Therein lies the problem. Even executives at Microsoft were burned by this and quite pissed off. To quote. "Spent over a grand on a machine that is only good for email." Vista Capable should mean more than the machine will "boot" with Vista on it.
People expected that the computer would run the eye candy and run at a decent speed. Microsoft changed the definition of capable from meaning just that to meaning, "will run all the fatures of Vista OR will somewhat run on intel graphic hardware." Once that happened just about anything qualified as "vista capable". To bad that it has not garnered Microsoft any goodwill.
Why not use Xubuntu or Fluxbuntu for older machines? That's what those distributions are intended for.
Because their definition of "old" hardware is different than mine or yours is.
When they say "old" they are talking computers that are fairly modern and would run XP terrific. 1ghz or better with at least 256megs of RAM and a 10 gig or better hard drive. Kubuntu runs fine on such systems. Not to mention it has a very windows feel to it.
It sounds like they don't have any really "old" computers around any more. However now that they understand the power of Linux. If someone offers to "donate" them a 700mhz system they might be willing to take it and put xubuntu on it. I am not so sure about fluxbuntu. I love fluxbox. I used is excluslively for 2 1/2 years. But the fact it does not have a menu on the bar across the bottom and you must click on empty desktop real estate to get a menu. Is to big of a paradigm shift for most people. (Ah, sad but true). I myself find that keeping a few dock apps running on one side of the display always leaves empty screen space open for getting a menu. But with no icons on the desktop, no dockapps running by default and only a little speck of screen space on either side of the panel after one app is running. Most folks cant figure out what to do with fluxbox.
Once you get on the sub 800mhz systems is when xfce4 fluxbox really shine. In there book that is not "old' but "obsolete".
MSDOS is even faster! Seriously you can't just say "Vista is slower so it must be worse". There are other factors to consider - functionality, aesthetics, hardware support, security, and so on.
The difference between MSDOS and XP in this instance is that XP gets the job done.
Want to browse the web, XP does it.
Want to watch full screen video, XP does it.
Want to edit video, XP does it.
Want to sync your iPod. XP does it.
Functionaly, XP has it. What new functionaly does VISTA really bring? I know, it is suposed to have some things that make it easier to administer in a business environment. I have not seen anyone who has said that is enough of an upside to take on VISTA. So in functionality, VISTA is preceived to be no better than XP.
Aesthetics, is in the eye of the beholder. Not everyone is in love with Aero. There are plenty of "Vista Ready" laptops that can not run Aero in all of its glory. I think of Areo, and I think of how hard it is to find anything in the Vista control panel(s) hell. I don't know that Vista wins because it MAY be possible to have translucent window decorations, and a fancy alt-tab.
Hardware support, XP has it. With support through 2014 from Microsoft. With the number of people and businesses NOT moving over to Vista. Hardware support is cleary in the XP camp and staying there. Since so many end users and business downgrade to XP. The quickest way for a PC manufacturer to shoot themseves in the foot, is to not provide XP drivers for their systems. Try googling "vista only". The only thing I saw come up is DX10. How much aftermarket stuff is VISTA ONLY? Not enough to make a difference. XP wins for hadrware support.
Security, Vista might have it. In exchange for this "security" you lose compatibility with many apps that you would want to run. UAC on is a pain in the butt. UAC off lowers security a notch. I am not sure how much less spyware a vista machine may pick up. I don't know anyone who ran it more than 3 weeks before switching to windows. I think the security ends up being a wash. Once you have to install antivirus, spwyare removal and keep them updateded. Watch what you click on and where you browse. Deal with UAC. How much more work is XP than Vista for the same level of security? How much more insecure is XP for the average user?
The bottom line is XP does everything users want to do with decent performance. MSDOS, Winodws 3.x, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 98SE, Windows NT 3.51, Windows NT 4.0, and Windows Vista do not. Windows 2000 almost does for most users.
So depening on your needs you have 1) Stick with XP 2) Take a perormance hit and go to VISTA for no apperant benefits.
Most folks are opting of for 1. Even if it means pulling out their old OEM CD of XP and installing it over Vista.
