If it's made today, you cannot define it as "not modern". If it's not even released yet you're revealing your bias completely. Tomorrow's technology is by definition "post modern".
I want to thank you guys for posting in my thread. It took a lot of persistent reloading of the slashdot page to get my post in first.
You've done a lot toward making people aware of how hopeless Vista is, and how useless are the arguments against Linux, and how Linux is a reasonable answer to all of the issues that might arise with migrating from XP.
By now you have all figured out you've been used. The point of this exercise was to get a lot of +5 informative and +5 insightful posts that will show up in Google.
I'd like to thank you all for playing.
Those of you with your opposing viewpoints? Well, what can I say? The premise of your plan is that your opposition is neither organized nor intelligent. You might want to rethink that.
At least you're thinking. That beats hell out of the other astroturfers here. You must be a girl. You're still too late. This thread is lost to you.
You say gaming will catch up; so your solution doesn't work now, but somewhere in some possible future? You say that eventually people will move to standardized file formats, sometime in this glorious future.
What is the current level of technology is a very fungible thing. Does Linux run the UT2k4 native client well? Why yes, it does. Does it run FEAR well? Well, no, but there isn't a platform that does. Is there a middle ground? Yes, but it's moving so fast that my post may be obsolete before your reply.
Do I know what everything that runs under Wine? No.
I still don't understand why you bothered bringing IBM into this to explain why you suggested that instead of giving money to one evil corporation, that getting a PS3 and thus giving money to another evil corporation is better? You're acting like you've got scruples, but it seems they're just blinders. Do you so intensely hate Microsoft that you're willing to allow wrongs done by another corporation corporation slide unnoticed? Once again, a compromise I'm not willing to make for another non-solution.
Your "partner" Sony is not going to be happy to hear you bashing them in this way. The IBM thing is obvious to people who have a longer view than you -- they once owned the market and shared your hubris. They needed to be stripped of control to become helpful to Progress. They were and I was really happy about that although it seems we've traded one tyrant for another. Breaking that cycle would really be nice.
Progress is to the benefit of us all. Proprietary solutions do not promote progress. They promote profits. Profits and progress are not exclusive goals unless you make them so by making your inventions proprietary. In that case your inventions are not progress. They are only distractions from it.
Actually, people do give a very big damn about people like the GP and his daughter, since they are the ones that will determine the place of desktop Linux in mainstream computing, and how much hardware manufacturers will pay attention to the demand for Linux-compatible drivers.
My daughter handles Linux just fine. She'll soon be two. It might be a PEBKAC issue.
Why yes, he does. This is part of the astroturfing effort to make it seem like Linux is hard. It's not, and the poster knows it. He's trying to make it look like it is hard, and it's a stretch. He would do better if he had actual experience in the subject.
We're going to have to get used to this. Microsoft has a whole staff in Calcutta trained in how to make their posts look like genuine issues. If you read them carefully though, you can see their issues are read out of an old book.
At least they're using proper English now. It used to be horrible.
Often these days the best clue is they dare not make errors in their typing.
I suppose we could counter with a staff in Bangalore that does the opposite but somehow I can't bring myself to do it. It seems dirty.
Actually, as a long time Unix programmer and current game console developer, DirectX really is a lot more pleasurable than most of the alternatives. I'm not a big MS fan, but DirectX is nice, and the documentation is very good.
Wait 'till you see what's coming down the pike. You're going to love it. Give it a year and tell me what you think.
the people I know who run Vista are quite happy with it.
That's because the myriad folks who hate it have rolled back, or never deployed it.
So, basically, your machine will be imperceptibly slower if you want all the whiz-bang 3D and transparency of Vista's UI. Go figure.
Unless you're driving one of those new $200 notebooks that weigh two pounds and run for six hours on a battery. If you're with them, Vista isn't going to install at all. Fortunately for those users the basic linux install has more whiz-bang transparency UI features and not surprisingly, comes with a real office suite. And it boots fast. And it runs fast. And it does more stuff at no extra cost.
So for some people Vista works. And it burns 500 watts. And it costs extra. And it works no faster than XP. And this is a good thing? This is not a good reason for everyone else to take it up.
