I am not sure what "computer boom" you are referring to. The last I heard, there was still an increasing demand for computers; not to mention, MS has boasted record quarters in very recent history.
If you read the article, you will see that sales/profits etc.. have very little effect on the phenomena observed, unless you argue that sales correlate directly with investment potential, in which case you might be right. To counter though, MS stock has been virtually static for quite some time.:
CoreBrand measures brand power using four criteria. It first rates the familiarity of a company's brand. Once a company has a certain level of familiarity, they are ranked according to three "attributes of favorability": overall reputation, perception of management and investment potential, Gregory said. While Microsoft's brand is still eminently recognizable, the company is declining in all three favorable attributes, he said.
Software licensing isn't the issue; updating his legacy hardware which he purchased under a specific license with specific rights without his knowledge or consent is the issue. Especially when this new firmware update (which he did not authorize but was automatically applied by Meraki despite having been sold with a different EULA) effectively bricks his hardware. This raises the question - Whose hardware is it?
I think what they are doing here is keeping a safe, stable desktop for their long-term stable release. This is the release that has commercial support available if you so choose, but it is not required. At the same time, they are trying to keep their community users happy by offering them the option of using a release which has KDE4, but shares the remaining base system. Of course, with KDE4 in it's very early stages they don't want to officially support it. It seems this is just a move to appeal to a broader audience.
Another thing: as a Linuzz contributor (which, believe it or not, I am), i couldn't care less about how many users I will get...
If you are truly a contributor why do you insist on trolling by using "Linuzz"? It detracts from anything you may say, positive or negative, with regard to Linux.
You make a few interesting points, but I think there are technical problems with your solution. First of all, with a large enough sampling of keys, cracking the algorithm becomes easier. If every disk had a unique key, there would be a huge base of samples thus cracking the actual algorithm would ultimately become trivial. The second problem I see is that if you did that, the crackers would know exactly where the key resides and wouldn't have to go through the hoops of retrieving it from memory.
I do not claim to be an expert in this area and maybe someone more knowledgeable can enlighten me.
The whole problem with encrypted media is that in order for the customer to want to purchase it, they will need to access the media they have purchased. In order to access that media, they will at some point need the key(s) that unlock it. Simply put, the purchaser of the media has the locked media, but they will also have the key. If you give people the key to the lock along with the lock, it is only a matter of time before someone figures out how to get the key.
While I realize your comment was meant to be funny (and it is) it is also informative/insightful. I have had some horrible problems with Windows drivers in the past and troubleshooting these problems made me want to stick bamboo shoots under my fingernails.
Not long ago I thought I would give Vista a look. I then found out that my Soundblaster Live! 5.1 had no official drivers available. Well, that card works fine with the several other OS's on that machine so I saw no point in replacing the card. I did find some converted XP drivers, but Vista uninstalled them upon reboot (every time you rebooted). OK, enough about that, I used an unsupported card, my bad. Same machine, same Vista install, a totally unrelated hard drive fails (happened to be the one with my XP partition on it). Now Vista won't boot at all. In fact it does nothing... spits out a couple errors and reboots. Screw Vista.
I fail to see how this is "easier" than dealing with hardware under Linux. At least with Linux you have a couple of very handy tools that will get you pointed in the correct direction. First off, you can lspci and lsmod to see what hardware is recognized and what drivers are loaded. You can also look at dmesg and/var/log/messages to see if there are any errors. Also, if there is an error, usually there is a nice descriptive error message that many times even suggests what your problem might be.
That's just plain wrong. If all you have is a certificate, it may be true, but if you're a Windows shop, why do you care if your admin can use bash? Likewise, why do you care if your linux admin knows anything about Windows if you're a Linux shop?
I think the point GP was trying to make is that there aren't many single OS shops left anymore. Add to that the fact that most positions above entry level (in regard to IT) usually require a more diverse experience set. If a company is so locked in to one strategy/platform I find it hard to believe the IT management has done their due diligence.
