Slashdot Mirror
Linux Going Mainstream
Gossi writes "The BBC is carrying an excellent overview of the growing use of Linux, by many different fields. The article says it all, really, and is probably something you should show your Boss."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
So true. Running on Linux baby!
The Army reading list
Oh no... I've got to start hating it now. Once common people like something, I can't like it, or I'll lose my elitist status. Hrm, what's a good obscure OS? BeOS isn't around anymore... maybe OpenBSD?
If my boss was so dumb that he didn't know Linux is the only choice for everything - well, he wouldn't be my boss, he would be the janitor.
Until Linux is a complete entertainment package as well as a utility package, Linux will be hard pressed to take over the desktop.
With the way games are written these days (requiring massive amounts of time and money), game development will have to undergo some pretty radical changes before it will fit successfully into the OSS model and we continue to have the quality of games we have today.
Of course, the other path is that the PC is removed from the entertainment picture and consoles take over that role completely (woe be that day).
I carry a variety of flavors of Linux CDs in my car and use live version to show friends and family what they are missing. Suse 9.0 live-eval works great for showing people what this "linux thing" they have read about is.
What post? The one you're carrying inside your rusty innards!
This ons still makes me slightly cross:
Earlier BBC story
Still, I suppose that the latest story is written by someone who has Clue. I'm told that they exist, even at the BBC.
...I'm quite sure you read about Linux becoming a mainstream server OS. A main-stream general purpose OS is something completely different.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I carry a variety of flavors of Linux CDs in my car
I do that too. They make quite a racket when I play them in the Kenwood. However, I've found that with 800 watt sub-woofers, anything can sound quite impressive.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
I'm 15 and have been using linux for a little over a year...people in the k-12 school system are starting to get a grasp on the bennifits of open source. It really is the best option for so many people and with the newest distros of Mandrake (what i use) make it incrediabily simple to do most anything graphically. With a little bit of help even people like my grandmother (who could never even minimize windows) can do as much on linux as any other OS out there.
In my openion the main problem is people, in general, don't even knwo open source exists. And those that do only vaguely recall that they've hear about it somewhere. Hopefully its only a matter of time before people (especially in the US) catch on.
Oh... my.... god!
Technical professional?!! You are SO unbelievably clueless, I don't even KNOW where to start!!!
I mean, since when has Redhat been a webserver!!!
Those certificates are obviously not worth the paper they're written on!! Next....
It's very interesting in that it doesn't mention technology at all, only some stuff about the "open" future.
You can watch it here.
Why isn't there a (-1 Stupid) mod?
-- -- Warning. Do not stare directly at the sun.
Yup, this is one thing I will be showing the director of the museum that I volunteer at.
I was hoping that when we get funding to construct the new building that it wont be squanded on things that can be obtained for free... licenses for instance...... If you are gonna have a multimedia kiosk running for instance to show how something works (A large steam pump for instance) Do you really need (or indeed want) to fork out a load of money when you can just sling linux on a resonable machine. Possably use Mozilla or something with a modified chrome, and do something you can walk away from.
All I can say is "Yessssss!"
Nick
Ok, I'm a software developer. I want to port my software, written for windows, to linux so that the average joe will be able to use it. Is it so simple? Well, which distro will I do first? Mandrake? Redhat? Suse? Debian? Then what about those who use *BSD? There are so many choices. I mean its a great kernel, I use different distrobutions for all of my servers. I have no desire to mess with Active Directory or IIS.. But how can it take over the mainstream market when each distro is different.
"Wisdom is not a product of schooling but of the life-long attempt to acquire it." -Albert Einstein
This is the commercial that made Michael Jackson switch to Linux!
There are other GPL'd operating systems, and the BSDs are all open source, aren't they?
Large companies have been benefiting from Linux for years now. They use it to run large servers and networks.
Small companies have arguably been benefitting more: I know from my experience that it's easier getting Linux into a small company than it is into a large one.
"This is something that a lot of people in developing countries have. It is a natural for them to make do with little, and to produce something of value out of nothing."
This is just patronising.
How about pointing out that people whoever they are all benefit and can run the same software without the discrimination that high prices cause.
Some worry, though, that large corporations may be reluctant to share their Linux-based software with others. And that, say long-time Linux programmers, would violate the tenets of the open source philosophy.
