Slashdot Mirror
BBC To Host Multi-OS Debate
Bananatree3 writes "BBC is currently seeking submissions from all you Microsoft Windows, Mac and Linux devotees "in 100 words or less, why you are such a supporter of your chosen operating system and what features you love about it". They will then select one user of each platform to go head to head in a debate that will be part of the BBC's Microsoft Vista launch coverage on January 30th."
Don't appply unless you're 20 something and remotely good looking. The BBC recently knee capped their tech presents to only pretty people who don't seem to care even remotely about tech.
Not to mention I've seen nothing but Second life all over the news tech wise in months.
I like muppets.
They should have specified that submissions cannot use words with numbers for the windows crowd. ;p
Because it's not Microsoft Vista?
Thank you, the defense rests.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
I submitted to this a few days back. Some are not shown (I probably wrote over 100 words though...).
What intrigues me is how or where debate will be held. Chat, live? Perhaps i'll just wait for the e-mail...
ilovegeorgebush
... lock the pink OMG-Ponnies CSS in his user preferences...
Whoever appeals to the general public and doesn't alienate themself with overly strong opinions. Someone who recognizes strengths and weaknesses in all platforms and summarizes that, but puts a spin on their own favorite platform.
QTFA: "We have received many entries and have now closed the call for submissions. We will be in touch with people shortly. Many thanks for taking part."
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I foresee a potential disaster in the linux presentation.
It's undoubtful that the most hardcore Free Software fringe of the Linux community has the most public appeal.
I mean...they're somewhat "weird", it's likely that the BBC will chose a super nerdy guy that bitches on everything that is not free software, and the topic will change from a mere technical analysis to the usual religion flamwar.
Windows and OSX will be presented as desktop systems. I doubt the server side of the story will be interesting to the average BBC listener.
Linux, unfortunately, will fail to show its good cards there. I'm not talking about mere graphics, of course, but the whole user friendlyness "from the scratch", hardware support...
I hope the supporters choice will be wise.
640KB of virtualized ram will be enough for everybody
And don't say "fewer attacks and/or security exposures on this OS as compared to Windows", because right now all non-Windows platforms are benefiting from "security through minority".
There's even a dorky genius here on slashdot who posts from his Amiga, and one of the benefits he lists for using steam-powered computing hardware, is the complete absence of any attacks targetting his box. Although he probably has to worry about termites eating his DRAM.
All of that would change if AmigaOS or Linux or whatever became the de facto standard.
FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
Steve Jobs does not kill kittens.
We have received many entries and have now closed the call for submissions. We will be in touch with people shortly. Many thanks for taking part.
Hmmm, interesting.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Dear BBC,
I like Linux. It is the best. I think that everybody should use Linux.
-- Rob M.
...which can be seen here: http://www.unitedmedia.com/comics/dilbert/archive/ dilbert-20070125.html
(google cached copy provided in case he runs his webserver on CP/M)
they only had a few submissions. I guess news spreads quickly beyond Slashdot. :)
Did anyone else notice the huge amount of Windows users bashing Apple?
I find it ironic that "Vendor lock-in" and "Trying to take control of your PC" is an argument FOR microsoft against anyone. It's like the kettle went into a coal mine before starting a fight with the pot.
I like muppets.
emacs vs vi
init 11 - for when you need that edge.
There's no "good OS", "bad OS" anymore. We have a developed industry and specialization. We have a bunch of OS that are all good, but for vastly different purposes.
... free). /less than Mac, but not a lot/, lots of software, superb dev tools).
My web servers run on BSD and Linux (simple, secure, stable, proven,
My designers run Apple-s (cultural phenomenon, the whole product line speaks "design", good software, user friendly).
Most of my developers and my accountant run on Windows (user friendly
When you grow up, you realize there's no place for favoritism and politics in here, just tools you pick depending on your task.
That said I suspect Apple supporters will come out the winners from the BBC competition. It's purely a branding thing, and entirely predictable: all Apple does it cool (good job, Steve & co!), all Microsoft does is not cool (with power comes resp... come the obligatory haters), and all Linux does, is way too geeky (by geeks, for geeks) and no one in the general public cares.
I submitted something to this yesterday but I think they've stopped taking submissions now.
