You and the other commercially orientated programmers that have moaned about Stallman's comments need to stop throwing your "toys out of the pram" and re-read the article properly again - I did not see any mention in the article about being denied the right to create commercial closed software.
The article is not about software directly but about exercising the right to exercise personal freedom and the right to choice of either open or closed source software - please remember that no programmer is forced to write open source software.
Firstly, you need to accept that a lot of people (myself included) are unwilling to pay hundreds of dollars/pounds/Euros etc. for a lot of the commercial software, Microsoft OSes and applications included, that are out there currently. Microsoft's penetration currently is due to the fact that a lot of new PCs have Windows etc. on them and because businesses pay large amounts of money for licensing - the CDs from that licensing get copied and passed around employees and their friends to the point where most home users have MS Office installed because they got it freely. Add to that the free availability of pirated software on Usenet and you have a whole heap of people using *ILLEGAL* free software. (I have been in the telecoms IT industry now for over 20 years and I have *NEVER* known anyone to buy a legitimate copy of MS Office or Windows yet everyone I know seems to have both!)
Therefore, on the assumption that a whole lot of people won't pay some of the prices asked for commercial software no matter what you do to them, surely it's better that they choose the *LEGAL* free alternatives?
Secondly, why should I allow a (corrupt?) business to dictate to me exactly how I should or should not use something I have purchased legally. Why should I be denied the option of choice? Why should I have to endure sub-standard product on my PC if I believe a cheaper (or free) alternative is better? That does not give me the right to dictate what you should use because you too have a right to choice...
Thirdly, how can you call someone that creates a proprietary stock market model a "mathematician"? A mathematician is a theorist who simply explores the science of mathematics in order to further his knowledge and the rest of human-kind - a "commercial statistician" (the best description I can come up with) has a remit of making the company he works for more money; sure, the model may be his/her own but there is a fixed end goal.
Fourthly, software is "intangible" - anyone with a computer and a knowledge of programming can create software. Hardware requires access to expensive manufactuting tools and therefore cannot be open to all by it's very nature.
Finally, adaption. I personally do not care whether or not people are still making money from software in 10/20/30 years time because it's irrelevant to the whole issue. The business market and simple laws of supply and demand dictate that commercial software is viable now but, just like the dinosaurs died out eventually, so might commercial software in the future - remember that universities and academics were giving away software long before anyone thought of selling it so what is guaranteed is that free software will continue and there isn't a damn thing Microsoft or anyone else can do about it...
All that matters is that people have the right to choice and the Open Source movement simply ensures that freedom remains nothing more.
All power to Stallman! I don't agree with everything he says but I defend him wholeheartedly in preserving the rights of you, me and everyone else to choose...
There seems to be a lot of discussion in here about upgrading from Windows 98SE to Windows 2000, Windows XP, Linux, etc. etc. without taking into account the simple fact that most people on/. are probably in the IT industry anyway and have free and easy access to MSDN CDs that allow them to install and use the latest Windows OS and Office at home, free of charge.
The arguments on here follow the same arguments I frequently have with colleagues at work and friends at home when we discuss moving to Linux as an option of getting out of the Windows upgrade cycle (I'm the Linux user, the others all use Windows as their main OS) - they're all happy to stay in the Windows upgrade cycle until you remind them that if they didn't have access to MSDN CDs, they would end up parting with several hundred dollars to run the Microsoft software that they currently run - when you remind them of that, Linux (to them) then seems to be something worth considering...
>>Microsoft products quite often serve as the >>blueprint and inspiration for open source >>products
Rubbish!
If you buy a car, you expect it to have 4 wheels, an engine, air-conditioning, etc.
Likewise, in software, you expect it to have networking capability, (probably) a GUI that you can use with a mouse and a few applications that you can load, edit and save files with.
Sure, Microsoft's penetration has influenced how people want a PC to "feel" when it's used but it would be a poor software developer who didn't focus on trying to make an application as usable as possible to his intended audience and to fit in with the way they currently use a computer as much as possible.
The same argument could be applied to Microsoft ripping off the GUI look and feel from Xerox.
Let's see what all these owners of illegal copies of MS Office do when DRM has it's evil little way with their PCs and stops them running software they've not paid for!
