... gain on the desktop then every Linux user that has children should teach all there children to use Linux and only Linux, Micro$oft should not enter these children's lives while they are at home. Your children should have there own Linux box and if they break it they should be taught that they should try to fix it first before they come to you for help, that breaking it is part of the learning experience and that it is ok to break it. When your children ask you for help with there Linux box you should not hold there hand and do the task at hand for them you should set by there side and guild them only when they are severally lost. If every Linux user did this I believe that we could get Linux into the 'Mainstream' because our children would be the ones running the networks of tomorrow, writing the programs of tomorrow, and running the companies of tomorrow and Linux is what they would be familiar with not M$. One of the other things that we would have to do is convince our local public schools that they should teach Linux in the classroom, I know my local public schools do in a limited fashion already, and my local Community College does to.
This reminds me of my first PC.
My Dad gave it to me. I don't know the exact year, but it was still a pretty current 286, with VGA graphics, two floppy drives, 50 spacious megs of hard drive, and a printer. All mine to do with as I pleased, on one condition.
I wasn't allowed to ask him how to run it, or call him when I broke it. If something happened to it, I had to fix it myself.
It turned out to be a great learning experience. I got me a couple DOS manuals and learned the ins and outs of setting up a menu based DOS machine.
I have a three year old, and I'll be giving her a computer in a few years. It'll have Linux on it, and I hope she learns as much as I did.
As for installing and removing software, it would be good to have a more-or-less universal software management system. The two current contenders are RPM and Debian's apt-get, of course. Both have advantages and disadvantages -- for example, it's more common to find fresh builds of programs in.rpm format; but apt-get handles dependencies more gracefully. Perhaps what we need is a synthesis of the two, which would use the.rpm file format and apt-get's syntax. Instead of having a centralized package depot like apt, or many randomly distributed files like rpm, you strike a balance: maintain a server that lists current URLs for packages, which would be hosted on the project's page instead of centrally. Typing "rpm-get install Snicklefritz1.3" would check the central database for current URLs of the RPM and its dependency BruberMIPS0.9.5, download them from two different sites and install them. (Note: the "spell" system in Sorcery GNU/Linux [wox.org] works kind of like this, only it downloads source and auto-compiles instead of downloading pre-built packages.)
Too late, someone already did it. Ximian Red Carpet handles installation of system packages and apps, divided into several channels. Go to one of your channels (one for your distro, loki demos, code weavers, opera, star office) and upgrade, install, or remove packages to your heart's content. Nice pretty GUI too.
Yeah, it doesn't pass my "Dad" test either. When you have to talk someone through opening a console window, ungzipping a file, untarring the file, running make... you realize how wonderful Windows Install programs are. Wizz-bang-click-next-next-next-finish. Really until my dad can install applications without having to open a console window, Linux isn't ready for the average home user.
Have your dad try Ximian Red Carpet. No console, no arcane commands, and so easy he'll probably be asking why there isn't something like this on windows:)
- You might someday get a customer, consultant, partner, etc. that needs interoperability - You will protect yourself from macro viruses - If Microsoft takes office in a direction you don't like, you won't be tied to it.
We need the CEOs or whoever else is at the top held responsible for the actions of his company as if he had committed them himself In the above instance of a jet company that caused the death of 110 people, the CEO should be in prison for manslaughter. And not this country club bullshit - throw his ass in Oz.
who says the brats should be entitled to reap the benefits of their genius parent any more than the general public? you want to create a freakin IP aristocracy here?
My customers may get a copy of the "source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable." but I don't have to give the WINE community anything at all. I don't have to make the source code available on the Net and I don't have to give my source code to anyone who hasn't "bought" a copy of my software.
Its clear that you don't get it. One of the properties of the GPL (and LGPL) is that is you use GPL software and make enhancements to it, you may sell that finished version. The person who buys it has a right to the source code and the right to redistribute the software. There's nothing stopping your customers from putting it up on an ftp site.
If it were possible to close off GPL software by just not putting the source on the web plenty of companies would have done it by now.
I actually like the dual licenseing arrangement that Trolltech uses for Qt. Both a closed commercial license available for a fee, or a GPLed license available for free.
Basically, if you plan to share your software with others, we will share with you. If you plan to make a commercial product, you will need to pay a fee for the code.
Good post. I'm a Linux newbie and I second every point in your post this elitist moron replied to. One further point: they should make a Special Edition HOWTO meant specifically for Windows users trying to migrate to Linux. AFAIK, such a thing doesn't exist yet.