I repeat what I wrote here for the benefit of you all and the good of society in general:
"Vista is best computer. it plays all my games just with putting in the disk and cliking on the mouse, i like the internets also and just with clicking the OKs it works really good in Vista.
My frend works in IT and he says that linux is rubbish and you cant even put in the dvds and theirs no games and he says no proper business would use it because it wont let microsoft run their programs on it so it is useless for all serious things. That is another reason why i use Vista because its good and i can use it for business too if i wanting to.
Mac is too expensive and will get too dirty cos its white"
Everybody laughs at my collection of VAX machines, but I've never had a virus/worm/trojan attack me and my house doesn't need extra heating in the Winter.
However, it takes me 2 minutes to open up a SSH connection, five minutes to boot, and my network card (although it is 10Mbps) max transfer rate is 500Kbps.
Oh well..tradeoffs everywhere...
TDz.
No mention of BeOS or O/S2 Warp. :(
So, the BBC is just too burnt out to cover this one themselves? I don't know about you, but I don't feel like watching some inexperienced laymans' debate unless they're required to drink a beer every 10 minutes and are given the ability to electrically shock eachother which they are strictly told to "only use as an extreme measure".
Reading this submission from the BBC site
"It seems to be very stable, and I have had few problems with the final release copy. I am sure the general public will enjoy its user friendly features. I recommend the Business or Ultimate versions, since they have the Complete PC. Backup feature, which I have found to be about the most useful feature of Vista since if one has a good backup to a secondary hard drive, DVD or External Hard Drive, it can save a lot of time in system reconstruction in case of hackers or system failures. I think the general and business community will save many millions if not billions of hours by using Vista. Mike Scott"
For some reason reminds me the cosmetic and grooming regime and genesis vs phil collins bits in American Psycho which obviously opens the debate as to whether all Windows users are closet psychopaths.
'Click', for those of you who don't know, is BBC News 24's tech show that caters for idiots who think they are hip and trendy because they write emails and know what flashmobbing means.
I don't know why I watch it; I guess its because its the only show on all of British TV about computers and technology. I wish they'd get their act together and make a program in the style of Working Lunch (about business) or Daily Politics that caters for the IT folks - surely there are enough of us these days.
As William Walllace said once before getting his guts out:
FREEEEEEEDDOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!
in just eight words?
For me the issue has always been more about the morality than the technology. Proprietary vs Free/Open Source. Monopoly vs diversity. Most importantly I consider the nature of the people/companies delivering the products. We all know that Microsoft software is incredibly unrealiable, insecure and too big and slow, but even if they were delivering the best software in the world I would never buy or use it if I had the choice. It is because I object to and abhor their business practices.
Microsoft itself has been mired in legal problems almost from its inception. It is probably the most sued company on the planet and it has been convicted of economic crimes in many different countries. They then simply ignore whatever legal judgements against them using their incredible financial clout to challenge whatever the courts rule. They seem to be completely immoral. It is for moral reasons more than anything else that keeps me away from using their software.
Yes, technology is important, but morality is even more important.
Should that not read "in 100 words or fewer"
Fewer words, less text when I was in school!
If reading OS fanboy arguments online isn't enought for you, now you can experience the towering tedium of them live on TV! Thanks BBC!
Surf the Web, receive/send email, watch videos, secure the system, and know what exactly what the system is doing or not doing, all at a cost of nothing but time. Games are dependent upon platform they are developed for. That should hit the 90 percentile.
There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
Ok, so this is probably asking for flame but when you look at the comments on the site there are two consistent patterns:
Either,
"I've always used Windows, never used Linux/OSX - Love Windows, Linux/OSX sucks".
or
"I used to use Windows, switched to Linux/OSX - Love Linux/OSX, Windows sucks".
I know that's what everyone mostly hears anyway and I know there are Windows users out there who can genuinely say, based on proper comparisons, that Windows is best for them - but the uninformed Windows user really sounds pathetic.
And the guy complaining about Apple charging for wireless unlike Microsoft - that's just funny.
Genesis 1:32 And God typed
Host: So you don't like Microsoft Windows. Care to explain why?
Mac/Linux supporter: (Tosses chair at Microsoft supporter.)
