what distro did she use ? my father who is a corrections officer and has no computer experience installed redhat 8 with almost no help from me. the only thing he needed help with was configuring evolution to get his mail.
Linux doesnt do alot of things. but some distros are easier for a computer n00b to use than windows.
no actually the analogy was very simple, just like the question that you cannot answer:
analogy= many people claimed at some point with closed minds the following (see previous post)
question= if there are so many people who have used linux I would like to know when this was, since the vast majority of the population have not used it. Since you are leading people to believe you HAVE used it and somehow have a problem with it, why dont you answer the very simple question: what doesnt it do that you need it to do, and when was the last time you tried it.
very simple. your refusal to answer the question leads me to believe your full of shit.
when was the last time you installed or configured linux ? i would venture a guess to say that 80% of the people out there could install redhat 9 with little to no problems.
but the point stands, the reason linux isn't more widely used is because of ms's ILLEGAL bussiness tactics. not because of its usability.
think of a wall. putting a wall in the middle of a 3 lane highway might only prevent people from driving through 1 lane, hence not totally blocking off the road. whereas if the road is gone there is hardly any chance someone will be driving there.
same principle with ports/services. if the port doesnt have anything listening on it that would prevent 100% of attacks destined for that port (netbios is my favorite) whereas a firewall might not be properly configured, or block the correct ports, or block to many etc etc. there are to many variables with firewalls, i dont expect the average windows users to know how to configure one. I do however expect a system engineer or developer or whatever to know that disabling a service (esp one thats not needed or heavily used) should be the default behavior.
if we were to move from core OS features into user land microsoft would still be trailing in everything except for userbase. that includes usability for *NEW* users. its true that the majority of people who use computers now would preffer ms to linux, but thats because they were trained on ms. this is starting to change, with a large amount of asain gov't using linux. (if 50% of china alone starts using linux, linux would have a larger install base than ms.)
3. their are tons of actual studies about the stability of linux vs windows. hell has a matter of fact i would like to know the last time somebody crashed a Linux box was. the ONLY time it has happend to me was because of a shitty graphics driver (thank you nvidia)
4. good to see you have no freakin idea what your doing. a properly admined system shouldnt be cracked, unless the vendor doesnt have a patch out prior to a virus/worm/rootkit, and last i checked that was something that didnt happen ever if at all in the OSS community. microsoft on the other hand......
6. Please explain to me how having a seperate super-user is a bad thing ? windows has tried and failed. but their is a reason they tried..... (security) because its a better to seperate priveledged and un-privledged users, and hence daemons and the like
7. I would like to know how to set priority on a windows process in a useful way. (and have it actually work) see nice.
8. actually I wasnt talking about daemons, I was talking about the kernel. see make menuconfig, and/proc
9. point taken, although I have not seen performance stats.
10. only the way to expensive version of windows 2003 enterprise, unless I am mistaken.
11. you can encrypt the data on a harddrive with windows via the kernel API ?
12. I cant speak for a few years ago, not to mention that going with "a few years ago" I can start bringing in things from windows 98 or 95, you dont want to go there. I have personally had windows 2000 dump the kernel from lack of memory, and kick the network stack under high load. i would like to see linux do that.
13. puhhlease. this was a heavily customized box, with special hardware operating in special circumstances. its like citing a gartner study.
I love you microsofties. you run your flap off about Linux/Unix because you think it is "cool" or that your the minority, yet you have no real evidence of anything short of the "its not point and click" crap and the "years ago" mantra.
the original post was a joke (hence the tinfiol hat reference). I honestly dont hate windows, i just have problems with people who ignore its short comings and treat it like the holy grail of OS's when its not, Linux isn't, BSD isn't, mac isn't, no unix is, amiga aint, BeOS aint, OS/2 aint, and windows sure as hell isn't...... and so on.....
1. better file systems
2. cleaner kernel/user seperation
3. stability
4. security
5. stateful firewall.
6. Grsecurity
7. real proccess acounting
8. visable (AKA usable) configuration info
9. NUMA support
10. 64 bit proccessor support (sparc, alpha, mips etc)
11. Crypto. (they are only what 3 years behind on this ?)
12. real memory management.
13. a real network stack.
14. Real time customizable. (sorta)
I can keep going. most people who actually know about the technology that goes into the OS (not the fucking UI) know the linux is far superior to windows, and unix is far superior to linux. but of course you were probably talking about some l33t program or useless service that needs microsofts shitty libraries to work.
