Slashdot Mirror
More Linux Predictions for 2004
An anonymous reader writes "Experts, shmexperts - it's time for the Linux community's own predictions, felt the editors of LinuxWorld Magazine. Prognostications in their Jan 2004 round-up cover media players ('turning your phone into an iPod will be hot by the end of 2004'), IPOs ('Of course, LinuxCertified, Inc'), and MS ('Microsoft will start an intensive campaign to promote their Longhorn technology as Linux standards compliant') - that last is one from Samba's John Terpstra." The original story was back in November.
Sun and IBM will be considered the biggest Linux players by the end of 2004, and that Linux will be installed on Mac like numbers of corporate desktops (corporate not techy).
I also predict the return of thin-clients to the corporate environment, especially in large outsourcing contracts.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
Linux, for me, peaked in usability/reliability in 1999. It's still quite useful, but I began experiencing many more compatibility problems since that point.
I have a video card whose driver is closed. I've got multiple peripherals that are only partially implemented because manufacturers for some reason are reluctant to release information to developers. It's great as-is, don't get me wrong, but participating on the Internet has gotten much harder as everybody decides to go proprietary and tug in different directions.
For example, Flash runs slower on Linux; so slow that it causes the sound to go out of sync (related bug that also seems to bite some Windows installs: this applet and those coded like it have audio that is too quiet). Java is still a real pain to get working right. Maybe the greatest thing that's happened this year is Mozilla/Firebird, but I'm running it without add-ons!
I believe only great things are to come, what with Linux having reached 2.6.0, and greatly appreciate all the developers have done for it. Now, I think it'd be nice if others began to support it.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
2004 will be a year for delivery-on-promise and return-on-investment. The halo is off and linux will have to prove itself by the same measures other IT components are judged. Fortunately, linux will continue to leverage huge cost benefits, huge mindshare benefits, and a rising tide of anti-Microsoftism. that said, lofty valuation for RedHat and Novell will likely come into question sometime soon.
Seen Google's new logo?
I think the general uncertainty in the market will prevent 2004 from being any more the Year of Linux than 2003 was. Not to say there wasn't any growth in the last year or that there won't be more this next year.
I certainly think that Microsoft sending out numerous free copies of Small Business Server 2003 shows that they are taking Linux much more seriously than previously. And I think when we hit 2005 and companies have to make a big decision either way that if the Linux offerings by then for the small shop and desktop have improved their UIs so that virtually anyone can setup Linux on their current machines as easily as or more easily than a Longhorn upgrade, THEN you will see the mass migration.
FWIW...
SCO will be forced to show their (nonexistant) hand in 2004 and the gig will likely be up. SCOX will get hammered as the speculators realize SCO is about to get laughed out of court with no remedy and huge legal bills looming.
... hired by Microsoft. RMS and ESR will join the SCO legal team. Bill Gates will get even fatter. Steve Ballmer will resign from MS and join some wicked monkey-dance group.
slashdot.org will be bought by Fox News. CowboyNeal will become a Fox News Anchor.
The world will collapse.
- Mandrake 10
- SuSE 10
- Slackware 10
- Fedora Core 2
- Lindows 5
- Gentoo 2004
- Knoppix 4
- Debian 3.1. Ooops, thats delayed until 2010
:)
Desktops- Xfree86 4.4
- Xouvert
- KDE 3.2
- Gnome 2.6
- XFCE 4.1
- More Boxes
Applications- Mozilla 1.6
- Mozilla bird collection
- OpenOffice 1.2 or 2.0
- Nvu
- Evoloution 2
- Gimp 2
- KDevelop 3
- Mplayer 1.0
Look forward to these, I know I am waiting for Mandrake 10, I am currently trying out the new snapshotAs far as hotkeys, why would you want to standardize them? I can define any key to do what I want currently with my distro (SUSE). Different people work in different ways. Why restrict them to what you think should be standard.
Your "frequent tasks" comment doesn'r provide any examples, but you could look back to hotkeys to provide solutions.
tar -zxvf is now automated by a tool called 'swaret', which is an apt-like utility, that downloads/decompresses the tarball, and then work's out dependencies, and download's anything you need. There is pkgtool for tarballs in the slackware format, however it doesnt dependency check.
-Adam
#!/bin/csh cat $0
I think we're on the brink of the collapse of Microsoft's office suite monopoly. There's a lot less lock-in with office than there is with windows, so it's much easier for people to switch to open office.
