People still port things to these older platforms.. I doubt apache, even the latest version, would take much work to compile on redhat 5 anyway.
With redhat you can incrementally upgrade the system from 5, to 6 7 8 9 etc...
Similarly, there are people there who patch older os`s, just patch vulnerabilities found in the existing versions of apps without installing the latest versions..
And finally, providing there`s no vulnerabilities in the version of apache in use, you don`t need to be running any other externally visible services on a redhat 5 box.
Windows (and the linux kernel) are basically just engines... While a complete linux distribution is an entire car ready to drive.
Neither windows, nor a linux kernel, are very much use on their own without additional software, whereas most modern linux distributions would satisfy the requirements of at least 95% of end users without requiring any additional software.
This is why, when you buy a pre-assembled computer it will usually have a lot of other software bundled with it, not just windows.
He doesnt say that linux doesn`t need patching.. He claims that windows ships with far less applications than a typical linux distribution, and yet still has a large number of patches..
It`s also worth noting that any given linux distribution will let you install a complete system that`s useable for all but specialised purposes without having to use anything that wasn`t provided with the distribution. Also on that note, you can update the entire system including all those apps from a single source, whereas with windows you can only update the core os, and need to locate/install patches for all your apps seperately. Similarly if you want to install anything that didn`t come on the installation CD, you need to find and manually install each program.
Because microsoft bundle their own software with their own os, in an attempt to lock out competing applications. Linux distributions on the other hand, bundle a large selection of THIRD PARTY software together with a THIRD PARTY kernel. They`re not bundling their own apps to the exclusion of competitors, and any company with a genuinely usefull app could easily ask any of the linux distributors to bundle their app.
It comes with these apps, doesn`t mean your forced to install them. Unlike windows, the entire os is modular and any part can be removed/replaced easily, or simply not installed at all.
MySQL may not be comparable to Oracle, but nor is the version of MSSQL which comes with small business server.. Small business server limits you to a single lowend machine, it doesn`t need a proper high end database in any case.. However on the linux system you may also/instead get postgres (scales much better than mysql) and you can easily install oracle or db2, i doubt the crippled version of windows supplied with SBS will let you install a full size db.
Perhaps this is the reason that VIA chipsets seem more stable under linux.. The grandparent posted commented about how poor the drivers were, i assume this is the windows drivers that via themselves write.. the linux drivers for via chipsets seem to work perfectly.. I have several machines (Athlon, Athlon64 etc) running via chipsets and linux which are rock solid.
Well, gentoo/LFS must be the worst choice of linux distributions for a production server... Sure if your an expert and have the time, you can have a very fast stable and secure server, but the key points are "expert" and "time".
Debian on the other hand is pretty much hassle free, you won`t get the same flexibility or performance as gentoo/LFS but you`l have a lot less work to do.
That would be trivial to create, however the reason it`s not done is.. The people writing this malware want to keep the machines they infect for future use (furthur infections, ddos, spamming etc) it`s simply not in their interest to destroy the machines.
It`s not about not being able to afford it.. It`s about people who can easily affording it wanting to save a few dollars... That`s why these cheap low-end systems are so popular even among people who can easily afford them.
Automobiles may well be an unsafe technology, but until a safer alternative comes along we have little choice... Some of the other alternative, such as motorbikes, are even more unsafe.
It would be better to use the openoffice formats internally, and then use msoffice formats externally but only when absolutely necessary... If companies start preferring opendocument format, but still support ms formats if they have to then it will encourage others to migrate to open formats so eventually it won`t be a problem.. If all the companies who chose not to use openoffice due to ms`s proprietary formats immediately switched over today, then openoffice would have a sizeable enough market share that ms compatibility wouldn`t be so important anymore, and those with msoffice would be demanding ways of using openoffice formats.
As for using openoffice formats internally, there can be oddities with opening and saving files repeatedly in ms`s formats with openoffice.. And if all your internal documents were in openoffice format, they would be more usefull to you in the future.
