Slashdot Mirror
Is Microsoft Afraid?
Joeldg sent us a link
to a fairly nice upside story that asks the question
is Red Hat Linux making Microsft Afraid?. It's a pretty realistic
article. Cites Linux's shortcomings, and what MS has to fear.
Worth a gander.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
as usual!
that for a techy/cool website, the people who would read and actually understand the content, would not be as lame as to post the "first" comment. Sorry Rob, while your website is "en vogue", lamers will exist.
The article is very realistic. I use Linux almost exclusively, I download or write most of my software, and I read lot's of positive things about Linux because that's what I like to read; but every time I walk down the software isles at CompUSA or Fry's, I realize how far Linux still has to go. Linux doesn't need to kill Microsoft to be successful; if it manages to provide a reasonable alternative it will have been successful.
The seem to be suffering the /. already.
cool!
and Apache 1.2.0
Wonder why they'd leave telnet open?
Companies as large as Mickeysoft cant possibly keep track of exactly who has a knife at their throat in the marketplace.
If you asked Billy who Linus was, he would probably respond "That Peanuts character."
Its not going to matter, anyway. By the time Microsoft figures out what the free software movement is all about, it will already be too late for them to do anything about it. Its like trying to dodge a bullet -- "Uhoh, a bullet is coming at me from the schoolbook depository! I better duck!"
Not likely.
President John F. Kennedy
Defrosted Ex-President Of The United States Of America
http://propaganda.themes.org
This is a Linux page? Since when is this a Linux page?
No-brainer *setup* doesn't necessarily mean no-brainer *administration*. We had an NT server before switching to Linux and, although I agree that the basic configuration is easier, I had to do plenty of trudging through NT's abominable registry when something went wrong that the GUI tools couldn't handle. NT's GUI setup tools are nice, but having to deal with the registry later on when something craps is, if anything, more difficult than using ascii config files.
Red Hat is building a strong brand that is an alternative to both Windows NT and Unix
These silly industry analysts have been predicting the death of Unix for as long as I can remember. Now their saying Linux will kill Unix??? Damn it, NT borrows heavily from Unix, and Linux IS Unix!!! How can Unix be on it's way out, when every popular new OS is now Unix-derived? Let's see... BeOS is based on Mach... Apple is adopting NeXT... NT claims POSIX compliance and touts a poor imitation of BSD sockets... the only thing not running Unix is the PalmPilot!
... best friend.
They just sued a Norwegian municipality for license
violations. This was after the municipality had
purchased enough licenses to comply.
The Norwegian judge awarded MS 900 dollars measely
dollars in damages. What a joke!
NT = VMS = kitchen sink
Mac OS X = Next = Mach
Linux is not really Unix(TM).
Linux has pretty much caught up with commercial Unicies. Microsoft's Jim Allchin attributes Linux's success to "chasing taillights". Linux is now entering "pure development". What will Linux 4.0 look like? I'm very interested to watch Linux as it grows PAST Unix!
...from Red Hat. Unless they are trying to be voted worst OS of the year.
Sorry, you don't know what you're talking about.
X11 is not a GUI, it's a protocol specification and a low-level mechanism.
Look and feel of an X based GUI are all a function of what window manager is used.
KDE and gnome are examples of modern Unix desktops, while e.g. the archaic twm could used as an example for the unix haters book.
I'm very happy with KDE - it's nicer than ms windows, and has a lot of features that microsoft hasn't ever thought of...
Hope this clears things up!
www.linuxapps.com
www.freshmeat.net
www.linuxlinks.com
www.linuxhq.com
www.stardivision.com
www.you get the picture. com
I use an international operating system called "Linux". Why do I care if some local company likes it or not?
Weird.
Sorry, my mistake... but it is a micro-kernel architecture, right?
"---- Linux is the only REAL O/S everything else is a joke."
I have four HP-UX application servers, 2 Solaris application servers, 2 freeBSD machines for firewall and corporate web server as well as several Linux print servers. They've all been up since the last power failure 273 days ago. They're all remotely administerable. The HP-UX and Solaris machines are serving applications that aren't available under Linux. Linux is good, but trashing everything else is serving anyone's interest.
Who made you the arbiter of stories for slashdot?
Lemme guess... In real life, nobody likes you either, right?
If you don't like the story, someone else might. And you may be surpised to find out that some things that you like a lot, other people don't. Shocking, isn't it?
Just trying to help you in your life lessons. Who knows, if you learn to treat people with respect, one day, they may not all hate you.
OK :)
Hay, when people in large companies have a dissagreeement, they hold more meetings. Everyone spends there time discussing the issue and making presentations. In the end, someone higher up in management makes the call.
