Slashdot Mirror
Ubuntu, Macintosh and Windows XP
LXer has an interesting look at the big three operating systems with some surprising results. From the article: "If you think that a Linux advocate cannot make an objective analysis of desktop operating systems, then you need to read this report. You may find yourself surprised with some brutal honesty that leaves out the free software philosophy."
HELLO WORLD
99996 99996
HELLO WORLD
23681 23681 10956 10956 13483 13483 07366 07366 27989 27989
50951 50951 01811 01811 91080 91080 04905 04905 11261 11261
75942 75942 17464 17464 19724 19724 88727 88727 56196 56196
41398 41398 90626 90626 16078 16078 80274 80274 25423 25423
73371 73371 10494 10494 12481 12481 59426 59426 92821 92821
66751 66751 07976 07976 81752 81752 16185 16185 42005 42005
92514 92514 90038 90038 40155 40155 54083 54083 58663 58663
57079 57079 27605 27605 47796 47796 77147 77147 28455 28455
57258 57258 70837 70837 52045 52045 62252 62252 20234 20234
53473 53473 16456 16456 46567 46567 46157 46157 68432 68432
99532 99532 47333 47333 96225 96225 01945 01945 88566 88566
86797 86797 82056 82056 41719 41719 10156 10156 49489 49489
53245 53245 98291 98291 18910 18910 18710 18710 50160 50160
35185 35185 40054 40054 24902 24902 60704 60704 36999 36999
76493 76493 17171 17171 82282 82282 65344 65344 18525 18525
04312 04312 59914 59914 27506 27506 57327 57327 53620 53620
42127 42127 91547 91547 44682 44682 15336 15336 43070 43070
98264 98264 72077 72077 77349 77349 43595 43595 07607 07607
32740 32740 83794 83794 41677 41677 06907 06907 11995 11995
65207 65207 61567 61567 84920 84920 39609 39609 97292 97292
67623 67623 02567 02567 12246 12246 13794 13794 46059 46059
02100 02100 40115 40115 43567 43567 17046 17046 76712 76712
63819 63819 06065 06065 53503 53503 51391 51391 07799 07799
K-BYE
Nothing for you to see here. Please move along.
If a man speaks in the forest, and there is no woman there to hear him, is he still wrong?
Boy, what a red banner day...
...is down with da GNAA.
comedy. w00t.
Its funny to see digg & slashdot playing catchup game today...
This poor little http server is on the front page of Slashdot and Digg simultaneously.
Just thought I'd put in my $0.02 adsense.
Making you think you're crazy is a billion dollar industry.
And now we wait for the holy war between OS fanatics to break out again...
Not everyone wants to read digg and sort through what majority of people thinks is cool (although often right, at one time majority thought the "earth is flat").
The article advertises itself as "brutal honesty that leaves out the free software philosophy." With a headline like that, I was hoping to get a real analysis of what's going right and what's going wrong for all three. Instead, the author ends up dodging the key positives and negatives of each system in favor of more nebulous concepts like available software. His conclusion is that Linux is losing because it doesn't have eductional titles or tax software. Excuse me?
A more thorough analysis would have focused on why these packages are lacking. What is so special about Windows and Mac that they have these markets clinched? Does his analysis show that Linux needs this software, or is it actually competing in a different market? These are the types of questions that are actually important.
Finally, some of his analysis was just confusing. According to the author, Apple is nicer than Windows because they make nice hardware. Wait. Aren't we comparing software? If hardware is a key issue, why isn't that brought up in all three analyses? And why does he believe that the higher price of Apple's hardware makes it only appealing to Enterprise users when it's quite obviously home users who use it?
All in all, I give him an A+ for effort, but a D- for content. He's really trying, but he doesn't have any real goal in mind during his comparisons. As a result, his analysis comes out confused and unfocused.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Ubuntu, Macintosh and Windows XP
,etc. Then I started using the Mac as a production machine at a DoE lab.
Posted by tadelste on Mar 19, 2006 3:44 PM
Lxer.com; By Tom Adelstein
If you think that a Linux advocate cannot make an objective analysis of desktop operating systems, then you need to read this report. You may find yourself surprised with some brutal honesty that leaves out the free software philosophy.
All three desktop operating systems have admirable qualities. Each has some weaknesses. Attending a recent User Group Fair, I had another chance to see them at work. Having used and programmed on each platform provides some unbiased insights.
Background
I have owned several Macintosh computers. I had new world and old world bios machines including several older 6500s, 7600s, etc. that would not take OS X. I also had a blue and white, a beige workgroup server, Power Mac G4s, a Cube, iBook, etc. I remember making the transition from OS 9 to OS X. I liked it.
I used Microsoft from the DOS days to early Windows 2.0, 3.0, 3.11, Windows 95, 98, ME, NT3.51 - 4.0, 2000 and XP. I still have the licenses and media for everything since Windows 3.1. I managed large IBM networks with OS/2 on the desktop and LAN Server 3 as the server. I won't get into my NetWare experience.
I used Solaris, AIX and Linux starting with Slackware 3x. I even ran Red Hat on Sun IPCs, Sparc 5 and 10 workstations. I'm now using SUSE SLES and Pro, RHEL, Fedora, Debian and Ubuntu for daily use on servers and workstations.
Each system has different programing architectures with OS X a little closer to Linux than Windows. OS X uses a UNIX architecture to run its internals. However, the OS X desktop interface does not resemble Linux or other UNICES which depend on X. You can use X on the Mac natively.
Windows has a completely different programing structure from OS X and Linux. Windows relies heavily on its user interface which has evolved over time. Programing involves using Windows shell extensions. XP uses the NT kernel to manage file systems, internals and communication with the graphical shell.
OS X and Linux use completely different schemes with kernel extensions and independent programs running inside the user interface shell. The UNIX shell runs independently in what kernel developers call userland.
UNIX and Linux programmers consider their programing methods preferable to Windows. Windows developers consider the interface extensions easier to use and providing for more rapid application development. Each have merit when you look at them objectively. Of course, Macintosh developers will say that since they moved to the UNIX method that they experience more stability.
Macintosh
I started with the first Mac configured as a desktop publishing machine. I remember liking it because it cut costs we otherwise spent on type setting and graphics, paste up
For personal use, I used the Mac for graphics, audio productions and developing web sites. OS X made a huge difference since I didn't have to reboot in the middle of working. I also knew my way around UNIX and that allowed me to use Internet applications I hadn't used previously.
I found the developers tools useful. I enjoyed the interface. I found myself exploring more of the system when I purchased "OS X, the Missing Manual". The same book helped me discover ways of using Windows and Linux I hadn't known previously.
Windows XP
I recall using XP for three months without having to reboot it. I don't remember that happening before. I started collecting Microsoft Certs when Windows 95 arrived. I had used Excel 5 and Access to develop financial tools. Later, I became a sysadmin and ran a couple of large NT networks.
XP appeared safe behind our firewall. After three months, my system became sluggish and prone to malware. I did maintenance on the system regularly including defraging the disk, deleting unnecessary files and checking the registry.
I liked XP better than any previ
fatduck has an interesting look at the big three nerd newsfeeds with some unsurprising results.
Making you think you're crazy is a billion dollar industry.
all software is lacking
this is news i guess.
it's hard to say, TFA is DOA
"Freedom and Justice for All" is a registered trademark of The United States Govt Inc. Not available in all areas.
http://lxer.com.nyud.net:8090/lxer/story/56437/ind ex.html
"Ubuntu, Macintosh and Windows XP"
Have you ever noticed that in the scheme of naming meat for the three big land animals is completely broke?
