Slashdot Mirror
Study Finds Linux 'Ready For Prime-time'
An anonymous reader tipped us to a Techworld article proclaiming Linux as the next big thing ... again. A study of IT directors, VPs and CIOs has concluded that within five years the open-source OS will be running more than half of all important business applications. From the article: "In short, open source, especially Linux, is being legitimized by the major enterprise vendors, and user executives are more than happy to believe them ... Microsoft's thawing toward Linux is now easier to understand when faced with such data - even as Windows continues to grow as the other main server platform of choice."
Only there to promote Microsoft/Novell and Oracle. It's making a campaign in favour of our enemies disguised as a positive article.
"most large vendors remain tied to legacy cash-cow operating systems"
I wonder who they mean by cash-cow OS?
Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
Linux is ready for prime time when a user doesn't need an admin to use a preloaded computer. That's still nowhere in sight, and we're not getting closer either: Many distributions remove codecs and proprietary drivers, making a useful system even less available to mere users.
Once again, I have to ask, how well does it integrate with SharePoint?
SharePoint is going to me Microsoft's collaboration tool of choice and not only does Linux not play with it, it doesn't have a competing offering.
Heck, this is going to affect OS X as well.
(And I'm not saying SharePoint is the answer, but a lot of CIO's seem to think so. For whatever that's worth.)
The opposite of progress is congress
Oh thank God for that! I was about to ditch Linux after 10 years of being utterly Microsoft free.
But with the blessing of these well informed and important pundits I feel the future is brighter
already!
There's something slightly sad and laughable about people who switch their minds once something is
so bloody obvious it can't be ignored any longer. Next we'll have Bush saying the war in Iraq is lost
and it was a bad idea in the first place - and everyone will applaud him for his incisive wisdom.
Why are those with the most influence always the last to know what is really going on in this world?
This isn't about Linux being ready for Joe Users Desktop or not, this is about Linux being used to run mission-critical businiess applications in the enterprise.
But who needs to even glance at the article if all one wants is to start a nice little flameware, he?
Linux gets a pool of lawyers and marketers.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
You are wrong! Linux is the best!
There never will be a "year of Linux", in the same way that there was no "year of Windows". It takes time, and it happens slowly. For me, 2006 meant the first time that I installed Linux on a laptop, and it was productive for me. Next year, some more people will discover it.
But in the very long term, I believe it's unstoppable.
that studies have found Linux ready for prime-time for 5 years now... *yawn*
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
Wow, that didn't take long!
So like,it will have only taken 20 years?!?!?!?!? -- SHOCKING.
The way this article is worded, it is obvious they are talking about servers. It will barely make a dent in MS's overall installed base. It might make a meaningful increase in Linux's total installed base, but I doubt it.
Only when the Linux developers and community take the desktop seriously and start to make Linux more accessable to Joe Average Luser will Linux gain an appreciable market share.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
I predict 2007 will be big for open source hardware.
Maybe in a paralell universe where everyone compiles kernels for breakfast and writes their own drivers.
Its amazing.. IT directors, CIO's and such consider Linux to be ready for the big boom. Just at the time where you keep hearing more and more "techies" complaining about certain development cycles within Linux. I for one am very sceptical about the current development cycles where new code makes it into the same kernel tree which is also deemed stable. Yes, I know the code is being tested but hardly as intensive as it used to be.
:)
No, this isn't one of those "back in the old days everything was better" rants. The only thing I'm saying is that while this current development model maybe good for Linux it simply isn't good at all when looking at this from an admins point of view. What about kernel modules which basicly stop working after you upgraded the kernel? In some cases you might not have a choice, and it can become awfully tedious if you first need to check if your drivers will keep working after the upgrade. That only creates overhead but most of all: impacts on dependability. Which is exactly the thing you'd need when dealing with enterprise based environments, at least from where I'm standing. Don't get me wrong here: I'm not dissing Linux, but I do highly question the phrase that it would be ready for enterprise based computing.
"Recent Linux deals and announcements by Oracle and Microsoft have only reinforced the 'open source is enterprise-grade' message that IBM, Unisys and others have been preaching for years," Guptill and McNee said.
