but until that command line is 100% optional, the masses will not accept Linux, period.
Not sure why you needed the CLI, as Ubuntu has Synaptic. Plus now there is EasyUbuntu to get multimedia stuff working.
That said, I don't think "the masses" have the strong anti-CLI bent that geeks like to suggest they do. Many people who fit into "the masses" once used text-based programs--remember WordPerfect? Lotus 123? Just a few years ago all the students at my university used Pine for email, and nobody whined about how hard it was to use--maybe because it wasn't hard to use! Library catalogs all used to have text-based interfaces. Even now, many people use computer systems at work (ever heard of BPCS?) that have text-based interfaces. I've seen law librarians use the old text-based interfaces to Westlaw and Lexis.
If "the masses" hate CLI, why do they use Google? That involves formulating queries, typing them in. Why didn't they prefer the old Yahoo Directory way of picking from a menu of choices?
"The masses" have the same realization that geeks do: many GUI programs are designed for newbies. The problem is that you're not a newbie for long, but the GUI keeps you stuck in newbie mode. Long before I was a geek, I was frustrated when public libraries switched to GUI catalogs. GUI and web-based catalogs are easier to use when you're new, but you're not new for long, and after you're experienced clicking around with the mouse is very frustrating. That's why the law librarians use the text-based Lexis.
I often find CLI based programs to be easier to use, and I don't think "the masses" are any different.
Bah, this whole thread contains the wrong question. It's obvious why the supermarket shoppers aren't using free alternatives; a better question is, why isn't Tesco selling a CD with Free/Open Source software? Slap OOo on there and charge $20 for it. None of the supermarket shoppers would be the wiser, and it saves Tesco money.
You've got "musicians" in quotes...what really needs to be in quotes is "artists". I have been wondering when any schmoe who records some music and releases a CD became an "artist".
True artists want their works to be seen, heard, shared, understood. They want to evoke a reaction in people. Of course they want to make a living too, but love of money is not what motivates them.
Lots of people in the recording business are not interested in "art". They want to make gobs of money. They want to be superstars. That's fine, but these people shouldn't be called "artists." Just like Schwarzenegger was a "movie star" but not an "actor."
That said, there aren't many times, other than college, in your life where you are as free to experiment, try new things, and "open your wings". Learning about yourself and growing as a person (being social is a HUGE part of this) are the most important parts of college. Being successful (and happy) in life isn't always about what or how much you know. It is very often about how you present yourself (social skills) and who you know. College is a critical networking and personal growth opportunity.
I'm really sad to read this. One can experiment and try new things and 'open wings' long after college is over. When you're in college people often say "these are your best years." That always made me sad when I was in college. It wasn't that I didn't have a good time in college--it was absolutely wonderful--but I was only twenty years old! I didn't want my best times to be over when I (hopefully) had at least sixty years left!!
Good thing people were wrong. I'm still growing, spreading my wings, and trying new things. I hope that life only gets better.
I want to get an iPod, but I'm not not sure they are the answer either because now I can't be sure that if I buy music through iTunes that it won't break someday either.
MP3 is here to stay. Just don't get anything from iTunes music store. Buy CDs (used ones are pretty cheap) or go to allofmp3.com or eMusic or Magnatune or whatever. Just because you get an iPod doesn't mean you have to use DRM.
I am so tired of two sets of articles: those discussing whether Linux is "ready" for the desktop, and those that say that "NOW is the time when there will be massive adoption of Linux on the desktop."
On the first set of articles: Linux is already "ready" for the desktop. I use it on my desktop already, and it does everything I need it to do. It is for me a superior choice.
On the second set of articles, what they usually mean is that upon some event, there will be massive adoption of Linux on the desktop in rich, developed countries. "some event" varies and is typically purported to be 1) the coming of a new Windows version, such as Vista, which will be expensive and have high hardware requirements; 2) some big vendor preinstalling Linux, or 3) some big Windows security flaw, or 4) some other pain in the ass thing that MS is newly implementing, such as more DRM or copy restriction.
Well I've got news: it's highly unlikely we will ever see "widespread adoption" of Linux on desktops in rich developed countries. People in these countries can afford Windows, and switching is a big pain. Windows is crappy, but not crappy enough to switch away. It would be amazing if we even saw adoption rates that paralleled the adoption rates of Firefox in parts of Europe, but I think even that is unlikely. Note that I'm not saying anything about developing countries, where the dynamics--economic and political--may be quite different.