More importantly, it would also be copyright infringement if they ever distributed it, and would cause them no end of trouble keeping their version of the code up to date.
But other than that, refreshing to read an article about linux that doesn't mention either Redmond or Utah.
when will "Pirates of Sillicon Valley 2: The Wrath of Linux" come out?
xao
http://TheHillforum.hopto.org
It also doesn't explain how the kid grows up to be a penguin.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
I think that if your boss does not already understand the ways of Linux, perhaps reading an article on a Web page won't be enough to convince him.
Get a hold of one of the new IBM ads and play it for him. Seeing a major, big name company back Linux with a TV spot would carry a lot more weight than someone's opinion on a Web page, no matter how eloquent that opinion is presented. But then, I'm not even employed right now, so I shouldn't be giving advice on what to show your boss. ;)
Still, it's hard for anyone to ignore the opinion of IBM. Or rather, it's a lot easier to ignore the opinion of an author at the BBC.
"To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit." -Stephen Hawking
My Mainstream is not always your mainstream.
Government computing is not homebased computing.
To be mainstream, could mean that the software is being embraced by the majority of teenagers using computers, or it could be that the majority of corporate users will start using Linux somewhere in their business this year.
I've seen Linux evolve a lot since I first tried to use it in 1997. I couldn't figure it out then. In 2000 I used Red Hat 6.0 for the first time, and found it easier to understand, but still not useful to me. Now in 2004, I could make it be almost as useful to me as my Windows machine. Do I really think that this year there will be some killer distro that will blow Windows away? No. But it is possible...
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
I would like to sway away all those trolls nay-sayers, and such things and would like to ask them one question - when Microsoft started to deliver to desktop what do you see now? Not so long time ago. And it's still unstable and unsecure. If someone is desktop king now - from visual and usability - it's Apple OS X.
I was doubtful three years ago but now I say for sure - Linux and Free Software has a future, and it is right here - in Gnome, in KDE, in OpenOffice.org, in all those new ideas, which pop-up instantly in mailing lists, forums, freedesktop.org, gnomedesktop.org. I like that creativity which grows and grows and seems to be unstoppable.
Linux is here to stay. Is also here to stay and be viable alternative for your desktop usage. Whatever you choose it or not, it's upon you. Because it is about the choice, not about pushing you to use it.
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
Why was Sun Microsystems even mentioned in this article. Sun is taking a beating from the spread of Linux. Sure, they offer some servers with Linux, but their operating system that they're trying to market is Solaris.
Too, the whole idea of Linux is to have boxes running on commodity chips, namely x86, because of the price. Sun is fighting an upward battle, they got into the market too late, are fighting IBM and HP, and aren't geared towards the lower end server market. Companies finally realized that they don't need to purchase mainframes every month.
And don't tell me that because Sun released Solaris to the public that they're on the bandwagon. Have you even attempted to download it? They check to make sure that your inputed address is valid with the zip code. And this is in stride with the open source movement?
Oh no, we can't trust the BBC these days don't you know? I can imagine that Bill Gates will now be launching a swingeing attack on the BBC, leading to a month-long enquiry chaired by, oooh, an unbiased Paul Allen, and then resignation of several senior BBC executives....
:)]
[if you dont know what I'm talking about, google for 'Hutton Report' or see BBC news main page
Baz
That ought to work, at least in England. The BBC article says that, "Linux is unique in that it is open source," so they've apparently never heard of OpenBSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD, kOS, etc, etc. :-)
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
Show Linux to the grandmother who needs her computer fixed. Show Linux to the government of your country. Show Linux to your mom. Your Boss already knows about Linux.
People don't exist to serve systems, systems exist to serve people.
I'm in a local pizza and gaming establishment (rhymes with lucky sneeze), and lo and behold, I'm looking at a linux boot up screen on an arcade game.
And then I'm at a local clothes retailer, and I look and see Red Hat 6.0 sitting on the register display.
It's coming, folks. It's just a matter of time.
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
Nethack
I have always felt that Linux is a nice operating system (for hobbyists and geeks), but there are some areas where it is seriously lacking, especially when compared to its main competitor, Microsoft Windows.
