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.

ultimauw@hotmail.com wrote:

> > 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.

 

yes, and I've told them SEVERAL times they need to concentrate on just

one or two distros and let the others die off. they just can't compete

until they take this advice.

 

chances are now zero that they can't rally around and heed this advice.

they are mostly young kids with no skills outside of playing games or

hacking.

 

linux had a chance during the late 90's but blew it. now OSX is the main

UNIX distro by a 7 to 1 margin... all because Apple knew about design

and understood high quality computing.

 

linux is a total mess now, and it's very sad. I thought at least they

would have 1% of the market, but it still hovers around .76 percent. Not

good when Apple has jumped to 6.4% in recent months.

 

-

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

 

ultimauw wrote:

> Maybe there is still hope yet,

 

Not for you. You're doomed to be stupid forever.

 

*plonk*

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

 

On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 13:16:30 -0600, Oxford wrote:

> ultimauw@hotmail.com wrote:

>

>> > 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.

>

> yes, and I've told them SEVERAL times they need to concentrate on just

> one or two distros and let the others die off. they just can't compete

> until they take this advice.

>

> chances are now zero that they can't rally around and heed this advice.

> they are mostly young kids with no skills outside of playing games or

> hacking.

>

> linux had a chance during the late 90's but blew it. now OSX is the main

> UNIX distro by a 7 to 1 margin... all because Apple knew about design

> and understood high quality computing.

>

> linux is a total mess now, and it's very sad. I thought at least they

> would have 1% of the market, but it still hovers around .76 percent. Not

> good when Apple has jumped to 6.4% in recent months.

>

 

I find it funny how everyone takes the statistic of one irrelevant web-

server of any actual value.

 

That said, what do you think is happening? The efforts *are* consolidated.

 

All distributions use the same kernel.

The same desktop managers.

The same browers.

The same software.

The same e-mail software.

The same newsreaders.

The same everything.

 

The only main significant difference between any distributions is what

they come with out of the box. That's largely irrelevant.

 

So how is this not consolidated?

 

So redhat has different package management than ubuntu does. Big friggin

deal....they still use the same software and kernel.

 

--

Stephan

2003 Yamaha R6

 

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯

å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

<ultimauw@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de

news: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...

>>

>>

>>

[snips]>>

>> > 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 don't agree entirely. Multiple distros means some degree of competition,

with no risk of another monopoly. There must be room for diversity.

 

The challenge is to keep this diversity without penalising people who just

want to use their computers (and who don't want/need to know how complicated

it is).

 

A constant feature of the history of personal computers is that the most

popular hardware and software architectures would never have become dominant

if technical excellence had been a even a minor criterion. This is perfectly

illustrated by posts to this NG, where Ubuntu is equated with Linux, simply

because it's proposed as the least worst alternative to Vista by a

particular hardware supplier (whose days are numbered if they don't start

treating their clients like real live people).

 

One approach to maintaining multiple Linux distros may be to arrange things

so volunteers could help provide distro-specific compilations on request.

Some kind of organisation would be needed so that software developers are

paid for their work.

 

Regards

chrisv wrote:

> ultimauw wrote:

>

> > Maybe there is still hope yet,

>

> Not for you. You're doomed to be stupid forever.

>

AWWWW Did I upset the little shillbot?

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

 

On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 11:54:16 -0700, ultimauw wrote:

> 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.

 

Your are missing the idea that the reason there are so many distros is

that many people want different things. You are missing the point that

many of the things added to or improved in one distro can be directly

added to another.

 

 

 

--

Rick

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

 

Stephan Rose wrote:

>> linux is a total mess now, and it's very sad. I thought at least they

>> would have 1% of the market, but it still hovers around .76 percent.

>> Not good when Apple has jumped to 6.4% in recent months.

>>

>>

> I find it funny how everyone takes the statistic of one irrelevant web-

> server of any actual value.

 

"Everyone", or just trolling idiots like Oxtard?

chrisv wrote:

> Stephan Rose wrote:

>

>>> linux is a total mess now, and it's very sad. I thought at least they

>>> would have 1% of the market, but it still hovers around .76 percent.

>>> Not good when Apple has jumped to 6.4% in recent months.

>>>

>>>

>> I find it funny how everyone takes the statistic of one irrelevant web-

>> server of any actual value.

>

> "Everyone", or just trolling idiots like Oxtard?

 

"ultimauw" is not OxRetard

 

It is either flatfish or the "linux-sux" cretin

--

Most projects start out slowly -- and then sort of taper off.

