The idea that the browser isn't feature-complete unless you install 20 add-ons is certain to scare some people away
What about IE? They weren't even going to include tabs in IE7 originally. The evolution of IE has been mostly in its core rendering and ActiveX, and not the interface or functionality of the application. Internet Explorer has basically always been just a bare shell for MS's HTML handling engine. It's the bare minimum!
Use how? What if one of the engineers needs a snippet of code, copies it from Spring, and incorporates it into their product without attribution? Suddenly, that company is legally vulnerable.
Well, they won't when you tell them you're not developing OSS so they need to come up with all their own code!
You just proved the point: licensing mistakes are easy to make. If you were developing a program that incorporated Spring, and mistakenly believed that it required you to license your source, you would cost your company a great deal of money by doing so.
Which is why you have to read the license. Even closed-source software providers draw up licenses for their software for you to agree to, they should be able to read them themselves. They probably read them for all of the closed-source software that they install on their PCs, so why wouldn't they read the licenses for open-source software? Anyway, such a "mistake" may actually benefit a company if their software becomes more useful through OSS, and if they are able to maintain both a closed and open version as Sun does with OO.o, etc.
. If I sell code that violates a license to a client, that client becomes legally vulnerable and might sue me.
Not if they didn't agree to a license that YOU were supposed to agree to. You passed on modified code with a modified and possibly invalid license... the company you passed it on to didn't agree to (and weren't planning to) the GPL or whatever in using the software you passed on to them so why should they be subject to its rules?
corporations have developed strict, mature processes for keeping themselves on firm legal footing
Not if they skip over license agreements and just allow anything (closed or open) onto their computers!
Is this a FUD piece? There are some parts of the article which don't make any sense to me and look like scaremongering:
Companies running open source also often make the mistake of thinking they are running a relatively benign, commercial-friendly license like BSD when they are actually using GPL, which has limitations on modification and distribution of code.
Actually the GPL is supposed to NOT limit modification and distribution, because if the person who holds it is trying to prevent modification and distribution, then the license is invalid for them. Why use the word "benign" and "commercial-friendly" together... shouldn't something GPL-friendly be considered benign, since people have approved its distribution (the authors) as opposed to using commercial code which might be prevented from being included in an open source project due to copyright and/or IP? With GPL-code the authors give their expressed permission to distribute it, and you're sure that someone else can't take it and turn it into their exclusive product.
And that's a problem because 10 per cent of open source code leaks out of development and into final product, meaning companies really are potentially at risk from rightfully aggrieved software authors.
Meaning that companies are trying to take GPLed code, close it up, and sell it? Do they think OSS is just a pool of example code they can cherry-pick from?
With GPL 3.0 coming, things ain't going to get any easier - especially for Software as a Service (SaaS).
Why not? GPL3 makes it easier for you to modify (protections so you can run modified binaries on the original machine) and clearer about what you're getting (regarding patents).
Yes, you could call this a case of predictable vendor scaremongering to drum up new business, but don't forget some well known open source cases are already on record - Tivo, Linksys/Cisco, and Progress Software versus MySQL, anyone?
Justice was upheld, and the companies aren't damaged as a result. Isn't it scaremongering to put a negative spin on this?
Another problem: the increasingly distributed nature of development makes bans impossible, as offshore teams and outsourcing partners employ open source.
How is this a problem? They don't cite any examples.
Um... why shouldn't Sony try to offer a fun "party" title?
Um... they shouldn't? I was merely pointing out how well Nintendo's already done it for cheap. This, on the other hand, is supposed to be generating hype that in turn convinces people to buy the PS3. It's kind of a wimpy system-seller if you ask me, especially if you don't even want to go online!
It's playable left-handedly. I'm right handed, but sometimes I've picked up the Wii-mote and "Nunchuck" attachment backward, i.e. Wii-mote in left hand and nunchuck in right hand, without even realizing it until I've played for a while. I like the fact that the controls in games can be swapped this easily and unconsciously... Plus it's great that your hands don't have to be so close together all the time, I found myself using armrests sometimes.
Sonic 2 is an excellent platformer. Let's hypothesise that someone hacked up a level design tool that outputs playable Sonic levels, and set up a web site so you could share the levels you designed. How soon am I going to get bored of playing new Sonic levels, most of which were designed by people who are/not/ expert level designers? I reckon, very soon.
Just for the sake of argument... wasn't that the same thing with DOOM? Player-made mods and levels everywhere from everyone, yet the best managed to rise to the top. The most organized groups put out the best level packages. There were competitions, and id even included some of the best player-designed levels with Final Doom didn't they? I'm sure there will be some commercial releases to get things going as well. All that said, I'm a gamer and it doesn't sound very exciting to me either. Give me a good single player game I can lose myself in any day... if I want something less serious to play with a bunch of people, there's plenty of fun games on the Wii.