* File sharing. Windows has long been superior when it comes to making large amounts of files available to third parties. Even early versions of Windows automatically detected and made available all directories thanks to the built in
NetBIOS-powered file sharing support. But Microsoft has realized that this technology is inherently limited and has added even better file sharing support to its Windows XP operating system. Universal Plug and Play will
make it possible to literally access any file, from any device! I think universal file sharing support needs to be built into the Linux kernel soon.
* Intelligent agents. With innovations like Clippy, the talking paperclip and Microsoft Bob, Microsoft has always tried to make life easier for its customers. With Outlook and Outlook Express, Microsoft has built a framework for developers to create even smarter agents. Especially popular agents include "Sircam", which automatically asks the users' friends for advice on files he is working on and the "Hybris" agent, which is a self-replicating copy of a humorous take on "Snow-White and the Seven Dwarves" (the real story!).
Microsoft is working on expanding this P2P technology to its web servers. This
project is still in the beta stage, thus the name "Code Red". The next versions will be called "Code Yellow" and "Code Green".
* Version numbers. Linux has real naming problems. What's the difference between a 2.4.19 and a 2.2.17 kernel anyway? And what's with those odd and even numbers? Microsoft has always had clear and sophisticated naming/versioning
policies. For example, Windows 95 was named Windows 95 because it was released
in 1995. Windows 98 was released three years later, and so on. Windows XP
brought a whole new "experience" to the user, therefore the name. I suggest that the next Linux kernel releases be called Linux 03, Linux 04, Linux 04.5 (OSR1), Linux 04.7B (OSR2 SP4 OEM), Linux 2005 and Linux VD (Valentine's Day edition).
Furthermore, remember how Microsoft named every upcoming version of Windows after some Egyptian city? Cairo, Chicago and so on. I think that the development kernels should be named after Spanish cities to celebrate Linux' Spanish origins. Linux Milano or Linux Rome anyone?
* Multi-User Support. This has always been one of Microsoft's strong sides, especially in the Windows 95/98 variants, where passwords were completely
unnecessary. Microsoft has made the right decision by not bothering the user with a distinction between "normal" and "root" users too much -- practice has shown that average users can be trusted to act responsibly and in full awareness of the potential consequences of their actions. After all, if your operating system doesn't trust you, why should you trust it? (To be fair, Linux is making some progress here with the Lindows distribution, where users are always running as root.)
With Windows XP, Microsoft has again improved multi-user support. Not only does Windows XP come with a large library of user pictures that are displayed on the login screen, su
and is probably something you should show your Boss."
Corporate middle management is not interested in facts. They are not interested in improvement. They are not interested in efficiency that is not accomplished by either making people shovel shit or firing people.
Middle management seeks to maintain the status quo, and to do nothing unless it is absolutely necessary. Incompetence, bankruptcy, waste, stupidity, anything is better than trying and failing.
They have failed to learn that the raw materials for success are failures. They have failed to learn this because they do not listen. They do not seek the advice of people who know better than they do. Faced with irrefutable truth, middle management will very often if not always follow the path of maximum stupidity.
Therefore, middle management will very often if not always refuse to allow Linux to be used to improve their business. No accomplishment, no fact, nothing will change this. Discussing Linux with a middle manager is nothing more than an amusing waste of time.
Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
I'm quite new to Linux (c64/z48/MSX->Atari->Mac->Win->Linux), and I'm working hard to get a deeper understanding of the Linux culture (and development model). Can't say I have a full understanding of the cultural and historical roots of this movement, but still I feel something's sorely missing from the coverage in 'mainstream media'.
The ongoing SCO and copyright shit - most of what I read is from open source people.
This trend of getting Linux "on every desktop" - again, open source advocates are legion.
What about free software? Yes, fanboys all over just love to trash RMS, but most fanboys (to my limited knowledge) have done dick all for the movement.
I don't know enough to say OSS is worse than free software (although I'm leaning towards the latter). But hell, it's starting to look like a lot of people's main goal is to put the "open source" sticker on the whole thing, get the mega corps blessings and declare this land Utopia.
WTF?
From what I'm slowly learning about this movement, there's a lot more to it than just the "open source". And I think it's getting lost in the process.
Aren't many good ideas and a lot of cultural heritage getting thrown aside here? Are we loosing important stuff along the way?