I think they'll get off their butts then and start learning cheaper / free alternatives...
>>Windows have a more consistent GUI and the need >>for diving into the command line is less often.
Please justify this statement. Linux has a large number of GUIs admittedly but those considered to be most "Windows-like" (i.e. that include a number of built-applications like text editors, email programs, etc.) are Gnome and KDE. Both desktop environments have application menus on a button in the bottom left of the screen, a taskbar to which windows are iconified, etc. Added to this, applications within each are compiled to specific Gnome or QT libraries giving a consistent "look and feel" to the applications.
I therefore do not see how the "consistent GUI" argument can be applied.
Also, I would be grateful if you would explain under what circumstances a standard user using Gnome or KDE might need to resort to the command line? The only time I can see this happening is that on some occasions it's necessary to run a "which" or a "find" to find the location of an application so as to create a shortcut icon to it on the desktop - hardly a great problem.
Also, try to perform network diagnostics on a Windows PC without having to resort to "ipconfig", "nslookup", "ping" or "tracert" on the command line.
My concern here is that you are a Windows-oriented user - that's fine, use what OS you are comfortable with and whatever applications you like using. However, please do not decry Linux until you have tried it to a much greater extent than you already clearly have done - you argument is based purely on supposition, not on fact.
Why do we continue to get Windows people who have never used Linux thinking they know all about Linux? If anything, the Linux people on Slashdot (including myself) are always well-informed about Windows also so can put up intelligent arguments - most Windows people use many of the same old tired arguments that they've read elsewhere on the Internet that frequently no longer apply to Linux due to its maturity now.
Also, it's actually the duty of private citizens to lobby the government that they pay for through taxation to use cheaper software alternatives.
I personally object to my taxes being used to swell the Microsoft coffers when that money can be spent on better hospital services, schools, etc. Especially as I also know that Open Source is more secure anyway...
So where are the stories of someone choosing Open Source over Microsoft then?
Microsoft continue to make profits because of tying in their existing customers to upgrade paths and by ensuring that Windows is pre-installed on the majority of pre-built PCs that get sold globally today - exactly the same reasons why Michelin and Firestone stocks won't fall as long as people continue to buy cars that need to use their tyres.
I've no doubt that Microsoft walks into green-field customer sites and wins new business in those areas also but, whatever your perspective, a lot of their business is being eaten away by Open Source, if only because of the bad press of viruses and so forth recently.
No-one is denying Microsoft is excellent at running a business but if I can quote Linus Torvalds from his biography "Just For Fun":
"Bill Gates couldn't teach me anything about programming and I couldn't teach him anything about running a business."
Also, please remember that Red Hat and SuSE cannot make large profits from software as they are "selling" Open Source software. These companies make their money from support and service contracts alone so they are not going to have as high a profit turn out as Microsoft.
Just a little effort and you get *SO* much more out of the computing experience...
e.g. "I want to archive up and delete all the DOC files on my PC to make some disk space."
Windows - go to the "Start" button, select "Search", type in *.doc, wait a couple of minutes while it finds them all, select them in the Explorer window, right click and "Add To Zip" if you've got WinZip installed, select them again and press delete.
Linux - "find / -name \*.doc -exec zip -m archive.zip {}\;" at a BASH prompt
A little effort at the beginning pays in the long run...
So you mean to tell me I can have more than 76 minutes of music spewed from the talentless maw of some cloth-eared, record-company manufactured bimbo on one CD?
Or a whole day-long duration CD of endless remixes and samples of "music" (and I use the term loosely) by some teenager that thinks its a great idea putting his greasy hands all over a vinyl record and moving it back and forth a bit?
>>What happens when Joe Sixpack wants to run >>current games?
1) He buys a games console like many existing PC users do.
2) He learns to use and configure WineX just like he learnt to use a mouse, click icons, configure his graphics card, etc. etc.
3) He waits until mainstream adoption of Linux and for games companies to port their games to Linux.
>>What happens when Joe Sixpack wants to run a >>Windows program?
Joe Sixpack doesn't *want* to run a Windows program... Joe Sixpack *wants* to send an email, write a letter, play a game or two, download images from his digital camera, etc. etc. All of these can be done in Linux.
>>What happens when Joe Sixpack get a new piece >>of hardware?
