Mandatory consideration of OSS is a good thing. Like the article pointed out, OSS doesn't have an army of lobbyists or a huge sales department pushing its products. This may be the only way to counter-balance the pressure put on the government by billion dollar corporations.
Mandatory consideration of OSS does not mean that the Government will drop proprietary software and jump on the OSS train. Unfortunately, once you are locked into a proprietary solution it can be very expensive to dump your existing software. In my agency we are very entrenched in Microsoft products. We have hundreds of Word macros that pull in data from our Microsoft SQL server. We also have other database applications that run against the SQL server. It would be a major project that would require several years to move away from Microsoft.
Further, there is no incentive to take the risk. No one is going to get fired by suggesting that we stay with Microsoft but if there were a push to OSS that didn't go well then heads would roll.
I use Linux at home and believe very strongly in OSS but I was almost crucified when I suggested it several years ago.
I won't argue the point. I'm just reporting what Microsoft considers innovations.
Another is that now the configuration files are in XML and are therefore "human readable." Seems like Linux has had plain text, "human readable" configuration files forever.
I just attended a Microsoft Launch Event yesterday in Seattle Washington. One of the products that they were talking about was Windows Server 2003.
How much of what they said was hype and how much was fact is hard to tell. It seems that benchmarks can be easily skewed. However ignoring their claims about alleged speed improvements and just focusing on features here are some of their innovations:
1. Better stability. Apparently one will no longer be required to reboot the server as part of a maintenance schedule. I know that some claim that rebooting a 2000 server isn't required but I know many more who do so. The new Windows 2003 server has the ability to monitor processes and if a process starts taking up too many resources that single process can be shutdown and restarted. Kind of like rebooting your system one process at a time as needed.
2. The theme of the event was "Do more with less." It was mentioned that many administrators will not place more than one mission critical application on an NT or Windows 2000 server because if that application has problems it could effect the other mission critical applications. Apparently this is no longer a problem.
3. Server services setup has been greatly simplified. The administrator is presented with a list of server responsibilities (http, email, file server, etc). There are checkboxes next to each server function and all the administrator has to do is check the functions that he/she wants the server to perform. The administrator will be lead by the hand by a wizard to help setup the selected services.
4. Most services are turned off by default for added security.
My personal observations are that Microsoft has done a lot of work to improve their server and if you believe everything they say, it's the best thing since buttered bread. However, I feel a lot of their claims about performance were hype. I guess time will tell.
You assume that the fine is excessive..01 cent per is probably not excessive.
Everything that we do has consequences, some good and some bad. He chose to use the resources of another in an unauthorized manner. A fine of.01 cent per violation is trivial.
"A SCHEME BEING IMPLEMENTED by Office Depot - almost certainly at Microsoft's behest"
"Almost certainly" means that they're not sure. The article really pushes my anger buttons and I don't like it. Before the INQUIRERER pushes my rage button I would like to be sure that they know what it is that they are talking about so that I don't go off and make an ass out of my self.
This may be a dark plot by Microsoft, it wouldn't be the first time but it also could be a decision made completely by Office Depot. Please don't push my buttons if you're not sure.
They think it's the war that is causing so many hits but we know that the web site was mentioned on/. and that alone is enough to bring most sites to their knees!
I'm not in favor of this war and I don't think that Bush has been truthful or honorable. However, for now, I am putting my distrust and belief that there are hidden agendas being perused down.
I believe that because the war has started, it is important that we support our troops. It is my hope that the war will end quickly and without massive loss of life.
There will be time later to discuss accountability.
Re:The politicians have sold out the American Work
on
U.S. Jobs Jumping Ship
·
· Score: 1
I understand what you are saying and from the corporation's point of view it is exactly right. However, the equation is more complicated than that.
From the corporation's side, the path to maximum profit is the way to go. It's perhaps a little more complicated than that, as corporations are willing to take a loss of profit to gain market share that will lead to maximum profit at a later date.
