Seriously, what would you possibly need to keep? There are thousands of applications with every GNU/Linux distribution, more than Windows has in some areas. I think it's more of a matter of finding out what GNU/Linux apps will replace the Windows equivalents, and go from there. That's the hard part. I migrated over to GNU/Linux over 7 years ago, and don't need any Windows apps. In fact, we've been using all GNU/Linux native apps during the past 7 years, and it's been wonderful. It wasn't an easy migration, but it can be done with a little work up front, but the payoff in the long run is definitely worth it. Things like Firefox, Thunderbird, LibreOffice, and other smaller apps that make up the GNU/Linux OS, are more than what we need. Once in a great while I may want to play a game or two that was released for Windows back in the late 1990s or early 2000s, but I use Wine and DosBox to run those in GNU/Linux.
In response to other comments about the possible lobbying efforts by Microsoft in this, at first I am skeptical but based on the reasons in the letter such as "no programs for text editing" and "office". Wait, what? Uhm, GNU/Linux has all of that and more. Any distro should be able to handle this sufficiently. So, based on the reasons in this latest letter, I am very skeptical as to what is really going on there.
That article in the link is one of the worst I have ever read. No details are given about how they patched their systems. I'm assuming (like others) that they used "yum" to install the update. But no details are given about exactly what they did or how they handled it. Don't waste your time with the link.
With various GNU/Linux distributions, Mono support is spotty and therefore I'd steer clear of it entirely. Why do we need it? We don't. We're much better off with native frameworks that are better suited to the GNU/Linux OS itself. Such as Python for example.
Red Hat for years has been good for open source. Jim has done a great job with his role there, as well. Since he took over, they surpassed the $1B mark and have been successful along the way as a company. Red Hat gives back to the community so they are a true open source company and their interests are definitely pro open source. This is very much unlike other companies that say they are for open source, but their actions say otherwise. Interesting that he is publishing this book and it might be worth checking out. The model Red Hat uses is clearly working, and now that they are officially supporting CentOS, the free alternative to their software but without support, is also a blessing. Cheers to many good years ahead.
I've been fighting with Gnome3 since it came out. Even in the later versions, it STILL isn't as stable and easy to use as was Gnome2 on a desktop PC. The Nautilus file manager has been absolutely destroyed and stripped of its useful features. I've learned to live with it, but it's just not the same, even with "classic mode". When I have to jump on legacy systems that still have Gnome2, it's noticeably faster and just better and easier to navigate, not to mention full featured. The new scrollbars in Gnome3 are extremely annoying as well.. some scroll the old way and some the new way. Overall it's messed up and causes users confusion and frustration.
After reading in to the problem, I can see it's due to sloppiness on Windows' part. At some point we need to just do the right thing, and do it whether Microsoft is on board or not. The fact that Microsoft, a software company, can still influence the hardware market is mind boggling. The reason is probably high market share, which is not the most ideal situation.
Not sure why Google is going their own way rather than jumping on with other projects that are already heading down this path. The X11 replacement is a controversial one. I have found X11 to be excellent over the years and have no plans to replace it. It does the job for me and has sufficient performance.
Even though the technology has been there for some time, it's good that these organizations have collaborated together and implemented this. Awesome stuff. GNU/Linux is probably the only OS that is able to accomplish this. Windows can't even touch a no-reboot OS like this. So, those using Microsoft will continue to patch and reboot their systems on a regular basis, which takes a LOT of resources. Obviously, GNU/Linux will and should excel in various markets, because it truly is better and more stable. And not having to reboot is a huge deal in the datacenter. Now, we can get this technology without various licensing requirements even though the technology has been free up until now anyway.
Linux is more fragmented, but that is because of much higher development activity taking place these days. And this is a good thing, because there are more choices and alternatives, more than ever. However, this also adds confusion to newcomers so we must focus on educating if at all possible. Stick with mainstream distributions, and with the defaults to start with before becoming more familiar with the OS.
