But in the GUI world, there isn't any piping metaphor because output is nonstandard. Because of this you also can't `` it. So there's no real way to pull little applications together in an easy fashion.
Well there is KParts and other ways to put together modules. For example Kaplan, the new groupware solution for KDE will use the standard KMail-KPart, so you will use the same code in Kaplan and in KMail.
what is is that you are implying here? that running a solution that fits their needs is bad?
A policy like this is PREVENTING them to running a solution that fits their needs best. If you think that "run whatever Microsoft gives us" is running the best solution, you are either pretty gullible or have Microsoft-stock (or both as being gullible is a prerequesite for having Microsoft-stock, just look at their P/E)
It also illustrates the incredible Microsoft double-standard. A Microsoft-only policy is great, but an open-source-only policy (which is much less restricting because it is multi-vendor) is evil, evil, evil.
Well I'm not Kevin but I'll give you the answer anyway. I'd do what I do every single day at work, type HTML into vim and save it with a ".doc" extension - Word users never know the difference.
The mythical Joe Sixpack just might go out and buy a new computer if he could watch every new feature film for the low, low price of $3 a viewing, or put together custom CDs for half the price of CDs he picks up in stores; that is, he might if he's a big enough consumer.
Or he could just save the money for a new computer, save the money for the movie and the CDs and continue to download everything from edonkey/napster/gnutella.
Of course, I'll get flamed for not bashing microsoft, but the difference really isn't that big.
I'm not bashing you, I just don't see your point.
If you get a car for 20000$ at dealer A and the same car for 19500$ at dealer B, will you say "Hey, it's just a small difference" and buy from dealer B?
Let's not forget, this is about database-servers here and both run the very same database (Oracle). The underlying OS is irrelevant, you don't have to run MS Office or "the Sims" on this thing.
So please tell us stupid Microsoft-bashers what is your point.
On the other hand, the difference in performance is 17.21 vs. 18.46, i.e. approximately 6%. I think that the result is inconclusive (except that Linux can complete in this area at all).
... and HP is willing to publish TCP-C benchmarks for Linux.
That's exactly what Linux needs: Marketing.
Re:Good for linux(?), probably not good for Sun
on
Sun To Sell Linux PCs
·
· Score: 2
Does Sun think they can make a box cheaper than Dell?
Well... Yes!
Sun doesn't have to pay MS-taxes. Sun has more Unix/Linux-knowhow and does not have to rely on a Linux distributor.
They can make both cheaper AND better Linux boxes. - If they want to, which remains to be seen.
Everytime I bring this up and people come up with knee-jerk reactions to defend X, I've yet to see anyone actually come up with a compelling reason why X is as good as or better than the other GUIs out there (Mac OS X, BeOS, MS Windows) as far as a consumer-oriented desktop goes.
Well, let's see: It can run 2d-applications (windows, menus, mouse - you know.) and it can run games (and faster than Windows, BTW).
So it's as good as MacOSX and Windows for consumers.
For power-users it offers nifty features like network-transparency and modularity.
I've yet to hear a compelling reason what's wrong with X and you also don't seem to know one.
Actually, Lindows has something that every other Linux distribution lacks:
Good marketing. Just the name "Lindows" attrackts a lot of users. Thousands of ex-RedHat users who have only seen GNOME will love Lindow's KDE desktop and will think that's the difference between Linux (which is KDE for them) and Lindows.
OEM contracts. Walmart sells those preinstalled. Many of the 200$ PCs will be used as web/email/simplewordprocessing computers, which can be done with any Linux distribution, also Lindows.
Of course many will upgrade to real Linux distributions, but as a bridge from Windows, Lindows seems quite nice for me.
Exactly, there is certainly a market for these things, even though it's not perfect for everybody.
Another example is the kiosks at our campus. All they do is run all day and display one webpage (the institute's webpage) to let students subscribe to lessions.
Or I saw a laptop in a bar whose sole purpose is to play mp3s all day long.
Nobody can tell me that these machines have to run Windows.
XFS supports ACL's (or access control lists) which are much better than standard UNIX permissions.
Actually I think ACLs are the reason why everybody is running as Administrator in Windows. They are just too damn complicated.
The Unix-permissions are simple. You can understand the concept of user-group-all in a few minutes and there are only 2 commands to remember (chmod, chown).
Also, Unix-permissions have so far fit with everything I needed and in the rare case you really need something special, there is also sudo.
I think ACLs are only useful for a tiny minority, IMO. I certainly don't need it.