He gets some Linux drivers for it or waits for the kernel to support the hardware. He goes to the Internet, downloads a software update or two and off he goes - no different to what he does in Windows.
>>GUI is just one part of what Joe Sixpack wants >>and it will take a lot more for Windows to be >>done for.
Well Joe Sixpack gets lots of *GUI choice* with Linux - Gnome, KDE, Blackbox, Fluxbox, FWVM, etc. etc. secure in the knowledge that he doesn't need to resort to the "sinful" command line and all those *nasty little apps* like vi and Emacs...
(Presumably though, Joe Sixpack knows how to drive a car and made the time and effort to learn how to do that before he bought it - just like he read his video recorder manual before plugging it in, etc. etc.)
The only thing Linux can't do for Joe Sixpack is get him off his lazy butt to go learn about how a computer works properly...
Erm, how many Joe Public home users can fix their Windows desktop machines when they go seriously wrong? Most rely on knowledgeable friends or relatives to fix their problems - as somebody who is rarely without someone else's PC in their hallway to fix, I speak from experience.
Joe Public usually gets a bootable CD from his PC vendor that reinstalls his Windows box for him afresh if he gets a problem that he can't fix - no different to booting a Linux CD to do an installation...
If you really had thought about this carefully before making this comment, you'd know that most Joe Public users install any old rubbish shareware from the Internet on their Windows boxes making them so registry bloated that they end up reinstalling them on a six monthly basis anyway.
I do see what you are saying but I think you're also being a little unfair.
For starters, you *DON'T* have to use vi with Linux (which is what I assume you are comparing to Edlin, albeit unfairly) - install Gnome or KDE and you have a perfectly good choice of Notepad-like editors at your disposal.
Secondly, as a novice user, you don't (now) need to manually edit any config files to get a base desktop system up and working - in most cases, a modern SuSE or Mandrake distro will find your hardware first time without any real problem - the only possible exception is probably having to install 3D drivers for graphics card acceleration to work.
I can't answer the comment about having to go online with Windows to get a Linux question answered except to say that it should be easy to get a base desktop system with email and web connectivity up and then go online with Linux to do any tweaking you need to do then.
I think it's unfair comparing Linux of 2000 to Linux of 2003 - it's the same as me comparing the functionality and stability of Windows 95 to Windows 2000 (not that I use either very much)due to them being separated by the same number of years.
I do think if you try it again today, and use Mandrake 9.2 or SuSE 8.2, you will notice a marked difference and will have an easier time of getting a Linux system working.
Unfortunately, this is where Linux falls over currently & I'm not sure how the problem will be resolved in the future.
In my particular case, I run Gentoo Linux and generally only use Open Source software on it - this means that if I fancy playing a game like Quake or whatever, I can just go to Gentoo's site and download it. Then it's just a case of compiling the source against my existing system and off I go...
However, it is not reasonable to expect a less knowledgeable user to have to do this all of the time so binary distributions, especially for commercial software, has to be the way forward.
I think this will only happen if and when the number of mainstream Linux distributions decreases and software vendors have to write installers for a very specific set of distros.
In terms of reliability, ease of installation and range of software, Linux is ready for the desktop but if you want to use commercial apps and games, there's still a big problem encouraging novice users into the fold...
Stop being a troll just because it's mid term school holidays and you've nothing better to do...
The guy asked a legitimate question and all you can do is throw insults.
If anyone's the dork, it's you...
Don't get me wrong - McDonald's are the biggest scum-sucking corporation there is with what they're doing to world farming and agriculture - not to mention the pollution from all that crap packaging of their equally crap products - but they ARE are business and are entitled to make money.
In my case, I NEVER buy their products even though I enjoy a burger and fries regularly (same goes for Burger King, KFC, etc.) - if more people voted with their wallets, they wouldn't get away with it...
Erm, I don't see why Lexmark should *HAVE* to make their cartridges refillable? They're in business to make money, of course they're going to charge as much as they can get away with...
I own a Lexmark printer and I'm disgusted at the cost of cartridges - but next time I'm face with a cost of 60 UKP (=$90) for a new set of cartridges, I'll probably go look at a new (non-Lexmark) printer then anyway.