Microsoft's pricing and online activation system has already pretty much removed office from consumer pc's. People who used to take cds home from work are doing without, and it's only a matter of time until the word about open office gets out. I'm not claiming that open office is as good as microsoft office, but it's good enough, I think.
I think that microsoft is making one of the biggest mistakes in its history in the way it prices office. The strategy seems to be aimed, as near as I can tell, at keeping corporate revenues high while allowing MS to cut prices for low end consumer machines.
A corporate workstation with xp pro and office pro pays microsoft almost 3x what a consumer user with xp home and works pays. I don't think that reflects costs or utility to the customer.
The most useful part of what people pay microsoft for comes from xp home -- it gives you the ability to run the huge library of windows software, access to the huge array of hardware device drivers, and core networking tools. What you get, for the buck, from jumping to xp pro or adding office on to the back, provides a lot less utility for each dollar spent.
If you decide that the corporate market can bear substantially higher prices than the consumer market, and if you notice that the main differences between a corporate user and a home user is office, then loading up the costs on the office side makes sense. I think that's what they're doing, and I think it's a fundamentally unstable pricing scheme.
So I predict that we're going to see corporate workstation users going with xp home and open office. A lot of computers that have been sold with $375 worth of microsoft software on them will now be sold with $94 worth of microsoft software on them.
MS-Office still makes sense for a lot of people. If you run exchange server, and want to use outlook as a groupware client, it makes sense. Excel users who earn a lot are going to get the spreadsheet they know and want, no one's going to tell a $150k/year guy to learn a new spreadsheet. But those types of users don't add up to a monopoly.
If the office monopoly begins to crack, it will be a really big deal. It will be a decline in a core microsoft business, and will suggest that perhaps the best days are behind them. And it will be the result of an open source project.
Windows to linux is a very wrenching change, in a million little ways. But MS-Office to Open Office is a lot more doable.
I think that's where MS's empire will first start to crack.
Here's a thread at Ars' OpenForum giving their predictions. whiprush's initial post is very insightful.
That's great and all, but I have to ask: What the hell does that have to do with "Linux Predictions for 2004"?
After the whole redhat/fedora thing I started looking around and tried out slackware, debian, fedora, and freebsd. I pulled out an old machine that wasn't beeing used and did fresh installs. The first thing I tried was slackware, and it was great. There were some quirks with partitioning, but I could break out into the shell and do it manually. I was hooked. Next when I tried debian, I knew slackware was the real thing (worst installer I've used in years).
Next I tried freebsd and the damn thing was rock solid. Most of my previous expierence was with IRIX and AIX machines, which help make slackware feel "right." However, when I started playing with freebsd it felt "more righter." Moreover, it was clear that slackware was trying hard to feel like BSD. I quickly realized that I would rather use the original!
When I tried fedora I was pleasantly surprised. Nobody came to my door to rape my cat and beat my wife or anything. Also, the desktop is nice and the support quite broad. The result is that I am now using Fedora on my desktop machines and will be converting my server over to freebsd.
After finally taking a look at freebsd I finally understand what some folks mean when they say the right tool for the job. I have really fallen for the mix of freebsd on a server and linux on the desktop. Also, I think that fedora will do well once it gets a second hearing. I just hope that they move a little slower than the proposed 6 month turn around time...
...Steve Ballmer gets drunk and decides to open source all of Microsoft's products.
If you want to run XP, install XP Gestures is a geek fad, most 'normal' users have never heard of this and never will. The simple dropdown menus are well known and appreciated, tried and true. We don't need to re-invent the wheel, but to improve on it.
The 'radial pie menu' would be the most logical next step...if it can be kept from being intrusive and ugly. I really don't find it difficult to move the mouse around, no matter how far across the desktop I must go...
"Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
It's set up like bind4 was, but you've got the bind9 named.conf file instead of named.boot
One odd thing I noticed, though, was that on my nameservers, I needed to set the debug level to 3 or higher for answer requests (and submitted a bug report about it, etc)
I predict that predictions made for 2004 will be no more accurate than the predictions that were made for any other year, and we should all stop wasting our time.
People wouldn't make so many predictions if they were forced to wear a signboard at the end of the year with a list of all the predictions they made that didn't come true. Say, that sounds like an idea....
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
It looks normal now, but I assume you mean the 2004 new year's image that has now been archived with the other holiday logos.