Cow == Beef
Pig == Pork
But CHICKEN is still just CHICKEN ("Poultry" doesn't count as it encompasses all domesticated food birds).
Using this known quirk, we can safely assume, that if all of these Operating Systems were a meat, Macintosh would be CHICKEN!
"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
>This poor little http server is on the front page of Slashdot and Digg simultaneously.
What is this server running on?
Have there been any really good studies showing this? I'm aware of a few very small samplnigs that show something like this, but nothing that was statistically significant. I'd be grateful if anyone knows of a good study showing usages. Anecdotally, Red Hat dominates my group of friends -- if we knew about a survey, we'd probably skew it pretty good too.
Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm
Like people who care about such important things have a terribly contagious lethal disease.
That sucks big time and sounds like a-moral freaks who would sell their moms (not that I buy that point of view, but it sure as hell sounds like it).
- Each system has different programing architectures with OS X a little closer to Linux than Windows. OS X uses a UNIX architecture to run its internals. However, the OS X desktop interface does not resemble Linux or other UNICES which depend on X. You can use X on the Mac natively.
I get so tired of hearing that OS X uses a UNIX architecture, but I digress. Also I like how Linux sucks because software like Income Tax apps are lacking...hello? I processed my last 3 income tax paperwork via Turbo Tax online. What a bad article, no wonder I stopped checking 'digg.com'fak3r.com
That server got _Served_!
*rimshot*
You can multi-boot all of these on the Intel Macs. Problem solved.
Someone rambles about 3 operating system == "interesting look" @ slashdot...
http://www.intellipool.se/ - Intellipool Network Monitor
I wonder if the /. editors are on the take from pharmaceutical companies that sell anti-hypertension drugs?
It seems like once a day there is an article like this that provides no real content, but may inspire limited skirmishes between hotheaded zealots. No doubt some of them are on these medications.
Or maybe the editors just like to see the ants fight after they shake up the bottle.
Franklin Hoenikker, is that you?
Have you ever noticed that in the scheme of naming meat for the three big land animals is completely broke?
No, the system works as designed. For mammals, the English name of the animal comes from Anglo-Saxon, while the English name of its flesh prepared as food comes from French. See also sheep => mutton; deer => venison. But for species in other classes that extend Chordata, the English name of the prepared flesh is derived directly from the common English name of the animal: duck => duck; pheasant => pheasant; frog => frog legs; tuna => tuna.
Sure it's got great graphics, but without tax software I just don't see it having any sort of audience...
Say it like you mean it?!
Here's my brutal honesty about the "free software" philosophy. I thought, in the case of Ubuntu, it would mean they would welcome new users, not ignore their the specifics of their question, or otherwise ignore direct question, insult new users by asking why they didn't take a precaution they could not have known to take, and generally give poor instructions and recommendations for installation (like telling you to put GRUB on your master boot record for dual boot, never mind that you're locked out of both OS's if it has the slightest error in running). That's not very welcoming.
Every time I bring up my experience with "easy to use" Ubuntu, no matter how I say it, I get modded down, but I will gladly do it until I get modded off Slashdot if it finally gets the message across - DESIGN THE SOFTWARE WITH THE NEW-TO-LINUX USER IN MIND.
Rank my idea: http://www.sinceslicedbread.com/node/531
Didja realize when he spoke of Linux he was enthusiastic, but when he spoke of Windows it seems someone was forcing him to do it. It's also filled with excuses "The large volume...seduces", "The lower cost...".
I may despise Windows, but i'll never say it isn't a good OS. If you want to make money, it's better for development, and development tools are easier. Like AOL, UI is key to Microsoft, and many, if not most, developers want that. Plus, tools for the braindead like VB and it's ilk are in abundance with help files, technical support, and addins. It's debugging is usually superior to Linux because it goes line by line, making it an excellent tool for the beginner.
I like Linux, and Linux is robust. I am learning to use C with a friend right now, and we login to my Debian box via SSH to get it done. But one thing is for sure, it ain't as easy. (Which is half the reason i want it that way, but that's another story.)
Linux is more secure, if you know what you are doing. To the average idiot, buying Windows and Symantec's security suite is ten times better. It works out of the box, it has support, and is updated for viruses.
But the "reviewer" didn't even get into overall usuability.
Windows is better, hands down because everyone knows it, it's UI is beautiful and easy to use to most people, there is a great deal of software support for it, and games are written for it. If you are willing to spend money, there's nearly nothing you can do with Linux that you can't do with Windows.
For the techy, however, Linux can be better in that it is control, speed, and reliability. Futhermore, debugging tools such as having the source, using strace, or having knowledgeable people in the newsgroups or mailing lists that speak Geek and are overall familiar with the techy nomenclature, can be a boon and a welcome diversion from the ignorance found amongst Windows support personell.
But, for the non-techy trying to save cash, or the techy trying to save time, the "other" OS may be better.
So much for my opinion. But (in my opinion!) it's alot less biased than his.
Have you read my journal today?
I use Ubuntu Linux, Windows XP, and OS 10.4 for my work, usually depending on what a customer uses and what special software I might need to use. For Java development, I use IntelliJ, and all three operating systems are just about the same. For Ruby I like TextMate on the Mac, or jEdit/eclipse/emacs under Linux, but TextPad on Windows is OK also.
:-) think about which OS I want to use for personal reasons - all three are just tools.
I don't usually (but sometimes
I did my taxes this year with Quicktax under WINE. To my surprise and delight, everything just worked. Kudos to the sidenet-wine-config people -- this tool downloads and installs several key bits of software from Microsoft that many windows apps expect (such as IE).
No... I'll simply say...
http://distrowatch.com/
Top 5 are:
1 Ubuntu 2711
2 SUSE 1827
3 Mandriva 1542
4 Fedora 1199
5 MEPIS 632
Jonathan
~~~~~~~~
"I really wish I hadn't recommended http://www.justgofaster.com/ driver training to that Spanish twat" - Michael Schumacher
To quote the "article" I have owned several Macintosh computers. I had new world and old world bios machines including several older 6500s, 7600s, etc.. Wow, I didn't know Macs used BIOS and on top of that there were new and old ones. Maybe that is why it was such a big deal when someone got XP running on a Macintel. You learn something new on slashdot everyday.
I always thought BIOS was an intel thing. Oh well, I guess Open Firmware never caught on in the mac world.
Ugh. If this was a typo, it would be one thing. I mean the old world and new word ROMs have nothing to do with bios. Old and New both have Open Firmware. What on earth is this person talking about? I think others have already ripped this thing to shreds. Reading the first few paragraphs was enough for me.
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
Please stop trolling The Associated Press for news.
Note to you: please stop trolling Slashdot.
Stasis is death. Embrace change.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I don't do much in the area of Framemaker or Pagemaker, but most desktops will do fine with the functionality present in OpenOffice.org Draw
A better substitute, IMO, would be Scribus. But OO.o is pretty decent for what's included.
I don't see anything "brutal" in the article. It's just a "yeah i like it but it needs a bit more of this and that" kind of review. No advantages, disadvantages, complaints, specifics. It's just a one-page recommendation.
That said, once AGAIN we see that same stupid statement. It's taken as a tautology that Apple's stability is due to it's hardware. From the article:
"Macintosh OS X runs on a limited number of hardware devices which allows Apple Computers to offer a stable and high-performance product overall. Apple's entry level products such as the Mac mini provides a low-cost, high-value multimedia platform."