The worker's point of view is exactly like the corporation's point of view except that the worker has minimal power in wage negotiations. This is particularly true in the current situation where you have underdeveloped countries with workers who are willing to work for practically nothing.
One might say that this is a truly free market so it's okay. However, although it is true that it is a free market it is also true that the market is immature and there are great regional inequities in the living standards and therefore in the amount of wages required to survive.
There is a finite pool of wealth in the world. It is a vast amount but still it is finite. The scary thing is that in a corporate world there is only one goal: The accumulation of as much of the wealth pool as possible. This is true for the corporations and the workers. Everyone is trying to get as much of the wealth pool as possible. However, the corporations are in control so they have a huge advantage over the workers and so two classes of people emerge; the few very rich and the many very poor. The few very rich are the ones who succeed in getting more than their share of the wealth pool and the many very poor are the powerless that are exploited for the sake of the few very rich.
The only defense that the workers have to prevent this situation is to ban together in unions. However, in the current situation with under developed countries this is not possible. It is not in the best interests of workers in the under developed countries to strike for the sake of the workers in the developed countries and if the workers in the developed countries strike the corporations are even more motivated to move operations to the under developed countries.
If left to follow its course, the global situation would eventually stabilize and workers could unionize on a global scale to help counter balance the corporation's power. This could take a very long time, however and the corporations have learned to use (lobby and bribe) our politicians to maintain their advantages so the system is not going to be allowed to work.
The job of any democratic government is to do for the people the things that the people cannot do for themselves without government help. If our government were working as it should then it would be responsive to the masses rather than special interests. Unfortunately the politicians work under the same "gather wealth/power" creed as everyone else so it actually becomes part of the problem rather than the solution.
Anyway, that's how I see it.
Re:The politicians have sold out the American Work
on
U.S. Jobs Jumping Ship
·
· Score: 1
I don't know if the price of property is over inflated or not. There is probably a large variance based on location. I do know that so far interest rates are very low so unless the property value is way over inflated, now is a good time to get locked into a fixed rate.
The idea of rolling back wages and prices (and property values) is so that moving a corporations operation out of country isn't such a temptation.
It's funny that the idea is to get the lowest cost of production and sell for the highest profit but by moving to under developed counties these corporations will also be destroying the ability of the developed countries to pay top dollar.
After reading through the posts, I think that many of you believe that the article is saying that Linux is overtaking windows on the desktop.
From the article: "It replaces the cubic zirconia otherwise known as the axiom that Linux is taking more market share from Unix than from Windows. I had long suspected this was a fallacy, and Evans' data confirms my suspicions."
He is obviously not talking about the desktop although I believe that Linux will start taking market share in that area also.
What the article is talking about is that Linux is clobbering Windows in the server area.
Re:The politicians have sold out the American Work
on
U.S. Jobs Jumping Ship
·
· Score: 1
Yes, as poor countries raise their standard of living the workers will demand more money. When that happens corporations will do the math and at some point move out of those countries to other under developed countries.
Corporations will exploit cheap labor where ever they can find it until labor costs are approximately the same everywhere.
This will be a good thing for the developing countries and a bad thing for countries that already have a high standard of living with accompanying high cost of living. Jobs in those countries may become hard to find.
You are right when you suggest that we need to find new kinds of jobs but that may be easier said than done. Starting more Mom and Pop businesses will increase jobs but how do they compete with corporations that have the ability to get labor at such low prices?
I'm thinking that at some point we will need to roll our prices and wages back. They may roll back naturally but that's called deflation and that is very painful. I suppose it will all shake out eventually but I don't think that it is going to be very pleasant in the mean time.
The only reason that we can't lower our wages to match foreign labor is the cost of living. I wonder what it would be like if all prices and wages were rolled back or reduced by a percentage?
I wouldn't mind working for $400.00 per month if my house payment was under $100.00 and the cost of everything else was reduced correspondingly.
It would also make the people with lots of money in the bank very happy as they would become a lot wealthier and maybe the people with modest retirement savings would be able to live out their days in comfort.