HIV Crosses Species Barrier... into Muppets
Which distributions will show the greatest growth in 2004?
I was surprised that Mandrake didn't make the list. Mandrake in my experience is one of the easiest distributions to install and use and has made some impressive contributions over the last year (9.2, MandrakeMove). Still I have to admit I haven't tried SUSE so maybe I'm missing out on something...
The only thing that will stop you from fulfilling your dreams is you. - Tom Bradley
shmexperts must refer to experts of shared memory -- what exactly does that have to do with predictions of the future?
I predict that a new algorithm for thread-safe access to shared memory will be developed using either semaphores and spin-locks. But them, I'm no expert.
"But actually trying to use m4 as a general-purpose langage would be deeply perverse" --ESR
What the hell does that have to do with "Linux Predictions for 2004"?
Ummmmm, I predict that parent post will appear in 2004, just as it did in 2003?
Just working from memory mind you and even predictions about the past are risky, but it's kind of a hard post to forget given the specific detail it contains.
KFG
Our brainy heroine and penguin loving paralegal babe, PJ at Groklaw, posted an article covering some New Year's trend spotting. Some of the goodies:
/., but I like the compilation of them as a converging threat to Microsoft's paradigms that may cause significant rethinking in 2004.
:-)
1. Invester's Business Daily makes up its Top 10 Tech Stories of the year without mentioning Microsoft in any context.
2. A speculation comes from Chris Gulker in an IT Managers Journal article that Microsoft will introduce an MSLinux when Longhorn turns out to be unsellable. (Good thing or bad thing? I think good, if it happened.)
3. The example of Smart Displays, where per-user licensing inhibits even Microsoft's innovation, as cited in a Register article:
"The final nail in its coffin was Microsoft's absurd decision to kow-tow to the tin god of its licensing agreements. If you took your smart display downstairs, nobody in the den with the computer could use it. Single user licence, repeated Microsoft marketing droids. 'We can't compromise our standard licensing policy."
4. From the counter example of what can be, in the MagicBike project of the Parsons School of Design, PJ muses: "The idea is, when everyone gets to play, innovation is the result. Innovation doesn't come from money or walled-in projects, although money can help implement ideas. Innovation comes from people, and as George Bernard Shaw once pointed out, talent can show up simply anywhere, where you least expect it. The lower the barrier to entry, the more likely you are to get wonderful ideas. It's one reason I keep it possible to leave anonymous comments on Groklaw, despite the down side to that."
5. Vince Cerf's vision of the ubiquitous net is cited, reaching even to other planets.
PJ concludes: "Yes, [Microsoft] must adapt in order to be part of the future. I think it's a given that no one wants a wireless product that can only legally connect to one PC predetermined during setup. Not after somebody sent the mayor an email from a bike in Union Square station in NYC. Or even read about it. Once you have the concept and you see what is possible, you know what you know, and Brand X doesn't work for you after that. Like the song says, there's nothing like the real thing."
I know most of these points have been previously featured on
Besides, I think I have a crush on PJ...
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. - Geek's corollary to Clarke's law
What Linux standards ? How many differnet "Linux" distros are compliant with these standards ? what are they ?
Furthermore, how would it benefit Microsoft to tout that "longhorn is compliant with xx". Microsoft already has source level compat with much free software via the Services For Unix Interix SDK. Windows can be an NFS client or server with SFU. CIFS interop between linux and windows could be better I suppose, but my feeling is that samba needs to move upwards, and microsoft has little incentive to move downward to acheive this.
I guess i'd just be curious to know where this statement came from. It sounds mostly like a "wouldn't that be nice" without a lot of thought behind it.. like an emotional victory rather than something of technical significance..
My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
Unfortunately somehow the program got installed on her system and "stole" the .doc file extension association (hidden by default of course) causing days of lost time getting her assignments submitted.
Obscure file formats and clipboard formats pay dividends for MS lockout it seems. It's a pity monopolies are allowed to do whatever they want in the USA.
When was the last time you installed windows. Anaconda is a much better install system that the windows install system is. It is much easier to install a linux distro which uses anaconda that it is to install the windows operating system. The difference is in the configuration. It is much easier to point and click your way to configure things for some reason than to edit text files. It just makes more sense for those who don't care about anything else but the gui.
Don't waste time... procrastinate now!
