yadda. I like things how they are, a decent part of the Mac "experience" is the hardware.
No parts available. (Where can I get a new motherboard or CPU? Shall I buy a whole computer when something breaks?)
Why even say something when you're pulling it out of your ass like that? Slashdot has even carried stories about building your own Macs. Don't spread stupid ignorant FUD.
Sure, MacOSX looks great in a demo and feels great the first 2 hours you use it. But after that time all the nifty animations just get in your way and slow you down. But that of course is just my opinion. Yes I did try Jaguar.
Eh, depends on what you're doing. If you just want a machine to display a billion xterms with vi or emacs, or whatever, then OSX is probably overboard. Then again, if you want great multimedia support, and other more "modern" OS features, plus some Unix power, then OSX is nice.
Re:OS X... by reallocate · 2002-12-24 02:13 · Score: 2

Whether or not Apple adds anything "to the core" is, I imagine, not important to Apple or to people who buy Macs. If your only use of a computer is to run character apps, then you obviously you don't need a Mac, or X for that matter.

Apple sells hardware to a broad base of consumers. Although they may advertise the Unix angle to the geek community to attract developers, that's the last thing they ought to do to generate sales elsewhere. The Unix toolset is, and will always remain, of little interest and use to the mainstream computer user.

--
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
Re:OS X... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 02:35 · Score: 0

What does the average Linux advocate usually present? It's Stable and Unix! Really!

I finally got around to trying out a Linux distro.
I've got to say I'm not that impressed.
Oh sure the commandline is fast and stable, but the GUI is flawed. Within one week I've had two hard freezes while in X11. The icons don't seem to hava a similar theme and I've noticed most of the bundled programs are broken.
I'm sure there's some hidden option to get everything running smoothly, but I don't have time for that kind of BS.

As it is, I'm more productive using OSX.
Re:OS X... by penguin_nipple · 2002-12-24 02:40 · Score: 2

it's: Only one remote hole in the default install, in more than 7 years! tard.
Re:OS X... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 02:52 · Score: 0

bahahaha... I love when Macheads try to stick up for their system. I own several Macs myself, but facts are facts

You can have multiple desktops with a 3rd party app.

And this costs how much? This works how well? I thought so.

Primitive? Perhaps you're just accustomed to other environments where things are done by right clicking. Is there something wrong with most Windows PC's because they don't use 5 buttons for normal usage? Did the mouse god declare that all mice shall operate by the left and right click paradigm? Macs are designed to not need right clicking often. This is your habit, and a problem you are creating.

LOL. And why are there so, so many things that require pressing a keyboard key while clicking? Empty the trash? Having another button on the mouse is just more convenient and efficient (I mean you're doing the same damn thing when you option-click but that requires TWO hands!).

Why even say something when you're pulling it out of your ass like that? Slashdot has even carried stories about building your own Macs. Don't spread stupid ignorant FUD.

And how easy is this? Oh, I forgot there and craploads of people doing this and it all works flawlessly. LOL, the whole idea is thoeritical in nature and a PITA (plus $$$) to actually accomplish.

Eh, depends on what you're doing. If you just want a machine to display a billion xterms with vi or emacs, or whatever, then OSX is probably overboard. Then again, if you want great multimedia support, and other more "modern" OS features, plus some Unix power, then OSX is nice.

Riiiight... Plus all the expense for something slower than PC hardware. Plus there is no way to remove the OS X cruft and slows everything down (Oroborus+DeskMenu+fsPanel user here).
Re:OS X... by fanatic · 2002-12-24 03:29 · Score: 3, Insightful

It is just a matter of time before we have almost complete compliance of windows apps on Linux.

At which point, microsoft will immediately make some undocumented change to hte APIs that will break it all.

Even if this were not the case, running MS apps on Linux still gives money to MS and puts your data in their closed formats. MS apps on Linux (or any other freee OS) is a non-starter in my book - I'd much prefer to see the brains spent on WINE used in native apps instead.

--
"that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
Re:OS X... by Junior+J.+Junior+III · 2002-12-24 03:31 · Score: 2

What makes you think NASA doesn't use macs?

--
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
Re:OS X... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 03:44 · Score: 0

>> I have tried Debian, yes I did, but I never got the hang of apt-get. You want to install an app and suddenly it wants to install perl? WFT? Perl? I don't need perl, but the app does seem to need it. That's one of the things I don't get about Debian.

This excerpt sums it up.
Apt-get? Macheads don't get it.
Open vs proprietary hardware? Macheads negative.
Monopoly vs competition? What's is that?

Notice the silly analogy of building your own car to bundling your own distribution. Not to forget that Debian does bundling one generation beyond Apple.

Which part of "the app needs Perl" is so hard to understand for a Mac user? Maybe you should stick to over-priced hardware from an integrator of Moto/IBM/Sony/Compal components such as Apple.
Re:OS X... by Xerithane · 2002-12-24 03:48 · Score: 2

I usually use vi to code some html ...

Please, Please, never, ever, say that again.

You don't code HTML. There is no coding there.

--
Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
Re:OS X... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 03:48 · Score: 0

Only a silly Macfuck would use an affectation such as "doing the Hubbard", because of a lack of mastery of simple English words. The object of language is communication you silly idiot. WTF is an Hubbard? Do you think FreeBSB and OSX are somehow comparable?
Re:OS X... by SnapShot · 2002-12-24 03:49 · Score: 1

It's really fucking sad that the needs of the developers needs to play second fiddle to the needs of the secretaries making Powerpoint slides. Expecially in a environment like NASA where one would assume that engineers have some clout.

What next? NASA will decree that all engineers need to buy all of their tools from Pep Boys because that's where the upper management takes their cars to be fixed.

--
Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
Re:OS X... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 03:51 · Score: 0

>but the GUI is flawed. Within one week I've had two hard freezes while in X11

X11 is a GUI?
I guess some people are OSX-freaks for a reason - lack of depth in understanding.
Re:OS X... by Corporate+Troll · 2002-12-24 03:53 · Score: 1

I'm sorry... I know that. I should have said "composed". I was just lazy to write "compose html and code C".
Re:OS X... by momobaxter · 2002-12-24 03:54 · Score: 1

I usually use vi to code some html and C and compile it on my Mac.

What's worse is he compiles html on his mac too!

No, in all seriousness, there's no reason that he HAS to use the terminal for everything. The point is, he utilizes it and it's there.

--
"Full sources for linux currently runs to about 200kB compressed" --Linus Torvalds 31-Jan-1992
Re:OS X... by Evil-G · 2002-12-24 03:58 · Score: 1

You think that's bad? In my A-level IT syllabus, it states that I must "write a program to display HTML code." By that it means to write a web page in HTML - it also refers to HTML files as "HTML programs." I must also learn how to "set TCP address" and do several other poorly-worded things which I currently can't remember.
Re:OS X... by kristjansson · 2002-12-24 04:05 · Score: 1

Excellent point. I can tell you that there's a lot of little insignificant looking crap that various government agencies cannot do without. Electronic SF-86's (security clearance paperwork), rare oddball little supply utils, etc., etc. In all fairness to NASA, I remember reading on /. quite a while back that they wouldn't use Windows for the ISS docking systems(they used a RedHat 5.2 for a base and wrote the program in C, installed it on a Thinkpad). Emulation is, unfortunately, a very necessary evil where these apps are concerned. Unless, of course, NASA engineers can not only rewrite all of the programs without violating the licenses that said programs were sold to the government under, but also get the rewrites approved for use...
Re:OS X... by ElectricRook · 2002-12-24 05:24 · Score: 1

run XWin-32, eXceed, or even VNC on ordinary PCs and share a large Unix machine

Yeah we do this...

The LARGE UNIX machine is a dual P4 w/2GB of ram running RED HAT.

We spend $3K for a dumb terminal/mail reader/virus magnet on every engineers desk.

So whats the gain here?

--
- High Tech workers, please say NO to Union Carpenters, their Union sees fit to control our compensation.
Re:OS X... by sql*kitten · 2002-12-24 05:36 · Score: 1

The LARGE UNIX machine is a dual P4 w/2GB of ram running RED HAT.

"Large Unix" starts at the level of an Origin or a Sun Fire.. pee cees don't count.
Re:OS X... by ScottKin · 2002-12-24 05:52 · Score: 1

If you actually *do* use your terminal window as stated, then you're .01% of the Mac OS-suX users that does so, while the other 99.99% of the other Mac OS-suX users just buy the thing because they've bought-in to the inane "switch" ads - I mean, if you're going to buy a computer based upon a "touchy-feely" TV Ad featuring a teen that has obviously used too much Alegy medication, or because some Umbrella-magnate from New York wants it to "rain every day", then you deserve a Mac. If you want to get some real *business* work done, get a PC with Windows XP or Windows 2k. If you want to *try* to get some real *business* work done and waste 80% of your time trying to get your PC to work with the hardware you have, run Linux on your PC.

Don't agree? That's your perogative - however, disagreeing doesn't necessarrily make one "right".

ScottKin

--
I don't give a rat's behind about "karma" here or anywhere else. Don't like what I have to say here? Deal with it!
Re:OS X... by RealBeanDip · 2002-12-24 06:10 · Score: 2

>>Or run XWin-32, eXceed, or even VNC on ordinary PCs and share a large Unix machine?

Just want to chime in on something here;

If you folks haven't tried the Cygwin XWindow server you really need to give it a shot. I use it at home running xdmcp on my linux box (tucked away down in the basement) and can use Linux from any of my kids machines or my wireless laptop. It's incredibly useful - I would imagine even more so in an office setting.

--
You know you're a geek if you've ever replied to a tagline.
Re:OS X... by Corporate+Troll · 2002-12-24 06:20 · Score: 1

I haven't seen one Apple switch ad here in Europe. I bought my Mac for OS X. For the rest of it, I am not going to disagree because I tend to get involved in too many Mac flamewars.
I'm not a classic mac-fanboy. I use Windows, Linux, BSD and Mac OS X. That OS X is just my favourite desktop is just a personal preference.
Re:OS X... by kirkjobsluder · 2002-12-24 08:00 · Score: 2

However, the BSD's also cripple themselves by maintaining an "avoid the GPL" mindset and would rather maintain their own userland.

I actually do not think this is the case. FreeBSD ships with gcc and supports dozens of GPL userland applications through packages, ports and a Linux compatability module. gcc is the default compiler under many BSD systems. Linux also includes a fair number of BSD-licensed userland utilities with most distributions.

So I'm not seeing an "avoid the GPL" mindset (and I've spent the last half hour actively looking for evidence of it.) There are advantages to having all of the core system under the same license, a sentiment also expressed by RMS in regards to non-GPL parts of the Linux kernel.
Re:OS X... by mackstann · 2002-12-24 11:02 · Score: 2

machead? hm, perhaps you assume too much.
Re:OS X... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 12:19 · Score: 0

Ahh, Shitgas the Troll is back! Oh wait..that's methane, isn't it?

In either case you're still full of shit. How do you draw the line between "coding" and "writing HTML" exactly? When I'm CODING in HTML, I do about the same things I would when writing a program in C++. I open a text editor, I put things together in their proper places, so that everything works the way it's supposed to when I'm finished. No, I suppose you don't compile a HTML file, but that doesn't make it incorrect to claim that you are CODING a webpage.

Besides, what are you going to do about anyway? I'm coding a response to your message right now. Coding coding coding. What do you have to say about that, you elitist prick? Hmm?
Re:OS X... by transiit · 2002-12-24 14:48 · Score: 2

http://slashdot.org/articles/02/06/26/1547242.shtm l?tid=172

OpenSSH vulnerability. Posted June 26.

The 7 years slogan no longer stands.
Re:OS X... by transiit · 2002-12-24 15:06 · Score: 2

My suspicion is that Apple has been astroturfing around these parts for some time, and I'm overall tired of the advocacy for most systems.

Too many times have I seen obvious bullshit such as "I used Linux for 5 years, and I used to hack in the kernel, but then I saw the icons on Mac OS X and it is so much better for development and now all I need my computer for is iMovie"

Or "I used to use solaris, but now I've got OS X and it's so much better for everything!", from the same people that used to post nothing but pro-Beos comments.

'The Best System for the Job' is indeed a noble goal, but I find a distinct lack of statement as to what's really all that great about OS X. Before you get into how 'pretty' it is, let me immediately exclude things that really don't apply for many developers: icons. consistency in look and feel. any of the "i-" apps. anti-aliasing.

When I'm coding, I tend to have several xterms open with my text editor of choice (joe), manpages, and top. That's about it, so all I really need of a GUI is to leave me plenty of screen real estate. So tell me, what can OS X do better for me?

-transiit
Re:OS X... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 15:06 · Score: 0

You said: "Large Unix" starts at the level of an Origin or a Sun Fire.. pee cees don't count.

That just demonstrates the case even better- I've got a bunch (>30) developers using a dual p3 with 1 gig as their "unix desktop", which they can use to access the unix "compile farm". This saves time because I don't have to install their favorite "productivity tools (vim, emacs, netscape, you-name-it)" on 6 different flavors of unix.
Re:OS X... by mixmasta · 2002-12-24 15:09 · Score: 1

Well, "code" is vague. Of course html is a document format, not a programming language, but I think you could code a document if you wanted. Think morse code.

And... you don't have to compile a file for it to be programming.

I think I'll go code my webpage, right now. =)

--
#6495ED - cornflower blue
Re:OS X... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 15:55 · Score: 0

Moore's Law is saving Linux from itself, which is more heartbreaking than that dumb bitch who dunked her cooze in McD's coffee and won the lottery.

If you never soldered together a PROM burner and wrote a program a byte at a time, flipping one on/off switch per bit and pushing a button to burn it in, you don't get to make pronouncements about what Unix means or what constitutes big iron. You just don't. Sorry about that.
Re:OS X... by Sj0 · 2002-12-24 16:09 · Score: 2

I know in your little world it's cheaper to replace an entire hardware platform to get UNIX, but it's not.