With Linux, when a dissagreement comes up, they hold a flamewar. Everyone jumps in and takes a stance on the issue. In the end, those who write code decide the issue.
It may not be pretty, but it's a hell of a lot better than what big companies give you.
But then, why would they want it?
;-)
to "embrance and extend" microsoft?
The 'Microsoft' icon is a picture of Bill Gates, obviously. But what is that red thing near his right eye? A planetoid? Some kind of wearable computer?
Exactly.
I'd also add to that list that I'd like to see constructive critism of MS. I don't like their business tactics but most of their software is very good.
A lot of the things that they do wrong are very difficult to get right. Very, very difficult to get right in practice. Stability on anything and the ability to run on old hardware are very difficult. Of course Linux and the army of programmers and willing beta testers excel at these things.
But Office is a nice product. The products which I use on Linux now aren't quite as pretty. I'm not sure if it's the years of learning the 'Word/Excel' paradigm or if they are intuitive (I started using Word on a Mac in '88 so at this point it's impossible to judge.) I wonder if I'd been using LaTex/Emacs since then if it would be at easy.
This is something that the Linux community often over looks. So NT is a couple hundred bucks and Office is $500 bucks. How much is training and lost productivity?
I learned HPUXnix in college and it took me a significant time investment to be my own SysAdmin. Are we asking to much of the average user who has never stopped pointing and clicking?
Instead of ripping each others flaming each others favorite distribs/projects/opinions we should be pointing out possible solutions to fellow Unixers.
Free software will always survive. It's up to us if this current era is just a flash in the pan or the start of long evolution.
-Pete
"----- Linux is the only REAL O/S everything else is a joke."
I have four HP-UX application servers, two Solaris application servers, two freeBSD machines handling the firewall and corporate web site, as well as several Linux print servers. All have been up since the last power failure 273 days ago, and all are remotely administratable. The HP-UX and Solaris machines are serving applications that aren't available under Linux. Linux is good, but trashing everything else doesn't serve any purpose.
You amuse me:
You have good points, but you are snotty and arrogant.
I know I'll probably get some names wrong but here it goes. A long time ago a guy made am OS called "Rochester Intelligent Gateway" at the University of Rochester (One article I read said Rochester Institue of Technology made it, but after going their and being part of their CS program I fine that hard to believe). this guy later went to Carnegie Mellon University. There he developed the first Mach kernel. And where is he know. He sold out and is working at Microsoft.
But you forgot the Borg's favorite tag-line -- The network is the computer!
School work?
I use WordPerfect for Linux and print to a Wintendo machine.
You can also checkout StarOffice and Applixware (don't know the URLs).
"You have a problem with ____? Okay, go to start/programs/vnc/WinVnc3.2.2?"
-conects to remote desktop-
"Okay, I see your problem, the volume control was set to mute"
-disconnects from user pc-
"Okay, you can listen to your cd's now..."
Vnc (or any PCAnywhere) like product is really a helpdesks dream, providing the problem isn't with their network connection.. It's in this months Linux Journal
has anybody quanitized the slashdot effect? just how many hits/sec do "slashdotted" sights get? 100? 200? 500? it'd be really easy to replace all the URL's in the stories with a redirect then analyze the logs of the redirect... is there any effort made to warn these sights? or just the friendlies?
In early 1996, I worked at a place that took a look at Windows 95, and rightfully said "Damn, that's a lot better than 3.1!!", so the plan was to push it out to user desktops very quickly.
You wouldn't believe the resistance that was encountered. People just refused to learn the new UI, and the company wisely refused to install the 3.1 interface on 95. Some users had to have two weeks of training.
In short, "nerds" may be able to sufficently generalize a GUI in their minds but normal people get very disturbed if you move things around. In my mind, if you think "KDE/GNOME are pretty = Desktop Linux is a go!", you are grossely overestimating most users.
Come on, people, think for yourselves!
Just because you enjoy Linux does not automatically require you to use the horribly inane "M$" and all the close-minded opinions that inevitably follow.
You don't like Windows? Fine. Continue contributing to an alternative. But your insistence on being slaves to the anti-Microsoft opinion that happens to be your latest fad only gives the open-source movement a reputation as isolated and unintegrable.
You routinely insist that market share does not correlate with quality -- that Linux's comparatively small share does not imply that it is too poor for mass consumption. Why, then, should you use that same fallacy to insist that large market share must imply the same lack of quality? Do you also find it unthinkable that the inspired works of Shakespeare could come from a man not sharing the same degrees as hang on your wall?
uh, it's book REpository, or in your case,
;-)
SUPpository ?!?
cointelpro24
Linux wins not by beating MS at their own game, but by playing by differnt rules.
