"THe reality is Microsoft is 70 or more % of comp desktops across the world."
Too right, and mostly in the form of Win98, which is well known to be a 32 bit extension to a 16 bit patch for an 8 bit OS written for a 4 bit processor by a 2 bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition.
Get real. Linux looks like Unix, but it doesn't contain any of the original Unix code, whereas Win98 is *still* hobbled by legacy code.
As for the server market, I think the last few day's events prove a lot in Linux's favour.
On the software front, what are you talking about? Server s/w or desktop apps? Coz Linux is pretty good for server software, and it's recently gained a lot of desktop apps thanks to KDE, GNOME, and a bunch of commercial vendors like Corel.
His point is even weaker than you suggest. The QWERTY keyboard hasn't changed much over the years, but to compare Linux 2.2 with the original UN*X is like comparing the PIII with the 186
Ok, I've been reading the article more thouroughly (as I should have in the first place).
First, it wasn't written by a hacker/nerd/geek/whatever. The word 'bug' is used as a synonym for 'virus'.
As to the OS, the article makes two interesting points : the OS *is* Open Source, and the machine will switch on instantly without a long boot sequence.
The former presumably just means the Linux part of the OS, but I still fail to understand the term 'hybrid'. I assume its misused, as 'bug' was.
The latter suggests to me that the OS is stored in ROM. Maybe not relevant, but interesting nevertheless.
Do you really think this system will be a) any less secure than all the Windows 98 machines out there now, and b) any less safe than all those Linux machines being used by newbies?
How does that explain the fact that I have three wordprocessors, two spreadsheets, three browsers, three file managers, five window managers and an uncountable number of editors running on my system, all of which I obtained for free?
Slashdot Mirror
"THe reality is Microsoft is 70 or more % of comp desktops across the world."
Too right, and mostly in the form of Win98, which is well known to be a 32 bit extension to a 16 bit patch for an 8 bit OS written for a 4 bit processor by a 2 bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition.
Get real. Linux looks like Unix, but it doesn't contain any of the original Unix code, whereas Win98 is *still* hobbled by legacy code.
As for the server market, I think the last few day's events prove a lot in Linux's favour.
On the software front, what are you talking about? Server s/w or desktop apps? Coz Linux is pretty good for server software, and it's recently gained a lot of desktop apps thanks to KDE, GNOME, and a bunch of commercial vendors like Corel.
Macintosh has chic appeal?
It still sounds like an anorak, even if it isn't spelt like one.
Sorry to cause offence. I'll think of a new one (how about : Windows - Transparent and easy to break)
I was really talking to all the feeble people out there who complain all day about Windows' flaws and then do nothing about it, though.
His point is even weaker than you suggest. The QWERTY keyboard hasn't changed much over the years, but to compare Linux 2.2 with the original UN*X is like comparing the PIII with the 186
Ok, I've been reading the article more thouroughly (as I should have in the first place).
First, it wasn't written by a hacker/nerd/geek/whatever. The word 'bug' is used as a synonym for 'virus'.
As to the OS, the article makes two interesting points : the OS *is* Open Source, and the machine will switch on instantly without a long boot sequence.
The former presumably just means the Linux part of the OS, but I still fail to understand the term 'hybrid'. I assume its misused, as 'bug' was.
The latter suggests to me that the OS is stored in ROM. Maybe not relevant, but interesting nevertheless.
Wow. You learn something new every day.
Ok, so they named it after a fruit. Is that any better?
I know you had a point to make, but was it really nescessary to send it twice %-)
A couple of points :
1) If it's not running Linux - what *is* it running? Bear in mind that this article was not nescessarily aimed at the technically minded.
2) This box is merely a small part of the 'world domination' that's going on, which is in reality simply an escape from the Microsoft monopoly.
If it was truly a hybrid OS of Linux and BeOS, I would expect it to run apps written for *both* OSs. They'd just need recompiling.
I've been thinking about this. (careful, could over-heat that brain cell)
BeOS has some kind of POSIX compatibility, right?
So maybe what they mean is that they've ported some user-space Linux software to BeOS. 'course, this doesn't explain the *free* bit.
The only other alternative I can think of is that they really have got some kind of license with Be.
You're kidding?
;-)
Seriously though - naming computers after raincoats, naming computers after kitchen appliances, what next?
These marketing people haven't got a clue
Do you really think this system will be a) any less secure than all the Windows 98 machines out there now, and b) any less safe than all those Linux machines being used by newbies?
If it is a TV thing, it's not exactly a new idea, although the price tag is pretty low. But then, technology gets cheaper.
What? No third party apps?
How does that explain the fact that I have three wordprocessors, two spreadsheets, three browsers, three file managers, five window managers and an uncountable number of editors running on my system, all of which I obtained for free?