OSX caters to the greatest common denominator, in that it has a static & eye-candy-licious interface, a (basically) static amount of programs, etc. E.g. It caters to the GCD by making choices for it's users.
And, that's not busting on Mac. (I mean, I didn't even mention the *** ****** *****). It's just stating a fact. Apple and MS put out products that are one-size-fits-all, while Linux (generally) takes the make-your-own-shoe approach.
The idea behind the 2 "houses" of congress was to prevent the will of the large states from superceding the will of the small. Overall, seems like a great way to stifle corruption.
However, as we can see, it didn't quite work. No, we definitely need something new.
Given:
1) They continue to come out with innovative products to give out
2) Those products continue to be popular
(Neither are unreasonable to me)
Then they integrate targeted ads into the products, and they can continue to collect $$$ from the ads... thereby sustaining their income. Granted, their stock is currently far to blaoted to be considered a safe investment. But their business model isn't going to fail.
search, email, blogs - free: but their web searching and blogging are by far the most popular around. And GMail is nothing short of brilliant (interface wise. personally, I have issues with availability).
photos, video - how does this earn money?: Google charges fees when people want to sell their videos. If you combine the video sales with google ads and searchability... = Profit!
mapping, satellite data - this is not essential, not even very important: tell that to mapquest. (Satellite images are not necessary, but they are a fun feature, which is great for joe user).
filtering - ?: not sure what this refers to. I'll leave it be.
secure remote storage - like all the companies before them who tried this...: Yeh. not too sure about this one either. I didn't think google offered it.
We need an unbiased but authoritative organization to do a reliable study of Linux versus Windows. The best choice is probably the computer department at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) or Carnegie-Mellon University (CMU).
Don't forget the guys over at UCal Berk--oh, wait.
Since Win 2k at least you've had the "Run as..." 'command' that allows you to do just that on Windows.
The sort of people who do, are the sort who would get them for *any* platform, because they're the sort who just blindly click "ok" on every dialogue without reading it. I've been running XP for about 3 years, and have never had a single spyware or virus infection.
I have been running Linux for 4, and I am in the same boat. Also, while I don't usually get pulled into the "scammy" sites, I have inadvertently managed to click "OK" a few times (don't ask how). The inability for windows binaries to run on Linux (no wine installed) is a good thing.;)
Something you forget about "run as" is that, to use it, you have to set up your computer to use that functionality. It is not enabled as default on XP.
This is silly. It's been raised on the Ubuntu lists time and time again. Nonetheless, they refuse to enable it, because Canonical can't guarantee security updates for it
Why not enable Universe by default, and when a user tries to download a package, alert them that it is not fully supported. Ooo! Ooo! or make an easy way to enable the Universe repo, and when then user enables that tell them that universe is not fully supported.
Some Vendors will spend the same amount of time writing drivers for windows, which 97% of their customer base uses, and linux, which 3% of their customer base uses.
I wish I could think of one that did... in the real world drivers for linux do NOT get the same level of attention.
Nitpicking here, but nVidia does a damn good job with their geforce drivers. (I can't speak for nForce, as I use VIA boards).
Debian is a rather "Zealotrous" distribution, as you so eloquently put it. They have rules of conduct, and those rules state explicity that Debian will not distribute non-free/non-oss software. However, Debian is more like a "staging" distro... it's largely a standard distro that is built on by other distros. My bet is that other distros, such as Ubutnu and Kubuntu, etc., do not distribute for the same reason.
Other distros take a less pragmatic stance (gentoo in particular) concerning closed-source inclusion. These distros are still hampered, however, by bad licensing terms for the closed-source driver. For instance, I can get my nVidia graphics driver, and I can get the Intel 2200/BG driver fine. However, because Intel chose to use a non-transferrable license for the 2200/BG's firmware, I have to download that on my own. (It still installs automatically).
That's the problem with you linux guys, you talk about "user bases." If anything's too hard to use or install, you just lay the blame on the user for trying to breach his assigned "user base."
You are half-correct with this statement. People who are not wise in the ways of arguing Linux will commonly fall back on the userbase argument. However, that does not make the argument fundamentally invalid.