With Linux, you dont need to have the company use an emploee as a Sysadm. A bad sysadm is worse then no sysadm.
What you do is, you remotely admin Linux. You outsource your admin work. This works beatufully with Linux (esp when coupled with VNC on windows client computers). All there needs to be at the company is someone who can handle calling when there is a problem, and perhaps loading the windows networking settings (which is the same for NT vs Linux). You can provide an idot tool on the server for adding users if needed, but this should be outsourced too.. The server should have a watchdog card, and the ability to call out for help.
For the company this is a much better AND cheaper solution then having a normal emploee be a networking guy.
It occurs to me that eventually Linux will follow the pattern: A massive group of idealists band together to form a beautiful system, built on sharing. But the system eventually becomes run by one stardards body, the one with the most power (Red Hat), and suddenly you're all slaves again and you're blind to the fact that you lost the stuggle. Congratulations, you labored to create a monster.
Watch.
ok, i like the anti-ms stuff as much as the next guy, but you (posting) people aren't responding with anything that could remotely be considered advocating a POSITIVE image of LINUX. :^ ... so try to be a little more responsible with your actions and your WORDS. think you're comments through, please.... and hey! helping an old lady cross the street=installing & configuring & supporting our favorite OS on a "PC's for dummies" candidate... get it? got it ? good !
;^) ;^)
/dev/null.
most of you sound like a bunch of little children... and most of you probably are. which in itself is no big deal. but you act like this is such a cut and dried issue (anything ms=bad).
when you grow up a little, you'll realize things aren't always clearly defined, black and white issues. think of yourselves as boy scouts, except
that ain't no american flag on your shoulder, it's
TUX
BTW i run BOTH NT and LINUX on my system for various reasons, and i LOVE LINUX... but my NT
machines do not crash under normal usage... (my linux machines don't crash under ANY usage
maybe if you actually learn how to PROPERLY administer a NT machine, it's ok (as a desktop box
comments? gripes? flames? i welcome intelligent debate, but "f*ck you's" go promptly to
Hawaiian Style
hawaiistyle@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~hawaiistyle
Netscape crashes Linux frequently?
I've been involved with Linux for quite some time and I've never heard of that happening... not to say it doesn't, but as a non-root user it should be near to impossible for an application to cause a crash. Even as a root user Netscape doesn't ever crash at least _my_ system...
What does happen is, a lot of people jump into X soley to run Netscape when they need it, and console-switching between X and text can crash you sometimes, though it seems to have been nearly fixed with newer X servers. Is that perhaps what you meant?
Actually, in my experience, the newer versions of Netscape are somewhat more stable on Unix than NT, though neither manage a full system crash on any sort of regular basis.
Uhm... most commercial websites _love_ hits. The # of hits is an important statistic to sell advertising space. Copying the articles locally would be extremely rude, and as somebody said, illegal.
Maybe for small noncommercial sites, who have been asked in advance?
I can't believe how much time and effort you people spend on Microsoft bashing. Yes, MS sucks. Just leave them alone. I am sick of Slashdot headlines like "Is microsoft scared?". Come on, I am bored already. Isn't there anything more interesting to write about?
Reading this article just made me realize...
AOL owns Netscape, and Netscape owns a chunk of RedHat, so AOL owns part of RedHat! Ohmigod!
In the Windows world there are several "security" products which change the desktop in some way.
How do organisations get arround resistance of users to be able to install these?
People with home systems are more likely to have
95 or 98 than NT. (Apparently MS have changed their timetable for unified NT with everthing, yet again.) Yet there are differences between NT and other versions of Windows. (e.g. NT using Ctrl+Alt+Del as a SAK.)
IIRC a Japanese group of developers have designed an X window manager which is a very close match for the 95 desktop.
How similar do things have to be before it isn't an issue? In many other areas people manage to operate machines which have a similar, but not identical user interface. (Otherwise there would be a monopoly on televisions, cars, toasters, etc.)
Lots of small companies rely on the secretary or the accountant, or who ever seems to know computers best to maintain their network. Dunno if you want to drop Linux in there. Even NT might be a bad idea.
The point of the whole article was that Linux is now primarily viable as a SERVER OS.
Your whole rant was about how you set up Linux as SERVER OS.
Exactly how does this make the article off-base? When you set up several businesses with Linux on every desktop, get back to us.
>I'll admit for the desktop it's a bit off until
>the applications show up. but that is the ONLY
>reason that Linux with KDE isnt on every desktop.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Have you ever used BeOS?
