That's fine, no one is saying get rid of free downloads. We are only saying "delay the newest releases to the public." Codeweavers appears to be doing well with such a strategy.
I can think of two ways this will be good from YOUR perspective:
1. People who NEED the newest features will end up PAYING
2. People who WANT to try things out do so on a version of the distro that has been out long enough for most of its bugs to all have fixes, and it will be easier to support these newbies on their exotic hardware with a version that has been out for a while.
Also, you give Mandrake more bang for your buck becoming a member than buying the box set (its called "profit margins").
As a fellow user, I appreciate your enthusiasm, but I think as an investor I have a much higher stake in seeing the company survive and, consequently, have given the matter a little more thought.
The idea is that Mandrake gives paying customer access FIRST. It doesn't mean it stop free downloads. There is just no way to stop free downloads.
With MDK 9.0, people could download for free the distro MONTHS before it was available in stores! This is ludicrous! And when people bought these in stores, they were suprised to hear that announcement of 9.1rc1! No, if Mandrakeclub gets its way (read my replies to JM and know this is NOT YET OFFICIAL), next time FREELOADERS will only get access to the finished distro AFTER the RC1 of the next version is released.
8.2 makes an EXCELLENT working demo of the distro, if you ask me. But if you want to newest and bestest, you are going to either have to pay or contribute.
"Mandrake disallowing free downloads will only hurt it in the long run."
Here is Deno's post. I did speak too soon . . . but this is what SHOULD happen.
JM, I don't know if you are idealistic or just a bit uninformed, but if you want to work for free, you could easily do so on your own instead of pulling down an entire company and its investors.
I will rally as many people as possible to support Deno's efforts. We are paying customers and investors in the company, so I doubt management will be able to ignore us. I won't say this will get through by next distro (I have learned my lesson about being to optimistic), but this will definitely get through, whether it means losing people like you or not. The club IS the future of Mandrake, and everyone WILL see just how valuable memberships are in the near future.
Here it is:
Just for the record, here is what I will try to do:
- ISOs aren't released to general public until packs are in the shop. This is almost certainly going to happen, because we have no choice anymore.
- Club members get set of CDs or DVD with complete distribution for $30, and ahead of the crowd. This means burning CDs and/or DVDs in house as soon as we have finished the distribution, and sending them to you as soon as we have burned them. I am not sure if this will be accepted, but it has a fair chance of being accepted if we can do it, and if we do it, I'll personally make sure that everyone really gets his/her pack. That is, if we do it it will be a joint Club/Store thing, and not just a normal Store operation.
- Club members get ISOs from our servers ahead of the crowd. This depends on two questions: 1) can we do it, i.e. can we put enough servers on this work to keep the download time reasonably short? 2) what will our marketing say about this.
If we do this, higher level members will probably have priority access (or separate download quotas), so gold + above will be able to get ISOs imediately, and silver folks will be able to download even during the time servers say "overloaded" to standard members.
WDYT?
(Deno was greated by many club member posts saying how great this would be)
That post was based on a "legitimate" post of Deno's. My post certainly reflects Deno's intention, but I made the horrible mistake of assuming that was where things were actually going. With the company being in ch. 11 in all, I really did believe Deno's (head of the club) post reflected Mandrake's direction. However, assuming JM is more in the know than Deno (or more influential), I guess I owe all you freeloaders an apology. Freeload your brains out . ..
"Don't forget that it's 100% open-source, most of the stuff is GPL, so it has to be distributable by everyone."
I am suprised that you work at Mandrake and yet are so uninformed . . . The GPL only specifies the source be available to those who are distributed binaries. It has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with having to distribute everything to everyone for free. And giving members priority as in servers and time was definitely discussed with Deno to the tone that "that is definitely something we will be aiming towards." Next time, I won't post until I hear "management has approved . .."
I don't know where you work (Mandrakestore? Mandrakeexpert?), but I would really hope you and your superiors would take a look at some of your "customers" (erh, paying customers) discussions with Deno. There really is a need to give those who pay a priority. For instance, why can people download, for free, a release over a MONTH before it is available in stores?
Apparently I have dipped more into the politics of your company than I would have liked. But if there really is a political split on this issue, I hate to inform you that you are on the wrong side.
BTW, before you claim one of your paying customers is full of sh!t, you might want to do a little research, or at least be a little more apathetic.