The only way to deal with this is NOT to buy the products - when it hurts them in the wallet, they'll find a way of making cartridges cheaper...
Personally, I'd rather go out into the big wide world as a responsible adult, not as some mindless moron that has no perception of temperatures.
People that sue corporations for these huge amounts are the most selfish, gutless people there are. All they end up doing is handing more of their responsibility over to government and the corporations and it's usually these same people that moan about us being in an Orwellian society.
What these idiots don't realise is that the cost of all these lawsuits and fraudulent insurance claims come straight back at the rest of us in higher priced goods and insurance premiums.
..just like the second one did.
Basically, "The Matrix" is a ten page short story that was stretched into a good movie by virtue of some innovative special effects and camera work.
The second was just a repeat of the same with a couple of really annoying LOOOOOOOOOOONNNGG philosophical dialogue sessions that admirably failed in trying to make the movie anything more than a pretty piece of eye candy...
I doubt that IBM or Sun are going to be too interested in supplying their gear to a 40 employee business.
I could be wrong here but it sounds to me like the cost of the IBM / Sun route would be excessively high compared to Intel boxes with Linux.
Why not go an download yourself or buy a copy of SuSE Linux, go install it and then tell us Windows is quicker to install?
By the time you've gone to MS Windows Update to get all your security updates and rebooted your Windows box several times in the interim, your SuSE box will have downloaded the few security updates it needs and come straight up without any need to reboot.
I'm more than happy to listen to people defend Windows and decry Linux when they have done their research and can present solid facts.
However, most Windows defenders seem to base all their anti-Linux arguments on speculation and hearsay - most Linux users have already used Windows and can validly make comparisons.
...because for many people, with access to MSDN disks from workplaces and CD copiers, I suspect that *most* home users of MS Office run it because they obtained it "freely".
I think the proportion of businesses and home users running OO would be much higher if everyone had to pay several hundred dollars for MSOffice...
Slashdot Mirror
You and the other commercially orientated programmers that have moaned about Stallman's comments need to stop throwing your "toys out of the pram" and re-read the article properly again - I did not see any mention in the article about being denied the right to create commercial closed software.
The article is not about software directly but about exercising the right to exercise personal freedom and the right to choice of either open or closed source software - please remember that no programmer is forced to write open source software.
Firstly, you need to accept that a lot of people (myself included) are unwilling to pay hundreds of
dollars/pounds/Euros etc. for a lot of the commercial software, Microsoft OSes and applications included, that are out there currently. Microsoft's penetration currently is due to the fact that a lot of new PCs have Windows etc. on them and because businesses pay large amounts of money for licensing - the CDs from that licensing get copied and passed around employees and their friends to the point where most home users have MS Office installed because they got it freely. Add to that the free availability of pirated software on Usenet and you have a whole heap of people using *ILLEGAL* free software. (I have been in the telecoms IT industry now for over 20 years and I have *NEVER* known anyone to buy a legitimate copy of MS Office or Windows yet everyone I know seems to have both!)
Therefore, on the assumption that a whole lot of people won't pay some of the prices asked for commercial software no matter what you do to them, surely it's better that they choose the *LEGAL* free alternatives?
Secondly, why should I allow a (corrupt?) business to dictate to me exactly how I should or should not use something I have purchased legally. Why should I be denied the option of choice? Why should I have to endure sub-standard product on my PC if I believe a cheaper (or free) alternative is better? That does not give me the right to dictate what you should use because you too have a right to choice...
Thirdly, how can you call someone that creates a proprietary stock market model a "mathematician"? A mathematician is a theorist who simply explores the science of mathematics in order to further his knowledge and the rest of human-kind - a "commercial statistician" (the best description I can come up with) has a remit of making the company he works for more money; sure, the model may be his/her own but there is a fixed end goal.
Fourthly, software is "intangible" - anyone with a computer and a knowledge of programming can create software. Hardware requires access to expensive manufactuting tools and therefore cannot be open to all by it's very nature.
Finally, adaption. I personally do not care whether or not people are still making money from software in 10/20/30 years time because it's irrelevant to the whole issue. The business market and simple laws of supply and demand dictate that commercial software is viable now but, just like the dinosaurs died out eventually, so might commercial software in the future - remember that universities and academics were giving away software long before anyone thought of selling it so what is guaranteed is that free software will continue and there isn't a damn thing Microsoft or anyone else can do about it...