Anyone who thinks that Windows is easier to install than Linux in 1999 probably only thinks they "installed" Windows... they probably bought it preinstalled. I can build 3 Linux boxes in the time it takes to do 1 Win, and I lose a lot less hairs in the process.
Here we go with this BeOS crap again. Remember Linux is the real O/S and everything else is crap. BeOS doesn't exist!!!
'Nuff said. God of all UI.
Maybe as a server Linux is sweet but it doesn't make for a good desktop OS and will not for quite some time. This is where we can work together because BeOS would need to be upgraded to make it even stink as a server. Why not work on conquering the world together? We stand a much better chance that way.
Wow, "hackers" must have an awful reputation for them to think that "code meddlers" sounds any better! :-)
Linux is very much like Unix, but it doesn't have Unix branding from The Open Group. The main reason is Linux doesn't have a big company with the money to pay for Unix branding.
This may change, there has been some hinting that The Open Group may work with the Linux community to get Unix98 branding (of course this was last year, and I don't see it happening)
It's still used in the medical and scientific community to name things
Yes, and when the monster is created and not liked, twenty or thirty of those slaves can take the source code and make their own nicer monster
Watch.
It's the power of open source.
I'm using a Linux box as a mission-critical web server, file server, and internet gateway. It's worked flawlessly; the hardware and software was virtually free...
But that's not good enough for me. What I want to know is, is Adobe scared? Does Bill Gates experience loss of bladder control when he thinks of Linux? The answers to these questions are important to me; I can't fully enjoy Linux unless I know it is making other people very unhappy.
Funny, I would have never considered myself to be a Communist. I'm for small goverment and for freedom of choice.
Please tell me where Redhat will *FORCE* me to do anything? If I don't like a certian subsystem (example: Networking, UGH! GO BACK TO ORIGNAL BSD/SysV STYLE PLEASE!) I ignore it and do it by hand.
It is like saying, "So your a Microsoft fan. How do you like being part of the BORG?" It's a sill unformed statement.
Agree.. Redhat/Linux vs Deb*n vs Slackware vs FreeBSD vs OpenBSD vs NetBSD...
It's silly.
I'm a strong Redhat and OpenBSD user. I'd love to see some merger of the two to build a better and stronger UNIX. Taking OpenBSD attention to details and Redhat's very well done Package manager.
But I doubt that any real work will occur with too many of the groups due to Political and Pig-headness.=(
The concept of Windows is very good. It is easy. Easy to install. Easy to run. (Easy to crash. [Evil Grin])
Many of the people running other operating systems had to configure them, debug them, and many of them are still not configured to be optimal. Windows does all of the configuring itself. This makes things better in way.
The problems arise when you cannot configure everything that you want. The problems arise when too much disk space is taken because the operating system wants to be compatible with everything. The problems arise when it crashes because it is virtually impossible to be compatible with everything.
When Windows becomes useable and home PCs and 'average users' have the stability that even NT does not offer, we will begin to see the benefit of the phrase 'user-friendly'.
My basic point would be 'What good is software if the average user cannot use it?'. Windows compatibility and standardization is good for developers that want to distribute to the masses.
I have a reason to hate Linux.
Description:
I am developing an EDA tool.
It is more than 100,000 lines of C++ code.
I am building it on both Linux and NT.
I use GNU C++ on Linux and Microsoft Visual C++ under Windows.
When I build it with GNU C++,
it takes me 25 minutes to build.
When I build it with Microsoft Visual C++,
it takes me also around 20 minutes to build.
HOWEVER WHEN I BUILD IT WITH MICROSOFT C++
USING EXPLICIT PRECOMPILED HEADER FEATURE,
IT TAKES JUST 2 (TWO) MINUTES TO BUILD.
Summary: Microsoft - 2 minutes, Linux - 25 minutes. Linux sucks.
Maybe I just dont know how to use precompiled headers with Linux GNU C++.
Maybe. But in this case Linux sucks too because
Linux is unfriendly enough to prevent me from
figuring out how to get an information
about GNU precompiled headers use.
I have a reason to hate Linux.
Description:
I am developing an EDA tool.
It is more than 100,000 lines of C++ code.
I am building it on both Linux and NT.
I am using GNU C++ on Linux
and Microsoft Visual C++ under Windows.
When I build it with GNU C++,
it takes me 25 minutes to build.
(Pentuim II 450 MHz)
When I build it with Microsoft Visual C++,
it takes me also around 20 minutes to build.