Usabilty is also good. There are some fancy advanced features, many of which have been introduced to windows to compensate for other flaws, and some of which are geniunely useful. However, most of these just lead to potential confusion when dealing with an average user. For instance, if a gesture opens an application, then the user must be careful not to make that gesture. Anyone who has worked with casual users know the importance of not overloaded the system with redundant features.
Which leads to three important conclusions. First, most users do not want to do installations at all. like Windows and MacOS, *nux machines must be already pretty much set up at the factory, and only require minimal setup by the user. This is hard to do right now due to lack of *nix demand and MS licensing, but, as Sun has shown, it can be exploited. It is not that installation is hard, it is that it is required at all.
Second, *nix has to be usable by people who now use windows. The basics have been in the marketplace for 10 years, and are largely implemented. The bells and whistles are good, but cannot be confusing to the new user.
Third, corporate is the taget. Many people get thier experience from corporate. Many people get thier tech support from corporate. Many people get thier software from corporate. If the office runs *nix,it is much more likely the home will as well. If the home can buy a machine that already has *nix installed.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Installing linux is easy. Even installing a hard to install distro such as debian isn't hard. Installing SuSe or Mandrake is easy enough that my MOTHER could do it. It's easier than installing windows. Fuck man, just having to type in the cd-key in a win2k install (and having to retype it a few times b/c you made mistakes) makes installing windows harder. Plus, 99% of the time on a modern computer your gonna hafta go out and get drivers for your video card to get it to display more than 16 colors, get drivers for your sound card (although the chipset may be recognized, in windows sometimes that gives you some pretty bad sound lol, believe me i know).
Installing SuSe on my machine was sooo incredibly easy. All my hardware worked (granted i did not have 3d support built in, but this was a long time ago)...
There's one thing linux needs to play catch up on: installing software after your system is set up. package management (yes, i know, itsn ot hard, but for n00bs its VERY CONFUSING) is a totallly COMPLETELY FOREIGN FRIGGIN CONCEPT to anyone in the windows and mac world...it makes installing software appear to be much harder than it needs to be!
replacing it with NEW Folger's Crystals! (lets see if they notice the difference)
In 2004 those (hard working) people over at KDE will change the K, in their name to some other letter. The letter K just comes up with images of crap in my head. ex. K-Car, K-mart (do they still exist anymore, there used to be one in my town but it went out of business) and KDE.
Just kidding, jeez, don't get all upset about it.
try mandrake 9.2
it's easier than windows XP.... even with the fisher price mode turned on in XP.
I had my grandmother install a game (icewalkers) and she said... "That's it? no parade of confusing installer boxes to click yes or ok on? Wonderful!"
mandrake is easier to install an app on than windows XP.
This is if the app is packaged right. most linux install problems can be linked to the package or app it's self being a mess.
Don't blame a poorly written or packaged app on linux... linux is ready now. what we have to wait for is all the app writers to pull their heads out of the sand and start making installable versions.. and yes this means statically linked in some situations.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
The halo is off and linux will have to prove itself by the same measures other IT components are judged.
Since Microsoft has set the bar rediculously low in terms of measurable and effective productivity, this won't be much of an issue.
*sigh* Yet another post claiming what Linux needs to be and where it needs to go, seemingly without understanding the seperation from Linux and the desktop.
/. ideallists telling it what and where it should be.
"First, the linux installer must be as easy as windows."
I suggest you try actually installing RedHat or Mandrake compared to Windows. Windows installer is not anything ot be proud of. If you really want to see the example of how an installer should work, try letting Lindows just do it for you. Apart from looking much better than the windows installer, all these installers provide more flexibiliy while retaining an even more user friendly install that Windows. Gentoo and Debian and the like aren't made for being easy to use, basing your idea of a Linux install off of these just shows that you either don't know what is out there or are just trolling.
"Second the linux desktop has to surpass Windows XP in usability"
Again, this is not something that Linux needs to do, because it has already been done. I find my fluxbox desktop infinately more usable than a Windows desktop (or a gnome or KDE desktop for that matter).
A standardized hot-key interface already exists. It's pretty much the same as it is in Windows. Alt-first letter of the menu item. Some people choose not to implememnt this in their applications, same goes for the Windows community.