Having said all of that, I hold an MCSE but I am mostly a Linux admin. My experience set makes me more valuable to my employer because I can assess situations based on a problem/solution equation rather than a problem/(my vendors best attempt at a solution) equation.
I would think that whatever subsequent cases happen, judges and defense will be informed by this case.
I think this is probably the most important point you make with regard to future lawsuits.
The courts in the SCO cases have given SCO every opportunity to produce evidence to back their case. SCO has spent millions trying to find that evidence and by the time they realized it did not exist they had already dug themselves in way too deep and could not back out.
Also, as a result of the SCO cases, the BSD lawsuit agreement was brought out in to the public. What is interesting here is the amount of Unix code that is now licensed under a BSD license. It is my understanding that BSD licensed code can be included in the Linux kernel and released under the GPLv2 along with the rest of the Linux kernel.
Being that there is no Unix code illegally included in Linux, it would seem this avenue of attack is no longer open (or at minimum, not feasible). What worries me more is the next logical vector of attack, patents. I agree with a statement you made earlier, "I think Darl was just a front, as Ransom Love was for Caldera. Ralph Yarro was the real boss of both. I guess he's out too (not sure), but IMO the new investor is pursuing the same program, and Microsoft is still behind it.".
Microsoft themselves could never sue a Linux company directly for a couple of reasons. First of all MS does not need the bad publicity it would bring. They currently have the perfect scapegoat, why not continue using it? Secondly, Microsoft has anti-trust issues to concern themselves with that their scapegoat does not have.
The only solace that I find in the fact that the next war will be based around patents is that the courts have become better educated in technology and that Linux has been virtually exonerated of any copyright issues. Quite frankly, patents scare me.
Remember, there were some theories in 2003 that SCO had filed the initial $1 billion suit as a ploy to get purchased by IBM. IBM could have ended it there with a purchase, which might have cost them less in the long run than paying their lawyers, and would have arguably gained them some assets. Instead they recognized the larger issues at stake and took a principled stand, fighting this out so that all the facts of the case would come to light (and the facts rarely flatter SCO).
As much as I would like to believe that IBM had altruistic interests in taking this to court, I find that hard to believe. First of all that is a hard sell to the board of directors. More importantly though is the fact that IBM did not want to set a precedent of buying up companies that sue them. In fact, I would go so far as to say that IBM went to court simply to give any other company considering this tactic a reason to not proceed. There is a reason that IBM's lawyers are referred to as the Nazgul.
I was startled to hear the thundering of hooves. Having lived near Armonk, NY all my life, I had never heard such a sound before. "What is that horrible sound?" "That is the sound of the Black Steeds riding west from Armonk." "The Black Steeds?" "The Nazgul. They once were men. Now they are neither dead nor alive. They are IBM's attorneys."
Trend Micro is not a patent troll, they are a legitimate company who patented a process that they developed. Now they are exercising their rights as a patent holder. So why the hate? This is what the patent system is designed to do.
As I understand it, the patent involves filtering viruses before they make it to end user computers; eg. at the router/mail relay etc. The reason for the hate is that this is an obvious way to prevent viruses from entering your network. The hate is not so much aimed at Trend Micro as it is at the broken patent. However, the fact that Trend Micro is suing their competition using a broken patent as ammo is not going to earn Trend Micro any kudos.
I found this when I was actually searching for the version that I had heard; during jet engine testing it was debatable whether man could travel faster than sound.
Excellent post. I would also like to point out that Microsoft could at any time implement ODF in MSOffice. I think this is important to note because MS has constantly berated governments that have adopted (or have plans to adopt) ODF. MS claims that opting for ODF excludes MS from the bidding for contracts while this is absolutely not true; MS could use the ISO standard (ODF) rather than milking what is left of a dying lock-in strategy (file formats that are impossible for someone other than MS to implement 100% correctly be they *.doc or OOXML).
