probably because they estimate that the cost per supported customer would shrink the revenue to 0.
On what do you base this statement? It makes no sense to me because first of all, linux users are absolutely the least likely of all to require hand holding and technical support.... obtw - the linux client is already done - it's been running on the roku box for years.
Lots of people, including the fortune 100 company i work for. In fact, the linux demand has gotten much stronger, as my employer is dumping old school platforms and moving to linux in the server room.
The tough times motivate them to maximize their bang for the buck.
Oh, and trust me, big companies want the official paid support - so that basically means Novell or Redhat, though debian/ubuntu are there in some cases now too, since you can purchase support for either one from HP now.
Of course, if it doesn't, you have the source so fix it yourself.
Sorry, what planet were you from again? Telling Aunt Mildred "you have the source, so fix it yourself" isn't going to fly.
As for trotting out apple, you're hopelessly naive if you think that microsoft won't kill the OSX version of silverlight the minute apple's market share gets a little bigger than microsoft would like.
For the government to put microsoft firmly in control of a lever by which which can hurt its competitors as much as it likes is like putting the proverbial fox in charge of the henhouse.
This isn't something the Slashdot demographic wants to hear.
Why would you think that? While I'm not sure exactly what "the slashdot demographic" might be, the fact of the matter is that the majority of slashdot readers are microsoft windows users.
> Could have fooled me, I minimized a screen in firefox which for some reason resulted in x crashing and at least nicely closing all the apps I had open. Doesn't crash my ass.
Not saying it couldn't have happened under some hypothetical situation, but in 15 years of linux use I've never seen that happen. Chances are, something else was going on there.
> Enterprise space - along with whatever mission critical application you care to name that isn't available on Linux
LOL, ever heard of Oracle, IBM or Novell? The enterprise isn't a problem for linux, but the home market has large legacy install of peecee software that will take time to replace.
Yes, ubuntu server is indeed every bit as solid as RHEL or SLES, and enterprise support contracts are available from canonical. We're a SLES shop, but we've set up some ubuntu servers and are impressed with the distro. We'd love to roll out ubuntu on a large scale but the chief stumbling block is not any fault of ubuntu, but our old nemesis, the old boy network again.
Oracle is the chief obstacle here, as they are pushing their own redhat clone (or redhat proper), barely tolerate suse, and dismiss everything else. They quite arrogantly (you had to be there) remarked that they had "no plans" to offer oracle for ubuntu. While annoyed at their arrogance, I do trust that time and market conditions will have them singing a different tune. I remember oracle telling me in 1998 that they don't support linux, and that I should try sco. muahaha.
Even so, we're looking at using ubuntu for general infrastructure roles - smtp, ftp, ntp, dns, etc. On the oracle front, our national manager is just angry enough to look very hard at using postgres or db2 or anything but oracle.
If it is "supplied by CentOS" then it was compiled by "CentOS" not Red Hat. Red Hat Enterprise Linux enterprise had a hotfix for this weeks ago. So if Vipul had been using a Red Hat product, he would not have had this problem.
A hotfix weeks ago for a problem that's been there since 2006? So he would have had the problem only slightly less longer than he did. Let's face it, redhat dropped the ball on this one.
Does that mean we also kick out everyone who has offshored to the US? When someone like, say, Toyota, wants to open up a plant in the US (who has 5 currently) do we tell them to fuck off because we are against offshoring? Or are we hypocrites about it and we are ok with offhsoring so long as the jobs come here.
I think you're missing the point. Toyota built plants in the US to make the cars they sell in the US, which makes a lot of sense, actually.
Most of us dual-boot, especially for games. Dunno about that, I'm a pretty hard core gamer, and spend way too much playing 3D FPS over the internet. I've been gaming on linux since doom in 1995.
I tend to stick with the native linux games (doom 1/2/3, ut 2k/2k3/2k4, quake 1/2/3/4, RtCW, ET etc) and have bought a lot of them.
I don't personally know any linux users who keep windows around for games, I've only heard of it at places like slashdot.
But I don't do windows, especially not for games, sorry. If there was a game I just had to have, and it was not available under linux, I'd play it on the ps3.