Since some posts appear to be made in ignorance of this fact, Mandrake apparently is no longer going to be the best distro to freeload off of.
Only members will be able to download the new version, or order cheap cd sets when it is first released. Depending on what kind of member you are (I am a Silver member) will determine what kind of bandwidth priority you get. I think the free download version for 9.1 will only be available after the package version is in stores for a while. Maybe the free download to the public will not even be available until the first RC of the next distro is out.
Complain all you want, but you brought this upon yourself. I became a member and was willing to let my membership fees go, in part, to allowing freeloaders download at the same time as everyone else. However, there were too many of you and too few of me, so now if you don't want to pay but want the newest version you will have to just use an RC (sounds fair to me).
Anyway, Mandrake not being dead is not news to me or any other members. It is just news to the people who don't care enough to get involved. Why such people would even care about weither Mandrake is dead or not eludes me.
If someone doesn't care about what I think, they won't read my post. Whether or not I start a post with "I believe" (which I like to qualify some posts with, so that readers don't mistaken me as the "spokesperson for Open Source") has nothing to do with whether or not I expect others to care about what I post. It appears you have made many assumptions about aspects of this world and expect the rest of us to just go along with you (a mirror reflection of your relations with MS, but I digress . ..).
Should I go through the merits of Open Source, as I have done countless of times here and at other forums? If IBM, HP, Dell, Matsushita, Sony, and, even, Sun are able to understand these merits, how could I expect to open the eyes of an individual who STILL doesn't get it?
No, you appear far too lost in your own assumptions to be able to benefit from such an explanation. But I will make a prediction. I give you 3 scenarios of your future:
1. You embrace open source and find yourself catching up with the rest of the world. You learn the difference between security and illusion.
2. You continue to turn your back to open source, until such a time that MS' makes a final effort to create a competing TCO with Open Source by making your position obsolete (some would argue it has already happened).
3. You continue to turn your back to open source, until such a time when ALL organizations require ALL alternatives to be considered. You are terminated for being incompetent.
but I don't believe in the "black box" form of security. If something is not transparent to me, then I cannot access whether or not it is secure or not (and neither can a third party), and if I was in the business of security, I would not be meeting my legal obligation of "professional due care" simply by buying a black box.
If you consider the above "MS bashing" then I think you have been exposing yourself to too much "MS marketing," 'cause I am just telling you how it is. If that is my personal data you are handling, and you are using the MS "black box" to "protect" it, I will sue you and your organization if that information gets out.
Clear and simple. You are not performing your duty, you are just maintaining a black box on the basis that MS marketing would never lie, and marketing buzz words like "trusted computing" does not change that fact.
but I think you must trust MS 100% before this can be considered a "good thing."
"With a technology in place to protect that data, our jobs as the IT staff becomes much easier."
It's very simple, if, say, my medical information gets out 'cause some MSCE stopped thinking about security 'cause MS told them to, you better believe I am going to do everything in my power to destroy that incompetent individual's career.
I see people stupidly pick MS all the time for no other reason than it is "MS." Well guess what, most of the time things are NOT working as a result. That's fine, but when we are talking about security required by laws, you better make damn sure YOU actually understand the system you are implementing, and I have yet seen an MS product implemented by someone who actually had an understanding of the innerworkings of the product (though they did read the marketing brochure . ..).
'Cause if my Space Shuttle's code ever had ANY bugs, you just know I would be in DEEP . ..
Of course, bugless space shuttle code is probably very expense per line . . . maybe $10k per line to write and maintain (total BS number, but you get my point). I doubt Open Source development can beat software development with an infinite supply of funds and extremely narrow purpose (not many developers would need it enough to code for it).
You know, just because space shuttles get the best gas mileage (1 tank of fuel/ many orbits around earth), doesn't mean you want to compare them to the car industry . . .
If MS rejects this, modchippers in court can say, "see, this is the only way we can run our alternative OS. Even when we asked nicely, they turned us down. Modchipping is the only way we can get what we want."
Either way, it seems smart to at least ask.
as "overrated" (you suck) or "flamebait" for karma-whoring, understand that, instead of posting this, I could have posted an explanation of how I could have posted a post explaining how I could have used my mod points instead of posting, which would have clearly been karma-whoring. But this is clearly is not.
plane into the side of a building, and I had never eaten pork before, then might be the time I would like to try it for the first time . ..