...but it doesn't mean you get to take someone else's show or movie and charge admission to watch it...
If the church wants to use the NFL's football games to attract more members to the church, and charge the people coming to the party to pay for that outreach program...
Read the article; it specifically states that the church was *not* charging admission.
I agree with everything you say, but I think MySQL has been a thorn in the side of Oracle much more so than Redhat or Sun ever could be. This could just be a stepping stone for Oracle (if any of what I read is true in the first place:).
I think it is important to remember that Oracle could never have bought MySQL (legal/political reasons; not because they could not afford it); yet Oracle would love nothing more than to see MySQL die.
I sincerely hope that this is not the case - I use MySQL daily. This is just food for thought. Not too mention, you can never truly kill MySQL; it is GPL'd!
How can an open source software company with $70 million or so in revenue and no profits to speak of be worth $1 billion?
This is where you have to think outside of the box. There are some who believe that Sun may simply be the pawn of Oracle. Oracle could not buy MySQL directly because of anti-trust issues etc.. Not to mention, Sun and Oracle have been "strategic partners" for a very long time. However, another company could purchase MySQL to kill it off.
I am not saying this is exactly what happend, but I do think the above author and Dvorak make some good points. Disclaimer: IANADF - I am not a Dvorak fan:)
Say I have a work of art in my loungeroom, an original painting by a famous artist.
Your anology would work much better if you had a copyrighted (signed and numbered) lithograph which strictly forbids reproduction and distribution of an original painting by a famous artist. You have purchased a copy of the original but in no way own rights to make more copies and distribute them. It then follows that, according to RIAA logic, you are responsible for "making available" in the context you presented. I tend to disagree though; I think the RIAA Nazgul would try to crucify you for public performance bacause it pays more:)
I see you are currently modded funny and thus hope that you are joking. The crux of the matter is that the site is not a revenue source for the authors yet they are purchasing advertising for the site. Combine this with the fact that one of the primary authors also happens to work on a competing project for a large corporation and did not disclose this on the site seems to imply that there is something more to the site than simply being someone's personal blog.
Back on topic; I take exception to the example you give. Not only do KDE and Gnome work together, but KDE and Gnome both have their respective places. I know Gnome is more popular with most of the big-name distros but that does not change the fact that I cannot stand it:) I have tried to like Gnome many many times however its complete lack of configuration options quickly drives me up a wall.
I cannot stand gterm (or whatever the default terminal in Gnome is) compared to konsole. As an example, in konsole when you have multiple tabs open switching between tabs is as easy as shift-(right or left arrow); in Gnome's terminal it is some esoteric 3-button key combo. I also like having Konqueror set up with the tree view on the left and the konsole terminal at the bottom in the file browsing mode; though this is no longer available in Dolphin which I see is poised to replace Konqueror for file browsing:(
Having said this, I can see where some of the options are overwhelming to the new KDE user and I find myself setting up Gnome for new Linux converts rather than setting up KDE. This is because I am generally setting them up with Ubuntu and 90% of the posts on the Ubuntu forums assume you are running Gnome. The funny thing is, most people who see my KDE desktop after they have used Gnome for a while will usually ask about setting theirs up in a similar manner at some point. I cross that bridge when I get there though.
I am actually quite happy with my phone even though it is older now. I originally got it from Cingular (now AT&T damnit) so it was not locked. I haven't had any problems charging it except under Windows with or without drivers:/ I have used moto4lin to put ringtones on the phone and to retrieve photos from the phone and had good luck with that, though moto4lin is a bit of a PITA to use and becomes moreso with a locked phone from what I understand.
Anyway, I agree to a point with much of what you have said though I express many of the same or similar frustrations when I have to use Windows. Hell, I am an MCSE (W2K) and I hate using Windows (especially Vista). With the exception of games, I have been running a 100% Linux desktop for about 7 or 8 years now (circa 2000). At first it was extremely frustrating but after a while it became Windows that frustrated me more. Neither is what I would call ideal and for you MacOSX guys who might suggest I use it, I do use it and it is not what I am looking for in an OS - I would call it more of a compromise between Linux and Windows; it has some of the good and the bad of both. Just my $0.02.
