An interesting comment, to be sure, almost edging on flame-bait. Are monopolies dead? Do we really want them to be dead?
As a resident of Southern California, I voted to open up the electrical power market to competition. But that was two years ago and no one has stepped in to compete with SoCal Edison. I can only buy my water from the City, my local telephone is GTE and my sewers... And frankly, I don't want or need these choices. It's just something I don't give a damn about. Can you imagine having to choose which company to buy sewer service from? I'll give you that cable and cable internet is a little more important, but to say that you're "an advocate for freedom of choice for the consumer" is just a little bit of an overstatement. Monopolies are far from dead, and really, we don't want them dead!
Is AT&T foolish? NO!!! The desire to be a monopoly is the American Company's dream. Every company who wants to stay in business must have the desire to become a monopoly as their top goal. That's what business is. It's the desire to be so good that everyone else is driven out. That's why we have anti-trust laws: to protect us from the unfairness our own better business instincts. Is AT&T foolish?
Oppening cable lines IS a good thing. But to over-generalize and say that all competition is good and AT&T is foolish for trying to keep its monopoly is deeply wrong.
They're both great products, but my point was that to woo the GENREAL popluace, you can't expect the "normal" user to ever edit a single.conf file if they don't want to. I know it's almost imposible, but for Linux to triumph, we have to find a way to keep Linux as powerful and configurable as ever (for you and me who know what/dev/cua0 is) but at the same time make it as easy (simple or dumb if you like) to those who like it that way. KDE and GNOME still have a long way to go to that end.
It seems to me the reason that Linux hasn't already trounced MS is twofold.
The first and possibly biggest reason is the lack of ANY decent installer or config tool (and no, I don't believe there is a SINGLE good one out there). Caldera's Windows based installer is a good attempt at widening Linux's appeal but runs the risk of alienating the diehard Linux-only crowd. GNOME is coming along nicely on the config front but it needs HELP.
The second part of the problem just compounds everything. The almost total lack of support from the hardware front for Linux makes the job of writing an installer harder (can't autodetect hardware that doesn't work with Linux) and keeps our beloved OSS a good way behind what we are able to support. (There have been a few good signs recently, such as Intel's investment in Red Hat, etc., but we've still got a LONG way to go.)
With a GOOD AND COMPLETE installer and config tool set and hardware support as wide as that of Windows, I see nothing but success in Linux's future. Until then...
Slashdot Mirror
down to 1 again
now back up to 2...
this is getting fun
starting from 0, up to 3, back down to 1
Your guess is correct!
Those of us who use "Highest Scores First" need to know these things.
If you add the total market share Windows enjoys you get:
MS Windows 98 Upgrade 13.25%
MS Windows 98 9.15%
MS Windows 98 Academic 3.87%
MS Windows 98 Academic Upgrade 3.63%
Virtual PC 2.1 (Win) 1.93%
Thats a total of 31.83%
That's 7.74% more than TurboLinux's claimed 24.09% market share...
Even if you don't count VPC's 1.93%, Windows 98 takes the cake... NOT TurboLinux.
Celeron, like the normal PII only supports two way SMP. Only a Xeon (II or III) can do four way.
What about SMP under linux? Yes? No? What about overclocking? How does a fan fit?
I'm doubtful.
An interesting comment, to be sure, almost edging on flame-bait. Are monopolies dead? Do we really want them to be dead?
As a resident of Southern California, I voted to open up the electrical power market to competition. But that was two years ago and no one has stepped in to compete with SoCal Edison. I can only buy my water from the City, my local telephone is GTE and my sewers... And frankly, I don't want or need these choices. It's just something I don't give a damn about. Can you imagine having to choose which company to buy sewer service from? I'll give you that cable and cable internet is a little more important, but to say that you're "an advocate for freedom of choice for the consumer" is just a little bit of an overstatement. Monopolies are far from dead, and really, we don't want them dead!
Is AT&T foolish? NO!!! The desire to be a monopoly is the American Company's dream. Every company who wants to stay in business must have the desire to become a monopoly as their top goal. That's what business is. It's the desire to be so good that everyone else is driven out. That's why we have anti-trust laws: to protect us from the unfairness our own better business instincts. Is AT&T foolish?
Oppening cable lines IS a good thing. But to over-generalize and say that all competition is good and AT&T is foolish for trying to keep its monopoly is deeply wrong.
They're both great products, but my point was that to woo the GENREAL popluace, you can't expect the "normal" user to ever edit a single .conf file if they don't want to. I know it's almost imposible, but for Linux to triumph, we have to find a way to keep Linux as powerful and configurable as ever (for you and me who know what /dev/cua0 is) but at the same time make it as easy (simple or dumb if you like) to those who like it that way. KDE and GNOME still have a long way to go to that end.
It seems to me the reason that Linux hasn't already trounced MS is twofold.
The first and possibly biggest reason is the lack of ANY decent installer or config tool (and no, I don't believe there is a SINGLE good one out there). Caldera's Windows based installer is a good attempt at widening Linux's appeal but runs the risk of alienating the diehard Linux-only crowd. GNOME is coming along nicely on the config front but it needs HELP.
The second part of the problem just compounds everything. The almost total lack of support from the hardware front for Linux makes the job of writing an installer harder (can't autodetect hardware that doesn't work with Linux) and keeps our beloved OSS a good way behind what we are able to support. (There have been a few good signs recently, such as Intel's investment in Red Hat, etc., but we've still got a LONG way to go.)
With a GOOD AND COMPLETE installer and config tool set and hardware support as wide as that of Windows, I see nothing but success in Linux's future. Until then...