Slashdot Mirror
If you are at it, remove the ","s from the 1,000,000
Well there is KParts and other ways to put together modules. For example Kaplan, the new groupware solution for KDE will use the standard KMail-KPart, so you will use the same code in Kaplan and in KMail.
Similar for Newsgroups, Notes and calendar.
We both know that your and his point was finding some excuse not to try any non-MS applications.
Actually this "ignorant and proud of it" attitude is the perfect start for a flame-war.
A policy like this is PREVENTING them to running a solution that fits their needs best. If you think that "run whatever Microsoft gives us" is running the best solution, you are either pretty gullible or have Microsoft-stock (or both as being gullible is a prerequesite for having Microsoft-stock, just look at their P/E)
It also illustrates the incredible Microsoft double-standard. A Microsoft-only policy is great, but an open-source-only policy (which is much less restricting because it is multi-vendor) is evil, evil, evil.
I personally don't like either policy, BTW.
(Yes, I know the new mouse and no it's not ergonomic. Ergonomics != good looks. But it's still many times better than the puck, that's sure...)
This works also very well with rtf, BTW.
Well, KDE does exactly that. (And for quite some time now, from v2.2 on AFAIR)
Or he could just save the money for a new computer, save the money for the movie and the CDs and continue to download everything from edonkey/napster/gnutella.
In what world are you living?
So you are not locked into a single vendor. Period.
But being locked into 2 vendors is worse than being locked into one single vendor, don't you agree?
Also, migrating between databases is not *that* hard, it's all SQL after all.
I'm not bashing you, I just don't see your point.
If you get a car for 20000$ at dealer A and the same car for 19500$ at dealer B, will you say "Hey, it's just a small difference" and buy from dealer B?
Let's not forget, this is about database-servers here and both run the very same database (Oracle). The underlying OS is irrelevant, you don't have to run MS Office or "the Sims" on this thing.
So please tell us stupid Microsoft-bashers what is your point.
That's exactly what Linux needs: Marketing.
Well... Yes!
Sun doesn't have to pay MS-taxes. Sun has more Unix/Linux-knowhow and does not have to rely on a Linux distributor.
They can make both cheaper AND better Linux boxes. - If they want to, which remains to be seen.
How typical. Microsoft destroying free market with crazy OEM-contracts? Sure.
Microsoft destroying innovative companies like Go with vaporware (PenWindows) - only to finish said vaporware and then discontinue it anyway? Sure.
Microsoft puposely breaking .doc formats and therefore causing millions (if not billions) of damages in lost productivity and useless upgrades? Sure.
Microsoft ignoring industry-standards (OpenGL) and pushing incompatible APIs (DirectX) only to make Windows less compatible? Sure.
Yeah, sure. Everything is fine, sure.
Now go away and get a clue.
Translation: I don't know what I am talking about and don't want to admit it.
[Goddamn, who has invented this 2-minute limit on slashdot?]
Well, let's see: It can run 2d-applications (windows, menus, mouse - you know.) and it can run games (and faster than Windows, BTW).
So it's as good as MacOSX and Windows for consumers.
For power-users it offers nifty features like network-transparency and modularity.
I've yet to hear a compelling reason what's wrong with X and you also don't seem to know one.
Of course many will upgrade to real Linux distributions, but as a bridge from Windows, Lindows seems quite nice for me.
Another example is the kiosks at our campus. All they do is run all day and display one webpage (the institute's webpage) to let students subscribe to lessions.
Or I saw a laptop in a bar whose sole purpose is to play mp3s all day long.
Nobody can tell me that these machines have to run Windows.
Nevertheless, it's a good thing. Anything that levels the playing field a bit is nice to see.
And what about those who enjoy analyzing it?
Various other things like purposely breaking .doc formats is already legendary.
I'd rather fly on this than on the Space Shuttle.
A guy that looks like the "Comic-store guy" from the Simpsons wins and sues Pepsi for not going to space.
BTW, I'd also rather take the 38 million $....
Actually I think ACLs are the reason why everybody is running as Administrator in Windows. They are just too damn complicated.
The Unix-permissions are simple. You can understand the concept of user-group-all in a few minutes and there are only 2 commands to remember (chmod, chown).
Also, Unix-permissions have so far fit with everything I needed and in the rare case you really need something special, there is also sudo.
I think ACLs are only useful for a tiny minority, IMO. I certainly don't need it.
The PC was the only open hardware platform at that time.