BTW, because Microsoft has VERY lucrative contracts with PC OEMs, they have little to no choice in what PC operating system gets pre-loaded on the computers. If they were to stick Linux on any of those computers, some part of those deals would be rescinded and the OEM would lose money one way or another. It is what it is so if you play in the Windows game, you're stuck playing by their rules and Vista is what they want you to use.
Until Microsoft doesn't offer an OS on the low power lightweight platform you're selling. And then it's Game On!
Microsoft really shouldn't have become an OEM for PC hardware in India with AMD chips. Now they're hosed.
You guys aren't getting any traction in this thread and your best bet is to ignore it. You won't, but at least I told you so.
No, you can't. The license does not permit you to move OEM copies to a different host. So if the machine dies, the license did just go up in a puff of smoke. I don't think I have ever seen a retail license on business owned machines, but if you did then that might leave that option open.
The vagaries of licensing are some of the things that make open solutions so much more inviting. If you discontinue your support contracts, you don't get any more support from your open source provider. The don't sue you for continuing to experience the benefits of the support you've already paid for.
Let's say I want to perform a task, and my financial security depends on my performance.
And your solution for this is to make yourself a hostage to the good intentions of a commercial software vendor? That sounds like a bad plan.
Eventually gaming on Linux will catch up. In the interim, console gaming is a good substitute. When you're striking the chains some pain is to be expected.
As a side note: You suggest giving money to Sony instead of Microsoft? Short sighted indeed.
When Microsoft's goal was to save us from the evil monolith that was IBM, I was their biggest fan. Now I'm a big fan of IBM and not Microsoft. This isn't difficult to understand. I haven't changed sides. They have.
I think it's because these machines have 512 MB of RAM, a 1.5GHz clock, and 10-20GB of high speed SSD storage. If you compare that with XP requirements you will see it is well over by 8 times every particular. XP doesn't run as well as Linux on these machines but they're much better than the best machine available when XP was released in 2001.
Vista, though? Not gonna happen.
If you must, they make a good thin client for Citrix though, and the internet-everywhere nature of the devices makes that a reliable answer if not an ideal one. I wonder if the cellular based wireless works on a plane. That would be cool.
10-20GB is more than enough for a fat Linux Distro with all the fancy effects that make it look better than Vista and OO.o, which opens most of the Office documents you'll ever need anyway. With documents on mini-SD or pendrive you're good to go no matter where you're going. So what you need Vista on these things for is beyond me.
Oh, and did I mention that they do HD video and run for six hours on one battery charge? What's that about?
Seriously, if a user needs more than this then he needs a server slice in the server room and he can still use one of these to remote into it.
The proprietary edge that Microsoft has in gaming is coming to an end. Raytracing is a better solution to this problem if you have the horsepower to drive it, and that's on the way. And it will be open.
Windows XP is still available. You can stock up on enough copies to meet your VM needs.
You can keep an activated VM to roll back to when your Windows VM becomes corrupted, as all of them do, with less trouble than imaging a real machine.
It doesn't have access to your real hardware unless you let it.
That Vista isn't pleasant in a VM is a good reason to avoid it. In case you haven't heard, avoiding it looks more and more likely these days. If you're doing development and have to test on Vista then you're already using it in a VM or you're stupid.
In many cases, XP runs better in a VM than it does natively. Imagine that.
When it's time to retire it, you can drag the XP VM to the trashcan where it belongs.
Keeping the status quo is not an option. Microsoft is forcing the migration whether you want it or not. The question is, since you're being forced to migrate would you prefer to not be forced next time? If so, then where you should migrate to should be obvious.
The idea of XP in a VM or in Citrix is to smooth the migration to an open system where control of your IT is up to you, not to a corporation with a profit motive to keep shuffling you along the upgrade path and tying down your options and artificially limiting your choices.
Keep saying "we can't" and eventually you will believe it.
Until they sell out the rest of the way Eclipse makes a nice development platform to replace Visual Studio. If they do sell out there will be a fork. You'll find that if Eclipse isn't included in your distribution you'll find it in the Applications installer. All linux users can develop applications on day one if they want to. They don't have to, but since it's built by developers they served their own needs first. It turns out programming is not some occult science after all.
As for J#, C#, VB and WebDev, we're back to the same "How do I keep giving Microsoft money" question again. Those are not standards. They're proprietary solutions and stuff you build on them will obsolete every time Microsoft decides it needs more of your money. It's a trap. Don't fall into it. If you must program in those soon-to-be dead languages then you've created your own predicament and nobody can help you.