Is Linux too complex? Only if we install everything on our systems. Start with the minimal installation and go from there. That's how I handle a lot of my server installations, and even using the latest CentOS/RHEL, starting minimal allows the servers to run VERY efficiently and get very high response times. GNU/Linux is unique and allows us to install minimal components and tailor the install to the system. Windows has stripped down versions as well, but is still very bloated in comparison.
It's been interesting over the years to watch Dell battle with Microsoft to get out laptops with Linux, take them away, put them back, over and over again. When Microsoft releases new versions of Windows, the Linux offerings mysteriously disappear from Dell's site. In either case, getting a machine from Dell is easy to wipe Windows off of it, and put Linux on, so no concerns with that anyway. I recently wiped Windows 8 off of a Dell Inspiron 660, disabled UEFI Secure Boot, and put CentOS 6.6 on it with ease. Quick, easy, no hassles and up and running with great success.
It's good to know that the developers are listening to the community. Not sure how this particular user knew of EISA support being dropped but good that we can make sure the Linux kernel and GNU/Linux operating system survives as community-driven software which will always outdo proprietary software where it is driven by a single company's wishes. GNU/Linux is excellent at supporting new and old hardware and retaining backwards compatibility. Thanks again to all of the developers and for making GNU/Linux such a huge success.
Having multiple options is good. For years, nVidia has lead the way on the Unix/Linux platform with its graphics driver support (despite it being proprietary software). The Nouveau project has supplied the free and open alternative to the proprietary driver. It is good to know there is some momentum for the ATI line, time will tell how close it can get or if it can exist at the same level as nVidia. Personally, due to the excellent support, I only buy nVidia graphics hardware so they have gained my business by providing a good Linux driver. I've been a happy customer for years. If ATI can get to that level I would consider looking at their products as well.
We always used the NORAD site in the past. However this year, it no longer loads up and has an Internet Explorer icon in the upper left corner. It appears that the site is incompatible with standards browsers like Firefox and Chrome. Oh well, I guess we will use the Google tracker instead, which is compatible and works fine in ALL browsers. Sad that they would shut out people from using the site.
Let's hope that this ruling catches on in other countries. It is true that consumers are forced to pay for a Microsoft license on most new computers because Microsoft has tight relationships with most of the major players. The interesting part is that PC vendors used to issue a partial refund for Windows software that is pre-installed on systems, when requested, however they no longer honor this request. This tells me that the PC vendors KNEW it was wrong to charge consumers, but they soon found out that they can simply force the consumers to pay for the Windows software regardless. Thankfully a government entity has finally stood up to represent the people. Today, I only buy used or refurbished systems to avoid the Microsoft Tax. However again with refurbished systems, we are still forced to pay the Microsoft Tax from most PC vendors. In those cases, I sell the Windows software and remove the license from the PC before I install GNU/Linux on it.
Ext2/3/4 are very stable filesystems, and widely supported by the GNU/Linux community, why in the world they would not support them is anybody's guess. Thankfully they have reversed course and will continue its support.
When it comes to making money off of its customers, Adobe is very creative (no pun intended). A subscription based model is the most ideal way for them to get regular income every month and I'm sure they are making even more money with this model than ever before because customers can't withhold from upgrading like they used to when they purchased specific versions of the software and had to re-buy upgrades at the time they actually performed the upgrades.
