Another story about the debate over Linux is ready for $WHATEVER?
Let's ally a little real-world here. There is no debate. People in the know really aren't having these sorts of conversations with each other. Discussions of the arguments themselves are invariably astroturfing.
Linux needs to be easier to install! Like Windows is? Who installs Windows anymore? People are buying new computers because of spyware! Nobody fights with the licenses, third party drivers, etc. that are part of installing Windows.
Linux has no applications! Any distribution of Linux comes with thousands of applications already included. Pretty much everything anyone needs is already on the damn disc(s). How many apps does Windows come with?
Linux is not stable or reliable! What? We are comparing Linux to Windows here, right?
Linux has no support! Tell you what. You call Microsoft, I'll go to the Gentoo forum. We'll see who gets an answer first.
These arguments simply don't exist in the logical sense. The business reality of Linux uptake basically goes something like this:
Manager: All my other manager friends in all the other companies use Windows, so it must be good.
Techie: I went to MCSE school and have a significant personal exclusive investment in Microsoft skills. I am therefore morbidly afraid of change. I will barrage anyone who suggests alternative suggestions with red herrings and FUD.
And that's the state of Linux today. It is better technology, has been for some time now, and is improving very quickly. Nobody credibly discusses weaknesses with the platform. Now it's simply about OS bigotry and organizational inertia.
Some other dates worth remembering, while we're digging up WWII bones...
April 9 through June 6
December 13
May 20
September 18
September 1
Not familiar with the dates? I can't say I am surprised. What's the rape of Nanking or the founding of Auschwitz compared to the unspeakable human brutality of the Hiroshima bombing?
For Windows 2000. If you can ignore Active Directory, 2000 is a pretty damn solid platform. It just seems that Microsoft can't produce anything of meaningful quality unless they are actively under investigation for anticompetitive behavior.
If Open Source software is being given away freely, he argues, people will feel that software is a commodity rather than a specialized product that requires a lot of hard work and brainpower to properly develop.
OK, a little history lesson is in order here. In the beginning there were mainframes, and computers were expensive. Along comes the PC which does everything faster and at a tiny fraction of the cost. The PC takes over the computer universe, including applications for which mainframes were previously used.
Because of the PC, the innovation of the software license, and because its early products were easily pirated, Microsoft makes a hell of a lot of money. This came not through the actual incremental cost of licensing, but because of market control granted by the ubiquity of the OS, which directly derived from being cheaper than everything else. In fact, most of the time, as a matter of practice, the OS was free. Microsoft owes its empire to software piracy and the clone PC.
Now move forward to the era of "no free lunch". Competely failing to understand the information marketplace, Microsoft decides to use invasive phone home licensing on everything it sells, effectively putting an end to the era of pirating their stuff. This has caused two things to happen - 1. - people are using older versions of Windows that predate the crackdown (windows 2000, etc.) and 2. - people are seriously looking at using free software. Face it - as if right now, Microsoft is on a doomsday countdown. Their only claim to market power at the moment is that 2000 is still a useable operating system. As soon as that changes, they will evaporate. Yes, I know - deep pockets, not going anywhere, etc. etc. - tell it to Atari. Microsoft has already begun to make the transition from a technology company to one that makes its living on IP litigation.
The point in all of this is that computing technology suppliers have consistently overvalued the technology from the beginning of the computer revolution until now, particularly with regard to incremental costs such as software licensing. They completely fail to understand the scale of what they are getting into. As such, the entire industry insists upon operating at an energy level just below that required to sustain a wildly lucrative consumer information revolution.
Microsoft blundered into their success the last time things changed, and clearly have no idea what happened or how to sustain it. The next big thing is going to be driven by people who understand the information equation.
Looks like Hurd is turning HP into a lean machine to be as focused on products and price as Dell currently is.