Before you mod this as "troll", know that, instead of posting, I could have modded all the "funny" posts as "trolls" simply out of spite that there are so many people out there more funny than me. Think about that before modding, ok?
"does this use of Linux in Motorola phones make it less likely that it will be used widely as a desktop? I think Linux is rapidly becoming viewed as an appliance engine."
In breaking news today, IBM, HP, and Sun Microsystems have officially dropped their plans for Linux becuase, quote, "Linux is just an appliance engine."
Meanwhile, sales of desktop Windows have crashed as the public has come to terms with "Windows only being a game console OS."
I guess I would tell the parent to "lighten up" if he was not already modded "Insightful."
Before you mod me down, please realize that I could have been a coward and used my mod points to mod the parent down, instead of posting a reply.
That's kind of funny. My post went from 5 insightful to redundant, and now I can't see how many mods it got . . . makes me wonder about the credibility of slashdot moderation.
Or does this just mean that my point is "moot" and therefore redundant?
But you are definitely right about a lot of things. I am by no means telling the developers to stop (not that it would matter if I did, cause they wouldn't;).
I believe you are referring to a group of users more savvy about computers. I am referring to the types that have trouble installing software because they download a file and don't know where to look for it to install it. I am afraid such users make up the majority of desktop users I know. And the only way I have ever been able to get them to install anything is by getting them to use Lindows click'n run. Such users do not function well with Windows because they don't know how to defrag, or to delete temp files every once and a while. So they get to a point where they don't use computers much at all, because their windows box has degraded too badly. In such cases, I see Linux being much more self-sustaining.
Anyway, I don't see any reason for us to argue over "what kind of user makes up the majority of users." We both agree that Linux needs to be better, and that is enough to base a community on.
I don't preach to other users to install Linux on their desktops, but I do constantly hand out knoppix cds.
Regardless of where it is today, I think we all have an idea of where it is going;)
"you'll still just be a whiny 14-year-old living in Mommy and Daddy's basement."
Or a financial analyst for a leading semiconductor supplier, besides, you are the one who is doing the whining, but I digress . ..
You seem to have established many assumptions about how a desktop should work, one such assumption is desktops, servers, and every other MS product should be a separate system ENTIRELY. Therefore, though Linux is good for the server, it ain't ready for the Desktop. However, I believe the post Internet era changes this completely (ironic that you compare Linux to Windows 3.1 . ..).
The fact of the matter is that, up until open source (to me, synonymous with "the Internet"), all software came as square pegs. This is because square pegs are much easier to produce than customized pegs. Proprietary software, which doesn't utilize the power of the Internet to its fulliest, is limitted to the square peg model. This can work great in niche markets (which is why MS is trying to make niches all over the place), but it depends on controlling all standards within the market, which is increasingly difficult as the Internet progresses and as more and more people learn how to program. And, as we see with adoption of Linux, when you don't have to use a square peg, a lot can be gained.
But, I suppose my biggest argument is based on the fact that the majority of the world does NOT own desktops. The definition of "Desktop" depends on this majority. For these users, who lack the assumptions you have been conditioned with, Linux is already a superior product and is being adopted at a very fast rate. As time passes, thanks to Linux, this majority will gain access to "the Desktop." Of course, since Linux is constantly improving itself, I will never really be able to prove that it was ready when I made this post, but reality tends to be grey, like that. Not so black and white, as some people see it.
However, I am afraid that without a Madonna song playing in the background and a video of someone flying around, I have failed to convince you. Oh, well . . . I can't say I cared much to begin with. Linux is definitely ready for the desktop as far as I am concerned, regardless of what you think.
Disclaimer: I am not the spokesman of Open Source. Nobody is the the spokesman of Open Source. Using stereotypes is an indication of a simplistic mind struggling to oversimplify a complex world. Using stereotypes for the Open Source community is down right ludicrous. So get a grip and come to terms that people can still share software even if they don't always agree . . .
You know, I really don't know what the logic is of arguing that. The people who are using Linux on their desktops now know Linux well enough to completely disregard that. I suppose you will scare newbies away until someone gives them a knoppix CD to play with, but MS spends BILLIONS already for that your little rant is insignificant in comparison.
Maybe Linux is more than ready for the desktop, it just isn't ready for your narrow view of what a desktop should be. And it is not that I really care that you are not satsified, but bitching to a bunch of volunteers seems a bit insane, because I don't think they really care that your are not satisfied, either.
