Actually I've been using it for about 15 years, and have written some pretty interesting software for it. The problem is that most people have not used it, do not want to use it, and put up a fight when forced to use it. Also, it's not nearly as easy to set up a server in Linux unless you know your way around bash. If your Linux server has a GUI interface, you're doing it wrong.
Rhe specific apps are all custom apps from devs that have long since moved on (one of which includes over 1 million lines of VB code). These things aren't easily replaced, and they rarely work without a hich in Wine. I'd go on, but you're obviosly a zealot who doesn't understand the realities of the business world. Linux is great for server, embedded systems, and as a hobby. But there's no reason to force it into situations where it just doesn't make sense.
You've got quite a few assumptions of your own. I've never worked somewhere that didn't have at least one heavily entrenched legacy app. And it doesn't take much to crash Wine... I've never seen anything work *quite right* on it.
I find it annoying that any argument against using FOSS for everything is considered FUD. I've fought for years in past jobs to adopt FOSS, including Linux. I run Linux at home, and I prefer it as an operating system to Windows. I'm pointing out the problems with trying to switch a business over to Linux based off of first-hand experience.
It costs money to transition to new employees though. Not to mention it's hard to get rid of someone who's been there 20 years.. It's really bad for morale. This is exactly why programmer/engineers/IT workers make horrible managers -- we think of systems in simplistic terms, when any system involving humans is really very complex.
The best action for management to take for a company that's doomed is embezzlement (which is even better than you bonus), so your argument is flawed.
Embezzlement requires risk though, which managers are notoriously afraid of. And unless switching to Linux aids in embezzlement in the first place, I'm going to have to call that a red herring.
You are saying that it's a better plan for idiots who are incapable of long term planning, but nobody wants to be an idiot incapable of long term planning
And that's a straw man. I never called managers incapable of long term planning. I pointed out that long term planning is not in their personal best interests.
I don't think that word means what you think it does. Same shit with the Office ribbon. Change for the sake of change, and if I complain that you are raping my productivity in the ass for no valid reason, or maybe, just maybe, your "solution" isn't really the best for someone who isn't you, I get insulted. Fuck you, shitbag IT geek. Now go watch some hentai and pretend some more that "nerds took over the world" or some other delusion you pasty, fat, pencil necked dogfuckers piss on about.
You need to work in a small business to understand this.. Often time users will simply boycott and refuse to do anything because they "don't understand the new system". Also, almost nothing mission-critical for small businesses is written in Java.
Anyone who can tie their own shoes can set up a Windows server
... which is practically guaranteed to be taken over by botnets.
You get what you pay for.
And what users do you have to pay to use a Linux server? How lazy can you be? At least spend the ten seconds it takes to pick the right FUD for the occasion.
There's two arguments in here.. One for the back end, which is the one you addressed. The other is for the desktop, which you seem confused on.
Think like a businessman. What happens if you switch from Windows to Linux? Suddenly mission-critical app X no longer works (or only half works in Wine), you have to hire a full time sysadmin, and half the users' productivity drops to nothing because they spend all their time bitching about how they can't install iTunes. Now imagine you really don't care about FOSS ideology, or even technical superiority, but only net profit, and then only net profit over a 3 month cycle. Really, what would you do?
I'm not sure if any reputable TCO studies have actually shown that, at least over any decent length of time.
And how many of these managers really care about the cost over a 2+ year period? They care about their quarterly bonus, and that's usually all they care about.
For most businesses, Linux is more expensive than windows. Anyone who can tie their own shoes can set up a Windows server. Linux, on the other hand, requires someone who at least kind of knows what they're doing, and that commands more money. Not to mention the cost of training the Luddite employees on a new operating system, when it took them 10 years to get used to the last one.
Linux config can be pretty fire-and-forget these days. But even so - it's a dangerous thing to bet your business on an IT infrastructure set up by someone who's qualification is the ability to tie their shoes. It can be done. But it's going to cost you eventually. As for the Luddite employees - no IT environment is without change.
My point though is that it's not just about the IT. Most slashdotters' lives center around IT in one way or another, so we have a strong bias toward keeping up with current technology. Most normal people, OTOH, couldn't give a crap about the computer except in so far as it allows them to enter basic info into some random app and lets them look youtube when the boss isn't around. These people will resist change with every fiber of their being, and you need to pick your battles with them.
Coming up next, our most recent study showing that Linux is more expensive than Windows.
For most businesses, Linux is more expensive than windows. Anyone who can tie their own shoes can set up a Windows server. Linux, on the other hand, requires someone who at least kind of knows what they're doing, and that commands more money. Not to mention the cost of training the Luddite employees on a new operating system, when it took them 10 years to get used to the last one.