All that matters is that people have the right to choice and the Open Source movement simply ensures that freedom remains nothing more.
All power to Stallman! I don't agree with everything he says but I defend him wholeheartedly in preserving the rights of you, me and everyone else to choose...
There seems to be a lot of discussion in here about upgrading from Windows 98SE to Windows 2000, Windows XP, Linux, etc. etc. without taking into account the simple fact that most people on /. are probably in the IT industry anyway and have free and easy access to MSDN CDs that allow them to install and use the latest Windows OS and Office at home, free of charge.
The arguments on here follow the same arguments I frequently have with colleagues at work and friends at home when we discuss moving to Linux as an option of getting out of the Windows upgrade cycle (I'm the Linux user, the others all use Windows as their main OS) - they're all happy to stay in the Windows upgrade cycle until you remind them that if they didn't have access to MSDN CDs, they would end up parting with several hundred dollars to run the Microsoft software that they currently run - when you remind them of that, Linux (to them) then seems to be something worth considering...
More importantly, he also seems to be JAADWNITS* *Just Another Arogant Dickhead With Nothing Interesting To Say.
>>Microsoft products quite often serve as the >>blueprint and inspiration for open source
>>products
Rubbish!
If you buy a car, you expect it to have 4 wheels, an engine, air-conditioning, etc.
Likewise, in software, you expect it to have networking capability, (probably) a GUI that you can use with a mouse and a few applications that you can load, edit and save files with.
Sure, Microsoft's penetration has influenced how people want a PC to "feel" when it's used but it would be a poor software developer who didn't focus on trying to make an application as usable as possible to his intended audience and to fit in with the way they currently use a computer as much as possible.
The same argument could be applied to Microsoft ripping off the GUI look and feel from Xerox.
Great comment!
Let's see what all these owners of illegal copies of MS Office do when DRM has it's evil little way with their PCs and stops them running software they've not paid for!
I think they'll get off their butts then and start learning cheaper / free alternatives...
>>Windows have a more consistent GUI and the need >>for diving into the command line is less often.
Please justify this statement. Linux has a large number of GUIs admittedly but those considered to be most "Windows-like" (i.e. that include a number of built-applications like text editors, email programs, etc.) are Gnome and KDE. Both desktop environments have application menus on a button in the bottom left of the screen, a taskbar to which windows are iconified, etc. Added to this, applications within each are compiled to specific Gnome or QT libraries giving a consistent "look and feel" to the applications.
I therefore do not see how the "consistent GUI" argument can be applied.
Also, I would be grateful if you would explain under what circumstances a standard user using Gnome or KDE might need to resort to the command line? The only time I can see this happening is that on some occasions it's necessary to run a "which" or a "find" to find the location of an application so as to create a shortcut icon to it on the desktop - hardly a great problem.
Also, try to perform network diagnostics on a Windows PC without having to resort to "ipconfig", "nslookup", "ping" or "tracert" on the command line.
My concern here is that you are a Windows-oriented user - that's fine, use what OS you are comfortable with and whatever applications you like using. However, please do not decry Linux until you have tried it to a much greater extent than you already clearly have done - you argument is based purely on supposition, not on fact.
Why do we continue to get Windows people who have never used Linux thinking they know all about Linux? If anything, the Linux people on Slashdot (including myself) are always well-informed about Windows also so can put up intelligent arguments - most Windows people use many of the same old tired arguments that they've read elsewhere on the Internet that frequently no longer apply to Linux due to its maturity now.
Buy her a cuddly stuffed "Tux" and she'll be yours forever :-)
Also, it's actually the duty of private citizens to lobby the government that they pay for through taxation to use cheaper software alternatives.
I personally object to my taxes being used to swell the Microsoft coffers when that money can be spent on better hospital services, schools, etc. Especially as I also know that Open Source is more secure anyway...
So where are the stories of someone choosing Open Source over Microsoft then?
Microsoft continue to make profits because of tying in their existing customers to upgrade paths and by ensuring that Windows is pre-installed on the majority of pre-built PCs that get sold globally today - exactly the same reasons why Michelin and Firestone stocks won't fall as long as people continue to buy cars that need to use their tyres.