Still not convinced? Friend of mine asked me to get their PC to recognize their digital camera. Took a driver disk before Windows would recognize the cam. I plugged it into my Ubuntu box....
Nope. I actually have used Linux, and the camera scenario you describe is the sasme experience in both; its reconized as a removable drive. Both will prompt you to copy pictures off the device. I've NEVER had a camera not reconized by Windows. I can only conclude you're making up this story, because I've never heard it related except on/.
While not really a camera I have had a similar problem with my Motorola Razr. I keep a mini-USB cable in my laptop bag as an emergency charger. I bought the Windows software for the phone. When I plug the phone in on a Linux machine it starts charging whether or not I have installed the drivers for the phone or not. I have yet to have it charge under Windows (XP) regardless of whether or not I have installed the Motorola software. I have not tried it with Vista simply because the one install of Vista I had I found to be so frustrating that I wiped it out a few hours after installing it.
I agree with you to a point, however I ran into a *hardware* problem a few years ago with a Dell Dimension (it was a P3 to give you the timeframe). The Dell representative refused support after learning that Linux had been run on the system. For the record, this was a power supply and the machine would not even powerup. I am still not sure how that had anything to do with Linux.
As a side note, I am in charge of IT purchasing and I was very happy with Dell up until that point. My company buys 8-12 servers a year and they were always Dell (pre-installed with Redhat). After that incident I moved to SuperMicro servers and I have never looked back. I don't even consider Dell anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
I am not sure what "computer boom" you are referring to. The last I heard, there was still an increasing demand for computers; not to mention, MS has boasted record quarters in very recent history.
If you read the article, you will see that sales/profits etc.. have very little effect on the phenomena observed, unless you argue that sales correlate directly with investment potential, in which case you might be right. To counter though, MS stock has been virtually static for quite some time.:
CoreBrand measures brand power using four criteria. It first rates the familiarity of a company's brand. Once a company has a certain level of familiarity, they are ranked according to three "attributes of favorability": overall reputation, perception of management and investment potential, Gregory said. While Microsoft's brand is still eminently recognizable, the company is declining in all three favorable attributes, he said.
Software licensing isn't the issue; updating his legacy hardware which he purchased under a specific license with specific rights without his knowledge or consent is the issue. Especially when this new firmware update (which he did not authorize but was automatically applied by Meraki despite having been sold with a different EULA) effectively bricks his hardware. This raises the question - Whose hardware is it?
I think what they are doing here is keeping a safe, stable desktop for their long-term stable release. This is the release that has commercial support available if you so choose, but it is not required. At the same time, they are trying to keep their community users happy by offering them the option of using a release which has KDE4, but shares the remaining base system. Of course, with KDE4 in it's very early stages they don't want to officially support it. It seems this is just a move to appeal to a broader audience.
Another thing: as a Linuzz contributor (which, believe it or not, I am), i couldn't care less about how many users I will get...
If you are truly a contributor why do you insist on trolling by using "Linuzz"? It detracts from anything you may say, positive or negative, with regard to Linux.
You make a few interesting points, but I think there are technical problems with your solution. First of all, with a large enough sampling of keys, cracking the algorithm becomes easier. If every disk had a unique key, there would be a huge base of samples thus cracking the actual algorithm would ultimately become trivial. The second problem I see is that if you did that, the crackers would know exactly where the key resides and wouldn't have to go through the hoops of retrieving it from memory.
I do not claim to be an expert in this area and maybe someone more knowledgeable can enlighten me.