You can Google anyone and find out more than they put on their resume, stuff that can be taken out of context if seen that way, stuff that they do outside of work that has nothing to do with work but may attach stigma to them depending on biases of whoever's doing the search, etc. A difference here though would be that there aren't others to collaborate (and therefore validate or invalidate information based on peer review) on such information such as on the web site in question, but hey, it doesn't seem to make a difference to employers anyway. At least this way the employees can see what truthful information exists that they may not otherwise know about their employer.
So actually I would love to have customer ready Linux ready to checkout from CVS.:) I would even pay for it.
Me too, but my point was that nobody's going to upload libconsumerlinux-dev-1.0.0-all.tar.gz... it's an ongoing process that's going to tip the scales gradually as the software becomes polished. It's in the process of happening right now, OSS is making great strides towards achieving this on Linux. People have to write the software and it's going to take a bit of time. Before recently, people weren't even focusing on Linux becoming a Desktop platform... it wasn't until Ubuntu and Fedora that Desktop software really started getting better on Linux, and that's because these distros were easy enough for your Windows geek to download and install. Soon it'll be easy enough for more and more people, but who knows when that will be. Tomorrow people won't be going "Holy crap, last night Linux just became perfect for the desktop!" It'll take a while of people getting used to it.
This thing about Linux being ready for the desktop and coming to mainstream gradually is repeated like from 1998 and still yet it has not significant share in the market.
Maybe, but I wasn't there for that so I don't know;) I was a die-hard Windows user until a few years ago, but now I'm a die-hard Linux user:) Things change, and everyone has their own unique point where they will say "I want to move to Linux" - but it won't be the same time for everyone. I started using OSS on Windows, and many other people do too. They're starting to get used to Linux now and they're not even running it yet!
If they were using Linux they couldn't buy just any camera (since most of them don't work with Linux), they couldn't just plug it in since using Skype in Linux often requires technical voodoo like editing text files, knowing about niuances of ALSA/OSS, installing packages and so on. Not to mention that Skype for Linux is like few versions behind and I don't really think it can do video.
Well, I didn't have to do that to get mine running on Linux. My parents (and grandparents) will always ask me "Is this compatible with my computer?" before they buy anything, this would even happen when they were running Windows. They even ask me if a certain brand of CD-R will work with their drive, or if a 48x CD-R will work on a 24x burner. I'm happy to point them towards Linux compatible hardware and they don't have any problems. When other hardware producers start supporting Linux, or interfaces get standardized for these kinds of things, these problems will go away. Right now though there is more vendor support for Linux than before, but I don't mind going out of my way to find hardware that is guaranteed to work on Linux to get the experience I want. And a lot of the time that hardware just works a lot better... I have an iRiver IHP-120, a Cowon A2 (which runs Linux itself), and an iAudio X5l. They all work great with Linux, and I'd rather have any of them than the Zune or iPod, and even then the iPod works with Linux! (I bought an iPod Video 5.5G and brought it back for the iAudio X5l which I liked better). I wouldn't buy the Sony Walkman even if I ran Windows. It doesn't work on Linux but I don't care, I wouldn't want it to (bought that and returned it too, it just sucked).
They also like to run those CDs with various multimedia apps (like health encyclopedia, history of football, whatever) that come with various magazines. These don't work with Linux either.
I set my family up with a VMWare box with their old Windows software loaded on just for this purpose. It helps that any of the freaky software they download and install is confined to a virtual machine, less hassle for me:) For any apps that need to be integrated, Wine has worked fine for all our needs.
Well I can agree that Linux can work if you have a skilled admin that will set it up for you an
Hey, every piece of hardware that Linux supports, it does so better than on Windows. For example, the drivers are built-in, on Windows you have to find and download drivers, which is quite a PITA if you've ever tried to visit places like driverguide.com. Also, if the drivers require any type of GUI to work (printers, etc) it's all standardized across each hardware device. In Windows, every piece of hardware seems to have its own wizard and properties panels, which all end up doing the same thing... it's just that MS never designed common utilities panels for these types of hardware. The only ones they did this for pretty much is Mouse, Network Card, Modem, and Gamepad, and even then they're pretty bare and devoid of advanced feature capabilities so 3rd parties have to design their own and hack them in there or have their own icon to launch it. Not to mention all the hardware that adds system tray icons, update notifications, etc etc etc. I will go out of my way and even pay more money for hardware that works on Linux just because it makes my life way easier.
Linux is not customer ready OS right now (like for grandpa or smth.). If it would it would be mainstream right now.
Oh yeah, because everyone is checking CVS for the consumer-ready build of Linux. Right. Well, actually, Linux will (or has) evolve to be consumer-ready gradually, and it won't sweep across the nation overnight when it does. Linux doesn't have marketing behind it, and most PCs don't even come with the option of shipping with Linux, so I don't see how you can say that. Linux will come to the mainstream more gradually.
You say it's not ready for grandma, but guess what? That's what my grandparents are running now. A couple of years ago I set up my parents with Linux and have never had to go back and touch it, never had any requests for help with a problem, and they can do everything they want (surf the web, watch videos, email + webcam, digital camera, scanning and printing, word processing/spreadsheet, the usual stuff). I'm much happier as a result, no more fiddling every time I go to visit:)
For professionals right now it is I think mandatory to know Linux in *some* way. Even just in way to see that Windows works better for you.
