Linux will not gain mainstream acceptance until it is easy to support.
Actually that's not true, Linux is already much easier to support than Windows, but I'm others here will jump at the chance to explain that to you so I won't get into it. The biggest barrier to mainstream Linux adoption is Corporate email, messaging, and calendars. I've worked for several Linux focused companies the last ten years, one of them even had 'Linux' in it's name, but all of those companies still used Exchange for company communications. What I've realized is that IT departments are not choosing Exchange for _any_ technical or security reasons, they are making this choice because to choose anything else means they have to own that choice. With any other solution they actually have know pretty much everything there is to know about the package(s) they're implementing.
In most companies (that I've been exposed to of course) most of the IT staff are Windows only, maybe a few Ubuntu 'installers' sprinkled around. These people know where all the wizards are and which boxes need checkmarks but that's pretty much it. When there's a Linux based alternative to Exchange that this class of people can choose without feeling any risk, THEN you will a massive expansion of Linux on the desktop.
PS:I mean no slight to the intelligence of the IT staff -the OS they are using is essentially closed to them so they are merely not in the habit of digging deep, or radically altering the behavior of the OS or application stack. Also, job security is a really really powerful motivator when you have a family to care for, I can't fault anyone for making the safe choices.
Can we go a few months without an article on slashdot describing yet another moronic idea from someone in Australia?
Seriously, there's something wrong in that place and I'm very curious to know what. Or maybe, these stories are coming from the Australian equivalent of WeeklyWorldNews?
The goal is to get them to change their behavior "in general". Copyright extensions, the DMCA, the super secret ACTA negotiations, not one specific thing. I already quit spending money on their products two years ago, and for that time, whenever I hear anyone complaining about *AA I tell them to quit going to the movies then, and be vocal about why. In my opinion nothing else will be effective. Most people (here on slashdot and irl) seem to think that no one will else will do it (and other excuses) so they might as well keep financing the behavior they're complaining about. Maybe they could do it for a month though.
ACTA is what prompted me to change my sig. It's Christmas season. If by some miracle the idea catches on the money people behind the *AA's will certainly get the message, and so will the politicians they bribe. I don't have resources for a campaign, just a sig. I could spend a year working on a vehicle but maybe someone who already has one will see this.
With prison sentence of highly celebrate years or money fine of the fifth category is punished the one which an image - or a fact bearer, containing an image - of a sexual behaviour, where someone who has reached obviously the age of eighteen years not yet, is concerned or seemingly has been involved, spreads, openly exhibits, manufactures, sails in, passes through, carries out or in possession has.
Online translators that don't suck are only 10 years away I guess.
Doesn't matter what they blame it on in public. They know. "It'll never work" is not a valid reason not to boycott them. As an individual, when you give them money you are blessing their behavior. No one _needs_ to buy a DVD.
General Boycott of all goods produced by companies represented by either the MPAA or the RIAA during the month of December 2009.
#Why? ---------------------- I know there are some brilliant writers here. I want to write list of reasons why a person should participate in a one month boycott of **AA. Please reply to this thread with your own, without concern over whether it's original or unique. If 10 people articulate the same idea there will likely be an obvious 'best' one.
What I have so far: 1)They need to know that they need us more than we need them.
2)They practically own Congress and they are right now drafting Global Legislation --in secret-- that will impact your rights and privacy, and may cause your taxes to be raised to pay for the criminalization of copyright law. (to pay for enforcement officers and jail space)
3)By sending this message to Hollywood we are also sending a message to our elected officials that openly accept their bribes.
I'm doing it. And I'm going put a real effort into getting others to do it as well. A thirty day boycott of Hollywood (Music, DVD's, Theaters, all of it) during December 2009, the Christmas season. No demands or conditions, no specific reasons given. They need to know that they need us more than we need them.
Seriously all we need is a logo and/or a catch phrase...a you tube video wouldn't hurt either. Christ, ONE good youtube video might hit a home run. I'm calling and emailing everyone in my contact list this week.
