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

  • Thread starter Thread starter ultimauw@hotmail.com
  • Start date Start date
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:07:14 -0600, Oxford wrote:

> George Graves <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Well, platform gnostics are like any other true believers. They are blind to
>> their platform weaknesses and indeed assert that what others see as
>> weaknesses They see as strengths. I.E, "Sure, Linux doesn't have Photoshop
>> but we lave The GIMP and it's free while Photoshop costs six hundred bucks."
>> We've all done it, and the point is not to denigrate Linux or its
>> enthusiasts, but to show them that as true believers, they simply can't see
>> their platform as enthusiasts of other platforms see it. It's like an
>> Orthodox Jew waltzing into a Southern Baptist church and spouting off about
>> the weaknesses he sees in the Baptist faith. The people in the church are
>> simply not going to be very receptive to his comments.
>
> 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.

>
> 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.

> the idea of gimp replacing it is just mythical thinking.
>
> i've learned to have no bias regarding platforms, i just search for the
> best and be done with it. i think if linux users will do the same
> they'll switch on over to OSX since there really isn't a better OS at
> this time.

Bullshit. You're incredibly biased against Linux.

>
> it's not about "faith" it's about being practical and currently OSX owns
> the unix market.

Bullshit.

--
Kier
 
Oxford <colalovesmacs@mac.com> did eloquently scribble:
> 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.

Bullshit.

> they'd have to do a lot of software kludges to make a Linux versions
> work correctly and since the Linux market is so tiny compared to the Mac
> one in the creative fields they simply can't afford do it.

Bullshit

> Same for all other professional level apps, like Office, iLife, AutoCad,
> etc. Their approach is too fractured and hard to support is the other
> issue. Wish it was different, but unless they "focus", they will never
> be a serious contender.

Bullshit

I wonder when oxford will begin to talk about something he has knowledge
of... Obviously, in this newsgroup, the answer is "Never"
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| spike1@freenet.co.uk | Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
| in |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
| Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
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?

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.

> > 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.

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
 
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Oxford
<colalovesmacs@mac.com>
wrote
on Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:07:14 -0600
<colalovesmacs-780812.16071408102007@mpls-nnrp-02.inet.qwest.net>:
> George Graves <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Well, platform gnostics are like any other true believers. They are blind to
>> their platform weaknesses and indeed assert that what others see as
>> weaknesses They see as strengths. I.E, "Sure, Linux doesn't have Photoshop
>> but we lave The GIMP and it's free while Photoshop costs six hundred bucks."
>> We've all done it, and the point is not to denigrate Linux or its
>> enthusiasts, but to show them that as true believers, they simply can't see
>> their platform as enthusiasts of other platforms see it. It's like an
>> Orthodox Jew waltzing into a Southern Baptist church and spouting off about
>> the weaknesses he sees in the Baptist faith. The people in the church are
>> simply not going to be very receptive to his comments.
>
> 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.
>
> photoshop is technically free, you just need to learn where to look. so
> the idea of gimp replacing it is just mythical thinking.
>
> i've learned to have no bias regarding platforms, i just search for the
> best and be done with it. i think if linux users will do the same
> they'll switch on over to OSX since there really isn't a better OS at
> this time.
>
> it's not about "faith" it's about being practical and currently OSX owns
> the unix market.

Sure it does. That's why so many Apple OSX servers are
running amuck serving webpages.

The Unix *desktop* market, maybe...and that's only if one
discounts the Linux variants.

--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
People think that libraries are safe. They're wrong. They have ideas.
(Also occasionally ectoplasmic slime and cute librarians.)

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
 
Per Oxford:
>nobody in the states uses
>linux, nobody in japan, canada, etc.

Few years back when I was doing contract work for a major mutual
fund at least one of the officer-level people I worked with used
Linux as their desktop of choice at work.
--
PeteCresswell
 
Re: Linux developers MUST consolidate and release a "master" distrofor the general computer/device market.

On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 14:01:04 -0600, Oxford wrote:

> George Graves <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> > 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.
>>
>> 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.
>
> good post George!
>
> 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
> off, this diluted effort has killed Linux so far, but it doesn't have to
> be.

Who is they Oxford?

(snip)
>
> -





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

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?

>
> 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.





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

On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:07:14 -0600, Oxford wrote:

> George Graves <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Well, platform gnostics are like any other true believers. They are
>> blind to their platform weaknesses and indeed assert that what others
>> see as weaknesses They see as strengths. I.E, "Sure, Linux doesn't have
>> Photoshop but we lave The GIMP and it's free while Photoshop costs six
>> hundred bucks." We've all done it, and the point is not to denigrate
>> Linux or its enthusiasts, but to show them that as true believers, they
>> simply can't see their platform as enthusiasts of other platforms see
>> it. It's like an Orthodox Jew waltzing into a Southern Baptist church
>> and spouting off about the weaknesses he sees in the Baptist faith. The
>> people in the church are simply not going to be very receptive to his
>> comments.
>
> yes, and while agree for the most part... linux users forget they are
> mainly isolated to the poorer sections of northwest europe.