Regardless, Linux isn't going away anytime soon (at least not in my lifetime), so why don't you create a project devoted to "making it ready for the desktop according to my definitions" instead of wasting your life away making complaints about the fruits of a VOLUNTEER EFFORT.
Do you complain about the Salvation Army or Goodwill Industries, as well?
for my case, unlike its creator, the actual language itself is not too picky about the cases, as long as you are consistent (For instance, @perl, @PERL, $peRL, $PEARL, and many other combinations all seem to work). But to be serious, even Larry uses both PERL and perl for slightly different meanings (something about language verse the implemention or something else I am not 7331 enough to grasp at this point)
However, the tragedy hear is not that I have failed at geek etiquette but that you have completely missed my point.
Compare me to any fulltime programer of perl, and I completely suck at Perl. My programs use very basic Perl syntax that any programming geek would rightly scoof at. That is not my point. These programs are implementations of complex financial concepts that most programmers would have a very hard time creating by themselves. Futhermore, even though my understanding of Perl is limitted, what I know puts me light years ahead of the Excel and Crystal Reports clicking idiots that are my financial peers. Then, finally, my foreign language skills have further helped me to burrow within a niche.
But why do I bother? You were not reading my post, you were merely interpreting it.
Companies are taking your advice to the next logical level and saying, "Fuck the rest of Americans."
All I can say is that some people measure the progress of our species by calculating the average wealth per capita. Others measure our progress by the wealth of the poorest amongst us. Neither methods of calculation change the overall happiness of our species, but they certainly do effect the happiness of the one doing the measuring. Maybe you should make some Indian friends, and your view of this matter will change.
Slashdot Mirror
That's fine, no one is saying get rid of free downloads. We are only saying "delay the newest releases to the public." Codeweavers appears to be doing well with such a strategy.
I can think of two ways this will be good from YOUR perspective:
1. People who NEED the newest features will end up PAYING
2. People who WANT to try things out do so on a version of the distro that has been out long enough for most of its bugs to all have fixes, and it will be easier to support these newbies on their exotic hardware with a version that has been out for a while.
Also, you give Mandrake more bang for your buck becoming a member than buying the box set (its called "profit margins").
As a fellow user, I appreciate your enthusiasm, but I think as an investor I have a much higher stake in seeing the company survive and, consequently, have given the matter a little more thought.
But to give you a full membership just wouldn't make economic sense . . . (alumni memberships still give you some access).
The idea is that Mandrake gives paying customer access FIRST. It doesn't mean it stop free downloads. There is just no way to stop free downloads.
With MDK 9.0, people could download for free the distro MONTHS before it was available in stores! This is ludicrous! And when people bought these in stores, they were suprised to hear that announcement of 9.1rc1! No, if Mandrakeclub gets its way (read my replies to JM and know this is NOT YET OFFICIAL), next time FREELOADERS will only get access to the finished distro AFTER the RC1 of the next version is released.
8.2 makes an EXCELLENT working demo of the distro, if you ask me. But if you want to newest and bestest, you are going to either have to pay or contribute.
"Mandrake disallowing free downloads will only hurt it in the long run."
We all are dead in the "long run."
Here is Deno's post. I did speak too soon . . . but this is what SHOULD happen.
JM, I don't know if you are idealistic or just a bit uninformed, but if you want to work for free, you could easily do so on your own instead of pulling down an entire company and its investors.
I will rally as many people as possible to support Deno's efforts. We are paying customers and investors in the company, so I doubt management will be able to ignore us. I won't say this will get through by next distro (I have learned my lesson about being to optimistic), but this will definitely get through, whether it means losing people like you or not. The club IS the future of Mandrake, and everyone WILL see just how valuable memberships are in the near future.
Here it is:
Just for the record, here is what I will try to do:
- ISOs aren't released to general public until packs are in the shop. This is almost certainly going to happen, because we have no choice anymore.
- Club members get set of CDs or DVD with complete distribution for $30, and ahead of the crowd. This means burning CDs and/or DVDs in house as soon as we have finished the distribution, and sending them to you as soon as we have burned them. I am not sure if this will be accepted, but it has a fair chance of being accepted if we can do it, and if we do it, I'll personally make sure that everyone really gets his/her pack. That is, if we do it it will be a joint Club/Store thing, and not just a normal Store operation.