--
It's been a long time.
Re:OS X... by Sj0 · 2002-12-24 16:54 · Score: 2

I can't speak for others, but I really liked BeOS. Sadly, it is all but useless until the Opnbeos project bears some fruit.

I can't really see the allure of OSX though. Sure, it's unix-like, but for $0, I can get no less than three unix-likes for a $200(new, mind you) PC.

--
It's been a long time.
Re:OS X... by Sj0 · 2002-12-24 16:59 · Score: 2

which linux, and when?

Linux progresses faster than any other OS. I like the latest round of linux distributions very much.

Very easy and functional.

--
It's been a long time.
Re:OS X... by curmi · 2002-12-24 23:35 · Score: 1

Some people actually like to build applications that make use of consistency in look and feel, anti-aliasing, "pretty" icons. What makes you think that any application that is of any use should be ugly?

I really don't see your problem. As I've said before, everyone is different. Obviously OS X is not for you. Some people have switched because it was for them - me included.

I'm not going to even try to convince you to switch. You've made up your mind already - nothing will convince you. I think that is your loss, but it is your choice.

BTW, I actually gave you good reasons for why OS X is great, without talking about the look and feel. Real integrated Java, access to unix utilities, access to commercial applications, and one of the best development environments around. Then you've got the toolkits - Cocoa for starters. I also use my machine for more than just development - and that is where the iApps come in real useful. I often have a number of xterms open with vim running - that doesn't mean I don't all the niceties that come with the operating system.

I was never pro-BeOS as I never used it. It is likely though that is was pretty good. Why do you have a problem with that? It is quite possible that someone can and will build a better OS than Linux - I personally believe Apple/NeXT have done this. BeOS probably did that too.

You need to move on.
Re:OS X... by ElectricRook · 2002-12-26 05:53 · Score: 1

Well... I mean in the scale of the model presented.

How's that for double speak.

I guess a LINUX Dual P4 is a giant... When compared to a single P4 running MS.

...love your sig.

--
- High Tech workers, please say NO to Union Carpenters, their Union sees fit to control our compensation.
Re:OS X... by RDohnert · 2002-12-26 06:08 · Score: 1

The TCO is not lower at all, The cost of hardware and having to trackdown a Mac tech is very costly, also if you rely on Macs to run your business and you need parts replacement you will have some serious downtime to go along with it. PCs with Linux are very easy to maintain, I service 12 servers running Red Hat Linux and I have not had any unintentional downtime over the 2 yr period and I have not had any problems, now the Windows and Macintosh workstations, they are a different story.

Score another for Linux? Not. by Dolemite_the_Wiz · 2002-12-23 21:10 · Score: 2, Insightful

If NASA didn't have to use any more MS apps then there would be a victory for Linux.

--
Save the World! Use a Quote!

Crossover plugins by tavarua · 2002-12-23 21:13 · Score: 5, Informative

This article can be summed up in one sentence: The Johnson Center's IT team installed CrossOver Office from CodeWeavers Inc. on McCartney's PCs to give the engineers access to a variety of open-source and Microsoft Office apps.

Bottom line: They didn't do anything special.

Re:Crossover plugins by rovingeyes · 2002-12-24 00:12 · Score: 2

That sums up alright. When I saw the line About a year ago, Patrick McCartney, a Johnson Center project manager, created a Linux desktop environment... I couldn't believe it for a moment. Single person, that too a manager, creating an environment. Phew! sounded some work!
Re:Crossover plugins by nutznboltz · 2002-12-24 00:43 · Score: 2

Ah, but you are forgetting that it also does one other thing: it creates the appearance that Linux is being used more. I think that by creating an illusion of something happening the chance that someone will go along with it and it will actually happen increases. I remember some old David Bowie interview where he confessed to fudging his stardom in the beginning and it became real.
Re:Crossover plugins by mr_z_beeblebrox · 2002-12-24 01:32 · Score: 2

Bottom line: They didn't do anything special.

The fact that an office in a bureaucracy like Nasa is taking steps to streamline IT costs and create a more efficient PC environment is something special.
Re:Crossover plugins by JohnHans · 2002-12-24 02:08 · Score: 1

> Bottom line: They didn't do anything special.

A curious perspective. They successfully created a PC/OS combination that allows them to run required 'Windows' applications and their mainline production applications which run on Unix. They run them all on a single PC, saving the cost of each working having two PC's. Having technology is great, successfully applying technology to meet your needs is "something special".

--
John
Re:Crossover plugins by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 06:15 · Score: 0

"Botton line:They didn't do anything special."
Seems like we bypassed shock and went straight into denial. Linux must indeed be advancing quickly.

How much progress is this really? by altgrr · 2002-12-23 21:14 · Score: 5, Insightful

"Score another one for Linux on the desktop". Maybe. But if you read the article it states that the machines replace both UNIX and Windows boxes, which implies that there was some un*x presence in the first place.

IMHO, you will find that, in scientific and academic establishments, un*x and Linux are used a lot, because that's what they have been working with for a long time, and that's where the programming languages are free. If the academics could have their way, a lot of universities would be running Linux already on all their desktop PCs. What? They are? Well, that'll be due to the fact that Linux is now more than passable as an OS for your everyday user.

There's a difference, though, between university students and academics running Linux, and your average office secretary running Linux. It's a difference which I think will still take a long time to erode.

--

Like car accidents, most hardware problems are due to driver error.

Re:How much progress is this really? by will_die · 2002-12-23 21:19 · Score: 2

That is the main place I am starting to see Linux in my workplace.
Systems that were previously running Solaris were going to be converted to mswindows,development had even started to take place to convert them. However with Linux now seeing growth; windows is being dropped as servers and Linux is taking its place. While this has caused problems with delay it is all for the better.
Re:How much progress is this really? by deaddrunk · 2002-12-24 00:52 · Score: 1

That's what they have a support desk for. Linux in the office is much more likely due to the fact that people that aren't particularly computer-literate have an entire department to call on when things go wrong.

--
Does a Christian soccer team even need a goalkeeper?
Re:How much progress is this really? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 00:54 · Score: 0

"Score another one for Linux on the desktop". Maybe. But if you read the article it states that the machines replace both UNIX and Windows boxes, which implies that there was some un*x presence in the first place.

And - get this - who cares? Run Linux if you want. Or Windows. Each are better at some things.
Re:How much progress is this really? by b17bmbr · 2002-12-24 04:42 · Score: 1

There's a difference, though, between university students and academics running Linux, and your average office secretary running Linux. It's a difference which I think will still take a long time to erode.
Really? If a business hires complete imbeciles who can't learn to use OO.org, than that's their problem. And what about the office secretary who opens up the latest email virus? In my school, we made a switch several years ago to "PC's" from macs. The teachers migrated because they HAD TO. Bottom line. I have several old boxen in my classroom that i turned into xclients. seventh grade students have no problem using OO.org, mozilla, etc. and i can lock them down. the truth is that linux is more than ready for the desktop. it is ignorant comments like that and FUD that keep it from wider adoption.

--
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
Re:How much progress is this really? by sql*kitten · 2002-12-24 06:04 · Score: 2

"Score another one for Linux on the desktop". Maybe. But if you read the article it states that the machines replace both UNIX and Windows boxes, which implies that there was some un*x presence in the first place.

Indeed. Linux is at least as big a threat to Sun as it is to Microsoft. Probably a lot more.
Re:How much progress is this really? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 06:19 · Score: 0

You missed that "How much progress is this really?" and "Well, that'll be due to the fact that Linux is now more plausible as an OS for your everyday user." form a valid question and answer pair. Therefore quite a bit of progress.
Re:How much progress is this really? by _Sprocket_ · 2002-12-24 08:53 · Score: 2

Indeed. Linux is at least as big a threat to Sun as it is to Microsoft. Probably a lot more.

...which makes the increase in Sun-branded Linux solutions so interesting.

Couldn't you already do this by Jason+O'Neil · 2002-12-23 21:15 · Score: 3, Informative

Sorry, but I was under the impression that CodeWeavers could already run Word and Outlook.

Is this just an example of it's implementation or have they added something new?

Re:Couldn't you already do this by D+iz+a+n+k+Meister · 2002-12-23 21:19 · Score: 1

From the article:

The Johnson Center's IT team installed CrossOver Office from CodeWeavers Inc.

--

He painted a unicorn in outer space. I'm askin' ya, what's it breathin'?

There Using Crossover Office by EzInKy · 2002-12-23 21:15 · Score: 5, Insightful

Though Bochs and Vmware are great apps, the future lies with projects like Wine. Interoperability is the only way to increase competition and that is why MS should have been forced to open up at least it's API rather than be forced to include competitors programs like Java.

--
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.

Re:There Using Crossover Office by NorthDude · 2002-12-24 02:19 · Score: 2

forced to include competitors programs like Java.

I tough that Sun was still in court to force MS to include Java. Is the case already over?

--

I'd rather be sailing...
Re:There Using Crossover Office by NorthDude · 2002-12-24 02:25 · Score: 1

Oups... Should have scrolled the front page sooner :(

--

I'd rather be sailing...
Re:There Using Crossover Office by Stinking+Pig · 2002-12-24 05:18 · Score: 2

In my experience VMWare is a much better interoperability solution than Crossover Office -- The only app I need at this point that I haven't replaced with a Linux alternative is Visio. OpenOffice is excellent at Word and Excel files and acceptable with PowerPoint, but nothing can touch Visio 2000 for usability (2002/XP is nasty and I had to downgrade back to 2000).

I'm a satisfied Plugin customer, so I tried Crossover Office when they announced Visio capability. I had to ask for my money back, as it was only able to install Visio after several manual steps and an unofficial upgrade, and then was unable to display complex diagrams properly or edit simple diagrams without crashing.

VMWare with Win98 and Visio2000 as the only apps in it is fast, responsive, and troublefree. I mount my home directory via a private samba server and use host-only networking so Windows can't see the Internet -- so no patching, no worries, no problems. It may cost more in terms of licensing and RAM than Crossover, but the value is there.

--
"Nothing was broken, and it's been fixed." -- Jon Carroll

mandatory useless post... by Jinxo · 2002-12-23 21:15 · Score: 1

Heeey, no fair! Somebody must have warned them we were coming, all the page image links seem to be broken! Damnit!

Re:Score another for Linux? Not. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 21:16 · Score: 0

Go take a bath

my home setup by zephc · 2002-12-23 21:18 · Score: 2

I have a PC running XP and a G4 Cube and I use them off of one monitor with VNC (mac is server, win is client) and I'll have a nice USB-supported monitor switcher by Xmas!

VPC with XP on OSX was just unacceptable for windows coding and gaming, henc my current setup. I like the UNIXness and Macness but I have to (well, had to) do Windows programming.

--
"I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.

Re:Score another for Linux? Not. by GimmeFuel · 2002-12-23 21:20 · Score: 5, Insightful

Agreed. Instead of making a hybrid like this, their time would be better spent trying to get NASA to dump MS completely. Point out MS's track record for bugginess and insecurity (do we want script kiddies to be able to fly the space shuttle?), and Linux's freeness (sure, NASA gets volume discounts, but free is still cheaper than a percentage of something). Linux running MS software seems to defeat the whole purpose.

--
live(free) || die;

it's already seamless by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 21:23 · Score: 0

I have a 100 Mbps LAN and decent (> 700mhz) Windows and Linux boxes, with Cygwin to establish a remote X session from the Windows to Linux machine. The speed difference is barely noticable when using Gnome/KDE in this manner! The Cygwin clipboard-paste utility is kind of a pin, but it gets the job done.

See...... by MegaHamsterX · 2002-12-23 21:24 · Score: 5, Funny

You don't have to be a rocket scientist to use Linux...

Re:See...... by phoenix_rizzen · 2002-12-23 23:19 · Score: 1

I think you meant, "See ... you *do* have to be a rocket scientist to rn Linux." :)
Re:See...... by Retief-CDT · 2002-12-24 04:11 · Score: 0

Actually being a Rocket Scientist does not help in understanding Linux. The biggest problem non computer users have with all Operating Systems is the Idiots that write the Manuals. Almost always Manuals explain the simple terms but leave out definitions that the Author feels is common Knowledge. Lets take the what should be simple act of getting your hardware to work. Most OS'es have an installation program therefore the Manual assumes the operator does not have to do anything to make his computer work. When the computer does'nt work, the manual does not step by step spell out what to do, but rather immediatly assumes that operator can find and program a solution. Which pisses off the Person who is trying to learn how to use the Dam-Blasted Gadget. I wish that computer people would learn to hire non technical people to write Manuals and Help files. I swere the next time I go to the Help section and it contains a stupid statement such as "a modem is used to connect you to the Internet." rather than how to fix a modem related problem, I will hunt down the Author and dis-enbowel Him/her/whatever.

--
Matt's addition to Occam's Razor:"The most simple answer is preferred by those that are simple."

Hybrids by katalyst · 2002-12-23 21:36 · Score: 2, Insightful

That's the most logical way to go about things. "DUMPING" windows to jump to Linux may be too drastic. Shifting as and when required/possible, is feasible.
Incedently, Star Wars AOTC was half done on Windows and half on Linux Machines. ILM ended up shifting completely from Windows to Linux.
I've made a beginning by installing my Windows fonts on Linux. Makes life MUCH easier.

--
|/________
|\A|ALYS|

Re:Hybrids by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:28 · Score: 1, Informative

Nothing personal, but if you look in the extras for AOTC, you'll see plenty of interviews with ILM employees who worked on AOTC, sometimes they're demonstrating bits and pieces of AOTC.

Pay close attention to the hardware in the background. Quite often it isn't a Windows system or a Linux system. It's a Mac.