Linux, in order to gain even desktop acceptance, needs all the features listed and more. Looking to Hell and back for an obscure HOWTO isn't help. Help is help, not HOWTOs, get it? Typing apt-get doesn't qualify as updating. It's crap. You need a Windows-Update lookalike to succeed.
How often have you found Windows help helpful? It generally isn't - you need a book or a google search or a guru. Linux is the same, but at least you have the HOWTOs and man pages.
As far as updaters, look at Ximian Red Carpet. Much better than Windows Updater, as it sorts out dependencies, has everything you need to update your system available, sorts them by urgency, provides an easy interface for uninstalling, and has a GUI slick enough to make an AOLer jealous.
Or if you're a deb fan there's always apt-get. You are complaining about nonexistant problems
People in civil trials are found liable. People in criminal trials are found guilty. Which was Microsoft? I don't recall hearing of them being liable of abusing monopoly power, but guilty of it. There are so many trials it can be hard to keep count.
There's the criminal trial that these comments apply to.
There's also a civil trial from various states to recover damages to the citizenry (the one where they offered to 'give' billions in software to schools.
There's also the civil suit from AOL for killing netscape.
There's also a civil suit from an anti-monopoly group suing both the DoJ and Microsoft for alleged backroom dealings in coming up with this agreement.
Did I miss any?
I can see how you could be confused, but have no doubt that Microsoft is a convicted corporate criminal.
AIX
[6 remote, 3 local, 1 both]
Debian GNU/Linux
[1 remote, 12 local] + 1 Linux kernel vulnerability[1 local]
FreeBSD
[12 remote, 9 local, 3 both]
HP-UX
[12 remote, 12 local, 1 both]
Mandrake Linux
[5 remote, 12 local] + 12 Linux kernel vulnerabilities[5 remote, 7 local]
OpenBSD
[7 remote, 5 local, 1 both]
Red Hat Linux
[5 remote, 22 local, 1 unknown] + 12 Linux kernel vulnerabilities[6 remote, 6 local]
Solaris
[14 remote, 22 local, 2 both]
Personally, I find remote vulnerabilites to be a MUCH greater concern than local ones. Looked at this way, we can see Linux clearly coming out ahead, which the champ Debain with only one vulnerability.
The author does make a good point about open source giving a false sense of security. Just because the source is available doesn't mean that it has been thoughouly audited. Still, the freedom to do so is there.
Security doesn't necessarily play along with getting an edge over competitors, which is (and will always be) a primary goal of any company.
You just outlined the primary reason that Open Source is the superior method of software design. A programmer crafting software because it scratches his personal itch will ensure that it is stable, secure, and reliable. A company will put lots of flashy glitz on it and get security/reliability up to "good enough" and ship.
Don't like the word targeting, give me a decent OS that I can do all sorts of cool things on and I'll be using your system too. Notice I said too, I'd set up 3 boot partitions: 1 with MacOSX 1 with OS9 and one with Linux. That way I could totally change desktops when I feel like it, not be stuck with one. Currently do something similer with a dual boot between windows and Linux, with the Linux partition having Ximian Gnome and the latest stable KDE. Love this combo. Then to have MacOSX would be a dream too.
Let them target me - I won't be giving up my beloved Tux, but if I had the cash I'd definately spring for a Mac to us in addition to my Linux box. It would allow me to use some of the funky USB devices that Linux can't do currently (visor and USB cd burner) as well as.doc compatibility. I could get rid of the Win partition altogether and spend all my time in Unixy goodness.
I really don't see OS X, or its targeting of Linux users, as a bad thing. Pretty ambitious really, going for both the ease of use traditional Mac fans, as well as the unix geek lords:)
"There are lots of bugs in linux, they have to keep releasing kernel updates to fix them, like the SNMP one." - Scored down, -4, troll.
"There are lots of bugs in windows, they have to keep releasing patch updates to fix them, like the IE6 one." Scored up, 5, informative.
You see how it works around here.:)
Not really. I've recently been modded down for making cracks at Microsoft - relevant ones - on a story about Microsoft. I poke at microsoft because I don't like thier products. I have to use them in my profession, and just about every task I do it occurs to me how much easier, more reliably, and quickly I could do it on a Unix based system, politics aside.
Evidently the generation of keys takes a lot of crunching and may take awhile to generate one useable key. If you want to hack out more keys or at a faster rate you must throw more hardware at it or parallelize it.