Something that non-linux users fail to comprehend is the choice that Linux gives you. Comparing your standard OSX or Windows installation against Linux is (strictly in the area of their userbase) inheirently fallacious. Windows and OSX cater to the greatest common denominator. They limit what is possible.
Meanwhile, Linux is about choice. Linux is about users finding their own level of comfort. Typically, this level of comfort is on the command-line side. That situation is changing. However, in order for such changes to occur, expert users need to be able to guide others into linux. We need ways of considering who the users are, and what their needs are. As most of us are pragmatic, we consider userbases.
For instance, I have been using Linux for the past 4 years. Most of my experience is with Debian and Gentoo, both highly-CLI oriented distros. I know very little about red hat, SuSE, etc. So, my first reaction to a problem is to fire up a console. I literally cannot use their config utilities, because I fall outside of the userbase they cater to.
So, userbases are used (by those-in-the-know) to categorize users, and then associate them with the distro that they will find comfortable with. I wouldn't drop grandma into Gentoo. She seems more like a Mandriva user. My personal experience with Mandriva, though, is that it removes too much of the experience I want. As you can see, it's a wholly different philosophy, as compared to other systems.
The first step in improving linux is tearing down the notion of exclusive user bases. Software can be easy to use and powerful, not just one or the other.
Another misconception is that userbases are exclusive. They arn't, though. One can move between them. If you want to learn about your system, make upgrading easier, not care anymore, whatever. There's always choice. My personal path was Mandrake->Debian->Red Hat->Gentoo. However, many people are comfortable with Mandrake. Why force them to switch? For those that don't like what mandriva offers, why force them to stay?
I mean, since nerd IS still a word that is used in a negative way it should not be bandied around like this. I don't care if you're not offended by it. Some people are
So, you would rather fall to the whims of all of the jocks and bullies of your past? You'd rather fall and wallow in your own self pity?
I say: may we never be complete. I say: may we never be content. I say: deliver me from doublespeak! I say: deliver me from popular opinion. I say: evolve, and let the chips fall where they may.
Actually, it seems to me that it would be better for the plaintiff to pay the full fees. I mean, that way, the poor guy won't be able to afford the trial. Meanwhile, the fat cats can run rampant.
And why should we do this? Well, it's rather obvious. We already live in an oligarchy, might as well make it official.
Slashdot Mirror
And, that's not busting on Mac. (I mean, I didn't even mention the *** ****** *****). It's just stating a fact. Apple and MS put out products that are one-size-fits-all, while Linux (generally) takes the make-your-own-shoe approach.
Hours? fuckin n00bs. The real man uses Gentoo, and it takes days... no, weeks!--to configure it.
Or having political tech pundits guiding the interent--wait a minute...
You misspelled fiends.
Hah! Calc.exe can't do comparisons. MS found it too difficult to implement ;)
However, as we can see, it didn't quite work. No, we definitely need something new.
No, seriously. I'm thinking about getting off this rock.
1) They continue to come out with innovative products to give out
2) Those products continue to be popular
(Neither are unreasonable to me)
Then they integrate targeted ads into the products, and they can continue to collect $$$ from the ads... thereby sustaining their income. Granted, their stock is currently far to blaoted to be considered a safe investment. But their business model isn't going to fail.
search, email, blogs - free: but their web searching and blogging are by far the most popular around. And GMail is nothing short of brilliant (interface wise. personally, I have issues with availability).
photos, video - how does this earn money?: Google charges fees when people want to sell their videos. If you combine the video sales with google ads and searchability... = Profit!
mapping, satellite data - this is not essential, not even very important: tell that to mapquest. (Satellite images are not necessary, but they are a fun feature, which is great for joe user).
filtering - ?: not sure what this refers to. I'll leave it be.
secure remote storage - like all the companies before them who tried this...: Yeh. not too sure about this one either. I didn't think google offered it.
Don't forget the guys over at UCal Berk--oh, wait.
The sort of people who do, are the sort who would get them for *any* platform, because they're the sort who just blindly click "ok" on every dialogue without reading it. I've been running XP for about 3 years, and have never had a single spyware or virus infection.
