Gates was saying everyone would switch to Tablet PCs a while ago. I think they had a thing called Passport that was supposed to be wildly successful as well. They're always pushing high powered high priced things in the portable/PDA universe. But sometimes something small and simple (and reliable) like an iPod mini is preferable. It does one thing and does it well.
You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License.
Doesn't this make it definite that you cannot fork a GPLed project into a closed source one, you would have to rewrite it first?
Progeny Component Linux based on Debian is free to download isos of and made a decent Debian install for me.
FWIW
funny....WB Linux != RHLinux != UNIX
on
Red Hat Recap
·
· Score: 1
White Box is a knockoff of RedHat, which is a version of the GNU knockoff of whatever UNIX really is..........
Re:License does not forbid sharing.
on
Red Hat Recap
·
· Score: 1
I read the license. It specifically explains how to legally share the software - specifically by deleting RH trademarks and 'anaconda-images'
I know, they now have something like that at CheapBytes.
Reminds me of when the Judge ordered Microsoft to produce a browserless Windows - they brought in some mess that wouldn't even boot and said they were doing what he asked.
I'm sure RedHat's people/lawyers are way smarter than me and that technically they are in compliance with the GPL - but if you read any of Stallman's stories about printer drivers and NDAs etc RHAT are not in step with the spirit of GNU.
If you have to pay for support to get the software that doesn't really seem very different than paying for the software. It would be different if you could opt out and maybe get support elsewhere. They are not allowing anyone to compete on the support services. Sort of reminds me of the "Microsoft tax" on laptops.
Re:Per-Seat pricing is fine....RHES != Free
on
Red Hat Recap
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
The availability of the source without the binaries for an entire distro is clearly a way to get around the GPL - although you can technically share the software the reasonable way to do so is prohibited- go to gnu.org and find the 4 freedoms defined and you will see one of them is sharing the software (not just the source)
RedHat does NOT allow you to install on machines if you have not purchased a license for that machine. You have to buy support for every machine you want to install it on. See this
InfoWorld article or read the actual license at
here (here's a quote: "If Customer wishes to increase the number of Installed System, then Customer will purchase from Red Hat additional Services for each additional Installed System. During the term of this Agreement and for one (1) year thereafter, Customer expressly grants to Red Hat the right to audit Customer's facilities and records from time to time in order to verify Customer's compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement")
I know RedHat contributes, but I prefer to use Debian nowadays.
Things are going from bad to worse - first the Redhat->Fedora transfer and now Sun is in bed with Mickeysoft.
The way his server is failing might have more to do with the fact that it's PHP. I don't think php holds up well to a heavy load. Which makes me think it might be able to serve more pages if it was JSP/servlet - which reminds me, isn't there sort of a cloud hanging over Java on BSD? It used to be just not available or available only via Linux emulation, but it's been a long time since I looked into it. Anybody using it?
I was a loyal Red Hat guy, with a laptop and a home server running 7.3, up2date/RHN subscriptions, etc - then the word was that 8 was not a good upgrade ("don't try the brown acid")* so I waited and stayed at 7.3, and then the word started coming out about RHEL/RHAS/whatever and that they would cease supporting regular Red Hat.
So I switched. I've been pretty pleased, Debian takes a little more digging to find answers sometimes and there are a few things that seem overly complex - but then you learn the reason for the complexity and it's a good one.
I guess people get into Linux for different reasons, for me it was a way to have my own UNIX-like box for free (as in GNU software freedom number 2, see GNU's Free Software Definition -- later I realized it was cool that that could be shared with others gratis.
Sometimes in the computer field you have situations where people sort of say "can't touch this" about some expensive shit (hardware, software, root access) - I wasted a lot of time trying to get around things like Lotus 1-2-3 copy protection and the cost of a PC back in the day, etc. Wasn't even clued in to be trying to get root on a VAX or whatever. Once I saw what the GNU people were doing I've never found a higher philosophy of computing. They just cut through all the BS and get to what's important.
Red Hat certainly helps Linux, making it credible, employing kernel coders, etc, etc. So I know they're not some totally evil entity. Nonetheless, if someone does good and bad, the good doesn't completely negate the bad. Their position is I believe that their "free software" cannot be freely copied** because of various embedded bits of intellectual property that are supposedly not software (they are of course bits and bytes) such as the logos and trademarks. I think this is a scam to avoid adhering to the GNU freedom #2 above.