(Pentuim II 450 MHz)
HOWEVER WHEN I BUILD IT WITH MICROSOFT C++
USING EXPLICIT PRECOMPILED HEADER FEATURE,
IT TAKES JUST 2 (TWO) MINUTES TO BUILD.
Summary: Microsoft - 2 minutes, Linux - 25 minutes. Linux sucks.
Maybe I just dont know how to use precompiled headers with Linux GNU C++.
Maybe. But in this case Linux sucks too because
Linux is unfriendly enough to prevent me from
figuring out how to get an information
about GNU precompiled headers use.
X is not a GUI! X has never been a GUI! X will never be a GUI!
X is quite user friendly. You type startx and it starts. After that, it's not X that decides whether the system is user friendly, it's the applications. And just so you know, I consider Emacs to be far more user-friendly than any form of editor MS has ever made. Not as newbiefriendly, perhaps, but definitely more friendly to me.
English borrows heavily from Latin. Does that mean that Latin isn't "out"
Ancient Romans, if they lived now, will be unable to understand English, leave along recognise it as Latin. Unix users however recognise Linux as their system.
Beyond that. BeOS is not Mach based, though it does have a POSIX interface, as does NT. Same goes for MacOS 10. This doesn't make any of them "UNIX" or even UN*X.
BeOS and NT have "POSIX" implementation that barely satisfies basic requirements to comply with POSIX.1. Quality of implementation in both is below the lowest standards, and both BeOS and Windows NT aren't really designed to be used with that.
BTW, "Unix" and "POSIX" aren't the same standards (at least what is commonly recognized as "Unix" -- what TOG says is different matter). Unified file descriptors, one of the cornerstones of Unix philosophy, for example, aren't present in BeOS and NT.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
I heard from someone that MS held a large meeting to discuss how they fear the massive user-friendliness of X11. And how easy it is to setup.
Hm. Several interesting bits in your comment caught my eye. To wit:
Red Hat does not "re-package" Linux. They "package" it. Linux as such is the kernel, the ext and ext2 filesystems, and some other assorted miscellany that are not found in other Un*x variants. Packaging entails selecting system utilities, writing init-scripts, filesystem layouts, writing installscripts, and other entertaining but admittedly tiresome drudgery. Although I've done it, I prefer to buy a CD or 6, as my time is a lot more costly than buying a distribution.
As another poster pointed out, "NOT" hiring anyone with an MCSE could deprive you of some great talent. That kind of policy is a knee-jerk reaction...rather, hire someone who will fit the bill, regardless of certifications obtained. Versatility is the name of the game in administration, and if you know Linux upside down and inside out, but you know no other OS, you are probably not going to get too far in a multi-platform environment.
As to your rather interesting comment of "Linux is the only REAL O/S" with everything else being "a joke"....sheesh. IRIX running on an Origin 2000 is far from a joke. OpenBSD running on my Mac Centris makes a rather laughable little box into quite a serious firewall. For future reference, this philosophy-professor adage might prove useful: "All general statements are false, including this one".
Posted by Wayne Steele:
To the best of my knowledge, BeOS is not based on Mach. It uses a completely new kernel written from scratch by Be, Inc.
BeOS does possess some Unix-like properties. But the code is fresh.
Straw-man fallacy. No such claim was made.
This is a Linux page,
That's incorrect too.
The "cue the foo posts in 3, 2, 1..." posts will commence with no subsequent foo posts in 3, 2, 1...
Yep, that's pretty realistic there.
The applications are there, if you look for them. No, not MS-Office. Unfortunately, WINE will run some versions of that beast, but at least it won't bring your system down like Office does under Windows.
I really like the bit about the "weak anti-trust defense". Poke, poke...
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
What does this mean?
It's a fact that what linux does (and has been doing for some time now) it does very well. This means server-oriented stuff: webserver, samba, print services, and the like. Office automation and intra/internet type goodies.
Linux ALSO does, to varying degrees of sucess, a number of desktop/personal computing type things, but it's true that there is a terrible lack of applications at present. Trends appear to be turning that around though, what with new commercial backers jumping on the linux bandwagon every time you look over your shoulder. Disregarding whether or not that's A Good Thing(tm), it certainly will add commercial viability to our little OS. More commercial viability means more money to be made, which will attract more developers, which will increase linux usability (and OSS in general), which in turn will grab more people's attention, etc. The feedback loop is in place, but it certainly hasn't built to a point where MS has fear... nervous, maybe?