Oops, so much for your theory. I just did a test, copying a big dvd iso file to another partition. Copying the file to an ext3 partition took over 8 minutes. Copying it to reiser took just over 3 minutes. xfs was almost as fast as reiser, at about 3.5 minutes.
> in order to unseat Outlook/exchange at this point you would have to give users a set of damn good reasons why its worth their time to switch.
Nice try. The truth, however, is that you don't have to give the users anything, because they aren't the ones calling the shots. Give the management sufficient reason to change, and there's the ballgame.
IIRC the linux kernel could be compiled with the intel c compiler a few years ago. But naturally the official kernel would have to be compiled with a free as in speech compiler.
IIUC the driver code is the same across all platforms - it's not like sat down and wrote a driver for mswindows, then wrote another driver for linux, then another for solaris, then another for freebsd. At the core, it's basically all the same code, the "nvidia binary blob", the differences being in the glue logic, the "shim" that acts as an interface between the binary driver and the host OS the driver happens to be running on.
> OSX is both UNIX based, and with close-to-mainstream user friendliness. Next to that, people have no incentive to use Linux at all.
LOL, right. I have a mac, in fact my wife and daughters all have macs as well. But I missed the part where that would somehow take away my incentive to use linux. Sure, I use the mac for doing my taxes, and for the cool karaoke program that runs on it, but for my day in and day out web browsing, email, gaming and multimedia stuff, I'm on linux, and don't have any plans to dump it in favor of a pure mac experience.
Bottom line, mac and linux will continue to coexist in my domain for some time. OTOH microsoft has been gone for over a year now, and it's been *great*!
Slashdot Mirror
probably because they estimate that the cost per supported customer would shrink the revenue to 0.
On what do you base this statement? It makes no sense to me because first of all, linux users are absolutely the least likely of all to require hand holding and technical support.... obtw - the linux client is already done - it's been running on the roku box for years.
Wow.. did I wake up in another dimension? Are slashdotters actually recommending MS products today??
But of course - did you not realize that the majority of slashdot readers are microsoft windows users?
Who buys Linux in an economy like this?
Lots of people, including the fortune 100 company i work for. In fact, the linux demand has gotten much stronger, as my employer is dumping old school platforms and moving to linux in the server room.
The tough times motivate them to maximize their bang for the buck.
Oh, and trust me, big companies want the official paid support - so that basically means Novell or Redhat, though debian/ubuntu are there in some cases now too, since you can purchase support for either one from HP now.
Of course, if it doesn't, you have the source so fix it yourself.
Sorry, what planet were you from again? Telling Aunt Mildred "you have the source, so fix it yourself" isn't going to fly.
As for trotting out apple, you're hopelessly naive if you think that microsoft won't kill the OSX version of silverlight the minute apple's market share gets a little bigger than microsoft would like.
For the government to put microsoft firmly in control of a lever by which which can hurt its competitors as much as it likes is like putting the proverbial fox in charge of the henhouse.
This isn't something the Slashdot demographic wants to hear.
Why would you think that?
While I'm not sure exactly what "the slashdot demographic" might be, the fact of the matter is that the majority of slashdot readers are microsoft windows users.
I know my boss likes to be able to say "heh, it's broken lets call * "
As if there is no such thing as commercial support for linux apps? ROFL!
Why would the author think it odd that the network stack performs so well? New to linux perhaps?
> Could have fooled me, I minimized a screen in firefox which for some reason resulted in x crashing and at least nicely closing all the apps I had open. Doesn't crash my ass.
Not saying it couldn't have happened under some hypothetical situation, but in 15 years of linux use I've never seen that happen. Chances are, something else was going on there.
for loops
here documents
execution of string output from backtick delimited command
command completion, hostname completion, command line editing
In Korea, only old people use ext3 with linux
> Enterprise space - along with whatever mission critical application you care to name that isn't available on Linux
LOL, ever heard of Oracle, IBM or Novell? The enterprise isn't a problem for linux, but the home market has large legacy install of peecee software that will take time to replace.
Screw that, I want linux on the high end. That's right, I want the best hardware you got, and I want it with linux. capice?
for once - and only once - in my life, I am actually on monkey boy's side.
google has too much power and this only worries me. I see no good coming from this.
You've gotta be kidding.
How could things possibly be any better if microsoft, rather than google, had this power?
