Funny, in the usability study CD-burning was one of the things Linux was found to be better because Windows XP's in-built system was found awkard.
But of course, if you are one of the "if Microsoft does it, it's great" - trolls, it's hard to believe.
Actually, if you read the study you will notice that setting the destkop background was the task that was responsible for most of the time difference between KDE and WinXP. With KDE 3.2 including the same "use as wallpaper" option in Konqueror, that difference will disappear. Not that I consider setting the desktop wallpaper an important task, though.
I mean that's how you're supposed to setup any operating system. No net connection until you've got all the necessary patches installed and firewalls set up.
Exactly! It's pretty easy, actually:
Unplug Internet connection
Download patches from the Internet
Set up firewall
Plug in Internet connection
If that doesn't work, just send an email to support@microsoft.com
Because of smaller structures, modern CPUs draw less power. (Well of course if you don't care about power you can also clock it higher and put a huge heatsink on it as well)
Neither SCO nor any other company has dared to sue anyone for using Linux so far. And never will because end users are never liable even in the very unlikely case there are IP-problems.
This whole SCO-thing is just so stupid. It's like saying Windows-users are liable to anti-trust laws.
The whole issue is even more stupid. Because once you turn your brain on, you realize that the risk of a closed source company illegally using freely available OSS code is a lot higher than Linux developers using CSS code which is only available to a tiny number of people. So to any thinking being the whole "OSS may be IP-problematic" thing looks like a shot in the foot by the CSS industry because the reality is reversed.
But I guess nothing is too stupid for the MS-loving/paid/stock-owning trolls that sprawl around here lately.
Sorry for the rant, but anybody taking SCO's threats seriously is either a complete moron or has some pro-MSFT interests.
Given that Microsoft's German (maybe even European) headquarters is located in the suburbs of Munich, I'm afraid Munich will be the most likely destination of Microsoft executives in that area...
If Linux is to survive, it is imperative that its license, the obnoxious GPL, is tested in court.
Contrary to the popular belief, the SCO case never was and never will be about the GPL.
However, why the SCO case could indeed be a good thing for Linux is that people, managers and businessmen could wake up and realize that the GPL is a true "no sue" license.
The risk of getting fined by the BSA is much higher than any risks from the GPL. (Actually there simply are no risks from a user's point of view. As long as you don't redistribute, there is no risk because there is no way to violate the license.)
In times in which many companies spend a significant portion of their revenue on lawers, a no-sue, no-IP-bullshit license like the GPL is exactly what is needed for a lot of companies.
It was mindless because you didn't provide neither model nor vendor of the part of your hardware that didn't work.
Saying "Linux sucks because my soundcard doesn't work" is mindless bashing. Even if somebody wanted to help you he can't.
Now that you did provide what didn't work, it's OK. However your experience is still not representative, sound problems under Linux are extremely rare IME.
I have to wonder -- do you guys REALLY want broad-based adoption of this technology, or would it ruin the allure?
Oh well. Then I could post "Windows sucks because it doesn't work with my harddrive". Would you consider that mindless bashing or a constructive addition to the discussion? I'm serious, how would you react?
P.S.: The harddrive (A western digital 40GB drive) isn't detected by the BIOS of both a P3-350 and an Athlon650, therefore Windows can't use it but in Linux it works like a charm as long as you don't want to boot from it.
PPS: And that's only one thing on a long list of stuff that didn't and/or doesn't work with Windows. You are trying to put forward the impression that everything works just perfectly with Windows which just isn't true, sorry. All in all, you can have big problems with both Windows and Linux depending on the hardware, skills and just luck.
Also, your "conclusion" is just pure nonsense:
My point is not to complain, but to indicate that there is still "geek time" and knowledge that must be "paid" to support free software.
Guess who is writing drivers for Windows? It's not Microsoft, it's normally the hardware vendors. The nature of Linux being open-source doesn't prevent hardware vendors from writing drivers, quite the contrary, it makes it easier.
