Okay, this would be nice if Microsoft was purely interested in developing a great consumer OS. Unfortunately, they're not. They are only interested in their bottom line (hey, this is capitalism!). To this end, they want to remain a monopoly and have their software on everyone's computer. Which is fair enough.
There are several problems stopping MS from using Linux:
1) They have.NET server (which will Win2004 or something, now), all of their.NET software, LongHorn and the next SQL Server under heavy development. I'm sure they'd rather continue working on software they know will rake in billions of dollars than start from scratch writing a UI for Linux.
2) Remember all the FUD about the GPL and Linux? Well, Microsoft probably doesn't feel like doing a three-point-turn and adopting Linux and proclaiming it as the underlying foundation to Windows. And I doubt they'll use Linux and just remain silent about the presence of Linux.
3) If they use Linux, they will probably want to extend some of the kernel, or alter parts of it. But it's GPL!! Now, they can dynamically link to GPLed software and that's okay, but if they want to make any alterations, they hve to distribute them. Now, that might actually make a valid busines plan, but it isn't an option as far as Microsoft is concerned. They don't want anyone seeing any source, if they can help it. The past is evidenc.
4) This would mean a re-write of either ALL of their software - Office, IE, VisualStudio, BackOffice... hardly a good idea, giving competitors a few years to catch up in the software stakes. Or they could drastically improve WINE and run their unported Windows software. But what would be the point of moving to Linux and using it to run Windows programs through an emulator? I doubt Microsoft would even consider this option, especially as WINE is GPL, so they'd have to start from scratch.
Basically, what it boils down to is: compatability with existing and under-development software, and a desire to keep the Windows platform closed to everyone outside of Microsoft.
Also, MS wants to integrate DRM into the OS. And they definitely don't want anyone getting their hands on the code. So they'd be rather worried about how to distribute the DRM without any legal issues concerning the GPL. They'd have to keep the DRM right away from the core of the OS, which is where they appear to want it to be. (Okay, this is a rather flaky reason, but it may be a small factor).
Okay, looking back at it, the cost of the PC was significantly reduced by keeping my 19" monitor, which makes it $1,900 vs. $2,500. And I suppose the Mac has FireWire and a few other goodies that I don't need or use. (Can I just buy a Mac tower only? - that would reduce the price a fair bit)
That's really my major "problem" with Macs - I don't really get to choose what I get. Sure, there are several models available, but there's little room for expansion and customisation. I realise that this isn't what Apple is about, but that means I will have to pay a bit extra for the unwanted features (on top of Apple's generally higher prices).
So yeah, my original post wasn't too accurate, but I still think it makes a valid point. If only Apple allowed third-party vendors (with really tight QA, if necessary). Oh well... I'll wait till I get out of Uni and into a high-paying job!
BTW, how'd you get the Alpha and what do you run on it - WinNT or DEC's *NIX? or something else?
Fair enough, they've spent a lot of money to get where they are. But from here on in, they should be able to save a fair bit. While having BSD as the core of MacOSX won't give them billion-dollar profits, it surely helps reduce OS-related software development costs.
And with these savings, they can spend time developing better, easier-to-use-for-the-whole-family apps. For example, their Powerpoint killer (whose name I have momentarily forgotten - argh!) and their iLife range (I think that was the name - I'm not a Mac user (can you tell?)).
Hopefully they can improve even further on the quality of their programs, because that's what the "Apple Experience" is all about.
Hell, I'd buy one except that in Australia, it costs me at least $2,500 to get the Mac-equivalent of my $1,200 home-built rig. Not to mention all of the PC games and stuff. But I digress.
Also, if Apple can work on the X-Windows side of things, perhaps they'll be used by big IT spenders to replace aging *NIX systems - another boon of the BSD lineage. Go MacOSX and go Apple!
WTF? It gets submitted by someone. Haven't you figured that part out yet?
(sorry, I'm kidding - who knows... someone obviously browses the net at "NaN: Whacked")
Scandinavian people ... ?
on
SAUNAAB
·
· Score: 2, Funny
From the article:
On this page you will find a little story about some (crazy?) nordic people, an old SAAB 900 Classic
5-door and a common desire to have a sauna.
This is not the first sauna in a SAAB, I know of at least one SAAB 96 made into a sauna in Finland.