ILM does a lot of work on Macs, no matter what the geeks and/or press monkeys may say (it's fab to talk up Linux, unfashionable to mention Macs).
Re:Hybrids by Com2Kid · 2002-12-23 22:59 · Score: 1
- Pay close attention to the hardware in the background. Quite often it isn't a Windows system or a Linux system. It's a Mac.
So Macs where used by the artsy types, your point is? The artsy fartsy machines did the artsy fartsy work and the work horse machines did the serious crunching.
--
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
Re:Hybrids by WindBourne · 2002-12-24 01:33 · Score: 1

two years ago, the moron from Caldera showed up running MS at a Linux conference. Everybody saw it on the screen. Does that mean that a lot of work is done on MS inside of Caldera?
You saw what ILM wished to show you. I have no doubt that Macs are used heavily. I also have no doubt that Linux is also heavily used as ILM (and other studioes) internal ppl have showed that Linux is replacing the MS and macs.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Re:Hybrids by MamasGun · 2002-12-24 04:49 · Score: 1

A friend of mine reported that at the UnitedLinux booth at Comdex this year, there was only one machine, and that was running (sit down for this one) XP Professional. That's right, XP Pro.

UnitedLinux doesn't eat its own dog food. Not a good sign.

--
"But you've already got a DVD. It lasts forever....In the digital world, we don't need back-ups..."
-- Jack Valenti

Why outlook? And office? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 21:42 · Score: 0

All the trouble just to run outlook and office?
As far as I know there are equivalents to these under linux.. Or am I wrong?

Sometimes I think if we would just modify the KDE menu's K to a "start button" then everybody would be able to use Linux.

Re:Why outlook? And office? by mr_z_beeblebrox · 2002-12-24 01:36 · Score: 2

As far as I know there are equivalents to these under linux.. Or am I wrong?

You are wrong, sort of. For the home user there are equivalents. However, there are some major functions of both apps that businesses feel they can not give up. The funny thing is, I work in such a business and I have yet to see those features used. Sometimes I think if we would just modify the KDE menu's K to a "start button" then everybody would be able to use Linux.

Right....like if I replaced the yoke in an airplane with a steering wheel, we would all be pilots.

Govt mandate? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 21:44 · Score: 0

A government mandate to use Windows apps?

So they wouldn't even need this "bridge" if whatever organization didn't have that requirement.

Our win is that they weren't forced to switch to Windows? Umm, more like not letting MS get points rather than scoring points for Linux.

They kept the worst demons... by Zemran · 2002-12-23 21:48 · Score: 5, Insightful

When I think of my reasons for leaving Microsoft, Word and Outlook are right up there at the top just under reliability. Reliability has always been one thing that Microsoft could never deliver and that is something they have gained and I can agree with them all the way on this. Where do most of the problem virii come from though? Word or Outlook with the occasional one on Excel. I know that you can try to lock them out but you never really succeed.

Open Office is a great office environment that meets all my needs and I have yet to meet someone that genuinely *NEEDS* anything that Word has, that OO does not (I have met some that claim they do but it always turns out that they really mean that once in the past 2 years they once had a situation that would have been easier with Word). I use Evolution instead of Outlook and it is even as good at eye candy. It does every thing and more that I was using Outlook for. The only think Outlook does better is spread virii.

--
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.

Re:They kept the worst demons... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:05 · Score: 0

*NEEDS* anything that Word has
I suppose you have never worked in technical sales and support departments?
You are right that Word is bloated and has way too many features. However, the one thing OO and other free alternatives do not have is the 100% compatibility with Word. Without that any alternative is useless when mailing Word and Excel documents is a part of your job.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by ender81b · 2002-12-23 22:21 · Score: 3, Interesting

and I have yet to meet someone that genuinely *NEEDS* anything that Word has

Well the asinine installation program that for some god unknown reason needs to 'configure' itself everytime you look at it the wrong way or some other user logs onto the computer helps keep me employed... =) (yes, blah we just made a custom .msi installation script that 'installs on first run' or whatever the point is you shouldn't fscking have to). of course it also makes me want to gouge out my eyes with a plastic spoon the minute somebody mentions MS Office.

FOR GODS SAKE WHY WHY WHY DOES MSOFFICE NEED TO FSCKING CONFIGURE ITSELF? WHY CAN"T IT JUST BE INSTALLED LIKE EVERY OTHER FSCKING APPLICATION? WHY GOD WHY IN THE NAME OF ALL THAT IS GOOD AND HOLY WHY?

Sorry. See what I mean?
Re:They kept the worst demons... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:25 · Score: 0

What the HELL are you talking about?
You only need to install MS Office once if you do a custom installation and install all the components you need right from the beginning. In older Office versions this is a good time to deselect Clippy installation as well. No configuration required after that.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by ender81b · 2002-12-23 22:28 · Score: 1

Install MSoffice on one account. Click on word icon. MS office pops up and needs to configure itself - insert cd. Fine. Great. Rinse, repeat for all user accounts on system. Sound like fun?
Re:They kept the worst demons... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:30 · Score: 0

I have Windows XP with MS Office installed using the Administrator account.
No configuration was required when I started Word on my regular user account. To check your claims, I activated the Guest account and tried running Word there. No CD required.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by MonkeyBoy · 2002-12-23 22:32 · Score: 2

Aren't anonymous cowards fun?

Frankly, the most annoying part of that install procedure is one user who every month or two ends up having that "install" process start over - for no apparent reason. He just logs into the system in the morning, fires up Outlook, and bam, time to reinstall!

So then Outlook forgets the server name, so then he calls me, and I'm none too happy to be bothered with asinine problems before I've put some caffeine in me.

--
Moof!
Re:They kept the worst demons... by ender81b · 2002-12-23 22:33 · Score: 1

Might be different in XP. THis is using windows 2000/office 2000. So far I have only seen it on 98/2k computers that happen to be on a windows domain. You won't see it most likely if you are not on a domain. Try clicking on the 'open new office document' in the start menu in a different account.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by Dysan2k · 2002-12-23 22:35 · Score: 2, Insightful

Outlook, I'm definately in agreement on. That is one piece of definate anti-productivity. Evolution was kind in giving a very similar look and feel, but truth be told, it's still not the definative answer. It copies something that many of us remember being a HUGE pita when it came out, and only got worse (migration from Outlook 2k -> Outlook XP was a miserable experience due to bugs galore.)

Office has become some severe bloatware, but in it's younger years (office 95 std), it wasn't too shabby at all. Gave all the functionality that you needed plus the macro abilities which were strong enough to do things like importing an address book from excel/access and producing mass-mailers for churches and businesses alike (put anti-church sentiment elsewhere, not the topic of this thread.) I firmly believe that if you were to model an office suite from 95 and make different improvements like easier wizards and such, that would be the killer app. Word has become more of a page-layout software than the word processor it began as.

Also, far too many people rely on Access instead of a relational db, but there must be some merit there that could be improved upon for a x-platform solution. I mean, we have db4 databases, why not slap an easy to use gui on the front? (If there's such a system that exists, I'm unaware of it so please list it in a reply.)

OpenOffice is a pretty great piece of work, and hopefully it can be tweaked to fix that niche that is the business desktop. I believe that another type of Email client, however, is really going to be necessary before the masses will accept it.

Many people still say that Linux can never fill the desktop market.

I don't believe that at all, but the large-profile companies (RH, Mandrake, Caldera) need to stop stripping the common desktop tools and include a distribution that gives the user the power that they have on current Windows boxen. Aside from not having a true DirectX equiv. (would be a HUGE bonus), they need to include packages like a video media player that covers ALL formats (including QT/Real/DivX) instead of having to download 10 different packages and compile them all (IN order, otherwise you lack features.. bloody mess), and provide a viewer that is intuitive enough for "Joe Bob" to use. He can already use Win Media, so make something as easy, but can play more formats (insert obligatory mpeg-2 + ogg plug here). Also, put the mp3 libs back in! XMMS is nice, but dangit, I wanna play both mp3's AND ogg's.

Businesses are slowly accepting Linux, but it's my belief that still some things must be changed before it can hit mainstream. The power is there and the apps are coming close. We just need to tighten the reigns and pull it all together.

[NOTE] I have tried multiple times to build a new email client, but to no avail. I've never been any good at layout and past attempts prove it. However, I'm gonna still plug at it until I or someone else gets it right.

--
-What have you contributed lately?
Re:They kept the worst demons... by ender81b · 2002-12-23 22:38 · Score: 5, Informative

Ouch. I've found this especially useful for office installs (link below) - basically it is a custom script that will not only install on first run but if some random asinine problem happens will look for a network share of office and grab the files necassary. even works if the people delete their entire office install:

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/defaul t. asp?url=/technet/prodtechnol/office/office2000/dep loy/depopt/wiofc2k.asp
Re:They kept the worst demons... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:38 · Score: 0

You won't see it most likely if you are not on a domain.
Ok, that probably explains it. I am not on a domain.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:40 · Score: 0

Anon since this is getting off topic. At any rate since you don't apparently believe me go read below - ms tech net article on how to prevent this from occuring:

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/defaul t. asp?url=/technet/prodtechnol/office/office2000/dep loy/depopt/wiofc2k.asp
Re:They kept the worst demons... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:46 · Score: 0

Umm,
Access is a relational database.
Dumbass.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by brightertimes · 2002-12-23 23:15 · Score: 1

I actually had the same problem, apparently on an the m$ kb article it stated because you installed word on a non-admin account i.e. non-global, every other account that is set up needs to have the correct registry enteries installed as the user-account doesnt have access to the admininstrator permissions. There is a link to a microsoft kb article which may help HERE
Re:They kept the worst demons... by Corporate+Troll · 2002-12-23 23:24 · Score: 1

I have seen what you describe in a NT4/Office2k and W2k/Office2k situation. Wasn't on a Windows domain, used Novell.
At home I just stayed on W2k/Office97. Works fine for my needs, and only had minor issues with Macro's if you don't run it as Admin (due to security settings in the registry). But that's all documented quite well at microsofts site.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by sql*kitten · 2002-12-23 23:50 · Score: 5, Insightful

Reliability has always been one thing that Microsoft could never deliver and that is something they have gained and I can agree with them all the way on this.

Really? I can't remember the last time I had Outlook or Word (2000 and XP) actually crash, and I use 'em both every day. The 2000 line of products is a huge leap over the 95 line (which I will agree were pretty crap).

Microsoft do have some unreliable products still - IIS and Exchange spring immediately to mind. But a lot of their stuff now is rock solid. I can honestly say that in the last couple of years I've had more Xemacs crashes than Word.

I know that you can try to lock them out but you never really succeed.

You can turn off VBA with a couple of clicks. Now do you want to talk about buffer overruns in sendmail and named?

I use Evolution instead of Outlook and it is even as good at eye candy. It does every thing and more that I was using Outlook for. The only think Outlook does better is spread virii.

As a straight mail client, Outlook as some competition from Open Source, but for groupware Open Source doesn't have anything to compare.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by ender81b · 2002-12-24 00:05 · Score: 1

Thanks, we use office 2k but I found a related way of doing it on win2k as well. The custom install script seems to have taken care of most of the problems but this won't hurt at all.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by Khalid · 2002-12-24 01:02 · Score: 2

This is because of billy boy ! one of his pet ideas, something he keeps talking about whenever is has the opportunity to talk about the future of software. He wants software that does things for you, that configue itself, that "guess" what you wanted to do ! this is for instance why Word insists on formatting what your type, making guess about what you wanted to do. This is just plain annoying ! every time you install a new instance of MS Office you have to endure this insanity ! it's one the first things I disable. Too bad, a lot of MS Office users are not aware of this, and keep silently suffring from billy's crazy ideas !
Re:They kept the worst demons... by christrs · 2002-12-24 01:07 · Score: 1

The only thing keeping me from dumping MS Office is OO's lack of a Wordperfect converter. Between that and the IE-Centric "Standards" my company has; I will have to stick with vmware/M$ucks a while more.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 01:24 · Score: 0

Uh, because people have different needs for the program, and so Microsoft thinking that it would benefit people to provide exactly what they want offers customization options? Not that I know of any differences between MSOffice and OpenOffice in terms of configuring, could you enligten me as to exactly what those are?
Re:They kept the worst demons... by mr_z_beeblebrox · 2002-12-24 01:41 · Score: 2

Open Office is a great office environment that meets all my needs and I have yet to meet someone that genuinely *NEEDS* anything that Word has, that OO does not (I have met some that claim they do but it always turns out that they really mean that once in the past 2 years they once had a situation that would have been easier with Word).

I could not replace Excel in my environment. You can not write a USEFUL financial application on OO. Yes, you can actually create apps on excel. BTW, locking virii out also disables those cool apps as they are mostly macro on MS (though few new macro virus get written)
Re:They kept the worst demons... by WindBourne · 2002-12-24 01:49 · Score: 1

However, the one thing OO and other free alternatives do not have is the 100% compatibility with Word. Without that any alternative is useless when mailing Word and Excel documents is a part of your job.
I am always amazed at he number of ppl who state this, even though it is not true. For years, we have dealt with differing versions of office being all over the place. When A sends a doc to B in a newer format than B can support, then B routinely ask that A resends it in a format that they understand, which A normally does. This has gone on for ages, and will continue to do so. Whatdoe sit matter if OO can not totally read and write the newest format. simply resend it in the older well-known format. BTW, when doing tech suport in-house most if not all ppl have the same software. But going out-of-house, normally involves some conversion even when sending to offices.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by Spunk · 2002-12-24 02:00 · Score: 1

The 2000 line of products is a huge leap over the 95 line

Over Office 97 as well. I switch between the two at work and home and I am always pleased when Office 2000 sucks less :)

Supposedly my office is finally switching to 2000 in the near future. Woo!
Re:They kept the worst demons... by Zathrus · 2002-12-24 02:39 · Score: 2

The issue, I believe, is that OO doesn't completely understand even the older versions of Word document format. Not bashing them - I'm extraordinarily pleased with how well they handle things as is - but if you can't read the document in any reasonably marked up format (no, RTF does not count) then it does you little good.

The document format dance has pretty well ended though -- at least until the next version of Office is released. Office '97 and 2000 use the same formats (AFAIK) and nearly everyone has moved to them by now.