Toss a chair?! There is no way a Mac/Linux supporter would ever lower themselves enough to toss a chair at a Microsoft Supporter. I don't care how obtuse they're being. It just wouldn't happen, and I find the accusation vaguely insulting.
We would toss the Microsoft supporter at the chair.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
Your point would carry more weight if the really serious problems had anything to do with being root. Unfortunately, for the most part, they don't.
For the vast majority of people and organisations, I suggest that the most damaging actions that malware can take are:
A virus that causes your system to crash randomly or erases your whole hard drive is annoying, but easily fixed (unless you're naive enough not to make back-ups). These are the sorts of things that not running as root prevent.
But running as root won't prevent phishing, won't prevent a cross-site scripting attack stealing your personal data, won't prevent a SQL injection attack compromising your customer database, won't prevent a virus forwarding your entire e-mail archive to your competitors, and is only partially effective in preventing a stupid user downloading a program that turns your PC into a zombie on a spam botnet.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Windows supporters claim their OS is the best, because a) most of them aren't aware of what an OS actually is, b)It means they don't have to think about what they're doing, c)they're already using it so it must be the best, right ?
Mac supporters claim theirs is the best because, a)it looks so much better than any of the others, and b)everything just works (never mind that it is built using only known and defined hardware).
Linux supporters claim theirs is the best because a)it's free, b)it's not vulnerable to viruses, and c)it's not Windows or Mac.
I placed my comment on there stating my support for GNU/Linux, as in my opinion, it remains the only OS (with respect to the BBCs question) which is designed to be used as a general purpose computing system. Windows is a black box, and does it's best to restrict the users. Macs are designed for ease of use and visual appearance, not for maximum flexibility. Linux is designed to be flexible, in every sense possible. It can look as good or better than a Mac, it is not restrictive in any meaningful way, it is open to change and despite what the big two like to promote - it is not difficult to use. I don't care whether people think it's "ready for the desktop" because these people really have no concept of what a computer is for, they just want an appliance. That's up to them, but for myself, I would rather have something that can perform virtually any computing task I throw at it, and not have to pay through the nose to be a part of somebody elses restricted vision.
Of course my post on the BBC was somewhat more succinct than that, as 100 words is really far too short to make a serious point about anything.
Also, I take any opinion espoused by the BBC as suspect, because they are fairly IT illiterate themselves (at least in their reporting staff). They consider a rootkit "a virus" Pop quiz, and a pc is nearly always considered to be running Windows. I must admit, incidences of "forward slash" on TV are getting less gradually. (before you start, how many times do you use the term "full colon" to differentiate from a "semi colon" ?)
And when the show starts, I will resign and agree to all of the Linux supporter's statements.
[sig]
Karen Bowerman: Well, Guy Kewney is editor of the technology website Newswireless.
Goma: (Face of horror)
KB: Hello, good morning to you. Goma: Good morning. KB: Were you surprised by this verdict today? Goma: I am very surprised to see...this verdict to come on me, because I was not expecting that. When I came, they told me something else and I am coming. You got an interview that's all. So a big surprise anyway. KB: A big surprise, yeah, yes. Goma: Exactly. KB: With regards to the costs involved, do you think now more people will be using pirated windows? Goma: Actually, if you can go everywhere you're gonna see a lot of people downloading to the Internet and the website, and everything they want. But I think it is much better for the development and...eh...to inform people what they want and to get the easy way and so faster if they are looking for. KB: It does really seem to be the way the OS industry's progressing now, that people want to get OSs for free. Goma: Exactly. You can go everywhere on the cyber cafe, and you can take...you can go easy. It is going to be an easy way for everyone to get something to the Internet. KB: Guy Kewney, thanks very much indeed.i use teh linux cuz i r a 31337 h4xx0r0r & ur box will be 0wned by me cuz im so 1337 & all 1337 h4xx0r0rs use teh linux and teh intarnet runs on teh linux also
See you in the studio!
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
It's true that rms may not be the best introduction to linux (or gnu/linux) for the general, non-technical public audience. But there are lots of very eloquent Free Software advocates who can be very persuasive without coming across as gonzo anarchist whack jobs. Regular people are starting to notice DRM, at least when they can't (easily) transfer their iTunes files to another player. Get someone like Eben Moglen in there to talk about MS and Apple working with the entertainment industry to sell us our "culture by the sip", and that will resonate with them.