I've abandoned Adobe software years ago except for Reader which I still need once a year to fill out a PDF form. I'll have to check but Evince may do this now. Otherwise, who needs Adobe? Adobe has abandoned GNU/Linux, so in a way it's helped to push me away from its proprietary and bloated products. I use GNU/Linux for my workstations and servers, and all of the software I need is there and works great, and doesn't come with all of the licensing hassle of proprietary software. I can't say how good it is not having to deal with re-buying software whenever I want to upgrade my computer's GNU/Linux OS. I click a button and I get the latest version of GIMP every time, which for me is the Photoshop replacement. PDF tools, video editing tools, you name it, it's there in most mainstream GNU/Linux distributions.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, what would you possibly need to keep? There are thousands of applications with every GNU/Linux distribution, more than Windows has in some areas. I think it's more of a matter of finding out what GNU/Linux apps will replace the Windows equivalents, and go from there. That's the hard part. I migrated over to GNU/Linux over 7 years ago, and don't need any Windows apps. In fact, we've been using all GNU/Linux native apps during the past 7 years, and it's been wonderful. It wasn't an easy migration, but it can be done with a little work up front, but the payoff in the long run is definitely worth it. Things like Firefox, Thunderbird, LibreOffice, and other smaller apps that make up the GNU/Linux OS, are more than what we need. Once in a great while I may want to play a game or two that was released for Windows back in the late 1990s or early 2000s, but I use Wine and DosBox to run those in GNU/Linux.
In response to other comments about the possible lobbying efforts by Microsoft in this, at first I am skeptical but based on the reasons in the letter such as "no programs for text editing" and "office". Wait, what? Uhm, GNU/Linux has all of that and more. Any distro should be able to handle this sufficiently. So, based on the reasons in this latest letter, I am very skeptical as to what is really going on there.
That article in the link is one of the worst I have ever read. No details are given about how they patched their systems. I'm assuming (like others) that they used "yum" to install the update. But no details are given about exactly what they did or how they handled it. Don't waste your time with the link.
With various GNU/Linux distributions, Mono support is spotty and therefore I'd steer clear of it entirely. Why do we need it? We don't. We're much better off with native frameworks that are better suited to the GNU/Linux OS itself. Such as Python for example.
Red Hat for years has been good for open source. Jim has done a great job with his role there, as well. Since he took over, they surpassed the $1B mark and have been successful along the way as a company. Red Hat gives back to the community so they are a true open source company and their interests are definitely pro open source. This is very much unlike other companies that say they are for open source, but their actions say otherwise. Interesting that he is publishing this book and it might be worth checking out. The model Red Hat uses is clearly working, and now that they are officially supporting CentOS, the free alternative to their software but without support, is also a blessing. Cheers to many good years ahead.
I've been fighting with Gnome3 since it came out. Even in the later versions, it STILL isn't as stable and easy to use as was Gnome2 on a desktop PC. The Nautilus file manager has been absolutely destroyed and stripped of its useful features. I've learned to live with it, but it's just not the same, even with "classic mode". When I have to jump on legacy systems that still have Gnome2, it's noticeably faster and just better and easier to navigate, not to mention full featured. The new scrollbars in Gnome3 are extremely annoying as well.. some scroll the old way and some the new way. Overall it's messed up and causes users confusion and frustration.
After reading in to the problem, I can see it's due to sloppiness on Windows' part. At some point we need to just do the right thing, and do it whether Microsoft is on board or not. The fact that Microsoft, a software company, can still influence the hardware market is mind boggling. The reason is probably high market share, which is not the most ideal situation.
Not sure why Google is going their own way rather than jumping on with other projects that are already heading down this path. The X11 replacement is a controversial one. I have found X11 to be excellent over the years and have no plans to replace it. It does the job for me and has sufficient performance.
Even though the technology has been there for some time, it's good that these organizations have collaborated together and implemented this. Awesome stuff. GNU/Linux is probably the only OS that is able to accomplish this. Windows can't even touch a no-reboot OS like this. So, those using Microsoft will continue to patch and reboot their systems on a regular basis, which takes a LOT of resources. Obviously, GNU/Linux will and should excel in various markets, because it truly is better and more stable. And not having to reboot is a huge deal in the datacenter. Now, we can get this technology without various licensing requirements even though the technology has been free up until now anyway.