In the long term, you can only determine failure rates in the enterprise market by charting the growth or lack thereof in Software Assurance sales by cost, and yet those appear to be increasing as well.
A good sign is VISTA ONLY software aimed at the enterprise. Time will tell if a program is Vista Only if the prior version outsells it. Or people just move on to some software that will still run on XP.
What I can't figure out for the life of me. Is why more software was not written correctly for XP. There is NO GOOD REASON that Quickbooks does not run properly on a locked down account. If an account is locked down. That is an indicator you are in a corporate environment. Perhaps the only time the program gets run as an administrator is when IT decides to install updates and patches. Otherwise anything out side of %USER% or HKCU should not be written to. There is no excuse for that.
Intuit deserves to be kicked in the nards just like Apple did to Adobe (remains to be seen if that was a good idea or not). Seven years is enough time to get their act together and program things properly. It ain't Windows 98 any more.
For starters, there will likely be nothing preventing it from running older Windows apps in some sort of virtualization or compatibility layer like Wine or the like. That would be the most suitable solution to running old stuff and the solution I've been begging for since Windows 2000.
This also opens up a whole new can of worms.
Is it really just a Windows XP emulator? In which case Microsoft may have to provide XP security and patches. So XP may not EOL till 2017 or 2018. XP Service Pack 4 or 5? If they have to keep fixing it, why can't you just buy XP with SP4 for real hardware?
Or is it some hybrid Windows9x/XP/Vista emulator thing? Like what Vista is supposed to do? Will it be better than what Vista does for compatibility?
The only thing I am sure of. Is that Microsoft is going to promise the stars, the moon, and the sun....and deliver something that is closer to earth or hades.
Far far better to refactor particularly bad code and restructure at higher levels.
Unless you code sets flags like
IsWin31Mode
IsAppLotus123
AppExpectWIn95EpsonPrinterExceptionBug
Every routine of any importance or value has loads of exceptions. You name it, behavior for certain versions of certain apps, for emulating certain OS version bugs, etc. I am not certain that a rewrite would not be better.
Microsoft is always promising the next Windows will be built new from the ground up so not much is really new this time. The only difference here is the promise to break backward compatibility. Thebetaguy contradicts himself about that by having the balls to promise, "This should allow the majority of legacy applications to run perfectly," while Vista provided less than 60% of the same.
Yeah, I am not holding my breath. Lets look at where Microsoft is at now. They have Vista, which is a mess. Lets consider it "done" as of July 2006. Then we have 2008, which has that lovely little modular server core.
Microsoft expects us to believe that between July 2006 and Decemeber 2009 (A span of about 3 1/2 years). That they have produced the following:
A brand new version of windows with a totally new code base.
Done in both a 32 bit and 64 bit editions
Pretty much duplicated all of the OS features people expect, like GUI's, networking, printing, etc, by rewriting them from scratch.
Have a seamless VM that will run Win 3.1, 98, NT 4.0, 2000, and XP apps with close to 100% compatibility
Have a VM that can run Vista ONLY apps.
Match or beat all of the cool features that Mac and Linux pick up in the next 20 months.
Have good performance on current (late 2009) hardware.
Hit the ground running with good driver support.
Now lets add in the "lock in" and the "who can we screw" factor.
With a whole new driver model. They will be lucky if they can get decent drivers for NEW hardware. Like new models of printers that went on sale in the six months prior to the launch of Winodws 7. I am sure there will be fees and driver signing. How much older hardware do you think will be ported over?
They are expecting to maintain a 32 bit code base, a 64 bit code base, and a "classic windows" code base. Remember, they are not VMing XP and Vista. They are creating a "NEW" VMd OS with the WinSxS collection to load the proper libraries to run Vista stuff properly, or XP stuff properly, or NT 4.0 stuff proplrey or Windows 3.1 stuff properly.
This sounds like a tall order for a company that took 6 years to deliver Vista. Not to mention emerging trends like "lite computing" in the eeePC. Is Microsoft going to secede that market? Or will they perpetually make XP available? How will they compete if Linux keeps adding features that make Linux the best choice for the low end market. How will the compete if Linux keeps making new hardware run faster than XP with more features than Vista and 7? What if ReactOS and Wine provide better compatibility with older Microsoft software than Seven does?