-- Norman Augustine

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

 

On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 13:16:30 -0600, Oxford wrote:

> ultimauw@hotmail.com wrote:

>

>> > 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.

>

> yes, and I've told them SEVERAL times they need to concentrate on just

> one or two distros and let the others die off. they just can't compete

> until they take this advice.

 

And you have been told several times you are a cluesless twit. Who are

you to say someone can't but together a distro to satisfy a want or need

that isn't being met?

 

And you told ... THEM? Who? Did you think to go tell Shuttleworth to kill

off Ubuntu? No? Did you write Novell or Red Hat to tell them to kill

their distros? Did you email texstar to tell him to dump PCLinuxOS? Have

you noticed PCLOS is becoming one of the more popular distros, without

heavy advertising? Using your "system", I probably wouldn't be able to

use the distro and environment I have chosen.

>

> chances are now zero that they can't rally around and heed this advice.

> they are mostly young kids with no skills outside of playing games or

> hacking.

 

I highly doubt the developers at Sun, IBM, Novell, Red Hat (to name a

very few) are mostly young kids with no skills outside of playing games

or hacking.

>

> linux had a chance during the late 90's but blew it. now OSX is the main

> UNIX distro by a 7 to 1 margin... all because Apple knew about design

> and understood high quality computing.

>

> linux is a total mess now, and it's very sad.

 

No, you are sad.

> I thought at least they

> would have 1% of the market, but it still hovers around .76 percent. Not

> good when Apple has jumped to 6.4% in recent months.

 

So Apple's at 6.4% now. What was their share in 1978. Let us know when it

gets back there.

 

 

--

Rick

On Oct 7, 3:16 pm, Oxford <colalovesm...@mac.com> wrote:

> ultim...@hotmail.com wrote:

> > > 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.

 

Not necessarily. Remember, Linux competes with a company who blocks

all access to the retail display space. A Linux customer must

purchase and install Linux without the benefit of an OEM preinstalled

system.

 

The OEM is not allowed to tell the customer exactly which machines can

easily be configured to run Linux, and which machines should NEVER be

used to run Linux. The customers usually figure this out for

themselves, but the OEM can't put this in advertizing or catalog

descriptions without getting Microsoft's prior written approval, which

never seems to come in time for the ad deadlines. The OEM just has to

keep falling back to a "safe" ad that has been approved. Often, both

ads are submitted the same day, but Microsoft seems to delay the Linux

ad past the known deadlines.

 

Most contracts I deal with, if the approver doesn't provide written

approval or revisions within 7 days, it is treated as an automatic

approval, but it seems that Microsoft must only respond within "a

reasonable time" - not sure what that means - maybe some time within

the decade?

 

The OEM can't make changes to the configuration without Microsoft's

prior written approval either. Again, if two versions are submitted,

the Microsoft-only version gets approved within a day, the one

involving competitors will be revised - perhaps within a year AFTER

the product release date.

That whole "reasonable time" thing again.

> > > Now it's simply too-little, too-late as Linux has absolutely zero

> > > mindset with the consumer. OSX and Vista will continue to dominate.

 

I wouldn't say that. There are billions of Linux licensed devices,

and almost 1 billion internet users access Linux systems such as

Google every day. They send their e-mail through Linux routers, they

protect their LAN with Linux firewalls, go to a coffee shop or

restaurant and connect via a Linux powered WiFi hub. The PC may be

purchased with Windows, but it may be running Linux as a VMWare

appliance, as a Virtual PC client, or it may be Linux working as the

primary operating system and Windows that is running as the

Virtualized Client. Running Windows as the VM client makes back-up,

recovery, and system management much easier, and the extra clock-

cycles burned in virtualization calls are offset by better

optimization of disk access and memory management.

> > 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.

 

Funny, that's not what IBM, Dell, and HP are saying. Most of the OEMs

like the idea of 2-3 competitors competing for access to the

preinstalled desktop. If they could have their way, all of them would

allow all of their distributions to be installed and started as either

the primary OS using a boot manager, or as a virtualized client. Most

like both Red Hat and SUSE for the server market, and many also like

Ubuntu for the client market. Others, including Linspire, Xandros,

and PCLinux are also willing to give very generous terms.

 

Unfortunately, Microsoft seems to be unable to approve any

configuration which involves any configuration of any product other

than the Microsoft standard Package. Furthermore, if the OEM makes

such requests, it often takes a while for the drivers for other

systems to be approved.