Because apple provide innovative hardware that runs the same old software, and the new software will still run on the old machines anyway.. You don`t have to buy the new machines, you can still run the latest apple OS on the older machines (i have a G3 running Tiger here) but you can buy them if you want to..
In the apple case, you can buy either the software or the hardware, or both.. With the microsoft example you can`t have one without the other.
Nowadays the software often costs MORE than the hardware, consider the cost of windows+office relative to a cheap lowend computer that companies might buy for general office use..
As for multiple architecture support, this means that each proprietary software vendor would need to not only compile their apps for each architecture but also test them... For a small architecture with very few users this wouldn`t be profitable and therefore wouldn`t get done. Not to mention that a small architecture, no matter how superior, wouldn`t increase in marketshare without software..
Proprietary software is causing a huge drag on hardware innovation and has been holding the whole world back for years.
Not to mention that a lot of proprietary software is only available as 32bit.. Although you can run this on a 64bit system, if it requires any additional libraries they must also be 32bit, forcing you to have 2 complete sets of libraries.. One such example is the flash plugin, there is no 64bit flash therefore you need a 32bit browser and 32bit copies of all the libs the browser uses, not to mention having to use 32bit versions of every other plugin (like java for instance) even tho 64bit versions are available.
I don`t know how they can claim linux is less consistent.. Assuming you don`t try to run multiple distributions (which is effectively running multiple different os`s) there are lots of things which are consistent under linux but not windows.. For instance: Access to devices - always/dev/something, always accessible as a file.. Package installation - consistent across the os, the entire os and your applications are installed and removed with the same package management tool. File locations - files are sorted under descriptive subdirectories on linux (/bin for binaries,/lib for libraries etc) contrast to windows where multiple types of files are stored in the windows and system32 dirs. Configuration - linux stores configuration in/etc for system wide and your homedir for user-specific, windows usually uses the registry but often in inconsistent locations within, and sometimes windows will also use seperate files in differing locations. Interface - commandline, the linux commandline is very consistent and flexible, you can manage the entire system from the commandline and it`s very similar to other unixes.. the windows commandline is nowhere near as flexible, and is different from anything else that exists. interface - graphical, ok, windows wins here for consistency, but not by much if your using a complete environment like KDE and associated apps on the linux system.. there are still a large number of inconsistencies on both interfaces.
The problem is the closed source nature of the flash plugin, and the fact they don`t compile it for any system other than x86.. It`s also holding people back from using native 64bit os`s aswell.
They either care about software or they don`t.. Since they obviously do, and are willing to back that up with money, why not put that money to good use - hiring developers to write code that suits their needs, rather than just moaning about it.
I assume theyre geared towards just moaning because that`s all they can do with proprietary software, but they should realise it would be far more productive to actually improve the situation here rather than just complaining about it.
Surely opensource is a plus in this area.. Those charities that push for and fund interoperability efforts could have a much more direct impact on opensource, instead of spending large amounts of money trying to convince vendors to implement accessibility features which may not directly meet their needs, they could actually hire coders to create these features exactly according to their specifications.
Instead of this, these groups seem to be spending all their time and money lobbying.. Why not produce open source accessibility software that not only suits your requirements exactly, but also benefits other people too?
Yes, i also have an old scanner (not parallel, something proprietary) that doesn`t work under linux, or any version of windows newer than 95 (it "kinda" works with 98 but is horribly unstable.
I also have a number of ethernet controllers (sun chipsets) that don`t work with any version of windows, but work perfectly with linux..
Also many wireless cards, don`t work fully (no monitor mode, arbitrary packet injection or changing your mac address) on windows.
Slashdot Mirror
People still port things to these older platforms.. I doubt apache, even the latest version, would take much work to compile on redhat 5 anyway.
With redhat you can incrementally upgrade the system from 5, to 6 7 8 9 etc...
Similarly, there are people there who patch older os`s, just patch vulnerabilities found in the existing versions of apps without installing the latest versions..