And to people who say "It'll never happen blah blah blah...", just do it anyway, why not. It won't kill you to not watch movies for one month.
Based on the summary, it's a completely wrong headed approach that leads to endlessly redefining terms. When this debate first started I thought it was a lot more clear: it's okay to prioritize based on protocols but it's not okay to prioritize based on source/destination.
Robert Mcdowell: "Consumers are telling the marketplace that they don't want networks that operate merely as 'dumb pipes,'" he said. "Sometimes they want the added value and efficiency that comes from intelligence inside networks as well."
I wish I could interview politicians, "You just made that shit up didn't you?"
It's already _not_ a free market, it is entirely monopolistic, and built with _public_ funds to boot. Also, it's way more expensive than it should be with intentionally substandard connection speeds.
I'm not defending this particular tact by the FCC, just saying your -wait a minute have I just been trolled?
Every time there's a discussion of.Net,.Net developers defend the framework with a list of reasons intended to demonstrate how much better/easier it is to write applications in Java (oops, I mean.Net).
_Every_ time I use one of these applications I am _very_ unimpressed.
Those too things together have me thinking that all the mediocre programmers in the world gravitate to these 'easy' languages, and, we get TradeElect.
Seriously, as an end user I give a damn how easy it is for you to crank out your ideas/applications, so please stop with the aforementioned approach to defending.Net and provide me with some examples of useful, solid, fast, not-buggy applications that can be written with.Net. As it stands right now applications written in.Net/Java/Ruby-on-Rails/etc. have no chance of making it into my infrastructure -sometimes there's an argument, but even then the guy who wrote it starts in with how easy it was to write, at which point he's lost the argument.
Change for the sake of change is what they've been doing with the UI for years now. Every new version means I have to go on a hunt for the fixes to undo the 'improvements'. Why the hell can't they leave the damn UI alone and fix the crap that's actually broken?
I seem to recall that Mono is/was justified by Miguel de Icaza by virtue of.Nets inevitable popularity (Linux distros would _need_ it). When I read this article I can't help but think that the motivation here is to help make.Net more popular, and by extension, Mono more popular. I already abandoned Gnome, but I won't be surprised when I'm eventually trapped into installing Mono..Net, C#, Java, I can't point to technical deficiencies and say "That's why I don't like them," but I have _never_ liked an app written in one of those languages. Buggy dependency ridden crapware has been my experience. I realize that an applications overall suckiness isn't necessarily a reflection of the language, but experience has set that expectation for me.
I really hope this project goes nowhere, because the last thing I want is more.Net apps in the world, on any platform.
Which part of that statement don't you understand? I'll say it again. If you have plenty of money and want to use a single computer as both a desktop system and a server, then you are a moron. Is that too complicated for your feeble little mind to understand?
Is that a do over? You DID error in your first reply, replying again as if you did not will not help you.
You DID NOT consider that there are valid use cases for using a single system as both a desktop and a server, although perhaps not at the same time, _regardless_ of budget. If you cannot think of one you are a moron. And no, I will not help you, it is my preference that you continue to go through life ignorant and illustrating the Dunning-Kruger Effect
And now, you're dropping Linus' name as a trump card in place of actual logic. YOU FAIL.
the damn kernel config tool(s) keep offering me a choice of which scheduler to select even though so many people have said it doesn't for example.
This is _not_ the context in which you called people morons.
This is:
One or two understand that it means dynamically (run-time) changeable. Alas, those people seem to think that is a good idea and needed "feature." It isn't. If you are running a server that you also use as a desktop, it isn't Linux's problem that you are either on a shoestring budget or a moron.
You're unable to keep track of your own arguments yet it's "other people" that are mentally challenged. Classic.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks, I did have some sense of that too, which is why I asked about the source of these stories.
Linux will not gain mainstream acceptance until it is easy to support.
Actually that's not true, Linux is already much easier to support than Windows, but I'm others here will jump at the chance to explain that to you so I won't get into it.