- Club members get ISOs from our servers ahead of the crowd. This depends on two questions:
1) can we do it, i.e. can we put enough servers on this work to keep the download time reasonably short?
2) what will our marketing say about this.
If we do this, higher level members will probably have priority access (or separate download quotas), so gold + above will be able to get ISOs imediately, and silver folks will be able to download even during the time servers say "overloaded" to standard members.
WDYT?
(Deno was greated by many club member posts saying how great this would be)
"The parent post is complete B.S."
.
."
That post was based on a "legitimate" post of Deno's. My post certainly reflects Deno's intention, but I made the horrible mistake of assuming that was where things were actually going. With the company being in ch. 11 in all, I really did believe Deno's (head of the club) post reflected Mandrake's direction. However, assuming JM is more in the know than Deno (or more influential), I guess I owe all you freeloaders an apology. Freeload your brains out . .
"Don't forget that it's 100% open-source, most of the stuff is GPL, so it has to be distributable by everyone."
I am suprised that you work at Mandrake and yet are so uninformed . . . The GPL only specifies the source be available to those who are distributed binaries. It has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with having to distribute everything to everyone for free. And giving members priority as in servers and time was definitely discussed with Deno to the tone that "that is definitely something we will be aiming towards." Next time, I won't post until I hear "management has approved . .
I don't know where you work (Mandrakestore? Mandrakeexpert?), but I would really hope you and your superiors would take a look at some of your "customers" (erh, paying customers) discussions with Deno. There really is a need to give those who pay a priority. For instance, why can people download, for free, a release over a MONTH before it is available in stores?
Apparently I have dipped more into the politics of your company than I would have liked. But if there really is a political split on this issue, I hate to inform you that you are on the wrong side.
BTW, before you claim one of your paying customers is full of sh!t, you might want to do a little research, or at least be a little more apathetic.
Since some posts appear to be made in ignorance of this fact, Mandrake apparently is no longer going to be the best distro to freeload off of.
Only members will be able to download the new version, or order cheap cd sets when it is first released. Depending on what kind of member you are (I am a Silver member) will determine what kind of bandwidth priority you get. I think the free download version for 9.1 will only be available after the package version is in stores for a while. Maybe the free download to the public will not even be available until the first RC of the next distro is out.
Complain all you want, but you brought this upon yourself. I became a member and was willing to let my membership fees go, in part, to allowing freeloaders download at the same time as everyone else. However, there were too many of you and too few of me, so now if you don't want to pay but want the newest version you will have to just use an RC (sounds fair to me).
Anyway, Mandrake not being dead is not news to me or any other members. It is just news to the people who don't care enough to get involved. Why such people would even care about weither Mandrake is dead or not eludes me.
If someone doesn't care about what I think, they won't read my post. Whether or not I start a post with "I believe" (which I like to qualify some posts with, so that readers don't mistaken me as the "spokesperson for Open Source") has nothing to do with whether or not I expect others to care about what I post. It appears you have made many assumptions about aspects of this world and expect the rest of us to just go along with you (a mirror reflection of your relations with MS, but I digress . . .).
Should I go through the merits of Open Source, as I have done countless of times here and at other forums? If IBM, HP, Dell, Matsushita, Sony, and, even, Sun are able to understand these merits, how could I expect to open the eyes of an individual who STILL doesn't get it?
No, you appear far too lost in your own assumptions to be able to benefit from such an explanation. But I will make a prediction. I give you 3 scenarios of your future:
1. You embrace open source and find yourself catching up with the rest of the world. You learn the difference between security and illusion.
2. You continue to turn your back to open source, until such a time that MS' makes a final effort to create a competing TCO with Open Source by making your position obsolete (some would argue it has already happened).
3. You continue to turn your back to open source, until such a time when ALL organizations require ALL alternatives to be considered. You are terminated for being incompetent.
Pick one soon before one picks you.
but I don't believe in the "black box" form of security. If something is not transparent to me, then I cannot access whether or not it is secure or not (and neither can a third party), and if I was in the business of security, I would not be meeting my legal obligation of "professional due care" simply by buying a black box.
If you consider the above "MS bashing" then I think you have been exposing yourself to too much "MS marketing," 'cause I am just telling you how it is. If that is my personal data you are handling, and you are using the MS "black box" to "protect" it, I will sue you and your organization if that information gets out.