And finally, providing there`s no vulnerabilities in the version of apache in use, you don`t need to be running any other externally visible services on a redhat 5 box.
Windows (and the linux kernel) are basically just engines...
While a complete linux distribution is an entire car ready to drive.
Neither windows, nor a linux kernel, are very much use on their own without additional software, whereas most modern linux distributions would satisfy the requirements of at least 95% of end users without requiring any additional software.
This is why, when you buy a pre-assembled computer it will usually have a lot of other software bundled with it, not just windows.
He doesnt say that linux doesn`t need patching.. He claims that windows ships with far less applications than a typical linux distribution, and yet still has a large number of patches..
It`s also worth noting that any given linux distribution will let you install a complete system that`s useable for all but specialised purposes without having to use anything that wasn`t provided with the distribution. Also on that note, you can update the entire system including all those apps from a single source, whereas with windows you can only update the core os, and need to locate/install patches for all your apps seperately. Similarly if you want to install anything that didn`t come on the installation CD, you need to find and manually install each program.
Because microsoft bundle their own software with their own os, in an attempt to lock out competing applications.
Linux distributions on the other hand, bundle a large selection of THIRD PARTY software together with a THIRD PARTY kernel. They`re not bundling their own apps to the exclusion of competitors, and any company with a genuinely usefull app could easily ask any of the linux distributors to bundle their app.
It comes with these apps, doesn`t mean your forced to install them.
Unlike windows, the entire os is modular and any part can be removed/replaced easily, or simply not installed at all.
MySQL may not be comparable to Oracle, but nor is the version of MSSQL which comes with small business server..
Small business server limits you to a single lowend machine, it doesn`t need a proper high end database in any case.. However on the linux system you may also/instead get postgres (scales much better than mysql) and you can easily install oracle or db2, i doubt the crippled version of windows supplied with SBS will let you install a full size db.
Perhaps this is the reason that VIA chipsets seem more stable under linux.. The grandparent posted commented about how poor the drivers were, i assume this is the windows drivers that via themselves write.. the linux drivers for via chipsets seem to work perfectly.. I have several machines (Athlon, Athlon64 etc) running via chipsets and linux which are rock solid.
Well, gentoo/LFS must be the worst choice of linux distributions for a production server... Sure if your an expert and have the time, you can have a very fast stable and secure server, but the key points are "expert" and "time".
Debian on the other hand is pretty much hassle free, you won`t get the same flexibility or performance as gentoo/LFS but you`l have a lot less work to do.
That would be trivial to create, however the reason it`s not done is.. The people writing this malware want to keep the machines they infect for future use (furthur infections, ddos, spamming etc) it`s simply not in their interest to destroy the machines.
It`s not about not being able to afford it.. It`s about people who can easily affording it wanting to save a few dollars... That`s why these cheap low-end systems are so popular even among people who can easily afford them.
Hitler never kept people incarcerated for very long, he aimed to kill them so he didn`t have to spend resources keeping them locked up.
Automobiles may well be an unsafe technology, but until a safer alternative comes along we have little choice... Some of the other alternative, such as motorbikes, are even more unsafe.
It would be better to use the openoffice formats internally, and then use msoffice formats externally but only when absolutely necessary... If companies start preferring opendocument format, but still support ms formats if they have to then it will encourage others to migrate to open formats so eventually it won`t be a problem..
If all the companies who chose not to use openoffice due to ms`s proprietary formats immediately switched over today, then openoffice would have a sizeable enough market share that ms compatibility wouldn`t be so important anymore, and those with msoffice would be demanding ways of using openoffice formats.
As for using openoffice formats internally, there can be oddities with opening and saving files repeatedly in ms`s formats with openoffice.. And if all your internal documents were in openoffice format, they would be more usefull to you in the future.
Some things may not be possible, for instance anything that hooks into the kernel (such as vpn clients, drivers for certain hardware etc)
Because apple provide innovative hardware that runs the same old software, and the new software will still run on the old machines anyway..