Bull. While that can't do anything but help, I don't buy it. I think Linux has proven that you can run an operating system on a very diverse set of hardware (that is, the same hardware Windows runs on) and be entirely stable enough to run for months without issue (Windows has gotten there, for the most part). OS X is stable not because there are only 3 pieces of hardware it runs on, but because it was well designed and well built, based on a stable and mature architecture (BSD). It's perfectly stable (from what I hear) when installed on generic Intel computers that it was never designed for.
Besides, what does OS X run on? It runs on Powerbooks, the Minis, PowerMacs, iMacs, iBooks, and the G4 Cube, and more. Each of those has numerous different revisions (often amazingly different, as the difference between a G4 PowerMac and a G5 PowerMac, or a 12" Aluminum Powerbook and a 15" MacBook Pro). In the year I have owned a PowerBook there have been 3 revisions, along with the MacBook Pro. That's one year, one computer line. Not including the different sizes (12", 15", 17").
When will people stop blaming OS X's stability on the hardware. When will they start to blame it on good design. Give Apple a fair shake.
Besides, if the hardware thing was true, OS 8 and OS 9 should have been MUCH MORE stable because they only ran on those few pieces of Apple hardware, while Windows XP should be much LESS stable because it runs on so many million different types of computers.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
When you consider more tax software companies are making their software available as web packages, which OS you are using becomes moot. As soon as this happened I abandonned the Mac tax software, since it was a good $15-$20 than the PC version.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
sites down http://mirrordot.com/stories/f34848c5ef9f30457f636 9132c5921d9/index.html
shanegrant.com
Q: How do I get it to run on Linux?
A: I use a high-tech interface called a web browser, specifically Firefox. As a result, my tax software is OS-independent.
Really, this isn't hard, is it?
Finding God in a Dog
Make sure you read the thread that he posted on the Ubuntu forums before feeling too sorry for this jerk. He had a problem, and people tried very hard to help. He refused to try anything anyone suggested and became very abusive. People continued to give him suggestions and try to help. He just got nastier and nastier. His experiences are bad only because he chose for them to be.
- fader
It's interesting to be since I have a fairly complicated return (including long and short term gains on taxable stock sales), I live in a sales tax state so I had that, I have accounts with interest income, my income is decent so I run it through the AMT (apparently I don't know what "decent" really is since AMT doesn't apply to me), I have a mortgage and school taxes. I'm reasonably smart but basically a "B" type not some superbrain.
My 2006 taxes took me about 100 minutes to complete from start to finish- by hand- without a program. The only thing I needed a calculator for was the sales tax thing (for the love of god could they have made it more complicated-- multiply the base amount by something like 1.337?).
Besides you only use tax software once a year as it is. Most people who would be interested in free software won't make enough that tax software would matter anyway.
Personally, I think the -government- should be required to produce a generic "C" program or web page that calculates your taxes according to the tax code and if it is wrong, you only pay interest- no penalties. Tax collection is a government function- it's insane that we have these huge industries built around calculating your taxes.
Sure-- 10% of the population would still need accountants and so on but 90% really don't need these things.
I'm moving pretty aggressively towards opensource software and mildly aggressively towards linix. It won't be because of the cost- I can buy a complete windows system at Fry's for $369 - slap in a hot video card and a cool quiet power supply and match 90% of the score of any single card $1800 system on the plant. How they do this when the operating system alone costs me $99 and the bloody hardware in the computer is worth over $369 purchased piecemeal is beyond me. Microsoft must be giving the OEM folks OS's for almost free.
No- the reason I will leave windows (and not go to mac) is because of DRM.
It's MY COMPUTER. Unless they are going to BUY it for me and give it to me free, I'm not going to give them money for a system that is going to snoop and report on what I'm doing, tell me what software I can and can't run, and tell me what content I can and cannot play.
Sure- I may have a $379 special version of whatever windows is out there the rest of my life- I also might have a PS2 or XBOX for the same reason- to play games (Tho there is a ton of MAME content out there these days for linux).
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
http://lxer.com.nyud.net:8090/module/newswire/view /56437/index.html
I'm not finished with it yet, but so far it seems like a pretty decent article.
To restore your master boot sector and regain access to your windows install:
/MBR
Boot off a DOS floppy that includes the FDISK program. If you don't have such a disk, get on your windows machine at work (or at your friend's house) and make one. Once booted, type this command:
FDISK
That's it! You can now restart your computer and boot right into windows.
Alternatively, you could make use of a generic floppy bootloader to gain access to both systems. Gujin is a good one, IMO, but it takes a bit of setting up. You can skip that step if you want by downloading the ISO of The Ultimate Boot CD and burning it (again, at work). You can boot right off that CD, select Gujin, and use it to boot any OS on your system.
That should get you back on track, assuming you haven't already reformatted and started over.
Now, on to more general issues:
Dual-booting is generally considered an advanced technique. That is to say, it is the sort of thing that a very computer savvy (not windows-savvy, but more generally computer savvy) user should do. It is not the sort of thing that someone who is new to Linux should do. Unfortunately, it is exactly what everyone who is new to linux wants to do, since they don't want to give up windows and also don't want to buy a completely separate computer for Linux. This is very problematic.
Advanced users, in general, already know how to do things like restore the master boot sector if it was damaged, make use of various bootloaders, backup all of their data in a recoverable form, overcome some of the more technical partitioning issues, etc. That is probably why you got flamed...you are attempting advanced-user stuff but seem to be making beginning-user mistakes.
Did you know, for example, that if you partition your hard drive and put your linux partition too many cylinders away from sector zero, you might not be able to boot linux at all? It depends on your hardware, of course, but partitioning problems like that always frustrate beginners. The only real way to address them is to do a lot of study upfront.
Like I said before, however, new Linux users don't generally want to do a lot of study upfront. They want it to just work. This is a fine desire, but unfortunately industry realities prevent some of the more advanced activities (such as dual-booting) from 'just working.'
Anyway, best of luck to you.
Agreed; the GUI configuration utilities never seemed to help me accomplish anything in Ubuntu. Maybe it was just the WL card I'm using (some piece of shit Marvell-based one -- thanks a bunch Linksys for not changing the model number), but every time I tried to use the control panels either in Gnome or KDE, it was a crap-shoot as to whether the changes would get applied, or whether the system would hang, or none of the above.
I don't find installing a new distro to be something enjoyable or entertaining, thus I'll probably stick with Ubuntu until I find a very compelling reason to change to something else, but I think if I was going to do it all over again I probably would have picked SuSE or RedHat. All in all, running Ubuntu has been an interesting experience -- I've discovered that the "spit and polish" aspect of an OS counts for a lot more to me than I thought it would.
So I suppose I'll keep coughing up $2.5k every few years for a new shiny thing from Apple, since so far they're the only company that I've found that does it right.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
I don't agree with the fact that linux is better for software development, for instance i haven't found one really good IDE that ties things together as much as visual studio, KDE does not compare at all. Additionally, most softwares you develop CAN be interpolated to linux with the exception of windowing, which you might consider to be a big deal, but for a class library development point of view it is not.
Seriously, Free software means that _this_ is what the people want. They want it so bad, they're making it themselves.
Very few people actually use windows- you ask them what kind of computer they have, and you'll hear "Dell" or "Packard Bell" or "Gateway" - maybe even an "IBM". These people have no idea what they're using or if anything might do what they want better.
Leaving out the fact that this is Free software is trollish- if you don't qualify any comparison with "This is what the people who actually have to use it want to use", then you're just feeding this FUD machine that zero-charge software equals lower-quality- because OF COURSE there's something available for Windows that isn't available for my Free operating system.