No, I think he's firing people willy nilly because that's the fastest way to increase stock price. Wall Street has a screaming convulsive orgasm when you fire people. Unfortunately, this creates a short term benefit at the expense of the possibility of future growth, but what's a few thousand careers next to a couple of point jump in stock price between now and Wednesday?
There's nothing Linux does that Windows can't do, certaintly if you're willing to invest the time and effort to produce a solution.
Factually incorrect. I work for a company where we needed a specific performance requirement from a file server. Windows could not meet that requirement. We HAD to use Linux to support the requirement. Reason - Because we had access to the internals of Linux and the supporting software, we could customize it to meet our needs. This is not possible with Windows, no matter how much time or effort you put into it.
Linux isn't about popping in a CD and installing a canned OS. It can be used that way, but that isn't where the value is. Because Linux is open source, there is an entire universe of possibilities that transcends anything you can do with Windows. It's more accurate to say that there is everything you can do with Linux that you can't with Windows.
If you use a binary distro, use binary software only if it comes from official repositories of that particular distro.
If you need software not thus provided (which, I must say, is difficult to believe in the case of Debian), build it yourself from source. I realize that many Linux neophytes cringe at the thought of downloading tar.gz files, but that's the way it used to be done../configure && make && make install - what's the problem? That way, the new software will compile to link with the libraries already in your distribution, and you don't have to worry about conflicts.
Alternately:
Use Gentoo. It isn't a binary distro and everything is in portage.
I speak authoritatively on the subject because my experience with Linux begins many moons ago with an old system called Linux Mandrake, now called Mandriva Linux. It started with version 5.2, a system forked from the Red Hat 5.2 release. I have since used Mandrake 6.0, Red Hat 7.0 and 7.3, 8.0, 9.0, Fedora Core 2, and variations from SuSE.
So you used a lot of really old versions of Linux, all RPM based, and haven't touched any of the hot latecomers like Ubuntu. Where does your authority come from again?
I don't know. Every zombie I've shot seems to have required at least two high power rifle rounds to the head before they go down. I always go after zombies with my assault rifle, so I don't have much experience with their tolerance for pistol ammo.
You'd think ID would do a little field research to make sure their zombies in the game were realistic.
The best part of this is to imagine the conversation that might take place with a cop after you completely annihilate some 80 year old bat in a crosswalk.
I'm sure they have weighed up their options with what to do with a broken shuttle.
Who says you have to dock it to anything? Just roll it out in the front yard, set it up on concrete blocks and presto! Crazy Ivan's used space part emporium!
I seriously doubt a server just sitting idle with a drop shadowed window and semi-opaque titlebar is going to be gobbling up "resources".
Bloody well time we had a voice of reason around here. Of course these features will consume no resources. What are you, stupid?
Nice try at a slam though.
Has astroturfing now actually reached a stage where no attempt is made to conform the actual statements to fact? I mean, at least cite nonexistent benchmarks or contrived user accounts or something.
Only occasionally does this new release differ from Ubuntu.
I am a Ubuntu fan, but let's keep things in perspective here. There are about a zillion more packages available for Debian than there are for Ubuntu. You have a hell of a lot more options about how you want your system to run with Debian than you do with Ubuntu.
It is alleged that he used software available on the internet to scan tens of thousands of computers on US military networks from his home PC, looking for machines that might be exposed due to flaws in the Windows operating system.
So he could get 70 years for being a big scary hacker, but MS gets precisely dick for product liability. Where's Ralph Nader when you need him?
Wow. Another Firefox vulnerability. Tell me, how many companies have either been completely shut down by a massive megaworm and/or have preemptively shut themselves down to stop the spread of destruction from this egregious and terrible flaw?
Slashdot Mirror
Let's ally a little real-world here. There is no debate. People in the know really aren't having these sorts of conversations with each other. Discussions of the arguments themselves are invariably astroturfing.
- Linux needs to be easier to install!
- Linux has no applications!
- Linux is not stable or reliable!