668.5
I showed a six inch stack of papers explaining the virtues of open source and Linux to my boss and our lead developer. I held a meeting with my entire team when they started thinking of switching to .Net. I brought together all the facts management should hear when making a platform choice and made a professional presentation. I rewrote one of our smaller apps on Linux in my personal time as an example.
.Net is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Our boss agreed and we were forced to switch to .Net without even looking at an alternative. Rarely have I seen such blatent ignorance. So I keep an eye open for other jobs and read the articles on starting your own software company. Seems the only option when dealing with such ignorance is to stay away from it.
They wouldn't even look at it. Our lead developer thinks Microsoft is the best producer of software and that
Developers: We can use your help.
Mike, i hate the break it to you, but mcse's are laughed at all over the world. talking your paper up by saying it's issued by the largest software company in the world just shows you for what you are. also cut and pasting from some bogus website doesn't help either. so yes you might have paper but your very far from skilled and shows horribly. and what exactly is "Linux 7.0" ?? to my knowledge the latest linux kernel is 2.6? you must be a kernel hacker as well huh? or maybe the website you copied from is just pulling numbers out of their arse hmm?
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
As with most people in the IT field I get a lot of requests for help from friends and family. It's almost never a hardware problem that they have -- it's always some virus or spyware program or some Windows corruption someplace. I found that I was reinstalling Windows every time I worked on someone's computer. And I was using my copies of Windows because they never had their own.
The first thing I want to know is, just how many people are using pirated copies of Windows? I don't even know one person who is now using a legitimate copy of Windows. Why pay when your pal can get it from work, or now from the net? How does this figure into the estimates of Windows domination and market share? Surely if you only counted legitimate, purchased and properly licensed copies of Windows, the home user market share would be drastically lower. Businesses are more or less forced by threat of litigation, fines, and raids, to be legitimate. That's why the first wave of GNU/Linux migration has been happening in the business sector. No matter how many bullshit Gartner studies "prove" that Windows has a lower TCO, it just doesn't. It costs more to buy, it costs more to maintain, and it costs more to upgrade.
I think the best thing that could happen to GNU/Linux right now is for Microsoft to crack down on home user piracy. Activation schemes are a step in the right direction. With more hassle, increased costs and the apparent (or at least, apparent to those who don't know how to get an activation crack) inability to get a copy from a friend, GNU/Linux will look like a much better choice to home users.
But back to my main point: service. I have continued to refuse to service a Windows machine unless it involves replacing the operating system with a Free alternative. Don't like it? Find someone else to do the work... but it'll cost more. I think if more people refused to work on Windows for friends and family, the death of Windows as a dominant desktop platform would be much more speedy.
-JemI'd been a happy Linux user for years, and used it for everything, from works (scientific research) and my own entertainment (music, movies, etc).
However, things changed a big bit for me a year ago: I've got a girlfriend. Being a typical person who can uses computer to a level (M$ Word, IE, WinAmp, etc), making her use Linux was difficult. It was just simply too difficult for her. So I had no choice but to installed Windows for her. Even that, I tried to make her use Mozilla or Firebird for web browsing. That failed, too. She simply use IE whenever possible. So, forget about OpenOffice.org, etc. There are people who refuse to use any other word processors because "it's not Word", and any other browsers because "it's not IE"... (the list goes on).
That's fine with me, whatever, I can still use Linux in another partition.
But, there was a problem: I usally run process as backgrounds and I want to do that when she's using Word or we both watching movies. And having all my works in Linux partition wouldn't allow me to do this!
So, I decided to get a Mac. OS X seems to provide me a reasonably good solution. First, it is a nice and very user freindly Desktop OS, one of the most friendly out there. Learning to use anything in OS X was painless, even for my girlfriend. Second, if she insists on using Word, then there's Office v. X for Mac (even though there're some compatibility problems). Third, it's UNIX with X11 so I can recompile most of things I need to do my works.
So, while I hope that Linux will eventually become more favorable for Home Users, I don't expect it anytime soon. This is simply because, more than anything else, convincing people who don't really know anything but stick with "name" of programs is very difficult. (Ex. There are people who won't buy anything but a computer wih Pentium-brand CPU, regardless of what he/she's doing with it.)
