Slashdot Mirror
Open Source is 'Not Reliable or Dependable'
Exter-C writes "News.com is reporting that Jonathan Murray, the vice president and chief technology officer of Microsoft Europe has made claims that 'some people want to use community-based software, and they get value out of sharing with other people in the community. Other people want the reliability and the dependability that comes from a commercial software model.'"
I don't think it's any more reliable or dependable than any other development paradigm. The difference is that instead of paying somebody for unreliable and undependable software, I can get it for free from open source. Firefox crashes more often, on every environment on which I run it (4 different OS's) than any other application I have. The difference is, I didn't have to pay for it.
"I have never won a debate with an ignorant person." -Ali ibn Abi Talib
...I mean, why are they so freaked out by Google? Since their entire infrastructure is based around software that isn't reliable or dependable, they can't possibly grow to any size.
~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
Hearing this out of MS reminds me of the quote: "We're seeing crazy uptime numbers now, like three months, six months. I fully expect we'll see a year of uptime when Windows Server 2003 is finished," said Jeff Stucky*. So uptimes, for MS's latest and greatest, that are far short of what *nix administrators experience, are a demonstration of MS's commercial stability? Does the other side of the pond experience MS in a different way?
That said, there are plenty of 3rd party applications that run well and are commercial. It's just Windows itself that doesn't run well. Some development groups are more focused on quality than others on both sides of the fence. I run a large number of commercial applications on Windows that run very well. I couldn't ask for more reliability or dependability. I could of Windows and that is the point.
*http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/04/25/ballmer _ushers_in_windows/
So to make an analogy, I should prefer buildings that are built that allow no inspections while being built or even after construction is completed, to buildings that are free to be inspected. Which would you trust to live in?
Letter To Iran
That includes MS, RedHat, and OpenBSD.
Just a few questions.
First about "I tried to install CVS or subversion". So, which one was it?
Second, you seem to value speed on something you do once - installation and setup - over the steady-state use of the source control tool - keeping your data integrity intact.
For Subversion, the explorer client is TortoiseSVN.
I've used Source Safe, Clear Case, Starteam, CVS and Subversion, RCCS, and a few others I've forgotten. By far, Subversion has been the best. Starteam was close, but it required a Microsoft setup back when I used it.
I do not agree that Subversion is difficult to set up.
You are checking your backups, aren't you?
"I really hate the slashdotters that have this logic "ClosedSource -> Malware" or "ClosedSource->Bad", there are tons of applications that are closed source and DO NOT have any kind of crapware on them, a lot of them are even FREE."
You bring up a very interesting point I have come to realize lately. When fixing my brothers laptop (and by virtue of that act, my parents computers as well) an interesting situation came up. I'll try to keep this to the bare minimum so as not to stray to diatribe length.
My brothers laptop needed to be reformatted due to the nature of virus and trojans he had accumlated while away at college. Afterwards he needed to prepare a power point presentation for one of his last assignments. I had a copy of Microsoft Office but could not force myself "enable him" with what would have ended up a pirated version. The relevance of this is I directed him to OpenOffice.org and gave the necessary directions needed to download, install, and finish his assignment...Without requiring him to run to the local software store to purchase missing components of MS Office from his fresh install of Windows XP. Ultimately my advice was taken and followed and all ended up well but not without having to change the mentality of not only my brother buy my parents as well.
Free = virus, spyware, adware, trojans, worms, spamware, etc. At least so far as Microsoft Windows end users think. Hell, if it is legit then it's nagware or a stripped down barely functional trial version.
Microsoft with all of the security issues seem to have received a bit of luck with regards to F/OSS. People that live in a "Windows world" are typically scared off from any offerings that F/OSS can provide because it's associated with the majority of crapware that thrives in a "Windows world". (Whether it be closed or open source; not playing favorites) Essentially keeping the attitude, "If it didn't come from Microsoft then it will not be installed."
I gave a specific example of my immediate family but I see this pattern with friends and co-workers too. It didn't occur to me though until my family argued with me aggressively that OpenOffice would "tear their computers up again" if they installed it.
You may be VERY surprised to find out what the average non-tech end user thinks of "free" in reference to "free software" if you listen to them...It hurst both open and closed source software more than you may realize.
BSD is designed. Linux is grown. C++ libs
You recommend abolishing IE, but what other commercial web browser is there for Windows? I guess there is Opera, though I don't think it has much mind-share...
Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
My cousin and my aunt bought the very same computer last year. On my aunt's box I installed Linux, on my Cousin I installed Windows XP (cause she needed to use a specific program for work that only runs on Windows). On my cousin's computer, besides the Windows Firewall, I installed ZoneAlarm, and Norton Antivirus. I installed Firefox as the default browser (got rid of any links to IE or Outlook Express), I make her login as a user with limited privileges (only I have root access as she's going to call me anyways to debug and I don't want her going ahead installing stuff... then coming to me crying. They've both had the computer for a year. My aunt's computer works like a charm still (she's been doing some intense browsing of the internet, an clicking happily). I have to go do a full reinstall to my cousin's computer cause it's just not working right anymore... programs look like they're corrupted and the like. So no, XP is still not as reliable.