Of course, if the court ruling actually sticks and MS has to open its document formats then it's a non-issue, and we'll finally have real competition -- both in the OSS and closed source arenas. Hallelujah.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by jgennick · 2002-12-24 02:46 · Score: 1

Open Office is a great office environment that meets all my needs and I have yet to meet someone that genuinely *NEEDS* anything that Word has, that OO does not
I edit books for a living, and spend much of my day reading and editing text. Open Office is indeed quite good, and I'm actually using it quite successfully on two of my book projects. Correction, I should say the authors and I are actually using it.

Good as it is however, Open Office does have some rough edges. It can be extraordinarily sluggish sometimes. Just hit F11 to open the style window, select "all styles", and then type a few letters. Editing becomes dog-slow with that style window open, and yet I must have that window open because a big part of my job is to apply the correct styles. Other features could certainly use some polishing too.

I in no way want to slam Open Office. It's a good effort, and for a 1.0 version is actually quite good. In fact, I'm installing it on the family PC and maybe on my daughter's PC. But if you were paying for my time, you'd find that it takes me longer to get through a chapter using Open Office than using Word. The fact that Open Office is "free" is meaningless to my boss, because in the long run Word is easily more cost-effective, in my particular environment.

So, do I *need* any features that Open Office doesn't have? I don't think so. Except that the ability to run Word macros would certainly be a time-saver. However, even though I don't strictly *need* any features, it would sure save me time and my company money if certain features were improved.

This is an interesting enough issue that I may write a longer article about it sometime. But today is Christmas Eve and my son wants me to take him to Marquette, so I've got to run.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 03:11 · Score: 0

Even if you tell MS Office to install everything, it doesn't. It'll stil prompt for the CD and license number when it needs to WP filter, or anything else out of the ordinary.

MS Office is just a giant hassle, and job security for the computer gurus, and just generates all sorts of support payroll expense. As a businessman, I hate it.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by luisdom · 2002-12-24 03:52 · Score: 1

Really? I can't remember the last time I had Outlook or Word (2000 and XP) actually crash, and I use 'em both every day. The 2000 line of products is a huge leap over the 95 line (which I will agree were pretty crap).
OK, it's only 10 years for the largest and welthiest corporation to make a word proccessor and a mail client stable. Impressive.
BTW, have you used, for example, MS Project? It's not a very complex app and ALLWAYS manages to hang the whole XP down when I use it. Sure, it is just me, there are a lot of people that doesn't, and now 2000 and XP are solid, bla, bla, bla.
It is just me or this kind of "MS rocks nowadays" posts seem written from a word template?
Seriously, I find XP stable if I only use word and winamp at a time. If I play a 3D game or another not-so-common app it is, ack., more stable than W Me (pffff), but nothing more.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by Dark+Fire · 2002-12-24 04:08 · Score: 1

sendmail?
named?

As in the M$ world, you have choices on your applications. You just picked the two buggiest UNIX apps in the bunch.

don't use sendmail, use qmail or exim

don't use named, use djbdns
Re:They kept the worst demons... by edunbar93 · 2002-12-24 04:19 · Score: 2

You can turn off VBA with a couple of clicks.

See, this is the problem right there. It should be the other way around. You should have to turn *on* VBA with a couple of clicks. It's kind of like saying that RedHat 6.2 was secure once you turned everything off...

There's almost no reason to have this in an e-mail client at all anyway, except for viruses and spam. This feature is nothing less than a huge blinking neon sign attracting ne'er-do-wells to your front door, and Microsoft was too stupid to see that putting it up would be a hugely bad idea. Oddly enough, they keep up the good work.

--
"No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
Re:They kept the worst demons... by glwtta · 2002-12-24 04:30 · Score: 2

Really? I can't remember the last time I had Outlook or Word (2000 and XP) actually crash, and I use 'em both every day. The 2000 line of products is a huge leap over the 95 line (which I will agree were pretty crap).
I was originally going to disagree with the parent, but this is more to the point. I've been using 2000 since it came out in one form or another (at home at first, now only at work), and while I am not a huge fan, it's stable enough. It does crash, but reasonably rarely (disgregarding shoddy 3D games, which you can't really blame the OS for), in any case no more often than KDE and X.
XP is another story all together. It was preinstalled on a laptop I bought recently, and I've had nothing but problems with it. Crashed several times in the month I've had it (might be an improvement for 9X users, I guess...), their wireless config utility makes wireless networking damn near unusable, and it has taken being patronizing to the levels of a fine art form... Office XP is nice though.
Anyway, it's gone now and replaced with 2K. Incidentally, the laptop isn't for myself, I personally am getting a PowerBook :)

--
sic transit gloria mundi
Re:They kept the worst demons... by crawling_chaos · 2002-12-24 04:36 · Score: 2

It does crash, but reasonably rarely (disgregarding shoddy 3D games, which you can't really blame the OS for),
Why should the OS let an unhandled exception in a userland app crash the entire box? Bad design decision.

--
You can only drink 30 or 40 glasses of beer a day, no matter how rich you are.
-- Colonel Adolphus Busch
Re:They kept the worst demons... by daoist · 2002-12-24 04:38 · Score: 1
Open Office is a great office environment that meets all my needs and I have yet to meet someone that genuinely *NEEDS* anything that Word has, that OO does not (I have met some that claim they do but it always turns out that they really mean that once in the past 2 years they once had a situation that would have been easier with Word).

I despise Office 97. I use it for the following reasons:
- Multi-writing system support in documents.
- Multi-writing system database support.
- Multi-writing system spreadsheet support
Then specific to Word97:
- My publisher demands Word97.
- I can place graphical images in the right part of the book --- as a table, when that is needed.
Now if you can point me to something on a linux platform that supports multiple writings systems let me know. Core languages are Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, Enochian, Japanese, Chinese, Tibetan, Korean, Xhosa, !kung, Spanish, French, and Enochian. None-core languages include Summa, Hieroglyphics, Coptic, Farsi, Urdu and Hindi.

If you can point me to something on a linux platform that lets me insert graphical images where I want/need them in the document, i am all ears. [ Sometimes the graphics are in the middle of the sentence, sometimes on the side. Usually as an 8 by 8 grid. ]

Do I have to wait for Unicode 4.0?
--

That which is, is not.
That which is not, is.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by sql*kitten · 2002-12-24 04:58 · Score: 2

There's almost no reason to have this in an e-mail client at all anyway, except for viruses and spam. This feature is nothing less than a huge blinking neon sign attracting ne'er-do-wells to your front door, and Microsoft was too stupid to see that putting it up would be a hugely bad idea. Oddly enough, they keep up the good work.

Well, remember that Outlook and Exchange were always intended to be more than just a mail client and server, they are meant to be a platform for developing groupware and workflow applications. The scripting support is there so you can send validation logic along with a form, for example.

Microsoft historically have always prioritized features over everything else, but now they are waking up to security. I agree that they are long overdue. But I guess it was just one of those things that seemed like a good idea at the time - and probably was a good idea on a LAN without an Internet connection - and once customers started using it, they had to keep it.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by SiliconEntity · 2002-12-24 05:05 · Score: 2

Why should the OS let an unhandled exception in a userland app crash the entire box? Bad design decision.

Many of these crashes are because the games rely on device drivers for graphics speed. Because Windows uses a monolithic kernel, every driver has the ability to crash the system.

Linux has the same architecture. If it ever got to be a huge gaming platform you'd see the same problems there.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by bogie · 2002-12-24 06:49 · Score: 2

"Now do you want to talk about buffer overruns in sendmail and named?"

Laughable that you would try to compare the billions of dollars in damage, yes billions, that MS desktop products cause as opposed to some SERVER daemons that aren't even installed on most linux desktops. His statement about viruses was correct, yours was in basketball terms a brick. Good try though, event he best MS lemming couldn't have put forth a better effort.

http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,4 96 81,00.html

This post brought to you by Nimda, Codred, Bugbear,Sircam,Love bug, and Klez.

--
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
Re:They kept the worst demons... by spruce · 2002-12-24 07:04 · Score: 1

Those features are very beneficial to the platform. Yes they've had some problems with viruses, but they just need to fix those and keep the features. I've personally automated Outlook, Word, Access, and Excel for various tasks.

Each program exposes it's features as a COM object, and usually .exe/user interface just makes calls ot that COM object. Therefore you can use the COM object in your own .exe, or write VB scripts that use the features. Add Winodws Script Host to it and you can do some pretty powerful things.

Here's some examples of things I did - note these were all projects requested by people to meet a specific need.

--Used VBA to cycle through an Access database and generate the system documentation in the Word format automatically

--Used Outlook for contact management sytsem including custom built forms and scripts

--Wrote an application that listened for emails with a particular format and would process them

--Used Access to query several Excel spreadsheets and email the result from Outlook

I've done a lot more too, and I'm just one developer.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by sean23007 · 2002-12-24 07:09 · Score: 2

But the problem in the article is that they are required to use Microsoft products. I, too, like 00o, but NASA apparently could not make that switch. that said, MS Office is still a little more professional. Until Open Office shapes up a little, I would not recommend it to everyone. MS is still better at this point. However, I would say that it isn't worth paying hundred, of dollars for.

--

Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by Malcontent · 2002-12-24 07:16 · Score: 2

The MS trolls are too stupid to use qmail or djbdns. They are too stupid to use linux in the first place.

--
War is necrophilia.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 16:51 · Score: 0

"It is just me or this kind of 'MS rocks nowadays' posts seem written from a word template?"

Well, Slashdot is a cesspool of teenage hippie idealism. Fucking fish is a higher calling than using MS, and using Macs is better than fucking fish. So, considering how many grownups have made their peace with MS and kept their karma into the bargain...yeah, it's a big fucking conspiracy. We almost had you going, didn't we. You're just too good.

Those people who claim Windows post-9X is stable as a rock are also lying. There's not a chance in the world that you have shit hardware, software, or both. They're all wrong and you are right. Don't lose sight of that or your brain might start working.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by Erik+Hollensbe · 2002-12-24 17:40 · Score: 2

Your attitude is what's keeping tons of IT departments from getting linux on the desktop.

As much as it pains me to say, word of mouth and stigma is everything, and fortunately people like you are going the way of the ghost.
Re:They kept the worst demons... by cookiepus · 2002-12-24 18:04 · Score: 1

his is for instance why Word insists on formatting what your type

I bet Word would annoy you to hell, underlining that sentence for no reason whatsoever.

--
Ecce Europa - Web Design for Business
Re:They kept the worst demons... by Malcontent · 2002-12-24 21:27 · Score: 2

Ooooh yes it's my attitude that's the problem. Not the idiots who are unable to figure out how to run djbdns. I alone am singularly responsible for keeping linux out of tons of IT departments all over the world. I have that much power!.

If a CIO is unable to make a decision based on technical merit and instead relies of word of mouth and stigma they are worthless piles of crap and should not use linux. A company who hires an addled CIO like that will surely fail and when they do fail they will blame it on linux.

Trust me you don't want idiot CIOs choosing linux, it will linux a bad name.

--
War is necrophilia.

I see what you did there. by vilms · 2002-12-23 21:50 · Score: 1

"NASA"/"rocket scientist"

Very droll...

Now back to our normal programming.

Government wasting taxpayer money by Woogiemonger · 2002-12-23 21:51 · Score: 2

Why can't the government just use Linux and Staroffice instead of wasting a crapload of taxpayer money on Microsoft products? If Denmark's entire school system can do it, so can NASA. There might be other products out there that Microsoft writes for the average desktop PC which become "government-mandated", but I'm sure it's no big deal to find cheap or free alternatives.

Re:Government wasting taxpayer money by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:03 · Score: 0

yeah, have NASA define mission critical, then have Denmark's entire school system describe mission critical. I'm sure you'll find there is slight difference.
Re:Government wasting taxpayer money by hdparm · 2002-12-23 22:28 · Score: 2, Insightful

I don't quite understand what you're saying. Can you please explain where do Outlook/Office apps come into picture when talking about mission critical systems? If anything, they may make those systems only less reliable, due to their proneness to viruses.
Re:Government wasting taxpayer money by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 00:44 · Score: 0

... except if you bothered to check, Denmark's entire school-system hasn't. It's simply been offered Star Office cheap from Sun.

There's not a single mention in the actual article about Linux.
Re:Government wasting taxpayer money by IndependentVik · 2002-12-24 03:13 · Score: 1

The AC said:

... except if you bothered to check, Denmark's entire school-system hasn't. It's simply been offered Star Office cheap from Sun. There's not a single mention in the actual article about Linux.

Somebody mod up the AC. There were numerous Danes who, after actually reading the article, posted up pretty much what the AC said. Now I can't read Danish, either, but I'd trust the Danish /.ers over the editors ;)

--
I'd suggest you don't use Slashdot as your only news source, or you will suffer permanent brain damage.

score one for linux? by Stanley+Feinbaum · 2002-12-23 21:52 · Score: 2, Insightful

How is this a score for linux if people are still using proprietary applications such as word and outlook? Linux isn't linux without the main software being open-source applications created for linux, not microsoft programs being "emulated' on the linux desktop.

Personally, I think this is more a score for microsoft, being able to market their proprietary products to more people.

--

Stanley Feinbaum, professional journalist and master debater! God bless the USA!

Re:score one for linux? by deaddrunk · 2002-12-24 01:02 · Score: 1

It's the easiest sale though. Your staff can work just the same way as they did before at far lower cost and with better reliability than those crappy NT4 workstations you've been unwilling to upgrade due to the fact that they work most of the time and it's not worth the risk or expense to move to XP. Once on Linux then you can gradually start changing the apps you use, while saving the organisation a fortune in licensing fees.

--
Does a Christian soccer team even need a goalkeeper?
Re:score one for linux? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 02:54 · Score: 0

Ah. Kindling.

What makes Linux Linux? Is is the licensing of all the software that runs on Linux? If you agree with that, then you have a good reason to call it GNU/Linux. Nevermind RMS, if your idea of Linux encompasses Free utilities and apps, you should be able to say "GNU/Linux."

Alternatively, if you're primary beef with emulation is that it's inefficient and doesn't make proper use of the kernel, then prefixing "GNU/" adds little meaning.

If both arguments seem reasonable, then you should be diplomatically neutral on the subject of "GNU/Linux."

