Linux developers MUST consolidate and release a "master" distro for the general computer/device mark

[Léonard Kai Schönitz]

X-No-Archive=Yes
Linux does not want world domination. Linux means diversity. There is need
for Distributions, and, by the way, Distributions aren't very important for
the functionality of Linux. They aren't very different to each others,
since they only use some more or some less programs and have a modified
structure of config files.

 

[Léonard Kai Schönitz]

Linux does suffer from people who think, Linux should rule the OS market.
Linux is a good system for geeks. And that's schweet.

 

[yakety yak]

Re: Linux developers MUST consolidate and release a "master" distro for the general computer/device market.

On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:07:49 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Oxford
> <colalovesmacs@mac.com>
> wrote
> on Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:03:10 -0600
> <colalovesmacs-591FE9.15031008102007@mpls-nnrp-02.inet.qwest.net>:
>> George Graves <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Could a company like, for instance, Adobe, release a single
>>> shrink-wrapped fully compiled version of its applications marked "For
>>> Linux" and have it install as easily on ALL modern Linux distributions
>>> as it now does on PCs or Macs? If so, then you're right. But that begs
>>> another question. If all the distros are that alike, why haven't any of
>>> the major software publishers released any of their applications on
>>> Linux?.
>>
>> from my understanding Linux simply doesn't have a modern enough
>> foundation to support high level apps like PhotoShop, InDesign, etc.
>
> Does Windows? Windows has Photoshop, InDesign, etc. I'd like to know what
> "modern" means in this context, specifically what is in the foundation of
> a "modern OS".

DRM?

 

[yakety yak]

Re: Linux developers MUST consolidate and release a "master" distro for the general computer/device market.

On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 20:02:11 -0600, Oxford wrote:

> In article .,
> yakety yak <who.me@nospam.diespammers.invalid> wrote:
>
>> >>> OTOH, I don't have to wonder how long before Apple starts bricking
>> >>> computers, too.
>> >>
>> >> they'd first have to start bricking anything. so far they haven't
>> >> bricked any of their products in 31 years.
>>
>> All those new iBrick owners would disagree.
>
> do you have any names of these people? nope!

Try asking these guys:

https://www.appleiphonelawsuit.com/Home_Page.html

> you got caught in a media lie.

You could be right. Maybe the bricking wasn't intentional and Apple is
merely incompetent.

 

[Oxford]

Re: Linux developers MUST consolidate and release a "master" distro for the general computer/device market.

yakety yak <who.me@nospam.diespammers.invalid> wrote:

> >> All those new iBrick owners would disagree.
> >
> > do you have any names of these people? nope!
>
> Try asking these guys:
>
> https://www.appleiphonelawsuit.com/Home_Page.html

no names, so still waiting for you to come up with some.

you pointed to lawyers site, not an angry iphone user(s). might want to
double check your links next time.

> > you got caught in a media lie.
>
> You could be right. Maybe the bricking wasn't intentional and Apple is
> merely incompetent.

Apple isn't going to test against 3rd party "hacks", why would they?

They clearly said things could break, and some did. Apple has no
culpability here.

You're just another angry person that doesn't have an iPhone.

 

[yakety yak]

Re: Linux developers MUST consolidate and release a "master" distro for the general computer/device market.

On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 22:12:51 -0600, Oxtard wrote:

> yakety yak <who.me@nospam.diespammers.invalid> wrote:
>
>> >> All those new iBrick owners would disagree.
>> >
>> > do you have any names of these people? nope!
>>
>> Try asking these guys:
>>
>> https://www.appleiphonelawsuit.com/Home_Page.html
>
> no names, so still waiting for you to come up with some.
>
> you pointed to lawyers site, not an angry iphone user(s). might want to
> double check your links next time.

Oh, I didn't figure you were smart enough to read it. That's OK, I'm
happy enough to give everyone else a good laugh at your expense.

>> > you got caught in a media lie.
>>
>> You could be right. Maybe the bricking wasn't intentional and Apple is
>> merely incompetent.
>
> Apple isn't going to test against 3rd party "hacks", why would they?