- Linux has no support!
These arguments simply don't exist in the logical sense. The business reality of Linux uptake basically goes something like this:Like Windows is? Who installs Windows anymore? People are buying new computers because of spyware! Nobody fights with the licenses, third party drivers, etc. that are part of installing Windows.
Any distribution of Linux comes with thousands of applications already included. Pretty much everything anyone needs is already on the damn disc(s). How many apps does Windows come with?
What? We are comparing Linux to Windows here, right?
Tell you what. You call Microsoft, I'll go to the Gentoo forum. We'll see who gets an answer first.
- Manager: All my other manager friends in all the other companies use Windows, so it must be good.
- Techie: I went to MCSE school and have a significant personal exclusive investment in Microsoft skills. I am therefore morbidly afraid of change. I will barrage anyone who suggests alternative suggestions with red herrings and FUD.
And that's the state of Linux today. It is better technology, has been for some time now, and is improving very quickly. Nobody credibly discusses weaknesses with the platform. Now it's simply about OS bigotry and organizational inertia.Some other dates worth remembering, while we're digging up WWII bones...
April 9 through June 6
December 13
May 20
September 18
September 1
Not familiar with the dates? I can't say I am surprised. What's the rape of Nanking or the founding of Auschwitz compared to the unspeakable human brutality of the Hiroshima bombing?
There was a LOT more to WWII than August 6.
For Windows 2000. If you can ignore Active Directory, 2000 is a pretty damn solid platform. It just seems that Microsoft can't produce anything of meaningful quality unless they are actively under investigation for anticompetitive behavior.
Quite so. I believe I will enslave you and sell you. Hold still.
From TFA:
Disclaimer
* I work at Microsoft.
Nothing to see here. Move along.
I've been doing this with tc on Linux for several years now, and never knew it was something so grandiose as a "gaming router".
If Open Source software is being given away freely, he argues, people will feel that software is a commodity rather than a specialized product that requires a lot of hard work and brainpower to properly develop.
OK, a little history lesson is in order here. In the beginning there were mainframes, and computers were expensive. Along comes the PC which does everything faster and at a tiny fraction of the cost. The PC takes over the computer universe, including applications for which mainframes were previously used.
Because of the PC, the innovation of the software license, and because its early products were easily pirated, Microsoft makes a hell of a lot of money. This came not through the actual incremental cost of licensing, but because of market control granted by the ubiquity of the OS, which directly derived from being cheaper than everything else. In fact, most of the time, as a matter of practice, the OS was free. Microsoft owes its empire to software piracy and the clone PC.
Now move forward to the era of "no free lunch". Competely failing to understand the information marketplace, Microsoft decides to use invasive phone home licensing on everything it sells, effectively putting an end to the era of pirating their stuff. This has caused two things to happen - 1. - people are using older versions of Windows that predate the crackdown (windows 2000, etc.) and 2. - people are seriously looking at using free software. Face it - as if right now, Microsoft is on a doomsday countdown. Their only claim to market power at the moment is that 2000 is still a useable operating system. As soon as that changes, they will evaporate. Yes, I know - deep pockets, not going anywhere, etc. etc. - tell it to Atari. Microsoft has already begun to make the transition from a technology company to one that makes its living on IP litigation.
The point in all of this is that computing technology suppliers have consistently overvalued the technology from the beginning of the computer revolution until now, particularly with regard to incremental costs such as software licensing. They completely fail to understand the scale of what they are getting into. As such, the entire industry insists upon operating at an energy level just below that required to sustain a wildly lucrative consumer information revolution.
Microsoft blundered into their success the last time things changed, and clearly have no idea what happened or how to sustain it. The next big thing is going to be driven by people who understand the information equation.
You can implant me with an RFID chip when you pry it from my cold, dead, body.
wait...
www.orbitersim.com
Looks like Hurd is turning HP into a lean machine to be as focused on products and price as Dell currently is.