Get someone from a free documentation project like Project Gutenberg, or the library community, to talk about proprietary formats and the dangers they pose to our ability to access our own data. Maybe not everyone will get it, but I think there would be real value in introducing people to the idea that they can get off the MSOffice upgrade treadmill.
I know rms' stubborn adherence to sticking GNU in front of Linux rankles a lot of people. But this is exactly why it is so important. If we want to argue in favour of Linux only in terms of features (more stable, excellent browsers, spreadsheet needs work, wordprocessors ok, multimedia tricky etc.) then we throw away our most compelling strengths. If you just want to replace Windows, Linux is ok, but if Windows is the standard we measure by we will always come out behind. But if you want to replace the proprietary paradigm that Windows represents, GNU/Linux offers more than enough to make up for the gap between OOCalc and Excel.
Like any social movement, you have to present your message with tact. But that doesn't mean you should abandon that message all together.
yp.
Actually, we haven't all been there. If the "sporty kids" are bullying you, it's your fault. I went to a high school where the smart people actually asserted themselves. It can work for you too, try it sometime!
It has been proven that an idividual action, that also helps the group affected, is the best action. Anyone can contribute their actions to Linux, and have done so; We have all benefited from their generosity. One can use Linux, and one can change it, and without sacrafice. Free of persecution from others who would creep into our homes, uninvited. Linux, helps the enviornment, it has the ability to give older hardware a chance to help others. Linux, created by just few of the planet's people, has given humanity a way to better its self without tides to Ceaser.
Dilbert January 25, 2007 (Disclaimer, I still use windows :P)
It's like the kettle went into a coal mine before starting a fight with the pot.
Wow, that was aweful! I hate it when people make up their own version of a well-known cliche and think it is more effective than the one that's been perfect for over a 100 years.
It's more wordy. It's less clear. It stole from the original. Parent must be a windows user.
Why would so many people be posting about Vista when it hasn't even been released yet? They stink of marketing speak too. You just know that MS and Apple are going to have people from their companies, supporting their OS...
Why do I prefer Linux over Windows or Mac? That's pretty easy, but it also goes to show how it all depends on what you want out of a system.
But obviously I'm an experimenter. I need basic tools, like a good web browser, as much as anyone, but beyond that I like having a system which is very flexible and open. If, on the other hand, you're an eBay-phile and really really want to use Turbo Lister to manage your auctions, then all the above points are irrelevant: you need Windows because that's the only platform on which Turbo Lister runs -- End Of Story.
proof, n. A demonstration that a conclusion is implied by certain premises and axioms.
Really it should.
I wonder how many people offered to advocate MOS?
Rather than generate controversy through a flame war about 'why I love operating system Q', they should review their support of Macintosh and Linux systems in their media distribution strategies.
I use a Mac so perhaps I'm more sensitive than most, but why the devil doesn't the BBC just distribute their content through iTunes? I know, I know ... some podcasts are available, but their home-grown solutions have been terrible - iMP is a perfect example of their Windows-centric support pattern.
And I see this throughout European media - way, way too reliant on Microsoft-only solutions.
I have seven computers at home-- two servers, three desktops, and two laptops. The two servers are running Ubuntu Server Edition 6.06 and OpenBSD 4.0. The three desktops are running Kubuntu 6.10, OpenBSD 4.0, and Windows XP SP2 (work gives me Windows-only software, forgive them). The two laptops are running OSX 10.4 and, again, OpenBSD. The Intel laptop was running Ubuntu 6.10 in beta, but Ubuntu didn't sit well with the hardware. OpenBSD has run glitch-free since I installed it.
Even though I love Linux, I resent when "linux" becomes a general noun that encompasses all free unices. The BSD operating systems are more reliable, more coherent, and more rigorous as unices than any version of Linux I have ever run. They deserve a seat at the table, along with Mac (which basically is a BSD) and Windows and Linux. I understand that a general population that barely understands that there are alternatives to Windows cannot grasp that there are different free unices. But surely we can come up with a general term that encompasses Linux, *BSD, OpenSolaris, and such.
