For going almost 15 years now and barely breaking backwards compatibility, they seriously deserve more credit than the slashdot crowd gives them.
Personally, I would have preferred that they sat down and did a _complete_ redesign of the OS, and said: screw backwards compatibility, lets do this right.
Unix as we know it today is now more popular than it's ever been among both geeks and the corporate world.
Really? It is? Last time I checked, the GNU toolset comes with (essentially) EVERY linux distro, not to mention the fact that the GNU tools are included with most proprietary UNIX's, to the detriment of the 'traditional' UNIX tools...
I don't think that Microsoft would _sell the magazine_ because of a critical article. If they really cared, I'm sure they would have censored the article before it was published (went live?). M$ is evil and vindictive, but I'm not sure that they really care if people use IE or not, as long as they aren't using Linux, *BSD etc.
Wait. In other words, that shiny new box I bought will have a processor that will be useless in five years? That sucks. Hell, thats a ripoff. I have five year old boxen that I _still_ use, if only as servers. And what about all those schools who bought new computers recently? Maybe things will change soon, but, where I live it doesn't look like there will be money for new boxen five years down the road. Hell, here in California (or at least the eastern San Francisco Bay Area) it doesn't always look like we'll have classes in five years.
They do? What about all those studies paid for by M$ showing windows is faster than linux? Or that the TCO is lower? And how about those hardware benchmarks you see everywhere?
The Linux kernel and other core OS components -- including libraries, device drivers, file systems, networking, IPC, and memory management -- operated consistently and completed all the expected durations of runs with zero critical system failures.
Every run generated a high success rate (over 95%), with a very small number of expected intermittent failures that were the result of the concurrent executions of tests that are designed to overload resources.
How does that compare with other OS's?
Yet again, the people who use the technology have no control over the technology... a prime example of the folly of Mr. Moore's 'Stupid White Men'. Everyone at the conference should be tested before entering- they should all be able to figure out how to turn on a computer. Ick.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally, I would have preferred that they sat down and did a _complete_ redesign of the OS, and said: screw backwards compatibility, lets do this right.
Now _there_ is your hard-core, oldschool troll. Clueless, but amusing in its own way.
Really? It is? Last time I checked, the GNU toolset comes with (essentially) EVERY linux distro, not to mention the fact that the GNU tools are included with most proprietary UNIX's, to the detriment of the 'traditional' UNIX tools...
I'm... heartbroken. Really.
There are no thin clients on the Linux side! I don't get it... last time I heard, LTSP was doing quite well...
Bah. When did they change it? I don't remember this particular eyeball sandblast...
I don't think that Microsoft would _sell the magazine_ because of a critical article. If they really cared, I'm sure they would have censored the article before it was published (went live?). M$ is evil and vindictive, but I'm not sure that they really care if people use IE or not, as long as they aren't using Linux, *BSD etc.
Wait. In other words, that shiny new box I bought will have a processor that will be useless in five years? That sucks. Hell, thats a ripoff. I have five year old boxen that I _still_ use, if only as servers. And what about all those schools who bought new computers recently? Maybe things will change soon, but, where I live it doesn't look like there will be money for new boxen five years down the road. Hell, here in California (or at least the eastern San Francisco Bay Area) it doesn't always look like we'll have classes in five years.
They do? What about all those studies paid for by M$ showing windows is faster than linux? Or that the TCO is lower? And how about those hardware benchmarks you see everywhere?
The Linux kernel and other core OS components -- including libraries, device drivers, file systems, networking, IPC, and memory management -- operated consistently and completed all the expected durations of runs with zero critical system failures. Every run generated a high success rate (over 95%), with a very small number of expected intermittent failures that were the result of the concurrent executions of tests that are designed to overload resources. How does that compare with other OS's?
Yet again, the people who use the technology have no control over the technology... a prime example of the folly of Mr. Moore's 'Stupid White Men'. Everyone at the conference should be tested before entering- they should all be able to figure out how to turn on a computer. Ick.
Linus you twit, not Linux. Ones a guy, the other's a kernel...
Isn't transmeta's new, super-kewl uberchip running at a wonder 1.1 ghz? Or was it 1.4?