FreeBSD can run tens of thousands of third-party applications without
bricking the machine Linux can run tens of thousands of third-party
applications without bricking the machine hell, even Microsoft can build
an OS that can run tens of thousands of third-party applications without
bricking the machine. So why should I believe that Apple can't do it, too?

> They clearly said things could break, and some did. Apple has no
> culpability here.

A company can't escape liability for a shoddy design by claiming the
product wasn't meant to be used in some way that it should reasonably
have known consumers would use it.

> You're just another angry person that doesn't have an iPhone.

Got piles of bricks laying around the yard, one more wouldn't make much
difference.

 

[spike1@freenet.co.uk]

Adam Albright <AA@abc.net> did eloquently scribble:
> I'm just illustrating even major software vendors haven't been able to
> push Linux into wider acceptance.

You DO realise that corel linux survived don't you?
It was forked and renamed Xandros.
You DO realise the reason Corel dropped linux (and the various linux apps
like wordperfect and draw, was because of pressure from microsoft rather
than any technical reason, don't you?


You don't?
Ahhhhh that explains the dormant look on your face.
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| spike1@freenet.co.uk | "I'm alive!!! I can touch! I can taste! |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| I can SMELL!!! KRYTEN!!! Unpack Rachel and |
| in | get out the puncture repair kit!" |
| Computer Science | Arnold Judas Rimmer- Red Dwarf |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[spike1@freenet.co.uk]

Oxford <colalovesmacs@mac.com> did eloquently scribble:
> Kier <vallon@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

>> > yes, and while agree for the most part... linux users forget they are
>> > mainly isolated to the poorer sections of northwest europe. and never
>> > have been able to spread beyond that region. nobody in the states uses
>> > linux, nobody in japan, canada, etc.
>>
>> Where do you get *that* incredibly dumb idea? You must have pulled it out
>> of your arse.

> the fact you spelled "ass" incorrectly according to the wealthier
> nations, proves you are living in a poor area.

He doesn't talk about pulling things out of a donkey, so he's poor?
He was TALKING about pulling things out of your ARSE, not ASS.
Your RECTUM. Your ANUS.

And god it must be sore by now, seems like you have your hand up there
rummaging around for more crap to throw at this channel more than ever.

> I'm trying to help you understand the larger world kier, to help you
> understand Linux is unheard of here in the States, Canada, Japan, etc.

Lesseee, IBM... Where's that based again?
Novell? MICROSOFT? That's CERTAINLY based mainly in seatle isn't it?
So, you're saying we've been misunderstanding microsoft's motives this past
20 years?

That their "Get the facts" campaign wasn't against linux the OS, but was
against the detergent? Did it stain bill's shirt or something?


>> > photoshop is technically free, you just need to learn where to look. so
>>
>> 'Technically free' - in other words, you recommend that people steal it.
>> We Linux users have no need to be thieves.

> No, I suggest people use PhotoShop no matter how they obtain it. GIMP is
> an embarrassment to the human race and you know it.

So you ARE advocating copyright infringement?
Nice to know.

--
______________________________________________________________________________
| spike1@freenet.co.uk | "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| |
| in | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
| Computer Science | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Oxford]

spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:

> > I'm trying to help you understand the larger world kier, to help you
> > understand Linux is unheard of here in the States, Canada, Japan, etc.
>
> Lesseee, IBM... Where's that based again?

In new york somewhere, but they no longer sell PCs, they got out of the
mainstream computer business several years ago. Apple sells more Unix
based machines in 5 minutes than IBM sell linux machines in a month. IBM
is totally off the radar now.

> Novell? MICROSOFT? That's CERTAINLY based mainly in seatle isn't it?

Novell based in Seattle? what? they mainly came from Provo Utah, and now
headquartered in Waltham, Massachusetts. They never had any connection
to Seattle.