Doesn't mean I miss it in the slightest.
And by the way, I have no problems using tax preparation software on Linux, or converting things to and from PDF. I also have no problems watching DVDs legally- as my DVD player and software predate the DCMA.
I have no interest in Visio, Framemaker or Photoshop, or rather any other software that doesn't want me to use it. I may be interested in performing some of the tasks that are possible with these programs- but I've already got adequate Free software, that works and does things the way _I_ want to.
Okay,..."Ubuntu"...never heard of it? Is it a small African nation?
If it read Linux, Macintosh, & Windows - I'd buy it.
Heck, if it said Ford, GM, & Chrystler - I could see the BIG THREE...but what the heck is Ubuntu?
Bulls are used for beef.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=cow
Ubuntu - "The Dreamweaver of Linux Distros!"
I like my software and operating systems like I like my women and weed... bare/nekid, and home-grown. =)
the only permanence in existence, is the impermanence of existence.
then he's screwed
or rather, isn't
XP provides an adequate operating system for hosting a number of applications.
The correct - and more important - distinguisher would be that XP provides the only hosting choice for a large number of applications.
We all, and Bill Gates and even Wallstreet know that if all software available for Windos were available for OSX and Linux as well, with no difference in price, support or ease of installation, Windos market share would drop faster than you can possibly sell your M$ shares. Not to zero, some people just use whatever is there or don't know any better, but users are already moving to OSX in droves despite the app count disadvantage.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Why do people do this? It's clearly a grab for karma.
I can't get to TFA, but I think I can guess what the author might have been getting at when he refers to "educational software", and you're about a dozen years ahead of him. He's probably referring to home-computing educational software like "Jumpstart 2nd Grade" and the Leapfrog programs, intended for elementary school kids and younger.
Save Maine's economy: write stuff down. All comments are exclusively my own, not my employer.
But no one is covering its respawn point.
That just reflects people looking for info about a platform, has nothing to do with people running the distros, just what is popular to read about and think about and, to some extent, a popular choice for newcomers, not for those established with a distro already.
An analogy would be to look at how many people search for, say, a Ferrari versus how often people search for a Ford Focus. The Ferrari are more interesting and people search for them, but doesn't mean that the proportion of Ferrari drivers to Focus drivers is anywhere near what google search statistics would suggest with this methodology.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
A collection of sentences, some of which express something tangible.
OS X and Linux use completely different schemes with kernel extensions and independent programs running inside the user interface shell. The UNIX shell runs independently in what kernel developers call userland.
Sorry. That's as far as I got. If you write up the concept of being able to run the system without root level privileges as the very elist pejorative prhase: "what kernel developers call userland", you are obviously twisting the facts to conform to an agenda.
If ISVs could come up with a solution to Linux's continuous upgrade cycles, they still have unknowns with regard to whether Linux would take off as a desktop alternative to Microsoft. Possibly, the availability of Adobe and Intuit products could supercharge Linux.
It's the same bullshit we have been getting from columnists for years. The fact that this guy is a self-proclaimed Linux advocate (but really seems to be a close Mac zealot) doesn't change that. For the n'th time: Linux doesn't need ISVs, it has all the software most people need built in.
As for Adobe and Intuit specifically: I have never seen an Adobe product I have wanted to use, and Intuit software has largely been replaced by on-line banking and tax offerings.
I absolutely agree to what you are saying!!! I gave ubuntu another try this weekend. The first try ended when I couldn't get wireless networking to work a year ago. One year later, I still can't get wireless networking to work. The drivers are available but have to be compile for my current kernel. Then, wpa support has to be compiled as well. Then, I have to edit in command line the conf file in /etc using vi. Let's not talk about the hoops I had to jump through to get ati driver working. Doom3 is still jumpy and I can't get it to drive my Apple Cinema Display. All this is cumbersome to do because the root account is disable by default so I can't use the gui and must type sudo before each command in the cli. Really, do we really believe that many people welcome the opportunity to go through that on their weekends? Now with Windows, all I needed to do was put the CD in my drive, install the drivers, and plug in the device. Granted, wpa was no walk in the park but it was doable in an 1 hour. Apple was easiest by far because it already comes with wireless and only asks for type of encryption and the pasword. Done in 1 min !!!
You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
Immediately after install.
I found my Linux system provided me with all the tools and applications that I needed in order to securely perform the functions I needed to do in my day to day live immedately after the 20 minute install.
Windows was very lacking, it came with paint as the graphics program, wordpad as the text editor and the only math program I could find was calculator. By default my windows system was wide open and vulnerable to virus and worm attack until I installed 3rd party software, at the recommendation of the windows installer itself.
Mac was similarly lacking in any useful applications as well. Mac at least was more secure than windows.
All in all I would say that Linux is up and running and is fully functional and secure immediately after it is installed while it takes days and hundreds to thousands of dollars to bring a mac or windows system upto the same level of functionality and safety.
Enjoy!
I would think most Linux advocates that knew anything about the OS other then "it's 1337" would be pretty honest about it's shortcomings, and even with Macs, If you talk to someone that knows what they are doing (such as a CS major with a Mac), you'd probably get an honest fairly judgemental answer if Apple's propiganda hasn't gotten to them. Macs are good. Quicktime sucks (horribly). and Apple is an evil company with good products (probably debatable). Linux is good, but still has problems with some new hardware in my opinion (drivers for it are often not out there that quickly (or suck) for a lot of new products that need specialized drivers because companies don't care that much, although I do applaud the developers of open drivers for their effort).
In undeveloped countries, the consumer controls the market. In capitalist America, the market controls you.
Windows XP is the best OS Microsoft have done so far - provided that you get rid of the *TRULY AWFUL* default Windows XP UI & go back to the "Classic" UI, as well as doing some registry hacks to get rid of all the "patronising" features that treat you like a five year old. When you do that, and accept Windows big design flaw (the ever-expanding, ever-fragmenting registry), it's worth using. I still, personally, use Linux much more but that's because of what I do on my computers & the way I like to do it.
What I *REALLY* have a problem with is the *WINDOWS MENTALITY*...
I've been using Linux and free software now for many years & it's great when I can run my favourite free apps on Windows or Linux - Firefox, Thunderbird, GIMP, Vim, OpenOffice, etc. Sure, many of free apps don't compare feature-for-feature with some of their commercial equivalents but if I've ever been in the situation where I've felt a free application needs an additional feature, then I've dropped an email to the developers of that app to say what feature their app needs and why I think it needs it. I've not always got a response but at least I hope someone is maybe considering my suggestion. But in my mind, this type of feedback is core to the advancement of free software because it gives the developers a viewpoint of their software from the usability perspective.
Unfortunately, the "Windows Mentality" deems that you don't feedback to software creators - instead, you just hand over money & have a shrink-wrapped box put in your hands. And when you try out the software, it either does what you want it to do or doesn't; if it's the latter, you just use it, put up with it & wait for the next version...
I really don't care how many people use Windows and whether or not they'll migrate to Linux. But I do wish many Windows users would make more of an effort looking for free software apps & just try them out. Rather than just handing out money, or passing round CDs of cracked commercial apps, I wish they'd put some energy into giving free software a try & contacting the developers - whether to just say "Thanks" or to suggest enhancements to their software.
I don't believe all software should be free - whether you write programs or paint ceilings, you deserve renumeration for any hard work you do if that's what you want. But the free software movement is one where everyone who has access to a computer can take part in - and with many mature free apps, they're now at a stage where it's the users who dictate "what happens next" by telling the devlopers what's needed.
