Ubuntu Linux is far superior. I've installed it successfully on every PC I own (Powerbook G4, Desktop G4, AMD 2500, Virtual PC 6 for Mac) and it has never failed to detect any of the hardware (save the airport extreme card). Completely amazing distro based on Debian. Since I started using it, I haven't been this excited since... I got my first motorcycle.
Sorry to break it to you, but better technology doesn't always win (take Mac OS vs. Windows). But that's not the case this time. Windows CE is more appealing because it integrates better with Windows (hmmm...).
An easy way to see where we're going is to see where we've been. 16 years ago, I loved the mac for it's graphic interface and hated DOS for it's lack of intuitive commands. Eight years ago, I hated Windows for it's cheap user interface and loved the mac for it's ease of use, and was intrigued by BeOS as a fast, graphically-savvy OS. Nowadays, I hate Windows due to the fact that my favorite software is as buggy as you can possibly imagine, it's command-line lacks any real umph forcing me to resort to cygwin, and the UI is still cheap looking. The Mac is better than ever, not to mention more stable and more technical than ever. Linux is also a favorite system and I can get massive amounts of work done on it. QNX also has recently crossed my path with an amazing stability that puts even Debian Linux to shame. BSD is included as well as a great server OS. On a day-to-day basis I use several Linux distros. In the next few months I may find myself jumping between 10 different Linux distros every day, running them simultaneously on the same system as virtual machines, etc. So - 16 years ago (2 OS's). 8 years ago (3 OS's). Now - depending on opinion, 5 OS's. Then I could say that based on the sequence, in eight years I will be using 13 different OS's.
Also, one would think UNIX refugees coming to Mac would boost the platform on the desktop. Not happening.
Hmmm... FINK, which allows me to run all kinds of Linux software on my Mac, blows your argument completely out of the water. Then there's the thousands of Linux projects which added Mac OS X targets to their Makefiles. Oh, and having tons of crappy software for Windows doesn't make it a good operating system.
Actually... in Silicon Valley, the vast majority of tech workers already are driving to work in expensive cars. But you never know if they actually own that car, or they are paying a high-interest loan on it. When the dot-com bubble burst, porsches were disappearing left and right to the repo guys.
Since Alviso is practically a ghost town in Silicon Valley now (if such a thing is even possible), less desirable a place to live than even East Palo Alto.
Programming Language creators should include a provision in their license that forces programmers to use the copyright system and not the patent system with programs written in their language. In addition all software patent applications should require actual working code that is complex and novel enough to actually warrant a patent for the idea itself and not just a single expression of the idea as in copyright.
Now there's a programming language that NO ONE would use...
My WALLET sure did. Now I can make 50% less money as a programmer, but, HEY, I can download free copies of Linux instead of paying Microsoft $100 each time I want to run Windows on my PC or upgrade... Wow, what a deal!
Why is moving towards open source equated with making more money in this article? Not so - it makes less every time - not that I don't like Open Source - I love being able to download free (as in beer) copies of Mandrake and Knoppix. And I'm sorry, but people who use Google aren't using Linux any more than people who hit my own web site are using Mac OS X. That's just nonsense! Why is Tim using Amazon, Google and Ebay as examples of being able to make money from Open Source? I think he means to say that they were able to cut costs by not paying Linux companies/developers as much as they would have Microsoft/Sun/Apple/SGI/QNX/etc.. I think Tim is missing the REAL paradigm shift here. He said it himself, but failed to see the forest for the trees. Microsoft made 32 billion last year, verses Red Hat's 126 million. Microsoft lost probably 5-10 billion last year due to eroded market share from Linux (well, fair enough - they deserved it). Am I an Open Source supporter? Yes. Do I hate Microsoft? Somewhat. But please, do not say that Open Source has lots of financial rewards. Open Source forces companies to "embrace and extend" Linux in quite the same way that Apple has with BSD, >. Those who don't, such as Microsoft, are losing market share (such as to Apache, Linux, and OpenOffice). Even funnier is the fact that the big-name Linux companies handle Open Source almost the same way that Apple does (like Mandrake, Red Hat, SuSE, etc.) in that they work with Open Source and give changes back, but they have their own value add (whether proprietary, open, or just a marketed name such as "Red Hat") added to it. No wonder Red Hat has been accused of being the Microsoft of Open Source. Open Source allows people to "steal code", however, it's not too hard for a competitor to copy the way an app works anyways (depending on which app, of course). Not to mention, it takes a lifetime to read and understand a million lines of code, so the BIG projects such as OpenOffice or the Linux kernel are relatively safe.
Re:According to the democrats
on
Linux in Iraq
·
· Score: 0
According to the democrats, rebuilding Iraq is a very bad idea! Linux should pull out immediately. It's a conspiracy!
Please consider the moral issues that derive from making money off a war and its reconstruction. Do you want to be part of the military-industrial complex, to join the likes of Haliburton or Kellog, Brown & Root? Do you want to be a war profiteer?
What moral issues are you referring to? You actually think it's immoral to help rebuild a country which wants nothing less than it's freedom? You think it's immoral to risk your life going to Iraq to do so? I don't know what kind of sick propaganda the media has been feeding you, but it's apparent you've become VERY brainwashed by it.
Slashdot Mirror
Ubuntu Linux is far superior. I've installed it successfully on every PC I own (Powerbook G4, Desktop G4, AMD 2500, Virtual PC 6 for Mac) and it has never failed to detect any of the hardware (save the airport extreme card). Completely amazing distro based on Debian. Since I started using it, I haven't been this excited since... I got my first motorcycle.
They should make the product better, not work on a half-baked Mac port. I can't stand to use office software anymore, and all because of bloat.