I have been running Linux for 4, and I am in the same boat. Also, while I don't usually get pulled into the "scammy" sites, I have inadvertently managed to click "OK" a few times (don't ask how). The inability for windows binaries to run on Linux (no wine installed) is a good thing. ;)
Something you forget about "run as" is that, to use it, you have to set up your computer to use that functionality. It is not enabled as default on XP.
I know where you're coming from. All the hotties love my leet *nix skills. I start talking and they literally fall (over) into my arms. ;)
Why not enable Universe by default, and when a user tries to download a package, alert them that it is not fully supported. Ooo! Ooo! or make an easy way to enable the Universe repo, and when then user enables that tell them that universe is not fully supported.
I wish I could think of one that did... in the real world drivers for linux do NOT get the same level of attention.
Nitpicking here, but nVidia does a damn good job with their geforce drivers. (I can't speak for nForce, as I use VIA boards).
Debian is a rather "Zealotrous" distribution, as you so eloquently put it. They have rules of conduct, and those rules state explicity that Debian will not distribute non-free/non-oss software. However, Debian is more like a "staging" distro... it's largely a standard distro that is built on by other distros. My bet is that other distros, such as Ubutnu and Kubuntu, etc., do not distribute for the same reason.
Other distros take a less pragmatic stance (gentoo in particular) concerning closed-source inclusion. These distros are still hampered, however, by bad licensing terms for the closed-source driver. For instance, I can get my nVidia graphics driver, and I can get the Intel 2200/BG driver fine. However, because Intel chose to use a non-transferrable license for the 2200/BG's firmware, I have to download that on my own. (It still installs automatically).
You are half-correct with this statement. People who are not wise in the ways of arguing Linux will commonly fall back on the userbase argument. However, that does not make the argument fundamentally invalid.
Something that non-linux users fail to comprehend is the choice that Linux gives you. Comparing your standard OSX or Windows installation against Linux is (strictly in the area of their userbase) inheirently fallacious. Windows and OSX cater to the greatest common denominator. They limit what is possible.
Meanwhile, Linux is about choice. Linux is about users finding their own level of comfort. Typically, this level of comfort is on the command-line side. That situation is changing. However, in order for such changes to occur, expert users need to be able to guide others into linux. We need ways of considering who the users are, and what their needs are. As most of us are pragmatic, we consider userbases.
For instance, I have been using Linux for the past 4 years. Most of my experience is with Debian and Gentoo, both highly-CLI oriented distros. I know very little about red hat, SuSE, etc. So, my first reaction to a problem is to fire up a console. I literally cannot use their config utilities, because I fall outside of the userbase they cater to.
So, userbases are used (by those-in-the-know) to categorize users, and then associate them with the distro that they will find comfortable with. I wouldn't drop grandma into Gentoo. She seems more like a Mandriva user. My personal experience with Mandriva, though, is that it removes too much of the experience I want. As you can see, it's a wholly different philosophy, as compared to other systems.
The first step in improving linux is tearing down the notion of exclusive user bases. Software can be easy to use and powerful, not just one or the other.
Another misconception is that userbases are exclusive. They arn't, though. One can move between them. If you want to learn about your system, make upgrading easier, not care anymore, whatever. There's always choice. My personal path was Mandrake->Debian->Red Hat->Gentoo. However, many people are comfortable with Mandrake. Why force them to switch? For those that don't like what mandriva offers, why force them to stay?
He's not kidding though. He said he was serious. Geez. ;)
What'd be funny is if they actually complied...
See, this article is the first in a 2 day series. He posted it here so /. would do his research for him.
I'm feeling pretty damn hostile. Those bastards took away Martin Sargent.
So, you would rather fall to the whims of all of the jocks and bullies of your past? You'd rather fall and wallow in your own self pity?
I say: may we never be complete. I say: may we never be content. I say: deliver me from doublespeak! I say: deliver me from popular opinion. I say: evolve, and let the chips fall where they may.
You're not your fucking pocket protector, chief.
And slashdot isn't?
So what do you consider /. then?
And why should we do this? Well, it's rather obvious. We already live in an oligarchy, might as well make it official.
</sarcasm>
Lest you forgot your </sarcasm> tag.