 

[George Graves]

On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 18:57:41 -0700, Oxford wrote
(in article
<colalovesmacs-24B109.19574108102007@mpls-nnrp-06.inet.qwest.net>):

> why so angry Jesus?
>
> I thought you loved everyone?
>
> It's sad that even you have turned on the human race.

It's pointless trying to have a discussion with these linux fanatics. To them
every comment is a challenge, a lie, or worse. You either follow the party
line or you are damned. It's real simple. Linux has had years to achieve some
sort of critical mass as a viable desktop system and it hasn't moved very far
in spite of being so much better than Windows that it isn't even a contest.
Yet if you tell these Linux fanatics that one little fact, they go ballistic.
Basically, I think that they know its true, but the emperor's new suit of
clothes.... well, you know.

 

[George Graves]

On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 18:42:30 -0700, TheLetterK wrote
(in article .):

> George Graves wrote:
>> On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 16:29:26 -0700, Rick wrote
>> (in article <13glfamgu0hrfb6@news.supernews.com>):
>>
>>> On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 12:32:59 -0700, George Graves wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 11:54:16 -0700, ultimauw@hotmail.com wrote (in
>>>> article <1191783256.814194.298860@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>):
>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 6, 4:19 pm, "Randy Oaks" <ro...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> <bones4jo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>
>>>>>> news:1191705624.157060.40790@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Oct 6, 3:47 pm, Gene Jones <ja...@janus.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Dean Plude <xenop...@charter.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In my many years using linux I have come to know that to truly
>>>>>>>>> support and promote linux as I did with brunswick and many others
>>>>>>>>> is simply show
>>>>>>>>> large companies that there are choices in an OS and that they do
>>>>>>>>> not have to pay a fortune to get.I will never forget when I gave
>>>>>>>>> the head manufacturing engineer a Debian BO disk and simplly said
>>>>>>>>> check it out . that was all it took.
>>>>>>>>> Remember World Domination is our ultimate goal.
>>>>>>>> Linux will never achieve anything close to world domination unless
>>>>>>>> the users unite and follow Apple's OSX direction. Now Linux has
>>>>>>>> pretty much become a footnote in history compared to what apple is
>>>>>>>> doing with UNIX.
>>>>>>>> So unless that changes, it's a slow fade to black for the Linux
>>>>>>>> community.
>>>>>>>> You guys have a chance, but you must "unite" - it's that simple.
>>>>>>>> OSX is now about 9 times as large in the world, 6 years ago you guys
>>>>>>>> were neck and neck. What happened? No leadership is the answer.
>>>>>>>> Within the next few weeks, OSX is going to be a CERTIFIED UNIX.
>>>>>>>> Why isn't Linux up to this certification level?
>>>>>>>> http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/unix/
>>>>>>> Linux is far too fragmented to accomplish anything useful. It's two
>>>>>>> hundred thousand developers all trying to release their own version
>>>>>>> of Linux.
>>>>>> Agreed. Linux is the classic case of "too many cooks in the kitchen."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If Linux were going to succeed in the consumer market it would have
>>>>>> done so already. Now it's simply too-little, too-late as Linux has
>>>>>> absolutely zero mindset with the consumer. OSX and Vista will continue
>>>>>> to dominate.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe there is still hope yet, but it requires the developers to get
>>>>> together, set aside their egos, and all work on a single master distro.
>>>>> If they did that, Linux would beat the pants off of Vista and OSX
>>>>> guaranteed, and perhaps chart the course for the whole computer (and
>>>>> computer-device) industry away from the lockdown-drm-crippled dreck
>>>>> that it's been floating in for a while now.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I doubt if it would "beat the pants off" of either OSX or Vista. Even
>>>> though Linux is better than Windows "anything" MS is too entrenched in
>>>> the computer world, and OSX is simply too sophisticated to be displaced
>>>> by an OS like Linux.
>>>>
>>>> But what a single distro would do would be to stimulate acceptance in
>>>> the "shrink-wrap" software world to the point where they could release
>>>> pre-compiled versions of their software for that one distro for one
>>>> platform (PC compatible) that would be relatively safe. Not wanting to
>>>> open their source-code to prying eyes is, IMHO, the single biggest
>>>> reason why companies like Adobe et al don't port their software to Linux
>>>> is because of the need for that software to be compiled by the user due
>>>> to the non-standard configurations of various distributions of Linux on
>>>> a myriad of platforms/processors.
>>> IMO you don't know what you are talking about. What makes you think the
>>> software would HAVE to be recompiled for each distro?
>>
>> Then why is most open source software distributed that way?
>
> It's packaged for a particular distro, but that's because there are
> several competing package managers out there. In many cases, you can use
> packages from other distributions just fine, though sometimes that can
> cause problems. There are also utilities out there that will convert
> binary packages from one format to another. Alien is an example of that,
> which lets dpkg users install binary rpm packages for their architecture.