It ends up with Red Hat, which is built in large part out of the GNU project, being a "can't touch this" kind of product. Somehow that doesn't sit well with me. Also the argument that there has to be some kind of unity among Linux people so don't criticize Red Hat, that makes you equivalent to Microsoft does not seem valid to me either. It sounds from this interview that they are opening some cracks in the wall, developer licensing, academic pricing, etc. This is good to see. It still doesn't seem that different from other commercial software companies though. I wish they could keep the software free and make money from selling services and consulting etc.
* gratuitous reference to Woodstock vinyl recordings
** yes I know you can get SRPMs. I'm talking about the kind of copying one would do normally, if one wasn't forced to jump through these hoops.
AIFF is (I don't know if it can be anything else) the original 16bit stereo uncompressed audio format (at 44.1 kHz) that is suitable for ripped audio from CDs with hopefully the same data as the original. I don't think it even does lossless compression, let alone lossy. That's why this reviewer is saying
Best of all--and, to my ears, completely indistinguishable from the original CD--was AIFF. Dynamics were impressive, imaging was nuanced and detailed,
WAV is a slight modification of AIFF in the header only, done to make people think Microsoft did something significant or else to make PC sound files be different than Macs. Or maybe both. I think this reviewer misses the point, with the levels of compression in normal use (128,160) an iPod can hold 5,000-10,000 songs, that's like 500-1000 albums - that is a significant music library. Of course with AIFF it will only hold about a 10th of that I believe. Don't get me wrong,I love my iPod and am looking forward to the Thursday rumored release of iTunes for Windoze. Then I can give Apple some cash.
There are lies, damn lies, statistics, and audiophiles.
I hereby do repeat and reallege the averments in paragraphs 1 through 91, with the same force and effect as though they were set forth fully herein.
IBM is really fighting the good fight, it's interesting to see FUD used as a legal term in a real legal document....Hope it is handled by a wise judge.
I have never tried Gentoo but I ran FreeBSD for a while. With FreeBSD you have source for the whole system as well as for any "ports" you install. There are procedures for doing a "make world" that recompiles all of it. You can get the source changes to go to the next version and with a bit of chicken and egg stuff about compilers if that has changed, you can compile yourself the upgrade.
I ended up bagging it because there is a fair amount of stuff for Linux that is missing in BSDs (or I wasn't willing to expend the effort to get to run through compatibility mode). Java, Flash, etc. no flames please, I know some people work these things out - I just got tired of the hassles with it when I could rpm/apt-get it with Linux.
I thought the FreeBSD was really high quality though.
Is Gentoo a similiar model? Has someone used both?
First of all, browsers and web sites already can use compression on the fly so I don't see the big advantage there. And google or whatever engine you prefer delivers the first 10 or so at a time in case your connection is slow.
Waiting a day to get an email from a search engine - that is like waiting for batch printouts in 1982 but worse.
Basically I don't see the point in this as it is being described. I suspect though that there is more to it as MIT is not full of dumb people.
Bates and Sierra also have a good cert book
on
Head First Java
·
· Score: 1
The authors of Head First (which I've never looked at) also have an excellent book for preparing for the 1.4 Programmer (and Developer but I can't speak to that part) Exam. It just helped me pass the test.
We use MS Visual Studio at work......it's a very nice development environment - really nice debugging and help features. There are Java tools that are comparable but I think they are actually more expensive (when you get the necessary top-end version) - MS ASP.NET as a development platform is attractive for medium-sized projects. I don't think there are any Free alternatives that are as nice.
The benefits of the GPL
on
RMS Turns 50
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I was trying to find the current hiding place of the cygwin utilities one day at work and I thought for a minute they had been pulled from the "market" - then I thought, "wait a minute, that software is protected by the GPL, they couldn't do that!" --- so I kept googling and found them. That realization was sort of a GNU/Zen moment for me.
Thanks to RMS for charting a solution through the horrors of software patents and such.
I code with MS stuff by day and Linux by night. At work we're starting to make the move everyone is in MS-land, which is from ASP with VBscript to.NET with C#. As far as I can see the Web Services stuff is not really taking off, I wouldn't be surprised if it slowly faded away as time goes by.