It sounds like it is time for Microsoft to reinvent itself, only there is no Steve Jobs in the wings to do so.
Hmm. It might also be a recognition that the upgrade treadmill is no longer providing much in the way of new value for the end users, compared to the nineties and early this century.
Why should people upgrade nowdays?
What do normal people do? Edit documents, browse the web, read email, listen to music, watch video, play some games. Heavy users may render/convert/edit audio/video or play high end games.
Full screen, full motion video is already possible on even low end hardware. I.E. 80 gig drive, 512mb ram, 64mb video card.
Why wouldn't the average user be happy if he could get the computer he got in 2004 all over again? It does everything they want to do.
Which is why the see so little value in moving to Vista. Better OS's could do more and they needed more hardware to do it. XP does it all with the hardware they have. Again, if they got that computer in 2004. Now in 2008 they can get MORE computer than that for $400-$500...if they could run XP.
When AI, rendering video in real time, and true speech recognition are a reality. Then people will see spending more to buy more software and hardware to run it. Till then, it is all going to be pretty ho-hum for folks.
And worse yet for Microsoft. Linux is trying to improve performance on current hardware. More eye candy and better performance than Vista. And if you can live without eye candy, watch out. Linux is going to be FAST compared to Vista on a machine with 512mb of memory.
Hopefully, everyone else agrees that it's shit, but I don't think that'll happen. OOXML will pass, MS OFfice will use its own, non-standard version of OOXML, governments will claim they are in compliance with laws requiring open standards, and the rest of us will be in the same boat we've been in for fifteen years. It's all quite sick.
You have forgotten all of the benefits the the ISO process.
Lets see. There is making a mockery of the standards making process. There is a cheapening of the term ISO standard. When I see that in the future, it won't have as much meaning to me. It does not mean something will work, or is used by the industry, or even that it is possible to implement. I know it is not multi-vendor. It will not prevent lock-in. Any data comitted to it may or may not be portable.
Also, as serves them right. The ISO has been crippled by this. All of those members that came on board to help Microsoft. Well, they are not showing up at any of the other meetings. So when a standards body meets. Has 40 members only 10 of them show up, and you get 4 YES, 4 NO, 2 abstain and 30 not present. Well shucks. Things just about grind to a halt.
For integration into fluxbox, blackbox, et al. At the start of your desktop session run
Thunar --daemon
That will put thunar running in the background. Anytime dbus signals a new device has been plugged in. It will mount the device and open it up in a new thunar window.
You are talking to a person who switched to opera back in 1997 because it was the best browser out there.
Firefox has gotten to where it is currently at via its quality, strategic alliances, and end-user word of mouth. There is still room for improvement in all 3 departments.
Microsoft has already lost the war. The browser IS the platform for anyone that cares to treat it that way.
Feisty was good. Gustsy was a dog. Hardy is excellent and it is only just beta at this point.
It is a matter of knowing your resources. http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Ubuntu:Gutsy Is the quickest way to get things like nvidia set up correctly. It is pretty much only an apt-get install nvidia-kernel-common nvidia-glx-new . And it looks like for hardy apt-get install helix-player will install real player.
As long as we all agree that Captain Picard used Emacs while he spread all measures of awesome throughout the galaxy. That is in stark contrast to Kirk, who used Vi to compose love notes to alien whores in his quest to spread space AIDS to as many planets as he possibly could before being canceled.
I am a Slackware refugee myself. It is very much a your millage may vary situation.
When prefer the look of many GNOME apps, but there are just to many good KDE apps out there. K3b, Amarok and Konqueror being the ones I use the most. Since Slackware droped GNOME. It was pretty easy. Slackware with KDE, XFCE4 and Fluxbox. I tend to spend most of my time in Fluxbox.
I would just spend 3 days setting up my system. Install Slackware and all the WM's. Then go to linuxpackages and pick up everything there that I can use. Then download, compile and rundown missing libraries to build all the apps, dock apps, drivers and things that I like on my system. Then tweak the configuration on everything to make it work on my network and start up the way I like it. As I said, about 3 days. The system was how I liked it and much faster than Fedora. Things like VMware were a pain to set up, thus it the Slackware way.