Listen to yourself! You've just confirmed what I said earlier.
>
> This is not really that big of a deal in practice, because all of the
> major distros have very robust package repositories these days. I don't
> generally need to download packages from the developer's site, unless
> I'm wanting bleeding edge packages. Why, then, would I care what they're
> releasing?
>
>>>> Once this happened, the MS hegemony would truly start to fall apart as
>>>> there would be fewer and fewer reasons not to replace Windows with
>>>> Linux.
>>

 

[George Graves]

On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 23:00:18 -0700, spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote
(in article <i0irt4-utb.ln1@ridcully.ntlworld.com>):

> Adam Albright <AA@abc.net> did eloquently scribble:
>> I'm just illustrating even major software vendors haven't been able to
>> push Linux into wider acceptance.
>
> You DO realise that corel linux survived don't you?
> It was forked and renamed Xandros.
> You DO realise the reason Corel dropped linux (and the various linux apps
> like wordperfect and draw, was because of pressure from microsoft rather
> than any technical reason, don't you?
>
>
> You don't?
> Ahhhhh that explains the dormant look on your face.
>

Can you give us a URL that backs that assertion up? I'd like to read it for
myself. I think they dropped it because they couldn't make any money out of
it (the quickest way to kill a product known to man!).

 

[Peter Köhlmann]

George Graves wrote:

> On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 23:00:18 -0700, spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote
> (in article <i0irt4-utb.ln1@ridcully.ntlworld.com>):
>
>> Adam Albright <AA@abc.net> did eloquently scribble:
>>> I'm just illustrating even major software vendors haven't been able to
>>> push Linux into wider acceptance.
>>
>> You DO realise that corel linux survived don't you?
>> It was forked and renamed Xandros.
>> You DO realise the reason Corel dropped linux (and the various linux apps
>> like wordperfect and draw, was because of pressure from microsoft rather
>> than any technical reason, don't you?
>>
>>
>> You don't?
>> Ahhhhh that explains the dormant look on your face.
>>
>
> Can you give us a URL that backs that assertion up? I'd like to read it
> for myself. I think they dropped it because they couldn't make any money
> out of it (the quickest way to kill a product known to man!).

Ah yes, another trait of a typical Mac user: Too damn stupid to start the
simplest of a google search.

Or, for that matter, simply going to the Xandros homepage

That puts the relative IQ of typical Mac users right where it belongs:
Somewhere slightly below a rotten sponge
--
Only two things are infinite,
the Universe and Stupidity.
And I'm not quite sure about the former.
- Albert Einstein

 

[Kier]

On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:44:06 -0600, Oxford wrote:

> Kier <vallon@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> > i really don't think anyone is "against" Linux, its just their own
>> > internal "perceived strength" is really their "greatest weakness" when
>> > they come up against very well organized, funded UNIX distros like OSX.
>> >
>> > they need to learn to focus on 1 or 2 distros, then let the others die
>>
>> Good luck with getting that to happen, moron.
>
> so you are you talking to yourself, or admitting I'm correct with that
> comment?

Neither. I'm telling *you* you're a moron. It ain't gonna happen, because
it's not the 'solution' to a non-existent 'problem'.