Anyway what is.NET?.NET is _not_ platform independent. You're definitely expected to run it on a Windows server. And to access it with IE. In fact it generates code (this particular code I don't think you can even get at) that makes it favor IE - it writes Javascript functionality for you on the fly but if you're what it calls a "downtarget" browser -- anything but IE - some things are not as nice. For instance validations that in IE happen on the client require a server trip; things like that.
It is supposedly "language agnostic", which means that it can subclass a VB.NET parent in a C# child. This agnosticism only extends to the languages MS has supported for it, namely VB,C#,C++(which is in some way I don't know the details of non-standard C++ in order to be.NET compatible) and J# (if anyone uses J# please tell me I'd be surprised)
What.NET really is in my opinion is a supercharged development tool, and a respectable new language. C# is actually pretty cool, they hired the guy that was the brain trust for Borland Delphi and copied lots of Java ideas - but hey Java is very much a copy of C......But the main thing is it is a very nice environment to code in. You can make a call to SQL Server (of course non-MS databases need not apply for this) and step through the code going through VB and C# function/object calls and then step through the SQL proc all without skipping a beat. And there's lots of type-ahead type things. If you define a function or a class method when you make a call to it the args are displayed. The debugger is very nice, you can roam through the code with a mouse and variables show their values as you pass over them.
I guess what they're going for is convincing tech managers that their programmers will be sufficiently more productive with their stuff to make up for the license costs. I try to find open-source equivalents for any features I like in the MS stuff, there are some respectable things like DDT (I think - the C/C++ debugger) - many emacs packages, JDEE in particular - Wing for Python (not open source though) - but the MS stuff really has some nice features for coders. You can get used to it.......and then news like this comes out and you remember what MS is all about.
MS's whole business is driven by large-scale EULAs, often cloaked in secrecy. Look at the Windows Laptop Refund people, they went to great efforts to get back the added cost of "bundled" Windows and I don't think anyone has gotten a dime.
They don't care about Joe Sixpack buying WinXP Home at ChumpUSA, they are after bigger fish. Like the country of India or China. Or every customer of Dell, Gateway, IBM, etc.
I think the budget items of a state university should be subject to some sort of FOIA inquiry, perhaps using state laws not federal. This is a really bad trend because when it becomes impossible to avoid paying Microsoft the "gratis" / free aspect of open source is nullified. If anyone in the states mentioned has the motivation they should pursue this with their state representative to bring these charges and their amounts to light.
An added bonus they have with their "free" Front Page copies (at one of the FAQs for the universities) is that they generate bad code for non-IIS servers * . Gee, I'll have to go download IIS for Linux once I'm done with this post.
http://www.oit.ohio-state.edu/site_license/mslic ense/answers.html*Is FrontPage recommended for use with my environment?
Before purchasing or developing your web pages with Microsoft FrontPage, ensure the web server for your pages will be the Microsoft Internet Information Server (IIS) running on Windows NT. FrontPage embeds proprietary and/or non-protocol-compliant features within HTML code, many of which are incompatible with many non-Microsoft web servers, including those utilized in OSU's OpenVMS and Novell architectures. The implications are twofold:
o Web page creators can't just place FrontPage-generated HTML files in their OpenVMS accounts or in their Universal Disk Space and expect the web pages to work correctly.
o Even if the pages are served successfully, they may only be fully readable by certain versions of Microsoft's Internet Explorer (IE) web browser.
I think the biggest leap of faith the new user has to make in trying Linux is Partition Magic or whatever. I think you're wrong that manufactured dual-boot systems are not a significant holdup; I'll bet lots of people would try Linux if they had a nice installed version on a partition of their new Dell/HP/Whatever. I'm sure Red Hat SUSE and all would be happy to cut those PC manufacturers a great deal on support agreements etc, it's just the 800 pound gorilla that stands in the way.
Also if you couldn't explain an NFS export and mount point as being analogous to a SMB share and drive mapping either you or your MCSE's are, well, maybe confirming what they say about MCSEs.
Michael Tiemman (sp?),CTO of Red Hat spoke to our LUG last night. He said that Wall Street is starting to use Linux to run custom number crunching software and I think Oracle. Big computational farm sort of things.
Dell ( here for instance) offers Linux as a less expensive option than Windows on at least this server. And as for their competitors,
here 's an example of IBM doing the same, but with a greater variety of Linux options.