Unfortunately, far too many people just sit there expecting software to just "fall into their laps" after they hand over money & it's that mentality that needs to change here.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
Thanks for the link to that- I was taking this guy seriously before I read that. But I guess you can't help the people that don't want help. The jackass wouldn't even TRY to make a live cd!
/. ID to his ubuntuforums ID?
How'd you link his
A bunch of words that say nothing.
Just because Digg has it, doesn't mean Slashdot needs to post it.
(1) This guy thinks he is an every-man. Since most people are exactly like him, whatever he desires is what most people desire. (Please sir, I'd like free educational and income-tax software.)
(2) This guy thinks that his sundry experience with a smattering of systems and operating systems constitutes some kind of basis from which to form opinions of some value, or to give advice. At least he could have polled three of his best friends and make a data-set taken from four people who think they are Everyman. As it is, this guy thinks everything that matters to him is what really matters in the big bad world out there.
(3) This guy is a terrible writer. He doesn't know how to present a cogent argument, formulate a clear thesis, and support it with evidence.
I've read a lot of really mundane and pointless articles. This one tops them all.
Warren
perhaps, but I find that software to be less than a reason to say it's holding Linux back. Computer's are rarely purchased for a toddler to play some educational game. They are however purchased for things like doing homework. And 90% of homework can be done on a Linux box, because most of it is writing papers. Seems like that's all I've done since elementary school. Infact Linux seems better to me for homework
If you have a dozen monkeys typing on a dozen typewriters for a dozen days, you would have an analysis of Linux vs. XP vs OS X with a dozen times as much depth as this one. About all I got out of it was the there's no tax software on Linux. The author seemed to think writing important-sounding sentences would cover up the fact that he didn't have anything to say. The few times an actual idea was introduced, it wasn't expounded on, and strengthening examples were left out. If this were a technical writing class, this paper would get a "C-", and then only because it was mostly grammatically correct.
I personally think it is a lot easier to develop in *nix, providing you are not writing a GUI and even then it is easier to use linux or any other unix type OS.
My example, a couple of years ago I had to write an application that needed to run on solaris, linux and windows I used C++ to write the application and developed it entirely using kdevelop on gentoo linux, once i was finished I went to solaris and complied there was a couple of minor errors which where easily fixed using techniques that work with most C++ compilers, I then went to windows opened visual C++ and using basic drag and drop developed a GUI wrapper for the application. It worked perfectly on all three platforms.
Can you imagine trying to do this same thing using visual C++? With all the crap MS puts into it by default it is almost impossible to easily port to alternate platforms.
This application gets heavy use by the company I wrote it for, it took me perhaps an extra 2 days worth of work to get it working on the required platforms (I also checked it in AIX 5.0, FreeBSD and MacOS 10, it worked on them all). All that is required to get cross platform code is ANSI standards, there is a few special exceptions when you deal with things like sockets but there is alternatives there also. I used kdevelop you can s/kdevelop/whateverIDE/ on a unix like platform, there is no chance this would have worked using visual C++.
GeekServ Unix Consulting Services (http://www.geekserv.com)
Why? Because they all talk like niggers.
Slashdotters: You are all a bunch of faggots.
Do you hear me, you repulsive faggots? NO DIGG.
U.S. tax payers wanting a tax preparation aid in software are hereby recommended to use a web-based application, such as TurboTax.
-I like my women like I like my tea: green-
TFA states that Ubuntu doesn't come with a PDF converter. An Ubuntu install is accompanied by OpenOffice, and the Writer module of that suite can convert almost any document to PDF format. This is how I avoid the formatting issues that arise when attempting to convert .sxw documents to MS word documents (for emailing homework assignments).
I've read many articles about the pros/cons of all 3 major operating systems and why are they all written by someone who ISN'T the actual USUAL end user?
"I've used every operating system on the planet, programmed for God HIMSELF, and built multi-billion dollar income vomitting websites" -cut the crap.
"Brutal Honesty" (which this article isn't) should be dished out by guys like myself who aren't so stupid we can't do anything but point-and-click.
Honesty my ass. The honest truth is all 3 blow chunks. OS X is pretty but dumbed down, XP is great but full of holes, and Linux is just too damned hard to use.
Want Linux to be more than a geek toy? Want OS X to be a big hitter? Want Windows to bite the dust?
LISTEN TO THE USUAL, NORMAL JOE USER!
This post can come off bitter and mean, but I am just so damned tired of being strapped to an operating system that only halfass performs. I'm tired of being afraid of checking my bank account online for fear of who else is doing it.
This is the perfect audience to voice my concerns.I've gotten to the point where I just don't want to screw with my computers. Probably since I do systems support professionally, I have little patience for doing it on my own stuff. I just want my hardware, apps, etc to work with no intervention on my part.
What I find with free software is I'm asked to make major, major compramises, and that the people pushing it seem to think I should be happy, and even thankful, to do so just because it's free. I particularly get in to this with audio apps. I have a number of pro audio apps I use that weren't cheap. Regardless, to me they are worth the money. When I check out the free alternatives, they are woefully lacking. However they get suggested to me as though they are drop in replacements, and anything lacking well "you don't really need that."
In the end, I just don't care. Sure, the open source ideal is nice, but if it can't do what I want I am not going to be a crusader about it. I'll pays my moneys and use commercial software. The ability to go to my desktop at work or at home and just sit down and use it, no problem, with all the apps I need, is priceless to me.
His opinion of the software problem, in passing he goes like paraphrased (I already closed the tab, no cut n paste) "linux doods won't pay for software". ISVs as a corporate structure are reluctant to develop speciality software, because they would be almst forced to give it away. I don't know if that is entirely accurate, but that was the gist of it. And they dislike having to recode their stuff every few months because there is no "linux" target to shoot at like there is osx or xp.
Those are somewhat valid points. And if you are trying to persuade some well established company to just stop with the closed source and go freebie open source...well...not happening real soon. Some will, most won't.
Sheep (Ram/Ewe/Lamb) = mutton/lamb ~ Ovine? Where the hell does that come from? Sheep don't even lay eggs.
From Latin ovis (ewe).
Unrelated to ovipara from Latin oviparus, from Lat. ovum and parere
Sheesh, I've been running PS and FrameMaker in Linux for ~3 years now. Ever hear of Crossover Office? Yeah, it costs a little bit, but only the price of a couple of pizzas, easy to afford if you can afford $600+ for Photoshop, and if you're really desperate you can just use Wine, upon which Crossover is based, and which is absolutely free (just a little harder to use and configure).
I get really tired about people bemoaning the lack of MS Office and Photoshop when Office XP and Photoshop 6 and 7 have run better (i.e. *faster* and more stably) in Linux than in Windows for several years now.
Yes, if you absolutely must have PSCS, then you're going to suffer a little on the stability front for the moment, and if you're running a print shop (i.e. must have fully color-managed workflow all the way through in-house press) then you'll still need Windows. But I'm a working media professional and honestly MOST of the other pros I know a) are still using older versions of PS (hell, some of them are still using PS4/PS5 on a pre-X Mac) and/or aren't color managed for their part of the process.