However, this is probably the only sauna built into a Classic 900...
This combines almost everything the stereotypical Scandinavian is known for... SAAB, sauna... they're missing a Volvo, but who wants a square, boxy sauna?
Not to mention the "bouncing Swedish funbags" (whatever they are!)
Seriously, though, in an icy-cold climate this takes car-heating to the MAX - kinda like case-modding with l33t h4x0rs. What next from the crazy Nordic fold? I'm almost scared to find out (but I think it'll involve rally-driving saunas)
What was the hardest aspect of producing the GNUWin II CD? Was it selecting the software? Was it making sure the software worked okay (ie, were there any major portings issues, and if so, how much work did you have to do vs. how much did the developer do). Was it something else entirely?
Also, what criteria did you use to select the software? Did you consider which applications had a UI that Windows users would find more comfortable? Did you consider any programs that you weren't able to get running under Windows?
BTW, best of luck with the project. My father has been using the Win32 port of the GIMP for about two years now and loves it! As I type, he's (ab)using his work's net connection to d/l the ISOs.
What!?! You obviously aren't a case-modder, are you?
My case is made of titanium alloys and packaging foam. I can drop it from a plane (while it's running) and the only thing that happens is that the CD-Audio skips (hang on a second, I listen to.oggs).
In fact, my computer works best when it's being dropped out of planes or having buildings land on it.
Besides, it's probably cheaper to case-mod each PC than to maintain the structural safety of the building. Now if those damned employees would only get titanium bones and exo-skeletons...
For UnitedLinux to choose such a market is definitely unusual, but is it really related to UnitedLinux being what it is, or is it a group seeing a potentially large market for their product?
I mean, I think that UnitedLinux may have chosen this route not because it's the sort of thing they're aiming for in particular, but that they believe it's a market where Linux may be one of the best available solutions. If this is the case, however, shouldn't they perhaps be aiming to establish themselves in a "core" market first, before aiming at something like this?
Then again, perhaps they have a bit of time and effort to burn, and if they do succeed then things may work out very well for UnitedLinux in other areas.
OR, OTOH perhaps this is one of the markets they've had in mind for a while and just haven't made that information public before. If they'd let everyone know ages ago that this was what they were looking at, then some other vendor may have beat them to it. (Just a suggestion - I don't think this is actually the case)
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, this would be nice if Microsoft was purely interested in developing a great consumer OS. Unfortunately, they're not. They are only interested in their bottom line (hey, this is capitalism!). To this end, they want to remain a monopoly and have their software on everyone's computer. Which is fair enough.
.NET server (which will Win2004 or something, now), all of their .NET software, LongHorn and the next SQL Server under heavy development. I'm sure they'd rather continue working on software they know will rake in billions of dollars than start from scratch writing a UI for Linux.
... hardly a good idea, giving competitors a few years to catch up in the software stakes. Or they could drastically improve WINE and run their unported Windows software. But what would be the point of moving to Linux and using it to run Windows programs through an emulator? I doubt Microsoft would even consider this option, especially as WINE is GPL, so they'd have to start from scratch.
There are several problems stopping MS from using Linux:
1) They have
2) Remember all the FUD about the GPL and Linux? Well, Microsoft probably doesn't feel like doing a three-point-turn and adopting Linux and proclaiming it as the underlying foundation to Windows. And I doubt they'll use Linux and just remain silent about the presence of Linux.
3) If they use Linux, they will probably want to extend some of the kernel, or alter parts of it. But it's GPL!! Now, they can dynamically link to GPLed software and that's okay, but if they want to make any alterations, they hve to distribute them. Now, that might actually make a valid busines plan, but it isn't an option as far as Microsoft is concerned. They don't want anyone seeing any source, if they can help it. The past is evidenc.
4) This would mean a re-write of either ALL of their software - Office, IE, VisualStudio, BackOffice
Basically, what it boils down to is: compatability with existing and under-development software, and a desire to keep the Windows platform closed to everyone outside of Microsoft.
Also, MS wants to integrate DRM into the OS. And they definitely don't want anyone getting their hands on the code. So they'd be rather worried about how to distribute the DRM without any legal issues concerning the GPL. They'd have to keep the DRM right away from the core of the OS, which is where they appear to want it to be. (Okay, this is a rather flaky reason, but it may be a small factor).