I'll bookmark these and mark my calendar to see the change on the 26th, since a unidentified source on Slashdot is such a reliable way to get information.
Try and imagine the DOS PC of 1984. Friendly interfaces like "Alt-F3" for help (unless you're in Lotus, in which case it is not). etc.... The OS does not provide a full-screen editor, just a line editor. You have to buy extra utilities to get functionality like deleting a directory subtree, a shell with history, etc..... Then think of the Mac as it debuted in 1984. It came onto the world with Cut/Copy/Paste/Save/Open/Print/Find THE SAME in all the apps. And they mapped frequently to quite intuitive keys, like Command-S for save. It introduced us to bitmap graphics in MacPaint, which was friendly enough for a 4 year old. Granted you did have to learn to operate a mouse (remember when you learned that?) and so on....still, it was a massive step forward in what the programmer can do for the user. Now, I am an application programmer. And I will confess - I HATE making things friendly for users. The fun part of the programming is getting the thing to work internally, fine tuning the UI is painstaking and boring. Also when the users are employees of your company who use your program for their job, one could argue there's a point where making the UI better is not worth the cost in programming. Still, The Mac of 1984 should be an inspiration to anyone contemplating how to make things user-friendly. And user-friendly is an ideal like a fast algorithm - there is no limit to how good it can be, it just hasn't been discovered yet. Obligatory anti-Windows comments suppressed - they may not have as good a UI as Mac but does Linux either?
Slashdot Mirror
Gates was saying everyone would switch to Tablet PCs a while ago. I think they had a thing called Passport that was supposed to be wildly successful as well. They're always pushing high powered high priced things in the portable/PDA universe. But sometimes something small and simple (and reliable) like an iPod mini is preferable. It does one thing and does it well.
Doesn't this make it definite that you cannot fork a GPLed project into a closed source one, you would have to rewrite it first?
www.progeny.com
Progeny Component Linux based on Debian is free to download isos of and made a decent Debian install for me.
FWIW
White Box is a knockoff of RedHat, which is a version of the GNU knockoff of whatever UNIX really is..........
I know, they now have something like that at CheapBytes. Reminds me of when the Judge ordered Microsoft to produce a browserless Windows - they brought in some mess that wouldn't even boot and said they were doing what he asked.
I'm sure RedHat's people/lawyers are way smarter than me and that technically they are in compliance with the GPL - but if you read any of Stallman's stories about printer drivers and NDAs etc RHAT are not in step with the spirit of GNU.
If you have to pay for support to get the software that doesn't really seem very different than paying for the software. It would be different if you could opt out and maybe get support elsewhere. They are not allowing anyone to compete on the support services. Sort of reminds me of the "Microsoft tax" on laptops.
I know RedHat contributes, but I prefer to use Debian nowadays.
Things are going from bad to worse - first the Redhat->Fedora transfer and now Sun is in bed with Mickeysoft.
The way his server is failing might have more to do with the fact that it's PHP. I don't think php holds up well to a heavy load. Which makes me think it might be able to serve more pages if it was JSP/servlet - which reminds me, isn't there sort of a cloud hanging over Java on BSD? It used to be just not available or available only via Linux emulation, but it's been a long time since I looked into it. Anybody using it?
So I switched. I've been pretty pleased, Debian takes a little more digging to find answers sometimes and there are a few things that seem overly complex - but then you learn the reason for the complexity and it's a good one.
I guess people get into Linux for different reasons, for me it was a way to have my own UNIX-like box for free (as in GNU software freedom number 2, see GNU's Free Software Definition -- later I realized it was cool that that could be shared with others gratis.
Sometimes in the computer field you have situations where people sort of say "can't touch this" about some expensive shit (hardware, software, root access) - I wasted a lot of time trying to get around things like Lotus 1-2-3 copy protection and the cost of a PC back in the day, etc. Wasn't even clued in to be trying to get root on a VAX or whatever. Once I saw what the GNU people were doing I've never found a higher philosophy of computing. They just cut through all the BS and get to what's important.
Red Hat certainly helps Linux, making it credible, employing kernel coders, etc, etc. So I know they're not some totally evil entity. Nonetheless, if someone does good and bad, the good doesn't completely negate the bad. Their position is I believe that their "free software" cannot be freely copied** because of various embedded bits of intellectual property that are supposedly not software (they are of course bits and bytes) such as the logos and trademarks. I think this is a scam to avoid adhering to the GNU freedom #2 above.