I've no doubt that Microsoft walks into green-field customer sites and wins new business in those areas also but, whatever your perspective, a lot of their business is being eaten away by Open Source, if only because of the bad press of viruses and so forth recently.
No-one is denying Microsoft is excellent at running a business but if I can quote Linus Torvalds from his biography "Just For Fun":
"Bill Gates couldn't teach me anything about programming and I couldn't teach him anything about running a business."
Also, please remember that Red Hat and SuSE cannot make large profits from software as they are "selling" Open Source software. These companies make their money from support and service contracts alone so they are not going to have as high a profit turn out as Microsoft.
...for when Linux consigns them to the grave.
I wonder what their last email would be:
Dear Microsoft User
Yes, Windows was a piece of crap and we lied to everyone all of the time.
Regards
Microsoft
Just a little effort and you get *SO* much more out of the computing experience...
e.g. "I want to archive up and delete all the DOC files on my PC to make some disk space."
Windows - go to the "Start" button, select "Search", type in *.doc, wait a couple of minutes while it finds them all, select them in the Explorer window, right click and "Add To Zip" if you've got WinZip installed, select them again and press delete.
Linux - "find / -name \*.doc -exec zip -m archive.zip {}\;" at a BASH prompt
A little effort at the beginning pays in the long run...
Ooooh!!
So you mean to tell me I can have more than 76 minutes of music spewed from the talentless maw of some cloth-eared, record-company manufactured bimbo on one CD?
Or a whole day-long duration CD of endless remixes and samples of "music" (and I use the term loosely) by some teenager that thinks its a great idea putting his greasy hands all over a vinyl record and moving it back and forth a bit?
Come back Bill Hicks - all is forgiven...
>>What happens when Joe Sixpack wants to run >>current games? 1) He buys a games console like many existing PC users do. 2) He learns to use and configure WineX just like he learnt to use a mouse, click icons, configure his graphics card, etc. etc. 3) He waits until mainstream adoption of Linux and for games companies to port their games to Linux. >>What happens when Joe Sixpack wants to run a >>Windows program? Joe Sixpack doesn't *want* to run a Windows program... Joe Sixpack *wants* to send an email, write a letter, play a game or two, download images from his digital camera, etc. etc. All of these can be done in Linux. >>What happens when Joe Sixpack get a new piece >>of hardware? He gets some Linux drivers for it or waits for the kernel to support the hardware. He goes to the Internet, downloads a software update or two and off he goes - no different to what he does in Windows. >>GUI is just one part of what Joe Sixpack wants >>and it will take a lot more for Windows to be >>done for. Well Joe Sixpack gets lots of *GUI choice* with Linux - Gnome, KDE, Blackbox, Fluxbox, FWVM, etc. etc. secure in the knowledge that he doesn't need to resort to the "sinful" command line and all those *nasty little apps* like vi and Emacs... (Presumably though, Joe Sixpack knows how to drive a car and made the time and effort to learn how to do that before he bought it - just like he read his video recorder manual before plugging it in, etc. etc.) The only thing Linux can't do for Joe Sixpack is get him off his lazy butt to go learn about how a computer works properly...
Erm, how many Joe Public home users can fix their Windows desktop machines when they go seriously wrong? Most rely on knowledgeable friends or relatives to fix their problems - as somebody who is rarely without someone else's PC in their hallway to fix, I speak from experience.
Joe Public usually gets a bootable CD from his PC vendor that reinstalls his Windows box for him afresh if he gets a problem that he can't fix - no different to booting a Linux CD to do an installation...
If you really had thought about this carefully before making this comment, you'd know that most Joe Public users install any old rubbish shareware from the Internet on their Windows boxes making them so registry bloated that they end up reinstalling them on a six monthly basis anyway.
