Why do people always have this monolitic view? Sure, I'd rather keep the files on my *personal* PC on my local disk and edit them with desktop-based applications.
But for large corporations, especially those with mobile users, this sort of web applications (when kept on internal servers) could be a great way to avoid the maintenance hell of hundreds of workstations with files scattered all over the place.
Even the British adopted the meter, and they invented the imperial units!
Erm, not technically true. Yes, the British are responsible for disseminating the imperial system all over the world, given their British Empire. However, these units are called "imperial" due to the other empire: it was the Romans who invented the system.
The problem is that, with 800 MB of code it's virtually impossible to be sure that there are no serious bugs somewhere.
Sure, it might be more solid than Windows (!), but no large software project nowadays can presume to be bug-free. It's just too much code and possible scenarios to say that it all has been tested.
That's what has been done in the UK (as far as I know). Stuff is still being measured in miles per hour and feet and inches, but the majority of the younger generation is more aware and ready to use the metric system.
The Conservatives, however, keep making this an issue of "national identity" (?) and resist any attempts to try and make it more common.
Apparently it will make you French if you buy 33cl bottle of beer instead of a pint... <sigh>
It gets interesting now, though. This guy at eWeek has a theory that MS is putting all it has onto Longhorn to steamroll Linux.
If that's the case, then projects like Mono (or anything that consolidates and professionalises Linux) takes a larger sense of importance and urgency (well, kind of: MS won't release Longhorn for another decade or so...)
"... consistent innovation requires coordination across many technology components. In the event of needed enhancements or fixes, the Linux development community, no matter how well intentioned, simply cannot advance Linux the way we can - and must - innovate in Windows."
An interesting point, although I think it's only valid on the desktop, where coherence of application behaviour is a very important requirement.
Windows built its market share by being easy to use and (kind of) consistent in its UI. Every time MS launches some new Windows or Office version, you see all these new small-to-large applications popping up, reusing MS's components and copying its UI. There's many bad UIs out there, but overall copying MSs designs leads to a more coherent user experience on the desktop.
If you notice, MS's "innovations" have always been about setting "standards" but offering them in a way that will only work in Windows. (check an earlier story from today).
Linux offers, in general, software that is more efficient and more secure. I believe the great next innovation needed by Linux to actually leap ahead of Windows is to integrate its desktop technologies better.
Miguel also makes some very interesting points about how Windows has managed code reusability to a point that allows it to offer a more integrated desktop than Linux. Check out his text.
That's the one thing about Linux I have to say I find a bit disconcerting: the lack of uniformity among applications (and no, I'm not trying to start trolling about that.) Just read Miguel's text if you're interested.
Slashdot Mirror
Why do people always have this monolitic view? Sure, I'd rather keep the files on my *personal* PC on my local disk and edit them with desktop-based applications.
But for large corporations, especially those with mobile users, this sort of web applications (when kept on internal servers) could be a great way to avoid the maintenance hell of hundreds of workstations with files scattered all over the place.
What on Earth...?! Are those really screenshots?!
Don't they know how to press Print Screen? (Yeah, it works on KDE too; go figure...)
Erm, not technically true. Yes, the British are responsible for disseminating the imperial system all over the world, given their British Empire. However, these units are called "imperial" due to the other empire: it was the Romans who invented the system.
More interesting is the fact that it was IE that first introduced the favicon idea...
The problem is that, with 800 MB of code it's virtually impossible to be sure that there are no serious bugs somewhere.
Sure, it might be more solid than Windows (!), but no large software project nowadays can presume to be bug-free. It's just too much code and possible scenarios to say that it all has been tested.
That's what has been done in the UK (as far as I know). Stuff is still being measured in miles per hour and feet and inches, but the majority of the younger generation is more aware and ready to use the metric system.
The Conservatives, however, keep making this an issue of "national identity" (?) and resist any attempts to try and make it more common.
Apparently it will make you French if you buy 33cl bottle of beer instead of a pint... <sigh>
Novell's behind Suse, Ximian, and Mono.
I don't think they'll be going away just yet...
You probably read it here.
It gets interesting now, though. This guy at eWeek has a theory that MS is putting all it has onto Longhorn to steamroll Linux.
If that's the case, then projects like Mono (or anything that consolidates and professionalises Linux) takes a larger sense of importance and urgency (well, kind of: MS won't release Longhorn for another decade or so...)
"... consistent innovation requires coordination across many technology components. In the event of needed enhancements or fixes, the Linux development community, no matter how well intentioned, simply cannot advance Linux the way we can - and must - innovate in Windows."
An interesting point, although I think it's only valid on the desktop, where coherence of application behaviour is a very important requirement.
Windows built its market share by being easy to use and (kind of) consistent in its UI. Every time MS launches some new Windows or Office version, you see all these new small-to-large applications popping up, reusing MS's components and copying its UI. There's many bad UIs out there, but overall copying MSs designs leads to a more coherent user experience on the desktop.
If you notice, MS's "innovations" have always been about setting "standards" but offering them in a way that will only work in Windows. (check an earlier story from today).
Linux offers, in general, software that is more efficient and more secure. I believe the great next innovation needed by Linux to actually leap ahead of Windows is to integrate its desktop technologies better.
Miguel also makes some very interesting points about how Windows has managed code reusability to a point that allows it to offer a more integrated desktop than Linux. Check out his text.
That's the one thing about Linux I have to say I find a bit disconcerting: the lack of uniformity among applications (and no, I'm not trying to start trolling about that.) Just read Miguel's text if you're interested.