Well I think the key difference is IE was forced onto the world even when it sucked, through rather nasty OEM deals. Safari is being offered to the world and the world is accepting it overwhelmingly because well it's better.
It's really hard to argue intergration is bad when everyone benifits from it; the thing is IE was more a netscape killer (because netscape was en route to making the os irrelivent) than a "better application" being offered.
Is Safari really already so much better than IE that Opera and others see no hope in going up against it?
Honestly it is so much better that it raises the bar of competition significantly. I have a very strange feeling IE7/win will try and adopt many of it's concepts (because to be quite honest for 99.99999% of the world [including most powerusers] Safari has everything you need in a nice clean interface)
You can drag safari to the trash and destroy it. Software Update will never require you to run safari to update your other components. You can (if you wished) write a wraper for Gecko and drop it in-place for WebCore.
The last news out of opera was they were considering adopting WebCore. Everyone and their dog knows KHTML is more robust than the Opera renderer, and I would assuem Opera themselves know this.
I think C|Net took a lot of out of context quotes and strunk them into a story... wouldn't be the first time.
AHAHAH! I take my hat off to you, sir. What a gimmick! Advocating Xfree86 on the desktop! I wish I had thought of that. Comedy gold! And claiming that Windows is unstable, too. And that Xfree86 is simple and intuitive to administer. That was the icing on the cake.
Oh wait. You're...serious? Please God no.
If Linux as a modern consumer operating system could be said to have a weakness, its Xfree86. It's a fucking toy-- A broken one at that. Xfree86 is the achillies heal of every Linux zealot who is worth his weight in flour, and the fact that you're pimping it as a serious alternative to Windows just goes to prove how utterly little you know what you're on about!
Absolutely no content until this point.
I like how you're so quick to call 'FUD' on everyone's arguments against X in this thread, when for most users, the points they're making are the absolute black and white truth. I also admire your sheer fucking gall to call Windows unstable by comparison.
Note he didn't say windows is more stable, he just said "he admires your sheer fucking gall" for claiming it isn't. Not exactly the same thing.
By making this statement, you're either affirming yourself to be a bumbling fuckwit unable to keep the most widely used OS in the world working straight for more than a few hours, or you're just trying to hold obsolete versions of windows up against the latest releases of X and hoping no-one notices.
Still haven't actually said windows is more stable yet, just listed some ad homenim attacks and a few unsuported "claims" with no merit even if they were taken as truth.
I hate to break it to you, but either way you lose, seeing as how even the older versions of Windows are more stable and better featured than even the latest builds of X, gnome, KDE and every single fucking 2-bit window manager out there. Combined.
X isn't a window manager. 2bit window managers are for servers that need a window manager, not for desktops. Stability has yet to be supported, or proven, you just made the claim it was better.
If you took 5 minutes out of your fucking fantasy land and actually looked long and hard at your average X session, you might be able to see what normal, every day people have to put up with.
I don't know. On average I launch x, go to the "Applications" menu, select the program I want to run, and use it. Hm seems hard. (note I use osx mostly). On linux I log into kde and use the "start menu" replica to launch applications, then use them. None of those seem particularly hard to me...
But then you probably pull out X-kill so many times a day it's as to you as swatting flies is to a man living in a house made of elephant shit.
Actually I'd bet this probability was pretty slim. I would point out here how an xkill has about nothing to do with the stability of x. In fact, if one wanted to actually refute you, they could point out X keeps running even after all those xkills, wwwd (what would windows do).
Does anyone remember those 'amazing discoveries' infomercials? With the hideously bad actors who potrayed simple, day-to-day activities with so much confusion and fear on their faces that they looked as if they were trying to tie their shoelaces using only 1 finger on each hand? And then you'd cut away to the sheer glee on their faces as the Amazotron 6000 tied their shoelaces for them in only twice as long?
Nope I don't, and honeslty I don't see the analogy.