Desktop Conversions: I'm not sure about anyone else, but my company ( a multinational telecommunications company ) rolls out new desktops of MicroSloth crap at least twice a year, and spends the intervening six months trying to make the stuff they just did work - the same crowd that says "You can't have XP because it will bring down the network."
Network Migration: What the hell, guy, are you still running NetBEUI or something? Linux has done SMB (through Samba) for-freaking-ever (in computer years, anyway). Outside of that, even MicroSloth doesn't really attempt to take on Linuxs' networking pedigree.
User Retraining: I would hope that your computer users are somewhat more savvy than, say, my grandfather - who converted to Linux eight months ago; or my wife, who converted over a year ago; or my Aunt Jill, who converted seven months ago and uses her home PC for work tasks. All in all I've had far fewer 'help me' calls from them since upgrading them. The hardest 'retraining task' was getting them to understand network logins and remember their passwords.
Consultants: LOL... Consultants won't recommend Linux conversion, on the whole, not yet. Mostly because their purpose is not to solve a company's technical problems, but to bill hours (and yes, I've been a consultant and I have been told that I 'solved a problem too rapidly').
When you combine all of these costs, double them, and then subtract the cost of troubleshooting and fixing SoBig, MyDoom, and the other litany of M$-based crapola, and, as the previous poster mentioned, the recovered gaming time (since you can't play a lot of the popular games on Linux) and reduced support hours, I think Linux becomes a clear win.
Thinking outside my Head
You know, lots of people roll their eyes when they see someone refer to Microsoft as 'M$' or Windows as 'WinBlowz' or something like that. Some people might even go as far as to flame you for it. Personally, I'm all in favour of it! Nothing makes me happier when I see someone make fun of Microsoft in that way! You know why? Because the quicker I see 'M$' or 'WinDOS' in a comment, the quicker I can disregard everything you've wrote, scroll past your post and add you to my 'retarded peon' list, never to take anything you say seriously ever again, even if its something completely unrelated. So, in the future, please try and work your tired shots at microsoft in toward the beginning of your posts. Thanks!!!
It's great that the mainstream press is giving Linux good coverage, unfortunately to wrest the Windows system from the mainstream user I'm afraid the games companies need to be involved in producing original Linux games alongside those of Windows. Only then will Linux get the Windows user looking the other way.... Unreal Tournament and Neverwinter Nights were starts but enter any Electronics Boutique and ask for a game for your Linux OS and chances are the sales rep will look at you like your ET
I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born - Ronald Reagan
Actually, one handy side effect of Linux taking over the server market is that game developers are more likely to create and distribute Linux-server versions. And once you've got a game working on a Linux server, porting the rest of the game is relatively simple. If the gaming community can build momentum from the server market, then Linux as a gaming platform isn't much of a stretch. Personally i'd like to see it happen, because as a gamer i'm practically chained to WinXP. I'd like to try Linux, but right now it just doesn't seem like a sweet enough deal. I'd be giving up a lot of past, present, and future games. Oh, and I don't really feel like having to re-learn how to use a computer either, or go back to mucking with command lines and such... but thats just me being lazy.
From the article: "Linus Torvalds: The man who started it all".
There goes another reading that takes 1 year of life from Richard Stallman!! X-D
As much as I liked the tone of this article, it does come off as way too optimistic. Issues such as drivers, buying linux pre-installed, standards compliance, etc are glossed over. Granted this is a Linux 101 article, but these are important topics.
I think Linux expansion on the server end is doing more good than some think. If a small, mid, or large company migrages to Linux servers then they are more or less forced to drop prorietary crap like MAPI and open the door towards accepting standards over closed-proprietary standards, protocols, etc. With this mechanism in action tat means more competitors, less vendor lock-in, and a healthier IT market all around.
I don't see Linux as a MS-killer, Apple-killer, but as a carrier of open protocols and standardization. If Linux can deliver this than most of the problems in the IT industry will disappear. As we've seen many times before its much tougher to make a monopoly without proprietary protocols, vendor lock-in, etc.
Right now I would say the fastest way to getting things more "open" in general would be OSX on the desktop and Linux in the server room. Its a shame Apple isn't seen a serious player in the corporate environment, especially with their prices so low.
...unless you distribute your changes.