I'm tired of these articles because I don't understand why they're relevant. It's much more likely that we would see massive adoption of the Mac than of Linux. But we don't see articles crowing about that. Macheads are secure in their superiority complex; they don't see a need to sit around and predict when Mac world domination will happen. They don't worry that the Mac is irrelevant, no matter how small its market share is. Macheads are happy because their machines do what they want them to do. As a Linux user, I feel the same way. My machine does what I want it to do. My platform is not irrelevant--huge companies like Adobe, IBM, and Intel realize its importance even on the desktop. I do not care that roughly ninety percent of people use Windows, and I do not care about world domination.
Unfortunately it's often pro-Linux people (rather than just random press idiots) who promote this world domination crap. We need to realize that we've got a great platform, it works for us, and it's continuing to improve and work for even more people. The world domination and "ready for desktop" talk is tiresome and it just makes us look stupid.
I really see no point in jailing spammers. Sure, I hate spam, but come on, is it worth spending tens of thousands of dollars a year of public money to house and feed a spammer? It would be better to impose monetary penalties, or to take measures to ensure the perpetrators won't spam again. Put them under court supervision.
Jailing people is expensive, and it should be reserved for persons who are a danger to the safety of others. Jailing a spammer is a waste of money--those tens of thousands of dollars would be better spent on funding technological anti-spam measures.
So it's going to delete cookies...so what? Article says they're forming a partnership with Yahoo to share search engine revenue. Even without cookies Yahoo can still use IP addresses and build a search history. As the recent AOL gaffe shows, that data can be quite revealing. If the makers of this new browser really cared about privacy they wouldn't be looking to grab search engine revenue.
"In these days, where 250G of hard disk space is not unusual, and many times is not that uncommon, does anybody care how big the swap file/partition is?"
I've got 512MB of RAM, and Linux rarely resorts to swap. But I have a 120GB hard drive that's nowhere close to full, so there's a 1GB swap partition. Why not?
I would never regularly use such a tool. I'm proud to use Linux and won't hide it. But I installed the extension, changed my user agent to IE6/XP, and went to nytimes.com. Firefox instantly crashed and quit. I repeated; same result. Changed user agent to default, and no more crash.
Didn't know these 802.11 SIP phones existed, thanks. Cell service in my apartment sucks. I'd be willing to do VOIP over my cable modem and cut the landline if it's not some garbage like Vonage and I'm not locked into somebody...
People will use it because the Linux alternatives are inferior right now. I've got a huge spreadsheet. Excel opens it in about two seconds and recalculates it in about half a second. OOo and Gnumeric take at least two minutes to open it and a recalculation takes about five *minutes*. I love free software but I'll admit when it's inferior, and it is here.
Good idea, but the Skype Wi-Fi Phone has this pretty much covered. Not available yet though. Even if it were, I wouldn't buy it because I wouldn't pay hundreds of bucks for a phone that's locked into somebody's proprietary protocol. If it were an open protocol I'd buy it in a second.
How good is your router? I have found that the quality of your networking equipment can make a huge difference. I too live in an apartment building with lots of nearby access points--at night if I sit by my window I can catch at least ten signals. I used to have a POS Netgear router that would drop the connection repeatedly. Then I got the DLink DGL 4300, and this thing is rock solid. Drops maybe once a month.
Keeping the equipment cool also matters. For awhile I had the DGL 4300 on the floor, on its side, behind my PC, near the case and power supply exhaust fans. In the summer it sure gets hot back there, and my connection would drop quite a bit. I moved the router so it's on top of my case, and now the performance is rock solid.
All routers are not of the same quality. (I could say the same of cable modems, but that's another story entirely.) Cheap networking equipment does not pay. Make sure you have a good router and WiFi can work well even in tough circumstances.
Why should Linux standardize on one package manager? Should Linux standardize on Emacs rather than Vi? Should Linux standardize on OpenOffice Calc rather than Gnumeric? Should Linux standardize on Opera rather than Firefox? Should Linux standardize on KDE rather than Gnome?
Of course not. Linux's great strength is its diversity. I like Portage, you like RPM. I take Gentoo, you take SUSE. We're both happy.
Maybe something akin to freedesktop would be nice for package managers--have a standard way of doing certain operations. But he seems to be suggesting it would be a good idea to have distros dump their package managers and adopt a single common one. Not only would this happen on the same day that all Vim users switch to Emacs, but it would also be just as pointless.