The whole problem with encrypted media is that in order for the customer to want to purchase it, they will need to access the media they have purchased. In order to access that media, they will at some point need the key(s) that unlock it. Simply put, the purchaser of the media has the locked media, but they will also have the key. If you give people the key to the lock along with the lock, it is only a matter of time before someone figures out how to get the key.
While I realize your comment was meant to be funny (and it is) it is also informative/insightful. I have had some horrible problems with Windows drivers in the past and troubleshooting these problems made me want to stick bamboo shoots under my fingernails.
/var/log/messages to see if there are any errors. Also, if there is an error, usually there is a nice descriptive error message that many times even suggests what your problem might be.
Not long ago I thought I would give Vista a look. I then found out that my Soundblaster Live! 5.1 had no official drivers available. Well, that card works fine with the several other OS's on that machine so I saw no point in replacing the card. I did find some converted XP drivers, but Vista uninstalled them upon reboot (every time you rebooted). OK, enough about that, I used an unsupported card, my bad. Same machine, same Vista install, a totally unrelated hard drive fails (happened to be the one with my XP partition on it). Now Vista won't boot at all. In fact it does nothing... spits out a couple errors and reboots. Screw Vista.
I fail to see how this is "easier" than dealing with hardware under Linux. At least with Linux you have a couple of very handy tools that will get you pointed in the correct direction. First off, you can lspci and lsmod to see what hardware is recognized and what drivers are loaded. You can also look at dmesg and
That's just plain wrong. If all you have is a certificate, it may be true, but if you're a Windows shop, why do you care if your admin can use bash? Likewise, why do you care if your linux admin knows anything about Windows if you're a Linux shop?
I think the point GP was trying to make is that there aren't many single OS shops left anymore. Add to that the fact that most positions above entry level (in regard to IT) usually require a more diverse experience set. If a company is so locked in to one strategy/platform I find it hard to believe the IT management has done their due diligence.
Having said all of that, I hold an MCSE but I am mostly a Linux admin. My experience set makes me more valuable to my employer because I can assess situations based on a problem/solution equation rather than a problem/(my vendors best attempt at a solution) equation.
I would think that whatever subsequent cases happen, judges and defense will be informed by this case.
I think this is probably the most important point you make with regard to future lawsuits.
The courts in the SCO cases have given SCO every opportunity to produce evidence to back their case. SCO has spent millions trying to find that evidence and by the time they realized it did not exist they had already dug themselves in way too deep and could not back out.
Also, as a result of the SCO cases, the BSD lawsuit agreement was brought out in to the public. What is interesting here is the amount of Unix code that is now licensed under a BSD license. It is my understanding that BSD licensed code can be included in the Linux kernel and released under the GPLv2 along with the rest of the Linux kernel.
Being that there is no Unix code illegally included in Linux, it would seem this avenue of attack is no longer open (or at minimum, not feasible). What worries me more is the next logical vector of attack, patents. I agree with a statement you made earlier, "I think Darl was just a front, as Ransom Love was for Caldera. Ralph Yarro was the real boss of both. I guess he's out too (not sure), but IMO the new investor is pursuing the same program, and Microsoft is still behind it.".
Microsoft themselves could never sue a Linux company directly for a couple of reasons. First of all MS does not need the bad publicity it would bring. They currently have the perfect scapegoat, why not continue using it? Secondly, Microsoft has anti-trust issues to concern themselves with that their scapegoat does not have.
The only solace that I find in the fact that the next war will be based around patents is that the courts have become better educated in technology and that Linux has been virtually exonerated of any copyright issues. Quite frankly, patents scare me.
Remember, there were some theories in 2003 that SCO had filed the initial $1 billion suit as a ploy to get purchased by IBM. IBM could have ended it there with a purchase, which might have cost them less in the long run than paying their lawyers, and would have arguably gained them some assets. Instead they recognized the larger issues at stake and took a principled stand, fighting this out so that all the facts of the case would come to light (and the facts rarely flatter SCO).