Agreed, people need to make more informed decisions. If you can try out every OS, then you will have a much better idea of the advantages/disadvantages of each. Unfortunately, not every OS gets equal time in front of the decision makers or even administrators.
Oh and btw, my parents both have been using Linux for 2 years, and I am in the process of setting up my grandparents with it right now (finally got fed up of helping them with their PC as every time I was over there was a crisis, so I'm switching it to Linux... now I can actually VISIT when I go there to visit, as with the parents)
Why is it virtually impossible to configure a decent firewall without knowing everything there is to know about every interface on your PC(I know this and can do it, at least with gui help, but your average user can't).
No shit, and your average user can't on Windows either. Instead, users get software pre-loaded for them, and ask neighbourhood geeks to come and set up their new antivirus or whatever. Most average users can't even complete a wizard-based install program. However on Linux, most software is installed automatically as soon as you click on "Install" in your favourite Add/Remove Package program (like Synaptic). There are GUIs for firewalls in Linux that are no more complicated than any of the ones on Windows or OS X. I don't know what your complaint is here.
Why is Redhat(at least the enterprise edition) still using the same craptastic package manager they've been using for the last 15 years?
Because it works. RPM is a package manager and does 100% fine at doing that. It is NOT a program that resolves dependancies, such as Yum, which they ARE using int he latest Redhat Enterprise. I don't know what your complaint is here either.
Why are there always 25 versions of the same basic program type, none of which is actually fully functional, and most of which are clones of windows versions anyway?
Because people won't use Windows software on Linux, and so software developers program something similar for Linux. Either that or the case is that the software is open source to begin with and runs on multiple platforms anyway (7-Zip, Firefox, OpenOffice, Gaim, etc). Sometimes the software is open source and only parts of it are used in other open source software for other platforms (Miranda for Windows shares bits with other IM software on other platforms, etc).
As for software that has 50 different versions, well that's the case on Windows too. You've got 50 different all-in-one IM apps, 50 different Media Player software, 50 different Zip file programs, on Windows and Linux both. Except on Windows all of them come bundled with spyware, or are 100% spyware masquerading as helpful software, stick icons for promotions everywhere on your desktop and have built-in ads, yay! Yeah I really miss that on Linux. However on Windows you also have 50 different "web-helper" applications that sniff your data and send it back to who knows, 50 different "weather dock" applications that really only exist to monitor your surfing habits. Whoo.
I love linux, but it isn't ready for prime time, it's just not, and if you really think that having to pay for Windows would mean that people would use linux, you're insane. Would your parents be able to use linux? How about your grandparents?
Hell I'd pay to use Linux now if I had to, see above reasons. And not reinstalling every 6 months due to "Windows rot" is a real time saver.
As much as I hate to say it, if Microsoft started enforcing their licensing, and didn't reduce the cost thereof, you'd just see a whole lot more people without PC's, without access to the internet.
Couldn't this be an attempt at MS to actually make their OS more secure, by leveraging TPM to verify that trusted modules/applications can communicate with each other but not with untrusted ones in order to maintain system integrity? In the world of OSS, the same thing could be done, except of course the trusted modules/applications would be signed by the administrator, and any modules/applications not approved by the administrator would be ignored in communicating with these. Granted, that is probably not the way MS is applying things (they sign the modules/apps no doubt, or you must pay $$$ to have your module/app signed), but it is for security's sake.
Now, perhaps the whole reason behind this is so that when DRM on media is cracked, MS can say "OMG you cracked the same technology that is used to secure teh computars!!" and take you to court. That way in the court's eyes, the thing that protects media, and the thing that prevents all "teh virus/trojan/worms!!!" is the same thing. It's a much bigger offense to have compromised the integrity of many companies' networks than it is to just restore your ability to back up your personal movies/audio.
But to MS, now that it is in distribution (via XBox 360 and Zune) probably has a bigger reason to protect big media now, and if MS releases the only "crack-proof" DRM scheme (as in: you break the DRM and you are seen as a terrorist that is aiding others to "break into our country" via internet/networks or whatever since it's the same protection that prevents trusted modules/applications from being compromised) then wouldn't all big media companies send their money MS's way as well?
You can copy them onto a memory card. You can't play them from the memory card, but you can transfer them back and forth between the main memory and memory card. You can then take them onto a PC and back them up onto CD.
the Korean mentality is to be as homogeneous as possible. Anybody "weird" is singled out and alienated. This mindset is embedded in their society, culture, personal and professional lives, and everything else they do.
How did that come to be? How is it possible to raise an entire country of emotional bullies and not have it blow up on itself?