The biggest barrier to mainstream Linux adoption is Corporate email, messaging, and calendars. I've worked for several Linux focused companies the last ten years, one of them even had 'Linux' in it's name, but all of those companies still used Exchange for company communications. What I've realized is that IT departments are not choosing Exchange for _any_ technical or security reasons, they are making this choice because to choose anything else means they have to own that choice. With any other solution they actually have know pretty much everything there is to know about the package(s) they're implementing.
In most companies (that I've been exposed to of course) most of the IT staff are Windows only, maybe a few Ubuntu 'installers' sprinkled around. These people know where all the wizards are and which boxes need checkmarks but that's pretty much it. When there's a Linux based alternative to Exchange that this class of people can choose without feeling any risk, THEN you will a massive expansion of Linux on the desktop.
PS:I mean no slight to the intelligence of the IT staff -the OS they are using is essentially closed to them so they are merely not in the habit of digging deep, or radically altering the behavior of the OS or application stack. Also, job security is a really really powerful motivator when you have a family to care for, I can't fault anyone for making the safe choices.
Thanks for that.
Can we go a few months without an article on slashdot describing yet another moronic idea from someone in Australia?
Seriously, there's something wrong in that place and I'm very curious to know what. Or maybe, these stories are coming from the Australian equivalent of WeeklyWorldNews?
Yes it does, don't be pedantic.
No, actually it's less fish. I had to look it up myself, I had never heard of it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okinawa_diet
The goal is to get them to change their behavior "in general". Copyright extensions, the DMCA, the super secret ACTA negotiations, not one specific thing. I already quit spending money on their products two years ago, and for that time, whenever I hear anyone complaining about *AA I tell them to quit going to the movies then, and be vocal about why. In my opinion nothing else will be effective. Most people (here on slashdot and irl) seem to think that no one will else will do it (and other excuses) so they might as well keep financing the behavior they're complaining about. Maybe they could do it for a month though.
ACTA is what prompted me to change my sig. It's Christmas season. If by some miracle the idea catches on the money people behind the *AA's will certainly get the message, and so will the politicians they bribe. I don't have resources for a campaign, just a sig. I could spend a year working on a vehicle but maybe someone who already has one will see this.
With prison sentence of highly celebrate years or money fine of the fifth category is punished the one which an image - or a fact bearer, containing an image - of a sexual behaviour, where someone who has reached obviously the age of eighteen years not yet, is concerned or seemingly has been involved, spreads, openly exhibits, manufactures, sails in, passes through, carries out or in possession has.
Online translators that don't suck are only 10 years away I guess.
Did they fix the database encoding in this one?
Doesn't matter what they blame it on in public. They know. "It'll never work" is not a valid reason not to boycott them. As an individual, when you give them money you are blessing their behavior. No one _needs_ to buy a DVD.
Top of the page:
No Christmas for Hollywood.
General Boycott of all goods produced by companies represented by either the MPAA or the RIAA during the month of December 2009.
#Why?
----------------------
I know there are some brilliant writers here. I want to write list of reasons why a person should participate in a one month boycott of **AA. Please reply to this thread with your own, without concern over whether it's original or unique. If 10 people articulate the same idea there will likely be an obvious 'best' one.
What I have so far:
1)They need to know that they need us more than we need them.
2)They practically own Congress and they are right now drafting Global Legislation --in secret-- that will impact your rights and privacy, and may cause your taxes to be raised to pay for the criminalization of copyright law. (to pay for enforcement officers and jail space)
3)By sending this message to Hollywood we are also sending a message to our elected officials that openly accept their bribes.
I'm doing it. And I'm going put a real effort into getting others to do it as well. A thirty day boycott of Hollywood (Music, DVD's, Theaters, all of it) during December 2009, the Christmas season. No demands or conditions, no specific reasons given. They need to know that they need us more than we need them.
Seriously all we need is a logo and/or a catch phrase...a you tube video wouldn't hurt either. Christ, ONE good youtube video might hit a home run. I'm calling and emailing everyone in my contact list this week.
And to people who say "It'll never happen blah blah blah...", just do it anyway, why not. It won't kill you to not watch movies for one month.