 

It seems that Microsoft has all the lawyers it needs for it's "Loyal

Customers", but there seems to be a single lawyer who speaks very

little English, as a 3rd language, who can't approve anything for

months, or even a year or two.

 

It seems that Microsoft must respond within a "reasonable time". Most

contracts I deal with, a specific time such as 5 business days is used

instead. If a response is not provided within that time period, it is

automatically approved.

 

Rex Ballard

http://www.open4success.com

Rex Ballard wrote:

> On Oct 7, 3:16 pm, Oxford <colalovesm...@mac.com> wrote:

>> ultim...@hotmail.com wrote:

>>>> 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.

>

> Not necessarily. Remember, Linux competes with a company who blocks

> all access to the retail display space. A Linux customer must

> purchase and install Linux without the benefit of an OEM preinstalled

> system.

 

I certainly see your point. But, if you don't like Microsoft's terms, don't

agree to them. Kick MS out the door. Do the right thing.

On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 14:45:12 -0500, Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com>

wrote:

>On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 13:16:30 -0600, Oxford wrote:

>

>> ultimauw@hotmail.com wrote:

>>

>>> > 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.

>>

>> yes, and I've told them SEVERAL times they need to concentrate on just

>> one or two distros and let the others die off. they just can't compete

>> until they take this advice.

>>

>> chances are now zero that they can't rally around and heed this advice.

>> they are mostly young kids with no skills outside of playing games or

>> hacking.

>>

>> linux had a chance during the late 90's but blew it. now OSX is the main

>> UNIX distro by a 7 to 1 margin... all because Apple knew about design

>> and understood high quality computing.

>>

>> linux is a total mess now, and it's very sad. I thought at least they

>> would have 1% of the market, but it still hovers around .76 percent. Not

>> good when Apple has jumped to 6.4% in recent months.

>>

>

>I find it funny how everyone takes the statistic of one irrelevant web-

>server of any actual value.

 

When does it become rlevant then? 10 servers, 100? 1'000?

What about 40'000?

 

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2

 

0.8% after 15 years of free availability? Linux will never make it.

Face it.

 

Meanwhile:

 

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5&qpcustom=Windows+Vista

In article <1191792966.660220.310560@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,

Rex Ballard <rex.ballard@gmail.com> wrote:

> Not necessarily. Remember, Linux competes with a company who blocks

> all access to the retail display space. A Linux customer must

> purchase and install Linux without the benefit of an OEM preinstalled

> system.

 

Nice fantasy. Exactly what mechanism prevents you from leasing space,

and opening a store there selling Linux computers? (Just like Apple

does to sell Macintosh computers).

 

Answer: absolutely nothing.

 

--

--Tim Smith

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

 

On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 01:07:42 +0200, OK wrote:

> On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 14:45:12 -0500, Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com>

> wrote:

>

>>On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 13:16:30 -0600, Oxford wrote:

>>

>>> ultimauw@hotmail.com wrote:

>>>

>>>> > 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.

>>>

>>> yes, and I've told them SEVERAL times they need to concentrate on just

>>> one or two distros and let the others die off. they just can't compete

>>> until they take this advice.

>>>

>>> chances are now zero that they can't rally around and heed this

>>> advice. they are mostly young kids with no skills outside of playing

>>> games or hacking.

>>>

>>> linux had a chance during the late 90's but blew it. now OSX is the

>>> main UNIX distro by a 7 to 1 margin... all because Apple knew about

>>> design and understood high quality computing.

>>>

>>> linux is a total mess now, and it's very sad. I thought at least they

>>> would have 1% of the market, but it still hovers around .76 percent.

>>> Not good when Apple has jumped to 6.4% in recent months.

>>>

>>>

>>I find it funny how everyone takes the statistic of one irrelevant web-

>>server of any actual value.

>

> When does it become rlevant then? 10 servers, 100? 1'000? What about

> 40'000?

>

> http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2

>

> 0.8% after 15 years of free availability? Linux will never make it. Face

> it.

>

> Meanwhile:

>

> http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5&qpcustom=Windows

+Vista

 

Because *who the hell* is hitslink.com!?

 

Their statistics don't represent the entire web.

 

Their statistics don't represent users that go to google.com.

 

Their statistics don't represent users that go to yahoo.com.

 

Their statistics don't represent users that go to microsoft.com.

 

I could go on...

