I think Microsoft have one real option if they want to stay in the game.
They have to do like they said before Vista: Rebuild everything, implement winFS, and give us a new, functional GUI, and a stable system. They also have to maintain a near 100% compatibility with Vista and/or XP.
I think Vista might be the last time that software companies will even bother to rewrite software for a new Windows. By the time 7 comes, Linux and Mac will have a significant part of the market share (I would guess at least 15-20%). If Microsoft fails this time, the future for Windows looks very dark.
I see your point, but the fact is that Linux is growing, and it is growing quite fast. I am not trying to say that Linux will take over for Windows tomorrow, but Vista has already converted several people to Linux, and it will continue to do so. I would think that in 5-10 years, if everything goes well, Linux will grow past Mac. And by that time, Mac would have grown a lot, too. I think that this would be the situation in 5-10 years:
Linux: 15%
Mac: 10-15%
Windows: 70%
I also think that BSD might pass the 1% mark by that time, but it will not become mainstream because it is too little, to late.
In what way are hardware drivers similar to VM technologies?
More VMs does not necessarily give more OS support. I can understand the need for a VM like lguest, since it does not require a CPU with virtualization technology. But wouldn't it benefit the user more if this where intigrated into KVM instead? I don't know how possible this is, but it sure would do my choice a lot easier.
Have soimeone translate this for you: "An accurate technical description of Microsoft Vista can be found in any good guide to computing under the heading 'clusterfuck'."
I understand you well without translation. And yeah, Vista is definitely a clusterfuck (I have to admit I had to google that).
Vista is a failure. It always has been, and it still is. Microsoft try to tell you otherwise, but that doesn't make it any less of a failure.
I hope and think that people are starting to realize that newer is not always better, and at the same time realizing that Microsoft doesn't always tell the truth. I also hope and think that this will speed up the adoption of Linux for the desktop, even if it is not quite ready for everybody yet.
I have been reading through most of the comments, and I have come to a conclusion. Linux needs:
- Games. You know, those expensive, crappy based-on-a-movie things...
- Polished software. Less bugs, cleaner, easier interfaces.
- IDEs. A fully functional IDEs with GUI constructor, syntax check (like Eclipse), and support for C, C++, C# (don't shoot), Python and more.
- Less dependencies. If you need some weird functions, bundle them. I hate.debs that do not install!
- Video editing. Give Kino support for importing more codecs or complete PiTiVi.
- "A new Apache". A better reason for people to change.
- Give away Linux CDs in shops.
- Sell machines with Linux, like Dell do.
- Special hardware should work out of the box. Especially webcams.
I hate to say it, but most of these need to be fixed before Linux outgrows even Mac.
Linux is great, but remember, a Windows user will try to think of any excuse to change back and avoid learning something new.
Ok, I tried to make a loose/lose joke when I replied there, but it might be hard to understand, since I first explain why I spelled wrong.
Anyway, it is not like I have anything to loose... That one was a joke.
I'm loosing the will to spell. Keep commenting like that. I am not English, and this is the only way I can learn it. Anyway, it is not like I have anything to loose...
They are not loosing the will to code. They just have too much other work, like reviewing others code. So they do not have enough time left to code.
RTFA. The headline is not reflected in the article itself at all.
Re:GPLv3 Doesn't Have to be the Only Licence
on
GPLv3 Released
·
· Score: 1
No you wouldn't. Some GNU'ers are not interested in money, but are true FOSS fighters. They wouldn't give you rights to re-licence their code for any reason (maybe except shutting down MS or something like that.)
Our turn to Embrace, Extend and Extinguish(?)
on
GPLv3 Released
·
· Score: 1
What if any commercial company released some GPLv3 code, would any program containing this code be safe from that company's patents?
That would have some really interesting effects...
This might just be another trick to get people over to the next generation of MS-OS. Vienna is scheduled to arrive in 2009, perfect for "Get all the advantages of better networking with IPv6, perfectly integrated in Windows Vienna!"...