So just because some big companies make a few deals wich involves the OS immediatly makes it perfect for enterprise usage? Well, thats just the kind of ignorance I'd expect from IT directors and CIO's and the likes. No offense to the people who do know what they're talking about, but it just happens too many times where a director picks up a story and immediatly thinks he's seen the holy grail. Naturally the whole company should then "benefit" from this "amazing discovery". Little does he know that his discovery is already old news among the people who really matter in these kinds of situations.
So to be honost I don't really consider the importance of this article to be very high. These are the kind of people which I'd expect to write off how everyone should be switching his Windows desktop to Vista A.S.A.P. because of the extreme benefits it has to offer. Lets sleep on
Yea, it blows... the users away from Microsoft! =)
If they mean servers - maybe... But desktops? No.
No, wait, maybe the next five years will be THE YEARS OF LINUX DESKTOPZ?!
In my experience, 5 years is too far away to make for a worthwhile prediction. If it is that far away, we are just guessing. Far too much can happen in that time (economic downturn, anyone?)
Further, my last employer was a Windows shop. The infrastructure was designed around proprietary MS security and authentication. They don't want linux. They don't care what it runs or what it can do. If you don't have an MCSE, you aren't qualified to work there (>1600 IT employees for a company of ~9000). We made several server purchases from Dell that would have been better served by Sun (per application specs). That never happened and never will. Why having linux as an option will make a difference I have no idea.
The worst thing is that this is the norm in my experience. I use a Mac and have been called a zealot (though I use Win2k and Solaris as well) but those who use nothing other than Windows are just plain IT people. The true zealots are the Windows only users and they exist and are in control of the IT departments.
Surveys that ask if you would be willing to use something have little validity. Nearly everyone is willing to try something on a survey but in real life, the story is very different.
The Novell/Microsoft deal is not Microsoft "thawing toward Linux", it is Microsoft attempting to exploit the patent system to spread their FUD in new ways because all other efforts have been ineffective. It is becoming tiresome to see this lie perpetuated. I know the Novell/Microsoft press release claimed it was all about interoperability between Windows and Linux but that was just a red herring for those not familiar with Microsoft's business history, and it sounds a lot better to Novell's customers than "Novell management cashes out and does long-term harm to the company in exchange for a short term financial benefit".
Here is a simple question for anyone who believes the interoperability cover story, if Microsoft actually cared about interoperability why would they be paying Novell, or anyone else for that matter, hundreds of millions of dollars? Microsoft is the only organization in the world that has access to both complete Microsoft source code and Linux source code, if they wanted interoperability they would be in a better position than anyone else. Or, without spending a dime, they could simply release the specs which already exist internally for any number of proprietary non-standard pieces of software such as active directory protocols, smb/cifs protocols, exchange server, ntfs specs, wmv, etc etc. Rather than force everyone to reverse-engineer everything.
I don't doubt that Linux will experience significant growth over the next few years, but this particular article is just more phb-oriented magazine filler.
...trust studies that weren't found with M$ dollars... The best studies...
- The usability needs serious attention, especially wrt giving all GUI apps a consistency target, not just those approved by a distro. There are still far too many X apps using ludicrously outdated interfaces.
- Installation defaults need to be rationalised so that the UI does The Right Thing -- right now there's still far too much post-installation configuration needed.
- Someone still needs to kick the third-party hardware vendors' butts into releasing their APIs. They currently make enough money from licensing to MS and OEMs not to need to release their specs to the OSS world, so they hide behind their proprietary API instead of making better hardware and selling it to a wider market.
- There's a software equivalent in the whole sublayer of file-format problems which will take a while to solve. The use of XML by both OOo and Word helps, but we don't want or need two office document file formats. Closed-source vendors are slowly (very slowly) beginning to realise that they need to open their file formats. This means they will no longer be able to hide behind proprietary formats and disregard the flaws in their executable code, but instead they will have to compete on a level playing surface and actually write a better program. This terrifies Marketing out of their wits, who have been accustomed to milking the clientele instead of doing the job properly.
But none of this will come to be unless there is agreement between developers that widespread use of Linux is what we all want. At the moment, a large number of developers still see *nix as the gurus' system, and resist all attempts to make it easy enough for Jill and Joe Office to use. Fortunately this number seems to be decreasing, but I think five years is optimistic.I bet the series runs longer than Battlestar Galactica Redux.