There are free operating systems. That fact is very nearly a miracle. What started as a dream fewer than a dozen people on earth could even imagine has become a myriad of viable alternatives to paying a corporation to run your computer hardware. Don't like UNIX? Haiku is looking pretty good, for an alpha OS. The point is not to switch to Linux. The point is to leave proprietary OSes in the dustbin of history, where they belong, without compromising one's computing style or power one iota.
"Indeed, it is wise never to consider any form of electronic data as final." --Arnold Robbins
You should always use the best tools for the job, whatever you're doing. People's impressions of what tool does the best job varies, but I think anyone who's a zealot for any ONE system is a moron. The smartest people I know use whatever is needed in the circumstances.. for example, Windows or a console for gaming, OS X for desktop, Linux for servers (or Ubuntu for desktop, etc).
So this 'debate' will really be three or more zealots sitting in a circle flinging mud at each other, screaming that one operating system is the best, rather than actually admitting they all have their niche. This isn't just a BBC trait, but one of the whole media.
Since this is for a 'MS Vista launch', probably funded by some Windows interest somewhere, what makes anyone but Windows advocates think that this will be a fair debate? Seems to me that MS Vista will be the winner despite the debate or presentation. Are you guys really that naive to believe that MS Vista isn't already the winner in this particular debate presentation?
Now I have a nasty image of a naked Bill Gates chasing a naked Steve Ballmer with a big rubber cock through a hotel lobby.
Thanks for that.
This article is nothing more than sensationalism. I might as well ask, "what are the best style of shoes?" A useful discussion is what are the benefits of each OS. Using that information a person looking to pick an OS for them, for a given use, can make an informed decision. In a previous article I wrote a list of features where Windows and OS X were respectively ahead of one another. Sadly, not a single person replied with additional features as I requested, while numerous people responded to argue tell me that some feature was not useful (I don't care if it's useful to you) or to argue that their favorite OS was just as good at that, even though they obviously had never used both OS's being compared for that purpose.
Just for fun, I'm going to copy my list here and add Linux into the equation. This is going to be a lot harder, because there are so many different Linux distros with so many different features and no one has used all of them. I'm going to try to stick to things I've used personally. Please if you have features to add to one list, go for it. If you want to complain that your favorite OS is better for some reason you can't put into words, or if you haven't actually used all the OS's and thus are just assuming the way other OS's do it must not be better, or if you want to argue the reasons for these advantages and disadvantages, please don't bother commenting. Also note, this is in regard to use on the desktop, not the server.
OS X Wins:
Windows Vista Wins:
So the BBC is hiring trolls?
It is a small step for a troll, but a giant leap for trollkind!
The BBC usually tries to prevent/control debates as much as possible. They used to have a system where people would send in emails to the "Have Your Say" page, and they would select the ones they liked. After lots of complaints of censorship, they changed over to a system where you could post instantly (like Slashdot). However, they quickly backtracked so that virtually all debates are "Fully Moderated". Much of the time perfectly valid comments are not published. Occasionally they do have "Reactively Moderated" discussions on trivial topics like the Oscars, but if anyone ever dares to criticise the BBC, the posts are removed very quickly.
For example, a while back the BBC had a "Have Your Say" topic on Google's participation in censorship in China. Some posters rightly pointed out that the BBC also censors things. These posts were removed at breakneck speed, but this prompted complaints at the new censorship. The BBC then started removing the new complaints, prompting even more complaints. Eventually they gave up and as you can see, the top rated posts are about the BBC's censorship, not China's. See here
When I complained to the BBC about this, I was told that posts about BBC Censorship were "off topic". So posts about the BBC's own censorship on a topic about China's Censorship are so wildly off-topic they have to be removed? People are becoming very tired of the BBCs censorship and sites like NewsSnifferhave started to appear. NewsSniffer automatically logs censored posts on the few open debates that are allowed to exist (It also logs the changes made to news reports)
Most people who were interested in real debate at the BBC never really used "Have Your Say" because of the BBC's control over the limited number of topics and the general low-probability of having your post accepted. Instead many people used the BBC Message Boards, which are sort of hidden away from public view. The busiest was probably the Today International board where people discussed the top news stories in more depth than was reported and covering many things the reporters were either ignorant of or chose to leave out. Unfortunately, the BBC has recently shut this down in favour of a system where the topics are picked by BBC Staff. Their excuse for this was budgetary concerns (they only get £4 Billion or so). Today's topical, controversial and cutting edge debates are 1. Do children need to learn Britishness at school?, 2. Are scientific terms like homo sapien out of date?, 3. Does affluence bring misery? (See for yourself http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mbtoday/F5963509).