That is how I find best describes the X zealot. Whereas normal human beings are content going about their day-to-day lives using tried-and-tested ways and methods, these fuckwits just can't stand to conform to the 'norm.
Windows didn't even support remote hosted applications until about 4 years ago. You fail this point in so many ways it's not funny. I shall stop pointing out how many things you couldn't do on "older versions of windows" that you tote as being superior.
They'd much rather be off pioneering new and exciting ways to do menal tasks that everyone else has no problem with. The only problem is: They're still about 5 years behind everyone else! and they're not gaining any ground at all! Oh No!
5 years ago was 1998. That would make windows 98 and system 9. I don't think anyone could argue recent KDE builds are worse than either system. If you would like to, please do a feature for feature comparison.
See folks, while Linux is an excellent, versatile, stable platform ideal for nearly every server-app under the sun, Xfree86 is a half-arsed crack at the wonderful X windowing system, which isn't even fit for gabage. never mind the desktop. Us Windows users have got that covered, thanks.
I'm sorry, could you support this in any way. I would say that XFree86 (especially recent builds) are very solid as an X server, and have been solid for desktop usage for about 3 years. With apple, ibm, sun, and hp on board now I can only imagene it could get better.
It doesn't bundle it integrates (as in makes unremovable). The difference is about the same as the one between the goverment of pre-revolution france and the usa.
Acceptable, similar to the way dentists drills are acceptable to most people.
If you think your using the only solution to the job, you will always think it's acceptable. Quite often with a little reasearch you can no longer believe you actually used such painful tools previously.
The problem of both Linux and Macosx is that Windows is the right tool for the job for 99% of end-user tasks.
Apple understands it and attempts to fix it as hard as possible.
Huh?
Seriously show some support of your arguments, opinions are not facts. I would strongly disagree with everything you just said on many many many levels.
To be quite honest that guy would have been happier with a nice shiny iMac. At least he would be able to do non-linear editing with quite a nice application out of the box. He also would have goten a DVD player and the (new!) iDVD 3 which well, blows away the competition in consumer title/chapter screens.
When I hear people like him are using windows is when I know apple needs to get a better marketing campaign.
Until next weekend, the only way to aquire iDVD legally is by buying an Apple system with a DVD writer. Any system without an Apple built in DVD drive cannot have a legitimate copy of iDVD. Next week this changes.
When that letter was sent there was no possible way you could legally have iDVD and not have a compatable DVD drive. No matter what law apple had used they were in the right for this one.
Apple legal chose to use the DMCA because it was the best law to get their point across, they probably did not consider the community backlash when they did so. There are other laws they could have used to stop this software distribution, but Apple legal thought this was the most sound one in court.
I really think it's really silly to complain about this particular usage of the DMCA though, as this was a good example of a proper usage of the DMCA (yes such things exist). Apple did not ask for any rights they did not already have, and just looked to enforce their rights over software they had created. If nothing else they could have used the same argument the RIAA used against napster and won easily, it was really a non-issue what particular law they chose to prove that what was being created violated the spirit of the law.
I'm sorry, we were talking about applications with independant skining abilities?
I cannot see how this does *not* breed interface inconsistancy.
I will agree I'm using straw men, but that's because this seems mostly obvious to me. If you honestly disagree I'll write a real post in your reply to this.
So now, the question becomes, are we going to support all these great choices that Linux offers us? Which GUI should we choose? KDE or Gnome? Or should we shun that and go straight to X? Should we abstract that out and use a generic cross-platform toolkit and run that on our Windows client?
Well, I would say if your seriously thinking this might be an issue, you should make the switch to something like wxWindows now so it's easier in the long run.
Legacy apps are a good reason to chooes a platform -- to an extent. I've watched many a company replace a "cheaper" xterm solution with a "more modern" windows "deskotop centric" solution in my day, and most never winced. Just last week I was involved in the conversion of an entire hospitals nusing staff from a decade old cli tool to a gui app to process orders.
