It won't happen in the long term either. Yes, Ubuntu is becoming ever more popular, but this is an expanding market. There are new users arriving on the 'Linux' scene every second. Red Hat may not grow at the same pace as Ubuntu in the short, medium, or long term, but it will grow.
All Ubuntu has done has made the competition for new desktop customers more intense. Red Hat will continue to specialise in the server market where it will continue to grow due to providing valued sevice.
Market trends determine the prospects of a company as much as (if not more than) the competition.
I'm almost as pro open source as they come, and this kind of news makes me smile.
However I really am sceptical of the cost comparisons. They do not seem to take into account distribution or installation or any of the other many factors that come into servicing an entire region with software.
I also suspect it does not take into account any discounts you may be able to get from Microsoft for such large scale installations.
Yes, there may be a large difference in licensing. But to say that you are getting a 99% discount is a fallacy. The cost of software is not just in the procurement.
As a community we should be encouraging responsible reporting so we don't fall into the same obfuscational traps that corporations like Microsoft revel in. It would be nice to be able to have faith in pro Free Software articles rather than approach them with the same sceptism that stigmatises any pro corporate publishing.
There's no substitute for hard facts and honesty and I feel the open source movement is becoming as marketing savvy as the commercial competition. It may win a bit in the short term but in the long term may undermine the cost-benefits that people perceive.
The two primary reasons: * More up-to-date than Debian * Easier to use than Debian
"But Debian can be bleeding edge if you add X and Y to sources.list"
If you have to know such things, then it's not easy to use.
If you want to start with a desktop that's preconfigured and generally pretty solid without the hassle of setting it up yourself, then Ubuntu Dapper is better than Debian unstable. If you want to start with a minimal base then build your desktop yourself, then Debian is better than Ubuntu.
I know I'm biased but this really doesn't address the key problems with "Internet Application" development.
Flash is just not a suitable host scalable, OS integratable, independent applications. DHTML is just not powerful enough, no matter how fancily you use it. AJAX is just yet another overly complex web-hack, just dressed a bit better than before.
The only real solutions for me are XUL and Vexi. XUL is limited to Firefox/Mozilla users. You'll be hearing more about Vexi before the year is up.
And how do I use these IDEs on a remote machine? And how long do they take to start up?
Sometimes I need to log in and be up and running in seconds. Sometimes I need to code over a terminal (SSH). Not everything is GUI and can wait.
Also, with all the keyboard shortcuts, a veteran Emacs/V[im] user can edit exceptionally quickly. Granted, IDEs make up for this with code generation and management, but not all situations are suited to an IDE.
Think *nix. Use the right tool for the job. Sometimes that tool is not something as heavy as Eclipse.
Most people do not know a group of writers, let alone a group of writers they trust.
This kind of feature is invaluable for Joe Schmoe who wants feedback on the quality of his grammer because he may not be a literary nor know literaries to whom he can refer his 'work'.
Figure out the target audience. Novelists are not the target audience. The average computer user is.
Also, don't call something bloatware and throw accusations of "massive amounts of RAM and processing power" requirements without first verifying your opinions, because in this case they are totally unfounded. AbiWord remains fast and relatively lightweight.
People paying attention to Linux kernel releases are not non-technical. Non-technical people go with the latest version of their preferred distribution. The release numbers of the distribution are what counts to them.
So... Miro created Mambo and released it under the GPL. They then created the Mambo Foundation to look after the interests of Mambo. What's the problem? Why did the Foundation need to own the copyrights? It's not like Miro could revoke the GPL nor, without the explicit permission of the volunteer developers, publish a closed source version incorporating any non-Miro contributions.
The words 'mountain' and 'molehill' spring to mind?
Think of the context. "Sony delays PS3 despite XBox 360 release." The comment being, "They did it before with the Dreamcast." He was comparing this to how Sony did not rush the PS1 when Sega released the Dreamcast.