"For his intimates and those closer to home, Bush appears to be what is called an emotional bully. An emotional bully gains control using sarcasm, teasing, mocking, name calling, threatening, ignoring, lying, or angering the other and forcing him to back down. Bush administration insider accounts describe this sort of behavior from the president. He's well known for his dismissive remarks. His penchant for giving nicknames to everyone has its dark, bully's side. Naming people is a way to control them."
One great franchise that performed well on the market but died off for no reason was Jumping Flash. A great platformer before even Mario 64, fun to play and fun to control even if it didn't use analog sticks.
Commander Keen, Wonder Boy, Streets of Rage, Road Rash, Splatterhouse, oh.. there are so many that I wish they would bring back in full force.
Why can't I just use my portable DVD player and cell phone for the same thing? Plus, I can take them out of the car and use them other places too! Building expensive entertainment centres/computers in vehicles seems a bit pointless when you consider that you could just make such a thing portable so you can use it everywhere. Plus you'll want to take it out when you leave your vehicle anyway in case it gets stolen, like those removable face plates on radios and such. Seems like this will only catch on with people that buy ridiculously expensive vehicles anyway. The article mentions keeping up with the Jones', and these people are the only ones who probably care about doing that.
Why should we eat "cloned" animals as opposed to normal ones? They eat the same amount of feed, and produce the same meat/milk. Isn't it more expensive to clone animals instead of the artificial insemenation method we already use? Isn't it pointless/dangerous to be eating cloned meat when we might as well just be eating animals that reproduce?
Do you really want to see characters drinking a generic soda or beer? how about driving through San Francisco and seeing fake billboards on the freeway?
I think it's great when they show generic things. Often times you see a derivative of a real-life product and notice nothing out of place, but at least if you DO notice it, you don't feel distracted by the idea of someone trying to influence you and you don't just get distracted by seeing the product prominently placed, it just blends into the background. Sometimes they put thought into it and parody the product or have an insightful tongue-in-cheek joke about it, and it's something extra for Tivo or DVD owners to see when they pause it to check things out.
if it's a realistic police drama, it would just pull you out of your suspension of disbelief.
So would it if I saw a real product prominently placed, I'd just think "Man this is just an ad for ____" and get pissed off, distracting me from the story and realism. I'd honestly rather have very good fakes than the actual article, because then they just concentrate on where to place it or how many times they can show it to you or have the camera pan across it.
Duplicate
Please bear with me as I refer to the open source community by using generalizations, and also as I tack on my thoughts on MS. But hey, it's only what I think.
It's not payback for SCO, it's divide and conquer. In one move, MS has eliminated Novell as a competitor. Novell has confused and/or pissed off a lot of the open source community by entering into this agreement behind closed doors; That is, without the open approval of the majority of SuSE customers, users, and supporters involved with SuSE, and yet they are claiming otherwise.
Now everyone in the community is paranoid about code touched by Novell post-agreement. Now Novell is no longer of any use to the community as a whole (i.e. those not directly involved with SuSE but still involved with OSS) since they can no longer be trusted by a large portion, which will lead to arguments which will lead to either forks or simply no integration of Novell code and therefore a lot of work that was lost on something that doesn't benefit those who helped build up SuSE or the other OSS projects that share code with SuSE in the first place (by using GPL-compatible licenses and by not restricting them with patent law).
This move has also caused the community to slow down by everyone putting so much attention on Novell instead of building better code, and to fight amongst each other as we decide what to do with Novell code and the SuSE platform.
Now Novell is building its software to be compatible with Windows so that businesses can easily migrate from the Novell platform by slowly phasing out their linux boxes and replacing them with Windows ones.
This is a move that attempts to funnel Novell customers to MS (I'm just saying now there is a much bigger chance of it happening than before, and MS may have some other moves/FUD/threats/patents/whatever up its sleeve to make this much more likely). This is also a move that attempts to cause in-fighting and to put chinks in the armor of the OSS movement/community/whatever.
MS is trying to figure out how to battle OSS and they are getting more and more successful with every attempt -- even if they are just throwing shit up on the wall to see what sticks, they're tenacious and they're building a strategy around the results of their actions. Slowly and steadily they are figuring out how to "deal with" OSS.
MS is easily forgiven as long as money and other flash are thrown around, but OSS has its integrity and the fruit of our sweat and blood. Let's show them which is most important.
Like I said, I'm just saying now there is a much bigger chance of it happening than before, and MS may have some other moves/FUD/threats/patents/whatever up its sleeve to make this much more likely.
MS will always keep its crown jewels to itself, and may hold back a lot of the glue that keeps the Linux tools being developed in "cooperation" with them to themselves, and make businesses that use the functionality introduced into Linux by this cooperation as a crutch to introduce more and more MS software.
Anyway, I'm just saying it would be a lot more likely and easier. Who knows what MS has in the cards, but it's definitely not helping their customers migrate to Linux.
Slashdot Mirror
Can't anyone see? This whole debate was created by Pluto itself as media hype to keep Pluto in the news!
Someone takes their porn browsing seriously!