"How is it not a good thing if it is part of competition?"
In an environment where the wages are relatively close I would agree with you. However, corporations (and this has everything to do with corporations) are moving their businesses to locations where they can get the absolutely lowest labor. You and I cannot compete. We simply cannot afford to work for wages that low because our local economy won't allow it.
"It is not controlled by corporations. It is a situation where individuals are able to make decisions while having to pay tribute to rulers less and less. That is all tariffs are: rulers trying to get a cut of our decisions to do transactions across borders."
Sure it is controlled by corporations. It is not the mom and pop businesses that are moving out of country it is only corporations (And possibly a few private businesses owned by the very wealthy.)
"This, as with almost everything else, has nothing to do with corporations."
Like I said before, this has everything to do with corporations. It is not the small un-incorporated businesses that are relocating to find cheaper labor.
The politicians have sold out the American Worker
on
U.S. Jobs Jumping Ship
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I can't believe that everyone didn't see this situation coming. It is the logical path of a world controlled by corporations in an emerging global economic system.
For the corporations the equation is always simple and, for the most part, always the same. The path that reaps the greatest profit is the path to follow. Period, end of story, no appeals allowed.
Out sourcing work to cheap labor increases profits so it will continue. There are three ways that jobs may start coming back to the US. 1. We lower our wages to compete. (Not a good option) 2. The legal system does something that impedes jobs from being outsourced. (Not a good option) 3. It becomes more expensive to outsource than to keep jobs in the US. (The best option)
Option number 3 will slowly occur as the living standard rises in the countries where the work is currently being outsourced. As the workers wages rise and come in line with the wages in the US costs of producing goods in those countries will rise.
This could take a long time, however, and one of the big questions is: When the cost of production comes to parity where will the factories that produce the goods be located? We may be loosing jobs for a lot longer if there is no incentive to move the jobs back to the US. The startup expense is one thing that is keeping some factories in the United States but once moved it will be the same startup expense that will keep them out.
It will be interesting to see how politicians deal with the effects of selling out the American people to the corporations.
I'll take your word for a compilation of facts being copyrightable.
So, what I would do if I wanted to be an asshole (which is almost always) is to take the list of all fares, find the average price then post it and the dollar amount above or below the average price for each airline.
"So Microsoft will continue its efforts to lock-in users with proprietary formats, and hopefully the rest of the world will produce an XML standard document format without them."
That is 100% correct. Microsoft will never produce products in an atmosphere of cooperation. The have made a cold calculation that with their monopoly muscle they don't have to.
It truly is Microsoft against the world. What everyone (except Microsoft) should do is cooperate with each other to produce open standards and then follow them. If all products interoperate except for Microsoft's, it will become painfully obvious that Microsoft is using its monopoly power to set its own proprietary standards with the objective of extending its monopoly.
The only real solution here is for the US justice system to break up this monopoly into at least three groups and enact laws that prevent the three from acting as one giant monopoly.
Every distro that I know sets up to boot into a GUI by default. Your antidotal evidence of a system that had problems is not by any stretch of the imagination what the average person will run into. There are system that Windows 2K has problems with also. Not many just as there are not many systems that have trouble with Linux.
I would not be surprised if the "winprinter" that you mentioned was supported being that you mentioned that it is a USB printer. Why not mention winmodems. They have missing chips for which the Windows OS must provide the functionality. Very hard to fight some of Microsoft's tactics.
"Floppy - here, you go overboard. You're presuming that somebody set up the system (/etc/fstab) so that you (the user) has permission to mount the floppy."
Are you flippin nuts? Gee, can you print from to your Windows 2K printer. You assume that the administrator set it up so that you would have permission to access that printer!
Like I said Mandrake detected and set up my printer so that all users have access. No one had to flippin' tweak the/etc/fstab table.
Can Linux be configured to make it hard for the user? Sure, but so can Windows 2K. By default most distros make it easy now. Linux has come a very long way toward user friendliness.