Sorry, but I have installed Linux (usually SuSE) on at least a dozen different computers in the last years and sound worked out of the box on all of them.
If you would at least tell us what sound card you claim is not supported, I could believe you, but this just seems like a mindless Linux-bashing post.
They made no mention of whether they had prior experience with 95/98/ME or NT/2K
Actually the study did mention that all users had experience with previous versions of Windows.
The reason for that is because the study wanted to simulate the situation in governmental (sp?) organisations where most users have Windows experience as well.
Actually it's quite impressive that KDE can keep up with Windows in a 45-minute test with Windows-users.
The most popular product is ALWAYS the superior product
Wow, that would make Windows98 superior to WindowsXP.
If everybody would think like you, we would still live in the stone age.... Nobody would ever try anything new because they would think the old way of doing it would be "superior"...
Aw, that's a non-issue. MCSEs are so cheap that it's no problem to always keep at least one MCSE within a 200 meter radius (300 meters if the MCSE is not overweight and under 30) from the system for 99.9% uptime.
Do people who don't read articles (including the original reporter, BTW) count as trolls?
It's named Kolab, not Kroupware. There is even a nice shiny logo for those literally less unfortunate who have problems with longer texts (like the window title)...
what is so bad about cookies anyway?
I'm a web developer and I've met one guy who refuses all cookies (therefore is unable to use some of my sites), I asked him why he did that and even though he is a techie, he wasn't able to give me an answer.
And I don't get it, neither.
So please: Show me one single incident where cookies caused anybody harm.
Thanks.
Actually, if you really start thinking about the whole licensing-stuff, you realize pretty quickly that the risk and fines of being busted by the BSA (yes, the licensing stuff is so complicated that hardly any company can be *really* sure that they comply) is much higher than any GPL risk.
While this whole thing sure hurts Linux in the short run it could backslash against Windows in the long run easily.
Slashdot Mirror
But of course, if you are one of the "if Microsoft does it, it's great" - trolls, it's hard to believe.
Actually, if you read the study you will notice that setting the destkop background was the task that was responsible for most of the time difference between KDE and WinXP. With KDE 3.2 including the same "use as wallpaper" option in Konqueror, that difference will disappear. Not that I consider setting the desktop wallpaper an important task, though.
I noticed exactly the same in the BBC-article. Finally the mainstream-press seems to get it.
Too bad that this "check daily, patch, reboot" procedures never get mentioned in any MS-paid TCO-analysis.
Exactly! It's pretty easy, actually:
If that doesn't work, just send an email to support@microsoft.com
Because of smaller structures, modern CPUs draw less power. (Well of course if you don't care about power you can also clock it higher and put a huge heatsink on it as well)
Moore's law will handle that soon enough.
This whole SCO-thing is just so stupid. It's like saying Windows-users are liable to anti-trust laws.
The whole issue is even more stupid. Because once you turn your brain on, you realize that the risk of a closed source company illegally using freely available OSS code is a lot higher than Linux developers using CSS code which is only available to a tiny number of people. So to any thinking being the whole "OSS may be IP-problematic" thing looks like a shot in the foot by the CSS industry because the reality is reversed.
But I guess nothing is too stupid for the MS-loving/paid/stock-owning trolls that sprawl around here lately.
Sorry for the rant, but anybody taking SCO's threats seriously is either a complete moron or has some pro-MSFT interests.
It's more or less an IT-services company.
You need money for investments!
Better stop making any investments, I'm sure that will solve all our problems!
Given that Microsoft's German (maybe even European) headquarters is located in the suburbs of Munich, I'm afraid Munich will be the most likely destination of Microsoft executives in that area...
You say that the largest internet-store (amazon.com) and the largest search-engine (google.com), all running on Linux are no businesses?
Where have you been the last 10 years?