Here's an honest question, I ask of you as a fellow atheist:
Why do so many atheists feel the need to be smug assholes? What the fuck does it matter to you if he believes in 'an invisible sky wizard'? Why can't you just let people believe what they will, why must you impose your beliefs on other people?
Because even in the absence of religious belief, people still *think* religiously. For all practical purposes I'm an atheist, thought I'd have to label myself as "technically agnostic" since I can't show that there is not a god. Putting that aside, though, God can be a good metaphor for when speaking of cosmic beauty, which I think is the context in which Hawking was speaking.
And if newspaper contrast didn't bother my eyes, you might have a point (though actually the Kindle is quite a bit worse than that). The bar is set at the level of a high quality matte-finished bleached page, with crisp black text. If these devices can't even manage that, then I don't see any reason to even consider them. And that's assuming I didn't have to pay $100-200 up front just for the privilege of using it.
Funny.. I'm a Dune fan, but I'm not a fan of excessive wordiness.. Then again, some of the Dune books were hard to get through. Dune Messiah bored the crap out of me. God Emperor was probably my favorite, but it was hard to read at times. Everything his son wrote is awful.
$10/year isn't bad, except I re-read books intermittently. I'll read a book, shelve it for a few years, and re-read it when there's nothing new that peaks my interest. Under this model, I'm paying $10 essentially every time I read it. Also, Kindles can't handle rich media, and they're still overpriced (and the black on dark grey text looks horrible). Reading a web site on my iPhone is a masochistic endeavor. Call me a luddite if you must, but I prefer paper.
It's not the setting that bugs me, it's the verbosity. The Baroque Cycle was a good read, but about 1500 pages too long. I couldn't even motivate myself to start on Anathem. His early works were actually a bit too terse, though.. Cryptonomicon was was the perfect balance in terms of wordiness.
The price point is too high, the author's last few works have not been up to his previous standard, and leisure reading at my computer is simply not possible.
Eh, to each their own I guess. But the features I mentioned actually add a lot of readability and maintainability. I do agree about functional programming being enjoyable, though. Too bad I don't get much opportunity for that at work.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually I've been using it for about 15 years, and have written some pretty interesting software for it. The problem is that most people have not used it, do not want to use it, and put up a fight when forced to use it. Also, it's not nearly as easy to set up a server in Linux unless you know your way around bash. If your Linux server has a GUI interface, you're doing it wrong.
Rhe specific apps are all custom apps from devs that have long since moved on (one of which includes over 1 million lines of VB code). These things aren't easily replaced, and they rarely work without a hich in Wine. I'd go on, but you're obviosly a zealot who doesn't understand the realities of the business world. Linux is great for server, embedded systems, and as a hobby. But there's no reason to force it into situations where it just doesn't make sense.
You've got quite a few assumptions of your own. I've never worked somewhere that didn't have at least one heavily entrenched legacy app. And it doesn't take much to crash Wine... I've never seen anything work *quite right* on it.
I find it annoying that any argument against using FOSS for everything is considered FUD. I've fought for years in past jobs to adopt FOSS, including Linux. I run Linux at home, and I prefer it as an operating system to Windows. I'm pointing out the problems with trying to switch a business over to Linux based off of first-hand experience.
It costs money to transition to new employees though. Not to mention it's hard to get rid of someone who's been there 20 years.. It's really bad for morale. This is exactly why programmer/engineers/IT workers make horrible managers -- we think of systems in simplistic terms, when any system involving humans is really very complex.
The best action for management to take for a company that's doomed is embezzlement (which is even better than you bonus), so your argument is flawed.
Embezzlement requires risk though, which managers are notoriously afraid of. And unless switching to Linux aids in embezzlement in the first place, I'm going to have to call that a red herring.
You are saying that it's a better plan for idiots who are incapable of long term planning, but nobody wants to be an idiot incapable of long term planning
And that's a straw man. I never called managers incapable of long term planning. I pointed out that long term planning is not in their personal best interests.
Luddite
I don't think that word means what you think it does. Same shit with the Office ribbon. Change for the sake of change, and if I complain that you are raping my productivity in the ass for no valid reason, or maybe, just maybe, your "solution" isn't really the best for someone who isn't you, I get insulted. Fuck you, shitbag IT geek. Now go watch some hentai and pretend some more that "nerds took over the world" or some other delusion you pasty, fat, pencil necked dogfuckers piss on about.
Who pissed in your cheerios?
You need to work in a small business to understand this.. Often time users will simply boycott and refuse to do anything because they "don't understand the new system". Also, almost nothing mission-critical for small businesses is written in Java.
If your management can't plan long term, there's a good chance your company won't exist long term.
Most don't. Even more reason not to sink heavy costs into something that won't pay off for years, especially in the current economy.
Anyone who can tie their own shoes can set up a Windows server
... which is practically guaranteed to be taken over by botnets.
You get what you pay for.