I am looking at things from experience. Apparently you are looking at things from the point of view of a Microsoft zealot. Never wanting to admit that Linux is maturing into the platform of choice for the next generation.
Let me give you some advice. Try Mandrake. All distros will soon be at that level of ease of use. That's what the GPL is all about.
Yes, That is exactly right. It is just a matter of learning where things are in Gnome or KDE as apposed to Windows 2K or XP.
A GUI is a GUI is a GUI.
Unlike what the poster who called me an idiot wants people to believe, Linux does not force the user to know shell commands. Everyone I know boots directly into either KDE or Gnome and starting applications is just as easy as in Windows.
Oh I'm an idiot am I? Lets see who is the idiot here.
"Let's say you want to do a spreadsheet. You see a login screen, white on black, that says:
Red Hat Linux release 7.3 Kernel 2.4.9-31 on an i586
system login:"
I have used Red Hat and Mandrake. The normal logon looks very much like Windows 2000 login. No big deal. Linux IS NOT DOS LIKE ANYMORE. Perhaps you never have heard of KDE or Gnome? You comment is stupid.
"You have a printer there. How do you set up the drivers?"
I use Mandrake. The printer is detected and setup automatically.
"And then, you have floppies. You have a spreadsheet file you want to take home. You have a disk in your hand. How do you copy the file to the disk?"
Well gee, that's a tough one! I would suggest putting the floppy into the floppy drive then (now listen closely because it gets complicated here) click on the floppy icon and drag and drop the icon of you document to the place that you want it.
"This is what's called "training" and there is a definite, and real learning curve. A cost towards getting all these things figured out."
Yes there is. Some configurations of KDE use a single click instead of a double click. Real tough stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
that after paying $95.00 for the six page FUD document, management is going to believe that it must be true.
"Could employees be scanned for violent or depressive impulses? Could soldiers be screened for homosexuality?"
Could politicians be scanned for stupidity?
Mandatory consideration of OSS is a good thing. Like the article pointed out, OSS doesn't have an army of lobbyists or a huge sales department pushing its products. This may be the only way to counter-balance the pressure put on the government by billion dollar corporations.
Mandatory consideration of OSS does not mean that the Government will drop proprietary software and jump on the OSS train. Unfortunately, once you are locked into a proprietary solution it can be very expensive to dump your existing software. In my agency we are very entrenched in Microsoft products. We have hundreds of Word macros that pull in data from our Microsoft SQL server. We also have other database applications that run against the SQL server. It would be a major project that would require several years to move away from Microsoft.
Further, there is no incentive to take the risk. No one is going to get fired by suggesting that we stay with Microsoft but if there were a push to OSS that didn't go well then heads would roll.
I use Linux at home and believe very strongly in OSS but I was almost crucified when I suggested it several years ago.
I won't argue the point. I'm just reporting what Microsoft considers innovations.
Another is that now the configuration files are in XML and are therefore "human readable." Seems like Linux has had plain text, "human readable" configuration files forever.
I just attended a Microsoft Launch Event yesterday in Seattle Washington. One of the products that they were talking about was Windows Server 2003.
How much of what they said was hype and how much was fact is hard to tell. It seems that benchmarks can be easily skewed. However ignoring their claims about alleged speed improvements and just focusing on features here are some of their innovations:
1. Better stability. Apparently one will no longer be required to reboot the server as part of a maintenance schedule. I know that some claim that rebooting a 2000 server isn't required but I know many more who do so. The new Windows 2003 server has the ability to monitor processes and if a process starts taking up too many resources that single process can be shutdown and restarted. Kind of like rebooting your system one process at a time as needed.
2. The theme of the event was "Do more with less." It was mentioned that many administrators will not place more than one mission critical application on an NT or Windows 2000 server because if that application has problems it could effect the other mission critical applications. Apparently this is no longer a problem.