Legacy apps are a good reason to keep some computers on windows, rarely are they a good reason to keep all computers on windows. I find anymore most of the real arguments to keep windows (in the it departments, not from where you are) come from people who don't know how to use anything else; they will fight it till the bitter end though.
As for my personal opinion on the future, I believe RH and whatever they choose as the default desktop will become "linux on the desktop" inside the next 5 years, in a buisness setting I worry less about flame wars and more about getting my job done for less money.
Right, I very much agree going from one to the other will hinder advanced users, you are forgeting this is a K-8 institution though. The most complex topic they might cover will be split colum pages.
What specifically are you proposing these kids will be unable to do using the "base" windows applications (assuming they are still even remotely similar 10 years from now...) that they could not learn from Open Office? Anything more complex than a memo is obviously going to require training unless your going into a secretary position, and most people are smart enough to figure most of the stuff out anyway.
What specific part of the average say, secretaries, workflow cannot be performed on linux after you give her 2 hours of training? (those two hours couldn't have cost you more than the windows license...)
I'm just really wondering when people will stop saying "not ready for the prime time", because by god, it is ready. This is the year where I'm starting to feel linux pick up again, and I expect the points your making now to look foolish by the end of '04.
Slashdot Mirror
Well I think the key difference is IE was forced onto the world even when it sucked, through rather nasty OEM deals. Safari is being offered to the world and the world is accepting it overwhelmingly because well it's better.
It's really hard to argue intergration is bad when everyone benifits from it; the thing is IE was more a netscape killer (because netscape was en route to making the os irrelivent) than a "better application" being offered.
Is Safari really already so much better than IE that Opera and others see no hope in going up against it?
Honestly it is so much better that it raises the bar of competition significantly. I have a very strange feeling IE7/win will try and adopt many of it's concepts (because to be quite honest for 99.99999% of the world [including most powerusers] Safari has everything you need in a nice clean interface)
You can drag safari to the trash and destroy it. Software Update will never require you to run safari to update your other components. You can (if you wished) write a wraper for Gecko and drop it in-place for WebCore.
Need I continue?
The last news out of opera was they were considering adopting WebCore. Everyone and their dog knows KHTML is more robust than the Opera renderer, and I would assuem Opera themselves know this.
I think C|Net took a lot of out of context quotes and strunk them into a story... wouldn't be the first time.
AHAHAH! I take my hat off to you, sir. What a gimmick! Advocating Xfree86 on the desktop! I wish I had thought of that. Comedy gold! And claiming that Windows is unstable, too. And that Xfree86 is simple and intuitive to administer. That was the icing on the cake.
Oh wait. You're...serious? Please God no.
If Linux as a modern consumer operating system could be said to have a weakness, its Xfree86. It's a fucking toy-- A broken one at that. Xfree86 is the achillies heal of every Linux zealot who is worth his weight in flour, and the fact that you're pimping it as a serious alternative to Windows just goes to prove how utterly little you know what you're on about!
Absolutely no content until this point.
I like how you're so quick to call 'FUD' on everyone's arguments against X in this thread, when for most users, the points they're making are the absolute black and white truth. I also admire your sheer fucking gall to call Windows unstable by comparison.
Note he didn't say windows is more stable, he just said "he admires your sheer fucking gall" for claiming it isn't. Not exactly the same thing.
By making this statement, you're either affirming yourself to be a bumbling fuckwit unable to keep the most widely used OS in the world working straight for more than a few hours, or you're just trying to hold obsolete versions of windows up against the latest releases of X and hoping no-one notices.
Still haven't actually said windows is more stable yet, just listed some ad homenim attacks and a few unsuported "claims" with no merit even if they were taken as truth.
I hate to break it to you, but either way you lose, seeing as how even the older versions of Windows are more stable and better featured than even the latest builds of X, gnome, KDE and every single fucking 2-bit window manager out there. Combined.