I do just fine with GIMP (90% of my graphics/photo work), PS7 (other 10%), and Office XP (100% of my office work) and I do it all in Fedora Core with no usability issues whatsoever.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Bull. While that can't do anything but help, I don't buy it. I think Linux has proven that you can run an operating system on a very diverse set of hardware (that is, the same hardware Windows runs on) and be entirely stable enough to run for months without issue (Windows has gotten there, for the most part). OS X is stable not because there are only 3 pieces of hardware it runs on, but because it was well designed and well built, based on a stable and mature architecture (BSD). It's perfectly stable (from what I hear) when installed on generic Intel computers that it was never designed for.
You are quite right that limited hardware helps but you underestimate just how much it helps. If you think for a single second that a bleeding edge Linux installation running on some built-at-home-with-noname-parts pizzabox can compare to something like AIX, Sun Solaris, or an good Enterprise Linux Distro like Red Hat or Suse running on certified hardware you have got another thing coming. Any idiot can build a Linux server, stick it in a corner doing nothing worth mentinoing other than download movies and music off the internet, serve a blog page half a dozen people read and brag about uptimes. Does that mean his server can measure up to Enterprise level systems that are expected to run for months on end at very high loads without incident? The answer is a big fat NO. The most stable Linux installations (and when I say stabe I mean stable at huge loads, running highly complex and demanding enterprise level appliactions) are exactly what I just described, Linux distros engineered by professionals, not for bleeding edge features but for stability and they are usually certified to run stably on a very limited collection of hardware for which they are exahaustively tested. And this, surprise surprise, is also a major reason for the stability of OS.X on Apple hardware. Much as I like OS.X, it is a well designed solid operating system and better designed in many ways than Windows, I am also aware of the fact that if you start installing OS.X on random crapware it's reputation for stability would take a major hit. This, incidentally, is also why Apple will never release OS.X for installation on random Intel PCs as long as they care about their reputation for quality.
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
I did read TFA, and I presume you're correct. [old guy rant] Now, when I was a kid, BASIC, PASCAL, and COBOL were considered educational. Heh, heh.
Reader Rabbit says, "Syntax Error! Undeclared integer varible!" [/ogr]
Guy posts on tech support forum asking for help, while insulting Ubuntu at every turn, muttering under his breath with little jabs about it not being functional and not being what it claims to be, and insulting the people who try to help him and offer him suggestions, all while whining the whole time that nobody is willing to help him, even though people offered numerous helpful suggestions that he ignored, and walked him through the troubleshooting process for four pages of forum discussion.
Then fast forward to the end, and it turns out his harddrive was defective, so he disappears and stops posting, never saying "thanks" or "oops" or "sorry I blamed Ubuntu" or "sorry for being a jerk."
Heh. Slashdot effect at work on the front page. For those of you who diddn't get to read the article, here is the mirror of the website, courtesy of MirrorDot. http://www.mirrordot.org/stories/f34848c5ef9f30457 f6369132c5921d9/index.html
As for the entire article, its a horrid example of what people get when they browse the AP for news. It offers no insight or objectible reasons as to why you would choose one over the other. Simply someone showing what they know about OSes.
Warning: Corny karma killing post above.
Some people just want to get their work done. Sometimes the ethical hairsplitting and free vs. not-free debate gets in the way of that. Some people want software, not a cause.
Yeah, I used to think that way. When I started writing software to do some astrophysical computing (lots of numerical integrals), I just used the numerical analysis package I had always used in grad school. My thoughts were precisely, "Hey, it works, why should I change? It just takes time and effort."
Now the software's done. And it's quite good. So good that I want to distribute it, so other scientists can use it too. But ooops! The numerical analysis package I used doesn't allow me to redistribute its source code. On their website, they even encourage my colleagues to tattle-tale on each other if they ever find someone redistributing their source code. So now I find myself having to go back and change the software so that it runs on GSL instead.
So, in this case, not using free software wound up costing me some time. Last week I changed the first module over to GSL. And it was like a breath of fresh air. The GSL integrator is much better than the proprietary one, too.
I had always followed the GNU movement, but it never hit me practically until this point. The whole time I was writing the software, the restrictive license of the original numerical analysis package was hanging over the project like a cloud. Now I really can understand what free-as-in-freedom means.
So, if "work" for you ever means programming for a non-profit/scientific community, be very wary of following the lazy, non-free route. It may even save you some time, as it would have in my case.
Ubuntu is junky for Bluetooth as well.
May I ask in what way? I recently bought a DiNovo media keyboard + laser mouse with bluetooth, and it was just plug and play. Insert USB stick, instantly use keyboard, mediapad and mouse. Friend of mine is syncing phone with calendar and used Skype via bluetooth headset.
I'm sure there are plenty of other things it should do and doesn't, as I know very little about bluetooth, but it worked fine for what I tried.
Getting all mouse buttons to work properly has finally also become realtively easy thanks to the evdev driver, but there is still lots and lots of work to be done with telling X to stop meddling in the affairs of the kernel.
Spine World
When there is a comparision with the mayor distro's of Linux and other OS'es then we could see an good and (hopefully) honest article.
I have seen many operating systems in my lifetime. All of them have pro's and cons against them. My personal favorite is still RiscOS.
Just remember, all giants will fall, just wait and see.
The biggest issue I see as a daily user of both Windows and Linux is that Linux is such a bitch to install, not just initially but ever after. With all the dependencies and whatnot, it's a disaster. Package management tools go only part-way. I still can't download a zip file from some web site, click "Setup" and quickly load it onto my hard disk.
I've recently gone through a Gentoo install, and it took me 4 days before I finally got my X working with ATI binary drivers. I don't expect the average monkey to go through the hell I suffered just to load a device driver. I don't expect the average techie to put up with that level of mediocrity either. Thank god it was Gentoo, as I was able to pinpoint the problem and code a quick workaround.
Then I tried to load Mandrake, and of course the installer crashed trying to load (you guessed it) ATI drivers. Same with Red Hat.. the only other distro I could load was Debian, and well, we all have our opinions about Debian now don't we.
For Linux to be accepted as a desktop OS, we need to trim off the fat, prune or at least hide the dangerous/baroque parts, and make it click-friendly. There will always be a market for hacker distributions like Slack or Gentoo, but for the rest of the world, Lindows is a step in the right direction. It's not just a matter of distribution and tweaks, it's also a kernel issue. How about a standardized binary driver interface for those who need it ? Simplify the things common people are most likely to work with and we will eventually have a usable OS for common people.
I look forward to the day when people are using Linux and have a reliable framework for us tech support guys to work with.
-Which distro are you using ?
-Which terminal emulator are you using ?
-Are you on Ext2, Ext3, Reiser ?
-What's the device node of your root partition ?
I don't expect the casual user to know any of that crap. They know they're running Windows (even if it's Xorg), they call any black text box DOS, and they know they have a C: drive and their CD player is D:. Why can't we make Linux that obvious ?
-Billco, Fnarg.com
i think he wrote a fine comparison.. people are simply getting pissed because they're either a MS Fanboy, or a Mac Fanboy.. who fuckin cares?? they both suck complete balls in my opinion.. but i'm not telling you who to run your life, and neither is this dude..
*plays the Apogee theme song music*
There are probably more DOS boxes still operating on the planet than all the Eunuchs and Macs put together.
I'd have to concur on your observations- with one caveat...
Any time I see "brutal honesty that leaves out the free software philosophy." I typically expect to find no honesty present- if it's that brutally honest, it doesn't need to point this out.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
[ ........ authority ........ ][asrt. soup][boring.p.]
good use of E-Prime!
"Or maybe the editors just like to see the ants fight after they shake up the bottle."
Bingo.
That's why they love tacking on some ID/Creationism tagline for basically any biology article, even if its not mentioned in TFA. Granted its not needed, or relevent. But I must admit to a guilty pleasure of seeing walls of flame arise.