3. Server services setup has been greatly simplified. The administrator is presented with a list of server responsibilities (http, email, file server, etc). There are checkboxes next to each server function and all the administrator has to do is check the functions that he/she wants the server to perform. The administrator will be lead by the hand by a wizard to help setup the selected services.
4. Most services are turned off by default for added security.
My personal observations are that Microsoft has done a lot of work to improve their server and if you believe everything they say, it's the best thing since buttered bread. However, I feel a lot of their claims about performance were hype. I guess time will tell.
With the way my car rattles I could convert it to a hybrid gas/electrical vehicle and get about 1000 miles to the gallon!
You assume that the fine is excessive. .01 cent per is probably not excessive.
.01 cent per violation is trivial.
Everything that we do has consequences, some good and some bad. He chose to use the resources of another in an unauthorized manner. A fine of
If his life is ruined so be it.
"A SCHEME BEING IMPLEMENTED by Office Depot - almost certainly at Microsoft's behest"
"Almost certainly" means that they're not sure. The article really pushes my anger buttons and I don't like it. Before the INQUIRERER pushes my rage button I would like to be sure that they know what it is that they are talking about so that I don't go off and make an ass out of my self.
This may be a dark plot by Microsoft, it wouldn't be the first time but it also could be a decision made completely by Office Depot. Please don't push my buttons if you're not sure.
It's called the BSOD. If anyone tries to access your computer it kicks in. It's not a bug, it's a feature!
Tell a big enough lie and people will believe you.
Claiming to be secure is pretty laughable when coming from Microsoft. But his isn't the first bonehead ad they've run.
I mean with all of the patches that they put out almost on a daily basis, why would they pick a butterfly (a bug) for their MSN mascott?!
Maybe I have a sick mind but Microsoft choosing a bug for a mascott just strikes me funny.
They think it's the war that is causing so many hits but we know that the web site was mentioned on /. and that alone is enough to bring most sites to their knees!
I'm not in favor of this war and I don't think that Bush has been truthful or honorable. However, for now, I am putting my distrust and belief that there are hidden agendas being perused down.
I believe that because the war has started, it is important that we support our troops. It is my hope that the war will end quickly and without massive loss of life.
There will be time later to discuss accountability.
I understand what you are saying and from the corporation's point of view it is exactly right. However, the equation is more complicated than that.
From the corporation's side, the path to maximum profit is the way to go. It's perhaps a little more complicated than that, as corporations are willing to take a loss of profit to gain market share that will lead to maximum profit at a later date.
The worker's point of view is exactly like the corporation's point of view except that the worker has minimal power in wage negotiations. This is particularly true in the current situation where you have underdeveloped countries with workers who are willing to work for practically nothing.
One might say that this is a truly free market so it's okay. However, although it is true that it is a free market it is also true that the market is immature and there are great regional inequities in the living standards and therefore in the amount of wages required to survive.
There is a finite pool of wealth in the world. It is a vast amount but still it is finite. The scary thing is that in a corporate world there is only one goal: The accumulation of as much of the wealth pool as possible. This is true for the corporations and the workers. Everyone is trying to get as much of the wealth pool as possible. However, the corporations are in control so they have a huge advantage over the workers and so two classes of people emerge; the few very rich and the many very poor. The few very rich are the ones who succeed in getting more than their share of the wealth pool and the many very poor are the powerless that are exploited for the sake of the few very rich.
The only defense that the workers have to prevent this situation is to ban together in unions. However, in the current situation with under developed countries this is not possible. It is not in the best interests of workers in the under developed countries to strike for the sake of the workers in the developed countries and if the workers in the developed countries strike the corporations are even more motivated to move operations to the under developed countries.
If left to follow its course, the global situation would eventually stabilize and workers could unionize on a global scale to help counter balance the corporation's power. This could take a very long time, however and the corporations have learned to use (lobby and bribe) our politicians to maintain their advantages so the system is not going to be allowed to work.
