This is so Slashdottish, yet I'm compelled to comment. For everything BUT this software, "closed source=the keys to hell". But wait, Red Hat (can't do no wrong), which sells Linux (savior of the people), buys this closed source stuff, all of the sudden, its all kosher. I guess I shouldn't be so surprised at the hypocracy. After all this is/.
This gets old. The creator of this thread is correct. Same old crap rehashed. Everyone here loves Linux, Linux is read for "prime time" blah blah blah.
Linux is not read. It's *not* easy to install, *not* easy to use and *not* a seamless integration of software to hardware.
!!!Don't dismiss this as trollbait. It's not.!!!
I'm being sincere here. Linux is a pain in the ass. If I wanted trollbait, I wouldn't have posted with my user id and email.
I went from the MacOS to Windows with absolutely NO PROBLEM. It took no time to figure out what was wrong and how to fix it.
I heard all the rave reviews from Linux fanatics with tunnel vision (read as: a vocal minority on/.) and I tried it.
What a hassle. I couldn't get anything to work. I putzed around for more time than was appropiate. Forget KDE and Gnome and whatever else there is. A GUI does help if all it hides is crap.
A GUI on a turd won't make it a bouquet of roses. It's still a turd.
Linux is stable as stable gets, fast flexible, robust and stout. But it's more than just rough around the edges, it's sharp as hell. And IT'S NOT FOR EVERYONE. IT'S FOR VERY FEW IN FACT. I don't want to make getting my computer to work a 'hobby'. If hobbies are your bag, then linux is your deal.
If you want to get real work done, with a full compliment of applications and utilities, and work with a familiar set of tools, then I'd recommend anything *but* Linux. NT seems to be pretty good and it's a hell of a lot easier to use.
Linux is a server OS. The FYI tidbit was correct. You pay for what you get. Linux is free. Do the math. The hidden costs are huge. The learning curve is a straight, vertical line that heads to the clouds.
If you think Linux is ready for the world, think again. You've got your head in the clouds.
Does that mean that anyone cannot install Linux. Hell no! It means it takes more time and effort than most people, including me, deem appropiate.
Linux can be used and operated by anyone. But not in the form it's in now. Mandrake is damn close. But there's still too much left. It shouldn't take a 500 page book from Barnes and Noble to get the damn thing to work.
I'm a clever person, but apparently not clever enough for linux. What that tells me is more work needs to be done.
I like plug and play, I like hundreds of thousands of apps, I like knowing that I can buy software to do ANYTHING. I like Windows, not necessarily everything --it's kind of crappy in fact. But it's, I'm sorry to say, easier and less intimidating than Linux.
And if you disagree, fine. But the fact is, it's true. Only an antagonist would disagree.
Though ZDNET most likely tried to put a polish on a turd and got this story a bit wrong, even if it is 1/10 right, there's some real irony here.
Everything Linux is about is what the Chinese gov't is against:
Namely: borderless sharing of everything, breaking down of divisions, an OS in constant flux and state of improvement. Plus a diffuse locus of control.
Why the heck is everyone so up in arms about this?
Finally, months after the CSC was launched, *someone* has a client out to work on it. That someone isn't distributed.net. And that's why you all are so mad. d.net isn't the guru of distributed computing.
If d.net hadn't piddled all this time away on rc5, they could have had the thing almost done.
Instead *they* spread themselves too thin over CSC, OGR, RC5, etc...
The heck with d.net. The heck with waiting and waiting and waiting for non-functional beta clients. Finally, the real deal.
Slashdot Mirror
This is so Slashdottish, yet I'm compelled to comment. For everything BUT this software, "closed source=the keys to hell". But wait, Red Hat (can't do no wrong), which sells Linux (savior of the people), buys this closed source stuff, all of the sudden, its all kosher. I guess I shouldn't be so surprised at the hypocracy. After all this is /.
This gets old. The creator of this thread is correct. Same old crap rehashed. Everyone here loves Linux, Linux is read for "prime time" blah blah blah.
/.) and I tried it.
Linux is not read. It's *not* easy to install, *not* easy to use and *not* a seamless integration of software to hardware.
!!!Don't dismiss this as trollbait. It's not.!!!
I'm being sincere here. Linux is a pain in the ass. If I wanted trollbait, I wouldn't have posted with my user id and email.
mailto: hoppern@ad13310.sdstate.edu.
(USE PGP please)!
I went from the MacOS to Windows with absolutely NO PROBLEM. It took no time to figure out what was wrong and how to fix it.
I heard all the rave reviews from Linux fanatics with tunnel vision (read as: a vocal minority on
What a hassle. I couldn't get anything to work. I putzed around for more time than was appropiate. Forget KDE and Gnome and whatever else there is. A GUI does help if all it hides is crap.
A GUI on a turd won't make it a bouquet of roses. It's still a turd.
Linux is stable as stable gets, fast flexible, robust and stout. But it's more than just rough around the edges, it's sharp as hell. And IT'S NOT FOR EVERYONE. IT'S FOR VERY FEW IN FACT. I don't want to make getting my computer to work a 'hobby'. If hobbies are your bag, then linux is your deal.
If you want to get real work done, with a full compliment of applications and utilities, and work with a familiar set of tools, then I'd recommend anything *but* Linux. NT seems to be pretty good and it's a hell of a lot easier to use.
Linux is a server OS. The FYI tidbit was correct. You pay for what you get. Linux is free. Do the math. The hidden costs are huge. The learning curve is a straight, vertical line that heads to the clouds.
If you think Linux is ready for the world, think again. You've got your head in the clouds.
Does that mean that anyone cannot install Linux. Hell no! It means it takes more time and effort than most people, including me, deem appropiate.
Linux can be used and operated by anyone. But not in the form it's in now. Mandrake is damn close. But there's still too much left. It shouldn't take a 500 page book from Barnes and Noble to get the damn thing to work.
I'm a clever person, but apparently not clever enough for linux. What that tells me is more work needs to be done.
I like plug and play, I like hundreds of thousands of apps, I like knowing that I can buy software to do ANYTHING. I like Windows, not necessarily everything --it's kind of crappy in fact. But it's, I'm sorry to say, easier and less intimidating than Linux.
And if you disagree, fine. But the fact is, it's true. Only an antagonist would disagree.
Though ZDNET most likely tried to put a polish on a turd and got this story a bit wrong, even if it is 1/10 right, there's some real irony here.
Everything Linux is about is what the Chinese gov't is against:
Namely: borderless sharing of everything, breaking down of divisions, an OS in constant flux and state of improvement. Plus a diffuse locus of control.
Funky.
Why the heck is everyone so up in arms about this?
Finally, months after the CSC was launched, *someone* has a client out to work on it. That someone isn't distributed.net. And that's why you all are so mad. d.net isn't the guru of distributed computing.
If d.net hadn't piddled all this time away on rc5, they could have had the thing almost done.
Instead *they* spread themselves too thin over CSC, OGR, RC5, etc...
The heck with d.net. The heck with waiting and waiting and waiting for non-functional beta clients. Finally, the real deal.