Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Free, One Year Later
madgreek writes "Last year I wrote of my switch from XP to Ubuntu at work. Now a year later, I am back to reflect on one year of being extremely productive at work using (almost) nothing but open source software in a Microsoft world."
I'm sure that many people will point at his failures (IE6 for some activeX websites & visio) as proof that linux is still not ready for the desktop. But these apps aren't available for the Mac either & few are suggesting OS X is not ready for the desktop.
Unfortunately, what's preventing business's adopting Linux or OS X is the fact that the various 'solution providers' & VARs make more money reselling Microsoft products.
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
... a computer.
Film at 11.
Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
I really fail to grasp why corporations (NOT individuals) fail to understand the ramifications of such EULAs and MS software contracts.
Negotiating a seat deal with MS leads to a very nasty possible outcome: invasion by Business Software Alliance. If you refuse, you invalidate all your licenses... and they always find something "illegal". It's one thing to switch because of some perceived wrong or being high and mighty, but a corporation is a corporation. When it comes to software, they literally open themselves up for heavy liability if they accept MS and other COTS software.
GPL means something else too: if you dont create software, you can ignore any "bad side effects". Only violators who refuse to share source are gone after. Usage is truly free of legal ramifications.
Protip: You're not the first person to use linux for a whole year.
*Gasp*
... and my coworkers still have no idea that I switched to free software.
I suppose all the 'Year of Linux' people will come out and say 'This is the year of Linux' and so on and so fourth.
Linux has had many years, and for what it has been up against, an illegal government coerced monopoly with more and more stress being put on it from every direction, it has not disappointed me in the slightest. With a dignity I hope that I have a tenth of when I die, Linux users and Linux developers have fought, and some died defending the vision of Linux and the FSF to preserve a future where some of us still do control how our computers are used.
To that end, every year Linux stays alive and relevant is the year of Linux. You see, Linux is fighting constantly a war against complete eradication. Not just Microsoft, but many software vendors, hardware makers, governments, and yes, a malevolent user base hate Linux, and every minute of every day seek to find ways of eradicating Linux from this world. A world where Linux is quarantined into certain sectors like server environment, is a path to extinction like Netware.
As far as Linux in the social arena. Linux as a social movement in its aspect as a social reform movement need not die out. In the Internet world, Linux is a symbol of transparency, of honest behavior, and accountability. Without Linux we would all be staring at a dark Palladium filled future.
So, in the name of the secular Linux social movement for transparency, property rights, freedom of speech and what not. Try and see what you can do to prevent Linux the OS from going into that quite good night. Develop. Write code, fix drivers, create new ideas. That driver for that hardware, that new application may be the driver or the program that changes history.
Yes there are aspects of Linux that are difficult. So, lets make sure this year isn't the last year of Linux, the year Linux became as obscure as DR-DOS, and Amiga, and the Z80. because, I'm sorry, but some things have to be fought for.
I find Linux more capable on the Desktop than Microsoft. There are often times when MS's (using XP) internal burning software is inadequate - like burning images. I don't know if it's fixed yet, but for a long time XP just would not burn an image with its built in software and you had to use something like Nero. Never had a problem burning an image running any linux distro. Same with mounting .iso right from the harddrive as a cd-rom. It usually required some pay-for software (Alcohol 120%) in Windows, while a 2 minute search yield a few command lines to do it in Ubuntu. I know I'd rather save the money.
A typical mainstream Linux distro is ready. It's often superior in many ways to MS, as MS seems to deliberately makes their OS do almost nothing useful beyond the basics it seems (or was it that Monopoly ruling that caused this?) It's now just 3rd party apps for most people. Web Browsing has reversed itself (there are enough people who wouldn't switch from Firefox due to plug-ins they can't get in IE).
On the Corporate Level, solution providers are slow to change if they're an MS only shop. I even know the university/college level has problems. Blackboard and other such garbage.
I suspect the oncoming economic shitstorm may finally get corporations to really tighten their belts and that company-wide OS licenses may just not fit in the budget anymore looking ahead 5 years in some places. I just hope the current/next generation of purchase managers learns from the past and looks to do away with vendor lock-in in so many areas as much as possible.
A two minute search on Google yields CDBurnerXP as a freeware CD burning tool and Daemon tools as an image mounting tool for Windows.
It might not be free as in speech, but it sure is free as in beer.
Jean-Francois Im's blog
Personally I'm very wary of installing random non-open-source apps on my desktop. I feel a lot better about something that is in the main Debian repository and more or less gpl compatible.
Hell, check out that daemon tools page you linked:
"Dear DAEMON Community,
it come to our attention that someone released a fake DT PRO version that is
contaminated with trojans and viruses, among the fact it is only a DT Lite and
not a PRO version!
We cant underscore enough how important it is that you always download from our
official sites and affiliates!
Nowadays, and with the popularity of DAEMON Tools, it is not unusual to see such
attempts to harm others (and, after all, also our reputation).
Rest assured: we double-check all uploads to our official sites and frequently check
them further to make sure you get no harmfull viruses/trojans!"
Frankly just googling and then downloading stuff that looks like it could help is bound to lead to a malware infested computer. One of the very clear things that good Linux distros have over Windows is the use of a centralized software repository.