I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
SharePoint is going to me Microsoft's collaboration tool of choice and not only does Linux not play with it, it doesn't have a competing offering.
Do you mean there's no open source competitive offering? Because there are products like Stoneware. That used to run on Linux, haven't checked up on it in a couple years but it offers web portal features, single sign-on, application framing. I'm not sure what else you'd want a competing product to do.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Put that in your pipe and smoke it, because that ain't ever gonna happen in real life.
It has been ready for the prime time for years, it is the work force that isn't ready. There's many IT support staff who can't administer Unix systems and therefore they can't administer Linux.
This is OT, but since I don't know where else to put it: Why do I have to load 500kb of css and js before the page even starts displaying? I know there was some article about pages loading for more than 4 seconds lose user interesst, well this page loads way longer (I visit the links in the RSS feed: http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/12/31/ 0430229&from=rss 15 seconds on my 7Mb connection).
Another funny thing is that the js consist mostly of comments...
Does that mean installing/uninstalling software under linux is now standardized, logical and quick, even for people who never used it before? Have you ever watched a new linux user try to install all their software onto a linux box without any help? Linux will not get any mainstream adoption until THAT need is addressed, and that's a promise.
:)
Back to the original claim. Does mainstream adoption mean CompUSA will begin stocking Linux? I tried to get a Linux installation CD's from comp USA in emeryville CA, and they didnt even carry it in stock.
If you want the OS to be adopted it seems that making it visible, accessible, usable and available are the first steps.
This is my experience with starting as a Linux user, 5 years ago: To install or uninstall software mainly seemed like a collosal task. With earlier versions I had to manually mount the friggin hard drive, AND couldn't do jack with the OS. RH 7.0 shipped with sun RPC open to the world, and it got hacked within 2 days (by the ramen worm). "hackers LOOOVE noodles!" The bottom line is, my Red Hat Linux 7.0/7.1 CD's came with a manual that told how to install and how to uninstall, and that's all I ever did, since the rest of it just seemed like a big hassle and windows was the OS that I could rely on, install things in, and that worked without getting a headache looking for information on the web.
Anyhow, perhaps I should just shut my mouth, and I wonder if I'll get mocked just for admitting that I had trouble using linux, but the linux of 5 years ago was attrocious. If you disagree with that, just try INSTALLING an application in RH 7.0. (i know, it's very old OS, but I'm saying unless getting RPM's to go to the right place and install the right way has gotten any simpler than needing a pc6 decoder, gunzip, tar, untar, rpm, the other equiv of rpm (whose name i don't recall at the moment), and whatever else is involved. If you're a veteran linux user then ask a user from another OS to install software while you watch them. Oh yea, cross your arms and provide no help to them if you really want to see the learning curve in action. Then be nice and help.
It would (i believe) quickly become evident how Linux still needs to be made more user friendly, and that all the nonstandardized behavior for basic OS functions (like installing software) is not all that helpful to the users you wish would get onto your bandwagon.
Again, I probably should just have kept my mouth shut about Linux, but those are the reasons I put Mandrake 6.x, RH 7.0,7.1 and 7.2, suse x.x into a box and put the box under my bed and hardly bothered with them for the last 5 years. I use the operating system to get things done, and I don't want to wrestle with it, I want it to do things intuitively.
Calling rpm with half a dosen switches (after reading a manual for 3 hours) just to get it
working is not an example of inuitive installation.
Long story short, I just wanted to get a basic functional web server together, and I said to myself: "well, they just can't say enough good things about linux, so I'll use it." And guess what. I just told you what.
OK, for those of you who began using linux within the past year or two, I guess I must ask: Has the experience of new linux users improved at all, since that time? Do YOU people see it catching on, or is it still more or less the same bag of obstacles for you as it was for me 5-6 years ago?
"Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." -Jesus Christ The Lord's Prayer
Why would you mod someone insightful for perpetuating a stereotype? You wouldn't do the same if it was Linux?
You guys always do this; you talk about "Linux" but you are really talking about either the X Windows System or you're talking about the thousands of various software tools (such as all the GNU software) in the various distributions or you're talking about the various applications software packages that run on Linux and X, most of which also run on, for example, BSD and X.