Finally, a use for all those Beowulf clusters we all love to imagine.:)
The issue isn't that simple. If you think an OS is a few tiny utilities and a kernel, then yeah, maybe MS violated laws continuously for decades. If you think an OS is the tool set used by people to get what they want done, then it seems pretty clear that most if not all software is "part of the OS".
You don't seem to define an OS very well. What's the difference between an OS and an application? By your definition there is no difference.
An Operating system allows programs, hardware, and users to interact. That's it. Everything else is an application. Most of what we think of as 'Linux' is applications. IE, notepad, paint, wordpad, scandisk, all applications.
I think developers should be wasy of developing Windows software. After all, if your software becomes popular enough Microsoft will make a clone and give it away.
Microsoft is a convicted criminal. They aren't accused, suspected, or alleged. THey are a monopoly and did abuse their monopoly powers. Since when do criminals get to negotiate their punishment?
MS does not get to play by the same rules as everyone else.
Agreed - my congress critter, John Shimkus, showed some cluefulness by starting an email newsletter. He actually requested email, because any snail mail takes ages to get through security.
The key word in your argument is use. You are not granting people to copy your stuff and claim that it is theirs, nor are you granting permission for another company to pull the image off your site and display it with their ads.
Use is irrelevant. Remember that the law doesn't follow common sense, it only follows its own definition. Copyright protect the creator, preventing a third party from making a copy of the work and competing with the original maker.
Linking or framing someone else's image is rather rude, as it drains bandwidth and makes it appear that someone else's work is your own. But you aren't making a copy! Ironically, making a copy of the image to host on your own server, while more polite as you aren't using someone else's bandwidth, would be a violation of copyright law.
Don't be so quick to assume that all republicans want to make love to Billy G. Even Rush Limbaugh has spoken out against Microsoft, during one show referring to Bill Gates as a "monopolist, threat to national security, and a thief."
Pro business doesn't mean evil, nor does it mean supporting a criminal business.
Slashdot Mirror
... gain on the desktop then every Linux user that has children should teach all there children to use Linux and only Linux, Micro$oft should not enter these children's lives while they are at home. Your children should have there own Linux box and if they break it they should be taught that they should try to fix it first before they come to you for help, that breaking it is part of the learning experience and that it is ok to break it. When your children ask you for help with there Linux box you should not hold there hand and do the task at hand for them you should set by there side and guild them only when they are severally lost. If every Linux user did this I believe that we could get Linux into the 'Mainstream' because our children would be the ones running the networks of tomorrow, writing the programs of tomorrow, and running the companies of tomorrow and Linux is what they would be familiar with not M$. One of the other things that we would have to do is convince our local public schools that they should teach Linux in the classroom, I know my local public schools do in a limited fashion already, and my local Community College does to.
This reminds me of my first PC.
My Dad gave it to me. I don't know the exact year, but it was still a pretty current 286, with VGA graphics, two floppy drives, 50 spacious megs of hard drive, and a printer. All mine to do with as I pleased, on one condition.
I wasn't allowed to ask him how to run it, or call him when I broke it. If something happened to it, I had to fix it myself.
It turned out to be a great learning experience. I got me a couple DOS manuals and learned the ins and outs of setting up a menu based DOS machine.
I have a three year old, and I'll be giving her a computer in a few years. It'll have Linux on it, and I hope she learns as much as I did.
As for installing and removing software, it would be good to have a more-or-less universal software management system. The two current contenders are RPM and Debian's apt-get, of course. Both have advantages and disadvantages -- for example, it's more common to find fresh builds of programs in .rpm format; but apt-get handles dependencies more gracefully. Perhaps what we need is a synthesis of the two, which would use the .rpm file format and apt-get's syntax. Instead of having a centralized package depot like apt, or many randomly distributed files like rpm, you strike a balance: maintain a server that lists current URLs for packages, which would be hosted on the project's page instead of centrally. Typing "rpm-get install Snicklefritz1.3" would check the central database for current URLs of the RPM and its dependency BruberMIPS0.9.5, download them from two different sites and install them. (Note: the "spell" system in Sorcery GNU/Linux [wox.org] works kind of like this, only it downloads source and auto-compiles instead of downloading pre-built packages.)
