Slashdot Mirror
Mandriva Goes Out of Business
An anonymous reader writes: After struggling for the past several years, Mandriva has finally gone out of business, and is in the process of being liquidated. The company was responsible for Mandriva Linux, itself a combination of Mandrake Linux and Conectiva Linux. When Mandriva fell upon hard times, many of the distro's developers migrated to Mageia Linux, which is still going strong and just putting the final touches on its next major version (5).
Mandriva still sounds like a gay porno.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
Back in 2002-2004 they were a great distribution; based on Red Hat, but using the optimizations for the 586/686 chipsets they made for a solid platform for LAMP powered systems running on last generation hardware. The support was top-notch for subscribers and when I started pushing out BEOWULF type systems for our computational systems they were right there making it flow.
Farewell Mandrake/Mandriva...
He who is always at the bottom of the distribution list, but needs the information first!
My first experience with Linux was Mandrake back in 2003, when I was 16. I had to ask a mate to download the CD images for me because his street had ADSL and I was still on dial-up lol. Fun summer :)
I didn't even realize they were still around.
In 1999, Mandrake was the first distro I ever got installed and running 100%. I've long since abandoned it, but it's a happy memory.
It's a perfect time for being wasted.
A perfect time to watch the stars.
- Burden Brothers, "Beautiful Night"
I made the move to Mageia years ago and never looked back. Still happy. Since it is not a business, it should theoretically not go under. Retains all the spirit and functionality of Mandrake/Mandriva but is completely community driven. It is a great desktop distro.
Face it, if Windows were a politician he'd be re-elected with a 90% majority every time, because Windows can deliver on his promises while Linux can't.
It's only really Linux desktop that does poorly. Embedded, mobile and server are fantastic. Desktop pretends to be (or maybe they actually believe that's what they are creating) a product for end users but is a product for admins and developers who are familiar and comfortable with the UNIX-like environment to use on their personal computers.
The Linux desktop community is a mess of hundreds of different distributions, various different protocols for doing things (how many freaking sound subsystems do you need?! ALSA, PulseAudio, FFADO, Jack, OSS, etc...) and all kinds of different UI paradigms, frameworks and toolkits. There's no consistency because it is all about choice. The problem with that is that the vast majority of computer uses do not want to choose every different option for every different part of the operating system so choosing a distro is a complete headfuck and hoping for consistent look and feel across applications is even worse. Great for (some) developers and admins, crap for the vast majority of other people (and the virtually immeasurable percentage that your anecdotal evidence -- yes i know you set it up for your grandma and she likes it -- represents falls outside the vast majority).
Linux itself is brilliant, it is just that thus far nobody has done a decent job at wrapping it in a desktop distribution palatable to the majority.
The only thing that windows does better there in windows 8 is video drivers... where gamers have gotten used to hard locks until they've tried three different versions of the driver.
Windows doesn't do drivers, the hardware manufacturer writes the drivers. If the driver is crashing that is the responsibility of the vendor.
Oh, but that one OpenSSL bug that was there for so long
What does that have to do with anything? OpenSSL runs on Windows too, heartbleed could be exploited on the Windows platform as well.
>"Strong? That's an understatement considering we're looking at +-1000 hits per day on average... compared to the 10s of thousand hits for Ubuntu"
Really? Because that is not what distrowatch shows. For last 6 months it has it listed as the 8th most watched distro and with 970 hits per day compared to Ubuntu's 1738 hits per day which is not even double.
In the last 12 months, Mageia is ranked 6th. And for the previous 12 months, Mageia was ranked 4th, with hits approaching Ubuntu. Mageia has longer release cycles, so when Mageia 5 hits, watch the current rank start to climb again.
Not that distrowatch is some type of scientific survey or anything, but it is something other than just wild rantings of an "anonymous coward".
Back around 2000 or so, Mandrake was THE distro for newbies. It was a straighforward simple install, and it Just Worked(tm). My first distro that I was able to really get working was Mandrake 8.1
The funny thing about Mandrake distributions was they had their own "only use version 3 of MS whatever" rule. Basically, it was "Use the x.1 version. x.0 and x.2 suck."