Then just cut some crapware of Vista, implement WinFS and get a new rip-off GUI (beryl?) and they might stay in their near-monopoly position for another two-three years.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple will have 7 new releases before 7 comes out. Duh.
I think Microsoft have one real option if they want to stay in the game.
They have to do like they said before Vista: Rebuild everything, implement winFS, and give us a new, functional GUI, and a stable system. They also have to maintain a near 100% compatibility with Vista and/or XP.
I think Vista might be the last time that software companies will even bother to rewrite software for a new Windows. By the time 7 comes, Linux and Mac will have a significant part of the market share (I would guess at least 15-20%). If Microsoft fails this time, the future for Windows looks very dark.
Remember, no other Windows version is as hated as Windows Vista. Proof here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcARXN7cr9Y
I see your point, but the fact is that Linux is growing, and it is growing quite fast. I am not trying to say that Linux will take over for Windows tomorrow, but Vista has already converted several people to Linux, and it will continue to do so. I would think that in 5-10 years, if everything goes well, Linux will grow past Mac. And by that time, Mac would have grown a lot, too. I think that this would be the situation in 5-10 years:
Linux: 15%
Mac: 10-15%
Windows: 70%
I also think that BSD might pass the 1% mark by that time, but it will not become mainstream because it is too little, to late.
In what way are hardware drivers similar to VM technologies?
More VMs does not necessarily give more OS support. I can understand the need for a VM like lguest, since it does not require a CPU with virtualization technology. But wouldn't it benefit the user more if this where intigrated into KVM instead? I don't know how possible this is, but it sure would do my choice a lot easier.
KVM (have been in the kernel since 2.6.20) already runs windows.
Wouldn't it be enough with one? Or maybe they could have merged all the features into one VM.
I think this will confuse users. Choice is good, yes, but 3 VMs in the kernel? Sounds like overkill.
No, I am afraid not.
Probably. I am just tired of idiots always picking on every little mistake. But I'll stop writing excuses anyway.
Vista is a failure. It always has been, and it still is. Microsoft try to tell you otherwise, but that doesn't make it any less of a failure.
I hope and think that people are starting to realize that newer is not always better, and at the same time realizing that Microsoft doesn't always tell the truth. I also hope and think that this will speed up the adoption of Linux for the desktop, even if it is not quite ready for everybody yet.
(Excuse my English, I am Norwegian.)
Because I live in Norway. Software patents are not enforced here.
Why should it?
I have been reading through most of the comments, and I have come to a conclusion. Linux needs: .debs that do not install!
- Games. You know, those expensive, crappy based-on-a-movie things...
- Polished software. Less bugs, cleaner, easier interfaces.
- IDEs. A fully functional IDEs with GUI constructor, syntax check (like Eclipse), and support for C, C++, C# (don't shoot), Python and more.
- Less dependencies. If you need some weird functions, bundle them. I hate
- Video editing. Give Kino support for importing more codecs or complete PiTiVi.
- "A new Apache". A better reason for people to change.
- Give away Linux CDs in shops.
- Sell machines with Linux, like Dell do.
- Special hardware should work out of the box. Especially webcams.
I hate to say it, but most of these need to be fixed before Linux outgrows even Mac.
Linux is great, but remember, a Windows user will try to think of any excuse to change back and avoid learning something new.
(Excuse my English. I am Norwegian.)
They are not loosing the will to code. They just have too much other work, like reviewing others code. So they do not have enough time left to code. RTFA. The headline is not reflected in the article itself at all.
No you wouldn't. Some GNU'ers are not interested in money, but are true FOSS fighters. They wouldn't give you rights to re-licence their code for any reason (maybe except shutting down MS or something like that.)
What the title says
What if any commercial company released some GPLv3 code, would any program containing this code be safe from that company's patents? That would have some really interesting effects...
This might just be another trick to get people over to the next generation of MS-OS. Vienna is scheduled to arrive in 2009, perfect for "Get all the advantages of better networking with IPv6, perfectly integrated in Windows Vienna!"... Then just cut some crapware of Vista, implement WinFS and get a new rip-off GUI (beryl?) and they might stay in their near-monopoly position for another two-three years.