The idea that the browser isn't feature-complete unless you install 20 add-ons is certain to scare some people away
What about IE? They weren't even going to include tabs in IE7 originally. The evolution of IE has been mostly in its core rendering and ActiveX, and not the interface or functionality of the application. Internet Explorer has basically always been just a bare shell for MS's HTML handling engine. It's the bare minimum!
Use how? What if one of the engineers needs a snippet of code, copies it from Spring, and incorporates it into their product without attribution? Suddenly, that company is legally vulnerable.
Well, they won't when you tell them you're not developing OSS so they need to come up with all their own code!
You just proved the point: licensing mistakes are easy to make. If you were developing a program that incorporated Spring, and mistakenly believed that it required you to license your source, you would cost your company a great deal of money by doing so.
Which is why you have to read the license. Even closed-source software providers draw up licenses for their software for you to agree to, they should be able to read them themselves. They probably read them for all of the closed-source software that they install on their PCs, so why wouldn't they read the licenses for open-source software? Anyway, such a "mistake" may actually benefit a company if their software becomes more useful through OSS, and if they are able to maintain both a closed and open version as Sun does with OO.o, etc.
. If I sell code that violates a license to a client, that client becomes legally vulnerable and might sue me.
Not if they didn't agree to a license that YOU were supposed to agree to. You passed on modified code with a modified and possibly invalid license... the company you passed it on to didn't agree to (and weren't planning to) the GPL or whatever in using the software you passed on to them so why should they be subject to its rules?
corporations have developed strict, mature processes for keeping themselves on firm legal footing
Not if they skip over license agreements and just allow anything (closed or open) onto their computers!
Is this a FUD piece? There are some parts of the article which don't make any sense to me and look like scaremongering:
Companies running open source also often make the mistake of thinking they are running a relatively benign, commercial-friendly license like BSD when they are actually using GPL, which has limitations on modification and distribution of code.
Actually the GPL is supposed to NOT limit modification and distribution, because if the person who holds it is trying to prevent modification and distribution, then the license is invalid for them. Why use the word "benign" and "commercial-friendly" together... shouldn't something GPL-friendly be considered benign, since people have approved its distribution (the authors) as opposed to using commercial code which might be prevented from being included in an open source project due to copyright and/or IP? With GPL-code the authors give their expressed permission to distribute it, and you're sure that someone else can't take it and turn it into their exclusive product.
And that's a problem because 10 per cent of open source code leaks out of development and into final product, meaning companies really are potentially at risk from rightfully aggrieved software authors.
Meaning that companies are trying to take GPLed code, close it up, and sell it? Do they think OSS is just a pool of example code they can cherry-pick from?
With GPL 3.0 coming, things ain't going to get any easier - especially for Software as a Service (SaaS).
Why not? GPL3 makes it easier for you to modify (protections so you can run modified binaries on the original machine) and clearer about what you're getting (regarding patents).
Yes, you could call this a case of predictable vendor scaremongering to drum up new business, but don't forget some well known open source cases are already on record - Tivo, Linksys/Cisco, and Progress Software versus MySQL, anyone?
Justice was upheld, and the companies aren't damaged as a result. Isn't it scaremongering to put a negative spin on this?
Another problem: the increasingly distributed nature of development makes bans impossible, as offshore teams and outsourcing partners employ open source.
How is this a problem? They don't cite any examples.
What's creating the confusion?
This article's author?
Um ... why shouldn't Sony try to offer a fun "party" title?
... they shouldn't? I was merely pointing out how well Nintendo's already done it for cheap. This, on the other hand, is supposed to be generating hype that in turn convinces people to buy the PS3. It's kind of a wimpy system-seller if you ask me, especially if you don't even want to go online!
Um
It's playable left-handedly. I'm right handed, but sometimes I've picked up the Wii-mote and "Nunchuck" attachment backward, i.e. Wii-mote in left hand and nunchuck in right hand, without even realizing it until I've played for a while. I like the fact that the controls in games can be swapped this easily and unconsciously... Plus it's great that your hands don't have to be so close together all the time, I found myself using armrests sometimes.
Sonic 2 is an excellent platformer. Let's hypothesise that someone hacked up a level design tool that outputs playable Sonic levels, and set up a web site so you could share the levels you designed. How soon am I going to get bored of playing new Sonic levels, most of which were designed by people who are /not/ expert level designers? I reckon, very soon.
Just for the sake of argument... wasn't that the same thing with DOOM? Player-made mods and levels everywhere from everyone, yet the best managed to rise to the top. The most organized groups put out the best level packages. There were competitions, and id even included some of the best player-designed levels with Final Doom didn't they? I'm sure there will be some commercial releases to get things going as well. All that said, I'm a gamer and it doesn't sound very exciting to me either. Give me a good single player game I can lose myself in any day... if I want something less serious to play with a bunch of people, there's plenty of fun games on the Wii.