Considering the BBC's astronomical budget and the technology available, they could quite easily have a "Discuss" button underneath each news story which would take people to an open discussion. They'll never do it though. The BBC have opposed open debate at every turn.
They should choose that Anonymous Coward guy, he always has plenty to say...
The only people I've met that have anything bad to say about OS X are, incidentally, OS X users. If you believe otherwise, you have probably been trolled.
It has often been said on Slashdot and other techie forums that disagreements about OS's are mostly a religious battle. I think this is mostly true.
Which is why I prefer Linux. If it's good enough for God, it's good enough for me.
Serving your airship needs since 1995.
I saw this post on the BBC site:
And what? An arrogant attitude from the company that makes your operating system is OK!He has obviosly never used anything other than Windows!
OBSD wins hands down anyhow. Watching Theo verbally demolish the competition would just be the icing on the cake!
What about us? the people that uses *BSD, Solaris or some BeOS child?
------ hand fits giving
Does this mean that each debater's point will be punctuated with Benny Hill skits and music? That would totally make it worth watching.
"I can be self-referential if I want to," said Tom, swiftly.
are OMG, WTF and LOL one word or 3?
mac,mac mac mac mac, lin, lin ,win win lin, lin, unix in mac mac mac mac mac mac win mac lin mac
As a guy... Go on Beauty and the Geek show, survive long enough to get a make over, and then try applying for this BBC event.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Sure, the results of the "debate" will be worthless, but that the BBC will be hosting it shows how much things have changed in computing. Ten years ago, the Mac was dying, fading into irrelevance. Few would have dreamed of using Linux on a desktop for routine computing. Windows 95 brought a lot of Mac usability to the PC. A debate like this would have been a yawner.
Now, the Mac is back, and Linux is a viable choice for scores of computer users. Here's to competition and choice.
Penny - plain text accounting
because most of those machine NUMBERS are due to IIS being best deployed as one-site/one-machine installs. Many FrontPage hompages run on a cheap ISP's system and reported as IIS, but there's nothing worth taking on them, so why bother hacking?
etc...
s/tides/tithes/
http://kb.wisc.edu/helpdesk/page.php?id=5175
It's interesting as wine approches 1.0 microsoft newest operating system has compatibility issues with win32 applications. new vista pc sales will slump even after vista's service pack is released. My prediction is computer oem's whom are not offering linux pre-installed will suffer and pressure from isv's not abandonning win32 will only make vista less attractive. Microsoft's will not be able to get the "pawns" to ditch win32 and this will be the death of microsoft's monopoly over win32 co-insiding with a http://winehq.com/ 1.0 release. wine will keep microsoft honest and keep them in the win32 business for the long haul.
in less than 100 words.
Windows is CRAP.
Linux is ALSO CRAP.
BUT Linux is FREE crap.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
no grammer nazi came by later to pick apart the spelling errors.
A goal is a dream with a deadline
What I want to see is somebody come on the air and actually explain what these 3 different OSes really are. Someone who can actually explain that the three OSes are somewhat comparable, but that they are different tools. Maybe someone can pull out an automotive example.
YMMV on these analogies, they're not perfect, but you get the point.
Now take a look at the pictures and the specs and the options. I mean, they all go from point A to point B and they all support CD players and they can all carry some type of load. However they are completely different vehicles with completely different purposes.
I don't know about your non-computer-literate friends, but given this type of example, my friends/family can understand that "comparing" the three is very apples/oranges and relatively pointless.
So there's really no point in starting a shouting match. DINKs don't argue with their friends about buying a van to shuttle their kids around; and the family of 6 doesn't argue about the DINKs driving their viper (with no extra passenger space!).
We inherently understand these differences, so let's learn to be equally accepting of our computer differences.