Clear and simple. You are not performing your duty, you are just maintaining a black box on the basis that MS marketing would never lie, and marketing buzz words like "trusted computing" does not change that fact.
but I think you must trust MS 100% before this can be considered a "good thing."
.).
"With a technology in place to protect that data, our jobs as the IT staff becomes much easier."
It's very simple, if, say, my medical information gets out 'cause some MSCE stopped thinking about security 'cause MS told them to, you better believe I am going to do everything in my power to destroy that incompetent individual's career.
I see people stupidly pick MS all the time for no other reason than it is "MS." Well guess what, most of the time things are NOT working as a result. That's fine, but when we are talking about security required by laws, you better make damn sure YOU actually understand the system you are implementing, and I have yet seen an MS product implemented by someone who actually had an understanding of the innerworkings of the product (though they did read the marketing brochure . .
"The Dell Inspiron you quote is 6.8lbs -- roughly 2.5 times the size of the Lindows PC."
That's roughly 2.5 times more 'puter for you money!
Looks like you dun made yourself a fool.
'Cause if my Space Shuttle's code ever had ANY bugs, you just know I would be in DEEP . . .
Of course, bugless space shuttle code is probably very expense per line . . . maybe $10k per line to write and maintain (total BS number, but you get my point). I doubt Open Source development can beat software development with an infinite supply of funds and extremely narrow purpose (not many developers would need it enough to code for it).
You know, just because space shuttles get the best gas mileage (1 tank of fuel/ many orbits around earth), doesn't mean you want to compare them to the car industry . . .
If MS rejects this, modchippers in court can say, "see, this is the only way we can run our alternative OS. Even when we asked nicely, they turned us down. Modchipping is the only way we can get what we want." Either way, it seems smart to at least ask.
as "overrated" (you suck) or "flamebait" for karma-whoring, understand that, instead of posting this, I could have posted an explanation of how I could have posted a post explaining how I could have used my mod points instead of posting, which would have clearly been karma-whoring. But this is clearly is not.
plane into the side of a building, and I had never eaten pork before, then might be the time I would like to try it for the first time . . .
Before you mod this as "troll", know that, instead of posting, I could have modded all the "funny" posts as "trolls" simply out of spite that there are so many people out there more funny than me. Think about that before modding, ok?
"does this use of Linux in Motorola phones make it less likely that it will be used widely as a desktop? I think Linux is rapidly becoming viewed as an appliance engine."
In breaking news today, IBM, HP, and Sun Microsystems have officially dropped their plans for Linux becuase, quote, "Linux is just an appliance engine."
Meanwhile, sales of desktop Windows have crashed as the public has come to terms with "Windows only being a game console OS."
I guess I would tell the parent to "lighten up" if he was not already modded "Insightful."
Before you mod me down, please realize that I could have been a coward and used my mod points to mod the parent down, instead of posting a reply.
believe me, I work for such a stupid company . . . prints out a report so that it can be scanned as a pdf file. However, gocr is coming along . . .
That's kind of funny. My post went from 5 insightful to redundant, and now I can't see how many mods it got . . . makes me wonder about the credibility of slashdot moderation.
Or does this just mean that my point is "moot" and therefore redundant?
But you are definitely right about a lot of things. I am by no means telling the developers to stop (not that it would matter if I did, cause they wouldn't;).
I believe you are referring to a group of users more savvy about computers. I am referring to the types that have trouble installing software because they download a file and don't know where to look for it to install it. I am afraid such users make up the majority of desktop users I know. And the only way I have ever been able to get them to install anything is by getting them to use Lindows click'n run. Such users do not function well with Windows because they don't know how to defrag, or to delete temp files every once and a while. So they get to a point where they don't use computers much at all, because their windows box has degraded too badly. In such cases, I see Linux being much more self-sustaining.
Anyway, I don't see any reason for us to argue over "what kind of user makes up the majority of users." We both agree that Linux needs to be better, and that is enough to base a community on.
I don't preach to other users to install Linux on their desktops, but I do constantly hand out knoppix cds.
Regardless of where it is today, I think we all have an idea of where it is going;)
"you'll still just be a whiny 14-year-old living in Mommy and Daddy's basement."
.
.).