Yes, ubuntu server is indeed every bit as solid as RHEL or SLES, and enterprise support contracts are available from canonical. We're a SLES shop, but we've set up some ubuntu servers and are impressed with the distro. We'd love to roll out ubuntu on a large scale but the chief stumbling block is not any fault of ubuntu, but our old nemesis, the old boy network again.
Oracle is the chief obstacle here, as they are pushing their own redhat clone (or redhat proper), barely tolerate suse, and dismiss everything else. They quite arrogantly (you had to be there) remarked that they had "no plans" to offer oracle for ubuntu. While annoyed at their arrogance, I do trust that time and market conditions will have them singing a different tune. I remember oracle telling me in 1998 that they don't support linux, and that I should try sco. muahaha.
Even so, we're looking at using ubuntu for general infrastructure roles - smtp, ftp, ntp, dns, etc. On the oracle front, our national manager is just angry enough to look very hard at using postgres or db2 or anything but oracle.
If it is "supplied by CentOS" then it was compiled by "CentOS" not Red Hat. Red Hat Enterprise Linux enterprise had a hotfix for this weeks ago. So if Vipul had been using a Red Hat product, he would not have had this problem.
A hotfix weeks ago for a problem that's been there since 2006? So he would have had the problem only slightly less longer than he did. Let's face it, redhat dropped the ball on this one.
Does that mean we also kick out everyone who has offshored to the US? When someone like, say, Toyota, wants to open up a plant in the US (who has 5 currently) do we tell them to fuck off because we are against offshoring? Or are we hypocrites about it and we are ok with offhsoring so long as the jobs come here.
I think you're missing the point. Toyota built plants in the US to make the cars they sell in the US, which makes a lot of sense, actually.
I tend to stick with the native linux games (doom 1/2/3, ut 2k/2k3/2k4, quake 1/2/3/4, RtCW, ET etc) and have bought a lot of them.
I don't personally know any linux users who keep windows around for games, I've only heard of it at places like slashdot.
But I don't do windows, especially not for games, sorry. If there was a game I just had to have, and it was not available under linux, I'd play it on the ps3.
IMHO it's not at all a good thing in the long run if it leads to an ms lock-in.
Sure, microsoft frantically desires to be relevant, and it's no doubt their wet dream to have a world where you can't manage unix without ms windows.
But, I'll pass - thanks but no thanks. Give me one or two skilled unix admins, and I'm good.
Oops, so much for your theory.
I just did a test, copying a big dvd iso file to another partition. Copying the file to an ext3 partition took over 8 minutes. Copying it to reiser took just over 3 minutes. xfs was almost as fast as reiser, at about 3.5 minutes.
> in order to unseat Outlook/exchange at this point you would have to give users a set of damn good reasons why its worth their time to switch.
Nice try. The truth, however, is that you don't have to give the users anything, because they aren't the ones calling the shots. Give the management sufficient reason to change, and there's the ballgame.
Gotta love how these articles always say "a million machines" rather than the clearer and more accurate "a million microsoft windows PCs"...
IIRC the linux kernel could be compiled with the intel c compiler a few years ago. But naturally the official kernel would have to be compiled with a free as in speech compiler.
IIUC the driver code is the same across all platforms - it's not like sat down and wrote a driver for mswindows, then wrote another driver for linux, then another for solaris, then another for freebsd. At the core, it's basically all the same code, the "nvidia binary blob", the differences being in the glue logic, the "shim" that acts as an interface between the binary driver and the host OS the driver happens to be running on.
> OSX is both UNIX based, and with close-to-mainstream user friendliness. Next to that, people have no incentive to use Linux at all.
LOL, right. I have a mac, in fact my wife and daughters all have macs as well. But I missed the part where that would somehow take away my incentive to use linux. Sure, I use the mac for doing my taxes, and for the cool karaoke program that runs on it, but for my day in and day out web browsing, email, gaming and multimedia stuff, I'm on linux, and don't have any plans to dump it in favor of a pure mac experience.
Bottom line, mac and linux will continue to coexist in my domain for some time. OTOH microsoft has been gone for over a year now, and it's been *great*!
> So 2008 is finally the year of Linux on the desktop?
Maybe for you. Every year since 1995 has been the year of the linux desktop for me!