They started going downhill with the Mandriva name, and when they ran into financial trouble, I - like many others - switched to Mageia.
Still a damned shame to see them go, though.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
>"First time I ever hear of Mageia. It seems like a minor project in comparison to Mandriva..."
Not really. Most of the Mandriva user base, volunteer base, and contributors moved over to Mageia already, which accelerated the death of Mandriva. And I expect even more now.
I believe it has all the same number of packages and features of Mandriva, just completely community driven instead of by a [small] corporation. It is almost 4 years old now. The now defunct Mandriva even started using the Mageia distribution as a technical platform for their Business Server product in 2012.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...
The only thing that windows does better there in windows 8 is video drivers..
I beg to differ on that.. I have a Dell Precision M4400 that I generally run Linux on. The laptop has Nvidia Quadro FX580M 512mb discrete video. I've *never* had a
hiccup on Linux, using the Nvidia "blob" driver. I did some work for a friend on his Windows install, and rather than pay me, he gave me a spare shrink-wrapped
retail copy of Windows 8.1. Just for shits/grins, I took a spare drive, popped it in the laptop instead of the Linux disk, and installed 8.1.. Figured since I'm the defacto neighborhood "tech support" I might as well get familiar with 8.1, since the last Windows I had any exposure to was Windows 7. The install went ok, and after the several reboots, the system *appeared* to be up and running.. No sooner did I get a local account created on the damn thing (don't want me no MS account...), the fucking thing blows a bluescreen.. the goofy new BSOD screen tells me its a "video_tdr_failure" in "nvlddmkm.sys"... Which of course is part of the Nvidia driver that MS plops on your system if you have an Nvidia card.. And of course, they've changed the way to get into safe mode... I screwed around with it for a while and then just said "Fuckit", and went back to Linux... Guess I'll peddle the package on Craigslist and see what I can get for it...
THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
I don't think that say Ubuntu is particularly more of a headfuck than Windows 8... Windows try really hard to hide some pretty fundamental facts from the user,
just to look simpler to use, with the result that it's *harder* to use the system since a lot of behavior is just inexplicable without the underlying metaphors.
Like the file system in windows for instance. Where are my files? Is the file system root the desktop? Or My Documents, or C:/ or my network drive?
(The driver support on Linux is a bit crappier though, since very few vendors spend time or money on linux drivers for their consumer-class stuff, especially l
>"It is official; Netcraft now confirms: Linux is dying"
Let me guess, you are somehow related to Microsoft...
Your "facts" are very wrong by the way.... Linux is on many orders of magnitude more than 1% of servers.
Go away, anonymous coward...
Comparing the hits of any Linux distro to iOS/OSX or Windows is an apples-and-oranges comparison, and makes little sense. Everyone knows that desktop Linux has a tiny marketshare. It might make some sense to compare to OSX perhaps, but certainly not Windows, and definitely not a mobile OS like iOS.
What you should be comparing is how popular it is in relation to Ubuntu, Mint, Debian, Fedora, Arch, OpenSUSE, and Slackware.
Don't be ridiculous. Majority will be using whatever OS that is pre-installed on the pc. Majority of users won't spot much of a difference between windows, linux and mac nowadays. Differences between them are insignificant for you unless you're a nerd.
Linux driver support definitely is a bit crappier, but it's a lot better than it was even say 5 years ago. Linux's biggest problem on the desktop is the lack of application support, the basics are there and there are a lot of admin/dev/poweruser tools but for workstation users it's pretty slim pickings. Most of the mainstream vendors don't provide Linux support for their biggest offerings - which are more often than not the industry standard - and that is the real issue.
Even if you don't have UI consistency that doesn't really matter once you have opened your programs because you aren't really futzing around in the OS much, you're working in the programs that you need to run. So in that regard from a UI perspective pretty much any Linux distro should be fine and even the Windows 7 to 8 switch isn't really a big deal, your programs still look the same. Linux vendors need to forget fiddling with the UI and all the OS shit that doesn't matter and focus on getting support from major vendors so the OS can do what an operating system's primary purpose is: Run the programs the user wants to run.