Now days. I just install xubuntu, do an apt-get update/upgrade, apt-get install kubuntu-desktop fluxbox. A few more apt-gets to get all of my needed apps, dock apps,goodies and eyecandy. I am then left to download and configure by hand maybe 10 or 15 apps. All of which seem to do so without compliant and library hell (i.e. needs imlib1.2 but imlib1.2a to be installed). Then tweaking very few config files by hand.
Now setting up a new system MY WAY takes a few hours instead of a few days. As a bonus, the forums are very helpful. There is much more likely a tweek or info on how to work around a problem for Ubuntu than for any other distro. I have hot tried Fedora in the last 2 years. But the ubuntu based distros run almost as fast as slackware and much faster than Fedora. Not to mention Fedora making KDE a second class citizen. No contest.
If I want to play around, tinker, and tweak. Slackware is where I will go. Believe me, when RedHat drove me back to Slackware, I knew I had it better. But if I want a system 97% of the way to where I like it in just a few hours. Ubuntu/Xubuntu/Ubuntu is the way to go.
I dont think that it is going to matter. Unless it automatically sets itself up as the default web browser.
The truth is, if it becomes the default web browser and sets the homepage to http://msn.com./ The people they want to switch, won't notice the difference. If they don't hijack the default browser settings, no one will even know it is installed. If they do hijack it and MSN is not the hompage, those people will switch back to IE anyways.
What bothers me, is that mozilla feels threatened. If Firefox is the best browser out there, it will continue to gain market share, despite what Microsoft and Apple do.
Heh. When the number of Linux distributions is critisized, it's good to have competition, because no one distro can fill everyone's needs. Yet when MS puts out a competitor to Java, and now Flash, it's "why do we need more than one?"
To be blunt. I don't know of one linux distro who's goal is to "fucking kill" another distro.
When Slax, or Puppy, or Knopix, or Ubuntu were put out there, they focus on doing something a bit different than some other distro. What they do, can be borrowed by other distros and improved.
When Microsoft puts out something like Silverlight. There goal is to own 100% of the market. The want to "Fucking chock off Adobe's air supply". Once Flash is gone, so is the Silverlight player for Mac and Linux. After all, with no flash out there, they can "leverage" Silverlight to lock people into Windows.
I had a similar idea as the poster a year ago with my father's retail shop.
I am in the same boat with an in-law. He owns a small mini-mart. I am trying to find any solution that will work. Neither Quickbooks POS nor Microsoft RMS are anywhere near prime time for a grocery store.
You can't buy beer/soda by the case and sell it by the 1 can, 6 can, or 24 can units AND be able to handle bottle deposits. QB can sell units in sets of 1/6/24. Or can do tie one product to another. Like attaching a deposit to a can of soda. But it cant' do both. Don't even try either one with RMS.
They don't handle lottery tickets. What if you want to turn your winning $5.00 ticket back in for 5 more tickets? Nope in QB and RMS.
They don't handle tracking which products are food for food stamps. I.E. Receipt is for $7.50 and 4.25 is for food (stamps) and 2.75 is non-food. Nope for QB and RMS
If I am shooting for the stars. They rent videos as well. Any way to "rent" items, track customers, see what is late? Nope for QB and RMS.
Even if you are willing to pay. What off the shelf software is out there to handle a mini-mart/grocery store?
There's a lot of concern that Microsoft will do a couple things:
3) They say they have implemented, and sure enough you can save to OOXML. Other programs that try to read it end up with junk. Everyone thinks their own implementation of OOXML filters are broke. Then 3 years down the road, it is discovered that when Microsoft saves to OOXML, it is not the same specification as they publicly stated it was.
Seriously, how many years do you think it will take to catch Microsoft if they do a bait and switch?
If your hardware is linux friendly. Learning Linux may be cheaper than learning Vista. And if you already use OpenOffice and Firefox. It will be much easier than moving to Office 2007. Even the French Police figured that one out.
Vista isn't a great product. Vista isn't a horrible product, and I'd argue that it's far better than XP was when it was released.