Everybody here at Slashdot knows this already but, still, and probably forever, most people won't know this. So, is this OK? I don't think so. Linux is the heart but X is the blood, lungs, bones, muscle and skin. Let's get over being shy or ignorant about the importance of X, its uniqueness as a network display protocol, the renaissance in X development, the activity in X related projects like cairo, SVG, all things GL (OpenGL,XGL, AIXGL), Desktop environments based on X, etc..
Let's get over being shy about the importance of the UNIX component model and the valuable tool extensions that make this approach so much more useful than the monolithic approaches of other operating environments, such as rsync, scripting, et al.. And lastly, let's start talking about the absolute need for network computing. That's the computing paradigm of the present and the future. Let's talk about how so much of Linux, X, rsync (for example) and the applications are already so well suited for making use of and advancing that approach to software. Network computing is replacing the desktop as the next 'big thing', so let's start talking about that, why don't we? The game console manufacturers have recognized and accepted this, so why don't we accept that this is also true for applications?
So, yeah, I don't have any particular axe to grind against Microsoft employees (at least those whose names are not "Gates" or "Ballmer" at any rate. But that doesn't mean the I have to approve of MS policy, its corporate culture, and it most certainly doesn't require me to maintain a neutral attitude towards the corporation.
Given their hostility towards a social movement I hold dear, that would be silly, really.
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
There's many IT support staff who can't administer Unix systems and therefore they can't administer Linux.
The problem is, they can't really administer MS-Windows boxes, either.
A basic understanding of computers would give any decent admin the ability to administer a Unix system (whether it's Linux, *BSD, OpenSolaris, or any of 'em). They might have to spend a week or two installing and learning their way around the system, and to grok the Unix Way, but they could do it.
Too many MS-Windows admins learn by rote, and not by concept. Many can set up DHCP, for instance, but not have a clue what DHCP really does, other than hand out IP addresses.
Oh, well. The same is true of some Linux people I know-- they couldn't handle an MS-Windows system, because they lack fundamentals.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
2007 will be the year linux makes the definitive leap to the desktop! Just like in 2006, 2005, 2004, ...
Windows has them, Linux doesn't. You don't have a computer just to run the OS. If a computer won't run the apps and hardware that you need to run, then it's useless, no matter how good the OS may be.
Linux developers don't get this, and probably never will. Linux developers think we need hundreds of different Linux distros, instead of one distro that actually runs the hw/sw that the people demand.
OTOH, if I'd had a million dollars for everytime it became true, I'd be living under a bridge feasting out of the bins behind the restaurant.
Conor "You're not married,you haven't got a girlfriend and you've never seen Star Trek? Good Lord!" - Patrick Stewart
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogcow
"Does that mean installing/uninstalling software under linux is now standardized, logical and quick, even for people who never used it before? Have you ever watched a new linux user try to install all their software onto a linux box without any help? Linux will not get any mainstream adoption until THAT need is addressed, and that's a promise"
.. Calling rpm with half a dosen switches (after reading a manual for 3 hours)"
Have you ever watched a new user installing Windows from scratch. If installing Windows is such a breeze then why are call centers such a growth industry. Since most of the standard apps come preistalled I doubt the new user would even have to install. For instance Linspire comes out of the box with Internet Suite, Email, Internet, instant messaging, Office Suite, Instant Messaging, Digital Music, Digital Photos, Wireless Capability, Plug and Play, Web Publishing. If that's not enough then there is an online update service. Just click and install. Off the top of my head SuSE, Mandrake, Debian all come with graphical installers. As do most of the rest I assume.
"but those are the reasons I put Mandrake 6.x, RH 7.0,7.1 and 7.2, suse x.x into a box and put the box under my bed and hardly bothered with them for the last 5 years"
Are you one of these Linux geeks who still live with their parents?
"I use the operating system to get things done, and I don't want to wrestle with it, I want it to do things intuitively"
You will be pleased to know that Redhat now comes with a graphical installer. As for getting things done, I put people down in front of a SuSE KDE/desktop and do know what, they can't tell the difference.
"unless getting RPM's to go to the right place and install the right way has gotten any simpler
I don't understand how you have to tell the RPM where to install. What took three hours to type RPM -Uvh.
"Long story short, I just wanted to get a basic functional web server together"
I also don't understand how you equate installing a web server with what the new user would ever want to do.