No, I think he's firing people willy nilly because that's the fastest way to increase stock price. Wall Street has a screaming convulsive orgasm when you fire people. Unfortunately, this creates a short term benefit at the expense of the possibility of future growth, but what's a few thousand careers next to a couple of point jump in stock price between now and Wednesday?
There's nothing Linux does that Windows can't do, certaintly if you're willing to invest the time and effort to produce a solution.
Factually incorrect. I work for a company where we needed a specific performance requirement from a file server. Windows could not meet that requirement. We HAD to use Linux to support the requirement. Reason - Because we had access to the internals of Linux and the supporting software, we could customize it to meet our needs. This is not possible with Windows, no matter how much time or effort you put into it.
Linux isn't about popping in a CD and installing a canned OS. It can be used that way, but that isn't where the value is. Because Linux is open source, there is an entire universe of possibilities that transcends anything you can do with Windows. It's more accurate to say that there is everything you can do with Linux that you can't with Windows.
- If you use a binary distro, use binary software only if it comes from official repositories of that particular distro.
- If you need software not thus provided (which, I must say, is difficult to believe in the case of Debian), build it yourself from source. I realize that many Linux neophytes cringe at the thought of downloading tar.gz files, but that's the way it used to be done.
./configure && make && make install - what's the problem? That way, the new software will compile to link with the libraries already in your distribution, and you don't have to worry about conflicts.
Alternately:I speak authoritatively on the subject because my experience with Linux begins many moons ago with an old system called Linux Mandrake, now called Mandriva Linux. It started with version 5.2, a system forked from the Red Hat 5.2 release. I have since used Mandrake 6.0, Red Hat 7.0 and 7.3, 8.0, 9.0, Fedora Core 2, and variations from SuSE.
So you used a lot of really old versions of Linux, all RPM based, and haven't touched any of the hot latecomers like Ubuntu. Where does your authority come from again?
I don't know. Every zombie I've shot seems to have required at least two high power rifle rounds to the head before they go down. I always go after zombies with my assault rifle, so I don't have much experience with their tolerance for pistol ammo.
You'd think ID would do a little field research to make sure their zombies in the game were realistic.
The best part of this is to imagine the conversation that might take place with a cop after you completely annihilate some 80 year old bat in a crosswalk.
I'm sure they have weighed up their options with what to do with a broken shuttle.
Who says you have to dock it to anything? Just roll it out in the front yard, set it up on concrete blocks and presto! Crazy Ivan's used space part emporium!
I seriously doubt a server just sitting idle with a drop shadowed window and semi-opaque titlebar is going to be gobbling up "resources".
Bloody well time we had a voice of reason around here. Of course these features will consume no resources. What are you, stupid?
Nice try at a slam though.
Has astroturfing now actually reached a stage where no attempt is made to conform the actual statements to fact? I mean, at least cite nonexistent benchmarks or contrived user accounts or something.
I don't think they understand the concept of the device. It can't be noisy if no one is there to hear it.
Only occasionally does this new release differ from Ubuntu. I am a Ubuntu fan, but let's keep things in perspective here. There are about a zillion more packages available for Debian than there are for Ubuntu. You have a hell of a lot more options about how you want your system to run with Debian than you do with Ubuntu.
title Windows
root (hd0,0)
chainloader +1
Now where's my beer?
It is alleged that he used software available on the internet to scan tens of thousands of computers on US military networks from his home PC, looking for machines that might be exposed due to flaws in the Windows operating system.
So he could get 70 years for being a big scary hacker, but MS gets precisely dick for product liability. Where's Ralph Nader when you need him?
Like $8 million?
Wow. Another Firefox vulnerability. Tell me, how many companies have either been completely shut down by a massive megaworm and/or have preemptively shut themselves down to stop the spread of destruction from this egregious and terrible flaw?
I would have to agree with India's assesment that working for an American company is a high risk exposure.