You're a bigot and a liar.

> and never
> have been able to spread beyond that region. nobody in the states uses
> linux,

The City Of Largo, Fl uses Linux in a BIG way. Why do you think they
chose Linux and not OS X?

> nobody in japan, canada, etc.
>
> photoshop is technically free, you just need to learn where to look. so
> the idea of gimp replacing it is just mythical thinking.

Photoshop is in no way free. Your saying so just shows how much of a
thief you are.


>
> i've learned to have no bias regarding platforms, i just search for the
> best and be done with it. i think if linux users will do the same
> they'll switch on over to OSX since there really isn't a better OS at
> this time.

Most Linux users HAVE searched for what works for them, and that's why
they use Linux and OSS.

>
> it's not about "faith" it's about being practical and currently OSX owns
> the unix market.


No, it doesn't.


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

On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:05:21 -0600, Oxford 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.
>
>> > 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?.
>>
>> Oracle isn't a major software publisher now?
>
> Oracle works on anything, linux is nothing special there.

yuppp .. according to Oxford, if an app works on Linux, it doesn't mean
anything.

You are SUCH a dishonest bigot.



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

On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:09:16 -0600, Oxford wrote:

> yakety yak <who.me@nospam.diespammers.invalid> wrote:
>
>> > 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.
>>
>> 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.
>
> sounds like you are reading false reports designed by Nokia to trick the
> uneducated.

Sounds like you are a little fanboi in denial.



--
Rick
 
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 13:41:05 -0700, spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote
(in article <18hqt4-nha.ln1@ridcully.ntlworld.com>):

> George Graves <gmgraves2@comcast.net> did eloquently scribble:
>> 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.
>
>> 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?.
>
> Oracle isn't a major software publisher now?
>

More like a networking company.
 
"Rick" <none@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:13glflm5luv427f@news.supernews.com...
> On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:09:16 -0600, Oxford wrote:
>
>> yakety yak <who.me@nospam.diespammers.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> > 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.
>>>
>>> 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.
>>
>> sounds like you are reading false reports designed by Nokia to trick the
>> uneducated.
>
> Sounds like you are a little fanboi in denial.
>
>
>
> --
> Rick

I'll second that.

Nick
 
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 23:35:18 +0000, Rick wrote:

> On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:09:16 -0600, Oxford wrote:
>
>> yakety yak <who.me@nospam.diespammers.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> > 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.
>>>
>>> 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.

>>
>> sounds like you are reading false reports designed by Nokia to trick the
>> uneducated.
>
> Sounds like you are a little fanboi in denial.

No, Oxtard does have a point. If you just do Apple's bidding then you
have nothing to fear.
 
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 15:07:14 -0700, Oxford wrote
(in article
<colalovesmacs-780812.16071408102007@mpls-nnrp-02.inet.qwest.net>):

> George Graves <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Well, platform gnostics are like any other true believers. They are blind
>> to
>> their platform weaknesses and indeed assert that what others see as
>> weaknesses They see as strengths. I.E, "Sure, Linux doesn't have Photoshop
>> but we lave The GIMP and it's free while Photoshop costs six hundred bucks."
>> We've all done it, and the point is not to denigrate Linux or its
>> enthusiasts, but to show them that as true believers, they simply can't see
>> their platform as enthusiasts of other platforms see it. It's like an
>> Orthodox Jew waltzing into a Southern Baptist church and spouting off about
>> the weaknesses he sees in the Baptist faith. The people in the church are
>> simply not going to be very receptive to his comments.
>
> 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.
>
> photoshop is technically free, you just need to learn where to look. so
> the idea of gimp replacing it is just mythical thinking.
>
> i've learned to have no bias regarding platforms, i just search for the
> best and be done with it. i think if linux users will do the same
> they'll switch on over to OSX since there really isn't a better OS at
> this time.
>
> it's not about "faith" it's about being practical and currently OSX owns
> the unix market.

Try to convince the "true believers" of that point.
 
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?
>
>>
>> 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 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:
>>
< snip >

>>> 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.

He certainly does not. Another clueless Mac user

>> What makes you think the
>> software would HAVE to be recompiled for each distro?
>
> Then why is most open source software distributed that way?
>>

Because it is prepared for the package manager of that distro
That does not mean that you can't take another package. In that case
you /may/ lose some advantages of the package management

--
What happens if a big asteroid hits Earth? Judging from realistic
simulations involving a sledge hammer and a common laboratory frog,
we can assume it will be pretty bad. --- Dave Barry
 
Re: Linux developers MUST consolidate and release a "master" distrofor the general computer/device market.

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.

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.
>
 
why so angry Jesus?

I thought you loved everyone?

It's sad that even you have turned on the human race.
 
"(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> wrote:

> Per Oxford:
> >nobody in the states uses
> >linux, nobody in japan, canada, etc.
>
> Few years back when I was doing contract work for a major mutual
> fund at least one of the officer-level people I worked with used
> Linux as their desktop of choice at work.

you did no such thing. name the company and I'll confirm.
 
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!

you got caught in a media lie.

-
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top