--
"do it to them before they do it to us", Sergeant Stan Jablonski
was I wonder. (Score:2), Troll
davecb5620@gmail.com
One of the primary reasons that there aren't any "replacements" in the linux world (and limited compatibility with apps that play well with Microsoft's apps) all boils down to one thing: document formats. And who do we have to blame for that? The linux crowd who is constantly having to invest ungodly amounts of time reverse-engineering so that an alternative *might* work. Proprietary document formats ought to be illegal- no company should be able to exercise control over *my* data.
I misworded something so that my intent comes across the opposite from what was intended:
And who do we have to blame for that? The linux crowd who is constantly having to invest ungodly amounts of time reverse-engineering so that an alternative *might* work.
This should read:
And who do we have to blame for that? The linux crowd who is constantly having to invest ungodly amounts of time reverse-engineering so that an alternative *might* work, or the company making all this extra effort necessary because of the difficulty associated with proprietary document formats?
So you agree then ... Linux is ready for prime time. I have many clients who are just normal Joe Users. I install and configure everything and then give them a five minute tutorial. They all have free support. I call from time to time to make sure everything is OK, since nobody calls me. Every one of them tells me everything is working great, and they couldn't be happier that they got rid of M$ garbage.
We're trying to incorporate more Linux systems in our office, but as an accounting firm, almost everything is Windows only. From Quickbooks to the ProSystemFX suites of Engagement and Tax, we're pretty well stuck on Windows for the most part.
:) I think it's going to be good. My younger took about 3 minutes to look around, and the next thing I knew, she had changed her background and theming - I was really impressed. AAAAAaaanyway, back to the discussion.
That said, we've been working with Citrix on an experimental basis in order to add better remote functionality to our staff - and Linux boxes might wind up being the way to go on the client end. I know I've been using Ubuntu on my laptop exclusively for a year now, and a lot of our users have been coming up to me and asking what the deal is with the cube and whatnot (Beryl - check it out if you haven't yet, very very cool - http://www.beryl-project.org/), and I just use remote desktop to manage servers and once in a while run Windows apps if I really need to.
Also, and this is a total self-serving link, I just wrote about giving my kids Linux laptops. http://endcycle.blogspot.com/ - SO FAR, they love Edubuntu. We'll see how long that lasts, though.
--endcycle--
Time to shut the Window and open the door to The march of the Penguin!!!!!!!
Where would we be without our regular Linux "is ready" article? It feels like it's been reported as being "ready" every month for the last 10 years...
And who do we have to blame for that?
You don't get it, do you? It doesn't matter who's to blame for that. The end user doesn't make decisions based on ideology. Almost nobody is going to forgive a product's deficiencies because it's not the manufacturer's fault - they'll just use another product.
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
For purposes of this post, I am going to ignore the implications of MS FUD in TFA, and specifically address whether or not (IMHO) Linux is ready for the desktop. Additionally, let me preface this by saying that I have used Linux as my sole desktop for PCs since 1994, but roughly two years ago switched to OS X on a Powerbook G4.
I recently tried to install Linux (specifically Ubuntu) on my Powerbook. To be fair, the live CD worked flawlessly and I was really impressed. Additionally, AirPort Extreme drivers are not working for PPC Linux, BUT I do not hold any distribution at fault for that because there are legal issues related to the open source version of the driver.
The installation went smoothly until I got to the Yaboot install - which failed. After considerable poking around, I read that there is a new bug in Yaboot when dealing with ATA drives. After several hours of manually editing the conf file - I finally figured out a manual workaround that solved the problem. However, I was frusturated by the whole process. Some time ago, I tried Yellow Dog (4.1, i think) - which installed flawlessly using Yaboot. This tells me that the new ATA bug was introduced recently. In the time since I first tried YD to the time I tried Ubuntu - I expected progress - not regression. While someone with time and experience can work through these problems, how can anyone expect Joe-six-pack to be impressed and not pissed when he tries it? One of the major Mac rags just ran an article about multi-desktop Macs and included mention of Linux. Each time someone with a Powerbook (or some other Mac with an ATA drive) attempts to install Ubuntu (or even openSuse for that matter), they will run across such bug and be soured.