Okay, looking back at it, the cost of the PC was significantly reduced by keeping my 19" monitor, which makes it $1,900 vs. $2,500. And I suppose the Mac has FireWire and a few other goodies that I don't need or use. (Can I just buy a Mac tower only? - that would reduce the price a fair bit)
... I'll wait till I get out of Uni and into a high-paying job!
That's really my major "problem" with Macs - I don't really get to choose what I get. Sure, there are several models available, but there's little room for expansion and customisation. I realise that this isn't what Apple is about, but that means I will have to pay a bit extra for the unwanted features (on top of Apple's generally higher prices).
So yeah, my original post wasn't too accurate, but I still think it makes a valid point. If only Apple allowed third-party vendors (with really tight QA, if necessary). Oh well
BTW, how'd you get the Alpha and what do you run on it - WinNT or DEC's *NIX? or something else?
Fair enough, they've spent a lot of money to get where they are. But from here on in, they should be able to save a fair bit. While having BSD as the core of MacOSX won't give them billion-dollar profits, it surely helps reduce OS-related software development costs.
And with these savings, they can spend time developing better, easier-to-use-for-the-whole-family apps. For example, their Powerpoint killer (whose name I have momentarily forgotten - argh!) and their iLife range (I think that was the name - I'm not a Mac user (can you tell?)).
Hopefully they can improve even further on the quality of their programs, because that's what the "Apple Experience" is all about.
Hell, I'd buy one except that in Australia, it costs me at least $2,500 to get the Mac-equivalent of my $1,200 home-built rig. Not to mention all of the PC games and stuff. But I digress.
Also, if Apple can work on the X-Windows side of things, perhaps they'll be used by big IT spenders to replace aging *NIX systems - another boon of the BSD lineage. Go MacOSX and go Apple!
WTF? It gets submitted by someone. Haven't you figured that part out yet? (sorry, I'm kidding - who knows ... someone obviously browses the net at "NaN: Whacked")
On this page you will find a little story about some (crazy?) nordic people, an old SAAB 900 Classic 5-door and a common desire to have a sauna. This is not the first sauna in a SAAB, I know of at least one SAAB 96 made into a sauna in Finland. However, this is probably the only sauna built into a Classic 900...
This combines almost everything the stereotypical Scandinavian is known for ... SAAB, sauna ... they're missing a Volvo, but who wants a square, boxy sauna?
Not to mention the "bouncing Swedish funbags" (whatever they are!)
Seriously, though, in an icy-cold climate this takes car-heating to the MAX - kinda like case-modding with l33t h4x0rs. What next from the crazy Nordic fold? I'm almost scared to find out (but I think it'll involve rally-driving saunas)
What was the hardest aspect of producing the GNUWin II CD? Was it selecting the software? Was it making sure the software worked okay (ie, were there any major portings issues, and if so, how much work did you have to do vs. how much did the developer do). Was it something else entirely?
Also, what criteria did you use to select the software? Did you consider which applications had a UI that Windows users would find more comfortable? Did you consider any programs that you weren't able to get running under Windows?
BTW, best of luck with the project. My father has been using the Win32 port of the GIMP for about two years now and loves it! As I type, he's (ab)using his work's net connection to d/l the ISOs.
What!?! You obviously aren't a case-modder, are you?
.oggs).
My case is made of titanium alloys and packaging foam. I can drop it from a plane (while it's running) and the only thing that happens is that the CD-Audio skips (hang on a second, I listen to
In fact, my computer works best when it's being dropped out of planes or having buildings land on it.
Besides, it's probably cheaper to case-mod each PC than to maintain the structural safety of the building. Now if those damned employees would only get titanium bones and exo-skeletons...
I mean, I think that UnitedLinux may have chosen this route not because it's the sort of thing they're aiming for in particular, but that they believe it's a market where Linux may be one of the best available solutions. If this is the case, however, shouldn't they perhaps be aiming to establish themselves in a "core" market first, before aiming at something like this?
Then again, perhaps they have a bit of time and effort to burn, and if they do succeed then things may work out very well for UnitedLinux in other areas.
OR, OTOH perhaps this is one of the markets they've had in mind for a while and just haven't made that information public before. If they'd let everyone know ages ago that this was what they were looking at, then some other vendor may have beat them to it. (Just a suggestion - I don't think this is actually the case)