..... funny thing comes to my mind regarding this (get your tinfoil hat out)....
1. Microsoft tells SCO to attack Linux
2. Microsoft tells SCO here's some money keep going
3. Microsoft plots to get the GPL invalidated
4. Microsoft steals Linux's code, gnu's code and puts the "Windows" GUI onto a Linux core, after the needed hooks in the kernel are added.
5. Profit !
6. Linux geeks start a new OS, GNU starts a new license. its the early 90's all over again....
7. Goto 1
this has nothing to do with the topic at hand, I just clicked through to your website (and although I cant read swedish...) I must say I enjoyed the bush resume`, and rigging the election thing as well. highly amusing stuff.
I also didnt know there were so many Swedish folks on/. , it being so american-centric.
I highly doubt anyone with half a brain would run IIS on anything important. If for no other reason than possible downtime do to bugs/worms whatever, apache is guilty of the same thing.
you would be surprised how many places run on proprietary/semi-proprietary web servers.
but thats not really the point, if we were to compare the amount of "real work" done by an OS on the desktop unix/linux and mac would have a much higher share than they currently do. however we dont compare that, we currently compare nothing more than actuall verified installed base. which is the same thing that should be done for webservers/databases/everythingandthekitchensink.
is see your point, but numbers such as that are subject to opinion. for instance what do i consider "traffic" ? and so on.
thats not to mention that apache is much much faster than IIS, and cheaper.
Netscape isnt dead its far from thriving, but MS used illegal tactics to get IE the victory.
Sun's Java is the ONLY Java, there are many different JDK's and such but they all must conform to standards in order to be Java, lest they be sued and lose like MS did. Not to mention that just about every mobile device made in that past year includes Java, or Java compatibility. still in much wider use than.crap... err.net
okay firstly Linux adoption is not regressing, as a matter of fact research shows it has only nominally slowed in the US.
Apache's popularity is not declining, and since you brought it up I want statistical proof of that claim, and dont point to netcraft, it is wildly inaccurate.
SCO's lawsuit has accomplished nothing, as a matter of fact if SCO loses (and it looks like they will according to lawyers) they will be helping linux and the GPL by eliminating this threat so early in their life span, and also by testing the GPL in court, thereby giving precidence.
PS2 faces stiff competition sure, but its still winning.
Oracle hasnt even been touched by MS, Oracle's only real competition is DB2, and in some markets mySQL. Microsoft doesnt make anything that even runs on 64 bit proc's yet(Or a REAL OS). let alone some of the more elite features of Oracle, that comment is laughable.
I'll grant you the IE comment. however microsoft has attempted the search engine thing before, and failed. miserably. every stinkin time.
he doesnt have to use linux on the machine itself. he could go to ebay and drop $30 - $40 on a POS old p2 and $10 on another NIC, so for as little as $40 he will have a standalone firewall.
then after he realizes that Linux "just works" for 99% of stuff he will end up dual booting for just games, or even buying a KVM and having a game rig and a system that "just works", its the way that most people i know ended up switching.
not to mention the linux firewall will over time be much cheaper than the software firewall, not to mention more flexible and useful.
i love how you anti-linux zealots twist everything into people saying "Linux is the only way", we know its not. but when it is a viable option it WILL get pointed out to be just that, no matter how much you jump up and down screaming about it. and next time you switch (and have a problem) ask someone who might know the answer, it'll make your life alot easier.
<sarcasm> I'm Sooooooo Sorry. You have been added to my enemies list. this is the default behavior for members of the EVIL empire. If you belive this is an error please call 1-800-936-4900. proceed to wait on hold for an hour and when some lackey answers beg for assistance, so you can transfered to someone else, and start all over. This post was sponsored by people who dont want an oversized greed-mongering convicted criminal corporation controlling their computer. Have A Nice Day. </sarcasm>
but Linux has never, is not, and will never be a mainstream operating system.
actually that depends on your definition. when mot manufacturors are using it, and releasing software for it then it very much IS mainstream to most people.
but it's just a hacked up UNIX-like OS
in what way is linux "hacked up". more specifically what do you mean by "hacked up". to the majority of people out there Linux is very user friendly. and a hell of alot easier to use from the get-go than windows.
built by a bunch of volunteers. Most people do NOT care about the free-software ideology
this is a moot point, most people arent even aware where their car was built, let alone where their software was coded or who it was coded by. not to mention that using linux doesnt require you to care about a damn thing other than usability, time and money.