You could always help out with Windstille which is being created in the spirit of Metroid. It is a bit alpha at the moment but has 3d characters running around a 2d platform environment.
You'll probably bitch and moan (as a collective, I mean) that this is OSS and incomplete and yadda yadda, but sometimes if you want something specific then there's no better solution than to do it yourself.
I've found programs packaged using Autopackage to install pretty nicely on my Gentoo box [which surely has to be one of the more diverse Linux environments].
Perhaps we, as a community, just need to be more vocal in our support for a common standard that embraces all distributions like Autopackage, or OpenPKG, or the other cross-distro install options out there.
"When I worked for the Air Force, I never worried about how much something would cost. I put in a few proposals and put in costs, wrote up a report on the various options, and submitted it to my superiors. It was rare the cheapest option was chosen. Cost was immaterial to me."
Good to know tax is being well spent. 'Immaterial'. Saddening. Tell that to the guy who gets by on the breadline whilst half his income (when taking into account the stuff he buys) goes on tax.
'If the first "O" in OpenOffice stands for "Open"...'
Don't forget, the nomenclature was probably considered according to the general misinterpretation of the term 'Open Source' which most people take to mean 'Free Software' when really it's a far more ambiguous term.
Plus 'FreeOffice.org' sounds like a charity to enlighten and release the millions of poor souls trapped in their chronicly tedious desk jobs.
Slashdot Mirror
"It may not happen in the short term, but .."
It won't happen in the long term either. Yes, Ubuntu is becoming ever more popular, but this is an expanding market. There are new users arriving on the 'Linux' scene every second. Red Hat may not grow at the same pace as Ubuntu in the short, medium, or long term, but it will grow.
All Ubuntu has done has made the competition for new desktop customers more intense. Red Hat will continue to specialise in the server market where it will continue to grow due to providing valued sevice.
Market trends determine the prospects of a company as much as (if not more than) the competition.
I'm almost as pro open source as they come, and this kind of news makes me smile.
However I really am sceptical of the cost comparisons. They do not seem to take into account distribution or installation or any of the other many factors that come into servicing an entire region with software.
I also suspect it does not take into account any discounts you may be able to get from Microsoft for such large scale installations.
Yes, there may be a large difference in licensing. But to say that you are getting a 99% discount is a fallacy. The cost of software is not just in the procurement.
As a community we should be encouraging responsible reporting so we don't fall into the same obfuscational traps that corporations like Microsoft revel in. It would be nice to be able to have faith in pro Free Software articles rather than approach them with the same sceptism that stigmatises any pro corporate publishing.
There's no substitute for hard facts and honesty and I feel the open source movement is becoming as marketing savvy as the commercial competition. It may win a bit in the short term but in the long term may undermine the cost-benefits that people perceive.
The same way any website-with-traffic does in the Google age - Google ads.
The two primary reasons:
* More up-to-date than Debian
* Easier to use than Debian
"But Debian can be bleeding edge if you add X and Y to sources.list"
If you have to know such things, then it's not easy to use.
If you want to start with a desktop that's preconfigured and generally pretty solid without the hassle of setting it up yourself, then Ubuntu Dapper is better than Debian unstable. If you want to start with a minimal base then build your desktop yourself, then Debian is better than Ubuntu.
I know I'm biased but this really doesn't address the key problems with "Internet Application" development.
Flash is just not a suitable host scalable, OS integratable, independent applications. DHTML is just not powerful enough, no matter how fancily you use it. AJAX is just yet another overly complex web-hack, just dressed a bit better than before.
The only real solutions for me are XUL and Vexi. XUL is limited to Firefox/Mozilla users. You'll be hearing more about Vexi before the year is up.
"...anyone working in the arctic needs to carry a rifle in case of emergency encounters."
Erm... estimated world population of barely 22,000 for polar bears. How many billions of humans are there? 6? 7? 8!? I forget.