It ends up with Red Hat, which is built in large part out of the GNU project, being a "can't touch this" kind of product. Somehow that doesn't sit well with me. Also the argument that there has to be some kind of unity among Linux people so don't criticize Red Hat, that makes you equivalent to Microsoft does not seem valid to me either. It sounds from this interview that they are opening some cracks in the wall, developer licensing, academic pricing, etc. This is good to see. It still doesn't seem that different from other commercial software companies though. I wish they could keep the software free and make money from selling services and consulting etc.
* gratuitous reference to Woodstock vinyl recordings
** yes I know you can get SRPMs. I'm talking about the kind of copying one would do normally, if one wasn't forced to jump through these hoops.
WAV is a slight modification of AIFF in the header only, done to make people think Microsoft did something significant or else to make PC sound files be different than Macs. Or maybe both. I think this reviewer misses the point, with the levels of compression in normal use (128,160) an iPod can hold 5,000-10,000 songs, that's like 500-1000 albums - that is a significant music library. Of course with AIFF it will only hold about a 10th of that I believe. Don't get me wrong,I love my iPod and am looking forward to the Thursday rumored release of iTunes for Windoze. Then I can give Apple some cash.
There are lies, damn lies, statistics, and audiophiles.
oh yeah....after a while I got tired of all-day compiles.
I have never tried Gentoo but I ran FreeBSD for a while. With FreeBSD you have source for the whole system as well as for any "ports" you install. There are procedures for doing a "make world" that recompiles all of it. You can get the source changes to go to the next version and with a bit of chicken and egg stuff about compilers if that has changed, you can compile yourself the upgrade.
I ended up bagging it because there is a fair amount of stuff for Linux that is missing in BSDs (or I wasn't willing to expend the effort to get to run through compatibility mode). Java, Flash, etc. no flames please, I know some people work these things out - I just got tired of the hassles with it when I could rpm/apt-get it with Linux.
I thought the FreeBSD was really high quality though.
Is Gentoo a similiar model? Has someone used both?
Waiting a day to get an email from a search engine - that is like waiting for batch printouts in 1982 but worse.
Basically I don't see the point in this as it is being described. I suspect though that there is more to it as MIT is not full of dumb people.
The authors of Head First (which I've never looked at) also have an excellent book for preparing for the 1.4 Programmer (and Developer but I can't speak to that part) Exam. It just helped me pass the test.
We use MS Visual Studio at work......it's a very nice development environment - really nice debugging and help features. There are Java tools that are comparable but I think they are actually more expensive (when you get the necessary top-end version) - MS ASP.NET as a development platform is attractive for medium-sized projects. I don't think there are any Free alternatives that are as nice.
I was trying to find the current hiding place of the cygwin utilities one day at work and I thought for a minute they had been pulled from the "market" - then I thought, "wait a minute, that software is protected by the GPL, they couldn't do that!" --- so I kept googling and found them. That realization was sort of a GNU/Zen moment for me.
Thanks to RMS for charting a solution through the horrors of software patents and such.
Anyway what is .NET? .NET is _not_ platform independent. You're definitely expected to run it on a Windows server. And to access it with IE. In fact it generates code (this particular code I don't think you can even get at) that makes it favor IE - it writes Javascript functionality for you on the fly but if you're what it calls a "downtarget" browser -- anything but IE - some things are not as nice. For instance validations that in IE happen on the client require a server trip; things like that.
It is supposedly "language agnostic", which means that it can subclass a VB.NET parent in a C# child. This agnosticism only extends to the languages MS has supported for it, namely VB,C#,C++(which is in some way I don't know the details of non-standard C++ in order to be .NET compatible) and J# (if anyone uses J# please tell me I'd be surprised)
What .NET really is in my opinion is a supercharged development tool, and a respectable new language. C# is actually pretty cool, they hired the guy that was the brain trust for Borland Delphi and copied lots of Java ideas - but hey Java is very much a copy of C......But the main thing is it is a very nice environment to code in. You can make a call to SQL Server (of course non-MS databases need not apply for this) and step through the code going through VB and C# function/object calls and then step through the SQL proc all without skipping a beat. And there's lots of type-ahead type things. If you define a function or a class method when you make a call to it the args are displayed. The debugger is very nice, you can roam through the code with a mouse and variables show their values as you pass over them.