>
> kier, you know I want the best for the linux movement, but I've clearly
> seen that it has stalled, so just trying to help you and other linux
> users see the clear light.

You know nothing at all about the Linux movement, which you prove every
time you post in COLA.

>
>> > off, this diluted effort has killed Linux so far, but it doesn't have to
>> > be.
>> >
>> > Later this month they are going to get hit with another massive round of
>> > a better UNIX that is incredibly "organized". I feel sorry for them in a
>> > way, but if they can't match this, they can't compete:
>> >
>> > http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/features/
>>
>> Yawn. Never learn, do you, Oxford>
>
> Ah, OSX is now 7 times larger than Linux's installed base, so that means
> I've learned quite a bit, while you have been sent back to school to
> learn more.

Wrong, and wrong.

>
> The biggest event in the history of UNIX is about to happen, where will
> you be when it does?
>
> http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/index.cfm?newsid=10951

Biggest event? You really are a moron, aren't you?

No one here cares about your silly 'event'. We're too busy using our Linux
PCs to do real work.
--
Kier

 

[Kier]

On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 00:05:19 -0700, George Graves wrote:

> On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 18:57:41 -0700, Oxford wrote
> (in article
> <colalovesmacs-24B109.19574108102007@mpls-nnrp-06.inet.qwest.net>):
>
>> why so angry Jesus?
>>
>> I thought you loved everyone?
>>
>> It's sad that even you have turned on the human race.
>
> It's pointless trying to have a discussion with these linux fanatics. To them
> every comment is a challenge, a lie, or worse. You either follow the party
> line or you are damned. It's real simple. Linux has had years to achieve some
> sort of critical mass as a viable desktop system and it hasn't moved very far
> in spite of being so much better than Windows that it isn't even a contest.

So, you admit Linux is an excellent OS. Good. That's a start. Pity Oxford
doesn't have the brainds to do likewise.

> Yet if you tell these Linux fanatics that one little fact, they go
> ballistic. Basically, I think that they know its true, but the emperor's
> new suit of clothes.... well, you know.

YOu're contradicting yourself. Id Linux is an excellent OS, waaaay better
than Windows, then it's nothing to do with 'the emperor's now clothes'.
There are many factors keeping Linux from overtaking Windows, not least
inetia by the general public. It has little or nothing to do with how many
distros there are.

--
Kier

 

[Kier]

On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 07:24:29 +0100, spike1 wrote:

> Oxford <colalovesmacs@mac.com> did eloquently scribble:
<snip>
>> the fact you spelled "ass" incorrectly according to the wealthier
>> nations, proves you are living in a poor area.
>
> He doesn't talk about pulling things out of a donkey, so he's poor?
> He was TALKING about pulling things out of your ARSE, not ASS.
> Your RECTUM. Your ANUS.
>
> And god it must be sore by now, seems like you have your hand up there
> rummaging around for more crap to throw at this channel more than ever.

Splorff!!

Man, you owe me a new keyboard for that <collapses into hysterical
laughter>

--
Kier

 

[Kier]

On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 00:54:30 -0600, Oxford wrote:

> spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:
>
>> > I'm trying to help you understand the larger world kier, to help you
>> > understand Linux is unheard of here in the States, Canada, Japan, etc.
>>
>> Lesseee, IBM... Where's that based again?
>
> In new york somewhere, but they no longer sell PCs, they got out of the
> mainstream computer business several years ago. Apple sells more Unix
> based machines in 5 minutes than IBM sell linux machines in a month. IBM
> is totally off the radar now.
>
>> Novell? MICROSOFT? That's CERTAINLY based mainly in seatle isn't it?
>
> Novell based in Seattle? what? they mainly came from Provo Utah, and now
> headquartered in Waltham, Massachusetts. They never had any connection
> to Seattle.

Last I heard, Utah was still in the United States.