FWIW - I installed KDE 1.1 on my laptop and it impressed my wife enough for her to do a decision-reversal about letting me install Linux on her machine. I'll probably scoop a mandrake installation, seeing how that seems the most mind-numbingly user friendly distro linux has to offer right now ;)
--
rickf@transpect.SPAM-B-GONE.net (remove the SPAM-B-GONE bit)
"People will pay big bucks for the luxury of ignorance."
and that gentlemen is the current dilemma. While there are some commercial apps around, (wp, star-office etc) linux requires more (and I'll qualify this) 'gui apps' for USERS that are as easy to purchase, install and run as m$ apps.
This is one area M$ does do well.
"..opinions are like R-Soles, everyones got one..."
peterrenshaw ~ Another Scrappy Startup
Linux runs on the Pilot. (A tricked out, hopped up Pilot, to be sure- but it runs on it just the same!)
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
What Company Hires a person with no networking knowledge to setup a network?
Not Mine.
Oh, I get it, you're one of those DAU's who does nothing but complain (without knowing the facts) when you can't get something done. You sound typical of the users at the company I work for......
Do not read this
They may want us to think there is brutal competition while the courts are still in session so they would have some kind of justification for eliminating 95% of the competition. If I pulled the crimes they are accused of commiting on such a scale, I would be doing some time.
Its not cool to screw your customers. You don't make $50 billion by accident with poor quality. But, they most likely will, since they have rewritten history, bought up news and broadcasting firms, travel, etc... Its the dark side, its your destiny. Its a dark shade of blue and time for a reboot.
ah, maybe someday after,
Bill G. is committed to a mental hospital.
M$ stock plummets to $0.24 per share.
RedHat Linux continues to gain market share.
Could happen someday.
Put some game console emulators on Linux and viola! You have a computer for the masses.
Cheers!
Lumpy wrote
>>Now I am training the IT department for them >>with a reccomendation of NOT hiring anyone that >>says the acronym MSCE.
Not _everyone_ who has an MSCE is an M$ goon.
Admittedly the MSCE is totally an MS specific course and gives you no alternatves. But some people with MSCE are senior *nix gurus who would prefer to use Linux or anything close to unix. Espcially when the alternative is from M$.
So please re-state your recomendation about "not hiring anyone that says acronym MSCE" to make an exception for people who are ashamed to have an MSCE.
Your Obedient Serpent,
smithdog
They would move into the buildings of the M$ campus in Redmond and format all hard drives then install Linux everywhere. Then on the second day they would lay-off all M$ employees and invite them back on day three for a job fair. If you know enough about *nix and are willing to take a cut in pay, then you _could_ be re-hired.
Be that as it may, you know what? Idiots shouldn't be setting up networks. Just because it happens a lot doesn't make it right.
If you don't know what you're doing, you're going to screw it up, no matter how "user-friendly" the tools are.
I have been using my laptop to take notes in class for over four years. I started running DOS and Win3.1, running WordPerfect 6.0, and also use my laptop to process my chemistry labs, write term papers, and all the other miscellany that students do. Later I upgraded to Win95 and WP7.0, then WP8.0, and kept doing the same things. Four months ago, I wiped my hard-drive and installed FreeBSD(an alternative to Linux which runs most Linux software). I eagerly awaited WP8.0's release to the Linux community, and found myself somewhat disappointed at it's crippled nature. I discovered, however, that the way to write things effectively, especially for school (I'm currently a grad student) is TeX, particularly LaTeX, specifically either Lyx or KLyx.
The basic theme is text-processing rather than word-processing. It allows you to focus on the text, rather than the format, it takes care of all of that for you. Rather than being an over-glorifyied typewriter, either of these programs use the TeX format to make beautiful documents, with equations, embedded pictures, and so forth. I've never seen better looking printouts from a computer. There's a small learning curve, because the paradigm is different from that of word processors, but it's a superiour way t do things, no doubt.
As to spreadsheets, check out Wingz, which has just about everything that should be needed. KOffice also has good alternatives, if you like, including presentation software. There's plenty of software for the student to use on Linux, no one should be left wanting.
"People who pick Linux would never have selected Windows NT to begin with," says Dan Kusnetzky, International Data Corp.'s program director of operating environment research.
This is wrong... it might be true for people in the rarified atmosphere at IDC, but I replaced an NT4 server with Linux and Samba here and have been very pleased with the results (it is noticeably faster, and I no longer have to physically go to the machine - Telnet and X-Windows are so cool). I still use NT on my main workstation because of otherwise unavailable apps... but you know Linux is starting to remind me of the days when I had to use DOS and couldn't move to Windows 3.0 because I had apps that would only run under real DOS and not a Windows VM. Those days didn't last that long because everyone could see Windows had the momentum as a platform and knew to remain credible they had to offer their apps on the new platform.