More MS bashing for fark's sake?! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 21:55 · Score: 1, Interesting

Tell me exactly how free == better, then?

Sounds to me like there are a lot more of your so called 'script kiddies' running *ix boxes than there are Windows these days.

Re:More MS bashing for fark's sake?! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:36 · Score: 0

Have you even bothered to look at the # of IIS & W2K exploits for 2002?! Lump in all the WXP and Office hotfixes and you don't even need a script kiddie to exploit a unpatched MS box, you just need to look at it funny.
Re:More MS bashing for fark's sake?! by Newcastle22 · 2002-12-23 23:06 · Score: 1

Yes, script kiddies (or at least semi-intelligent crackers) run Linux more so than Windows. They use it to break into the Windows systems.
As for how free == better, well, that's why Eric Raymond and others have written books on the subject of Open Source. Read 'The Cathedral and the Bazaar' if you have not explored the argument for Open Source.
Dan
Re:More MS bashing for fark's sake?! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 23:34 · Score: 0

Oh, so if I write a book with a contrary argument to "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" then my point is valid?

One aspect of most OSS projects that is ignored in CatB, is this: The Importance of Having Users

Go into any non-small OSS project channel on IRC and have fun asking questions from a users perspective. It's very clique-ish. If you're not one of the "core" developers, most of the people won't listen to you. If they do, they don't "listen" and usually just say a cool statement like RTFM. Sometimes you do get help though, at the expense of being someones condensending attitude and over-inflated ego. But, every once in a while, you'll get someone who helps you and doesn't bitch about it nor crititiques you on your use of the software.
Re:More MS bashing for fark's sake?! by runderwo · 2002-12-24 00:06 · Score: 2

Go into any non-small OSS project channel on IRC and have fun asking questions from a users perspective. It's very clique-ish. If you're not one of the "core" developers, most of the people won't listen to you. If they do, they don't "listen" and usually just say a cool statement like RTFM.
You know, every anti-OSS person I have run into seems to claim this, but I've never run into it myself. Maybe I take care to ask the right questions and do not demand an answer?
In any case, if you want good and/or patient support, perhaps you should pay for it rather than using others' valuable free time on public IRC channels, if the free support isn't living up to your expectations.
Also, you haven't any proof that these are actual developers who have harassed you or caused whatever bad experiences you had. It could just as easily have been some 13-year-old jumping into an IRC channel for some fun, acting all l33t, pissing you off to the point of frustration, and then getting kicked later when an op shows up.

--
LRC, the best-read libertarian site on the web
Re:More MS bashing for fark's sake?! by arglesnaf · 2002-12-24 04:36 · Score: 1

Hrmm, I disagree.

In my experience, it can seriously vary. Many times I have found no-one is willing answer anything that is not an intermediate question. Newbie stuff gets you flamed or ignored, and advanced stuff just gets you ignored. (Unless a senior person on the project is interested in that area)

I had a PCMCIA kernel bug in RedHat 8 that I got all the support in the world for from RedHat bugzilla users. But many times I can sit in an IRC channel with 60 people and not get a single answer.

I also have now learned so much about the standard init processes on my own that I have submitted PCMCIA script patches to a few distro's. Did I want to become a master of obscure hardware? No, but since the people who knew wouldn't answer me (and I found several pages of people running the same hardware and distro) I had to learn it. And what is worse is that I had to submit the patched, not the many people who fixed the problem before me on their own.

It really does piss me off. It is not that all open source people are dicks, but many do have the "1|\/| 13373R 7|-|@|\| j00" attitude and flat out ignore you.

Some projects I have found to support the community very well, but there really are quite a few people out there who tarnish the community image.

Just for reference, I have a MacOSX Powerbook G4, and a Gateway Solo running RedHat 8 with Crossover and MS Office. The only thing I ever need to use windows for is administrative, auditing, and forensic tools. My only complaint with open source in general is that Windows seems to be Mozilla's stablest platform.

True, Linux is a completely workable platform, but it requires flexibility, patience, and technical skill. The fact that NASA is using a crossover environment may not be newsworthy, but it is a nice step closer to making people expectations be that that should be able to wordprocess on any platform without pain and suffering.

When the general public's expectations change, MS will support open source without the need for products like crossover. Using crossover at NASA causes just a few more people to have that expectation.
Re:More MS bashing for fark's sake?! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 16:11 · Score: 0

The fish doesn't notice water.

It took years for Amway's bad rep to get around so that even neolithic Borneo savages knew to run at the sight of a whiteboard. Linux has become known as "the asshole OS" in less than ten years. If believing in some Vast Remond Conspiracy makes you feel better about the world's failure to beat a path to your door, go with it. Just don't lie to yourself.
Re:More MS bashing for fark's sake?! by runderwo · 2002-12-24 23:30 · Score: 2

If believing in some Vast Remond Conspiracy makes you feel better about the world's failure to beat a path to your door, go with it. Just don't lie to yourself.
Um, did you reply to the right post? I have no idea what you are talking about.

--
LRC, the best-read libertarian site on the web
Re:More MS bashing for fark's sake?! by runderwo · 2002-12-24 23:32 · Score: 2

I had a PCMCIA kernel bug in RedHat 8 that I got all the support in the world for from RedHat bugzilla users. But many times I can sit in an IRC channel with 60 people and not get a single answer.
You disagree, but you restate my point exactly, in that paid support is typically going to be more helpful than free support. What do you mean?
Some projects I have found to support the community very well, but there really are quite a few people out there who tarnish the community image.
Which ones? If you don't come out and say who's being offensive, then how can anyone be expected to remedy the situation?

--
LRC, the best-read libertarian site on the web

Mandate standards not Apps by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:04 · Score: 2, Insightful

I feel that government should be mandating standards not Apps. But then Microsoft apps would not be aloud.

Re:Mandate standards not Apps by beaubell · 2002-12-24 00:05 · Score: 1

I feel that government should be mandating standards not Apps. ...
I second this. In fact, I'm gonna fire off a letter to my congress people now.
Re:Mandate standards not Apps by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 06:47 · Score: 0

As long as Balmer is there, they'll be loud.

Re:My hot cousin Jennifer by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:11 · Score: 0

uh... why not?

what's the worst that could happen? she might hear you? she might barge in and see in you strangling your one eyed trouser snake? women diddle with themselves just as much as us guys. those who claim to have never masturbated are plain out lying.

and who knows if you might get some action that way. my ex girlfriend often wanted to watch me masturbate as a part of the foreplay.

Re:My hot cousin Jennifer by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:15 · Score: 0

who knows if you might get some action that way

WTF?! Are you so inbred that missed the word "cousin" in his post? Here's a newsflash for you: fucking your cousin is SICK not to mention illegal (except possibly in afghanistan or some other muslim shithole country).

Re:My hot cousin Jennifer by binarie · 2002-12-23 22:18 · Score: 0, Offtopic

dude... you also said she is "hot", now... logicaly that means that you see her as a "sex" object in your mind. Since you see her as a sex object the next thing follows is that you don't mind fucking her... and that is what was suggested just previously

Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:22 · Score: 0

I work at Nasa's astronaut training facility. I have since well, many years...I've never heard of this guy, or his network.
So many of us here at JSC dislike Windows and prefer Unix/Linux that I am sure I'd have heard if someone was building a Linux lab.
Not sure where this guy is hiding...

bridging the gap?? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:25 · Score: 0

maybe there was pun intended, but aren't these the same folks that fucked up with the metric/us standard system? maybe bridging gaps isn't their thing.

Re:My hot cousin Jennifer by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:27 · Score: 0

I am not the AC who has the hots for his "hot cousin".

Goddamn what kind of freaks read /.! What's next? Someone would like to screw his sister or mother?

Re:hmm... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:32 · Score: 0

i knew i shouldn't have gotten that tattoo ... now my mom knows what i do when she's at work.

Re:My hot cousin Jennifer by binarie · 2002-12-23 22:33 · Score: 1

neah... that would be very sick and unintelligent. I was just pointing at another premise in the previous statement, in order to clarify the argument.

Re:hmm... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:35 · Score: 0

Indeed. I showed the pic to your mom over here at work and she called you a cheating bastard. Sounds like you've got some explaining to do.

Re:hmm... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:38 · Score: 0

wow ... you work at dirty dan's pure platinum topless bar too? small world!

Reliability by David+Gerard · 2002-12-23 22:43 · Score: 2

The advantage of running Windows apps on Unix is that the app is very unlikely to take the damn OS - and hence, all your other running apps - with it when it goes down!

It's amazing watching Windows users get their first taste of reliability ... and realise what sort of crap they've been putting up with all this time, and that they don't have to any more.

Key marketing point for Unix over Windows: A STABLE, RELIABLE DESKTOP. That doesn't fall over once a day.

--
http://rocknerd.co.uk

Re:Reliability by Stinking+Pig · 2002-12-24 05:35 · Score: 2

Win2K Pro is exactly that -- slow as mud, but just as stable as Linux in my experience. I prefer not to use it for freedom and licensing reasons, but I can't knock it as a capable OS the way that I've knocked all their desktop products.

--
"Nothing was broken, and it's been fixed." -- Jon Carroll

Re:hmm... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:43 · Score: 0

Well, what can I say? I have great shaved legs, tight little ass and my man-boobs fill a B-cup nicely. A little bit of make up and I have the guys stuffing greenbacks into my thongs and begging for a private show.

During the day I am a systems administrator but at night I turn into this sexy, sexy lady and make a hell of a lot money in the process.

Re:hmm... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:48 · Score: 0

god ... no wonder my finger smells like shit. i thought it was a pussy with very large labia! fuck. better get my finger out of my wife's mouth.

Re:Government ?wasting? taxpayer money by Dysan2k · 2002-12-23 22:50 · Score: 3, Informative

Schools and business are 2 totally different institutions. Not trying to down you, Woogie, but computers used in a school system and a business are not the same. Give ya a good example:

Computers go down at the Board of Education. People can't access budget, students grades, or profile records. Wait until the system comes back up or is restored from backup. It's just annoying since there are no REALLY necessary deadlines outside of payroll.

Computers go down at the office. Sales can't work on/give presentations to clients, customer information can't be retrieved (think ISP or Credit card processor), or quarterly reports can't be completed for stockholders/banks. This can cost a company a TON of money, clients could leave to find another place of business, etc. (Imagine needing the IRS to look up your information to make sure your extension was filed lest you be fined/go to jail.)

Keep in mind, swapping an office or group of offices takes a TON of time. Normally there are a number of in-house applications that would have to be re-written AND heavily tested before they could be implemented (think of the MEGS of VB source that would have to be ported to perl/php/java). In the gov't, MOST applications are custom-written, many by contracted companies, so the gov't doesn't necessarily have the source to it. Then there is retraining of employees to use the new office/email applications, and the meer re-install of EVERYone's machines from Win to Linux where you hope that all the needed hardware is supported (which has gotten SO much better in the past 3 years.)

It's a daunting task, and can be VERY costly in man-hours to do such a task. If nothing else, the down-time upon switching over and the performance curve while everyone learns the new applications.

I agree in the sense that I'd LOVE to see M$ no longer in the gov't offices, but I also realize what it would entail to switch everything over.

--
-What have you contributed lately?

Hybrids are good for linux. by Kjella · 2002-12-23 22:54 · Score: 3, Interesting

Don't expect every program people might need to exist or get ported to linux. I know of at least one business that went from win98 to VMware/win98. Of course this means they'll replace what they can with native linux apps as time goes by, but those things take time, money, and nagging many software producers. Plus a gradual changeover is much better for the users and support, which get things slowly instead of a *completely* new system. All the menus/buttons being in different places can be enough of a problem for some. Having a fall-back solution is always good.

Kjella

--
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings

Re:Hybrids are good for linux. by Clover_Kicker · 2002-12-24 02:09 · Score: 3, Insightful

>Don't expect every program people might need to
>exist or get ported to linux.

Exactly.

In big companies, people often spend a lot of time using a terminal emulator to access mainframe applications from their Windows desktop. Old apps don't disappear/get replaced overnight.

RMS would not approve by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 22:59 · Score: 0

RMS would say: NO COMPROMISE!

VMware is not free. Windows is not free. By using both or either you are acting unethically!

Re:RMS would not approve by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 23:06 · Score: 0

Who cares what RMS approves.
He is a nut who does not shower and who likes to play a flute -- probably a "skin flute" too.

Re:homeland security by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 23:17 · Score: 0

I don't think the Secret Service would let a cock anywhere near their faces.

Why outlook? by ej · 2002-12-23 23:24 · Score: 1

I'm wondering why outlook is a 'government-mandated' app. It's hard to see the difference between an email generated by outlook or another email app. Why force people to use an app, while there are plenty of different compatible apps available?

--
I've got nothing to offer but confusion - throwing muses

Re:Why outlook? by ThaReetLad · 2002-12-23 23:43 · Score: 2

One word. Exchange

--
You can't win Darth. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
Re:Why outlook? by duffbeer703 · 2002-12-24 02:20 · Score: 3, Insightful

Government has lots of meetings, and the best app for scheduling meetings is MS Outlook/Exchange

--
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
Re:Why outlook? by Phroggy · 2002-12-24 08:30 · Score: 2

I'm wondering why outlook is a 'government-mandated' app. It's hard to see the difference between an email generated by outlook or another email app. Why force people to use an app, while there are plenty of different compatible apps available?

Because Outlook is used for other things besides sending and receiving e-mail. If my boss sends me a meeting invitation, and I click Accept, I get a reminder popup 15 minutes before the meeting. I want other people on my team to be able to see certain e-mails, so I set up a rule to filter them into a folder with a few clicks of the mouse (the rule is stored server-side, not client-side, so it works when I'm offline), then I share that folder so each member of my team has access to it - maybe read-only access, maybe full read/write, depending on what I need - but they can't access the rest of my mail at all.

There are other ways of doing these things, and there are plenty of features in Outlook that I never use, but this stuff only works if everybody is doing it the same way, so you have to standardize on something, and Outlook is the existing standard. Managers love it. Try training a manager to set up appointments with something other than Outlook. They won't be happy.