How do these posts on Linux install being hard get modded up? First, the article was about the installer for Debian Etch, not about individual application installation. Installing Linux is generally *easier* than installing Windows. With Windows you have to search all over the Internet for drivers. Linux usually comes with all the drivers you need and configures them for you.
Second, even if you want to talk about installing apps, it's super easy to go into Synaptic or whatever tool your distro uses, click on something, and install it. Why is it that people think that "I can't install things the exact same way I install things in Windows" equals "it's hard to install things"? If you want to do things the Windows way, use Windows!
Third, I have seen Linux apps that are easy to install "the Windows way." Google Earth is a prime example; Skype is another. Download, click, and use.
"Device cables are becoming a thing of the past, and that development couldn't come soon enough."
Haha, he hasn't seen the back of my computer! 3.1 speakers alone generates five cables. Printer cable. Power cables. Even with wireless networking, the cable modem and the wireless router generate about four cables. Even a wireless keyboard has a cable to connect the wireless receiver to the ps/2 port. Monitor cable. The rat's nest back there is amazing. Every time I move my computer I have to disconnect every single cable, detangle them, and then plug them all back in again.
End of cables? Not even close, especially for desktops. Probably the best cable-reduction tactic is to get one of those luggable laptops. But then you have to accept crappy sound, no external mouse (or an erratic wireless one), etc...
"DRM is imposed on operating system vendors by Big Media." TFA makes the same claim: "Vista will support an unprecedented level of DRM (digital rights management), but that's at the behest of the content providers rather than Microsoft itself." That's completely ridiculous.
Microsoft has over ninety percent of the market for desktop and laptop operating systems. That gives it ENORMOUS leverage to negotiate with Big Media. The simple fact is that within a year or two, almost every new Windows machine will be shipping with Windows Vista. Big Media would lose out if Vista couldn't play newfangled DVDs: of course, people using home DVD players might not care. But lots of people use computers to play back DVDs now. If the operating system with over 90 percent of the market can't play them back, DVD sales would fall. Travelers would stop by the airport newsstand for in-flight entertainment, rather than popping a DVD into the laptop.
Microsoft stands to gain a great deal from Vista's heavy incorporation of DRM. Services like Yahoo Music and Napster aren't using Microsoft DRM technologies for free--they're paying huge licensing fees for them. Meanwhile, every end-user who finds services like Yahoo Music and Napster to be indispensable is another user who won't switch to MacOS or Linux. Furthermore, heavy usage of DRM in next-generation DVDs would be yet another impediment to the adoption of free operating systems.
Microsoft is not some poor, two-bit player that's being forced to succumb to the power of Big Media. Microsoft is willingly employing and profiting from DRM, in furtherance of Microsoft's objectives.
The only distribution that seems to have real staying power is Red Hat.
False. Debian's first 1.0 release was about ten years ago. SUSE's first release was about twelve years ago. Slackware's first release was about thirteen years ago. All are about as old as Red Hat, which was first released about twelve years ago.
The only difference is that the rise of consolidated suburban multiplexes and the erosion of small locally owned theaters has made it rather harder to see the good ones in many places throughout the US.
Good point; good thing Netflix exists as a sort of antidote. It's easy to dig up all sorts of movies on there you could never see at the theater--even here in Washington, D.C., where there are tons of good arthouse theaters.
If they had sold MSOffice at the Windows-version price, few would have bought. If they had sold it substantially lower, that would have motivated Windows users to look at Linux.
That's why MS would be worth more as a company if it were broken up. Have a Windows division, a Office division, and a Internet division. Post breakup, the Office folks would create a Linux version--they'd probably still be chained to the proprietary shrink-wrap model, but a cheaper Linux version might sell.
The Windows division would fork Windows to have a consumer version that's secure but that breaks backward compatibility. They'd keep a corporate version that pretty much sticks to Win 2000 without adding a bunch of useless doodads.
The Internet division would create online apps and not be afraid of siphoning business from Office. Actually the Office division could do this too.
Not that I'm saying the government should have broken MS up. MS should do this itself. But they're too prideful to see it.
I am an American, yes, but when considering that every single word of what's written on Slashdot is in English, I find it reasonable to assume that outbound links should be to stories in English. If I want French links I'll go to a French language site.
Slashdot Mirror
but until that command line is 100% optional, the masses will not accept Linux, period.
Not sure why you needed the CLI, as Ubuntu has Synaptic. Plus now there is EasyUbuntu to get multimedia stuff working.