I do see what you are saying but I think you're also being a little unfair. For starters, you *DON'T* have to use vi with Linux (which is what I assume you are comparing to Edlin, albeit unfairly) - install Gnome or KDE and you have a perfectly good choice of Notepad-like editors at your disposal. Secondly, as a novice user, you don't (now) need to manually edit any config files to get a base desktop system up and working - in most cases, a modern SuSE or Mandrake distro will find your hardware first time without any real problem - the only possible exception is probably having to install 3D drivers for graphics card acceleration to work. I can't answer the comment about having to go online with Windows to get a Linux question answered except to say that it should be easy to get a base desktop system with email and web connectivity up and then go online with Linux to do any tweaking you need to do then. I think it's unfair comparing Linux of 2000 to Linux of 2003 - it's the same as me comparing the functionality and stability of Windows 95 to Windows 2000 (not that I use either very much)due to them being separated by the same number of years. I do think if you try it again today, and use Mandrake 9.2 or SuSE 8.2, you will notice a marked difference and will have an easier time of getting a Linux system working.
Unfortunately, this is where Linux falls over currently & I'm not sure how the problem will be resolved in the future.
In my particular case, I run Gentoo Linux and generally only use Open Source software on it - this means that if I fancy playing a game like Quake or whatever, I can just go to Gentoo's site and download it. Then it's just a case of compiling the source against my existing system and off I go...
However, it is not reasonable to expect a less knowledgeable user to have to do this all of the time so binary distributions, especially for commercial software, has to be the way forward.
I think this will only happen if and when the number of mainstream Linux distributions decreases and software vendors have to write installers for a very specific set of distros.
In terms of reliability, ease of installation and range of software, Linux is ready for the desktop but if you want to use commercial apps and games, there's still a big problem encouraging novice users into the fold...
Stop being a troll just because it's mid term school holidays and you've nothing better to do...
The guy asked a legitimate question and all you can do is throw insults.
If anyone's the dork, it's you...
Don't get me wrong - McDonald's are the biggest scum-sucking corporation there is with what they're doing to world farming and agriculture - not to mention the pollution from all that crap packaging of their equally crap products - but they ARE are business and are entitled to make money. In my case, I NEVER buy their products even though I enjoy a burger and fries regularly (same goes for Burger King, KFC, etc.) - if more people voted with their wallets, they wouldn't get away with it...
Erm, I don't see why Lexmark should *HAVE* to make their cartridges refillable? They're in business to make money, of course they're going to charge as much as they can get away with...
I own a Lexmark printer and I'm disgusted at the cost of cartridges - but next time I'm face with a cost of 60 UKP (=$90) for a new set of cartridges, I'll probably go look at a new (non-Lexmark) printer then anyway.
The only way to deal with this is NOT to buy the products - when it hurts them in the wallet, they'll find a way of making cartridges cheaper...
Personally, I'd rather go out into the big wide world as a responsible adult, not as some mindless moron that has no perception of temperatures.
People that sue corporations for these huge amounts are the most selfish, gutless people there are. All they end up doing is handing more of their responsibility over to government and the corporations and it's usually these same people that moan about us being in an Orwellian society.
What these idiots don't realise is that the cost of all these lawsuits and fraudulent insurance claims come straight back at the rest of us in higher priced goods and insurance premiums.
..just like the second one did. Basically, "The Matrix" is a ten page short story that was stretched into a good movie by virtue of some innovative special effects and camera work. The second was just a repeat of the same with a couple of really annoying LOOOOOOOOOOONNNGG philosophical dialogue sessions that admirably failed in trying to make the movie anything more than a pretty piece of eye candy...
I doubt that IBM or Sun are going to be too interested in supplying their gear to a 40 employee business. I could be wrong here but it sounds to me like the cost of the IBM / Sun route would be excessively high compared to Intel boxes with Linux.
Why not go an download yourself or buy a copy of SuSE Linux, go install it and then tell us Windows is quicker to install?
By the time you've gone to MS Windows Update to get all your security updates and rebooted your Windows box several times in the interim, your SuSE box will have downloaded the few security updates it needs and come straight up without any need to reboot.
I'm more than happy to listen to people defend Windows and decry Linux when they have done their research and can present solid facts.
However, most Windows defenders seem to base all their anti-Linux arguments on speculation and hearsay - most Linux users have already used Windows and can validly make comparisons.
...because for many people, with access to MSDN disks from workplaces and CD copiers, I suspect that *most* home users of MS Office run it because they obtained it "freely". I think the proportion of businesses and home users running OO would be much higher if everyone had to pay several hundred dollars for MSOffice...
I see Steve Ballmer has joined us today then... :-)