The community as a whole needs a better way to deal with (read prevent) issues like the one I just encountered. While I understand how and why said bug occured, and how to work around it, someone trying to install Linux for the first time will run across it, get pissed, tell their friends Linux sucks, and get on with their lives. I firmly know that Linux has a better (read more stable) kernel than MS, and that all of the components necessary for Linux to be a prime candidate for the desktop are in place. Additionally, I believe that open-source is a better route. BUT, until the community gets its shit together and makes a distribution that works - Linux on the desktop will continue to be an uphill battle.
Who cares *why*? That's all just excuse-making. I don't care *why* Ubuntu can't play MP3 files, the point is that it can't-- and because of that I'm moving to something else. That's all there is to it.
The point of software development is to hide complexity from the user. I mean, if you let every software developer with an excuse to go home, then we'd still be punching machine-code on paper tape.
Besides, an Exchange replacement has only one cross-platform file format you're concerned with: "email." And, last I checked, a huge number of applications, both commercial and open source, seem to be just fine at passing email to each other.
Comment of the year
Hey, idjit, try using a little common sense before posting.
The Zune, and similar recent players, use this wonderful DRM-related bullshit called MTP. Libmtp is a Sourceforge project writing libraries to let Linux do this, and most MTP players are usable through it. However, the Zune implemented a lot of new APIs and calls that didn't exist before. Give them some time to reverse engineer it.
Yo.
What? You mean Linux works? On computers?
Excuse me while I go write a news bulletin.
What's happened here is that MS "legitimized" Linux in the minds MS-sycophants and now they all want to jump on the bandwagon.
All Linux gurus out there get ready to capitalize (MS is certainly going to try).
Also, remember all your buddies who you finally got their Windows PCs working to where you can get a little peace? Get ready for another round of "why can't I (___fill in the blank___)"? when they switch to Linux.
1 in 4 Maine children in struggle with hunger.
You just said it took three hours to figure out RPM. Installing new software is done also from the graphical installer as is managing the OS, as is configuring the desktop, all done by clicking boxes, just like Windows. You can even install your RPMs from the GUI as well.
'Firefox, for instance, still didnt work. Due to? Old kernel perhaps. That left me asking "how am I expected to upgrade this kernel?" and "is that potential headache of upgrading a kernel worth upgrading to firefox?"'
By what order of logic do you need to 'upgrade the kernel' to run firefox. Download and extract into
"Well, running a web server is actually very easy. Just run the thing. (after installing it
What need you of a 'guru', have you never heard of support contracts or the help forums or emailing the developers directly. And you will get an answer something I can attest to personally.
Again I can't undestand the difficulty, As a test I installed an apache web server locally (192.168.2.253). Install as the default configuration and copy the web files to
"learning the ins and outs of linux software management and kernel upgrades / patches didn't seem worth it."
I have never had to upgrade/patch the kernel in years of using Linux.What have you been doing this past twenty six years. And running a web server from your bedroom isn't considered wise as what happens when your mom comes in to vacuum the floor and unplugs the server.
davecb5620@gmail.com
Of course it can. You just have to endure a progress bar (Starting up... Time remaining: 6 years, 10 months, 25 days, 12 hours, 2 minutes) so that the decoding process begins the moment US Patent 5,579,430 and foreign counterparts expire.
The point of software development is to hide complexity from the user.How can software hide legal complexity from a user?
Besides, an Exchange replacement has only one cross-platform file format you're concerned with: "email."And calendar, right?
If the goal is to subscribe to updates and leave comments about intranet web pages, can't free MediaWiki software do that?
1) Why? Just because they don't have the same fancy SVG icons, what is the problem? Do you go batshit about Office not using the standard windows icons? WMP using it's own interface style?
2) Be more specific. If you mean "three editors? Why not one?" then this is sorted by the smaller distros and the defaults are being more limited for the bigger collections. If not, then what?
3) Nothing that can be done by the linux community so please move this to another slot
4) What about OpenXML? Why isn't it not going to be the year of windows because there are 8 word formats?
Most of your gripes are equally valid at the other two commercial OSs but you claim them as reasons why Linux is failing. Obviously not true. These could be fixed and Linux will still not be ready because these weren't the reasons in the first place. The real problems are OEM builds and hardware and the marketing and FUD available for Windows while it enjoys 85%+ profit.