My experience is that it has gotten worse. 5 years ago I could pretty much run an arbitrary Linux distribution on an arbitrary 1 year old laptop and have say an 80% chance of few if any problems. Today most interesting laptops have whole swaths of features not covered and many drivers not included. I think hardware got more interesting and the Linux community has gotten less focused on desktop (understandably) and the result has been a huge downgrade in terms of compatibility.
You're probably quite right actually, I was thinking in terms of the quality of the existing drivers - the NV and AMD ones seem to have gotten better as have the open source versions of them. But as far as breadth of hardware support goes yes the landscape has expanded and you're likely right that Linux may not have kept up.
I am downloading it now. I will see how it goes. I have a PC about a year old that I am not sure why I bought it (I think the i7 and 16GB of RAM for something silly like $400 was the reason - stupid NewEgg making me buy silly things I do not need) but it has never had an OS on it at all - it has never even been plugged in - so I think it will suit for a test. I should journal my results and I may but I may be too lazy for that.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Shouldn't someone from the anti-open-source bunch be on here stating that this "proves" that open source isn't viable?
Oops, shouldn't give them ideas.
I more lament the demise of Crunchbang, actually. It was a pretty original concept. But distros come and go. There are market forces in open source, too. Commercial software also comes and goes, but when it goes, users are generally left with ... not much.
You might be interested in Crunchbang++. They are basically a continuation of the original, with the same goals and values. I've been mainly a FreeBSD user since early 2005 or so, and that's my main OS for my workstation. However, when it came to my laptop, nothing could beat Crunchbang on that thing - hope the successor can be as awesome as the original.
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
No. For manufacturers only matter their anti-competitive deals with IBM, Microsoft and what-not. Also, there's no difference between OSes for majority of users so no reason to change..
Technically my first was RedHat and I could not get that fucker to install properly on any machine. Every. Single. One... The monitor would never work - multiple different monitors. It worked during the install process, damn it... I paid for that disk too! Mandrake is the first one that, well, just worked. I had used Sun before it but that was UNIX.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Holy shit... I thought you were dead or something.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Nothing is over.
The distro is the same, present in the daughters OpenMandriva, in Mageia and in ROSA/POCA. The distro is not over, though the forks are just starting to diverge.
The developers are still there, the users are still there -- and above all, Linux is still there. It's not even like when XP reached its EOL. One just has to pick a distro and go on.
The developers are great people. If you try so hard to make it happen, that can only mean you have a strong heart and courage to face the odds. What they lack was Marketing skills. Other Linux distros, if they're smart, are probably contacting these guys because Mandriva had an excellence which I witnessed several times these last years. Or hardware makers, if they need e.g. embedded Linux for, say, a phone... *wink*.
Because the Mandriva guys were thoughtful, the user community has already another place to go, OpenMandriva. BTW, thank you, fellas, you did think about us even in your darkest hour. Not so many are that nice in this world we live now. More than once you saved me. Thanks for being awesome!
Some even opted for Mageia long ago (like me). And ROSA looks another good option. For those who want traditional desktops, there's also other similar distributions, though for hardware support and configuration probably just a few can rival Mandriva.
Actually, there was some wise juggling behind the stages and we now face the demise of just the part of the company which was supposed to offer enterprise services and products. With players like Red Hat, SuSE and Oracle, I think this is a somewhat hard to enter fight. Any other competitor would face difficult odds in that arena.
It's not the end, too, because I bet these people will still offer professional services, either personally or they might join others coming from Mandriva, or from one of the daughters, or still being hired but already existing service providers.
I was much more worried the first time they sank :-) I hope they get reunited in the future, after they perfect their ninja skills to fight again and I hope next time they pay more attention to Marketing -- if nothing more to devise a minimally acceptable name -- even Mageia and OpenMandriva names suck majorly and ROSA, well, ROSA is OK but the logo is blue when it should be rosy! Ever imagined Red Hat's logo in green?