I don't get it.
Ahem...I am a high school computer teacher who has been using linux exclusively in all of my classes for the past 5 years!!? I teach Gimp, Blender, Scribus, Ktouch, Open Office, Celestia, Klogic, KiCad, C/C++, python, php, Quanta Plus, etc., etc., etc.!
Why in the world would I waste my time with Windows junk? (which I did for 10 years previous to using linux). I watch other teachers constantly struggling with server problems, password problems, errors of various sorts, access problems, CD problems, virus problems, CDKey problems...well, I think you get the idea.
Meanwhile, I TEACH concepts, designing with apps, logical thinking and problem solving...
You can take my linux when you pry it from my cold, lifeless hands...:-)
Ugh. Poorly researched, overhyped, unimaginative, and basically just a rehashing of things that have been said a million times.
Move along, there's nothing to see here.
Actually his take on non FOSS available "packaged" is what makes the article great and yes brutally honest.
Linux users use linux because its free and powerfull. Most dont care about the gnu vs bsd licenses. If your not a developer opensource wont help you unless someone else makes what you need. Of course I prefer the BSD license but my point is I want to learn and get work done. Not try to be political.
Second, packaged commercial software is important in the real world. How many folks do you know who refuse to buy macs because they believe MS Office is unavailable?
Yes its there but most dont want to be in a situation where the mac turns into a doorstop if software vendors leave. My father wont buy a mac because he is afraid his digital camera might not work even though its supported. I know this is all fud but its quite powerfull in the eyes of the consumers who like WindowsXP.
In the corporate office somethings are only commercial and buying closed software is the norm. In this regard unix still has more commercial software than linux and Windows has almost all ISV programs ported to windows on the server.
I can't find a good argument to use linux other than browsing the web with firefox and writing a document or 2 with openoffice. Unless of course you are a developer then its a powerfull platform.
But the author put the fact that Microsoft's development tools were non portable as a negative. Most corporate users dont care as they only use Microsoft products and want something that ties into windows and outlook, etc. You can do RAD in windows very easily with the nice tools that linux is catching up in.
http://saveie6.com/
This was by far the worst 'wrap-up' article of the 3 OSes I've ever read. 1/3 is masterbatory self praise for his years of ignoring the obvious. 1/3 is "rah rah Linux!", and 1/3 is a stream of marketing excuses, as opposed to techncial ones, for Windows to be the market leader. If you're going to talk market, talk about it across the board. Same goes with programming, application availability, ease of use, etc.
mac os x runs windows xp and linux at the same time, on a mac, why settle for anything else? you linux people continue to amaze me. I cant believe all the linux peeps think that linux will work for everyday joe. ITS NOT GONNA HAPPEN. get real. OS X is the best, it blows WIndows XP out of the water, Linux sucks just as bad as windows. There's never gonna be any major companies or drivers built for linux. Get real.
It really depends. I use both SUSE 10 and Ubuntu on two different lapops with very diferent hardware. SUSE 10 runs great on one but not the other.
As far as apps go, SUSE gets you up and running with everything you need, including mp3, flash, java out of the box - but no reliable DVD/avi playback. But all it takes is two extra clicks after initial Ubuntu install to get the same functionality with EasyUbuntu. And that will also give you reliable DVD/avi playback.
"Best" really is a subjective term.
Actually it was about as bland as you could get; certainly written to avoid line-by-line nitpicking.
It's like discussing "Love Thy Neighbor" over a few beers with a Unitarian, agnostic, and New Ager.
the crap (less good) from the good (less crappy)...
Every Joe has his blog and wants to share his personal user experience with the other Joes. Some are good, some are bad, most of them are just average and could be avoided.
I wish that one day Google will launch a search engine that sort out articles based on quality and interest rather just keywords.
Most people are using automatic (windows) gearbox because it's no brainer and easy but it's funnier to drive a car with a manual (Linux) gearbox.
Also you can think about Windows as a soap TV for couch potatoes where Linux is more a Nouvelle Vague movie that will require you to use your brain.
Ubuntu is based on Debian. Why not Debian is not great? Everybody else is offering Firefox, OpenOffice, etc? How does Ubuntu different from others? Is that just the packages more recent?
What defenses Ubuntu deployed to stop virus, worm, Phishing/Pharming, remote hacking/hijacking attacks, etc. If you are looking forward to something new than package versions, its worth have a look at the Tomahawk Desktop, the multimedia Linux OS.
I would not call it brutal honesty but it is very interesting:i nux.shtml
http://www.softpanorama.org/Articles/solaris_vs_l
hmmmm, doubt it.
> Knob.
Cunt.
whut? I mean, I think I understand what he's saying there, reading between the lines, he's talking about the operating system architecture, not "programming" which might refer to the software development environment. Or something. Dunno. But I think that sentence captures the rather vague, uselessness of the article, i.e. the signal to noise ratio was poor.
How did this get posted to Slashdot? Not to be condescending, but this stuff is aimed at the neophyte, not regular Slashdotters. But then again, if it was as confusing as this, I'd feel sorry for the neophyte trying to gain some useful peice of wisdom from the article. Because of the upgrade cycle, Linux is at a disadvantage? Well gee, I guess he's never had to install any Service Packs.
Your sig is missing a http:/// .. and hmm, what does it do exactly, whatever it is it doesn't seem to be working for me.
What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
He starts off decently, although he presents his "vast amazing incredible" experience to a fault. Having experience, also, doesn't directly translate to objectivity, as we see with this note on Ubuntu: "It fits mid-level desktop users and works for about 80 to 90% of enterprise users." I wonder what he thinks a "mid-level desktop user" is, or how many enterprise users he spoke with to determine that 80-90% of them (a massive percentage!) would agree that it "works" for them. An explanation of assumptions and evidence for claims would be part of any decent analysis. There isn't a single mention of his methodology, the factors considered by his analysis, nor any regularity of presentation. Either he honestly doesn't know what an objective analysis is or he's just trying to get published (on Slashdot, no less)...
Ever notice how fast Windows runs? Neither do I - get Mac OS
Let's not kid ourselves, this is not some kind of attempt at neutrality (despite how the article's description might lead you to believe that). It's about a different set of values without any of the interesting debate that even tries to justify those values.
"[L]eav[ing] out the free software philosophy" just means sanctioning proprietary software. Arguing the popular doesn't mean arguing from neutrality, it means taking the well-worn path of discussing something that is beyond debate for most people because they're ignorant of an alternative and the rationale behind that alternative.
Most people have not been taught to value software freedom, hence they don't understand it. In "leaving out the free software philosophy" one skips past all of the interesting arguments (if free software is interesting, and why or why not) to something that has been done before: compare title counts and discover that Microsoft Windows has the most programs available for it that people are aware of, which itself is a biased count favoring what is widely advertised.
Digital Citizen
One of Sun's goals for Java was to have a write once, run anywhere environment. MS wanted to embrace and extend Java so that it would be very easy to write a Java program that ran only on Windows. The project files that VC spits out are "an abomination in the eyes of the Lord".
You download it from the ATO in Australia.
The E-Tax handles the most common things for you. Easy.
http://www.ato.gov.au/individuals
If that's important to you move to the netherlands. Our government gives us a linux binary to fill in our taxes.
How many times do I have to say that with true cross-platform development, the used system doesn't matter anymore these days. Sure enough if you stick in a Windows-Only environment or else, you have to care for all the little differences between the systems. But if you develop as I've outlined in wyoGuide (http://wyoguide.sf.net/) you can code on any platform as if it were the only existing platform while you code will most likely run unchanged on any platform. To say it once more:
"It doesn't matter which system you use for development".