X isn't a window manager. 2bit window managers are for servers that need a window manager, not for desktops. Stability has yet to be supported, or proven, you just made the claim it was better.
If you took 5 minutes out of your fucking fantasy land and actually looked long and hard at your average X session, you might be able to see what normal, every day people have to put up with.
I don't know. On average I launch x, go to the "Applications" menu, select the program I want to run, and use it. Hm seems hard. (note I use osx mostly). On linux I log into kde and use the "start menu" replica to launch applications, then use them. None of those seem particularly hard to me...
But then you probably pull out X-kill so many times a day it's as to you as swatting flies is to a man living in a house made of elephant shit.
Actually I'd bet this probability was pretty slim. I would point out here how an xkill has about nothing to do with the stability of x. In fact, if one wanted to actually refute you, they could point out X keeps running even after all those xkills, wwwd (what would windows do).
Does anyone remember those 'amazing discoveries' infomercials? With the hideously bad actors who potrayed simple, day-to-day activities with so much confusion and fear on their faces that they looked as if they were trying to tie their shoelaces using only 1 finger on each hand? And then you'd cut away to the sheer glee on their faces as the Amazotron 6000 tied their shoelaces for them in only twice as long?
Nope I don't, and honeslty I don't see the analogy.
That is how I find best describes the X zealot. Whereas normal human beings are content going about their day-to-day lives using tried-and-tested ways and methods, these fuckwits just can't stand to conform to the 'norm.
Windows didn't even support remote hosted applications until about 4 years ago. You fail this point in so many ways it's not funny. I shall stop pointing out how many things you couldn't do on "older versions of windows" that you tote as being superior.
They'd much rather be off pioneering new and exciting ways to do menal tasks that everyone else has no problem with. The only problem is: They're still about 5 years behind everyone else! and they're not gaining any ground at all! Oh No!
5 years ago was 1998. That would make windows 98 and system 9. I don't think anyone could argue recent KDE builds are worse than either system. If you would like to, please do a feature for feature comparison.
See folks, while Linux is an excellent, versatile, stable platform ideal for nearly every server-app under the sun, Xfree86 is a half-arsed crack at the wonderful X windowing system, which isn't even fit for gabage. never mind the desktop. Us Windows users have got that covered, thanks.
I'm sorry, could you support this in any way. I would say that XFree86 (especially recent builds) are very solid as an X server, and have been solid for desktop usage for about 3 years. With apple, ibm, sun, and hp on board now I can only imagene it could get better.
Hows that? Troll.
That was the most obvious troll I've ever seen, why did it get moded up?
It doesn't bundle it integrates (as in makes unremovable). The difference is about the same as the one between the goverment of pre-revolution france and the usa.
Acceptable, similar to the way dentists drills are acceptable to most people.
If you think your using the only solution to the job, you will always think it's acceptable. Quite often with a little reasearch you can no longer believe you actually used such painful tools previously.
The problem of both Linux and Macosx is that Windows is the right tool for the job for 99% of end-user tasks.
Apple understands it and attempts to fix it as hard as possible.
Huh?
Seriously show some support of your arguments, opinions are not facts. I would strongly disagree with everything you just said on many many many levels.
To be quite honest that guy would have been happier with a nice shiny iMac. At least he would be able to do non-linear editing with quite a nice application out of the box. He also would have goten a DVD player and the (new!) iDVD 3 which well, blows away the competition in consumer title/chapter screens.
When I hear people like him are using windows is when I know apple needs to get a better marketing campaign.
Well let me explain some history here.
Until next weekend, the only way to aquire iDVD legally is by buying an Apple system with a DVD writer. Any system without an Apple built in DVD drive cannot have a legitimate copy of iDVD. Next week this changes.
When that letter was sent there was no possible way you could legally have iDVD and not have a compatable DVD drive. No matter what law apple had used they were in the right for this one.