 

Their statistics ONLY represent users that go to THEIR servers. So what

servers, of what significance, do THEY host and what content? Different

content attracts different users which also influences statistics.

 

What significance does one single server companies' statistic that likely

doesn't even capture 1% of all users have to do on a world-wide scale?

 

Ultimately their statistics are utterly meaningless.

 

About the only statistic I would give any credit to would be Google.com's

statistic just simply because it is a neutral site that isn't going to

favor linux, microsoft or mac users. And it is a site that virtually

everyone uses.

 

Google.com however does not show their statistics. Smart move.

 

And, if you still don't get it....here is an example

 

marketshare.hitslink.com claims 0.8%

 

http://www.w3schools.com claims 3.4%

 

So who is right now? Is it 0.8%? Is it 3.4%?

 

If you don't answer that question with "Neither one" then you probably

don't nor ever will get it.

 

--

Stephan

2003 Yamaha R6

 

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯

å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

In message <reply_in_group-2A5541.16163207102007@news.supernews.com> Tim

Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

>In article <1191792966.660220.310560@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,

> Rex Ballard <rex.ballard@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Not necessarily. Remember, Linux competes with a company who blocks

>> all access to the retail display space. A Linux customer must

>> purchase and install Linux without the benefit of an OEM preinstalled

>> system.

>

>Nice fantasy. Exactly what mechanism prevents you from leasing space,

>and opening a store there selling Linux computers? (Just like Apple

>does to sell Macintosh computers).

>

>Answer: absolutely nothing.

 

Lack of funds. Lack of venture capitalists that won't look into what

he's doing and realize he won't make any money?

 

--

You can get more with a kind word and a 2x4 than just a kind word.

DevilsPGD <spam_narf_spam@crazyhat.net> writes:

> In message <reply_in_group-2A5541.16163207102007@news.supernews.com> Tim

> Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

>

>>In article <1191792966.660220.310560@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,

>> Rex Ballard <rex.ballard@gmail.com> wrote:

>>> Not necessarily. Remember, Linux competes with a company who blocks

>>> all access to the retail display space. A Linux customer must

>>> purchase and install Linux without the benefit of an OEM preinstalled

>>> system.

>>

>>Nice fantasy. Exactly what mechanism prevents you from leasing space,

>>and opening a store there selling Linux computers? (Just like Apple

>>does to sell Macintosh computers).

>>

>>Answer: absolutely nothing.

>

> Lack of funds. Lack of venture capitalists that won't look into what

> he's doing and realize he won't make any money?

 

How can he make any money? Linux users don't pay for the OS and

certainly wont pay the hourly rate required for a computer professional

to install their custom kernels.

 

The only way would be disk cloning and a good "Lets get started" FAQ on

how to use Synaptic and the like.

 

--

Look afar and see the end from the beginning.

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

 

ultimauw@hotmail.com wrote:

> 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.

 

So, who's good ideas are we prepared to give up? Could we live with the

loss of developers and interest? Where will new ideas get tested and

promoted? What's the advantage? I'm not having compatibility problems.

Are you?

On Oct 7, 6:12 pm, "HeyBub" <hey...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Rex Ballard wrote:

> > On Oct 7, 3:16 pm, Oxford <colalovesm...@mac.com> wrote:

> >> ultim...@hotmail.com wrote:

> >>>> 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.

>

> > Not necessarily. Remember, Linux competes with a company who blocks

> > all access to the retail display space. A Linux customer must

> > purchase and install Linux without the benefit of an OEM preinstalled

> > system.

>

> I certainly see your point. But, if you don't like Microsoft's terms, don't

> agree to them. Kick MS out the door. Do the right thing.

 

Not as easy as it sounds. Remember, Microsoft gets less than 1% of

it's revenue from Windows licenses sold directly to retail customers.

Remember, those customers would be those who went to CompUSA, Staples,

or BestBuy and purchased a "Full Version" of Windows XP or Vista. Of

those, even most of those purchases are made as emergency recovery

media for systems that have already been licensed under OEM or

Corporate licenses. Typically, those who would pay $500 for Windows

at a retail store are those who are likely to lose thousands or

hundreds of thousands of dollars in commissions or bonuses if they are

unable to make a critical presentation to a prospective customer on

the verge of signing a contract.