--
Kier

 

[Peter Hayes]

Oxford <colalovesmacs@mac.com> wrote:

> spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:
>
> > > Could a company like, for instance, Adobe, release a single shrink-wrapped
> > > fully compiled version of its applications marked "For Linux" and have it
> > > install as easily on ALL modern Linux distributions as it now does on PCs
> > > or
> > > Macs?
> >
> > Seems to work fine for google earth and opera.
>
> java based apps and a few open source apps are fine. but when you get
> into "professional" level code, Linux doesn't work without a LOT of
> extra fine tuning.

The Maya developers will be fascinated to learn they aren't creating
"professional level code".

--

Immunity is better than innoculation.

Peter

 

[Peter Hayes]

Oxford <colalovesmacs@mac.com> wrote:

> linux users forget they are mainly isolated to the poorer sections of
> northwest europe.

Not sure what you mean here. Northwest Europe is probably the best part
of the world to live in, and it's getting better, unlike the US with its
imploding economy.

We also know who Adele Goldberg is, and the crucial role she played in
Steve Jobs's world. Unlike you...

--

Immunity is better than innoculation.

Peter

 

[High Plains Thumper]

Re: Linux developers MUST consolidate and release a "master" distrofor the general computer/device market.

George Graves wrote:
> Oxford wrote:
>
>> why so angry Jesus?
>>
>> I thought you loved everyone?
>>
>> It's sad that even you have turned on the human race.
>
> It's pointless trying to have a discussion with these linux
> fanatics. To them every comment is a challenge, a lie, or
> worse. You either follow the party line or you are damned.
> It's real simple. Linux has had years to achieve some sort of
> critical mass as a viable desktop system and it hasn't moved
> very far in spite of being so much better than Windows that it
> isn't even a contest. Yet if you tell these Linux fanatics
> that one little fact, they go ballistic. Basically, I think
> that they know its true, but the emperor's new suit of
> clothes.... well, you know.

Interesting .... full of generalisations, one size fits all.
However, it is education time. Not everyone agrees with your
senseless and baseless accusations. Let's take a look at what is
going on in the Far East:

http://www.bbj.hu/main/news_29721_microsoft+%E2%80%98monopoly%E2%80%99+comes+under+fire.html

or http://tinyurl.com/2j94cj

Microsoft ‘monopoly’ comes under fire

07 Aug 2007
bbj.hu

Chinese academics and software developers gathered in Beijing
yesterday to voice their opposition to Microsoft’s latest
standard document format Office Open XML (OOXML).

Major software developers, academics and industry associations
spoke out against Microsoft’s ‘monopoly’ on the format of digital
documents. Document format refers to how a digital file is coded.
Microsoft’s document formats - such as .doc, .xls and .ppt - have
been widely used all over the world since the company first began
its dominance in the 1990s.

Its document format has helped it to unprecedented success,
setting a formidable barrier for other software companies, who
must make Microsoft-compatible products and cannot access the
core code of the format. „Microsoft’s move to make its OOXML
format the international standard is an extension of its goal to
maintain its monopoly in the world’s software market,” said Ni
Guangnan, an academic from the Chinese Academy of Engineering.

"We are calling on the government to veto the OOXML format at the
International Organization for Standardization (ISO)." The OOXML
format is a file specification released by Microsoft in December
last year for its Microsoft Office 2007 suite. It is currently in
a fast track standardization process with the ISO and will be
subject to voting next month. Unlike the current ISO digital
document standard ODF (Open Document Format) and China’s national
standard UDF (Unified Office Document Format), Microsoft’s OOXML
format can only be run on a Windows platform.

It is also criticized for containing many proprietary
technologies that can only be fully supported by Microsoft’s
Office products. Over the past few months, Microsoft has been
campaigning to get the new format approved as an ISO standard. It
claims there are thousands of software companies in China that
can support the format.

Ni wrote a public letter to Chinese media on July 17 opposing the
new format. Microsoft did not respond to Ni’s letter until July
31, when Tim Chen, senior vice-president of Microsoft and
chairman and CEO of its China operation, said the accusation was
“unfair”. “We are promoting the new format in response to our
users’ needs,” he said. (english.people.com.cn)