That said, I don't think "the masses" have the strong anti-CLI bent that geeks like to suggest they do. Many people who fit into "the masses" once used text-based programs--remember WordPerfect? Lotus 123? Just a few years ago all the students at my university used Pine for email, and nobody whined about how hard it was to use--maybe because it wasn't hard to use! Library catalogs all used to have text-based interfaces. Even now, many people use computer systems at work (ever heard of BPCS?) that have text-based interfaces. I've seen law librarians use the old text-based interfaces to Westlaw and Lexis.
If "the masses" hate CLI, why do they use Google? That involves formulating queries, typing them in. Why didn't they prefer the old Yahoo Directory way of picking from a menu of choices?
"The masses" have the same realization that geeks do: many GUI programs are designed for newbies. The problem is that you're not a newbie for long, but the GUI keeps you stuck in newbie mode. Long before I was a geek, I was frustrated when public libraries switched to GUI catalogs. GUI and web-based catalogs are easier to use when you're new, but you're not new for long, and after you're experienced clicking around with the mouse is very frustrating. That's why the law librarians use the text-based Lexis.
I often find CLI based programs to be easier to use, and I don't think "the masses" are any different.
Bah, this whole thread contains the wrong question. It's obvious why the supermarket shoppers aren't using free alternatives; a better question is, why isn't Tesco selling a CD with Free/Open Source software? Slap OOo on there and charge $20 for it. None of the supermarket shoppers would be the wiser, and it saves Tesco money.
You've got "musicians" in quotes...what really needs to be in quotes is "artists". I have been wondering when any schmoe who records some music and releases a CD became an "artist".
True artists want their works to be seen, heard, shared, understood. They want to evoke a reaction in people. Of course they want to make a living too, but love of money is not what motivates them.
Lots of people in the recording business are not interested in "art". They want to make gobs of money. They want to be superstars. That's fine, but these people shouldn't be called "artists." Just like Schwarzenegger was a "movie star" but not an "actor."
Agreed, the old GTK file chooser is an absolute monstrosity. Looks like relief is finally on the way with the new GNOME 2.16 http://www.gnome.org/start/2.16/notes/C/rnbackend. html
That said, there aren't many times, other than college, in your life where you are as free to experiment, try new things, and "open your wings". Learning about yourself and growing as a person (being social is a HUGE part of this) are the most important parts of college. Being successful (and happy) in life isn't always about what or how much you know. It is very often about how you present yourself (social skills) and who you know. College is a critical networking and personal growth opportunity.
I'm really sad to read this. One can experiment and try new things and 'open wings' long after college is over. When you're in college people often say "these are your best years." That always made me sad when I was in college. It wasn't that I didn't have a good time in college--it was absolutely wonderful--but I was only twenty years old! I didn't want my best times to be over when I (hopefully) had at least sixty years left!!
Good thing people were wrong. I'm still growing, spreading my wings, and trying new things. I hope that life only gets better.
I want to get an iPod, but I'm not not sure they are the answer either because now I can't be sure that if I buy music through iTunes that it won't break someday either.
MP3 is here to stay. Just don't get anything from iTunes music store. Buy CDs (used ones are pretty cheap) or go to allofmp3.com or eMusic or Magnatune or whatever. Just because you get an iPod doesn't mean you have to use DRM.
I am so tired of two sets of articles: those discussing whether Linux is "ready" for the desktop, and those that say that "NOW is the time when there will be massive adoption of Linux on the desktop."
On the first set of articles: Linux is already "ready" for the desktop. I use it on my desktop already, and it does everything I need it to do. It is for me a superior choice.
On the second set of articles, what they usually mean is that upon some event, there will be massive adoption of Linux on the desktop in rich, developed countries. "some event" varies and is typically purported to be 1) the coming of a new Windows version, such as Vista, which will be expensive and have high hardware requirements; 2) some big vendor preinstalling Linux, or 3) some big Windows security flaw, or 4) some other pain in the ass thing that MS is newly implementing, such as more DRM or copy restriction.
Well I've got news: it's highly unlikely we will ever see "widespread adoption" of Linux on desktops in rich developed countries. People in these countries can afford Windows, and switching is a big pain. Windows is crappy, but not crappy enough to switch away. It would be amazing if we even saw adoption rates that paralleled the adoption rates of Firefox in parts of Europe, but I think even that is unlikely. Note that I'm not saying anything about developing countries, where the dynamics--economic and political--may be quite different.