Or a financial analyst for a leading semiconductor supplier, besides, you are the one who is doing the whining, but I digress . .
You seem to have established many assumptions about how a desktop should work, one such assumption is desktops, servers, and every other MS product should be a separate system ENTIRELY. Therefore, though Linux is good for the server, it ain't ready for the Desktop. However, I believe the post Internet era changes this completely (ironic that you compare Linux to Windows 3.1 . .
The fact of the matter is that, up until open source (to me, synonymous with "the Internet"), all software came as square pegs. This is because square pegs are much easier to produce than customized pegs. Proprietary software, which doesn't utilize the power of the Internet to its fulliest, is limitted to the square peg model. This can work great in niche markets (which is why MS is trying to make niches all over the place), but it depends on controlling all standards within the market, which is increasingly difficult as the Internet progresses and as more and more people learn how to program. And, as we see with adoption of Linux, when you don't have to use a square peg, a lot can be gained.
But, I suppose my biggest argument is based on the fact that the majority of the world does NOT own desktops. The definition of "Desktop" depends on this majority. For these users, who lack the assumptions you have been conditioned with, Linux is already a superior product and is being adopted at a very fast rate. As time passes, thanks to Linux, this majority will gain access to "the Desktop." Of course, since Linux is constantly improving itself, I will never really be able to prove that it was ready when I made this post, but reality tends to be grey, like that. Not so black and white, as some people see it.
However, I am afraid that without a Madonna song playing in the background and a video of someone flying around, I have failed to convince you. Oh, well . . . I can't say I cared much to begin with. Linux is definitely ready for the desktop as far as I am concerned, regardless of what you think.
Disclaimer:
I am not the spokesman of Open Source. Nobody is the the spokesman of Open Source. Using stereotypes is an indication of a simplistic mind struggling to oversimplify a complex world. Using stereotypes for the Open Source community is down right ludicrous. So get a grip and come to terms that people can still share software even if they don't always agree . . .
You know, I really don't know what the logic is of arguing that. The people who are using Linux on their desktops now know Linux well enough to completely disregard that. I suppose you will scare newbies away until someone gives them a knoppix CD to play with, but MS spends BILLIONS already for that your little rant is insignificant in comparison.
Maybe Linux is more than ready for the desktop, it just isn't ready for your narrow view of what a desktop should be. And it is not that I really care that you are not satsified, but bitching to a bunch of volunteers seems a bit insane, because I don't think they really care that your are not satisfied, either.
Regardless, Linux isn't going away anytime soon (at least not in my lifetime), so why don't you create a project devoted to "making it ready for the desktop according to my definitions" instead of wasting your life away making complaints about the fruits of a VOLUNTEER EFFORT.
Do you complain about the Salvation Army or Goodwill Industries, as well?
"Yeah, thats the solution to everything."
;)
It is if you are a lawyer
I can make the same argument about ANY kind of copyright . . .
Sure, say the GPL is not defendable, but then ALL copyrights are not defendable.
I even hear that rather odd fellow should up in a, get this, penguin costume! What a total embarrassment!
for my case, unlike its creator, the actual language itself is not too picky about the cases, as long as you are consistent (For instance, @perl, @PERL, $peRL, $PEARL, and many other combinations all seem to work). But to be serious, even Larry uses both PERL and perl for slightly different meanings (something about language verse the implemention or something else I am not 7331 enough to grasp at this point)
However, the tragedy hear is not that I have failed at geek etiquette but that you have completely missed my point.
Compare me to any fulltime programer of perl, and I completely suck at Perl. My programs use very basic Perl syntax that any programming geek would rightly scoof at. That is not my point. These programs are implementations of complex financial concepts that most programmers would have a very hard time creating by themselves. Futhermore, even though my understanding of Perl is limitted, what I know puts me light years ahead of the Excel and Crystal Reports clicking idiots that are my financial peers. Then, finally, my foreign language skills have further helped me to burrow within a niche.
But why do I bother? You were not reading my post, you were merely interpreting it.
Companies are taking your advice to the next logical level and saying, "Fuck the rest of Americans."
All I can say is that some people measure the progress of our species by calculating the average wealth per capita. Others measure our progress by the wealth of the poorest amongst us. Neither methods of calculation change the overall happiness of our species, but they certainly do effect the happiness of the one doing the measuring. Maybe you should make some Indian friends, and your view of this matter will change.