 

For 99.9% of all PC users, the Windows operating system was installed

whether they wanted it or not. Even if they wanted a PC without

Windows, the OEM had to pay for the license, not for that specific

machine, but for a pool are "bucket" of licenses that often exceeds

the number of machines actually produced by as much as 20%. OEMs do

this to get deeper discounts. In many cases, the cost of 120% of

their need has a lower total cost than an order for 80% of their need

due to steep discounts for exceeding the minimum threshold.

 

Microsoft uses similar tactics with corporate customers. Many

companies must license PCs for every employee, even if many of those

employees don't use PCs as part of their job. Even the Janitor gets a

Windows license.

 

Even in the face of all this, end users still install Linux, often

using VMWare converter to relgate Windows or Vista to a secondary role

as a virtualized "application". Even many corporations are

discovering that the same advantages of virtualized server systems

provides similar benefits to those using virtualized desktop and

laptop systems. With USB drives dropping to $100 or less, VMWare

player available for free, and VMWare converter also available for

free, it's now quite trivial to generate a virtualized VMWare client,

save it to a USB drive, convert the machine to Linux, install VMware

Player, recover the VMWare client, and have a Windows system that can

be fully recovered as often as needed.

 

The bigger advantage is that different appliances can be created for

different systems. For example, one can be customized for

presentations, another for collaboration, another for project

management, and another for application development or other

specialized uses.

 

Micrsoft is beginning to realize that Linux has created a "Better

Windows than Windows", but realizes that it still controls licenses

and intellectual property rights critical to the success of such a

strategy. This may be one of the reasons why Microsoft expressly

forbids the use of Vista Home edition as a Virtualized client (pushing

the client to order directly from OEMs and upgrade to Vista Business

Edition rather than purchasing retail PC versions).

 

The irony is that rather than hurting Microsoft, Linux has actually

turned out to be a BOON to Microsoft. Microsoft is now getting

premiums, possibly as much as 20% (anyone have hard numbers?) for the

Vista Business edition upgrade, from OEMs. The premium also gives

OEMS the ability to sell the same machines with XP Professional

instead of Vista Business.

 

Ironically, the Retailers are the ones getting burned badly. Home

Basic is sitting on the shelves and prices of "Vista Only" systems

have fallen drastically. Meanwhile, "Linux Ready" machines,

especially those with higher resolution monitors, are back-ordered,

hard to keep in stock, and prices are remaining quite firm (producing

higher profits than Vista only machines).

 

It could be interesting to see how much longer the OEMs continue to be

willing to let Microsoft continue their anticompetitive practices.

There seems to be a substantial market for "Linux Ready" machines

using 64 bit processors, WSXGA and WUXGA displays, OpenGL or FireGL

graphics cards, Linux friendly WiFi cards such as Intel's, and Linux

optimized storage, such as SATA/300 hard drives and SATA laptop

drives.

 

Microsoft designed Vista Home edition to be a "Showdown" with Linux,

and has found that they have lost. Vista Friendly Linux hostile

systems containing DirectX-10 video cards, WXGA graphics, Atheros WiFi

cards, and Linux hostile versions of Intel Core 2 chips have not been

selling well, in fact, they have now been reduced to clearance

prices. Many retailers are even having a hard time selling the

display models.

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

 

Micoshaft Asstroturfer ultimauw@hotmail.com wrote on behalf of Micoshaft

Corporation:

> O

 

Install Vista PISTA on your machine and pistify your machine? No thanks.

 

Linux is a lot better.

 

Linux has many consolidated master distros.

Free to download loads of them from here..

http://www.livecdlist.com

http://www.distrowatch.com

 

Each as masterful as the other.

 

The fact is they are all better than windopws crap.

You can see them in action at

http://www.youtube.com search for beryl and compiz to view demos.

 

Use for example GParted to boot up from CD and format a disk drive,

or a broken flash drive or a USB stick or an SDCard.

Most of this cannot be done with a windummy OS because there

are no inbuilt utilities for it.

Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> did eloquently scribble:

> How can he make any money? Linux users don't pay for the OS and

> certainly wont pay the hourly rate required for a computer professional

> to install their custom kernels.

 

I have no idea how you can claim to be a linux advocate and yet you still

come out with crap like this.

 

How is this FUD advocating linux? Name one home user who needs a custom

kernel? AVERAGE mind, no specialist computing needs where they have the

knowledge and wherewithall to do it themselves.

 

--

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

| 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. |

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Rex Ballard" <rex.ballard@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:1191810357.744080.48610@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...