O. Wyss
See http://wyoguide.sf.net/papers/Cross-platform.html
Solaris, HP/UX and AIX are still way ahead in terms of deployment, just because it's got a rabid bunch of followers doesn't make it "big".
Interestingly enough, I run all three off the same machine...
I am scientifically inaccurate.
I also recall this recent thread where he keeps making comments like this: "I'm also an engineer. A real engineer, not a "software engineer".".
In that thread he generally behaves abusively and continually attacks 'software "engineers"' (always in quotes) for not building in some kind of fallback when the bootloader fails. In spite of his abrasive insults, several people anyway patiently post calm, detailed responses explaining why his suggestion is literally impossible due to the actual design of PC hardware ('there is nothing to fall back to'), yet he continually ignores these responses and repeats his claim that it's all just bad design on the part of the programmers that wrote the bootloader code, all the while taking sideshots at software "engineers".
Talking desktop for a minute:
Apart from a few very very good high volume apps like Firefox, I'd be hard put to name an OSS product that I use daily, weekly or even monthly. And I am extremely enthousiastic about it all. But when it comes to ease of installation and ease of use there is not very much that is appealing out there. I keep versions of the Gimp, office apps, editors and the like around just for the hell of it, but apart from checking the apps out, I don't use them. Not to do any amount of real work.
Which doesn't mean it's bad, it just means that the people working on it aren't in it to make it work for the maximum amount of people. Which isn't a bad thing!!!!! But which does come in the way of "we'll conquer the world with our OSS".
While I think this review isn't worth the pixels it was written on, you can't deny most people can't be bothered with Linux for good reasons. And those who can will for the most part have very good reasons for doing so, but aren't mainstream.
Now, the same thing doesn't apply for most server side applications. I'm blown away by what is out there for free, under various licenses. It's incredible. These apps aren't exactly written for the average user, but most are written with the average webmaster or sys admin in mind. And it is mind blowing. Things we'd try and envision ten years ago for xxx$ paying clients are just up for grabs and work as advertised, are maintained and have a huge community of developers if you want to customize.
I've done a redesign (and some recoding) of SMF and am even allowed under its license to sell the result (as installation service). The people at Lewis software and most of the community are really encouraging. I've done all the work with proprietary software though, couldn't really have done it otherwise. Not in any economical way. The software may be free, my time isn't. I am reasonably sure there are not more than ten people around who could have done what I did on the graphics in the same amount of time with the Gimp, for instance. And these ten would probably run circles around me in just about every app, including pencil and paper.
It's hard to read bad things about your favorite OS, and this guy imo proves you can't be objective about that, he isn't by a long shot. But I just can't see the average desktop user switch to Ubunto or any other distro as things are now today.
I can see more OSS projects become hugely mainstream though. And hopefully that will give raise to an OSS desktop that is aimed from start to finish to a wide audience of average users.
I think, therefore I am...I think.
Story is a lame bullcrap and sounds the same as efforts of random idiots to install Windoze on Macs. I understand that Windows is on its place, but compare OSX with Linux?.. OSX can run everything what Linux runs, but it never happens vice versa.
So where Solaris is in that silly review? Maybe Solaris even more sucks, because nor Windoze, neither Linux is running Tokyo City Bank (actually, we did some efforts to run RedHat, but it simply crashes so often, asking fsck the FS randomly)?
*sigh*
Tired to reading such a moronic bullshit: "My $Foo is better your $Bar". All toys on their place! :-(
As a long time Windows power user and a user of various Linux distros for the last four years (Suse and Red Hat to start off with then Ubuntu for the last two) I have one thing to say about the Linux/Windows debate.
The main thing that Ubuntu lacks is a decent file manager. Nautilus is simply hopeless. It's 2006 and you *STILL* cannot recursively set permissions. It *STILL* copies files off a CD/DVD and doesn't set the users write flag.
Honestly after using Konqueror or Windows Explorer using Nautilus is simply a royal pain in the arse. It feels like I've gone back ten uears in time to something off the Amiga. You're forced to use a mouse and Spatial mode is simply a poor joke. It's an idea whose time came and went in the 80s with the Atarti and the Amiga. It sucked then and it simply stinks now.
No this isn't *supposed* to be a troll. The lack of a good file manager is the number one reason I still use Windows as my primary day to day OS. I've even shared my Ubuntu home directory via Samba so I can use Windows Explorer to manage my files because I simply find file management in Nautilus to be too painful to contemplate.
Seeing that GNOMEs goal seems to be to simplify the desktop to the point of unusability I don't ever see things getting any better. click. click. click. drool. drool. drool.
Why not just use Konqueror on the Ubuntu desktop? Because it doesn't display properly under GNOME and it looks *ugly*. Maybe this is down to the fact that I kan't konfigure it korrektly. More "newb lamer can't even RTFM" points for me right?
Why not use KDE desktop then? Man that thing is a kluttered mess. Why install one mail client when you can install 3,000? Why give something a meaningfiul name when you can give it a kool KDE one? The underlying KDE technology is fantastic (KIO slaves are a splendid, splendid thing) but the desktop experience is just poor.
So here I am. I would love to use Linux as my primary desktop OS but sadly it's just not up to the job. At home I run a splendid Linux server, two windows desktops (98 & 2000) and a Linux desktop. All I can say is that with Linux the underlying technology is wonderful and far in advance of Windows, configuring the Linux machines is also much easier thanks to the lovely, well documented, understandable plain text config files in a logically laid out directory structure. But quite frankly the desktop experience sucks.
Standing by for -1 troll modification in 3, 2, 1.
I'm an old hand *nix pro who has installed various distos over the years. I decided to give Ubuntu a whirl at home.
I installed it on a middle spec laptop and it ran ok. Still took me an hour to get wifi working and I still haven't got it to play a DVD.
I also installed it dual bootable with XP on my top-of-the-range desktop with the intention of doing some development. The install is slick with a fixed wire connection.
But in use, first subjective impressions - slow. Applications take longer to start and are less responsive than on XP. And the fonts are ugly. There's a desktop preference to use anti-aliasing but most apps seem to ignore this.
To be honest, if this is the best distro around then Linux is still not ready for the for the desktop end user.
On the contrary, not recognizing that you are a special case and that the vast majority of people who use "tax software" on their computers are not CPAs is short sighted.
FYI, everyone here in Brasil who earns more than ~US$ 20,000.00 a year is obligated to turn his/her taxes in via a tax software and every company is also obligated to turn its taxes via a tax software. Luckily for me, there are two versions of said software: a Windows version developed in Delphi and using Paradox tables -- which works perfectly, flawlessly under wine -- and a multiplatform one, that runs under any j2re1.4+. I use the latter b/c its interface is better than the former.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
I've been totally stumped about this for years. I can only imagine that there would be an order of magnitude increase in efficiency and compliance if they did this.
Call me conspiratorial, but I think the only reason they don't do this is that there's an entire industry built up around filing taxes that would more or less be eliminated by this. Which is fine by me -- I don't think the government should prop up businesses by making the business of government overcomplicated.
It's diffucult to find hard facts, but it looks like Codewarrior is not going to be developed any further for the intel Macs (i.e. for the Mac tout cour). The last version is 10.
So you are stuck with the free Apple development tools. Should you wish to spend money as a developer, you can always join the Apple Developer Connection as a Select or Premier member.