I'm tired of these articles because I don't understand why they're relevant. It's much more likely that we would see massive adoption of the Mac than of Linux. But we don't see articles crowing about that. Macheads are secure in their superiority complex; they don't see a need to sit around and predict when Mac world domination will happen. They don't worry that the Mac is irrelevant, no matter how small its market share is. Macheads are happy because their machines do what they want them to do. As a Linux user, I feel the same way. My machine does what I want it to do. My platform is not irrelevant--huge companies like Adobe, IBM, and Intel realize its importance even on the desktop. I do not care that roughly ninety percent of people use Windows, and I do not care about world domination.
Unfortunately it's often pro-Linux people (rather than just random press idiots) who promote this world domination crap. We need to realize that we've got a great platform, it works for us, and it's continuing to improve and work for even more people. The world domination and "ready for desktop" talk is tiresome and it just makes us look stupid.
I really see no point in jailing spammers. Sure, I hate spam, but come on, is it worth spending tens of thousands of dollars a year of public money to house and feed a spammer? It would be better to impose monetary penalties, or to take measures to ensure the perpetrators won't spam again. Put them under court supervision.
Jailing people is expensive, and it should be reserved for persons who are a danger to the safety of others. Jailing a spammer is a waste of money--those tens of thousands of dollars would be better spent on funding technological anti-spam measures.
So it's going to delete cookies...so what? Article says they're forming a partnership with Yahoo to share search engine revenue. Even without cookies Yahoo can still use IP addresses and build a search history. As the recent AOL gaffe shows, that data can be quite revealing. If the makers of this new browser really cared about privacy they wouldn't be looking to grab search engine revenue.
"In these days, where 250G of hard disk space is not unusual, and many times is not that uncommon, does anybody care how big the swap file/partition is?"
I've got 512MB of RAM, and Linux rarely resorts to swap. But I have a 120GB hard drive that's nowhere close to full, so there's a 1GB swap partition. Why not?
I would never regularly use such a tool. I'm proud to use Linux and won't hide it. But I installed the extension, changed my user agent to IE6/XP, and went to nytimes.com. Firefox instantly crashed and quit. I repeated; same result. Changed user agent to default, and no more crash.
Anybody have screenshots of what these "self-signed certificate" errors look like so that I know what to beware?
Didn't know these 802.11 SIP phones existed, thanks. Cell service in my apartment sucks. I'd be willing to do VOIP over my cable modem and cut the landline if it's not some garbage like Vonage and I'm not locked into somebody...
People will use it because the Linux alternatives are inferior right now. I've got a huge spreadsheet. Excel opens it in about two seconds and recalculates it in about half a second. OOo and Gnumeric take at least two minutes to open it and a recalculation takes about five *minutes*. I love free software but I'll admit when it's inferior, and it is here.
Good idea, but the Skype Wi-Fi Phone has this pretty much covered. Not available yet though. Even if it were, I wouldn't buy it because I wouldn't pay hundreds of bucks for a phone that's locked into somebody's proprietary protocol. If it were an open protocol I'd buy it in a second.
How good is your router? I have found that the quality of your networking equipment can make a huge difference. I too live in an apartment building with lots of nearby access points--at night if I sit by my window I can catch at least ten signals. I used to have a POS Netgear router that would drop the connection repeatedly. Then I got the DLink DGL 4300, and this thing is rock solid. Drops maybe once a month.
Keeping the equipment cool also matters. For awhile I had the DGL 4300 on the floor, on its side, behind my PC, near the case and power supply exhaust fans. In the summer it sure gets hot back there, and my connection would drop quite a bit. I moved the router so it's on top of my case, and now the performance is rock solid.
All routers are not of the same quality. (I could say the same of cable modems, but that's another story entirely.) Cheap networking equipment does not pay. Make sure you have a good router and WiFi can work well even in tough circumstances.
Why should Linux standardize on one package manager? Should Linux standardize on Emacs rather than Vi? Should Linux standardize on OpenOffice Calc rather than Gnumeric? Should Linux standardize on Opera rather than Firefox? Should Linux standardize on KDE rather than Gnome? Of course not. Linux's great strength is its diversity. I like Portage, you like RPM. I take Gentoo, you take SUSE. We're both happy. Maybe something akin to freedesktop would be nice for package managers--have a standard way of doing certain operations. But he seems to be suggesting it would be a good idea to have distros dump their package managers and adopt a single common one. Not only would this happen on the same day that all Vim users switch to Emacs, but it would also be just as pointless.