At last, it's not the end, because... it ain't over till the fat lady sings! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_ain%27t_over_till_the_fat_lady_sings
I used various versions of Mandrake up through 10.x or so. It was rock solid and a great workhorse. Fond memories.
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
I dunno - Windows 8.xx doesn't support some of my working older devices all that well - which is understandable as manufacturers can't or won't opensource their code and/or do not want to rewrite drivers for products they are no longer selling. I am running both Windows 8.1 & Manjaro (Arch) Linux and am fairly satisfied with both. I agree that newer stuff always seems to be an issue in Linux at least initially but things usually sort themselves out over time - usually it seems to take longer when there are large changes in pc tech - like displays etc. Overall I think there is actually a greater amount of compatible device drivers for the latest Linux versus the latest Windows.. but ymmv.
Desktop pretends to be (or maybe they actually believe that's what they are creating) a product for end users but is a product for admins and developers who are familiar and comfortable with the UNIX-like environment to use on their personal computers.
This is total BS. Lots of people who aren't computer experts use Linux desktops every day. My wife is one of them. I never have to do anything much with that computer, besides regular backups of course. Back when she was running Windows, I had no end of problems with it. I'm sure plenty of people here can attest to similar stories, of switching their spouses or parents to Linux and no longer needing to spend any time being their unpaid tech support.
What desktop Linux is, is a very good product for people who don't need to run any Windows (or OSX) applications. For home users who just surf the web, use Facebook, and do basic PC tasks like some basic word processing or whatever, Linux works extremely well. For people who just *have* to run Photoshop or whatever, obviously that's a problem, but not everyone is like that.
The Linux desktop community is a mess of hundreds of different distributions, various different protocols for doing things (how many freaking sound subsystems do you need?! ALSA, PulseAudio, FFADO, Jack, OSS, etc...) and all kinds of different UI paradigms, frameworks and toolkits.
You're completely overblowing things. Most modern Linux distros have settled on ALSA and PulseAudio (ALSA is the kernel-level drivers; PulseAudio is a userspace layer on top of that) and it works fine. No one uses OSS on Linux any more, and Jack is only used by a small number of people doing high-performance audio stuff. Different UIs aren't a big problem; people get along just fine choosing a desktop environment like KDE or Cinnamon and sticking with that. Different toolkits don't matter if you aren't developing software; you can run software written in one just fine in a DE written in another.
The problem with that is that the vast majority of computer uses do not want to choose every different option for every different part of the operating system
And they don't need to. Just download a copy of Ubuntu or Mint and be done with it. That's what everyone else does. This choice is generally made by the person who's computer-savvy, and the user doesn't question it. My wife uses KDE because I chose that for her since I prefer it and it works similarly to Windows, and she's never had a problem with it. She doesn't know or ask about Unity, Gnome3, Cinnamon, MATE, Xcfe, etc. People have zillions of choices when they buy a car too, but regular, everyday people don't have a problem there. They pick something they like and stop worrying about it. It may be a car their friend had, or they may have just stopped at a dealership and checked out a few things based on a salesman's advice. No one checks out every single model of car before making a decision.
yes i know you set it up for your grandma and she likes it -- represents falls outside the vast majority).
No, actually it doesn't (BTW, your sentence doesn't parse here). Most home users don't do anything terribly complicated with their computers, and these days they really don't do anything besides use it for web-surfing. This is why tablets have become so popular: people are sick of Windows problems, and tablets work just fine for using Facebook. Linux works fine here too, and better than tablets (since you get a real monitor, a real keyboard, real storage space, etc.). For the things most home users do, Linux does them extremely well. It can even play a lot of games now too, though that still works better on Windows because many games still don't support Linux (including anything that isn't on Steam) of course. No, it doesn't do TurboTax, but who cares: everyone's moving to web-based stuff for that. No, it doesn't run Pro/E, but how many home users do that. I've never heard of someone's grandma running engineering software. No, it doesn't run [random Windows software], but neither does Mac OSX, but I never hear of anyone saying Macbooks aren't viable alternatives.