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=%22blocks+terahertz+waves%22
No results found for "blocks terahertz waves"
Based on the summary, it's a completely wrong headed approach that leads to endlessly redefining terms. When this debate first started I thought it was a lot more clear: it's okay to prioritize based on protocols but it's not okay to prioritize based on source/destination.
Not sure why they're making it so complex now.
Robert Mcdowell:
"Consumers are telling the marketplace that they don't want networks that operate merely as 'dumb pipes,'" he said. "Sometimes they want the added value and efficiency that comes from intelligence inside networks as well."
I wish I could interview politicians, "You just made that shit up didn't you?"
You are confused.
It's already _not_ a free market, it is entirely monopolistic, and built with _public_ funds to boot. Also, it's way more expensive than it should be with intentionally substandard connection speeds.
I'm not defending this particular tact by the FCC, just saying your -wait a minute have I just been trolled?
They still have the argument that your server can "harm the network" as described in the summary.
He's a child. A talented programmer, but still a child. I'm sure when he matures he'll regret making that comment, if he doesn't already.
I'm thinking "damn, I was hoping the internet already sucks as much as it can..."
...allow developers...
Every time there's a discussion of .Net, .Net developers defend the framework with a list of reasons intended to demonstrate how much better/easier it is to write applications in Java (oops, I mean .Net).
_Every_ time I use one of these applications I am _very_ unimpressed.
Those too things together have me thinking that all the mediocre programmers in the world gravitate to these 'easy' languages, and, we get TradeElect.
Seriously, as an end user I give a damn how easy it is for you to crank out your ideas/applications, so please stop with the aforementioned approach to defending .Net and provide me with some examples of useful, solid, fast, not-buggy applications that can be written with .Net. As it stands right now applications written in .Net/Java/Ruby-on-Rails/etc. have no chance of making it into my infrastructure -sometimes there's an argument, but even then the guy who wrote it starts in with how easy it was to write, at which point he's lost the argument.
Change for the sake of change is what they've been doing with the UI for years now. Every new version means I have to go on a hunt for the fixes to undo the 'improvements'. Why the hell can't they leave the damn UI alone and fix the crap that's actually broken?
I seem to recall that Mono is/was justified by Miguel de Icaza by virtue of .Nets inevitable popularity (Linux distros would _need_ it). When I read this article I can't help but think that the motivation here is to help make .Net more popular, and by extension, Mono more popular. I already abandoned Gnome, but I won't be surprised when I'm eventually trapped into installing Mono. .Net, C#, Java, I can't point to technical deficiencies and say "That's why I don't like them," but I have _never_ liked an app written in one of those languages. Buggy dependency ridden crapware has been my experience. I realize that an applications overall suckiness isn't necessarily a reflection of the language, but experience has set that expectation for me.
I really hope this project goes nowhere, because the last thing I want is more .Net apps in the world, on any platform.
Which part of that statement don't you understand? I'll say it again. If you have plenty of money and want to use a single computer as both a desktop system and a server, then you are a moron. Is that too complicated for your feeble little mind to understand?
Is that a do over? You DID error in your first reply, replying again as if you did not will not help you.
You DID NOT consider that there are valid use cases for using a single system as both a desktop and a server, although perhaps not at the same time, _regardless_ of budget. If you cannot think of one you are a moron. And no, I will not help you, it is my preference that you continue to go through life ignorant and illustrating the Dunning-Kruger Effect
And now, you're dropping Linus' name as a trump card in place of actual logic. YOU FAIL.
the damn kernel config tool(s) keep offering me a choice of which scheduler to select even though so many people have said it doesn't for example.
This is _not_ the context in which you called people morons. This is:
One or two understand that it means dynamically (run-time) changeable. Alas, those people seem to think that is a good idea and needed "feature." It isn't. If you are running a server that you also use as a desktop, it isn't Linux's problem that you are either on a shoestring budget or a moron.
You're unable to keep track of your own arguments yet it's "other people" that are mentally challenged. Classic.
Hey MORON, take a few seconds and try to think outside of your own use case.