Too late, someone already did it. Ximian Red Carpet handles installation of system packages and apps, divided into several channels. Go to one of your channels (one for your distro, loki demos, code weavers, opera, star office) and upgrade, install, or remove packages to your heart's content. Nice pretty GUI too.
Yeah, it doesn't pass my "Dad" test either. When you have to talk someone through opening a console window, ungzipping a file, untarring the file, running make... you realize how wonderful Windows Install programs are. Wizz-bang-click-next-next-next-finish. Really until my dad can install applications without having to open a console window, Linux isn't ready for the average home user.
:)
Have your dad try Ximian Red Carpet. No console, no arcane commands, and so easy he'll probably be asking why there isn't something like this on windows
Why should you change?
- You might someday get a customer, consultant, partner, etc. that needs interoperability
- You will protect yourself from macro viruses
- If Microsoft takes office in a direction you don't like, you won't be tied to it.
We need something more than that.
We need the CEOs or whoever else is at the top held responsible for the actions of his company as if he had committed them himself In the above instance of a jet company that caused the death of 110 people, the CEO should be in prison for manslaughter. And not this country club bullshit - throw his ass in Oz.
who says the brats should be entitled to reap the benefits of their genius parent any more than the general public? you want to create a freakin IP aristocracy here?
You misspelled 'maintain'
:)
My customers may get a copy of the "source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable." but I don't have to give the WINE community anything at all. I don't have to make the source code available on the Net and I don't have to give my source code to anyone who hasn't "bought" a copy of my software.
Its clear that you don't get it. One of the properties of the GPL (and LGPL) is that is you use GPL software and make enhancements to it, you may sell that finished version. The person who buys it has a right to the source code and the right to redistribute the software. There's nothing stopping your customers from putting it up on an ftp site.
If it were possible to close off GPL software by just not putting the source on the web plenty of companies would have done it by now.
I actually like the dual licenseing arrangement that Trolltech uses for Qt. Both a closed commercial license available for a fee, or a GPLed license available for free.
Basically, if you plan to share your software with others, we will share with you. If you plan to make a commercial product, you will need to pay a fee for the code.
Good post. I'm a Linux newbie and I second every point in your post this elitist moron replied to. One further point: they should make a Special Edition HOWTO meant specifically for Windows users trying to migrate to Linux. AFAIK, such a thing doesn't exist yet.
Try this site
Linux, in order to gain even desktop acceptance, needs all the features listed and more. Looking to Hell and back for an obscure HOWTO isn't help. Help is help, not HOWTOs, get it? Typing apt-get doesn't qualify as updating. It's crap. You need a Windows-Update lookalike to succeed.
How often have you found Windows help helpful? It generally isn't - you need a book or a google search or a guru. Linux is the same, but at least you have the HOWTOs and man pages.
As far as updaters, look at Ximian Red Carpet. Much better than Windows Updater, as it sorts out dependencies, has everything you need to update your system available, sorts them by urgency, provides an easy interface for uninstalling, and has a GUI slick enough to make an AOLer jealous.
Or if you're a deb fan there's always apt-get. You are complaining about nonexistant problems
Yes, you must have.
People in civil trials are found liable. People in criminal trials are found guilty. Which was Microsoft? I don't recall hearing of them being liable of abusing monopoly power, but guilty of it. There are so many trials it can be hard to keep count.
There's the criminal trial that these comments apply to.
There's also a civil trial from various states to recover damages to the citizenry (the one where they offered to 'give' billions in software to schools.
There's also the civil suit from AOL for killing netscape.
There's also a civil suit from an anti-monopoly group suing both the DoJ and Microsoft for alleged backroom dealings in coming up with this agreement.
Did I miss any?
I can see how you could be confused, but have no doubt that Microsoft is a convicted corporate criminal.
CompTIA can't be too MS dependant, as they recently began offering a Linux+ certification, in addition to A+ and a couple others.
Personally, I find remote vulnerabilites to be a MUCH greater concern than local ones. Looked at this way, we can see Linux clearly coming out ahead, which the champ Debain with only one vulnerability.
The author does make a good point about open source giving a false sense of security. Just because the source is available doesn't mean that it has been thoughouly audited. Still, the freedom to do so is there.
Security doesn't necessarily play along with getting an edge over competitors, which is (and will always be) a primary goal of any company.
You just outlined the primary reason that Open Source is the superior method of software design. A programmer crafting software because it scratches his personal itch will ensure that it is stable, secure, and reliable. A company will put lots of flashy glitz on it and get security/reliability up to "good enough" and ship.