(The driver support on Linux is a bit crappier though, since very few vendors spend time or money on linux drivers for their consumer-class stuff, especially l
The driver support is usually *better* on Linux because you aren't reliant on some stupid hardware vendor who doesn't feel like updating their driver for a new OS release. This happens on Windows all the time. Driver quality is usually better too; manufacturers are notorious for making shoddy and bloated driver packages with all kinds of extra crapware included.
The main problem where Linux drivers have problems is with video drivers, but most people seem to do just fine with Nvidia's proprietary drivers these days (no, they're not Free/open-source, but they do work and modern distros seem to manage them well enough by most accounts), and if your video needs aren't as high, Intel's drivers work great and are FOSS. A lot of people still seem to complain about AMD stuff though, so I'd avoid that.
I remember popping the disk out to make sure I didn't put a Redhat disk in by mistake when I saw "REDHAT LINUX" across the top of the installer. No, it really was the Mandrake disk.
Chewbacon
The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
Support for cutting edge technology is usually better in Windows but support for ancient technology is usually better in Linux, that said my 10 year old desktop is fully supported in Windows 8.1. I suppose that is really the problem here though, you buy a new laptop with new technology and you want to use it, not wait until somebody has written a Linux driver for it.
It was a sinking ship before I ever started using Linux -- Mandriva 2009 was my first ever distro, and it made me fall in love with Linux. But the writing was on the wall for that company, well documented in the forums I used to frequent back in the day. These days (and since roughly 2010) I'm an Arch Linux user, so I never got on the wagon to Mageia, but back then I so desperately was ready to take on a huge role with the community-based distro that we always talked about.
I hadn't noticed him in a long time. I figured dead or in a psyche hospital.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Once upon a time, it was possible to install Corel Photopaint on Mandrake 9.x and it was fantastic.
Only Apple Macs ruled the designer world roost and this was a rebellion in its on right.
If all you say is true then what is your reasoning for why Linux adoption is still in the low-single-digit percentage?
A combination of: it's long-standing reputation for user-hostility, a general lack of interest in "geeky" things, fear of the unknown, and the fact that you have to go wayout of your way to get a copy.
True story:Iwas talking with a friend, who is a school-teacher, at a bar, and she mentioned how sad she was that the school was shutting down their Ubuntu lab. A while later, Isaid something about Linux, and she said, "Oh Ihate that." So Isaid, "if you hate it, why are you so sad the school is shutting down the Ubuntu lab?" And she replied, "Oh, is that Linux? Ihad no idea! Ithought it was that system where you had to type to make the computer do anything." :)
Shame really. I picked up a copy of Mandrake 7.0 in July of 2000 at the local Staples (office superstore chain), at the time their version numbers were 1 higher than Redhat. They created a host of software tools (all with "drake" in the name), at the time hardrake was the best Linux hardware detection library and was used by several other distros.
... but I'm still sorry to see them close down.
A couple of years after that I reported a bug with the installer of the then-new version (8.0). When they wrote me back they asked if I needed help with the bug, I told them that I'd worked around it in terminal mode, so they asked me if I'd like to be a "crash tester" and I said "Sure." They sent me a free copy of 8.0 (which I obviously already had) and a black and yellow shirt featuring a cartoonish penguin crash test dummy. I worked with them for 3-4 years, until they stopped supporting my old hardware. After trying half a dozen other versions, I settled on OpenSUSE for about a year and a half. Once I finally upgraded my hardware I went back to what was then Mandriva.
When Mageia released their own 1.0, I installed that. The next version of Mandriva included the Rosa desktop and was trying to do too much for my system to handle, so I reluctantly said "farewell" and have stuck with Mageia since.
So they left me, a couple of times
Please stop spamming Slashdot. It shows a great disrespect for everyone who reads your posts. It's also counter-productive to your cause, as it is advertising your system can not block, but your competitors can.