How do these posts on Linux install being hard get modded up? First, the article was about the installer for Debian Etch, not about individual application installation. Installing Linux is generally *easier* than installing Windows. With Windows you have to search all over the Internet for drivers. Linux usually comes with all the drivers you need and configures them for you.
Second, even if you want to talk about installing apps, it's super easy to go into Synaptic or whatever tool your distro uses, click on something, and install it. Why is it that people think that "I can't install things the exact same way I install things in Windows" equals "it's hard to install things"? If you want to do things the Windows way, use Windows!
Third, I have seen Linux apps that are easy to install "the Windows way." Google Earth is a prime example; Skype is another. Download, click, and use.
"Device cables are becoming a thing of the past, and that development couldn't come soon enough."
Haha, he hasn't seen the back of my computer! 3.1 speakers alone generates five cables. Printer cable. Power cables. Even with wireless networking, the cable modem and the wireless router generate about four cables. Even a wireless keyboard has a cable to connect the wireless receiver to the ps/2 port. Monitor cable. The rat's nest back there is amazing. Every time I move my computer I have to disconnect every single cable, detangle them, and then plug them all back in again.
End of cables? Not even close, especially for desktops. Probably the best cable-reduction tactic is to get one of those luggable laptops. But then you have to accept crappy sound, no external mouse (or an erratic wireless one), etc...
"DRM is imposed on operating system vendors by Big Media." TFA makes the same claim: "Vista will support an unprecedented level of DRM (digital rights management), but that's at the behest of the content providers rather than Microsoft itself." That's completely ridiculous.
Microsoft has over ninety percent of the market for desktop and laptop operating systems. That gives it ENORMOUS leverage to negotiate with Big Media. The simple fact is that within a year or two, almost every new Windows machine will be shipping with Windows Vista. Big Media would lose out if Vista couldn't play newfangled DVDs: of course, people using home DVD players might not care. But lots of people use computers to play back DVDs now. If the operating system with over 90 percent of the market can't play them back, DVD sales would fall. Travelers would stop by the airport newsstand for in-flight entertainment, rather than popping a DVD into the laptop.
Microsoft stands to gain a great deal from Vista's heavy incorporation of DRM. Services like Yahoo Music and Napster aren't using Microsoft DRM technologies for free--they're paying huge licensing fees for them. Meanwhile, every end-user who finds services like Yahoo Music and Napster to be indispensable is another user who won't switch to MacOS or Linux. Furthermore, heavy usage of DRM in next-generation DVDs would be yet another impediment to the adoption of free operating systems.
Microsoft is not some poor, two-bit player that's being forced to succumb to the power of Big Media. Microsoft is willingly employing and profiting from DRM, in furtherance of Microsoft's objectives.
The only distribution that seems to have real staying power is Red Hat.
False. Debian's first 1.0 release was about ten years ago. SUSE's first release was about twelve years ago. Slackware's first release was about thirteen years ago. All are about as old as Red Hat, which was first released about twelve years ago.
The only difference is that the rise of consolidated suburban multiplexes and the erosion of small locally owned theaters has made it rather harder to see the good ones in many places throughout the US.
Good point; good thing Netflix exists as a sort of antidote. It's easy to dig up all sorts of movies on there you could never see at the theater--even here in Washington, D.C., where there are tons of good arthouse theaters.
If they had sold MSOffice at the Windows-version price, few would have bought. If they had sold it substantially lower, that would have motivated Windows users to look at Linux.
That's why MS would be worth more as a company if it were broken up. Have a Windows division, a Office division, and a Internet division. Post breakup, the Office folks would create a Linux version--they'd probably still be chained to the proprietary shrink-wrap model, but a cheaper Linux version might sell.
The Windows division would fork Windows to have a consumer version that's secure but that breaks backward compatibility. They'd keep a corporate version that pretty much sticks to Win 2000 without adding a bunch of useless doodads.
The Internet division would create online apps and not be afraid of siphoning business from Office. Actually the Office division could do this too.
Not that I'm saying the government should have broken MS up. MS should do this itself. But they're too prideful to see it.
And why would people "contribute" to SourceForge, a for-profit enterprise?
I am an American, yes, but when considering that every single word of what's written on Slashdot is in English, I find it reasonable to assume that outbound links should be to stories in English. If I want French links I'll go to a French language site.