they just want to turn on their computer, read their e-mail, browse the web, and look at porn/pictures of their grandkids (not necessarily the same people). Why screw around with Linux when Windows comes for free on their computer?
this is the real point. Why ? well that all depends on what you think will happen, if microsoft tries to hijack all their data or force updates that break things (or worse delete things) then people will migrate. i already know a large number of "users" that have migrated because of microsofts cruddy stability, security, data formats etc. i will admit that the thing that would help Linux the most is having it installed by default on store bought PC's. but has the parent pointed out it doesnt need to start in the US to affect the US. if china starts making a move, south korea will follow shortly after so will india and japan (arguably two of our biggest bussiness partners) and sooner or later the companies that spawn dominance in those countries/regions will start marketing in the US. at that point the average person wont care what OS they run, so long as they can "turn on their computer, read their e-mail, browse the web, and look at porn/pictures of their grandkids"
The linux zealots constantly inflate the miserable usability that most linux things currently have
usability is a myth. it varies from one person to the next greatly. for some people that term means "purtty" for others it means "bloat" or "features" yet for others it means "it just works".
you attaching the tag zealots to something proves the point that you know little-to-nothing about which you speak. the zaurus was never marketed to "average joe user guy". as such it shouldnt be compared to things that were, the zaurus was made for network techs and sysadmins (possibly even linux coders, although they wouldnt run the crippled version of linux that is included by default) and since i happen to be a network tech who owns a zaurus (and has owned a zire and a treo) i would completely and utterly disagree with your statement about usability. it does everything i need it to do and with little to no hassle.
Slashdot Mirror
The java enterprise desktop is based on SuSe linux. It basically is SuSe with some value add-ons and support.
You can buy songs for $1 plus the $99 for windows or x for mac.
no thanks. I preffer not to be forced to buy a product I dont need, and wont use. Or support convicted felons.
that all depends on the libraries and compilers you are using. and what arch you are using.
on the other hand if you want noticable speed increases use a nptl kernel and prelink. of course speed will cost you stability.
what distro did she use ? my father who is a corrections officer and has no computer experience installed redhat 8 with almost no help from me. the only thing he needed help with was configuring evolution to get his mail.
Linux doesnt do alot of things. but some distros are easier for a computer n00b to use than windows.
no actually the analogy was very simple, just like the question that you cannot answer:
analogy= many people claimed at some point with closed minds the following (see previous post)
question= if there are so many people who have used linux I would like to know when this was, since the vast majority of the population have not used it. Since you are leading people to believe you HAVE used it and somehow have a problem with it, why dont you answer the very simple question: what doesnt it do that you need it to do, and when was the last time you tried it.
very simple. your refusal to answer the question leads me to believe your full of shit.
so basically what your saying is that because people say something that makes it true ?
......
the earth is flat.
the earth is the center of the universe
there was no holocaust.
america isnt self-centered.
bush isnt a jackass
and so on and so forth
when was the last time you installed or configured linux ? i would venture a guess to say that 80% of the people out there could install redhat 9 with little to no problems.
but the point stands, the reason linux isn't more widely used is because of ms's ILLEGAL bussiness tactics. not because of its usability.
dont give me hearsay, give me specifics.
just cause im bored ....
whats your beef with linux ? what cant it do that you need it to ?
So basically since no software can be utopian (made by humans, to error is human and so on ...) all software will evolve or die.
I whole heartedly agree. someone drop ms a line and tell them to evolve into something secure, or die.
the lawyers ?
or perhaps the judge ?
technically speaking, not exactly.
think of a wall. putting a wall in the middle of a 3 lane highway might only prevent people from driving through 1 lane, hence not totally blocking off the road. whereas if the road is gone there is hardly any chance someone will be driving there.
same principle with ports/services. if the port doesnt have anything listening on it that would prevent 100% of attacks destined for that port (netbios is my favorite) whereas a firewall might not be properly configured, or block the correct ports, or block to many etc etc. there are to many variables with firewalls, i dont expect the average windows users to know how to configure one. I do however expect a system engineer or developer or whatever to know that disabling a service (esp one thats not needed or heavily used) should be the default behavior.
thank you.
if we were to move from core OS features into user land microsoft would still be trailing in everything except for userbase. that includes usability for *NEW* users. its true that the majority of people who use computers now would preffer ms to linux, but thats because they were trained on ms. this is starting to change, with a large amount of asain gov't using linux. (if 50% of china alone starts using linux, linux would have a larger install base than ms.)