You are wrong. OEMs charge money to preinstall software (trial-ware, most of it). They can do that on Windows, but not on Linux. Thus, it actually ends up costing more (in terms of opportunity costs) to install Linux over Windows.
Windows has always been easier to use with multiple drives or partitions or CD/DVD drives. /media/username/f907c92b-cc37-4207-aab7-90a526d154f2 (I shit you not), semi-auto mounted.
You just go to D:\, E:\, F:\ etc. instead of doing a mkdir as root and editing the fstab, or living with poor defaults like
You can also go to Disk Management to assign drive letters, "deassign" them for partitions you don't want to see mounted and as far as the user is concerned : there's one file system root per file system.
Why isn't that simpler? linux is better is you want to do some shit like mounting a specific subdirectory (/usr/blah etc.) from a network share and Windows is rather more inflexible, but doesn't require expert knowledge to access data.
I also have that GUI component that pops to warn the system disk is almost full (that can be useful!). It offers to help me, and that launches a piece of software that does a recursive search to show me where space is wasted but as this is the / drive it searches all file systems, which is slow and useless.
" Is the file system root the desktop? " I think that matters fuck all to most users as most users don't know what you mean by "root file system".
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
I can adapt to it fine, except for when it ends up like this http://imgur.com/QQojrbG
How sad. Mandrake was the first Linux distro I tried, years ago.
The reasons why GP is far from an excellent reply:
1. Anecdotes are not data. Doubly so if its someone who lives with you.
2. Native apps still matter because they attract a wide-ranging ecosystem of talented people who move between native apps and the Web, and...
3. ...That range of people between grandma and kernel developers form networks of support and advocacy. If the Power Users don't like your pile of bytes called an OS, the more creative ones won't start writing interesting apps for their non-techie friends and colleagues, and they won't recommend the OS either.
4. People depend on the 'look and feel' of software environments. Its what enables tech support staff to deliver *usable* instructions in a way that doesn't feel threatening to users, and also to get reliable answers from those same users. Having a well-defined GUI is important, but Linux is very slippery in this area.
There are many more reasons why GP represents nerdy myopia and wishful thinking. Perhaps the most important one is that Apple and Microsoft laid down, by example, a de-facto definition of what Desktop Personal Computer is. The FOSS community actively sabotages itself whenever it tentatively tries to reverse engineer the *concept* of the desktop PC; I think most of those numbskulls would define it as some kind of aberration that needs to be stomped out. Where "platform" is supposed to evoke (feature) stability and recognizable surroundings, the Desktop Linux crowd instead create this.
Perhaps I should start using stronger words than "numbskull" for these true believers.
I can always spot the authentic ones, because they contain the "we have the Web so who needs a native UI or native apps" meme.
Did you ever consider that people advance this idea because it's true? There's plenty of people that JUST want email and the web. They don't care about native apps and never will. They use their computers to communicate with other people, and couldn't care one whit about doing their taxes on their computer, or editing video.
Its demonstrably UNtrue, otherwise Apple and Microsoft would not still be viable companies. "Plenty of people" apparently does not define the whole consumer electronics market.
That you think Chrome OS belongs in the Desktop Linux category is instructive... But Google doesn't even identify Chrome OS as Linux. They could switch to a different, closed kernel and hardly anyone using Chromebooks would notice or care. That's because a Chromebook is a type of mainframe terminal or client, not a personal computer (it may be converted to a PC, but that's not its design).
If you don't think this is a common windows experience, you're not paying attention.
The tragedy is that you can't even give a Desktop Linux distro away for free despite how awful that Windows experience has been.
Desktop pretends to be (or maybe they actually believe that's what they are creating) a product for end users but is a product for admins and developers who are familiar and comfortable with the UNIX-like environment to use on their personal computers.
This is total BS. Lots of people who aren't computer experts use Linux desktops every day. My wife is one of them.
The obligatory Slashdot-Linux-enthusiast defense of "Desktop Linux for my relative" never ceases to make me chuckle. I can always spot the authentic ones, because they contain the "we have the Web so who needs a native UI or native apps" meme.