Every single stinking chance that microsoft has had over the last two decades to play nice in the workplace has resulted in them being asshole crooks and liars. They have zero "objectivity" when it comes to anyone else, any other company, nothing, they are greed, incorporated.
Tell ya what sparky, when your pet company can come clean for a decade, then maybe I'll consider it, until then, they can go to hell, and screw their drooling stockholders, they are pigs munching at the public trough now and have driven up the cost of doing business all over the landscape to support their criminal gang profits.. That company needs to be broken up and their assets sold at auction. They are just big enough to get away with crime after crime after crime and you want other people to "remain objective" about them? NO THANKS. Believe it, a lot of people have ethics and morals, and your "cash is king screw everyone else greed rules" types can go get stuffed. MS is just an evil company, that's it, and it doesn't matter anymore what code they poop out. it does NOT matter.. I feel sorry for any honest folks who work there, my advice for them is to find another company to work for or start their own.
The bottom line is, you can do honest business, which is perfectly all right and acceptable, or be a capitalist pig, and there is a distinct difference.
How can software hide legal complexity from a user?
Microsoft and Apple seem to manage it just fine. Again, you're making excuses.
And calendar, right?
Possibly. I did forget vcard format for exchanging contacts, but again, dozens of applications exchange that format all the time. I personally don't export calendars from one app into another, but I suppose it's possible a lot of other people do.
Comment of the year
Thank you for helping me make a decision. I'm a "silly user pretending" to run a business and I will cater to companies that cater to us "silly users pretending". I guess I'm just too stupid to use Linux.
Bill Gates isn't my enemy -- I don't (really) want to destroy him. Neither is Steve Ballmer.
<rant class="awful" title="Final Sanctimony Of 2006" style="presentation: preachy;">
Recognizing both of these guys as enemies is better than regarding them in any other way. Bill Gates' public history is littered with debris of the destruction he has caused to people who were his allies and partners: I would risk the safety of things I hold dear if I regarded him as anything other than an enemy. From statements in the public record, there is no doubt that if Steve Ballmer knew me personally, he would be threatening to "fucking kill" me.
Slashdot is full of people who want to emulate one or the other of these guys. They've got a word for people who see the world the way parent post describes it: suckers.
Enemies want to destroy each other.... I don't (really) want to destroy him.
Ah-hah! There is the problem; a simple but very basic mistake in how one should interpret reality.
It isn't about you all the time, you know. Do you really think that if you decided that Gretchen will be your lover, all of a sudden she will enthusiastically come to your bed? You actually have less say in who shall be your enemy than you do in who might become your lover. Failure to recognize that the other person has a lot to say about either relationship is not a good basis for one's view of the world.
No, Grasshopper, in this life you do not get to choose your enemies. You get to choose what principles will guide your behavior. You will then find that your enemies will choose you. If you are resourceful, careful, attentive, and very, very lucky, you may be able to choose your battles. But not your enemies; they will choose you.
Now enmity is another thing entirely. Avoid it, along with hatred, hostility, and all those associated feelings. Treat your enemies dispassionately, even in the midst of battle. For unless you are actually involved in hand to hand combat, there is no place for the intense concentration and focus, the tunnel vision and imperviousness to pain and injury, that are the hallmark of these emotions.
Invest your passionate energies in your friendships and loves; don't waste them on your enemies.
</rant>
Desiderata
That's just wrong. There's no reason why an equivalent of Exchange with address books, shared calendars, shared folders and mail can't be done with its own set of open standards. I'm not talking about any of it working with any Microsoft stuff. I'm talking about something that works with open source apps, or as a web application. Something that delivers similar business functionality.
I am going to ... address whether or not (IMHO) Linux is ready for the desktop. Additionally, let me preface this by saying that I have used Linux as my sole desktop for PCs since 1994...
Oh the irony. He's going to tell us that Linux isn't ready for the desktop, yet it's been on his desktop since 1994. It may not be ready for Aunt Tillie's desktop, but it certain has been ready for his for a dozen years.
The problem with stupid statements about Linux desktop readiness is that no one ever bothers to define was "desktop ready" means. Or if they do, it involves such a convoluted definition that only Windows can ever ever qualify (for some people, not even even Mac OSX is ready). Reading the parent's post, his definition seems to be "zero bugs in hardware drivers". But by that definition, Windows XP isn't ready for the desktop!