I have to take this one on. I had a Vista system on a domain. Brought up explorer, put in a UNC for another system. I realized I had a typo, and the system I was trying to reach was not going to be there. So instead of sitting around for a minute so waiting for Vista to figure this out. I hit the escape key and closed the window. At that point, Clicking on applications would not open them, Already open instances of Internet Explorer could not browse UNCs or URLs. The Shutdown menu was no where to be found. Even after a ctrl-alt-delete. No shutdown menu anywhere is sight. This has happened on more than several occasions...till I put kubuntu on the box.
Even XP from day one was more prime time than that. I remember complaining about not being able to find things. But I never thought "What a POS, they broke or botched perfectly good features that worked in 98".
Like IBM, MS isn't going away... but they'll be one option among many in a few years, not the single dominant giant.
As much as I'd like to believe this, I see no indication that it will actually happen.
All monopolies lose their standing. Be it the Egyptian priests telling the peasants when to plant. To the Italian button makers of the 16th century. To the Railroad Barons of the 19th Century. To IBM of the 20th Century.
Every monopoly loses it's stranglehold at some point. I expect that with Microsoft it will be in my lifetime (the next 40 years or so).
Slashdot Mirror
Therein lies the problem. Even executives at Microsoft were burned by this and quite pissed off. To quote. "Spent over a grand on a machine that is only good for email." Vista Capable should mean more than the machine will "boot" with Vista on it.
People expected that the computer would run the eye candy and run at a decent speed. Microsoft changed the definition of capable from meaning just that to meaning, "will run all the fatures of Vista OR will somewhat run on intel graphic hardware." Once that happened just about anything qualified as "vista capable". To bad that it has not garnered Microsoft any goodwill.
Because their definition of "old" hardware is different than mine or yours is.
When they say "old" they are talking computers that are fairly modern and would run XP terrific. 1ghz or better with at least 256megs of RAM and a 10 gig or better hard drive. Kubuntu runs fine on such systems. Not to mention it has a very windows feel to it.
It sounds like they don't have any really "old" computers around any more. However now that they understand the power of Linux. If someone offers to "donate" them a 700mhz system they might be willing to take it and put xubuntu on it. I am not so sure about fluxbuntu. I love fluxbox. I used is excluslively for 2 1/2 years. But the fact it does not have a menu on the bar across the bottom and you must click on empty desktop real estate to get a menu. Is to big of a paradigm shift for most people. (Ah, sad but true). I myself find that keeping a few dock apps running on one side of the display always leaves empty screen space open for getting a menu. But with no icons on the desktop, no dockapps running by default and only a little speck of screen space on either side of the panel after one app is running. Most folks cant figure out what to do with fluxbox.
Once you get on the sub 800mhz systems is when xfce4 fluxbox really shine. In there book that is not "old' but "obsolete".
Since it is not a habit, once every few months must be ok?
You know. Just to see what kind of cool music they are putting on the kegens these days.
The difference between MSDOS and XP in this instance is that XP gets the job done.
- Want to browse the web, XP does it.
- Want to watch full screen video, XP does it.
- Want to edit video, XP does it.
- Want to sync your iPod. XP does it.
Functionaly, XP has it. What new functionaly does VISTA really bring? I know, it is suposed to have some things that make it easier to administer in a business environment. I have not seen anyone who has said that is enough of an upside to take on VISTA. So in functionality, VISTA is preceived to be no better than XP.Aesthetics, is in the eye of the beholder. Not everyone is in love with Aero. There are plenty of "Vista Ready" laptops that can not run Aero in all of its glory. I think of Areo, and I think of how hard it is to find anything in the Vista control panel(s) hell. I don't know that Vista wins because it MAY be possible to have translucent window decorations, and a fancy alt-tab.
Hardware support, XP has it. With support through 2014 from Microsoft. With the number of people and businesses NOT moving over to Vista. Hardware support is cleary in the XP camp and staying there. Since so many end users and business downgrade to XP. The quickest way for a PC manufacturer to shoot themseves in the foot, is to not provide XP drivers for their systems. Try googling "vista only". The only thing I saw come up is DX10. How much aftermarket stuff is VISTA ONLY? Not enough to make a difference. XP wins for hadrware support.