A BIG reason PHBs dont use GNU/Linux / FOSS is because misinformed geeks keep spreading the nonsense that if you use open source / free software then you have to make publicly available the source code to your applications.
This is NOT true.
You do not have to unless you are going to make modifications and then sell / distribute the modified code. If it is an in-house application and never gets distributed, there is no requirement AT ALL to release the source code back into the community.
PHBs would be far more comfortable using F/OSS if they didnt have geeks telling them how good it is that the company will become part of the F/OSS movement, and instead were told about the virtues of using F/OSS.
I am Monkey, the Great Sage, equal of heaven!
"If you spend a dollar with a local company working on Linux, that dollar stays in your economy," said Simon Phipps of Sun Microsystems.
"When you spend a dollar with a multi-national corporation as a license fee for a piece of software, that dollar leaves your country."
"It's about keeping the money in your local economy, developing skills and developing the local economy to be strong in its own right in a global context."
At first I wondered, "Wait a sec. Microsoft is an American company, right? So if other nations pay fees to M$, then the 'local economy' is... the American economy. 'We' are the economy that this benefits!"
Obviously Phipps wants China and other nations to recognize that if they develop open source software (presumably Linux based) then whatever money the government spends on software supports their own people.
One has to ask. "Where does Phipps live and work?"
Do not misunderstand me. I love Linux. I want it to grow and expand and compete effectively with Microsoft. Especially because I want poorer nations to have a solid alternative that works - and works well. Even discounted M$ software imposes a burden on Third World nations.
My only point is that is struck me as odd that an American(?) like Phipps working for Sun Microsystems would invoke the "we want them to invest in their own nations' economies" argument.
Fortunately, KDE auto-loads a lot of programs not made by them like Emacs, Gaim, Mozilla, GIMP, et c. This is the beauty of Open Source; KDE doesn't have to be great at applications (and IMO it's horrid) since it can just borrow other open-source applications and just provide the best base GUI.
The version that comes with RH 7.5 is the worst paint program I have EVER seen;
I must say I was also very disappointed by RH 7.5. This is probably one of the worst RH release I ever downloaded!
When my printer, keyboard and mouse cannot work under Linux how happy am I going to be? This is the scenario now for me (BJ printer, Internet keyb & intellimouse), but I'm persisting and then printing to pdf dropping on a Windows PC and out comes the paper. Why would Mr/Ms Mainstream bother if they have to buy new stuff or lose functionality? Less time on making the gadgets work well and more time on making them work seamlessly with what the user has already and we may get this thing on many PCs - until then its like building a kit car - a limited audience...
If your boss doesn't know about Linux at this point he/she should be fired.
"It's a great OS and it's stable" but you don't use it because XP is not-really-stable -- but good enough -- and it requires less maintenance from you. Presumably after you've installed all the software you need to use which would otherwise come bundled, like OpenOffice, Gaim and the others you mention.
And then you complain that managing 1000s of libs is a pain in the neck, saying "it needs to get a real system to distribute packages" -- after admitting that you use Slackware.
Worst. Critique. Ever.
RTFA. Linux can seriously eat Microsoft's lunch in this environment. And you need to learn a little about Linux before trying to comment.
And moderators... Insightful... Please...
Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
Quote from the article: "Because Linux is open source, it can be obtained for free, although most companies pay software developers for a package of Linux-based applications, including e-mail and word processing." That is so wrong wrong wrong on many levels. This just adds to the FUD around Linux. I'm amazed that such a blatant falsehood has made it to the pages of the BBC. Sloppy journalism IMHO. ( Maybe someone in authority from KDE, Gnome or OpenOffice could care to inform the BBC of their inaccuracy? (and no - i really do think that the Hutton report is a whitewash and that the BBC WERE right. But thats a different story and off topic)
An exe-like format for morons.
If you're thinking of this, you really have to ask yourself why you want widespread linux adoption at all. If you're just going to create an equally crappy system to replace windows with, what's the point? We already have a crappy system on 90%+ of desktops.
And it needs to get a real system to distribute packages and make it a standard.
Compared to windows which has er.. no package management at all. Just a haphazard bunch of proprietary binaries putting their files wherever they want, overwriting whatever libraries they feel like, and having no versioning system. That isn't package management.
