Slashdot Mirror
Dvorak on How Microsoft Can Kill Linux
gewg_ writes "John C. Dvorak thinks he knows the way Redmond can kill Linux. Basing his premise on the relative dearth of device drivers available for Linux (compared to what is available for Windows), he sees an opportunity for the Borg to embrace and extinguish." From the article: "The immediate usefulness of Linux running under Windows is obvious. You can use all the Windows drivers for all the peripherals that don't run under Linux. Drivers have always been an issue with Linux as PC users have gotten spoiled with Windows driver support. Today's user wants to grab just about anything and not worry about installing it and making it work."
If only this one had been a dupe too, this would have been REALLY funny :-)
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
B
Does anybody still take a word that says seriously anymore? All he ever does is troll for ad hits by saying something which will piss off one fringe group of computer geeks or another.
Honestly. Why ever link to that joker?
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Please don't click the link.
John Dvorak knows the state of Linux drivers versus Windows (or Mac) perfectly well. This is an excellent example of writing something obviously incorrect so you get a huge amount of hits and links from people that (rightly) disagree.
Exactly like the Science Citation Index, actually, but speeded up about 20 times.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
John Dvorak has been in the computer industry about as long as Univac, but I really disagree with him on his points in TFA.
The first thing I disagree with is his assertion of how useful Linux would be when running under Windows. Is anyone crying for this?
His second assertion that Microsoft could create a flavor of Linux with their driver-base that people would adopt is just as loony. Beyond its quality nature, isn't one of the reasons people switch to Linux to get rid of Microsoft and their business practices and high prices?
I'm a big tall mofo.
I'll readily admit as soon as the next person that Linux doesn't support all of the latest & greatest hardware. That doesn't mean that it doesn't support last-generation hardware though - as long as you do research and buy the right sort of hardware, you can usually build a system where almost every piece is well-supported by any given Linux distro.
Companies like Intel and ATi are examples of how the hardware manufacturers are realizing that Linux users want to use their hardware too.
SCREW THE ADS! http://adblock.mozdev.org/ Proud user of teh Fox of Fire - Registered Linux User #289618
If that were true, why hasn't Windows gone away?
Dvorak thinks that open-source developers will stop working on their stuff if they perceive it as benefitting Microsoft. I say this is obviously not true; there are many, many projects now that run on Windows (like Firefox, just to pick one major example), and their developers don't seem the least bit deterred by running on Windows.
Have you read my blog lately?
Its called Cooperative Linux, and has been around for quite some time.
www.colinux.org
Yet, suspiciously, the Linux kernel running on my laptop hasn't spontaneously died. Hmm. This Dvorak chap is quite the retard.
The moving cursor writes, and having written, blinks on.
1) Linux device drivers are a big problem
and
2) Putting Windows PnP in Linux would be an easy task
I have a problem with #1 because, well, I haven't had a problem with device drivers for years. The first thing I do with a new computer (and I've gone through 5, from Dell and HP, in the last few years) is reformat, install Windows, and then install Linux. Guess which one is easier to install? Guess which one requires special driver disks and arcane "press-F8-at-the-right-time-during-the-install" crazieness to get things working? That's right: windows. With Linux, stick the CD in, click a few buttons, and done.
The problem with #2 should be obvious to everyone: one of the main tasks of an OS is to manage devices. Look at the code in the kernel that does this. Sure, there's other important stuff (vfs, memory management, process management, etc), but if you count the lines, the heaviest piece of the OS is device driver management. Ripping this out and sticking in Redmonds garbage would be disastrous.
Now, user-mode linux is a different beast. Even virtualizing the hardware could get things to work correctly under Dvorak's scheme without so much effort. But what he suggests is not only ludicrous, its outright silly, and really illustrates how out of touch he is with how technology works.
This week-old story from OSNews is pointless. Microsoft would never do that, because it would acknowledge that an opponent was on the level of Windows.
Look how Microsoft very rarely mentions Linux, and barely mentions OS X at all (if ever). Microsoft's voice is heard by so many pointy-haired bosses that to talk about someone or release a product based around them is to give free advertising. Granted, they make an Office for Mac, but you'd never know it if you weren't a Mac user.
No, Jon Katz was sinserely wrong. He watched Buffy reruns and thought he understood modern teens, read Kevin Mitnick interviews in 2600 and thought he understood hacker culture, read Slashdot comments and thought they were a representative sample of American geeks. I think he was genuinely surprised at how detested some of his rambling became around here.
Dvorak, on the other hand, knows better. He knows that if he calls the iBook 300 "girly" or says that Linux-on-Windows will put Red Hat, Debian, and Gentoo out of business, people will rush to the web site to read his rubbish, and then comment on it it forums, link to it on blogs and slash sites, and go to great lengths to alert the world about how wrong he is... all of which gets his site hits, and makes his publisher very happy with him. He's laughing all the way to the bank, because his goal is not to be seen as insightful, but simply to be seen.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
While I agree that Dvorak is a blowhard, he does have a point about Linux hardware support. I recently compared a dozen different install-from-CD distros, and only one supported my ASUS motherboard's on-board sound and video correctly. None had support for my Canon scanner, which I realize is Canon's fault. But don't tell me I need to buy a new scanner to be able to migrate to Linux. Your average Joe just wants to plug-n-play, and to me that's one of the two real advantages Windows has over Linux.