Security, Vista might have it. In exchange for this "security" you lose compatibility with many apps that you would want to run. UAC on is a pain in the butt. UAC off lowers security a notch. I am not sure how much less spyware a vista machine may pick up. I don't know anyone who ran it more than 3 weeks before switching to windows. I think the security ends up being a wash. Once you have to install antivirus, spwyare removal and keep them updateded. Watch what you click on and where you browse. Deal with UAC. How much more work is XP than Vista for the same level of security? How much more insecure is XP for the average user?
The bottom line is XP does everything users want to do with decent performance. MSDOS, Winodws 3.x, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 98SE, Windows NT 3.51, Windows NT 4.0, and Windows Vista do not. Windows 2000 almost does for most users.
So depening on your needs you have 1) Stick with XP 2) Take a perormance hit and go to VISTA for no apperant benefits.
Most folks are opting of for 1. Even if it means pulling out their old OEM CD of XP and installing it over Vista.
A good sign is VISTA ONLY software aimed at the enterprise. Time will tell if a program is Vista Only if the prior version outsells it. Or people just move on to some software that will still run on XP.
What I can't figure out for the life of me. Is why more software was not written correctly for XP. There is NO GOOD REASON that Quickbooks does not run properly on a locked down account. If an account is locked down. That is an indicator you are in a corporate environment. Perhaps the only time the program gets run as an administrator is when IT decides to install updates and patches. Otherwise anything out side of %USER% or HKCU should not be written to. There is no excuse for that. Intuit deserves to be kicked in the nards just like Apple did to Adobe (remains to be seen if that was a good idea or not). Seven years is enough time to get their act together and program things properly. It ain't Windows 98 any more.
But where will the licenses come from to do so?
"Buy real estate God ain't making no more of it" --Mark Twain
MS is soon going out of the market of selling XP...or so they say.
You will have to buy Vista Professional for each VM to be able to legally "upgrade" to Windows XP.
This also opens up a whole new can of worms.
Is it really just a Windows XP emulator? In which case Microsoft may have to provide XP security and patches. So XP may not EOL till 2017 or 2018. XP Service Pack 4 or 5? If they have to keep fixing it, why can't you just buy XP with SP4 for real hardware?
Or is it some hybrid Windows9x/XP/Vista emulator thing? Like what Vista is supposed to do? Will it be better than what Vista does for compatibility?
The only thing I am sure of. Is that Microsoft is going to promise the stars, the moon, and the sun....and deliver something that is closer to earth or hades.
Unless you code sets flags like
Every routine of any importance or value has loads of exceptions. You name it, behavior for certain versions of certain apps, for emulating certain OS version bugs, etc. I am not certain that a rewrite would not be better.
To bad it will be written by committee.
Yeah, I am not holding my breath. Lets look at where Microsoft is at now. They have Vista, which is a mess. Lets consider it "done" as of July 2006. Then we have 2008, which has that lovely little modular server core.
Microsoft expects us to believe that between July 2006 and Decemeber 2009 (A span of about 3 1/2 years). That they have produced the following:
Now lets add in the "lock in" and the "who can we screw" factor.
With a whole new driver model. They will be lucky if they can get decent drivers for NEW hardware. Like new models of printers that went on sale in the six months prior to the launch of Winodws 7. I am sure there will be fees and driver signing. How much older hardware do you think will be ported over?
They are expecting to maintain a 32 bit code base, a 64 bit code base, and a "classic windows" code base. Remember, they are not VMing XP and Vista. They are creating a "NEW" VMd OS with the WinSxS collection to load the proper libraries to run Vista stuff properly, or XP stuff properly, or NT 4.0 stuff proplrey or Windows 3.1 stuff properly.
This sounds like a tall order for a company that took 6 years to deliver Vista. Not to mention emerging trends like "lite computing" in the eeePC. Is Microsoft going to secede that market? Or will they perpetually make XP available? How will they compete if Linux keeps adding features that make Linux the best choice for the low end market. How will the compete if Linux keeps making new hardware run faster than XP with more features than Vista and 7? What if ReactOS and Wine provide better compatibility with older Microsoft software than Seven does?