And what users do you have to pay to use a Linux server? How lazy can you be? At least spend the ten seconds it takes to pick the right FUD for the occasion.
There's two arguments in here.. One for the back end, which is the one you addressed. The other is for the desktop, which you seem confused on.
Think like a businessman. What happens if you switch from Windows to Linux? Suddenly mission-critical app X no longer works (or only half works in Wine), you have to hire a full time sysadmin, and half the users' productivity drops to nothing because they spend all their time bitching about how they can't install iTunes. Now imagine you really don't care about FOSS ideology, or even technical superiority, but only net profit, and then only net profit over a 3 month cycle. Really, what would you do?
I'm not sure if any reputable TCO studies have actually shown that, at least over any decent length of time.
And how many of these managers really care about the cost over a 2+ year period? They care about their quarterly bonus, and that's usually all they care about.
For most businesses, Linux is more expensive than windows. Anyone who can tie their own shoes can set up a Windows server. Linux, on the other hand, requires someone who at least kind of knows what they're doing, and that commands more money. Not to mention the cost of training the Luddite employees on a new operating system, when it took them 10 years to get used to the last one.
Linux config can be pretty fire-and-forget these days. But even so - it's a dangerous thing to bet your business on an IT infrastructure set up by someone who's qualification is the ability to tie their shoes. It can be done. But it's going to cost you eventually. As for the Luddite employees - no IT environment is without change.
My point though is that it's not just about the IT. Most slashdotters' lives center around IT in one way or another, so we have a strong bias toward keeping up with current technology. Most normal people, OTOH, couldn't give a crap about the computer except in so far as it allows them to enter basic info into some random app and lets them look youtube when the boss isn't around. These people will resist change with every fiber of their being, and you need to pick your battles with them.
Coming up next, our most recent study showing that Linux is more expensive than Windows.
For most businesses, Linux is more expensive than windows. Anyone who can tie their own shoes can set up a Windows server. Linux, on the other hand, requires someone who at least kind of knows what they're doing, and that commands more money. Not to mention the cost of training the Luddite employees on a new operating system, when it took them 10 years to get used to the last one.
Here's an honest question, I ask of you as a fellow atheist: Why do so many atheists feel the need to be smug assholes? What the fuck does it matter to you if he believes in 'an invisible sky wizard'? Why can't you just let people believe what they will, why must you impose your beliefs on other people?
Because even in the absence of religious belief, people still *think* religiously. For all practical purposes I'm an atheist, thought I'd have to label myself as "technically agnostic" since I can't show that there is not a god. Putting that aside, though, God can be a good metaphor for when speaking of cosmic beauty, which I think is the context in which Hawking was speaking.
Just because something is sufficient does not make it necessary.
But that $20 buys me a lifetime of usage and no power requirement or DRM.
Well, the Baroque Cycle was 6 books in 3 volumes. I consider that more than a single work. Three at the least.
And if newspaper contrast didn't bother my eyes, you might have a point (though actually the Kindle is quite a bit worse than that). The bar is set at the level of a high quality matte-finished bleached page, with crisp black text. If these devices can't even manage that, then I don't see any reason to even consider them. And that's assuming I didn't have to pay $100-200 up front just for the privilege of using it.
Funny.. I'm a Dune fan, but I'm not a fan of excessive wordiness.. Then again, some of the Dune books were hard to get through. Dune Messiah bored the crap out of me. God Emperor was probably my favorite, but it was hard to read at times. Everything his son wrote is awful.
$10/year isn't bad, except I re-read books intermittently. I'll read a book, shelve it for a few years, and re-read it when there's nothing new that peaks my interest. Under this model, I'm paying $10 essentially every time I read it. Also, Kindles can't handle rich media, and they're still overpriced (and the black on dark grey text looks horrible). Reading a web site on my iPhone is a masochistic endeavor. Call me a luddite if you must, but I prefer paper.
So you're saying I should buy a $500 iPad and pay $10/year to read a website novel that I might not even like?
So you're saying I should buy a $30,000 car and pay $3/gallon to drive it?
Well, if you want to stay true to the analogy, it's more like paying $30,000 for a car, $3/gal to drive it, and there's only one road in existence.
It's not the setting that bugs me, it's the verbosity. The Baroque Cycle was a good read, but about 1500 pages too long. I couldn't even motivate myself to start on Anathem. His early works were actually a bit too terse, though.. Cryptonomicon was was the perfect balance in terms of wordiness.
So you're saying I should buy a $500 iPad and pay $10/year to read a website novel that I might not even like?
It reminds me of work, and slashdot.
The price point is too high, the author's last few works have not been up to his previous standard, and leisure reading at my computer is simply not possible.
Eh, to each their own I guess. But the features I mentioned actually add a lot of readability and maintainability. I do agree about functional programming being enjoyable, though. Too bad I don't get much opportunity for that at work.