You can Google anyone and find out more than they put on their resume, stuff that can be taken out of context if seen that way, stuff that they do outside of work that has nothing to do with work but may attach stigma to them depending on biases of whoever's doing the search, etc. A difference here though would be that there aren't others to collaborate (and therefore validate or invalidate information based on peer review) on such information such as on the web site in question, but hey, it doesn't seem to make a difference to employers anyway. At least this way the employees can see what truthful information exists that they may not otherwise know about their employer.
So actually I would love to have customer ready Linux ready to checkout from CVS. :) I would even pay for it.
... it's an ongoing process that's going to tip the scales gradually as the software becomes polished. It's in the process of happening right now, OSS is making great strides towards achieving this on Linux. People have to write the software and it's going to take a bit of time. Before recently, people weren't even focusing on Linux becoming a Desktop platform... it wasn't until Ubuntu and Fedora that Desktop software really started getting better on Linux, and that's because these distros were easy enough for your Windows geek to download and install. Soon it'll be easy enough for more and more people, but who knows when that will be. Tomorrow people won't be going "Holy crap, last night Linux just became perfect for the desktop!" It'll take a while of people getting used to it.
;) I was a die-hard Windows user until a few years ago, but now I'm a die-hard Linux user :) Things change, and everyone has their own unique point where they will say "I want to move to Linux" - but it won't be the same time for everyone. I started using OSS on Windows, and many other people do too. They're starting to get used to Linux now and they're not even running it yet!
:) For any apps that need to be integrated, Wine has worked fine for all our needs.
Me too, but my point was that nobody's going to upload libconsumerlinux-dev-1.0.0-all.tar.gz
This thing about Linux being ready for the desktop and coming to mainstream gradually is repeated like from 1998 and still yet it has not significant share in the market.
Maybe, but I wasn't there for that so I don't know
If they were using Linux they couldn't buy just any camera (since most of them don't work with Linux), they couldn't just plug it in since using Skype in Linux often requires technical voodoo like editing text files, knowing about niuances of ALSA/OSS, installing packages and so on. Not to mention that Skype for Linux is like few versions behind and I don't really think it can do video.
Well, I didn't have to do that to get mine running on Linux. My parents (and grandparents) will always ask me "Is this compatible with my computer?" before they buy anything, this would even happen when they were running Windows. They even ask me if a certain brand of CD-R will work with their drive, or if a 48x CD-R will work on a 24x burner. I'm happy to point them towards Linux compatible hardware and they don't have any problems. When other hardware producers start supporting Linux, or interfaces get standardized for these kinds of things, these problems will go away. Right now though there is more vendor support for Linux than before, but I don't mind going out of my way to find hardware that is guaranteed to work on Linux to get the experience I want. And a lot of the time that hardware just works a lot better... I have an iRiver IHP-120, a Cowon A2 (which runs Linux itself), and an iAudio X5l. They all work great with Linux, and I'd rather have any of them than the Zune or iPod, and even then the iPod works with Linux! (I bought an iPod Video 5.5G and brought it back for the iAudio X5l which I liked better). I wouldn't buy the Sony Walkman even if I ran Windows. It doesn't work on Linux but I don't care, I wouldn't want it to (bought that and returned it too, it just sucked).
They also like to run those CDs with various multimedia apps (like health encyclopedia, history of football, whatever) that come with various magazines. These don't work with Linux either.
I set my family up with a VMWare box with their old Windows software loaded on just for this purpose. It helps that any of the freaky software they download and install is confined to a virtual machine, less hassle for me
Well I can agree that Linux can work if you have a skilled admin that will set it up for you an
Hey, every piece of hardware that Linux supports, it does so better than on Windows. For example, the drivers are built-in, on Windows you have to find and download drivers, which is quite a PITA if you've ever tried to visit places like driverguide.com. Also, if the drivers require any type of GUI to work (printers, etc) it's all standardized across each hardware device. In Windows, every piece of hardware seems to have its own wizard and properties panels, which all end up doing the same thing... it's just that MS never designed common utilities panels for these types of hardware. The only ones they did this for pretty much is Mouse, Network Card, Modem, and Gamepad, and even then they're pretty bare and devoid of advanced feature capabilities so 3rd parties have to design their own and hack them in there or have their own icon to launch it. Not to mention all the hardware that adds system tray icons, update notifications, etc etc etc. I will go out of my way and even pay more money for hardware that works on Linux just because it makes my life way easier.
Linux is not customer ready OS right now (like for grandpa or smth.). If it would it would be mainstream right now.
:)
Oh yeah, because everyone is checking CVS for the consumer-ready build of Linux. Right. Well, actually, Linux will (or has) evolve to be consumer-ready gradually, and it won't sweep across the nation overnight when it does. Linux doesn't have marketing behind it, and most PCs don't even come with the option of shipping with Linux, so I don't see how you can say that. Linux will come to the mainstream more gradually.
You say it's not ready for grandma, but guess what? That's what my grandparents are running now. A couple of years ago I set up my parents with Linux and have never had to go back and touch it, never had any requests for help with a problem, and they can do everything they want (surf the web, watch videos, email + webcam, digital camera, scanning and printing, word processing/spreadsheet, the usual stuff). I'm much happier as a result, no more fiddling every time I go to visit
For professionals right now it is I think mandatory to know Linux in *some* way. Even just in way to see that Windows works better for you.