As much as I would like to believe that IBM had altruistic interests in taking this to court, I find that hard to believe. First of all that is a hard sell to the board of directors. More importantly though is the fact that IBM did not want to set a precedent of buying up companies that sue them. In fact, I would go so far as to say that IBM went to court simply to give any other company considering this tactic a reason to not proceed. There is a reason that IBM's lawyers are referred to as the Nazgul.
I was startled to hear the thundering of hooves. Having lived near Armonk, NY all my life, I had never heard such a sound before.
"What is that horrible sound?"
"That is the sound of the Black Steeds riding west from Armonk."
"The Black Steeds?"
"The Nazgul. They once were men. Now they are neither dead nor alive. They are IBM's attorneys."
Trend Micro is not a patent troll, they are a legitimate company who patented a process that they developed. Now they are exercising their rights as a patent holder. So why the hate? This is what the patent system is designed to do.
As I understand it, the patent involves filtering viruses before they make it to end user computers; eg. at the router/mail relay etc. The reason for the hate is that this is an obvious way to prevent viruses from entering your network. The hate is not so much aimed at Trend Micro as it is at the broken patent. However, the fact that Trend Micro is suing their competition using a broken patent as ammo is not going to earn Trend Micro any kudos.
I found this when I was actually searching for the version that I had heard; during jet engine testing it was debatable whether man could travel faster than sound.
Excellent post. I would also like to point out that Microsoft could at any time implement ODF in MSOffice. I think this is important to note because MS has constantly berated governments that have adopted (or have plans to adopt) ODF. MS claims that opting for ODF excludes MS from the bidding for contracts while this is absolutely not true; MS could use the ISO standard (ODF) rather than milking what is left of a dying lock-in strategy (file formats that are impossible for someone other than MS to implement 100% correctly be they *.doc or OOXML).
This attitude that churches should not have to play by the same rules as everyone else drives me up the wall.
:)
Agreed.
RTFA
...but it doesn't mean you get to take someone else's show or movie and charge admission to watch it...
If the church wants to use the NFL's football games to attract more members to the church, and charge the people coming to the party to pay for that outreach program...
Read the article; it specifically states that the church was *not* charging admission.
(Unless I'm mistaken and contractions are considered a single word even though it is made up of two words.)
Please turn in your grammar-nazi badge at the door.
In traditional grammar, a contraction is the formation of a new word from one or more individual words. -- This is the very first sentence in the referenced article by the way.
I agree with everything you say, but I think MySQL has been a thorn in the side of Oracle much more so than Redhat or Sun ever could be. This could just be a stepping stone for Oracle (if any of what I read is true in the first place :).
I think it is important to remember that Oracle could never have bought MySQL (legal/political reasons; not because they could not afford it); yet Oracle would love nothing more than to see MySQL die.
I sincerely hope that this is not the case - I use MySQL daily. This is just food for thought. Not too mention, you can never truly kill MySQL; it is GPL'd!
How can an open source software company with $70 million or so in revenue and no profits to speak of be worth $1 billion?
:)
This is where you have to think outside of the box. There are some who believe that Sun may simply be the pawn of Oracle. Oracle could not buy MySQL directly because of anti-trust issues etc.. Not to mention, Sun and Oracle have been "strategic partners" for a very long time. However, another company could purchase MySQL to kill it off.
I am not saying this is exactly what happend, but I do think the above author and Dvorak make some good points. Disclaimer: IANADF - I am not a Dvorak fan
Say I have a work of art in my loungeroom, an original painting by a famous artist.
:)
Your anology would work much better if you had a copyrighted (signed and numbered) lithograph which strictly forbids reproduction and distribution of an original painting by a famous artist. You have purchased a copy of the original but in no way own rights to make more copies and distribute them. It then follows that, according to RIAA logic, you are responsible for "making available" in the context you presented. I tend to disagree though; I think the RIAA Nazgul would try to crucify you for public performance bacause it pays more
In your examples, a *copy* was never made. The (licensed) original was stolen.
