Hmm... let me see if I can make this argument valid...
Cost: Windows: Expensive (especially if you count licenses) RedHat: You either pay or don't (download). It's Linux.
Support: Windows: Support costs you hell a lot of money RedHat: If you can't afford to pay RedHat, it's Linux for God's sake. There're thousands of people on the net willing to help you.
Documentation: Windows: None RedHat: It's Linux, damn it. RTFM:P
Source code: Windows: None RedHat: It's Linux. You get the source code.
Patches: Windows: Waiting for patches if Microsoft has the time and mood to fix it. Service packs come out once in a blue moon. RedHat: It's Linux. Thousands of people have access to the source code. Bug fixes come out rapidly.
I don't understand why RMS makes such a big fuss over the name Linux or GNU/Linux. After all, GNU doesn't suppy all of the software (though they did supplied a large number of them). Remember there are Apache, Mozilla, MySQL, etc....
I prefer to call Linux just plain simple 'Linux' - it's more affectionate anyway, than to call it GNU/Apache/Mozilla/MySQL/..../Linux
I find one use of it - If you can't get a refund of your unused Windows CD, engrave it with the words "It sucks! Give me back my money!" and send it to Microsoft.
Open source is about giving freedom/free speech to all. I'm very sure all developers have their very own contrasting idea about a lot of things. But it really doesn't matter, they're to co-exists.
If you force some idea to someone, you're just talking the freedom out of open source.
I anti-war myself. But whatever any developer do for the US government is their business. They have the freedom/right to do so.
Or ask yourself this, planes are used by terrorists to destroy the WTO towers. So are we to stop the production of planes because the terrorist use them? Similarly, the US government may use open source software to do whatever they want, even though a lot of them are idiotic.
You can have tools fall into good hands and bad. And yes, they yell vastly different result. But what about it? Are you to control who should use it or not? Will you be able to? Do you want to take away the freedom?
A full-page advertisement in the January 2003 issue of UFO Magazine has generated considerable interest amongst the UFO community. It refers to an event taking place on the weekend of 24-27 January, when some extraordinary satellite images of anomalous objects will be screened at the National Space Centre in Leicester.
I wonder why there isn't any ISO images to download. I mean for someone who doesn't have credit card and live far away from North America, ISO images seems like the best alternative.
Well, you got a competition, Microsoft. Well, let's see... storing user's information and access anywhere. Hmm... Let's see:
Well, you've just bought me a workstation. Guess what? You've transfer $10,000 to my account. Thanks! I'll login as you more often next time:)
Slashdot Mirror
You can't find Licensing 6.0 else where.
Hmm... let me see if I can make this argument valid...
:P
Cost:
Windows: Expensive (especially if you count licenses)
RedHat: You either pay or don't (download). It's Linux.
Support:
Windows: Support costs you hell a lot of money
RedHat: If you can't afford to pay RedHat, it's Linux for God's sake. There're thousands of people on the net willing to help you.
Documentation:
Windows: None
RedHat: It's Linux, damn it. RTFM
Source code:
Windows: None
RedHat: It's Linux. You get the source code.
Patches:
Windows: Waiting for patches if Microsoft has the time and mood to fix it. Service packs come out once in a blue moon.
RedHat: It's Linux. Thousands of people have access to the source code. Bug fixes come out rapidly.
Hmm.... Windows is better than RedHat?
I don't understand why RMS makes such a big fuss over the name Linux or GNU/Linux. After all, GNU doesn't suppy all of the software (though they did supplied a large number of them). Remember there are Apache, Mozilla, MySQL, etc.... I prefer to call Linux just plain simple 'Linux' - it's more affectionate anyway, than to call it GNU/Apache/Mozilla/MySQL/..../Linux
I find one use of it - If you can't get a refund of your unused Windows CD, engrave it with the words "It sucks! Give me back my money!" and send it to Microsoft.
On the other note, Microsoft will be demonstrating examples of badly written, highly insecure code by using their own products, notably IIS.
All students are required to sign non-disclosure agreement prior to entering the college.
Open source is about giving freedom/free speech to all. I'm very sure all developers have their very own contrasting idea about a lot of things. But it really doesn't matter, they're to co-exists.
If you force some idea to someone, you're just talking the freedom out of open source.
I anti-war myself. But whatever any developer do for the US government is their business. They have the freedom/right to do so.
Or ask yourself this, planes are used by terrorists to destroy the WTO towers. So are we to stop the production of planes because the terrorist use them? Similarly, the US government may use open source software to do whatever they want, even though a lot of them are idiotic.
You can have tools fall into good hands and bad. And yes, they yell vastly different result. But what about it? Are you to control who should use it or not? Will you be able to? Do you want to take away the freedom?
But it's only 20 January today.
Well, you can use uname command to tell what kernel it uses. :)
I wonder why there isn't any ISO images to download. I mean for someone who doesn't have credit card and live far away from North America, ISO images seems like the best alternative.
So now polar bears face their toughest competitors...
Microsoft: "We don't use any Open Source software."
Microsoft (quietly): "Shh.. Don't tell people we use freeBSD."
Well, you got a competition, Microsoft. Well, let's see... storing user's information and access anywhere. Hmm... Let's see: :)
Well, you've just bought me a workstation. Guess what? You've transfer $10,000 to my account. Thanks! I'll login as you more often next time