There aren't that many apps which keep me on NT any more: Protel and Xilinx, plus the ability to render graphics to non-postscript printers like the EPSON 740 I just bought (Samba acts as a raw print server just fine).
Thank you for this tip. One down, two to go :)
__
Scott Draves
"Slashdot isn't just Linux News, its 'News for Nerds'"
That's a direct quote from the Slashdot FAQ.
-- laws are the opinions of politicians --
I've commented before to other people that my biggest problem with Microsoft is that they market their products one level above where they should be. NT isn't a horrible OS, but it should be marketed to the market they're currently selling 98 to. It's not on the level of unix. Similar things exists with say MS-SQL server, not a horrible product, would work for low-end stuff, but no Oracle. I think their point is that Linux isn't ready to be a desktop OS for every man, and as much as I wish that wasn't true, it still is. On the server it makes sense. For the technically savy desktop user it makes sense. For my mother, no. KDE has made great progress, and I could see myself configuring a machine for non-tech-savy people to use, but they still couldn't do it themselves, and thus MS days aren't exactly numbered yet, as much as I wish they were.
...which would be an elegant name, except no one likes Armenian! (Sergar Argic must have been busy.) BTW, "Jack" Kevorkian is actually Murad...
teleny, friend of cats.
For the last time:
BeOS is not based on Mach/MacOS/Unix/Linux/Amiga/whatever.
BeOS is a 'new thing'.
- Darchmare
- Axis Mutatis, http://www.axismutatis.net
- Jeff
sure.... screw copyright laws... who cares about that... let's ignore the probability of a lawsuit... Rob is obviously wealty enough to deal with the lawyers bills...
er....
no
I agree with your complaint about Linux killing Unix. Linux is simply one of the many variants of "Unix" that has existed. I have worked on computers running SunOS, Solaris, AIX, Linux, IRIX, HP-UX, and Ultrix. All somewhat similar and all somewhat different. Their common heritage traces back to some variant of BSD or SYSV (probably should also include OSF/1). Just listing them reminds of the Unix holy wars that were fought.
Now for a caveat. Unix is a trademark that is controlled by some consortium (X/Open?). So maybe they are saying that Linux will kill th consortium.
heheh... that's actually pretty funny...
Zontar
(somewhere in tenn.)
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
On the other hand, the point about applications and about linux not being ready for the desktop market is pretty accurate.
-- Elflord
There is R, an OSS (I think) version of the S statistics language. Check out SAL (Scientific Applications for Linux) to find many more. The available software including OSS, freeware, and commercial applications is useful across all fields that would require the use of a computer.
-- This is not a signature.
The title says it all...the site looks like it's been slashdotted...loading rate was down to 80 bits per second when I tried to load it..
Finding God in a Dog
Please don't ask the government to start defining/regulating OSs or anything else, I don't want to have to request permission from the Ministry of Software before writing my code.
Perhaps I missed the news flash, but when did Slashdot become a Linux page? Most of the articles I am interested in are not related to Linux. Its called "News for nerds, stuff that matters", and there is more news than just Linux.
Read my sig, 'nuf said
--weenie NT4 user: bite me!
"Computers are nothing but a perfect illusion of order" -- Iggy Pop
The various Opensource camps are spending way too much time bashing each other instead of doing productive work - and I mean bashing, not constructive arguments that lead to results.
Too many folks see Linux as a religion, not as a tool. And extremists are always dangerous, especially when you criticize the object they glorify.
It's the better tool for most things _I_ do, but that doesn't mean that Linux is the best tool for everyone. Because it helps me, I try to help the community and give something back, thus supporting the cause.
...Looking forward to the next Emacs/vi, Gnome/KDE, RedHat/otherDistro, Linux/BSD, C/Java etc. etc. flamewar. Or then again, not.
------------------
You may like my a cappella music
I guess if you want a "no-brainer" sysadmin running your systems, you deserve something as worthless as NT.
Mac OS X Server is based on BSD.. the client is not, as near as I can make out...
Just to add one more comment to the don't care about MSCE's, the guy who wrote the UNIX vs. NT paper (Kirch, the one who pointed out how badly UNIX kicked NT's butt), the main feature of unix-vs-nt.org, has a MSCE. It actually makes his paper more persuasive. Don't bash MSCEs. Just the people that think that that means something serious. If someone picks up a MSCE to get a job, though they'd far prefer UNIX, and are in fact UNIX gurus, by all means take them. On the other hand, if all someone has is a MSCE... politely point out that a computer is significantly differnt from a nintendo system, and suggest learning how. :-)
They laughed at Einstein. They laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. -- C. Sagan
Which is really a shame -- Your years of unix, vax, netware, mainframe or whatever experience aren't actually considered because you don't have those magic letters. And meanwhile some totally green bozo with $10,000 worth of training will be considered.