I see you are currently modded funny and thus hope that you are joking. The crux of the matter is that the site is not a revenue source for the authors yet they are purchasing advertising for the site. Combine this with the fact that one of the primary authors also happens to work on a competing project for a large corporation and did not disclose this on the site seems to imply that there is something more to the site than simply being someone's personal blog.
Wow... some mod has your number...
:) I have tried to like Gnome many many times however its complete lack of configuration options quickly drives me up a wall.
:(
Back on topic; I take exception to the example you give. Not only do KDE and Gnome work together, but KDE and Gnome both have their respective places. I know Gnome is more popular with most of the big-name distros but that does not change the fact that I cannot stand it
I cannot stand gterm (or whatever the default terminal in Gnome is) compared to konsole. As an example, in konsole when you have multiple tabs open switching between tabs is as easy as shift-(right or left arrow); in Gnome's terminal it is some esoteric 3-button key combo. I also like having Konqueror set up with the tree view on the left and the konsole terminal at the bottom in the file browsing mode; though this is no longer available in Dolphin which I see is poised to replace Konqueror for file browsing
Having said this, I can see where some of the options are overwhelming to the new KDE user and I find myself setting up Gnome for new Linux converts rather than setting up KDE. This is because I am generally setting them up with Ubuntu and 90% of the posts on the Ubuntu forums assume you are running Gnome. The funny thing is, most people who see my KDE desktop after they have used Gnome for a while will usually ask about setting theirs up in a similar manner at some point. I cross that bridge when I get there though.
I am actually quite happy with my phone even though it is older now. I originally got it from Cingular (now AT&T damnit) so it was not locked. I haven't had any problems charging it except under Windows with or without drivers :/ I have used moto4lin to put ringtones on the phone and to retrieve photos from the phone and had good luck with that, though moto4lin is a bit of a PITA to use and becomes moreso with a locked phone from what I understand.
Anyway, I agree to a point with much of what you have said though I express many of the same or similar frustrations when I have to use Windows. Hell, I am an MCSE (W2K) and I hate using Windows (especially Vista). With the exception of games, I have been running a 100% Linux desktop for about 7 or 8 years now (circa 2000). At first it was extremely frustrating but after a while it became Windows that frustrated me more. Neither is what I would call ideal and for you MacOSX guys who might suggest I use it, I do use it and it is not what I am looking for in an OS - I would call it more of a compromise between Linux and Windows; it has some of the good and the bad of both. Just my $0.02.
Still not convinced? Friend of mine asked me to get their PC to recognize their digital camera. Took a driver disk before Windows would recognize the cam. I plugged it into my Ubuntu box....
/.
Nope. I actually have used Linux, and the camera scenario you describe is the sasme experience in both; its reconized as a removable drive. Both will prompt you to copy pictures off the device. I've NEVER had a camera not reconized by Windows. I can only conclude you're making up this story, because I've never heard it related except on
While not really a camera I have had a similar problem with my Motorola Razr. I keep a mini-USB cable in my laptop bag as an emergency charger. I bought the Windows software for the phone. When I plug the phone in on a Linux machine it starts charging whether or not I have installed the drivers for the phone or not. I have yet to have it charge under Windows (XP) regardless of whether or not I have installed the Motorola software. I have not tried it with Vista simply because the one install of Vista I had I found to be so frustrating that I wiped it out a few hours after installing it.
I agree with you to a point, however I ran into a *hardware* problem a few years ago with a Dell Dimension (it was a P3 to give you the timeframe). The Dell representative refused support after learning that Linux had been run on the system. For the record, this was a power supply and the machine would not even powerup. I am still not sure how that had anything to do with Linux.
As a side note, I am in charge of IT purchasing and I was very happy with Dell up until that point. My company buys 8-12 servers a year and they were always Dell (pre-installed with Redhat). After that incident I moved to SuperMicro servers and I have never looked back. I don't even consider Dell anymore.