In windows can you do 'apt-get install application'? Using your logic I could say that therefore windows isn't ready for the desktop because it doesn't behave like the rest of my systems. Windows looks massively inferior from where I'm standing.
I think before you boot your slackware system again you have to repeat the mantra: "this is not windows, this is not windows...".
Malike Bamiyi wanted my assistance.
What a pity that Clark Boyd, the tech journo who wrote the piece, failed mention that the BBC uses Linux and Apache to host its main news portal. If some above average technical writer would like to do a piece about the Net infrastructure at the BBC, I for one would be very interested to read it.
I just saw an awesome Linux/IBM commercial during the superbowl. I usually just watch for the commercials - so I am pretty apathetic about the game. But when I saw the commercial come up, I stood up and screamed...
Half of the people at the campus-wide superbowl party turned around and looked at me like I was insane, while the Comp Sci club all raised their fists in the air in victory.
It is good to have allies with deep pockets. Let's just hope it stays this way.
Cameron King
I think a glaring omission of this article, one that most reporters seem to miss, is that a business need only buy one copy of a vendor's version of Linux (none if they download it), and it can then be installed on any number of machines. Absolutely no extra costs per seat. Why this point is being driven home I don't know.
Failure is simply the opportunity to begin again, this time more intelligently. - Henry Ford
"If you talk to governments, they're actually thinking - why don't we write open source software as well.
"So it's not just cost-based, but also the concept of open source software. They just like the idea of saving the people money, but also giving back to the people what they created."
So now government will get in to the business of writing it's own code and releasing it to the public? Just think about that and reflect upon what projects have governments undertaken that you personally would hail as successful, efficient, and inexpensive.
Didn't we the public just spend a decade crying for how government should be more business-like e.g. outsourcing? But we should change that for things like the software that makes government "run"?
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
But my point is that the target market is *not* necessarily home-user desktop computing! Linux is certainly mainstream at my campus, where all engineers have at least a basic intro to UNIX, and where many of the CS classes are taught on Linux. Linux is certainly mainstream (if not dominant) in the graphics workstation market where major movie studios like ILM use it for their artists. Linux is certainly mainstream in the embedded market, where many embedded products use Linux. And Linux is on the verge of becoming mainstream in the corporate desktop market.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Where is the obligatory Gentoo-freak? Everyone knows you can't mention the word "linux" without one jumping out to scream, "Use Gentoo, just like me!"
Eager to find this 300 dollar PC I jumped to Dell's site to find something close to the eMac.
Here's the big ad/cheap machine on the site:
"Dimension 2400 Series $599 with a limited time 100 mail in rebate." Now that's cheap. Yet the eMac comes with a better video card. So we're looking at where Apple has always been, a few hundred dollars more expensive than the CHEAPEST PC. I think a fairer comparision would be the Sony Vaio which has all the multimedia software that comes on the Mac. Those start at $699 sans monitor.
Just because one thing is cheaper than another doesn't make that other thing "expensive." $799 for a eMac is still a good deal when you consider OSX v Windows, all the iX software, etc. Apple will always have some premium, but the real question is: is it fair to call a 799 desktop and a 1099 laptop expensive? Considering what people spend on average for computers in general that's still good pricing and far from the myth that a Apple will cost you an arm and a leg.
The ironic thing about Linux's growth is that in one way, it's easier for the average joe to use. But in a different sense, the scripts and code become hidden. While this makes using Linux easier, the learning aspect decreases as the amount of GUI use increases. It's like the programmers' work is going unappreciated because it's being shadowed by the GUI. And the GUI can easily deter a user from wanting to see what's underneath the pretty pictures and windows. After all, a graphical tool that shows your partition information is just reading /proc/partitions and putting a window around it.
Thank god giant corporations have people like you to defend them. the richest man in the world is most grateful to your ceaseless efforts to defend MS from the zealots here on slashdot.
It's gratifying that so many people take time aways from their busy lives to defend corporations like this. People like you who pledge their allegience to a corporation and defend it are a rare and precious commodity these days. Most people seem to be advocating on behalf of some non profit, community, or a worthwhile cause but not you. No sir you are the fearless fighter for MS! The greatest company in the world!.
War is necrophilia.