The job of any democratic government is to do for the people the things that the people cannot do for themselves without government help. If our government were working as it should then it would be responsive to the masses rather than special interests. Unfortunately the politicians work under the same "gather wealth/power" creed as everyone else so it actually becomes part of the problem rather than the solution.
Anyway, that's how I see it.
I don't know if the price of property is over inflated or not. There is probably a large variance based on location. I do know that so far interest rates are very low so unless the property value is way over inflated, now is a good time to get locked into a fixed rate.
The idea of rolling back wages and prices (and property values) is so that moving a corporations operation out of country isn't such a temptation.
It's funny that the idea is to get the lowest cost of production and sell for the highest profit but by moving to under developed counties these corporations will also be destroying the ability of the developed countries to pay top dollar.
After reading through the posts, I think that many of you believe that the article is saying that Linux is overtaking windows on the desktop.
From the article:
"It replaces the cubic zirconia otherwise known as the axiom that Linux is taking more market share from Unix than from Windows. I had long suspected this was a fallacy, and Evans' data confirms my suspicions."
He is obviously not talking about the desktop although I believe that Linux will start taking market share in that area also.
What the article is talking about is that Linux is clobbering Windows in the server area.
Yes, as poor countries raise their standard of living the workers will demand more money. When that happens corporations will do the math and at some point move out of those countries to other under developed countries.
Corporations will exploit cheap labor where ever they can find it until labor costs are approximately the same everywhere.
This will be a good thing for the developing countries and a bad thing for countries that already have a high standard of living with accompanying high cost of living. Jobs in those countries may become hard to find.
You are right when you suggest that we need to find new kinds of jobs but that may be easier said than done. Starting more Mom and Pop businesses will increase jobs but how do they compete with corporations that have the ability to get labor at such low prices?
I'm thinking that at some point we will need to roll our prices and wages back. They may roll back naturally but that's called deflation and that is very painful. I suppose it will all shake out eventually but I don't think that it is going to be very pleasant in the mean time.
Yes, that is an offshoot of number 1.
The only reason that we can't lower our wages to match foreign labor is the cost of living. I wonder what it would be like if all prices and wages were rolled back or reduced by a percentage?
I wouldn't mind working for $400.00 per month if my house payment was under $100.00 and the cost of everything else was reduced correspondingly.
It would also make the people with lots of money in the bank very happy as they would become a lot wealthier and maybe the people with modest retirement savings would be able to live out their days in comfort.
Just a though...
"How is it not a good thing if it is part of competition?"
In an environment where the wages are relatively close I would agree with you. However, corporations (and this has everything to do with corporations) are moving their businesses to locations where they can get the absolutely lowest labor. You and I cannot compete. We simply cannot afford to work for wages that low because our local economy won't allow it.
"It is not controlled by corporations. It is a situation where individuals are able to make decisions while having to pay tribute to rulers less and less. That is all tariffs are: rulers trying to get a cut of our decisions to do transactions across borders."
Sure it is controlled by corporations. It is not the mom and pop businesses that are moving out of country it is only corporations (And possibly a few private businesses owned by the very wealthy.)
"This, as with almost everything else, has nothing to do with corporations."
Like I said before, this has everything to do with corporations. It is not the small un-incorporated businesses that are relocating to find cheaper labor.
I can't believe that everyone didn't see this situation coming. It is the logical path of a world controlled by corporations in an emerging global economic system.
For the corporations the equation is always simple and, for the most part, always the same. The path that reaps the greatest profit is the path to follow. Period, end of story, no appeals allowed.
Out sourcing work to cheap labor increases profits so it will continue. There are three ways that jobs may start coming back to the US.
1. We lower our wages to compete. (Not a good option)
2. The legal system does something that impedes jobs from being outsourced. (Not a good option)
3. It becomes more expensive to outsource than to keep jobs in the US. (The best option)
Option number 3 will slowly occur as the living standard rises in the countries where the work is currently being outsourced. As the workers wages rise and come in line with the wages in the US costs of producing goods in those countries will rise.