But what the fsck do I know, I don't even use Linux anymore. I've been using FreeBSD on my desktop since 2000.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Primetime is not ready for linux.
It's already there. Its Called Notes/Domino. Yes, the anti-Notes trolls can start complaining, but there is a reason that so many huge companies use it. It works. The fact that it is multi-platform doesn't hurt either.
In other news I hear that 2007 may be the "Year of LINUX on the Desktop"
"A lot of what Photoshop has that Photoshop Elements lacks is the prepress output capability that depends on patented processes licensed from Pantone and other companies."
Whine! But we can't come up with any good ideas. Can we have yours?
"With 3 AC fanboys replying I must have said something right."
Once again proving karma is worthless.
Anyway troll.
Double-click on Steam--->Starts up and updates itself--->Updates games I've purchased and installed.
OR
Start menu--->Program menu--->EA--->NFS:3--->NFS3 update check.
OR
Maxis--->Simcity4 Deluxe--->Check for update.
OR
Start Menu--->MS update--->Pick critical updates--->reboot*--->Done.
OR
Help--->Check for updates--->quit FF and restart. Oh wait!
Now I'm not going to type out all my programs, but I think I made my point.
*And before you say something smart-alec about the reboot. You don't always have to do that either.
When windows took over the world it could hardly be called "Ready For Prime-time". Now that it is ready, people forgot how awful it was. Feature set, stability or whatever properties of software you find important are just a part of equation, not the whole equation.
Windows ME and Windows XP operating systems ship with Compressed Folders, a utility that reads and writes PKZIP format archives. WinZip is not necessary. For other archive formats, 7-Zip comes as an exe download, and it doesn't have nag screens.
as I've said here several times before that the OSS community gets on the stick and starts writing things like OSS critical enterprise infrastructure software and vertical industry packages instead of 3D eye candy and media players for home user desktops.
You may have FUN writing the latter - but the former is what will put bread on the table - even if issued as OSS. The eye candy and media players will get installed in some distro and you won't make a dime supporting them. Supporting the infrastructure software or the vertical industry you understand will make you money.
Linux per se is fine. What's lacking is good testing of the desktops and the apps running on them by undermanned distro organizations - and OSS software that handles enterprise level requirements and vertical industries.
Five years ought to be just about enough time to pull this off - and preferably sooner if ESR's analysis earlier is correct that 2008 is the last window of opportunity before Microsoft locks down the corporate market.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Proponents of linux are driven by their hatred of microsoft. A cool-headed and objective look at operating systems would show that linux is mediocre and doesn't excel at anything. Solaris and all 4 BSDs are much better at their respective strengths.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! ROTFLMAO!!!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! at first i didnt realise this article was a spoof!! whew! excellent!!
You can't "have LITERALLY fallen into" an "emotion trap".
I mean, it's not like someone dug an emotion trap out in the woods, and disguised it with sticks and grass, and Maxo-Texas fell into it during a recent perambulation.
Or is that what you really mean?
Note that the word "war" doesn't mean what it used to mean, i.e., armed conflict between governments.
It acquired a larger meaning when LBJ started his "War on Poverty".
We now have a "war" on drugs, a "war" on terrorism, a "war" on copyright violators, a "war" on spammers and phishers, a "war" on this, a "war" on that, and a "war" on the other, some of which involve violence, others that don't.
(In fact, I'm still waiting for somebody to declare a "war" on violence.)
So the definition "war" (or, at least, the usage of the word) has been watered down in the last 40 years.
I see nothing wrong with discussing a "war" between Linux and Microsoft.
(I recently trained in a Linux terrorist training camp, and have infiltrated at least two Microsoft terrorist training camps.
Geeks with guns.
A frightening image.)
Disclaimer to the NSA/CIA/FBI/whatever: The above is a joke.
I never trained in nor infiltrated any terrorist training camp, Linux, Microsoft, or otherwise, so please don't arrest me and send me to Gitmo.
BRB, I hear helicoptors.
On, shi
Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
The only thing keeping me from switching to Linux is Adobe apps. I needs my Flash IDE, Flex Builder 2, Illustrator, and I'm sorry but The Gimp isn't Photoshop. But oh how I wish I could switch to CentOS.