Apple legal chose to use the DMCA because it was the best law to get their point across, they probably did not consider the community backlash when they did so. There are other laws they could have used to stop this software distribution, but Apple legal thought this was the most sound one in court.
I really think it's really silly to complain about this particular usage of the DMCA though, as this was a good example of a proper usage of the DMCA (yes such things exist). Apple did not ask for any rights they did not already have, and just looked to enforce their rights over software they had created. If nothing else they could have used the same argument the RIAA used against napster and won easily, it was really a non-issue what particular law they chose to prove that what was being created violated the spirit of the law.
Using open source is not the same as embracing it however.
Well, I might ask you what you think the following slide shown to 40,000 people meant:
"Open Source
We think it's good."
I mean, seriously, if that's not embracing it does he have to sleep with RMS to get on the "inside track"?
I'm sorry, we were talking about applications with independant skining abilities?
I cannot see how this does *not* breed interface inconsistancy.
I will agree I'm using straw men, but that's because this seems mostly obvious to me. If you honestly disagree I'll write a real post in your reply to this.
There is absolutely no value of different that = bad that can evaluate true in the statement different != bad.
Anyway he was negating you, he purpousfully said different = bad because it is.
Use OSX for a while and you will understand, a consistent OS for your entire computer using experience is somewhat like heaven.
uh, Different != Bad means quite literally "Different is not equal to Bad", or alternatively "Different is anything but Bad".
You sir are a pirate, not a "sampler".
Don't delude yourself.
Apple wants to have a usable computer out of the box, so long as everything is still trashable I do not have a problem with this.
.Mac!" every time you start the computer is where I draw the line (see .net).
The instant they require registry hacks to disable "join
So now, the question becomes, are we going to support all these great choices that Linux offers us? Which GUI should we choose? KDE or Gnome? Or should we shun that and go straight to X? Should we abstract that out and use a generic cross-platform toolkit and run that on our Windows client?
Well, I would say if your seriously thinking this might be an issue, you should make the switch to something like wxWindows now so it's easier in the long run.
Legacy apps are a good reason to chooes a platform -- to an extent. I've watched many a company replace a "cheaper" xterm solution with a "more modern" windows "deskotop centric" solution in my day, and most never winced. Just last week I was involved in the conversion of an entire hospitals nusing staff from a decade old cli tool to a gui app to process orders.
Legacy apps are a good reason to keep some computers on windows, rarely are they a good reason to keep all computers on windows. I find anymore most of the real arguments to keep windows (in the it departments, not from where you are) come from people who don't know how to use anything else; they will fight it till the bitter end though.
As for my personal opinion on the future, I believe RH and whatever they choose as the default desktop will become "linux on the desktop" inside the next 5 years, in a buisness setting I worry less about flame wars and more about getting my job done for less money.
Right, I very much agree going from one to the other will hinder advanced users, you are forgeting this is a K-8 institution though. The most complex topic they might cover will be split colum pages.
Seriously, are you just a troll?
I don't understand you sometimes.
What specifically are you proposing these kids will be unable to do using the "base" windows applications (assuming they are still even remotely similar 10 years from now...) that they could not learn from Open Office? Anything more complex than a memo is obviously going to require training unless your going into a secretary position, and most people are smart enough to figure most of the stuff out anyway.
I'm dying to hear what is so different though..
Damnit I didn't read your grammar carefully, please mod me down.
And I know for a fact we forked up $20,000 for doing just that last spring.
Nice fact dumbass.
What specific part of the average say, secretaries, workflow cannot be performed on linux after you give her 2 hours of training? (those two hours couldn't have cost you more than the windows license...)
I'm just really wondering when people will stop saying "not ready for the prime time", because by god, it is ready. This is the year where I'm starting to feel linux pick up again, and I expect the points your making now to look foolish by the end of '04.
is there a good document on figuring out what all the headers mean? I've always wondered where my spam comes from.