This could take a long time, however, and one of the big questions is: When the cost of production comes to parity where will the factories that produce the goods be located? We may be loosing jobs for a lot longer if there is no incentive to move the jobs back to the US. The startup expense is one thing that is keeping some factories in the United States but once moved it will be the same startup expense that will keep them out.
It will be interesting to see how politicians deal with the effects of selling out the American people to the corporations.
I'll take your word for a compilation of facts being copyrightable.
So, what I would do if I wanted to be an asshole (which is almost always) is to take the list of all fares, find the average price then post it and the dollar amount above or below the average price for each airline.
"So Microsoft will continue its efforts to lock-in users with proprietary formats, and hopefully the rest of the world will produce an XML standard document format without them."
That is 100% correct. Microsoft will never produce products in an atmosphere of cooperation. The have made a cold calculation that with their monopoly muscle they don't have to.
It truly is Microsoft against the world. What everyone (except Microsoft) should do is cooperate with each other to produce open standards and then follow them. If all products interoperate except for Microsoft's, it will become painfully obvious that Microsoft is using its monopoly power to set its own proprietary standards with the objective of extending its monopoly.
The only real solution here is for the US justice system to break up this monopoly into at least three groups and enact laws that prevent the three from acting as one giant monopoly.
What a crock of shit!
/etc/fstab table.
Every distro that I know sets up to boot into a GUI by default. Your antidotal evidence of a system that had problems is not by any stretch of the imagination what the average person will run into. There are system that Windows 2K has problems with also. Not many just as there are not many systems that have trouble with Linux.
I would not be surprised if the "winprinter" that you mentioned was supported being that you mentioned that it is a USB printer. Why not mention winmodems. They have missing chips for which the Windows OS must provide the functionality. Very hard to fight some of Microsoft's tactics.
"Floppy - here, you go overboard. You're presuming that somebody set up the system (/etc/fstab) so that you (the user) has permission to mount the floppy."
Are you flippin nuts? Gee, can you print from to your Windows 2K printer. You assume that the administrator set it up so that you would have permission to access that printer!
Like I said Mandrake detected and set up my printer so that all users have access. No one had to flippin' tweak the
Can Linux be configured to make it hard for the user? Sure, but so can Windows 2K. By default most distros make it easy now. Linux has come a very long way toward user friendliness.
I am looking at things from experience. Apparently you are looking at things from the point of view of a Microsoft zealot. Never wanting to admit that Linux is maturing into the platform of choice for the next generation.
Let me give you some advice. Try Mandrake. All distros will soon be at that level of ease of use. That's what the GPL is all about.
Yes, That is exactly right. It is just a matter of learning where things are in Gnome or KDE as apposed to Windows 2K or XP.
A GUI is a GUI is a GUI.
Unlike what the poster who called me an idiot wants people to believe, Linux does not force the user to know shell commands. Everyone I know boots directly into either KDE or Gnome and starting applications is just as easy as in Windows.
Oh I'm an idiot am I? Lets see who is the idiot here.
"Let's say you want to do a spreadsheet. You see a login screen, white on black, that says:
Red Hat Linux release 7.3
Kernel 2.4.9-31 on an i586
system login:"
I have used Red Hat and Mandrake. The normal logon looks very much like Windows 2000 login. No big deal. Linux IS NOT DOS LIKE ANYMORE. Perhaps you never have heard of KDE or Gnome? You comment is stupid.
"You have a printer there. How do you set up the drivers?"
I use Mandrake. The printer is detected and setup automatically.
"And then, you have floppies. You have a spreadsheet file you want to take home. You have a disk in your hand. How do you copy the file to the disk?"
Well gee, that's a tough one! I would suggest putting the floppy into the floppy drive then (now listen closely because it gets complicated here) click on the floppy icon and drag and drop the icon of you document to the place that you want it.
"This is what's called "training" and there is a definite, and real learning curve. A cost towards getting all these things figured out."
Yes there is. Some configurations of KDE use a single click instead of a double click. Real tough stuff.