--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
Re:Why outlook? by chez69 · 2002-12-24 17:18 · Score: 1

Lotus notes does this quite well also.

--
PHP is the solution of choice for relaying mysql errors to web users.

Score another one for Linux on the Desktop ? by dJOEK · 2002-12-23 23:29 · Score: 2, Funny

That brings them up to, what, one and a half ?

--
Exercise caution when modding this message up: the author acts like a jerk when his karma is excellent.

OT::My hot cousin Jennifer by Corporate+Troll · 2002-12-23 23:34 · Score: 1

Oh, come on... often you can even marry your cousin, you just have to ask for permission. I know a european country where you have to ask the king for permission.
Fucking your cousin isn't that sick. Not that I would do it, but I don't see it as fundamentally sick. After all sex is just a way to have fun. I just think thah having children with your cousin isn't the wisest thing to do.

Use Linux-only by anarchima · 2002-12-23 23:38 · Score: 1

Why not just get rid of all the Windows apps and run Linux eclusively? Seems like you can do all the email/word processor/spreadsheet stuff in OpenOffice, StarOffice, KOffice or whatever, with some Crossover plugins. Certainly, if that's all they're doing under Windows, then it doesn't justify a bi-platform existence.

--
The Welkin: Online Music Reviews

Re:Use Linux-only by reallocate · 2002-12-24 02:37 · Score: 3, Interesting

Seems to me the geek community constantly overestimates the rest of the world's interest in and skills at using computers. Abruptly replacing Windows and Windows apps with Linux and a batch of Windows-wannabe apps would, from where I sit, produce three certain results in any typical office environment: An immediate and precipitous drop in productivity; flooding of tech support and management with questions and demands for training; and simmering discontent as users ask "If it's supposed to be just like Windows, why didn't we keep Windows in the first place?"

Remember, most users are no more interested in their computers than they are in their televisions. They just want them to do what they want them to do in the way they're used to doing that.

--
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
Re:Use Linux-only by anarchima · 2002-12-24 04:17 · Score: 1

Remember that the reasons for going over to Linux are usually tied in with cost benefit. Therefore, it is irrelevant what others think of its usefulness.

--
The Welkin: Online Music Reviews
Re:Use Linux-only by Ziviyr · 2002-12-24 07:28 · Score: 2

Remember, most users are no more interested in their computers than they are in their televisions. They just want them to do what they want them to do in the way they're used to doing that.

I wish my television did what I want it to...

--

Someone set us up the bomb, so shine we are!

Re:My hot cousin Jennifer by ThaReetLad · 2002-12-23 23:46 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Actually I believe it is legal to marry your cousin here in the UK. Not that I know anyone who has done that, but I have heard it is common among certain immigrant communities.

--
You can't win Darth. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine

NASA and Government Waste, and Free Software by Conspire · 2002-12-23 23:48 · Score: 4, Insightful

Why oh why, do we have an agency that is already under budget pressures, REQUIRING thier employees to use MS software for email and office applications, when they cost MUCH more in licensing fees to that budget squeezed agency? It is so disgusting I am almost to lazy to start the list, but here is my list of points:

1. If NASA says GNULinux administrations costs are too high, think again---surely all these Unix gurus can administer thier own systems little support needed.

2. If NASA says that MS Office Formats are required for standard file formatted documents accross the organization, think again----surely the entire organization switching to OpenOffice.org is a much better way to ENSURE future standardization without upgrade costs.

3. IF NASA says that MS OUTLOOK is needed to standardize email ---- sticking to open and standard protocols as opposed to proprietary and costly protocols is surely the best way to standardization.

4. IF NASA management says that they liked the MS PowerPointless presentation, they probably did, and they probably believed all the points that MS made to them during the presentation. Which explains why we have a GOVERNMENT organization still running PROPRIETARY software and forcing thier users to use MICROSOFT when they don't want to!

5. If NASA made it a REQUIREMENT that ALL of its vendors communicate using OPEN and NON-PROPRIETARY FILE FORMATS as a REQUIREMENT FOR DOING BUSINESS, THEY WOULD!

6. If you told your senator what you think, than you did the right thing. If you did not, than you can blame no one but yourself when GNULinux is OUTLAWED and a copy of PALADIUM is REQUIRED to VOTE.

Get the letters out to the senators folks.

--
Real men don't need signitures!!!

Re:NASA and Government Waste, and Free Software by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 01:43 · Score: 0

It would be nice... but, working for a company that frequently does NASA contracts... and we use MS Office, it would mean a lot of changes for all of their 3rd party contractors as well (read this as "large corporations like Raytheon, Lockheed-Martin, etc"). Thats a lot more change.

Now, mind you, we have had customers in the past request their proposals and other documentation in FrameMaker, Quark, and other packages... and have complied. Its not *that* big of a deal.

Still, changing an *entire* corporation, being a commercial entity or NASA, is still a big deal. And expensive (even if the software is free).
Re:NASA and Government Waste, and Free Software by Zathrus · 2002-12-24 03:13 · Score: 2

If NASA says GNULinux administrations costs are too high, think again---surely all these Unix gurus can administer thier own systems little support needed

Yes, because it's a good idea to have your people wasting time on system administration instead of doing what they need to do. And yes, this applies just as much to Windows, OS-X, or any other system -- it's why you have sysadmin groups in the first place. And, frankly, it's generally cheaper to admin Unix than NT since you need fewer people for more boxes.

IF NASA says that MS OUTLOOK is needed to standardize email ---- sticking to open and standard protocols as opposed to proprietary and costly protocols is surely the best way to standardization.

No, because you save money in time. Look, the greatest expense any large company has is not capital expenditures -- it's payroll. There is no equivalent to Outlook in the open source world. There are very few equivalents in the commercial software arena, and there's a reason that Outlook is beating them. Notes, whatever Sun is offering now, Novell -- they all require a lot more administration and hardware for little gain. Yes, you get stuck with Outlook. But the calendaring, email, tasklist, and so forth aren't as well integrated in any open source solution. I sincerely hope that changes, and soon, but until then all the people whining about Outlook are simply proving that they don't have a clue about what it does and what it offers to a medium-to-large company.

If NASA made it a REQUIREMENT that ALL of its vendors communicate using OPEN and NON-PROPRIETARY FILE FORMATS as a REQUIREMENT FOR DOING BUSINESS, THEY WOULD!

Not likely. NASA isn't stupid enough to make that kind of decree, nor is the DoD. Just take a look at the three biggest aerospace/military contractors - Lockheed-Martin, Boeing, and Raytheon. Oh heck, let's throw General Dynamics in there too. You aren't going to tell these four monsters to switch their entire computing platform -- yes, they need the business. But you also need them. If they told you to go screw yourself and your standards, who the hell are you going to get to replace them? There isn't anyone that can step in. Which is why any kind of standards like you talk about are fielded before the large defense/NASA contractors beforehand to make sure it doesn't cause too many problems. Yes, this is the real world. You may not like it, but it doesn't care about you.
Re:NASA and Government Waste, and Free Software by Chester+K · 2002-12-24 04:17 · Score: 2

1. If NASA says GNULinux administrations costs are too high, think again---surely all these Unix gurus can administer thier own systems little support needed.

The problem with that is that all those NASA engineers are supposed to be working on aerospace stuff, not Linux stuff. That's why even technology companies have IT departments.

2. If NASA says that MS Office Formats are required for standard file formatted documents accross the organization, think again----surely the entire organization switching to OpenOffice.org is a much better way to ENSURE future standardization without upgrade costs.

At the incredibly expensive cost of converting all their existing documents to OpenOffice's format (you can't simply run them through the DOC filter, because it sucks), and retraining their clerical people to work with it. Not to mention the looming headache of interacting with other companies. I use OpenOffice myself at work to open the few DOC files that come across my desk as a progammer, and I've seen that it mangles the document beyond use just as often as it opens it in a legible format.

3. IF NASA says that MS OUTLOOK is needed to standardize email ---- sticking to open and standard protocols as opposed to proprietary and costly protocols is surely the best way to standardization.

People don't use Outlook for the email, they use it for the groupware. And open source has nothing that can hold a candle to Outlook's groupware functionality.

4. IF NASA management says that they liked the MS PowerPointless presentation, they probably did, and they probably believed all the points that MS made to them during the presentation. Which explains why we have a GOVERNMENT organization still running PROPRIETARY software and forcing thier users to use MICROSOFT when they don't want to!

And the Government also drives automobiles built on proprietary technologies by General Motors and Ford. And they also fly fighter jets built on proprietary technologies by Lockheed Martin and Boeing. What's your point? There's no historical precedent that states that everything the Government uses needs to be in the public domain, or that every piece of data the Government works with needs to be open to public inspection. (In fact, I'm sure the people at Area 51 or Cheyenne Mountain would strongly disagree on that point.)

5. If NASA made it a REQUIREMENT that ALL of its vendors communicate using OPEN and NON-PROPRIETARY FILE FORMATS as a REQUIREMENT FOR DOING BUSINESS, THEY WOULD!

I'm sure NASA picks its battles, and I don't think using one word processor over another is worth throwing down the gauntlet over. Users simply do not care whether it's Office or OpenOffice. Go ahead and imagine that in words with alternate capitalization if that helps.

6. If you told your senator what you think, than you did the right thing. If you did not, than you can blame no one but yourself when GNULinux is OUTLAWED and a copy of PALADIUM is REQUIRED to VOTE.

Slippery slope theory and pure FUD. You're stretching for things to rant about by this point, apparently.

--

NO CARRIER
Re:NASA and Government Waste, and Free Software by sconeu · 2002-12-24 05:04 · Score: 1

As a former employee of Litton, now a divison of Northrop Grumman, I wish to register a protest at you leaving them out. NOC is the second largest defense/aerospace contractor after LockMart.

--
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.

spelling troll by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-23 23:57 · Score: 0

s/GNULinux/Linux
s/PALADIUM /palladium

Re:spelling troll by nbvb · 2002-12-24 06:15 · Score: 1

Forgot the trailing slash ....

_sigh_ if you're going to troll, do it right.

--NBVB

Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war! by Alsee · 2002-12-23 23:59 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Damn terrorists trying to destroy the US economy!

THEY
MUST
BE
STOPPED!

We must protect the children!

-

--
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.

Score by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 00:17 · Score: 0

" Score another one for Linux on the Desktop."

Great, so the score is now a bajillion to 3 for MS. Woot! We're catching up!

a bridge too far/to hell by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 00:30 · Score: 0

instead of pretending to interact with the ill eagle kingdumb, while being .aspsimilated, anyone with ANY integrity should flat out refuse to have ANY dealing with those gangsterious payper liesense stock markup FraUDs. you too, robbIE. fuddle's "future" for most of US, is dark.

piling phonys on top of phonys never works. we should already know that buy now.

Just Another History about running by Lolaine · 2002-12-24 00:33 · Score: 0

Windows apps on Linux ...
Face it, that is no score for Linux, it is a score for Microsoft, as long as those ppl need to run windows apps.

--
------- The last Sig. got fired.

Windows Terminal Services on OS X by pvera · 2002-12-24 00:38 · Score: 2

I have the same problem, I want to use a unix-type environment but I am stuck programming for Windows-only platforms. The solution was provided by Microsoft itself: a terminal services client for OS X.

Now I use my iBook for all MS Office tasks, web programming is done in BBEdit and HTML layouts in Dreamweaver MX. Whenever I need to do something on a SQL Server or configuration of IIS I can use the Remote Desktop Client and use terminal services to do whatever I need to do.

I also tried XP on Virtual PC 6 but found it horribly slow on the iBook. Terminal server will do for now until we phase out IIS and SQL Server and bring up php and MySQL.

--
Pedro
----
The Insomniac Coder

Re:My hot cousin Jennifer by nutznboltz · 2002-12-24 00:49 · Score: 1, Offtopic

Well, it works for the chinese:

http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/7/19/15334/2974

Slowly does it by FungiSpunk · 2002-12-24 00:58 · Score: 2, Insightful

This NASA thingy has raised one of my favourites! Now I love Unix, I work as an SA/DBA, but I notice a lot of people stating, simply dump Windows/Office and get Linux/OpenOff! How many of you have ever worked on a Win/PC help desk? Generally you get calls from people who lose their minds because the send button was moved three inches down or "Word has crashed or is infected with a virus" when the document reload/fix option auto-repairs a doc. These are the sort of people we are hoping to ask to move over to a completely new environment where buttons will be in completely differnet sub-panels and applets. We need time to educate and coax standard desktop users over, not rush in guns blazing stating that "YOU WILL MOVE TO LINUX OR ELSE!", slowly does it!

--

"I kill you! You no good 56'ing!"

Re:Slowly does it by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 02:08 · Score: 1, Interesting

Dude,

You've just described what already happens every couple of years when you are forced to upgrade to a new version of Office.

Or, in the case of the unexpected dialog pop-ups, what already happens after applying service packs or after reinstalling due to a "windows ate itself" situation.

NASA and the Mac by zecg · 2002-12-24 01:03 · Score: 3, Funny

It was proposed, but the Macs make the astronauts all fruity -- in a test they started complaining about the shuttle wallpapers, using words like "flamboyant" over the voice comm and pinching each others' behinds.

--
.i lu doi ringos.star. xu do puku'aroroi dunli dopecaku leni virnu li'u

No hacking required by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 01:10 · Score: 0

Sun Blade 100 + SunPCi board: $1500 [Windows license not included]

Re:No hacking required by duffbeer703 · 2002-12-24 02:34 · Score: 2

Only problem is the Sun Blade 100 includes a processor designed for telecom switches.

It's so slow that it can barely run CDE

--
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
Re:No hacking required by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 03:48 · Score: 0

And the SunPCi board runs like a total dog, and actually makes Windows 2000 (more?) unreliable.

Not worth the money IMHO.. more of a novelty!