So, free software is geeky, useless, childish and no one cares? What an ignorant flame disguised as a thoughtful and informed reflection. Let's have a look.
We have a bunch of OS that are all good, but for vastly different purposes.
There is nothing free software can not do. The Linux desktop has been ready for the general public for years, despite the best efforts of non free software owners to make things like printing and networking difficult.
When you grow up, you realize there's no place for favoritism and politics in here, just tools you pick depending on your task.
Freedom is not a childish goal and you no longer have to chose between it and getting things done. Non free software is the dead hand of the past clinging to control it should never have had.
all Linux does, is way too geeky (by geeks, for geeks) and no one in the general public cares.
Linux does Firefox and Firefox seems to have taken a 20% share of the browser market, despite the effort required to do so on a M$ platform. Sooner or later people are going to realize that all of their favorite applications are free and work better on a free platform.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Too speling korrections poasted....moor two kum i'm shur
A goal is a dream with a deadline
What a perfect forum for a modern day Monty Python skit. Instead of Football Philosophers it could be Phil-OS-ophuds.
* s/GNAA/anyone else you disagree with or don't like/. I'm sure there's plenty to choose from.
It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
A lot of software exists for Windows that isn't likely to be ported soon. Windows emulation enables non-Windows users to run them anyway.
And why are so few Windows users concerned with Lunix or OS X emulation?Because open source software that originates on Linux have a tendency to become ported to Windows, while the reverse (closed source software that originates on Windows) does not exhibit the same trend. The closed source Windows programs requires involvement of the holder of the source code to be ported, while the open source Linux programs can be ported by anyone with experience in programming in both affected environments.
Here is my entry to BBC. I have the right attitude, I understand the community and I know the jargon. I should be the winner for the FOSS catagory if the BBC judges are half way decent.
My entry
======================
To BBC: can't you RTFA
Mac User: well, violence is for the intellectually feeble anyway, so I will stay here and write a damning article about you other OS users, as the pen is mightier than the sword, I feel I will win.
.. erm, at least the err.. .. erm, ratings will have gone up. And to think the best that Channel 4 could do was put Jade back on Big Brother.
Linux User: yeah right. n00b luuuuuser! My ninja skills will kick your a$$ right to the middle of next week, Take that! ow. ow! Nobody said this violence thing would hurt! Not fair.
Windows User: guys, meet Dave, he's a special forces sergeant and, well, he's been given money to see that I win this argument. Cheers Bill. Go for it Dave.
BBC: That's not quite the arguments we were hoping for, but..
Linux User: not fair, not fair, this is cheating thi sis arggggggg.
BBC:
Mac User: like back off man, this is a violation of my civil libertieeeieieieieeeeeeee
BBC:
OS/2 User: Sorry, I thought I'd have a bit of a kip. Am I too late to join in?
OK, I take the bait.
Because Gates was smart enough to seize his opportunities and get a large userbase initially, and used his business skills to further grow that userbase so that 95% of the world uses it. They use it not because it's better, they use it because it is so big. When a company has that big of a market share, it is obviously very hard for another OS to break into the market. Windows comes on just about every computer you buy (the 4% market share macs have doesn't negate the fact that Windows is on just about every one), it is used by businesses, games are written for it, most applications are written for it - it's an autocatalyzing process. Because most programs are written for it and it comes with most computers, most people use it. Becuase most people use it, applications continue to be written for it, and computers continue to be bundled with it. Windows is the default OS of the world due to this, and OSes like Linux have to be chosen.
If Linux and MacOS (and BSD, to be fair) are chasing Windows' tail lights, it's only because Windows got a head start and took some shortcuts - not because it is are a better vehicle.
As for the concern with Windows emulation, it is because there is so much written for Windows and relatively little for other OSes. So emulation is a good way to make available a large amount of programs for a proportionately small amount of work. It is not because Windows is better, or the interface is supreme - if that was true, why create the alternate OS in the firs tplace?
Most people who are on Windows are on Windows because that's what their computer came with. Grandma doesn't care what her computer is running, as long as she can get to her e-mail and play solitaire. A lot of the people who actually care about their OS are already on Linux or OS X, so they don't care if they can emulate stuff from Windows. And despite that, there are efforts to emulate Linux/OSX on Windows. QEMU is a multi-platform (on both ends) emulator, Cygwin is an effort to run Linux apps on Windows. There are others as well - they do exist.
