Slashdot Mirror


Bill Gates Claims OSS Has Poor Interoperability

XeRXeS-TCN writes "In yet another example of Bill Gates seemingly 'not getting it' (or getting it just fine and spreading FUD), he has sent out an email to all MSFT's corporate customers, stating that if they are looking for interoperability, they should not look to Linux or OSS software. What he really means of course, is free alternatives trying to interoperate with Microsoft's non-documented proprietary standards."

2 of 565 comments (clear)

  1. hey's right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Windows has api's that when they publish them they stick to them for apps and the OS. OSS your lucky if you can get 3 years out of an environment and keep current on upgrades and patches. I would say in my enterprise in environment we have more problems with OSS than with non OSS when it comes to upgrades and maintanence.

  2. Um, what? by deusexcrottsma · · Score: 0, Troll

    I feel like I'm taking crazy pills, cause everyone's always speaking of Linux's salvific glory, when last time I checked Linux was a bitch when it came to interoperating with Windows! It was only about two years ago that Samba even became tolerablely usable, and even still it's a pain in the ass (in comparison to Windows' network-interoperability) to use with a Windows network. Linux is also slow as hell reading and writing to and from an NTFS partition, which sucks if the primary reason you use Linux is for the Live boot cds (such as Knoppix) for salvaging data from a corrupted Windows OS. Linux is awesome in that it has functions beyond those of Windows, but not because it's the beatific vision of operating systems. Because it's a tool with a couple cool features, people think it must therefore be a wonderful operating system. Bullshit. Even as a stand alone desktop it's questionable. I just love reading articles on Slashdot where some Linux-authority admits "Linux is not yet a practical desktop solution," when anyone who has ever used Linux for more than ten minutes would have figured that out! I want to play some video games, oh shit, I either have to emulate them at intolerably slow speeds, or wait a year for a Linux release (if the release comes out at all)! Ok, time to network with other computers, oh wait!, most of them are Windows computers and so this is going to take me a buttload of time! I bet most of the people posting about the greatness of Linux are in fact, using Windows. "But that's just because there's this Windows monopoly that results in most software being released for Windows. If Linux was as extensive as Windows it would be much better!" Well, that may be the case, but it doesn't make Linux any better NOW, when I need to use a viable operating system. And yes, if you're not a total retard going to sites like "givemeadwareandspyware.com" Windows is completely fine.