You don`t have to buy the new machines, you can still run the latest apple OS on the older machines (i have a G3 running Tiger here) but you can buy them if you want to..
In the apple case, you can buy either the software or the hardware, or both.. With the microsoft example you can`t have one without the other.
Wrong on several counts..
Nowadays the software often costs MORE than the hardware, consider the cost of windows+office relative to a cheap lowend computer that companies might buy for general office use..
As for multiple architecture support, this means that each proprietary software vendor would need to not only compile their apps for each architecture but also test them... For a small architecture with very few users this wouldn`t be profitable and therefore wouldn`t get done. Not to mention that a small architecture, no matter how superior, wouldn`t increase in marketshare without software..
Proprietary software is causing a huge drag on hardware innovation and has been holding the whole world back for years.
Not to mention that a lot of proprietary software is only available as 32bit.. Although you can run this on a 64bit system, if it requires any additional libraries they must also be 32bit, forcing you to have 2 complete sets of libraries..
One such example is the flash plugin, there is no 64bit flash therefore you need a 32bit browser and 32bit copies of all the libs the browser uses, not to mention having to use 32bit versions of every other plugin (like java for instance) even tho 64bit versions are available.
Which is just a stupid limitation of exchange.. I don`t think any other mail system has such limitations, even on 32bit processors.
I don`t know how they can claim linux is less consistent.. /dev/something, always accessible as a file.. /lib for libraries etc) contrast to windows where multiple types of files are stored in the windows and system32 dirs. /etc for system wide and your homedir for user-specific, windows usually uses the registry but often in inconsistent locations within, and sometimes windows will also use seperate files in differing locations.
Assuming you don`t try to run multiple distributions (which is effectively running multiple different os`s) there are lots of things which are consistent under linux but not windows.. For instance:
Access to devices - always
Package installation - consistent across the os, the entire os and your applications are installed and removed with the same package management tool.
File locations - files are sorted under descriptive subdirectories on linux (/bin for binaries,
Configuration - linux stores configuration in
Interface - commandline, the linux commandline is very consistent and flexible, you can manage the entire system from the commandline and it`s very similar to other unixes.. the windows commandline is nowhere near as flexible, and is different from anything else that exists.
interface - graphical, ok, windows wins here for consistency, but not by much if your using a complete environment like KDE and associated apps on the linux system.. there are still a large number of inconsistencies on both interfaces.
The problem is the closed source nature of the flash plugin, and the fact they don`t compile it for any system other than x86..
It`s also holding people back from using native 64bit os`s aswell.
They either care about software or they don`t..
Since they obviously do, and are willing to back that up with money, why not put that money to good use - hiring developers to write code that suits their needs, rather than just moaning about it.
I assume theyre geared towards just moaning because that`s all they can do with proprietary software, but they should realise it would be far more productive to actually improve the situation here rather than just complaining about it.
Surely opensource is a plus in this area..
Those charities that push for and fund interoperability efforts could have a much more direct impact on opensource, instead of spending large amounts of money trying to convince vendors to implement accessibility features which may not directly meet their needs, they could actually hire coders to create these features exactly according to their specifications.
Instead of this, these groups seem to be spending all their time and money lobbying.. Why not produce open source accessibility software that not only suits your requirements exactly, but also benefits other people too?
Yes, i also have an old scanner (not parallel, something proprietary) that doesn`t work under linux, or any version of windows newer than 95 (it "kinda" works with 98 but is horribly unstable.
I also have a number of ethernet controllers (sun chipsets) that don`t work with any version of windows, but work perfectly with linux..
Also many wireless cards, don`t work fully (no monitor mode, arbitrary packet injection or changing your mac address) on windows.
Not to mention that google are COMPETITORS.. You wouldn`t want your business depending on your competitors goodwill.
Supercomputing is a specialist market...
The Formula-1 teams have fast cars which aren`t street legal, Formula-1 is a specialist market too.