"Orthodoxy means not thinking--not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness." --Eric Blair
Unfortunately, what's preventing business's adopting Linux or OS X is the fact that the various 'solution providers' & VARs make more money reselling Microsoft products.
It's not just the Microsoft products that keep businesses using Microsoft products...it's the business processes that are wrapped around the existing software. Upgrades are expensive, but less expensive than conversions to new software (and processes). There are also costs (and questions) regarding conversion of legacy data.
Until businesses can migrate to systems that are agnostic to specific processes (and applications) , it will be difficult to show a positive return on investment for the large expense.
KDE vs. Gnome, Terminal vs. GUI, Vi vs. Emacs, ... and now Kivio vs. Dia! Nice!
Persian Project Management Software as a Service
This is a 100% Linux laptop and still I need to rely on wine and Vmware to use the applications I really want/need.
That's all very well for you, but I still need to rely on Linux for my audio software, which just plain doesn't work in Windows. So, Windows isn't ready for the desktop either.
5? Informative? It's just FUD with a non sequitur example. Randomly downloading an executable and expecting it to be as advertised is not what this is about. He found free software for Windows, thus dismantling the OP's argument. What you did was to compare a software repository in Linux with anything randomly downloaded from the internet. That's not only inaccurate .. it's stupid.
Your example is furthermore flawed because if you'd downloaded DT from the original site (or any other repository you might trust, like Softpedia or FileForum) you wouldn't risk the trojan. There you have what you could call your precious "centralized repository". Add a rogue/unknown repository for, I don't know, MP3 support in Fedora and you're about as safe as you are downloading programs from the evil innertubes! Having a warning from the authors in the authors' site as an example of the benefits of "centralized software repository" in Linux vs freeware on the internet is *facepalm*. It's like saying communism is superior to capitalism because "it's centralized planning and thus perfectly safe and fun for the whole family". Yes. I can use stupid analogies too.
The "centralized software repository" you like is just convenience. Someone compiled software so you don't have to. It's not safe, nor is it for the greater good of the users. Don't find what you want/need in the main repo? You either do what the poor Windows users do and download a package from some evil random website, or compile yourself from some evil random website with sources. Difference being...?
Well, there is one thing. Microsoft isn't allowed to add too many freebies in it's OS because of monopoly allegations (Media Player in Europe for example). Linux just copies stuff they like from the Windows platforms and call it something funny//witty/similar and often get away with it. It's a "port" and not a "copy".
The OP argued about free software in Linux versus, what he believed, were only commercially available software in Windows. He's wrong, and your argument is too.
/* Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana */
These threads are always fun to read.
/rant
If an app crashes on a Windows box, it must be Windows fault. If it crashes on a l/unix box, it must be the app's fault.
If an app that runs on Windows has a price tag attached, it must be Windows fault. If an app that runs on l/unix has a price tag attached, the developer needs thier head checked.
If an app comes comes preinstalled in Windows it's bloat (and Microsoft's fault, even though most of the adware/shareware/freeware has nothing to do with them). If an app comes preinstalled with l/unix, it's a feature.
Yes, Windows is not free and it's not open source. When viewed purely as an OS, it certainly isn't perfect. But please, for the love of God, how is it Windows' fault that *any* other application is not free, and most app/security problems because of poor 3rd party coding? Yet every time this discussion rears its head, people trot out a list of free alternatives to applications that have absolutely nothing to do with Microsoft or Windows (as an operating system) as a reason for how much better thier lives are in Windows free world.
If anything, it's the community that should take the blame for the lack of free/open source software on Windows, not Microsoft.
*Disclaimer: I have nothing against either Windows or linux and use both. This rant courtesy of having had to work with some very rabid linux fanboys in the past. The kind that would regularly spend hours, or even days, fine tuning whatever shiny new app they'd discovered for thier linux box - and then turn around and use it as an excuse as to why thier actual work isn't done (and no, they were not sysadmins).
I find it interesting and a little aggravating that people always imply it is the open source software that isn't interoperable, i.e. "Kivio and Dia can't do that." Visio and the .vsd file format are the ones actively trying not to be interoperable, i.e. "the .vsd file format can't do that."
The problem goes away if the people you work with also use open standards. Even if they don't, usually all it takes is for someone to send you an exported image file instead of a .vsd file, as I rarely have to edit a file someone else controls.
This space intentionally left blank.
I'm not idealistic about open standards. I use them because they are convenient and free, not to protest capitalism or something, and I fully realize some people feel a compulsion to use closed formats. More power to them. I'd just like the blame for lack of interoperability to go where the blame is due.
Having done it successfully through two engineering degrees and 10 years in industry, I can tell you that getting around the compatibility barrier is easier than most people think. 99.9% of the time the following magic words work: "I don't have visio, can you export it to a png or something and resend it?" When you send a file to them, do the same thing. Formats specific to a certain software application are meant for the author or a small group of authors to use, who are likely going to be in the same office and therefore can easily use the same software. Export formats are generally much better suited for "publishing" the work to other people who will not need to edit it.
This space intentionally left blank.