Aww, screw it all. I'm tired of trying to explain the benefits of Linux to Windows users. I'm tired of talking until my voice goes out about how terrible Windows is...
I'm just going to leak an ISO onto the net of RedHat, and change the name to:
"Windows 2005 (unreleased) [pirate] NO KEY NEEDED.iso"
Thousands of people "upgrade" to Linux, and everyone is perfectly happy. They will recieve a small error message when they try to play their games of old programs that they are incompatible with the new version of Windows, and should request a new version from the company (nothing new there, Windows upgrades always do that crap). Meanwhile it'll lead them to free equivalents.
Bingo. Linux takes over the world overnight. Companies are suddenly getting hundreds of thousands of requests to port their software to Linux, and many are happy using the free equivalents.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
No doubt Lord Hutton will be appointed, and will come down entirely in favour of Bill Gates, MicroSoft, proprietary software, and the Labour Government. All blame for Linux and all other open source initiatives will be laid on the BBC, causing the chairman and director general to resign. Alastair Campbell will make a speech about how he was right all along, and demanding a full apology. If this is democracy ... someone give me a gun
OK. The government takes on its own software development but also uses some open source. Something goes wrong. Who's responsible? Now you may argue that current EULA's waive any accountability at the moment except that there is nonetheless an accountable party and the issue can be debated in court. In the case of oss who does the government take to task?
Even worse, what if a government agency develops some software which it releases. Will it be held responsible should there be a flaw which adversely affects other users? In this day and age there is no doubt that someone would try to sue esp. if it's a government agency. And let's face it, a government agency is fundamentally accountable to "the people" for its actions.
Lack of liability is already bad enough. Moving to oss would seem to exacerbate the problem. And should you doubt any of this, ask yourself, when you've bitched about a really thorny problem with some oss software how often have you had the response that "Hey, it's free. Don't like it then take a hike." That is not an option for a responsible agency with a critical need, nor is it a response they can make.
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
Au contraire - it's not that they are incompetent at all. They have 60k desktops to support, and the attempt to lock the platform down (Windows was never really designed to be locked down; it's inherently a blown up single-user system. One of those design decisions I was talking about) to reduce the desktop to a one-size-fits-all push introduces complexities that are difficult to manage.
You apparently don't have a clue what a 'network operating system' is. Active Directory is a directory service - just like Novell's NDS, and the industry standard LDAP (which AD and NDS both owe a debt of gratitude to), and NIS/NIS+ (both of which, IMO, suck, but do what they are designed to do and did it LONG before Microsloth realized they needed a Directory). And, as the saying goes, only fools are positive. I admit, somewhat sheepishly, that I have an MCSE - first acquired in 1997, and updated once since then. I've supported enterprise level WAN spanning M$ NT/2k networks before I got to play with the big boys.
And in case you didn't realize it, *NIX had TCP/IP long before M$, and the entire stack of protocols for NT (tcp, udp, telnet, ftp, http) could be considered a "*NIX Emulator", quite defensibly, if not exactly accurately.
, Actually, quite a few more than that, I was simply talking about the level of computer savvy required to run linux, and making the point that I would like to believe that our American business computer users are more savvy about computers in general than my grandmother. But maybe that's a forlorn hope. *sigh*.
The fact is that I could (and have) built distribution systems that would allow me to roll out *NIX (linux, specifically, in this instance) to an arbitrarily large number of people with far fewer "desk runners" and less IT/workstation interaction than any M$ migration I've seen, and much faster install times... Even using Ghost over a 100mbit network, a full boat imaging of a windows Box usually takes on the order of 20 to 50 minutes depending upon how many applications are included; I can do Linux boxen in 9 minutes from reboot to login.
Well, then, I'm proud of you. How did you keep those users from double clicking on 'document.doc' from MyDoom? I'm just curious.
"Real World MIS experience"... I'll tell you what. I managed an exclusively Microsloth network (only 2500 seats, but spread out over seven countries and having some 130 servers of various types) for four years, then that same network and all of that company's Unix servers for another two years, then on to solely *NIX support for the past five years. Now, you go out and get a job managing an Enterprise level *Nix network, and do it for as long as you've worked on Microsloth's products, and then come back and tell me about "real-world MIS experience". I've done both at very high (engineering and systems integration) levels. Have you?
Thinking outside my Head