Re:My hot cousin Jennifer by resiak · 2002-12-24 01:11 · Score: 0, Offtopic

You believe right. I understand that it used to be common practice in the Royal Family. This might well explain Prince Charles.

Re:Score another for Linux? Not. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 01:27 · Score: 0

The Space Shuttle? AFAIK It's still using technology from the 70s and 80s, I really doubt most script kiddies could even guess how to hack it. Even if the Shuttle's control systems were connected to the internet, which they aren't.

Creating the illusion of something happening. by hndrcks · 2002-12-24 01:42 · Score: 2

A description of the concept of vaporware - generally considered to be a bad thing.

--
Everyone will start to cheer when you put on your sailin' shoes.

Re:Creating the illusion of something happening. by nutznboltz · 2002-12-24 02:11 · Score: 2

A description of the concept of vaporware - generally considered to be a bad thing.

So are you saying that Linux is vaporware? I'm talking about the illusion of the acceptance of the technology.
Re:Creating the illusion of something happening. by hndrcks · 2002-12-24 02:30 · Score: 2

If you have to 'create an illusion' of something, is that thing real? If the 'illusion' isn't necessary, why create it in the first place?

Leave the FUD, vapor, and marketing-by-'illusion' to the corporate droids. No need for it here.

--
Everyone will start to cheer when you put on your sailin' shoes.

Now if only... by jconley · 2002-12-24 01:47 · Score: 5, Funny

they could bridge the metric/english units thing ;)

Sure, lets talk. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 01:51 · Score: 0

Now do you want to talk about buffer overruns in sendmail

And that was when? Its been a while for any really GOOD sendmail exploits.

and named

Bind 9 is a rewrite. Combine that with the chroot, and I'm not seeing bind as a problem.

You are willing to cut Microsoft slack over their old products
huge leap over the 95 line (which I will agree were pretty crap).
here.

Re:My hot cousin Jennifer by WindBourne · 2002-12-24 02:02 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Someone would like to screw his sister or mother?
That would not be here. That would be on Jerry Springer, National inquiror, or Fox News.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.

Re:Score another for Linux? Not. by duffbeer703 · 2002-12-24 02:12 · Score: 2

You may not realize this, but companies other than Microsoft develop for the Windows-32 platform.

Using crossover is easier than convincing all of your software vendors to port products.

--
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK

Re:Score another for Linux? hell yeah by radon28 · 2002-12-24 02:50 · Score: 1

Well, considering how the U.S. Government operates (slow, behind the times, resistant to change), this actually IS a score for Linux. Which would be better for Linux: a) NASA decides to stick with Windows (score for win licenses) to run Windows apps (more licenses) OR b) NASA having no choice whether or not they want to run Windows Apps, but they sure as hell don't want to run them on Windows, making a small investment in Codeweavers so they can be happy?

I dont see how this isn't a score for Linux.

It doesn't work. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 02:50 · Score: 0

I work for a govt organization and am in charge of purchasing IT hardware and software. Whenever we mandate sensible standards into our RFPs, we get ZERO RESPONSES from any vendors at all because nobody is writing apps for anything but MS platform anymore. It's a totally sick situation and we're forced to eat MS dogfood because that's all there is anymore. The number of software vendors who write big mission-critical apps for professional Unix platforms, apps that govt orgs like ours use, has dwindled to almost nothing over the past two years. Our management has dictated to us that we are to acquire and use only vendor-supported turnkey apps, and under no circumstances get back into the business of developing our own apps ever again because during the dot-com boom, we lost all our in-house talent and could not support our home-grown apps. Of course the vendor support is very expensive and generally worthless, but our management refuses to acknowledge this because since we're paying so much money we *must* be getting something of value, right? Even though the software still doesn;t do what we need. Ugh... I digress. Management is in for a rude awakening when they find out we'll soon be forced to start renting MS licenses at a very high recurring expense to continue to use our systems. Then, maybe then, oh hope..... we'll be once again authorized to hire our own team of developers and be able to control our own destiny and have systems as robust and reliable as back in the good old mainframe days.

Re:Score another for Linux? Not. by babbage · 2002-12-24 02:58 · Score: 5, Insightful

That's nice. But if you actually read the article, the government *requires* them to use Microsoft software for tasks such as email. Can you honestly picture a department full of Unix nerds bending over backwards to accomodate Outlook because they *wanted* to? Especially when Ximian Evolution is available for much less pain?

So while you make a good point, it doesn't seem to be Nasa that you need to make your argument to. The problem sounds like it's upstream somewhere, and that itself is a huge problem: why is the federal government forcing its employees to use the software of a tried, convicted, and... well completely unpunished abusive monopoly? Don't take your aggression out on the people that came up with this hack, point it at their bosses & their bosses' bosses, who told them that this is what they have to do.

--
DO NOT LEAVE IT IS NOT REAL

Crossover Office can't do this.... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 03:01 · Score: 0

I've been playing around with Xandros lately, to see how well it can substitute for a real Win PC and there is still many, many showstopper problems. The biggest of which is a total lack of ability to have any concept of network mapped drive letters or even UNC paths in the file-open-browse dialogs of MS Office apps. You can only get to files stored in the emulated fake windows area of your local hard drive, and that my friends is a BIG SHOWSTOPPER.

What exactly does Outlook do? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 03:18 · Score: 0

I don't understand this obsession with Outlook? What does it do that is _so_ special?

Re:What exactly does Outlook do? by Zathrus · 2002-12-24 04:42 · Score: 1

Outlook is more than just email -- in fact, as an email program it's not that great -- the filtering is sub-par and the permanently embedded HTML rendering is nice for idiots, but causes security problems.

The magic is in the group collaboration... which takes relatively little to setup as I understand it (I'm a Unix programmer, not a Windows admin). Properly setup you can schedule meetings, view your own or other people's calendars, schedule reminders (for yourself, for a group, etc), view availability of conference rooms, and quite a bit more (I'm an Outlook novice frankly). I haven't even looked at the journaling and PDA sync capabilities.

Can you do all of this in a bevy of other programs? Yup. Are they as well integrated as Outlook? Nope. Having all of the scheduling system in one place makes a lot of sense, and thus far Outlook is one of the few that does it right. I really hope Evolution becomes fully functional with Exchange and Outlook, and/or that someone puts forth an app that's better than Exchange/Outlook -- there's certainly room for improvement. I like Outlook's interface for email, but wow does it suck beyond that. Moving between tasks/calendar/email is a PITA to me, probably because I'm more keyboard oriented.

I'm very much hoping that someone comes out with an Exchange/Outlook killer in the near future. It's pretty much the one thing that's holding a lot of companies back at this point.
Re:What exactly does Outlook do? by Derek+S · 2002-12-24 07:16 · Score: 1

One feature of Outlook/Exchange that doesn't get mentioned very often is the integrated security and delegation system. It's quite easy for users to grant and restrict access to portions of their account, and they can do it straight from the mail client. Most users seem to be able to figure it out without any help.

I did a test deployment of Bynari Insight Server (Cyrus+exim+OpenLDAP+web interface) once, and found that the equivalent capabilities were very limited and difficult for users to understand. And that was the least of the problems we would have faced in a migration. I do hold out hope for Samsung Contact, which I'll probably be evaluating this spring. That seems to be a much more integrated solution that was designed with the business user in mind.

I know I will regret this ... but by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 03:21 · Score: 0

I have seen several refereces to 1337 and now 31337. Can someone advise me as to the meaning of this.

Re:I know I will regret this ... but by Corporate+Troll · 2002-12-24 03:29 · Score: 1

Replace 1 with L, 3 with E and 7 with T. Then you'll get it.

Yeah... that will teach me.... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 03:33 · Score: 0

30 seconds with google and I found it... how many times do I have to learn that lesson..

How long has there been a gov. mandate? by burgburgburg · 2002-12-24 03:44 · Score: 2

For how long has there been a government mandate requiring the use of MS Word and Outlook? Is this just for NASA, or has the whole Federal government signed on to the MS monopoly system? Is this a law? A directive? Was this voted on by "representatives" or instituted by bureaucrats?

Most importantly, considering the court-recognized status of MS, shouldn't Federal dollars not be spent in supporting a monopoly?

Re:How long has there been a gov. mandate? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 05:07 · Score: 0

MS Office is the NASA standard for document exchange and has been for years. If you type up a report or send a document it should be in Word format. They also expect Excel spreadsheets, powerpoint presentations, etc. It's annoying really, but you can't fight government standards. The few times I've tried to use StarOffice they've complained the formatting is screwed up when they open it in Office 2000.
By the way, this is NOT going to change anytime soon. NASA CIO Paul Strassmann loves the e-mail environment at Johnson and wants to implement the same thing (MS Exchange) across the entire agency as part of the OneNASA initiative. So, basically we'd probably see the one or two mail servers per center replaced with hundreds of Exchange servers centralized at Johnson or Marshall. Such progress!!

OS X sysadmin costs less. hardware easier to maint by goombah99 · 2002-12-24 03:47 · Score: 2

Not only is the expected TCO for mac osx lower than linux the hardware is easier to maintain.

I've seen this phenomena too many times. a site has a zillion pc techs and 1 mac tech. rather than conclude the obvioust that PCs need higher levels of support they usually vote to go to a single PC platform, and the poor single mac tech is outvoted.

--
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.

Advice of Unix geeks trying out a mac by goombah99 · 2002-12-24 03:50 · Score: 5, Insightful

Dear Unix user, welcome to mac. If you trust me you will just do all of the following without asking why, before you start whining about features you miss. The following is a no-fat-added list of essential customization for unix users converting to the mac world.

1. The Mouse.
Go buy a 3 button USB mouse. Make sure you get an optical mouse with a wheel. Buy the most expensive one you can. Heriditary mac users prefer a 1 button mouse, but you wont.

2. The Terminal.
Open /Applications/Utilities. Drag the terminal.app to the Dock

3. File system journaling
Open the terminal.app and type
sudo diskutil enableJournal /Users
Just do it. This can be undone and you can change how you want it later.

4. The Compiler
Regardless of what compiler you prefer, you need the native compiler and libs. Go to
http://developer.lanl.gov and register for free. Enter the site and select the downloads option. Scroll through the list till you find "developer tools", download and install it.

5. Installing GNU ports part 1.
Goto http://sourceforge.com and find the latest stable release of "fink" for mac os X. download and install it. There will be some questions to answer, just choose the defaults except if offered, ask it to get updates from CVS.

6. Install X-windows part 1
If you have 5 hours to you can wait, type in the terminal
fink install xfree86-rootless
this is preferred as it gets the latest release of a fast changing package.
If you are in a hurry you can install the binary.
Type
sudo dselect
Quick intro to dselect: after some preliminaries you are offered the chance to choose packages from a list. Use the down-arrow key to move down and find xfree86-rootless.
Press the + key to select it. You will be offered "conflict resolution": accept the defaults by pressing return. Then return again to exit the selection. DO NOT GET GREEDY and select other packages yet. Finish the installation.

7. Installing X-windows part 2: the window manager
You may prefer fvwm2 or some other window manager but take my advice and try out oroborus first. Oroborus does things the mac way, and later you will be glad you did even if its not familiar at first. Oroborus deliberately eschews many popular features, letting the OS provide those services. For example, if you want virtual screens you DO NOT want them as part of the windows manager! You want them as part of Aqua so that they apply to both aqua and to x-windows. Likewise you want the Dock to manage minimizing windows not the window manager.
Go to http://apple.com click the OSX tab, then the downloads tab and find oroborus.
Note: the oroborus that comes with Fink/dselect is not quite the same thing.

8. Installing GNU ports part 2.
Use dselect or fink to install a few packages. Fink has about 2000 packages available including your favorite parts of kde and gnome. To see what's avalaible type
fink list | more
just for practice try installing gv (ghost view) and xemacs.
Remember, dselect will install binaries (fast), and fink will install source (slow), generally dselect is a good idea. Once a month type "fink update-all" or update packages in dselect.

9. Text editor
Goto http://www.barebones.com and get a free copy of bbedit "lite". I recommend buying the full version, especially to geeks. Note that you can save files in unix/mac/PC formats which have different end of line characters. Despite the name, on a mac you should normally use unix format. Mac mode is mainly for historic reasons but gums up unix commands. Even if this (amazingly) does not turn out to be your preferred editor, you should install it anyhow so that it is there for guests.

10. Mounting network disks
You can mount NFS disks by creating a file that looks just like the usual /etc/fstab file. It does not matter where you put it since the mac will ignore it. To mount the disks type "sudo niload fstab" followed by the file path name. However, don't do this right away till you have more experience. Instead do the following.
In the finder window, select go>servers. In the text field type
nfs://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/hostpath
Where xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx is the ip address or domain name of the host with the disk, and /hostpath is the exported fs. The disk will be mounted in /Volumes and be "aliased" to the desktop.
To mount windows network disks we use
smb://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/path
Be nice and unmount your disks (throw them in the trash) before disconnecting from the net.

11. using X windows across the network.
All the usual stuff (like xhosts and DISPLAY) works as expected. However you do need to activate oroborus (which will fire up X-windows) since its not on by default. However, before you do this let me suggest an alternative you may find better. Goto http://apple.com and on the osx downloads page locate VNCdimension (or VNCthing) and install this application. On the X windows client, run vncserver. And on the mac attatch to it using VNC dimension. On anything but the fastest network connection you will find this smoother and faster than using x-windows. Plus its more secure and even runs through firewalls. At present much of X-windows on the mac is not graphics accelerated, but VNC dimension which runs in aqua is.

12. Shortcuts worth knowing about
On your unix machine to run netscape you type /usr/bin/Netscape &
on a mac you type
open /Applications/Netscape
to open the file browser at the current working directory type
open . (note the period)
to open a web page type
open http://macosxhints.com

13. Pitfalls
There are few pitfalls in the file system you need to know about early on.
First be careful with cp,mv,rsync, and tar. For 99.9% of the time they work as expected. But a lot of mac applications and mac documents store info in something called the "resource fork" of a file. Unix files only have a single data fork. Mac files have a data and a resource fork. The data fork is the same as what you would see on the unix system. The resource fork can contain almost anything, but usually contains unimportant meta-information about the file itself like what app created it, and so on. But sometimes it contains crucial information (e.g quicken).
When you do a unix cp or mv or tar all you get are the data forks. The rule of thumb is this: if your file can be used by a unix program then dont worry about the resource fork. Most modern mac apps do not use the resource fork but older ones do.