Photoshop? Enough with the photoshop. I don't care about photoshop. If you need a dedicated photoshop box it's no excuse to chain everyone in your enterprise to Windows when it's only you that is determined to suffer.
3d? You have to be frimping kidding. You don't really think Windows is a cutting edge 3d platform do you? On what planet?
Slashdot Mirror
Some of the time the escape from a difficult trap involves chewing your leg off.
I wish you luck.
If it's made today, you cannot define it as "not modern". If it's not even released yet you're revealing your bias completely. Tomorrow's technology is by definition "post modern".
15 replies and moderated troll. How does it feel? For an under 3k UID that must suck. Not the first time though?
I hear the koolaid has a bitter aftertaste. Does it?
I want to thank you guys for posting in my thread. It took a lot of persistent reloading of the slashdot page to get my post in first.
You've done a lot toward making people aware of how hopeless Vista is, and how useless are the arguments against Linux, and how Linux is a reasonable answer to all of the issues that might arise with migrating from XP.
By now you have all figured out you've been used. The point of this exercise was to get a lot of +5 informative and +5 insightful posts that will show up in Google.
I'd like to thank you all for playing.
Those of you with your opposing viewpoints? Well, what can I say? The premise of your plan is that your opposition is neither organized nor intelligent. You might want to rethink that.
As soon as it is not profitable.
Didn't you know that? I would think before you learned something that complex you would apply your mind to the broader question.
I really doubt this issue is going to impact the world of IT. But thanks for contributing to the economy.
That's cute. What are you, twelve? There's a war on. Pick a side.
At least you're thinking. That beats hell out of the other astroturfers here. You must be a girl. You're still too late. This thread is lost to you.
What is the current level of technology is a very fungible thing. Does Linux run the UT2k4 native client well? Why yes, it does. Does it run FEAR well? Well, no, but there isn't a platform that does. Is there a middle ground? Yes, but it's moving so fast that my post may be obsolete before your reply.
Do I know what everything that runs under Wine? No.
Your "partner" Sony is not going to be happy to hear you bashing them in this way. The IBM thing is obvious to people who have a longer view than you -- they once owned the market and shared your hubris. They needed to be stripped of control to become helpful to Progress. They were and I was really happy about that although it seems we've traded one tyrant for another. Breaking that cycle would really be nice.
Progress is to the benefit of us all. Proprietary solutions do not promote progress. They promote profits. Profits and progress are not exclusive goals unless you make them so by making your inventions proprietary. In that case your inventions are not progress. They are only distractions from it.
Not gonna happen.
I have to bet that's not what you were aiming for.
Face it. You guys lost this thread. Retreat to "but it doesn't run Exchange". You're safe there for now.
My daughter handles Linux just fine. She'll soon be two. It might be a PEBKAC issue.
Why yes, he does. This is part of the astroturfing effort to make it seem like Linux is hard. It's not, and the poster knows it. He's trying to make it look like it is hard, and it's a stretch. He would do better if he had actual experience in the subject.
We're going to have to get used to this. Microsoft has a whole staff in Calcutta trained in how to make their posts look like genuine issues. If you read them carefully though, you can see their issues are read out of an old book.
At least they're using proper English now. It used to be horrible.
Often these days the best clue is they dare not make errors in their typing.
I suppose we could counter with a staff in Bangalore that does the opposite but somehow I can't bring myself to do it. It seems dirty.
Wait 'till you see what's coming down the pike. You're going to love it. Give it a year and tell me what you think.
About this I can agree most wholeheartedly.
That's because the myriad folks who hate it have rolled back, or never deployed it.
Unless you're driving one of those new $200 notebooks that weigh two pounds and run for six hours on a battery. If you're with them, Vista isn't going to install at all. Fortunately for those users the basic linux install has more whiz-bang transparency UI features and not surprisingly, comes with a real office suite. And it boots fast. And it runs fast. And it does more stuff at no extra cost.
So for some people Vista works. And it burns 500 watts. And it costs extra. And it works no faster than XP. And this is a good thing? This is not a good reason for everyone else to take it up.
They're working on the Windows 7 now. No chance your issues are getting fixed.
The problem with Vista is that it's Vista. I don't think they can fix that.
Until Microsoft doesn't offer an OS on the low power lightweight platform you're selling. And then it's Game On!