It sounds like it is time for Microsoft to reinvent itself, only there is no Steve Jobs in the wings to do so.
Why should people upgrade nowdays?
What do normal people do? Edit documents, browse the web, read email, listen to music, watch video, play some games. Heavy users may render/convert/edit audio/video or play high end games.
Full screen, full motion video is already possible on even low end hardware. I.E. 80 gig drive, 512mb ram, 64mb video card.
Why wouldn't the average user be happy if he could get the computer he got in 2004 all over again? It does everything they want to do.
Which is why the see so little value in moving to Vista. Better OS's could do more and they needed more hardware to do it. XP does it all with the hardware they have. Again, if they got that computer in 2004. Now in 2008 they can get MORE computer than that for $400-$500...if they could run XP.
When AI, rendering video in real time, and true speech recognition are a reality. Then people will see spending more to buy more software and hardware to run it. Till then, it is all going to be pretty ho-hum for folks.
And worse yet for Microsoft. Linux is trying to improve performance on current hardware. More eye candy and better performance than Vista. And if you can live without eye candy, watch out. Linux is going to be FAST compared to Vista on a machine with 512mb of memory.
You have forgotten all of the benefits the the ISO process.
Lets see. There is making a mockery of the standards making process. There is a cheapening of the term ISO standard. When I see that in the future, it won't have as much meaning to me. It does not mean something will work, or is used by the industry, or even that it is possible to implement. I know it is not multi-vendor. It will not prevent lock-in. Any data comitted to it may or may not be portable.
Also, as serves them right. The ISO has been crippled by this. All of those members that came on board to help Microsoft. Well, they are not showing up at any of the other meetings. So when a standards body meets. Has 40 members only 10 of them show up, and you get 4 YES, 4 NO, 2 abstain and 30 not present. Well shucks. Things just about grind to a halt.
Thunar --daemon
That will put thunar running in the background. Anytime dbus signals a new device has been plugged in. It will mount the device and open it up in a new thunar window.
You are talking to a person who switched to opera back in 1997 because it was the best browser out there.
Firefox has gotten to where it is currently at via its quality, strategic alliances, and end-user word of mouth. There is still room for improvement in all 3 departments.
Microsoft has already lost the war. The browser IS the platform for anyone that cares to treat it that way.
It is a matter of knowing your resources. http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Ubuntu:Gutsy Is the quickest way to get things like nvidia set up correctly. It is pretty much only an apt-get install nvidia-kernel-common nvidia-glx-new . And it looks like for hardy apt-get install helix-player will install real player.
Make sure you have enabled the universal repositories. Also http://www.medibuntu.org/ and http://www.getdeb.net/ are a good source of apps.
You say that as if it is a bad thing.
When prefer the look of many GNOME apps, but there are just to many good KDE apps out there. K3b, Amarok and Konqueror being the ones I use the most. Since Slackware droped GNOME. It was pretty easy. Slackware with KDE, XFCE4 and Fluxbox. I tend to spend most of my time in Fluxbox.
I would just spend 3 days setting up my system. Install Slackware and all the WM's. Then go to linuxpackages and pick up everything there that I can use. Then download, compile and rundown missing libraries to build all the apps, dock apps, drivers and things that I like on my system. Then tweak the configuration on everything to make it work on my network and start up the way I like it. As I said, about 3 days. The system was how I liked it and much faster than Fedora. Things like VMware were a pain to set up, thus it the Slackware way.
Now days. I just install xubuntu, do an apt-get update/upgrade, apt-get install kubuntu-desktop fluxbox. A few more apt-gets to get all of my needed apps, dock apps,goodies and eyecandy. I am then left to download and configure by hand maybe 10 or 15 apps. All of which seem to do so without compliant and library hell (i.e. needs imlib1.2 but imlib1.2a to be installed). Then tweaking very few config files by hand.