In summary, Windows is big because it is big, not because it is good. And it wasn't big originally because it was good, but because there weren't a lot of other options. And Microsoft has carried that market share to the present day. If Windows was really the best OS, its market share would not be decreasing, slipping away to Linux, OSX, and other alternative OSes. People and corporations are realizing that just because everyone is doing it doesn't mean that they have to jump too - they have a choice. Linux is gaining, Mac is gaining, and Windows is...oh wait, declining. That alone is an indication of which is the better OS.
And there are a lot of great benefits to using an OS which isn't owned by a giant corporation looking out for itself first. I run Ubunutu Linux with Beryl, and it's better looking, more functional, I can run a large portion of Windows apps I need (that aren't already linux-native, which doesn't leave many) via Wine or QEMU, and if I absolutely need Windows, I can just reboot into it. Not to mention it's an extra layer of protection (but not a sure one) against baddies out there, so I can connect to wifi with less (but not no) fear. My primary OS is, and will be, Ubuntu. An OS that is there for its users is far more valuable than a popular one that is there for the benefit of its company.
P.S. - It's spelled Linux.
You all have Oo.o and Firefox, so get World Wind.
I know you must be used to commercial TV, but this is the BBC, they don't get funding from private companies! Damnit, you'll prise my BBC from my cold dead radio!
Wordpad and MS Paint. =P (From the article:) I use microsoft currently Xp, I like this os because of, once you have it you can immediately use it as it is. It has the basic features which are very useful to me as a user, to name a few the wordpad, paint, system tools and user definition. --- PS.. OSX/Gentoo user
It is fairly sure protection as you could just overite disk image/directory when hit byvirus or anything
The program is more than the source code. You might be able to read the Photoshop source. But would you bring to the table Adobe's understanding of photo editing?
How many so-called ports have the look and feel of a second-rate translation?
That may be because a lot of so-called ports probably are just that - hack-togethers of programs originally written with only one platform in mind, but adapted to a completely different one as an afterthought. In the worst case, by people with little or no experience about the new platform.
It also happens to be the biggest reason why I like to keep away from Microsoft's APIs.
...but not in a meaningful way
"We live in a global world" - Harvey Pitt, former Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman
We don't want some Magic: The Gathering geek who lives with his parents and attends fursuit conventions representing the Linux demographic on national television.
What's Ceren Ercen up to nowadays? She's one in a million, literally.
http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html
Has anyone noticed that when you Google for "Linux" the first sponsored link is Microsoft's "Get the Facts" campaign?
...
What about modular software updates? The operating system doing all the installing and removing of applications? Real time operation? Removal of the ever present dependency of file systems? OS assisted versioning control? Saving all settings and reusing them for new OS installs? More direct, secure, communication between software components? Restarting drivers without taking the OS down? Crap, a system key that takes me back to a usable screen when a DirectX (or OpenGL on Linux) game is hanging would be an improvement.
In other words: I don't think there aren't enough truly new things in the latest operating systems. Sure, there are innovations, but basically the systems haven't changed a bit since MacOS and Windows 95, with Microsoft being one of the biggest contributers to that. In many ways, the latest operating systems are still shells. I can understand that compatability issues are important, but what's keeping them from at least offering better support for the latest and greatest? Windows 2000 is rather usable, but there are so many things wrong with the *entire design* that it is hard to know where to start.
Comparing OS'es is probably usefull, but having some truly interesting things build in would be much more interesting.
Windows: I've never used anything other than Windows and Windows is the best OS I've ever used.
Mac: I switched from Windows to Mac and Mac is the best OS I've ever used.
Linux: I've used all 3 and Linux is usually the best tool for the job.
The BBC is accountable to the license fee paying public.
Which in the UK is pretty much everybody and his dog.
UK geeks will be watching very carefully that such a high profile program is fair, and if it isn't the BBC will have to brace itself for all the complaints, that if are many, do have repercussions.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Unless you think it is wise to make bussiness with companies that break the law as needed.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.