Agreed, people need to make more informed decisions. If you can try out every OS, then you will have a much better idea of the advantages/disadvantages of each. Unfortunately, not every OS gets equal time in front of the decision makers or even administrators.
Oh and btw, my parents both have been using Linux for 2 years, and I am in the process of setting up my grandparents with it right now (finally got fed up of helping them with their PC as every time I was over there was a crisis, so I'm switching it to Linux... now I can actually VISIT when I go there to visit, as with the parents)
Why is it virtually impossible to configure a decent firewall without knowing everything there is to know about every interface on your PC(I know this and can do it, at least with gui help, but your average user can't).
;)
No shit, and your average user can't on Windows either. Instead, users get software pre-loaded for them, and ask neighbourhood geeks to come and set up their new antivirus or whatever. Most average users can't even complete a wizard-based install program. However on Linux, most software is installed automatically as soon as you click on "Install" in your favourite Add/Remove Package program (like Synaptic). There are GUIs for firewalls in Linux that are no more complicated than any of the ones on Windows or OS X. I don't know what your complaint is here.
Why is Redhat(at least the enterprise edition) still using the same craptastic package manager they've been using for the last 15 years?
Because it works. RPM is a package manager and does 100% fine at doing that. It is NOT a program that resolves dependancies, such as Yum, which they ARE using int he latest Redhat Enterprise. I don't know what your complaint is here either.
Why are there always 25 versions of the same basic program type, none of which is actually fully functional, and most of which are clones of windows versions anyway?
Because people won't use Windows software on Linux, and so software developers program something similar for Linux. Either that or the case is that the software is open source to begin with and runs on multiple platforms anyway (7-Zip, Firefox, OpenOffice, Gaim, etc). Sometimes the software is open source and only parts of it are used in other open source software for other platforms (Miranda for Windows shares bits with other IM software on other platforms, etc).
As for software that has 50 different versions, well that's the case on Windows too. You've got 50 different all-in-one IM apps, 50 different Media Player software, 50 different Zip file programs, on Windows and Linux both. Except on Windows all of them come bundled with spyware, or are 100% spyware masquerading as helpful software, stick icons for promotions everywhere on your desktop and have built-in ads, yay! Yeah I really miss that on Linux. However on Windows you also have 50 different "web-helper" applications that sniff your data and send it back to who knows, 50 different "weather dock" applications that really only exist to monitor your surfing habits. Whoo.
I love linux, but it isn't ready for prime time, it's just not, and if you really think that having to pay for Windows would mean that people would use linux, you're insane. Would your parents be able to use linux? How about your grandparents?
Hell I'd pay to use Linux now if I had to, see above reasons. And not reinstalling every 6 months due to "Windows rot" is a real time saver.
As much as I hate to say it, if Microsoft started enforcing their licensing, and didn't reduce the cost thereof, you'd just see a whole lot more people without PC's, without access to the internet.
Sweet, maybe we'll finally lose that AOL crowd
Couldn't this be an attempt at MS to actually make their OS more secure, by leveraging TPM to verify that trusted modules/applications can communicate with each other but not with untrusted ones in order to maintain system integrity? In the world of OSS, the same thing could be done, except of course the trusted modules/applications would be signed by the administrator, and any modules/applications not approved by the administrator would be ignored in communicating with these. Granted, that is probably not the way MS is applying things (they sign the modules/apps no doubt, or you must pay $$$ to have your module/app signed), but it is for security's sake.
Now, perhaps the whole reason behind this is so that when DRM on media is cracked, MS can say "OMG you cracked the same technology that is used to secure teh computars!!" and take you to court. That way in the court's eyes, the thing that protects media, and the thing that prevents all "teh virus/trojan/worms!!!" is the same thing. It's a much bigger offense to have compromised the integrity of many companies' networks than it is to just restore your ability to back up your personal movies/audio.
But to MS, now that it is in distribution (via XBox 360 and Zune) probably has a bigger reason to protect big media now, and if MS releases the only "crack-proof" DRM scheme (as in: you break the DRM and you are seen as a terrorist that is aiding others to "break into our country" via internet/networks or whatever since it's the same protection that prevents trusted modules/applications from being compromised) then wouldn't all big media companies send their money MS's way as well?
You can copy them onto a memory card. You can't play them from the memory card, but you can transfer them back and forth between the main memory and memory card. You can then take them onto a PC and back them up onto CD.
the Korean mentality is to be as homogeneous as possible. Anybody "weird" is singled out and alienated. This mindset is embedded in their society, culture, personal and professional lives, and everything else they do.
How did that come to be? How is it possible to raise an entire country of emotional bullies and not have it blow up on itself?