3. their are tons of actual studies about the stability of linux vs windows. hell has a matter of fact i would like to know the last time somebody crashed a Linux box was. the ONLY time it has happend to me was because of a shitty graphics driver (thank you nvidia)
......
..... (security) because its a better to seperate priveledged and un-privledged users, and hence daemons and the like
/proc
...... and so on .....
4. good to see you have no freakin idea what your doing. a properly admined system shouldnt be cracked, unless the vendor doesnt have a patch out prior to a virus/worm/rootkit, and last i checked that was something that didnt happen ever if at all in the OSS community. microsoft on the other hand
6. Please explain to me how having a seperate super-user is a bad thing ? windows has tried and failed. but their is a reason they tried
7. I would like to know how to set priority on a windows process in a useful way. (and have it actually work) see nice.
8. actually I wasnt talking about daemons, I was talking about the kernel. see make menuconfig, and
9. point taken, although I have not seen performance stats.
10. only the way to expensive version of windows 2003 enterprise, unless I am mistaken.
11. you can encrypt the data on a harddrive with windows via the kernel API ?
12. I cant speak for a few years ago, not to mention that going with "a few years ago" I can start bringing in things from windows 98 or 95, you dont want to go there. I have personally had windows 2000 dump the kernel from lack of memory, and kick the network stack under high load. i would like to see linux do that.
13. puhhlease. this was a heavily customized box, with special hardware operating in special circumstances. its like citing a gartner study.
I love you microsofties. you run your flap off about Linux/Unix because you think it is "cool" or that your the minority, yet you have no real evidence of anything short of the "its not point and click" crap and the "years ago" mantra.
the original post was a joke (hence the tinfiol hat reference). I honestly dont hate windows, i just have problems with people who ignore its short comings and treat it like the holy grail of OS's when its not, Linux isn't, BSD isn't, mac isn't, no unix is, amiga aint, BeOS aint, OS/2 aint, and windows sure as hell isn't
well you mean besides the obvious ?
1. better file systems
2. cleaner kernel/user seperation
3. stability
4. security
5. stateful firewall.
6. Grsecurity
7. real proccess acounting
8. visable (AKA usable) configuration info
9. NUMA support
10. 64 bit proccessor support (sparc, alpha, mips etc)
11. Crypto. (they are only what 3 years behind on this ?)
12. real memory management.
13. a real network stack.
14. Real time customizable. (sorta)
I can keep going. most people who actually know about the technology that goes into the OS (not the fucking UI) know the linux is far superior to windows, and unix is far superior to linux. but of course you were probably talking about some l33t program or useless service that needs microsofts shitty libraries to work.
..... funny thing comes to my mind regarding this (get your tinfoil hat out) ....
....
......
1. Microsoft tells SCO to attack Linux
2. Microsoft tells SCO here's some money keep going
3. Microsoft plots to get the GPL invalidated
4. Microsoft steals Linux's code, gnu's code and puts the "Windows" GUI onto a Linux core, after the needed hooks in the kernel are added.
5. Profit !
6. Linux geeks start a new OS, GNU starts a new license. its the early 90's all over again
7. Goto 1
on second thought maybe not
this has nothing to do with the topic at hand, I just clicked through to your website (and although I cant read swedish...) I must say I enjoyed the bush resume`, and rigging the election thing as well. highly amusing stuff.
/. , it being so american-centric.
I also didnt know there were so many Swedish folks on
I highly doubt anyone with half a brain would run IIS on anything important. If for no other reason than possible downtime do to bugs/worms whatever, apache is guilty of the same thing.
you would be surprised how many places run on proprietary/semi-proprietary web servers.
but thats not really the point, if we were to compare the amount of "real work" done by an OS on the desktop unix/linux and mac would have a much higher share than they currently do. however we dont compare that, we currently compare nothing more than actuall verified installed base. which is the same thing that should be done for webservers/databases/everythingandthekitchensink.
is see your point, but numbers such as that are subject to opinion. for instance what do i consider "traffic" ? and so on.
thats not to mention that apache is much much faster than IIS, and cheaper.
point taken. not necessarily agrred with, but i see your point.
Netscape isnt dead its far from thriving, but MS used illegal tactics to get IE the victory.
.crap ... err .net
Sun's Java is the ONLY Java, there are many different JDK's and such but they all must conform to standards in order to be Java, lest they be sued and lose like MS did. Not to mention that just about every mobile device made in that past year includes Java, or Java compatibility. still in much wider use than
So much so that no OS is the answer for everybody.
i agree with that, but if you stand behind it why be so critical of the recomendation ?
where to start ......