Linux is more fragmented, but that is because of much higher development activity taking place these days. And this is a good thing, because there are more choices and alternatives, more than ever. However, this also adds confusion to newcomers so we must focus on educating if at all possible. Stick with mainstream distributions, and with the defaults to start with before becoming more familiar with the OS. Is Linux too complex? Only if we install everything on our systems. Start with the minimal installation and go from there. That's how I handle a lot of my server installations, and even using the latest CentOS/RHEL, starting minimal allows the servers to run VERY efficiently and get very high response times. GNU/Linux is unique and allows us to install minimal components and tailor the install to the system. Windows has stripped down versions as well, but is still very bloated in comparison.
It's been interesting over the years to watch Dell battle with Microsoft to get out laptops with Linux, take them away, put them back, over and over again. When Microsoft releases new versions of Windows, the Linux offerings mysteriously disappear from Dell's site. In either case, getting a machine from Dell is easy to wipe Windows off of it, and put Linux on, so no concerns with that anyway. I recently wiped Windows 8 off of a Dell Inspiron 660, disabled UEFI Secure Boot, and put CentOS 6.6 on it with ease. Quick, easy, no hassles and up and running with great success.
It's good to know that the developers are listening to the community. Not sure how this particular user knew of EISA support being dropped but good that we can make sure the Linux kernel and GNU/Linux operating system survives as community-driven software which will always outdo proprietary software where it is driven by a single company's wishes. GNU/Linux is excellent at supporting new and old hardware and retaining backwards compatibility. Thanks again to all of the developers and for making GNU/Linux such a huge success.
Having multiple options is good. For years, nVidia has lead the way on the Unix/Linux platform with its graphics driver support (despite it being proprietary software). The Nouveau project has supplied the free and open alternative to the proprietary driver. It is good to know there is some momentum for the ATI line, time will tell how close it can get or if it can exist at the same level as nVidia. Personally, due to the excellent support, I only buy nVidia graphics hardware so they have gained my business by providing a good Linux driver. I've been a happy customer for years. If ATI can get to that level I would consider looking at their products as well.
We always used the NORAD site in the past. However this year, it no longer loads up and has an Internet Explorer icon in the upper left corner. It appears that the site is incompatible with standards browsers like Firefox and Chrome. Oh well, I guess we will use the Google tracker instead, which is compatible and works fine in ALL browsers. Sad that they would shut out people from using the site.
Let's hope that this ruling catches on in other countries. It is true that consumers are forced to pay for a Microsoft license on most new computers because Microsoft has tight relationships with most of the major players. The interesting part is that PC vendors used to issue a partial refund for Windows software that is pre-installed on systems, when requested, however they no longer honor this request. This tells me that the PC vendors KNEW it was wrong to charge consumers, but they soon found out that they can simply force the consumers to pay for the Windows software regardless. Thankfully a government entity has finally stood up to represent the people. Today, I only buy used or refurbished systems to avoid the Microsoft Tax. However again with refurbished systems, we are still forced to pay the Microsoft Tax from most PC vendors. In those cases, I sell the Windows software and remove the license from the PC before I install GNU/Linux on it.
Ext2/3/4 are very stable filesystems, and widely supported by the GNU/Linux community, why in the world they would not support them is anybody's guess. Thankfully they have reversed course and will continue its support.
When it comes to making money off of its customers, Adobe is very creative (no pun intended). A subscription based model is the most ideal way for them to get regular income every month and I'm sure they are making even more money with this model than ever before because customers can't withhold from upgrading like they used to when they purchased specific versions of the software and had to re-buy upgrades at the time they actually performed the upgrades.
I've abandoned Adobe software years ago except for Reader which I still need once a year to fill out a PDF form. I'll have to check but Evince may do this now. Otherwise, who needs Adobe? Adobe has abandoned GNU/Linux, so in a way it's helped to push me away from its proprietary and bloated products. I use GNU/Linux for my workstations and servers, and all of the software I need is there and works great, and doesn't come with all of the licensing hassle of proprietary software. I can't say how good it is not having to deal with re-buying software whenever I want to upgrade my computer's GNU/Linux OS. I click a button and I get the latest version of GIMP every time, which for me is the Photoshop replacement. PDF tools, video editing tools, you name it, it's there in most mainstream GNU/Linux distributions.