"For his intimates and those closer to home, Bush appears to be what is called an emotional bully. An emotional bully gains control using sarcasm, teasing, mocking, name calling, threatening, ignoring, lying, or angering the other and forcing him to back down. Bush administration insider accounts describe this sort of behavior from the president. He's well known for his dismissive remarks. His penchant for giving nicknames to everyone has its dark, bully's side. Naming people is a way to control them."
One great franchise that performed well on the market but died off for no reason was Jumping Flash. A great platformer before even Mario 64, fun to play and fun to control even if it didn't use analog sticks.
Commander Keen, Wonder Boy, Streets of Rage, Road Rash, Splatterhouse, oh.. there are so many that I wish they would bring back in full force.
The "legal way" thing probably refers to the inability to provide a legal WMV player for Linux
Yes there is, they could simply license the codec and provide a product for Linux that supports WMV.
Step 1: Rig election
Step 2: Change laws so election can't be verified
Step 3: Profit!
Why can't I just use my portable DVD player and cell phone for the same thing? Plus, I can take them out of the car and use them other places too! Building expensive entertainment centres/computers in vehicles seems a bit pointless when you consider that you could just make such a thing portable so you can use it everywhere. Plus you'll want to take it out when you leave your vehicle anyway in case it gets stolen, like those removable face plates on radios and such. Seems like this will only catch on with people that buy ridiculously expensive vehicles anyway. The article mentions keeping up with the Jones', and these people are the only ones who probably care about doing that.
Why should we eat "cloned" animals as opposed to normal ones? They eat the same amount of feed, and produce the same meat/milk. Isn't it more expensive to clone animals instead of the artificial insemenation method we already use? Isn't it pointless/dangerous to be eating cloned meat when we might as well just be eating animals that reproduce?
Do you really want to see characters drinking a generic soda or beer? how about driving through San Francisco and seeing fake billboards on the freeway?
I think it's great when they show generic things. Often times you see a derivative of a real-life product and notice nothing out of place, but at least if you DO notice it, you don't feel distracted by the idea of someone trying to influence you and you don't just get distracted by seeing the product prominently placed, it just blends into the background. Sometimes they put thought into it and parody the product or have an insightful tongue-in-cheek joke about it, and it's something extra for Tivo or DVD owners to see when they pause it to check things out.
if it's a realistic police drama, it would just pull you out of your suspension of disbelief.
So would it if I saw a real product prominently placed, I'd just think "Man this is just an ad for ____" and get pissed off, distracting me from the story and realism. I'd honestly rather have very good fakes than the actual article, because then they just concentrate on where to place it or how many times they can show it to you or have the camera pan across it.
Duplicate Please bear with me as I refer to the open source community by using generalizations, and also as I tack on my thoughts on MS. But hey, it's only what I think. It's not payback for SCO, it's divide and conquer. In one move, MS has eliminated Novell as a competitor. Novell has confused and/or pissed off a lot of the open source community by entering into this agreement behind closed doors; That is, without the open approval of the majority of SuSE customers, users, and supporters involved with SuSE, and yet they are claiming otherwise. Now everyone in the community is paranoid about code touched by Novell post-agreement. Now Novell is no longer of any use to the community as a whole (i.e. those not directly involved with SuSE but still involved with OSS) since they can no longer be trusted by a large portion, which will lead to arguments which will lead to either forks or simply no integration of Novell code and therefore a lot of work that was lost on something that doesn't benefit those who helped build up SuSE or the other OSS projects that share code with SuSE in the first place (by using GPL-compatible licenses and by not restricting them with patent law). This move has also caused the community to slow down by everyone putting so much attention on Novell instead of building better code, and to fight amongst each other as we decide what to do with Novell code and the SuSE platform. Now Novell is building its software to be compatible with Windows so that businesses can easily migrate from the Novell platform by slowly phasing out their linux boxes and replacing them with Windows ones. This is a move that attempts to funnel Novell customers to MS (I'm just saying now there is a much bigger chance of it happening than before, and MS may have some other moves/FUD/threats/patents/whatever up its sleeve to make this much more likely). This is also a move that attempts to cause in-fighting and to put chinks in the armor of the OSS movement/community/whatever. MS is trying to figure out how to battle OSS and they are getting more and more successful with every attempt -- even if they are just throwing shit up on the wall to see what sticks, they're tenacious and they're building a strategy around the results of their actions. Slowly and steadily they are figuring out how to "deal with" OSS. MS is easily forgiven as long as money and other flash are thrown around, but OSS has its integrity and the fruit of our sweat and blood. Let's show them which is most important.
Like I said, I'm just saying now there is a much bigger chance of it happening than before, and MS may have some other moves/FUD/threats/patents/whatever up its sleeve to make this much more likely.
MS will always keep its crown jewels to itself, and may hold back a lot of the glue that keeps the Linux tools being developed in "cooperation" with them to themselves, and make businesses that use the functionality introduced into Linux by this cooperation as a crutch to introduce more and more MS software.
Anyway, I'm just saying it would be a lot more likely and easier. Who knows what MS has in the cards, but it's definitely not helping their customers migrate to Linux.