The other? Software. There are still some tremendous voids in the software area. There is no equivalent to Visio (yes, I've tried Dia and it's cute, but it's not Visio), and the Gimp isn't Photoshop or even Paint Shop Pro. Linux needs more apps like Firefox, Thunderbird, and OpenOffice that can really bridge the gap, and can offer clear advantages over Windows applications.
Serving your airship needs since 1995.
Agreed. People need to stop promoting this douche bag.
He intentionally writes dumb columns in order to (negatively) attract readers.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
He doesn't know the first thing about what he's saying!
Linux as a task under Windows exists!
Linux as a task under Linux exists.
In either instance, the "guest" OS doesn't get a "magic ride" on the hosts's drivers.
He takes an out-of-context comment, and combines it with half-knowlege of the subject and a dollop of wishful thinking.
Whoops! I think I just defined "Visionary"!
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Xandros != Linux!
bork bork bork!
What makes Xandros buggy? Isn't it all the same basic sets of open source code that's so much more secure and stable than anything Microsoft produces?
An unsafe and a safe house can be built from exactly the same bricks, it's the way you arrange those bricks.
All the best open software is tested to hell and back through lots of release candidates etc.. If a distro chooses to use these development versions of software or doesn't test the combination of software they are using throughly (essentially making it a development distro) then you can't expect the security and stability that open source software done properly provides
Those Linux fanboys you speak of are the same ones that brought it from a concept in Linus' mind to the relative powerhouse it is today. Sure, it isn't the desktop to end all desktops, but look at how far something that was put together by a bunch of geeks in their parents' basements has come.
Everyone talks about the "death" of Linux that, or Microsoft "crushing" Linux. They may someday crush Redhat and SuSE and others, but they're never going to stop this "geek (r)evolution" from continuing to unfold. The only thing that could do that is something just as free and better.
I fail to see what makes him think improved driver support will change people's reasons for running it.
... and the minority can either whine & be ignored, or give up and join the rest on the dark side.
Wow, you're really missing the point.
Microsoft's winning tactic is "embrace and extend": grudgingly accept the winning standard, get LOTS of people to use the MS version, then slowly deviate from that standard. They win by default via customer loyalty; when a large majority of users choose the MS solution, the "standard" becomes whatever MS says it is
In this case, the idea is to play off Linux's biggest weakness: lack of drivers. MS drivers may suck, but at least they exist! (Personally, it was incredibly frustrating to run Knoppix on a once-popular reasonably-capable Gateway laptop and not even have sound because the drivers wouldn't support even the most common sound card - but freakin' Win95 that was on it runs sound fine! ARGH!) By "embracing" Linux via a method heavily dependent on drivers, there would be a boom in Linux - to be specific, MS-Linux. Then, once hooked like crack addicts, upgrades gradually fork away from "real" Linux and toward Windows - exactly what Microsoft did to IBM regarding OS/2. The few hardcore Linux users left are left swinging in the breeze.
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
Look,
;). This as far back as 1998. You see where Apple is today.
This is the SAME GUY who went through tirade after temper-tantrum-touting-tirade about how he was eviling being targeted as an Apple hater meanwhile spewing out vitriolic fodder on how Apple will die (all within the confines of an OBJECTIVE viewpoint, of course
Dvorak's not a credible source. Case closed.
-- (Score:i , Imaginary)
Are you sure you can compare the X11 protocol with gdi.exe (or whatever it's called in WindowsXP)?
The juxtaposition seems as disingenious as that of the Linux kernel alongside the whole Windows OS.
Running GNU/Linux you've got an embarrassment of choices, and a configuration zoo of libraries to support them, from the spartan minimalism of Ion to the full-tilt boogie of Enlightenment, with KDE and Gnome somewhere in between. So party.
Or just log in to a terminal and get your Emacs on. It really is all good.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
Actually, you using the word "windoze" is going to do more to slow down linux growth than Xandros' occasional lockups.
Just remember, a calm and cool zealot will convert more than the raging fanboy.
i use linux and windows oh god how can i have an opinion
I'm sorry to hear that. Gnome manages to lock my IM box up at least once a day. My Windows box hasn't been rebooted, much less crashed, in 26 days, 13 hours, and 11 minutes.
:]
I've never had anywhere near the stability problems on Windows as I have on Linux. I can see it being more stable without any sort of GUI interface, but really, I never, ever, ever have any Windows problems.
Of course, you could chalk all that up to a: knowing what I'm doing on Windows and b: not _really_ knowing what I'm doing on Linux. Sure, I've installed Gentoo countless times, so I know stuff somewhat, but I'm nowhere near as experienced as I am with Windows.
But I ramble