....
lets see
okay firstly Linux adoption is not regressing, as a matter of fact research shows it has only nominally slowed in the US.
Apache's popularity is not declining, and since you brought it up I want statistical proof of that claim, and dont point to netcraft, it is wildly inaccurate.
SCO's lawsuit has accomplished nothing, as a matter of fact if SCO loses (and it looks like they will according to lawyers) they will be helping linux and the GPL by eliminating this threat so early in their life span, and also by testing the GPL in court, thereby giving precidence.
PS2 faces stiff competition sure, but its still winning.
Oracle hasnt even been touched by MS, Oracle's only real competition is DB2, and in some markets mySQL. Microsoft doesnt make anything that even runs on 64 bit proc's yet(Or a REAL OS). let alone some of the more elite features of Oracle, that comment is laughable.
I'll grant you the IE comment. however microsoft has attempted the search engine thing before, and failed. miserably. every stinkin time.
he doesnt have to use linux on the machine itself. he could go to ebay and drop $30 - $40 on a POS old p2 and $10 on another NIC, so for as little as $40 he will have a standalone firewall.
then after he realizes that Linux "just works" for 99% of stuff he will end up dual booting for just games, or even buying a KVM and having a game rig and a system that "just works", its the way that most people i know ended up switching.
not to mention the linux firewall will over time be much cheaper than the software firewall, not to mention more flexible and useful.
i love how you anti-linux zealots twist everything into people saying "Linux is the only way", we know its not. but when it is a viable option it WILL get pointed out to be just that, no matter how much you jump up and down screaming about it. and next time you switch (and have a problem) ask someone who might know the answer, it'll make your life alot easier.
<sarcasm>
I'm Sooooooo Sorry.
You have been added to my enemies list. this is the default behavior for members of the EVIL empire. If you belive this is an error please call 1-800-936-4900. proceed to wait on hold for an hour and when some lackey answers beg for assistance, so you can transfered to someone else, and start all over. This post was sponsored by people who dont want an oversized greed-mongering convicted criminal corporation controlling their computer. Have A Nice Day.
</sarcasm>
but Linux has never, is not, and will never be a mainstream operating system.
actually that depends on your definition. when mot manufacturors are using it, and releasing software for it then it very much IS mainstream to most people.
but it's just a hacked up UNIX-like OS
in what way is linux "hacked up". more specifically what do you mean by "hacked up". to the majority of people out there Linux is very user friendly. and a hell of alot easier to use from the get-go than windows.
built by a bunch of volunteers. Most people do NOT care about the free-software ideology
this is a moot point, most people arent even aware where their car was built, let alone where their software was coded or who it was coded by. not to mention that using linux doesnt require you to care about a damn thing other than usability, time and money.
they just want to turn on their computer, read their e-mail, browse the web, and look at porn/pictures of their grandkids (not necessarily the same people). Why screw around with Linux when Windows comes for free on their computer?
this is the real point. Why ? well that all depends on what you think will happen, if microsoft tries to hijack all their data or force updates that break things (or worse delete things) then people will migrate. i already know a large number of "users" that have migrated because of microsofts cruddy stability, security, data formats etc. i will admit that the thing that would help Linux the most is having it installed by default on store bought PC's. but has the parent pointed out it doesnt need to start in the US to affect the US. if china starts making a move, south korea will follow shortly after so will india and japan (arguably two of our biggest bussiness partners) and sooner or later the companies that spawn dominance in those countries/regions will start marketing in the US. at that point the average person wont care what OS they run, so long as they can "turn on their computer, read their e-mail, browse the web, and look at porn/pictures of their grandkids"
The linux zealots constantly inflate the miserable usability that most linux things currently have
usability is a myth. it varies from one person to the next greatly. for some people that term means "purtty" for others it means "bloat" or "features" yet for others it means "it just works".
you attaching the tag zealots to something proves the point that you know little-to-nothing about which you speak. the zaurus was never marketed to "average joe user guy". as such it shouldnt be compared to things that were, the zaurus was made for network techs and sysadmins (possibly even linux coders, although they wouldnt run the crippled version of linux that is included by default) and since i happen to be a network tech who owns a zaurus (and has owned a zire and a treo) i would completely and utterly disagree with your statement about usability. it does everything i need it to do and with little to no hassle.