Microsoft really shouldn't have become an OEM for PC hardware in India with AMD chips. Now they're hosed.
Seven years ago when XP was coming out, this page looked considerably different.
That was then. This is now.
You guys aren't getting any traction in this thread and your best bet is to ignore it. You won't, but at least I told you so.
The vagaries of licensing are some of the things that make open solutions so much more inviting. If you discontinue your support contracts, you don't get any more support from your open source provider. The don't sue you for continuing to experience the benefits of the support you've already paid for.
And your solution for this is to make yourself a hostage to the good intentions of a commercial software vendor? That sounds like a bad plan.
Eventually gaming on Linux will catch up. In the interim, console gaming is a good substitute. When you're striking the chains some pain is to be expected.
When Microsoft's goal was to save us from the evil monolith that was IBM, I was their biggest fan. Now I'm a big fan of IBM and not Microsoft. This isn't difficult to understand. I haven't changed sides. They have.
By the way, this little bit of text...
When talking about systems that are just released or not released yet doesn't make sense. What part of "still in beta" is pre-modern?
I think it's because these machines have 512 MB of RAM, a 1.5GHz clock, and 10-20GB of high speed SSD storage. If you compare that with XP requirements you will see it is well over by 8 times every particular. XP doesn't run as well as Linux on these machines but they're much better than the best machine available when XP was released in 2001.
Vista, though? Not gonna happen.
If you must, they make a good thin client for Citrix though, and the internet-everywhere nature of the devices makes that a reliable answer if not an ideal one. I wonder if the cellular based wireless works on a plane. That would be cool.
10-20GB is more than enough for a fat Linux Distro with all the fancy effects that make it look better than Vista and OO.o, which opens most of the Office documents you'll ever need anyway. With documents on mini-SD or pendrive you're good to go no matter where you're going. So what you need Vista on these things for is beyond me.
Oh, and did I mention that they do HD video and run for six hours on one battery charge? What's that about?
Seriously, if a user needs more than this then he needs a server slice in the server room and he can still use one of these to remote into it.
The proprietary edge that Microsoft has in gaming is coming to an end. Raytracing is a better solution to this problem if you have the horsepower to drive it, and that's on the way. And it will be open.
There are a lot of advantages to Windows in a VM.
Windows XP is still available. You can stock up on enough copies to meet your VM needs.
You can keep an activated VM to roll back to when your Windows VM becomes corrupted, as all of them do, with less trouble than imaging a real machine.
It doesn't have access to your real hardware unless you let it.
That Vista isn't pleasant in a VM is a good reason to avoid it. In case you haven't heard, avoiding it looks more and more likely these days. If you're doing development and have to test on Vista then you're already using it in a VM or you're stupid.
In many cases, XP runs better in a VM than it does natively. Imagine that.
When it's time to retire it, you can drag the XP VM to the trashcan where it belongs.
Keeping the status quo is not an option. Microsoft is forcing the migration whether you want it or not. The question is, since you're being forced to migrate would you prefer to not be forced next time? If so, then where you should migrate to should be obvious.
The idea of XP in a VM or in Citrix is to smooth the migration to an open system where control of your IT is up to you, not to a corporation with a profit motive to keep shuffling you along the upgrade path and tying down your options and artificially limiting your choices.
Keep saying "we can't" and eventually you will believe it.
Until they sell out the rest of the way Eclipse makes a nice development platform to replace Visual Studio. If they do sell out there will be a fork. You'll find that if Eclipse isn't included in your distribution you'll find it in the Applications installer. All linux users can develop applications on day one if they want to. They don't have to, but since it's built by developers they served their own needs first. It turns out programming is not some occult science after all.
As for J#, C#, VB and WebDev, we're back to the same "How do I keep giving Microsoft money" question again. Those are not standards. They're proprietary solutions and stuff you build on them will obsolete every time Microsoft decides it needs more of your money. It's a trap. Don't fall into it. If you must program in those soon-to-be dead languages then you've created your own predicament and nobody can help you.
Photoshop? Enough with the photoshop. I don't care about photoshop. If you need a dedicated photoshop box it's no excuse to chain everyone in your enterprise to Windows when it's only you that is determined to suffer.
3d? You have to be frimping kidding. You don't really think Windows is a cutting edge 3d platform do you? On what planet?