The real problem with Linux on the desktop, in my experience, is the first time a new user goes looking for software somewhere other than the distro repository.
Back in my foolish days of trying to change the world, one family asked me to fix their incredibly ancient old Windows 95 machine that was infected up the gazoo with malware, and had failing components too. I ended up giving them a much newer Pentium III machine totally free, with a highly customized Linux install I tailored to their tastes and needs. I offered this with free around the clock tech support. About a week later, I got a call asking how the guy's wife could get her emails back. Apparently they got some incredibly tantalizing piece of malware they couldn't live without installing, and the malware wouldn't run on Linux, so they hosed everything, including their emails, in the process of installing Windows on the machine. So they could install the malware, and infect the computer, no less!
That is when I finally accepted Linux on the desktop was a pipe dream. Both of my children eventually moved to Windows too, after growing up with Linux from the time they first started using computers. They wanted to play video games, and even though Linux has Steam, Steam on Linux is a joke.
I barely care myself anymore, but every time I think I'll just go with the flow and join the rest of the world, it only takes a few minutes to change my mind. If you haven't yet experienced a Linux installation on a brand new Windows 8 machine, you're in for a treat there. It took two hours and repeated Windows boots to negotiate my way to the damn BIOS screen to get it to boot something else. Disposing of that hideous garbage was a joy, but I am a weird freak, and I am in the 0.0000001% or something. Long live Windows! Hallowed be thy name!
Sigh.
That's actually incorrect. Windows ran a customized openssl that is not vulnerable. http://blogs.microsoft.com/cyb...
That's talking about the Windows' builtin services don't run OpenSSL at all, they use their own SSL/TLS implementation, the article you linked even says that. However you can run OpenSSL on Windows and if you ran a version that had the heartbleed vulnerability it is just as exploitable on Windows as on Linux.
If all you say is true then what is your reasoning for why Linux adoption is still in the low-single-digit percentage?
Because if what he says is true then the operating system doesn't matter at all. So long as you can turn on your computer and hit the button for the web browser you'd be set, you can do that on Windows and OSX already on your desktop so there's still no reason to switch to Linux and that's why its marketshare remains low.
If users only care about the web browser then what's the point of any of these Linux distros?
OEMs charge money to preinstall software (trial-ware, most of it). They can do that on Windows, but not on Linux.
You can't preinstall software on Linux? Why not? What would stop them from preinstalling the trial of McAfee or avast! or AVG linux trial products?
Sad you folks consider it a troll. They really did do that, and left many of us really upset over it. Upset enough to stop buying their product and switch to other distributions.
This sig intentionally left blank.
One one side we have all the schemes that Gates & Zuckerberg dream up to make every kid a computer genius.
On the other we have teachers who are as dumb as box of rocks.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
IBM T40. No Sound or WiFi on Windows 7. Both work fine on Scientific & Kali.
Asus Eee. Everything works on both, but the touchpad configuration utility (which was excellent on XP) doesn't work on 7.
Clevo D900T: Had problems getting sound on both Win 7 and CentOS driver didn't install by default. Can't get WiFi to work on either. Can't find a GeForce driver that will install on Win 7, so only get full resolution on Linux.
So for me Linux wins more often than it loses in the driver game.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Wait, I thought that any time now we'd have the "Year of the Linux Desktop!" It has only been promised to us for 20 years now.
http://www.zdnet.com/article/2...
That was from 2004.
http://tech.slashdot.org/story...
That is from 2005, but has some interesting observations from years past
http://linux.slashdot.org/stor...
That one is from 2007, it asks "Is 2008 the Year of the Linux Desktop?"
---
NO IT IS NOT AND IT NEVER WILL BE. Yea, yea, a few techies use it and will probably always use it. It will run millions of servers and continue to do so. And 10 years from now, 95% of desktop and notebook PCs will continue to run Windows.
If Microsoft has its way with Secure Boot, it will be 100 percent.
You think so? My understanding is that Secure Boot can be turned off in the BIOS.
I also thought that you could get a "secure boot" version of Linux.
If I'm mistaken, please let me know.