There already are programs to launch programs or perform other tasks using gestures. Take a look at xstroke. It doesn't come as default in a distro, because most people don't use gestures. This includes advanced users. A great deal of us Linux users try to use the mouse as little as possible, as a keyboard is quicker and more precise, and with customizable hotkey functionality can pretty much make your rat obsolete, which is a perfect reason NOT to force any standard hotkeys. Why include stuff only a few people are going to use? Just because it makes you happy and might impress a PHB who will still never use that functionality? Gesture users are a definate minority. I have yet to use the gestures plugin I downloaded and installed for Firebird, even though I took the time to customize my gestures.
If these are thing syou truly beleive Linux "needs" to become successful in your eyes, then build your own damn distro. Quit screaming that Linux's "needs" are identical to your own, because they are not.
All Linux "needs" to do is stay open and free in the same spirit it has always been, and the community will tailor Linux to suit their needs. It sounds like what you want is a free and open Windows. Linux was and is not created to replace Microsoft Windows, it has it's own goals which it will complete in its own time, and is doing fine without the 20000
Sorry for the rantings, but every time a comment like this comes along it boils my blood. Linux in my eyes has far surpassed Windows in every arena except for gaming, and the blame there lies with Game Developers, not Linux. Yes it took me some time and effort to get my ultimate desktop, and no matter what, it will take individuals time and effor to get the ultimate desktop, because it's a very personal experience. If you just want something that's standardized across platforms, pick a distro and a desktop and stick to it, but you will always have to make sacrafices.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.
I figure I'll throw in my two cents:
1.) Package format becomes a hot topic. Discussion regarding a standard takes center stage. Work begins on a standard package format, a stable version is expected in 2005. Adoption of linux on the desktop continues to be slow.
2.) Resolution and refresh rate changing on the fly (ala Windows since 9x) will finally appear in desktop distros.
3.) NTFS read/write support will be sorted out using the NTFS driver from windows. Microsoft will not issue a patch that breaks compatibility, suprising more zealous MS haters.
4.) Gnome or perhaps Mozilla will have servers compromised. The compromise will be found quickly and dealt with quickly as well. Many will use the compromise to point out that UserLinux should have indeed used KDE.
5.) Not linux, but still a prediction. Apple releases some much hyped product with relatively large mind-share. Product is recalled due to design/manufacturing error. Apple faithful blame someone else; Apple stock and market share dip.
6.) Microsoft releases DirectX 10. Doom 3 is the only major linux-native game released in 2004.
7.) Adobe or Autodesk release linux versions of Photoshop or AutoCAD respectively. The released program is quite successful. Many businesses stop using Wine or switch over to linux for their workstations.
Open Source, on the other hand, works according to another economic model, one which is not limited by profit-loss ratios and ROI. If you have people interested in it, you can create an internationalized version of a package for any audience. Now, there are still complicated technological issues (such as some of the really complex scripting systems in many of the smaller markets like SE Asia), but once we get past some of the difficult hurdles of creating truly flexible font and glyph servers and text rendering systems, we will see Linux and FOSS expanding into places where MS cannot hope to go. True, these won't bring in gobs of cash for Linux developers and ISV's, but I think we will see steady progress made. We will soon see Linux as the foundation for technological, and ultimately economic freedom for the majority of the world's governments and citizens.
Your Servant, B. Baggins
that linux will get some steam, but will face new legal concerns, IBM and sun will be sued by microsoft for imitating their gui, then gnome and kde will be sued in the whole ordeal, apple turns around and sues microsoft ripping off NexT
might not be that far.
but I predict this year will be the year of tech lawsuits as a new major player gets involved in the market.
I wouldnt be surprised if the GPL got overturned and claimed invalid by a well paid judge.
the shit with SCO last year might prove to be the stone in the pond that started the ripple effect.
I know that many business operate with that sort of attitude. I have friends that say "My department has a budget for licensing and related costs - if I don't spend it I will loose it. Besides, if I have any problems, I can just call tech support and they can bail me out. Seems like a pretty good investment to me."
This may all be true but I can only speak from my personal experience. We have a large mixed-platform network (~10,000 nodes running Windows98-XP, MacOS 7.6-Panther, RedHat 6.2-9.0) that is distributed accross about 35 locations. Being a non-profit organization we are constantly hit with ever-tighting budgets and a tiny IT staff.