Anyway, my point? We should be giving the rifles to the polar bears, if only they could use them.
FreePop is on the way there. Go and help out if you want it that badly.
The mailing list is still active... so... yes.
And how do I use these IDEs on a remote machine? And how long do they take to start up?
Sometimes I need to log in and be up and running in seconds. Sometimes I need to code over a terminal (SSH). Not everything is GUI and can wait.
Also, with all the keyboard shortcuts, a veteran Emacs/V[im] user can edit exceptionally quickly. Granted, IDEs make up for this with code generation and management, but not all situations are suited to an IDE.
Think *nix. Use the right tool for the job. Sometimes that tool is not something as heavy as Eclipse.
Most people do not know a group of writers, let alone a group of writers they trust.
This kind of feature is invaluable for Joe Schmoe who wants feedback on the quality of his grammer because he may not be a literary nor know literaries to whom he can refer his 'work'.
Figure out the target audience. Novelists are not the target audience. The average computer user is.
Also, don't call something bloatware and throw accusations of "massive amounts of RAM and processing power" requirements without first verifying your opinions, because in this case they are totally unfounded. AbiWord remains fast and relatively lightweight.
People paying attention to Linux kernel releases are not non-technical. Non-technical people go with the latest version of their preferred distribution. The release numbers of the distribution are what counts to them.
So... Miro created Mambo and released it under the GPL. They then created the Mambo Foundation to look after the interests of Mambo. What's the problem? Why did the Foundation need to own the copyrights? It's not like Miro could revoke the GPL nor, without the explicit permission of the volunteer developers, publish a closed source version incorporating any non-Miro contributions.
The words 'mountain' and 'molehill' spring to mind?
Perhaps it's running one of these new hard drives.
Oh for the love of...
Think of the context. "Sony delays PS3 despite XBox 360 release." The comment being, "They did it before with the Dreamcast." He was comparing this to how Sony did not rush the PS1 when Sega released the Dreamcast.
This was not a difficult concept to grasp.
You could always help out with Windstille which is being created in the spirit of Metroid. It is a bit alpha at the moment but has 3d characters running around a 2d platform environment.
You'll probably bitch and moan (as a collective, I mean) that this is OSS and incomplete and yadda yadda, but sometimes if you want something specific then there's no better solution than to do it yourself.
40 releases X 7.5 minutes X 100 users = 30000 minutes (or 500 hours) of employee time for the client.
If only they cared.
They already did, didn't they? I thought that's what eComStation was, an OS/2 spin-off.
Sorry, forgot to give the link!
There's also this site providing unofficial support for OS/2 as well as eCS.
Why not migrate to eComStation, which seems to revive OS/2?
Um did they even retail non-super-computers with 1 gig of memory in 1995?
I've found programs packaged using Autopackage to install pretty nicely on my Gentoo box [which surely has to be one of the more diverse Linux environments].
Perhaps we, as a community, just need to be more vocal in our support for a common standard that embraces all distributions like Autopackage, or OpenPKG, or the other cross-distro install options out there.
How sarchastic of you.
</sarcasm>
You're just jealous of my BLING BLING! Eeeee-asy now!
"When I worked for the Air Force, I never worried about how much something would cost. I put in a few proposals and put in costs, wrote up a report on the various options, and submitted it to my superiors. It was rare the cheapest option was chosen. Cost was immaterial to me."
Good to know tax is being well spent. 'Immaterial'. Saddening. Tell that to the guy who gets by on the breadline whilst half his income (when taking into account the stuff he buys) goes on tax.
'If the first "O" in OpenOffice stands for "Open"...'
Don't forget, the nomenclature was probably considered according to the general misinterpretation of the term 'Open Source' which most people take to mean 'Free Software' when really it's a far more ambiguous term.
Plus 'FreeOffice.org' sounds like a charity to enlighten and release the millions of poor souls trapped in their chronicly tedious desk jobs.