Now setting up a new system MY WAY takes a few hours instead of a few days. As a bonus, the forums are very helpful. There is much more likely a tweek or info on how to work around a problem for Ubuntu than for any other distro. I have hot tried Fedora in the last 2 years. But the ubuntu based distros run almost as fast as slackware and much faster than Fedora. Not to mention Fedora making KDE a second class citizen. No contest.
If I want to play around, tinker, and tweak. Slackware is where I will go. Believe me, when RedHat drove me back to Slackware, I knew I had it better. But if I want a system 97% of the way to where I like it in just a few hours. Ubuntu/Xubuntu/Ubuntu is the way to go.
The truth is, if it becomes the default web browser and sets the homepage to http://msn.com./ The people they want to switch, won't notice the difference. If they don't hijack the default browser settings, no one will even know it is installed. If they do hijack it and MSN is not the hompage, those people will switch back to IE anyways.
What bothers me, is that mozilla feels threatened. If Firefox is the best browser out there, it will continue to gain market share, despite what Microsoft and Apple do.
You must be new here.
To be blunt. I don't know of one linux distro who's goal is to "fucking kill" another distro.
When Slax, or Puppy, or Knopix, or Ubuntu were put out there, they focus on doing something a bit different than some other distro. What they do, can be borrowed by other distros and improved.
When Microsoft puts out something like Silverlight. There goal is to own 100% of the market. The want to "Fucking chock off Adobe's air supply". Once Flash is gone, so is the Silverlight player for Mac and Linux. After all, with no flash out there, they can "leverage" Silverlight to lock people into Windows.
I am in the same boat with an in-law. He owns a small mini-mart. I am trying to find any solution that will work. Neither Quickbooks POS nor Microsoft RMS are anywhere near prime time for a grocery store.
- You can't buy beer/soda by the case and sell it by the 1 can, 6 can, or 24 can units AND be able to handle bottle deposits. QB can sell units in sets of 1/6/24. Or can do tie one product to another. Like attaching a deposit to a can of soda. But it cant' do both. Don't even try either one with RMS.
- They don't handle lottery tickets. What if you want to turn your winning $5.00 ticket back in for 5 more tickets? Nope in QB and RMS.
- They don't handle tracking which products are food for food stamps. I.E. Receipt is for $7.50 and 4.25 is for food (stamps) and 2.75 is non-food. Nope for QB and RMS
- If I am shooting for the stars. They rent videos as well. Any way to "rent" items, track customers, see what is late? Nope for QB and RMS.
Even if you are willing to pay. What off the shelf software is out there to handle a mini-mart/grocery store?3) They say they have implemented, and sure enough you can save to OOXML. Other programs that try to read it end up with junk. Everyone thinks their own implementation of OOXML filters are broke. Then 3 years down the road, it is discovered that when Microsoft saves to OOXML, it is not the same specification as they publicly stated it was.
Seriously, how many years do you think it will take to catch Microsoft if they do a bait and switch?
If your hardware is linux friendly. Learning Linux may be cheaper than learning Vista. And if you already use OpenOffice and Firefox. It will be much easier than moving to Office 2007. Even the French Police figured that one out.
I have to take this one on. I had a Vista system on a domain. Brought up explorer, put in a UNC for another system. I realized I had a typo, and the system I was trying to reach was not going to be there. So instead of sitting around for a minute so waiting for Vista to figure this out. I hit the escape key and closed the window. At that point, Clicking on applications would not open them, Already open instances of Internet Explorer could not browse UNCs or URLs. The Shutdown menu was no where to be found. Even after a ctrl-alt-delete. No shutdown menu anywhere is sight. This has happened on more than several occasions...till I put kubuntu on the box.
Even XP from day one was more prime time than that. I remember complaining about not being able to find things. But I never thought "What a POS, they broke or botched perfectly good features that worked in 98".
I have found spell check on Slashdot next to impossible.
As much as I'd like to believe this, I see no indication that it will actually happen.
All monopolies lose their standing. Be it the Egyptian priests telling the peasants when to plant. To the Italian button makers of the 16th century. To the Railroad Barons of the 19th Century. To IBM of the 20th Century.
Every monopoly loses it's stranglehold at some point. I expect that with Microsoft it will be in my lifetime (the next 40 years or so).