Over the past several years I have run into many situations where licensing has "cost" way more that it should. Rather than go into an overly-broad generalization, let me give an example that occured last week: I was tasked with upgrading our backup system which had reached capacity. After doing some research on the larger players (NetVault, ArcServe, etc.) I chose an "enterprise-level" backup solution. My particular choice was heavily weighted because our backup system is critical and after the nightmare we had with Welchia, et al, I wanted our backup server to run on Linux and be able to back up to a multi-terrabyte RAID array we'd purchased. I also wanted a "universal management client" that would run on any of our client platforms. Anyway, I won't go into whom I chose, but the problems I've had since then have almost ALL been related to licensing.
First off, the "core" program is reasonably priced. But every client that you are going to back up has to have client software loaded (requiring a reboot unless it's linux - so now I have to wait until after hours to install) Each client comes with it own license that's tied to that machine. OK, no problem. I'm just doing initial testing and each client has a 30-day evaluation license (except it doesn't take for some reason - call tech support - they can only give me a 7-day eval license key - WTF? - OK, I'll use that.)
I run a test backup and it misses about a thousand files - Oops, silly me me "Open Files" require a separate plugin (that costs as much by itself as the client plugin.) So I install that plugin and re-run the job. It still misses hundreds of files. I investigate. All the files were saved to the server by older mac clients and had "invalid characters" in their name (like forward slashes, etc.) Strange, all our mac and PC clients can access these files - why can't the backup software? (Call tech support - I need the UNICODE plugin for windows 2000 Server. It costs as much as the original client software. This particular server is NT 4 - Sorry, no plugin for you! You must upgrade to Server 2K ($$$) and then buy the plugin license. WTF!!!)
I don't WANT to upgrade that server. It's just a file and print server. It does everything I want it to do the way it is. Besides, I'll have to buy server 2003 for it - How will M$ licensing affect me then? What other hidden costs will I have to prepare for in my uncertain budget?
OK, I can use our existing backup solution to back that server up until we get it upgraded or migrated. By now my 7-day keys have expired so I can't do any more test backups on my other servers (MsSQL: separate plugin. MysQL: separate plugin. Filenames beginning in 'T': I'm sure I'll need to buy$$$ a separate plugin.) So I figure I'll just register the backup server and the five-or-so clients I want to do the longer term tests on. I head over to the registration page and fill in the information and am about to hit submit when I notice some small print between the last field and the submit button. I actually read it :-) it says, in part:
"terrorism" and "pedophilia" are the root passwords to the Constitution
Oh, please provide some evidence for your wild claims.
I've been hearing it every year since, as well as Linux being "desktop-ready."
It certainly is desktop-ready. *IF* the applications are there, Linux takes over. Just look at the 3d-modelling world which has gone over to Linux almost completely. If the applications are not there, Windows stays in place, obviously. That's why all the gamers are running Windows and will do so for a while.
This has nothing to do with Linux on the technical side. Linux certainly is desktop ready and has been so for quite some time, no matter what Trolls like Overly Critical Guy claim. (Actually the Windows-GUI is quite primitive and horrible to work with once you are used to Unix-style copy/paste, 3-mouse button GUI-support and multiple desktops)
It all depends on the applications. As some cities migrate to Linux and governmental apps get ported to Linux, the migration gets easier, faster and cheaper for other cities and the migration accelerates.
Linux will take one market segment after another, it will take years, not just one year and governments and coroporations will be long running Linux before home users and gamers, just like WinNT was used long before in business than at home, but in the end Linux will take over the desktop just like it took over embedded systems and is taking over servers.
I remember people like Overly Critical Guy:
1993: Linux will never be useful for anything
1995: Linux will never be useful for anything except webservers
1997: Linux will never be useful for anything except webservers and fileservers
1999: Linux will never be useful for anything except for webservers, printservers, fileservers and clusters
2001: Linux will never be useful for anything except for webservers, printservers, fileservers, clusters and embedded systems
2003: Linux will never be useful for anything except for webservers, printservers, fileservers, clusters, embedded systems, 3d-modelling and mainframes
Overly Critical Guy, you look like the catholic church fighting science. You condemn Linux but have to take a little bit every year. Of course you never admit that you were wrong. Of course you never have any evidence (like for that ridiculous "Linux overtaking Windows in 1998" claim). And of course you don't realize that every year your beloved Microsoft loses one little bit of grip.
My prediction for 2005:
Overly Critical guy:
Linux will never be useful for anything except for webservers, printservers, fileservers, clusters, embedded systems, 3d-modelling, mainframes, government desktops and cellphones.