That they CAN compile on it... I've installed many "desktop" or "personal" distros which don't even come with GCC. Truly sad...
Sorry to break it to you, but better technology doesn't always win (take Mac OS vs. Windows). But that's not the case this time. Windows CE is more appealing because it integrates better with Windows (hmmm...).
It's a travesty! If Apple doesn't sue, I'll sue myself! It's an insult to the Mac!
An easy way to see where we're going is to see where we've been. 16 years ago, I loved the mac for it's graphic interface and hated DOS for it's lack of intuitive commands. Eight years ago, I hated Windows for it's cheap user interface and loved the mac for it's ease of use, and was intrigued by BeOS as a fast, graphically-savvy OS. Nowadays, I hate Windows due to the fact that my favorite software is as buggy as you can possibly imagine, it's command-line lacks any real umph forcing me to resort to cygwin, and the UI is still cheap looking. The Mac is better than ever, not to mention more stable and more technical than ever. Linux is also a favorite system and I can get massive amounts of work done on it. QNX also has recently crossed my path with an amazing stability that puts even Debian Linux to shame. BSD is included as well as a great server OS. On a day-to-day basis I use several Linux distros. In the next few months I may find myself jumping between 10 different Linux distros every day, running them simultaneously on the same system as virtual machines, etc. So - 16 years ago (2 OS's). 8 years ago (3 OS's). Now - depending on opinion, 5 OS's. Then I could say that based on the sequence, in eight years I will be using 13 different OS's.
Also, one would think UNIX refugees coming to Mac would boost the platform on the desktop. Not happening.
Hmmm... FINK, which allows me to run all kinds of Linux software on my Mac, blows your argument completely out of the water. Then there's the thousands of Linux projects which added Mac OS X targets to their Makefiles. Oh, and having tons of crappy software for Windows doesn't make it a good operating system.Fedora and Debian will rule the market. With BSD ruling the server market.
In Silicon Valley, after taxes, that will buy me a condo. Then I can sing that Weird Al Yankovic song.
Actually... in Silicon Valley, the vast majority of tech workers already are driving to work in expensive cars. But you never know if they actually own that car, or they are paying a high-interest loan on it. When the dot-com bubble burst, porsches were disappearing left and right to the repo guys.
Now I've REALLY got to get a new iMac. Squirrel cage fans rock! (no wonder apple was boasting about how quiet they are)
If Microsoft claims that their operating system won't be insecure until 2011, why are people still using it?
Since Alviso is practically a ghost town in Silicon Valley now (if such a thing is even possible), less desirable a place to live than even East Palo Alto.
How about a job offer instead of the eternal contract position? (like 18 months worth...) That would be very nice...
Now there's a programming language that NO ONE would use...
Really? Dang, I need to switch to TWM! Those attractive people are a real problem!
Hmmm....
1. How do I make my desktop feel more like a video game?
2. How can I make Linux even more elite and confusing to the rest of the world?
3. How do I make up for the lack of games on my Linux box?
4. How can I get the linux community to work harder on those darn 3d video card drivers?
5. How can I show up Sun?
6. How can we bring back that silly vrml technology?
7. What can I replace my Quake gaming addiction with?
8. How can I really, really distract Redmond?
9. How can I guarantee that students in grade school will want to use Linux?
10. Dangit, I'm too old to program video games anymore. What should I use my 3d talents for instead?
Anonymouse posting is for wimps...
That's right. Now add a little outsourcing, and you've got a REAL winner.
Why is moving towards open source equated with making more money in this article? Not so - it makes less every time - not that I don't like Open Source - I love being able to download free (as in beer) copies of Mandrake and Knoppix. And I'm sorry, but people who use Google aren't using Linux any more than people who hit my own web site are using Mac OS X. That's just nonsense! Why is Tim using Amazon, Google and Ebay as examples of being able to make money from Open Source? I think he means to say that they were able to cut costs by not paying Linux companies/developers as much as they would have Microsoft/Sun/Apple/SGI/QNX/etc.. I think Tim is missing the REAL paradigm shift here. He said it himself, but failed to see the forest for the trees. Microsoft made 32 billion last year, verses Red Hat's 126 million. Microsoft lost probably 5-10 billion last year due to eroded market share from Linux (well, fair enough - they deserved it). Am I an Open Source supporter? Yes. Do I hate Microsoft? Somewhat. But please, do not say that Open Source has lots of financial rewards. Open Source forces companies to "embrace and extend" Linux in quite the same way that Apple has with BSD, >. Those who don't, such as Microsoft, are losing market share (such as to Apache, Linux, and OpenOffice). Even funnier is the fact that the big-name Linux companies handle Open Source almost the same way that Apple does (like Mandrake, Red Hat, SuSE, etc.) in that they work with Open Source and give changes back, but they have their own value add (whether proprietary, open, or just a marketed name such as "Red Hat") added to it. No wonder Red Hat has been accused of being the Microsoft of Open Source. Open Source allows people to "steal code", however, it's not too hard for a competitor to copy the way an app works anyways (depending on which app, of course). Not to mention, it takes a lifetime to read and understand a million lines of code, so the BIG projects such as OpenOffice or the Linux kernel are relatively safe.
Modded down by Democraps, no less. How ironic.
And anyone caught running any OS other than Linux loses their head!
According to the democrats, rebuilding Iraq is a very bad idea! Linux should pull out immediately. It's a conspiracy!
What moral issues are you referring to? You actually think it's immoral to help rebuild a country which wants nothing less than it's freedom? You think it's immoral to risk your life going to Iraq to do so? I don't know what kind of sick propaganda the media has been feeding you, but it's apparent you've become VERY brainwashed by it.
This is silly. IT guys in silicon valley can make that much, still be with their families, AND not risk being the next headless Iraqi horseman.