You don't let reality get into the way of your FUD, right?
Contrary to the popular belief, the SCO case never was and never will be about the GPL.
However, why the SCO case could indeed be a good thing for Linux is that people, managers and businessmen could wake up and realize that the GPL is a true "no sue" license.
The risk of getting fined by the BSA is much higher than any risks from the GPL. (Actually there simply are no risks from a user's point of view. As long as you don't redistribute, there is no risk because there is no way to violate the license.)
In times in which many companies spend a significant portion of their revenue on lawers, a no-sue, no-IP-bullshit license like the GPL is exactly what is needed for a lot of companies.
Saying "Linux sucks because my soundcard doesn't work" is mindless bashing. Even if somebody wanted to help you he can't.
Now that you did provide what didn't work, it's OK. However your experience is still not representative, sound problems under Linux are extremely rare IME.
I have to wonder -- do you guys REALLY want broad-based adoption of this technology, or would it ruin the allure?
Oh well. Then I could post "Windows sucks because it doesn't work with my harddrive". Would you consider that mindless bashing or a constructive addition to the discussion? I'm serious, how would you react?
P.S.: The harddrive (A western digital 40GB drive) isn't detected by the BIOS of both a P3-350 and an Athlon650, therefore Windows can't use it but in Linux it works like a charm as long as you don't want to boot from it.
PPS: And that's only one thing on a long list of stuff that didn't and/or doesn't work with Windows. You are trying to put forward the impression that everything works just perfectly with Windows which just isn't true, sorry. All in all, you can have big problems with both Windows and Linux depending on the hardware, skills and just luck.
Also, your "conclusion" is just pure nonsense:
My point is not to complain, but to indicate that there is still "geek time" and knowledge that must be "paid" to support free software.
Guess who is writing drivers for Windows? It's not Microsoft, it's normally the hardware vendors. The nature of Linux being open-source doesn't prevent hardware vendors from writing drivers, quite the contrary, it makes it easier.
If you would at least tell us what sound card you claim is not supported, I could believe you, but this just seems like a mindless Linux-bashing post.
Actually the study did mention that all users had experience with previous versions of Windows.
The reason for that is because the study wanted to simulate the situation in governmental (sp?) organisations where most users have Windows experience as well.
Actually it's quite impressive that KDE can keep up with Windows in a 45-minute test with Windows-users.
(Combo boxes are those in which you can both enter a text and choose from a list - for example the "location" bar in most browsers.)
The only effects a no longer forced Windows bundling would be:
Actually, it might be a good idea to also bring a boxed Linux distribution to court, just in case.
Wow, that would make Windows98 superior to WindowsXP.
If everybody would think like you, we would still live in the stone age.... Nobody would ever try anything new because they would think the old way of doing it would be "superior"...
Try that with a non-*nix.
Aw, that's a non-issue. MCSEs are so cheap that it's no problem to always keep at least one MCSE within a 200 meter radius (300 meters if the MCSE is not overweight and under 30) from the system for 99.9% uptime.
Well, the main goal of Reiser4 is to improve reliability.
Do people who don't read articles (including the original reporter, BTW) count as trolls?
It's named Kolab, not Kroupware. There is even a nice shiny logo for those literally less unfortunate who have problems with longer texts (like the window title)...
Jeeez.
what is so bad about cookies anyway? I'm a web developer and I've met one guy who refuses all cookies (therefore is unable to use some of my sites), I asked him why he did that and even though he is a techie, he wasn't able to give me an answer. And I don't get it, neither. So please: Show me one single incident where cookies caused anybody harm. Thanks.
Actually, if you really start thinking about the whole licensing-stuff, you realize pretty quickly that the risk and fines of being busted by the BSA (yes, the licensing stuff is so complicated that hardly any company can be *really* sure that they comply) is much higher than any GPL risk.
While this whole thing sure hurts Linux in the short run it could backslash against Windows in the long run easily.