"We're targeting Linux users..."
.doc compatibility. I could get rid of the Win partition altogether and spend all my time in Unixy goodness.
:)
Don't like the word targeting, give me a decent OS that I can do all sorts of cool things on and I'll be using your system too. Notice I said too, I'd set up 3 boot partitions: 1 with MacOSX 1 with OS9 and one with Linux. That way I could totally change desktops when I feel like it, not be stuck with one. Currently do something similer with a dual boot between windows and Linux, with the Linux partition having Ximian Gnome and the latest stable KDE. Love this combo. Then to have MacOSX would be a dream too.
Let them target me - I won't be giving up my beloved Tux, but if I had the cash I'd definately spring for a Mac to us in addition to my Linux box. It would allow me to use some of the funky USB devices that Linux can't do currently (visor and USB cd burner) as well as
I really don't see OS X, or its targeting of Linux users, as a bad thing. Pretty ambitious really, going for both the ease of use traditional Mac fans, as well as the unix geek lords
lol man, don't bother with this crowd. Example:
:)
"There are lots of bugs in linux, they have to keep releasing kernel updates to fix them, like the SNMP one." - Scored down, -4, troll.
"There are lots of bugs in windows, they have to keep releasing patch updates to fix them, like the IE6 one." Scored up, 5, informative.
You see how it works around here.
Not really. I've recently been modded down for making cracks at Microsoft - relevant ones - on a story about Microsoft. I poke at microsoft because I don't like thier products. I have to use them in my profession, and just about every task I do it occurs to me how much easier, more reliably, and quickly I could do it on a Unix based system, politics aside.
Evidently the generation of keys takes a lot of crunching and may take awhile to generate one useable key. If you want to hack out more keys or at a faster rate you must throw more hardware at it or parallelize it.
:)
Finally, a use for all those Beowulf clusters we all love to imagine.
If I want to use a bong to try and invent cold fusion I should have the right to.
:)
I'm pretty sure that's what those original cold fusion scientists were using back in the 80s.
Congrats Taco! Happy for you man.
(Assuming she says yes. If not, then insert the male bonding slam of the lady of your choice. Either way I got your back)
The issue isn't that simple. If you think an OS is a few tiny utilities and a kernel, then yeah, maybe MS violated laws continuously for decades. If you think an OS is the tool set used by people to get what they want done, then it seems pretty clear that most if not all software is "part of the OS".
You don't seem to define an OS very well. What's the difference between an OS and an application? By your definition there is no difference.
An Operating system allows programs, hardware, and users to interact. That's it. Everything else is an application. Most of what we think of as 'Linux' is applications. IE, notepad, paint, wordpad, scandisk, all applications.
I think developers should be wasy of developing Windows software. After all, if your software becomes popular enough Microsoft will make a clone and give it away.
You don't seem to get it, read this slowly -
Microsoft is a convicted criminal. They aren't accused, suspected, or alleged. THey are a monopoly and did abuse their monopoly powers. Since when do criminals get to negotiate their punishment?
MS does not get to play by the same rules as everyone else.
Wrong - what gives you the funny idea that the US is pure capitalist?
Pure capitalists don't have
- worker unions
- social security
- gov't provided health care for the poor
- gov't subsidized housing
- Minimum wages
just to name a few. The US is on a continuum between capitalist and socialism, though we do tend to lean toward the capitalistic side.
Agreed - my congress critter, John Shimkus, showed some cluefulness by starting an email newsletter. He actually requested email, because any snail mail takes ages to get through security.
The key word in your argument is use. You are not granting people to copy your stuff and claim that it is theirs, nor are you granting permission for another company to pull the image off your site and display it with their ads.
:)
Use is irrelevant. Remember that the law doesn't follow common sense, it only follows its own definition. Copyright protect the creator, preventing a third party from making a copy of the work and competing with the original maker.
Linking or framing someone else's image is rather rude, as it drains bandwidth and makes it appear that someone else's work is your own. But you aren't making a copy! Ironically, making a copy of the image to host on your own server, while more polite as you aren't using someone else's bandwidth, would be a violation of copyright law.
IANAL, though I am rather intelligent
Don't be so quick to assume that all republicans want to make love to Billy G. Even Rush Limbaugh has spoken out against Microsoft, during one show referring to Bill Gates as a "monopolist, threat to national security, and a thief."
Pro business doesn't mean evil, nor does it mean supporting a criminal business.