I guess what they're going for is convincing tech managers that their programmers will be sufficiently more productive with their stuff to make up for the license costs. I try to find open-source equivalents for any features I like in the MS stuff, there are some respectable things like DDT (I think - the C/C++ debugger) - many emacs packages, JDEE in particular - Wing for Python (not open source though) - but the MS stuff really has some nice features for coders. You can get used to it.......and then news like this comes out and you remember what MS is all about.
Haskell is cool - why aren't there any jobs in Haskell??????
They don't care about Joe Sixpack buying WinXP Home at ChumpUSA, they are after bigger fish. Like the country of India or China. Or every customer of Dell, Gateway, IBM, etc.
I think the budget items of a state university should be subject to some sort of FOIA inquiry, perhaps using state laws not federal. This is a really bad trend because when it becomes impossible to avoid paying Microsoft the "gratis" / free aspect of open source is nullified. If anyone in the states mentioned has the motivation they should pursue this with their state representative to bring these charges and their amounts to light.
An added bonus they have with their "free" Front Page copies (at one of the FAQs for the universities) is that they generate bad code for non-IIS servers * . Gee, I'll have to go download IIS for Linux once I'm done with this post.
http://www.oit.ohio-state.edu/site_license/mslic ense/answers.html*Is FrontPage recommended for use with my environment?
Before purchasing or developing your web pages with Microsoft FrontPage, ensure the web server for your pages will be the Microsoft Internet Information Server (IIS) running on Windows NT. FrontPage embeds proprietary and/or non-protocol-compliant features within HTML code, many of which are incompatible with many non-Microsoft web servers, including those utilized in OSU's OpenVMS and Novell architectures. The implications are twofold:
o Web page creators can't just place FrontPage-generated HTML files in their OpenVMS accounts or in their Universal Disk Space and expect the web pages to work correctly.
o Even if the pages are served successfully, they may only be fully readable by certain versions of Microsoft's Internet Explorer (IE) web browser.
Also if you couldn't explain an NFS export and mount point as being analogous to a SMB share and drive mapping either you or your MCSE's are, well, maybe confirming what they say about MCSEs.
My personal favorite, generated by Oracle 7.3.3.... on Digital UNIX
Michael Tiemman (sp?),CTO of Red Hat spoke to our LUG last night. He said that Wall Street is starting to use Linux to run custom number crunching software and I think Oracle. Big computational farm sort of things.
Dell ( here for instance) offers Linux as a less expensive option than Windows on at least this server. And as for their competitors, here 's an example of IBM doing the same, but with a greater variety of Linux options.
I'll bookmark these and mark my calendar to see the change on the 26th, since a unidentified source on Slashdot is such a reliable way to get information.
Try and imagine the DOS PC of 1984. Friendly interfaces like "Alt-F3" for help (unless you're in Lotus, in which case it is not). etc.... The OS does not provide a full-screen editor, just a line editor. You have to buy extra utilities to get functionality like deleting a directory subtree, a shell with history, etc.....
Then think of the Mac as it debuted in 1984. It came onto the world with Cut/Copy/Paste/Save/Open/Print/Find THE SAME in all the apps. And they mapped frequently to quite intuitive keys, like Command-S for save. It introduced us to bitmap graphics in MacPaint, which was friendly enough for a 4 year old. Granted you did have to learn to operate a mouse (remember when you learned that?) and so on....still, it was a massive step forward in what the programmer can do for the user.
Now, I am an application programmer. And I will confess - I HATE making things friendly for users. The fun part of the programming is getting the thing to work internally, fine tuning the UI is painstaking and boring. Also when the users are employees of your company who use your program for their job, one could argue there's a point where making the UI better is not worth the cost in programming.
Still, The Mac of 1984 should be an inspiration to anyone contemplating how to make things user-friendly. And user-friendly is an ideal like a fast algorithm - there is no limit to how good it can be, it just hasn't been discovered yet.
Obligatory anti-Windows comments suppressed - they may not have as good a UI as Mac but does Linux either?
My kid hates M$oft and so has gladly run RTCW in Linux(Debian).
My kid can beat your kid at video games!