I look at it this way -- Who would want to work for a company with such Dilbertean PHB's in charge? Chances are if they are so stupid as to cull resumes in such an arbitrary manner that they will do a lot of other things that would make life hell.
So maybe someday our kids will be throwing out neato little catch phrase about how evil RedHat and Linus are. Linu$? I don't quite like the ring to that...I'm a BSD man myself, and when I ran Linux it was always either Debian or Slackware, I've never been a big fan of RedHat anyway...but its kinda nice to see RedHat stickers on bumper's all around my town...MS doesn't get that kind of support.
I am sick of news that are neither informative, nor useful.
Could you please filter those stories more efficiently?
Zebulon
English borrows heavily from Latin. Does that mean that Latin isn't "out"
Beyond that. BeOS is not Mach based, though it does have a POSIX interface, as does NT. Same goes for MacOS 10. This doesn't make any of them "UNIX" or even UN*X.
I know; I use NT right now, contemplating which Linux Distro as soon as Spring Break rolls around...
About the only thing NT does better than Linux is Netscape... everyone around me keeps on crashing their systems with Netscape...
Regardless, if you really want to help your company with a stable, reliable, robust, and high performance network and server, go out and LEARN Linux, quick. It doesn't take more effort than learning how to administer NT... And the rewards are much higher. Sure, its tougher to install, but only slightly...
For all the problems and reliability failures of NT, said creampuff network is essentially a big money sink, compared to Linux, with all the per client per set money comparisons...
NT is a big fat resource hog, good for personal use if you have to do minor graphics and multi-media, and even then Be is quickly going to catch up, and Macs are still better, okay for minor networking, ie client wise, and only really useful because of the inertia for the desktop provided by M$. For networking, Linux really is the way.
AS
-AS
*Pikachu*
I said Linux was only slightly tougher to install; only slightly, and for those who don't know their systems inside and out. For people who don't know their modem speeds, the name of their video chipsets, irq settings and the number of PCI slots they actually have onboard, etc...
Of course, I will admit that I have installed NT machines several times, and Linux only twice, and that 3 years ago before the introduction of RedHat. Slackware had the honor of deflowering me =), so I accede to your correction that RedHat's install is easy.
I've ordered a handful of CDs from Cheapbytes to test out how Linux has changed and improved since my last install.
AS
-AS
*Pikachu*
So, their Texis server is swamped, and timing out. Slashdot effect takes down yet another server.
Yeehaw......
-- Perl Hack, Web Hack, SQL Hack, Guitar Hack
I am a linux user, admittedly a newbe I am also a WinNT user. Linux does lack the software I need for school, it's ported for Windows. I would perfer using just linux on my new machine(ppro180 x2), and set up my old machine(p133) for those few applications that use Windows. I have been looking for ways to more utilize Linux in my schoolwork, but short of writing my own software for something I don't know anything about, it's not useful to me.
I have been looking for utilities and information so the kernel and software hackers around here can benifit more from Linux in classes other than CS and programming. (eg I am not aware of a graphical simulator for mechanisms in Linux or X.)
Laugh, it's good for you!
damn. how many are you? good thing we're gonna upgrade our server soon.
aj
As a computer network engineer, I know that I would most likely not suggest Linux (even with KDE) to be the front-end of a new system. Too many end-users are familiar and comfortable with the Windows 95 interface, and they know Windows apps and are functional with them. Putting Linux on the front end would be inviting disaster. (Ever worked Help Desk? Think of all the questions you get there on Windows 95, and then imagine how that would be with Linux!)
However, the backend is a different story. This is where reliability, performance, and sheer power are most needed. I have no qualms at all recommending Linux, esp. in places where the IT department is well developed, and already has UNIX experience.
Furthermore, the front end only affects one person per computer: the person sitting in front of the computer. If that computer hoses, then only one person is affected. If the backend hoses, *everyone* is affected. So, put something familiar and relatively stable on the front end -- Windows NT -- and put the real strength on the backend -- Linux. Combine the two and you've got a lethal, capable system that combines the familiar but somewhat unreliable (NT) with the exotic but powerful and robust (Linux).
"The dead do not shoo-bop-aloo-bah." -- Kai, 'Lexx'
Ahhhh I see, so Microsoft is afraid, this makes Linux better....wait, that doesnt make sense. This is a Linux page, enough with Microsoft. Watch it or I'll bump you down to Private Taco.
SpamMan