Windows group chief James Allchin accuses Linux of being a cheap knockoff: "There's no innovation. Linux is still in the business of cloning existing technology." Allchin points to new features in the version of Windows due in 2007 that will allow users to remotely turn PCs on or off, with programs still running. Searches will extend across all data like e-mail, photos, Word. "We're creating things," he says.
This has yet to be the biggest crap of all time. Linux (or technically, the distribution) has always had remote shutting down, # shutdown now, once logged in. So, who's cloning existing technology now? In fact, one can remotely suspend a machine as well.
Infact, there are not many things that Microsoft has actually innovated, most of the time they use thier financial position to break existing markets (or duplicate technology). Does anyone know of a good product that Microsoft innovated, i.e. one that was a first-timer in the market?
The problem isn't that the user tried a 'bad' distro and didn't have a good experience... the problem is that there isn't a SINGLE distro for Linux that is easy altogether.
What I meant was that: the person who wrote the parent parent, had not tried other distros out there before making a good judgement. For instance if I ate a bad apple, it does not mean that all apples are bad.
Different distros have different ideologies. What I was trying to say is that one can't make judgements like that if one has not seen it all. The parent parent really sounds like if he had lost his first love, he'll never fall in love again.
Getting the right distro may seem difficult. It does take effort. Even as you said, there is not a single distro that is easy all together. Have you tried each and every one of the distros out there? If not, then how can you make such a judgement?
Yet another user who blames Linux because he had a bad experience with some distro.
I remember when I first started off. It was Red Hat 8.X if I am not mistaken. I mucked the intallation so bad, I reinstalled it a few times. Then I got fed-up and installed ALL packages, yes, it did reach to a 3GB installation, but everything worked.
But to me, it was a learning phase. I have never used Red Hat ever again. I've moved from Mandrake to SuSE to Mandrake to at long last Gentoo now.
One distro does not reflect how Linux is. There are plenty of options out there. Be bold and explore! Find one that suites you. Rather than complaining about Red Hat, I moved on to a different distro.
If SMEs have any idea on how to survive and cut costs IT wise, they'd just strip all exe, scr, bat, pif etc (for this matter of e-mail viruses) from all attachments. If a client wants to send a file, tell them to upload it somewhere, or give the client some access on their own servers or whatever. This estimate of 48k to 58k is just way to high. Where in the world did they come up with this anyway?
Slashdot Mirror
Are you trying to say women don't like India?
From TFA:
Windows group chief James Allchin accuses Linux of being a cheap knockoff: "There's no innovation. Linux is still in the business of cloning existing technology." Allchin points to new features in the version of Windows due in 2007 that will allow users to remotely turn PCs on or off, with programs still running. Searches will extend across all data like e-mail, photos, Word. "We're creating things," he says.
This has yet to be the biggest crap of all time. Linux (or technically, the distribution) has always had remote shutting down, # shutdown now, once logged in. So, who's cloning existing technology now? In fact, one can remotely suspend a machine as well.
Infact, there are not many things that Microsoft has actually innovated, most of the time they use thier financial position to break existing markets (or duplicate technology). Does anyone know of a good product that Microsoft innovated, i.e. one that was a first-timer in the market?
What I meant was that: the person who wrote the parent parent, had not tried other distros out there before making a good judgement. For instance if I ate a bad apple, it does not mean that all apples are bad.
Different distros have different ideologies. What I was trying to say is that one can't make judgements like that if one has not seen it all. The parent parent really sounds like if he had lost his first love, he'll never fall in love again.
Getting the right distro may seem difficult. It does take effort. Even as you said, there is not a single distro that is easy all together. Have you tried each and every one of the distros out there? If not, then how can you make such a judgement?
Ahhh...
Yet another user who blames Linux because he had a bad experience with some distro.
I remember when I first started off. It was Red Hat 8.X if I am not mistaken. I mucked the intallation so bad, I reinstalled it a few times. Then I got fed-up and installed ALL packages, yes, it did reach to a 3GB installation, but everything worked.
But to me, it was a learning phase. I have never used Red Hat ever again. I've moved from Mandrake to SuSE to Mandrake to at long last Gentoo now.
One distro does not reflect how Linux is. There are plenty of options out there. Be bold and explore! Find one that suites you. Rather than complaining about Red Hat, I moved on to a different distro.
Of course, MS could also just make their own Linux distro (MS Linux)...
They did it here
Well, for those who don't understand English/American, here's the article in Ali G.
Even though I feel that CSS is not that important, it's a nice thing, the time wasted on discussing this could have been spent on deploying the CSS.
Not essential, but nice.
If SMEs have any idea on how to survive and cut costs IT wise, they'd just strip all exe, scr, bat, pif etc (for this matter of e-mail viruses) from all attachments. If a client wants to send a file, tell them to upload it somewhere, or give the client some access on their own servers or whatever. This estimate of 48k to 58k is just way to high. Where in the world did they come up with this anyway?