Second, mac filenames are case-insensitive but case preserving. Thus ReadME and readme are the same file.

Third, unfortunately, for backwards compatibility there are two different kinds of soft links on a mac. One is the usual unix soft link and the other is the "alias" function of the OS. The OS is smart enough to recognize the unix links and treat them as file aliases in the GUI. But the reverse is not true. Generally you are better off using the unix soft links.

Fourth, macs have three layers of file permissions where unix has one. Macs have the usual unix permissions. Plus there is an ability to lock a file against changes or deletion, and finally there is the ability to lock a file against modification even by root. generally you wont ever need either of the latter two, but you may someday find a file you cant seem to delete! just in case, the normal file lock is accessed via "get info"

Fifth, fstab, exports, shadowpassword, passwd, and most unix configs don't work the way you expect. Use the admin tools to alter netinfo configuration data. (see root below)

14. Thinking mac-like.
First off you never need to touch the other mouse buttons outside of x-windows. Second, try to adopt apple applications where they exist to replace you current favorites. For example, use the mail.app instead of pine or Eudora. Sure these have nice features, but long term apple apps will stay more tightly integrated: for example, mail.app links to addressbook which links to iCal. Third, Chill-out dude. Macs force you to do things a certain ways with warning dialog boxes or focus-on-click windows. These are not worse than other ways, and long term you will come to see the benefits from the cross-application uniformity of operations. Unmount disks, especially network disks, by tossing them in the trash. (you may want to add an eject button to the finder menu)

15. Viruses, Worms, holes, etc...
Regularly use the software update feature. Bugs get patched quickly. Historically, the only security holes you must stay on top of are Microsoft Internet Explorer holes, Microsoft Entourage/outlook holes, and Microsoft macro viruses. Don't bother worrying about anything else till you worry about these. Many people use Chimera for this reason.

16. Root
If you read just one book try "mac OS X for unix geeks", most other books aren't for you because they are trying to explain unix to mac-heads. Avoid using root when you can use an admin tool or sudo instead. Apple has not fully document root admin, so stick with tools. Except don't ever play with netinfo manager or niload until you have a lot of experience, as there is no faster way to make your mac unbootable.

17. Goodies
There are virtual window managers at mac OSX downloads.
Try out Watson at http://www.karelia.com/watson/
Microsoft office X is a great program even if it is made by Microsoft.
Scientific plotting: You may like Igor from wavemtrics.com since it has both command line and menu driven interface. Fink comes with R, Octave and Gnu-plot. Mathematicians may prefer mathematica.
If you have a powerbook, put the dock on the left and make it small.
Turn off autostart on OS 9.0
Discover iTunes.
Consider a mac.com account
Read http://macosxhints.com

--
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.

Re:Advice of Unix geeks trying out a mac by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 05:49 · Score: 0

mostly good comments.

but you're on glue about bbedit.

don't be silly , just get emacs ;)
Re:Advice of Unix geeks trying out a mac by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 06:07 · Score: 0

I was in the market for a laptop and seriously considered getting an
iBook due to the new OS. Then I looked at the one button touch pad
and crossed it off the list. Unlike the desktop, I can't upgrade it.
It's unfortunate their narrow vision on this one item ruins what looks
like an excellent product otherwise.
Re:Advice of Unix geeks trying out a mac by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 06:12 · Score: 0

Sounds complex. Rather than do all that, why not insert a RedHat CD and reboot?
Re:Advice of Unix geeks trying out a mac by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 07:11 · Score: 0

[ ... point after point after point ... ]

My goodness - and I thought installing Debian
on this Titanium was a heck of a job !

Toon Moene.
Re:Advice of Unix geeks trying out a mac by chialea · 2002-12-24 07:54 · Score: 2

fink and 10.2 do not work well together as of the last time I installed it (a few weeks ago). you need to dig up some directions, otherwise it will be Bad and Annoying.

you have to install all packages from source from now, and compile fink, and use cvs-selfupdate.

Lea
Re:Advice of Unix geeks trying out a mac by Engelbot · 2002-12-24 16:46 · Score: 2

developer.lanl.gov? I think you mean developer.apple.com.
Re:Advice of Unix geeks trying out a mac by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 19:34 · Score: 0

what kind of crack are you smoking?

all you need is vi!

Re:Government ?wasting? taxpayer money by the+eric+conspiracy · 2002-12-24 04:01 · Score: 3, Insightful

It's just annoying since there are no REALLY necessary deadlines outside of payroll.

Baloney. Schools run on tighter schedules than most businesses. Try telling a parent that you can't get out a transcript for an application deadline, or a student they can'r get the records they need for a financial aid application.

Re:OS X sysadmin costs less. hardware easier to ma by itwerx · 2002-12-24 04:04 · Score: 1

That's 'cause most sites have a zillion PC's and only one Mac!
But this isn't flamebait, just pointing out the obvious.
For what it's worth Mac's aren't necessarily easy to work on either. I've got a TiBook in pieces right now and it was a royal bitch!

I agree by b17bmbr · 2002-12-24 04:34 · Score: 1

I still use linux for many things. But I found that OS X makes developing LAMP applications very easy, and I have iMovie for movies of my kids. No, OS X isn't going to appeal to (linux)kernel hackers. But it appeals to those of us who want to run Apache/MySQL, etc., on a real UNIX environemnt. Plus, there is not one laptop out there besides my iBook that weighs less than 5 pounds, and can actually rest on my lap for hours. Plus, battery life is awesome.

--
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.

Re:I agree by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 06:19 · Score: 0

Yeah, it is all nice and dandy but why would I want to pay 2x as much for the same computing power but with a different logo on the case ?

Face it , the day I can find OSX machine that is pricewise within 20% range of your typical PC, I will switch.

A minor correction by Archie+Steel · 2002-12-24 04:58 · Score: 2

The Johnson Center's IT team installed CrossOver Office Server Edition. There's a difference - the Server Edition lets you run MS apps from a server on a Linux thin client.

--

Reminder: find a new sig

Progress on the Inside by _Sprocket_ · 2002-12-24 05:16 · Score: 2

"Score another one for Linux on the desktop". Maybe. But if you read the article it states that the machines replace both UNIX and Windows boxes, which implies that there was some un*x presence in the first place.

As someone else pointed out - a group moving from another Unix platform to Linux is a group not moving to Windows. I know that there are other Unix environments even within the Directorate that McCartney works that moved from HP/UX and Solaris to WinNT / 2K. Despite the engineer's preferences. Cheap hardware is a strong draw for management. Linux provides a link between the preferred Unix (or unix-like) environment and commodity hardware pricing.

It might also be worth mentioning that the more Linux is used, the more the JSC / NASA environment becomes used to seeing Linux. And once they're familiar with it, they're much more likely to accept it as a solution. Old biases against "freeware" fade. And "Microsoft" is no longer the knee-jerk response to any form of IT question.

Finally, you have to consider the internal politics within JSC's IT environment. JSC was, at the direction of CIO Jack Garman, heavily Microsoft centric. The great exodus of Mac workstations was due to this policy. As was the slow shift away from Unix to WinNT. Today, JSC is still widely Microsoft centric. The "requirement" mentioned has more to do with the need to handle certain Microsoft protocols and data formats for day-to-day office automation than specific policy. The fact that Linux solutions are being implemented shows that the old single-vendor mentality is no longer the guiding force within JSC. And that's a win for Linux... and everyone else. Except, perhaps, Microsoft.

So the I in CIO is by burgburgburg · 2002-12-24 05:49 · Score: 2

Idiot?
Ignorant?
Imbecile?
Indefensible?
In Microsoft's pocket?

Re:So the I in CIO is by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 16:32 · Score: 0

The I stands for If brains were black powder you couldn't blow your nose, kid, now beat it.

Total Cost of Switching Often Ignored by reallocate · 2002-12-24 06:55 · Score: 2

If you're speaking of an office environment in which employees have no choice of OS or applications, then, in my experience, often little or no thought is given to all the costs of moving to a new OS and new applications. For a large organization, even the introduction of a single new application on a familiar OS -- say, for example, the replacement of Lotus Notes by Exchange -- will pull employees away from their jobs for at least 8 hours worth of training (typically buy a contract staff billing several thousand dollars or more). Add to that the actual cost of the installation, training the support staff, and absorbing the spike in one-to-one support ("where'd my archived mail go!!?"), and you tally up real costs that are there even if everything else is gratis. Imagine the extra costs inherent in switching out the entire OS and all the familiar apps.

Because of the gap in understanding between management and its IT staff (sustained, in many cases, I think, by mutual disdain for the other's profession), management often buys into new software that provides little or no improvemen.

--
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"

Here ya go... by bhsx · 2002-12-24 08:12 · Score: 2

http://www.apple.com/ibook/
$999 with 6-hour battery life.
Switch away.

--
put the what in the where?

Battle of the also-rans: sad... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 15:37 · Score: 0

"Hey, I hate Micro$haft LoseBloze too. Are you guys the People's Better Bet?"

"Fuck off! We're the Better Bet of the People! 'People's Better Bet' -- the fuck! Those wankers!"

Again with this crap? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 16:00 · Score: 0

"MS isn't that bad": obvious Microsoft astroturf, string him up.

This insane DIY Make the Mac a Useful Unix Box laundry list: manna from the heavens.

Idiots, the bunch of you.

Amway again - "fake it til you make it" by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 16:16 · Score: 0

Good news: word of mouth gets around. Bad news: one friend who had a bad experience trumps a dozen aggressive weirdos trying to sell you something.

Linux = Amway. "Oh shit, one of THOSE again! I'm not stupid and I'm not getting burned again! Fuck you!"

"complete imbeciles" blah blah fishcakes by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-24 16:26 · Score: 0

Listen up neckbeard, you are expendable. Good secretaries are hard to find. Comic Book Guys with no social skills and an unrealistic image of their own importance, not. Comic Book Guys who are terrified of working at McDonalds, are more competent than you, and will work cheaper than you, are falling out of the walls. The ride is over. Adjust or pin on a name tag and get used to smelling like french fries. Your choice.

Computers are for users, not developers by simplement · 2003-01-01 03:57 · Score: 1

Oooh, I like vitriol as much as the next guy! So, here goes. I drive a Jaguar and I use Jaguar. I got the money to spend it and I spend it on better stuff. I don't live in a cheap house, buy cheap clothes, ride the bus. I am an absolute elitist, live in one European country and work in others. I stay in Marriott on business if one is there, I fly EasyJet cause their website works, I have a house with a swimming pool and I don't have to buy something because it is cheaper. That OK with you? Don't like that? Tough for you. Now that the cost argument is dead....... I am the only Mac OSX user in my circle of colleagues. They hate me. Know what? My clients love me and want me to stay. Know why? Because I do things differently and better! Not gonna waste my time telling you and Anonymous Coward why. You both write like 10 year olds that just learned how to swear. Windows advocates do business with a poor corporate citizen that is convicted of breaking the law all the time. You use three programs 80% of the time but claim having 5,864,400,320,900 available applications as an argument. There is NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING in my Windows and Mac experience that could make me think Windows is a better system for me. The most obvious is saving a file: Macs ask if you want to Save, Don't Save or Cancel, while Windows makes you read so you can answer Yes or No or Cancel. The former is actually intelligent programming. The latter is slower and of poor design. Designers have to think of a Yes or No question for the app to do its job! Stupid! It takes twice as many clicks in Windows XP (or any other previous versions) to do the same work in a Mac, but then that makes a developer look like he's worked real hard. Windows is full of apps that people don't necessarily use everyday but its there if you want it. And Windows apps are, in my view, UGLY and COMPLICATED! I have seen my Colleague's Viao next to my TiBook. Speed? No question the XP Viao is faster than OS X. But the TiBook with 9 is much faster than the Vaio with XP. And, the Viao battery dies MUCH sooner, the quality of sound SUCKS, WMP is no match of iTunes. When I watch a DVD on the train or a plane on the way home, no skips, no hesitations, etc. The Viao and no other Windows machine I know of can play an entire DVD on one charge. (Oh, sorry - no candy for you!!) I produce documents in three different languages almost daily (uh, for you developers out there, I am talking about English, French and Spanish, not C+, d-, Geecobalt BSD 5.893, etc.) I change my keyboard with a simple key stroke (maybe xp does that, I don't know). I can change the language of the Operating System with a simple logout-login (does Windows/Linux do that? Oh, yea, in Amerka speak English or get out!) Great CRM, wouldn't you say? The Systems Preferences beats the Hell out of Windows Control panel hands down. Configure a new ISP in a new State, country? Unbelievably easy, all in one screen! Connect to another Windows machine without having to buy LapLink? Easy peasy if you can get the Windows machine configured to ethernet! We're talking about some serious PIBKAC issues when it comes to networking laptops! Windows users don't even TRY! And I do not have to give MY money to a convicted monopolist and contract breaker like Microsoft. It is soooooo disappointing to see that the developer community is so full of people that have no noble values! Microsoft has 95% of the browser market (obtained illegally) got .Net off the ground by changing Java (broken contract), was convicted of coercing Apple to install IE as the default browser under threat of discontinuing Office for Mac and will most likely be convicted of abuse of monopoly in Europe for bundling WMP in order to kill Real and Quick Time usage in PC's. It is a reprehensible organization. But you probably buy stolen goods to keep your costs down, don't you? Even if you can't get off the Wintel addiction, at least participate in the development of Linux. Or, simply move to Apple. Great corporate citizen, not convicted of any poor business practices or lawbreaking (that I know of), headed by a CEO of a major media studio as well (Pixar) so understands the implications of copywrite infringement.... Great company to do business with.

Slashdot Mirror

Bridging Unix and Windows At NASA

265 comments