> Microsoft uses similar tactics with corporate customers. Many

> companies must license PCs for every employee, even if many of those

> employees don't use PCs as part of their job. Even the Janitor gets a

> Windows license.

 

They don't have to do it and it applies to many things not just windows.

If you have 9,999 employes it is frequently cheaper to buy everything in

units of 10,000, be it paper clips, name badges or PCs.

Why its wrong for M$ and not wrong for Staples or the vending machine

supplier to be cheaper if they buy 10,000? I don't understand the

difference.

Its the companies decision, they can buy 9,999 and pay more if they want.

At least with software licenses its not harming the environment like it

would be buying an extra name badge.

 

BTW the big company I worked at had licenses for each windows PC not for

each employee so it must have been cheaper that way.

They did not have windows licenses for the PCs running UnixWare and M$

didn't try and force them to get them either.

Oh and they were supplied with Unix installed by the manufacturer (they were

made by Intel and would have been branded HP) so it is quite possible to get

machines without windows, at least in the UK.

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

 

On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 02:11:19 +0200, Hadron wrote:

> DevilsPGD <spam_narf_spam@crazyhat.net> writes:

>

>> In message <reply_in_group-2A5541.16163207102007@news.supernews.com>

>> Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

>>

>>>In article <1191792966.660220.310560@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,

>>> Rex Ballard <rex.ballard@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>> Not necessarily. Remember, Linux competes with a company who blocks

>>>> all access to the retail display space. A Linux customer must

>>>> purchase and install Linux without the benefit of an OEM preinstalled

>>>> system.

>>>

>>>Nice fantasy. Exactly what mechanism prevents you from leasing space,

>>>and opening a store there selling Linux computers? (Just like Apple

>>>does to sell Macintosh computers).

>>>

>>>Answer: absolutely nothing.

>>

>> Lack of funds. Lack of venture capitalists that won't look into what

>> he's doing and realize he won't make any money?

>

> How can he make any money? Linux users don't pay for the OS and

> certainly wont pay the hourly rate required for a computer professional

> to install their custom kernels.

 

Uhh, people who actually run custom kernels aren't likely going to need a

professional to install it for them. I think that if someone needs a

custom kernel and knows why they need one they also likely know enough to

install it themselves.

 

--

Stephan

2003 Yamaha R6

 

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯

å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Hash: SHA1

 

On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 02:11:19 +0200,

Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:

> DevilsPGD <spam_narf_spam@crazyhat.net> writes:

>

>> In message <reply_in_group-2A5541.16163207102007@news.supernews.com> Tim

>> Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

>>

>>>In article <1191792966.660220.310560@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,

>>> Rex Ballard <rex.ballard@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>> Not necessarily. Remember, Linux competes with a company who blocks

>>>> all access to the retail display space. A Linux customer must

>>>> purchase and install Linux without the benefit of an OEM preinstalled

>>>> system.

>>>

>>>Nice fantasy. Exactly what mechanism prevents you from leasing space,

>>>and opening a store there selling Linux computers? (Just like Apple

>>>does to sell Macintosh computers).

>>>

>>>Answer: absolutely nothing.

>>

>> Lack of funds. Lack of venture capitalists that won't look into what

>> he's doing and realize he won't make any money?

>

> How can he make any money? Linux users don't pay for the OS and

> certainly wont pay the hourly rate required for a computer professional

> to install their custom kernels.

 

Are you excluding yourself from the ranks of "Linux users"

 

 

when was the last time you paid "the hourly rate required for a computer

professional" to install your "custom kernels"?

 

Or were you just blowing hot air?

 

again?

 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

 

iD8DBQFHCfXvd90bcYOAWPYRAsv/AKCmhBL+1F0JIAWTYXPB9NUWKmHz4wCeOXeU

Rvg/I00YyYvzUzsEyRAizUc=

=ckVi

-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

--

Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock

Does Emacs have the Buddha nature? Why not? It has bloody well

everything else

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

 

On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 02:18:39 -0700, Jim Richardson wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

> Hash: SHA1

>

> On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 02:11:19 +0200,

> Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:

>> DevilsPGD <spam_narf_spam@crazyhat.net> writes:

>>

>>> In message <reply_in_group-2A5541.16163207102007@news.supernews.com>

>>> Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

>>>

>>>>In article <1191792966.660220.310560@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,

>>>> Rex Ballard <rex.ballard@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>>> Not necessarily. Remember, Linux competes with a company who blocks

>>>>> all access to the retail display space. A Linux customer must

>>>>> purchase and install Linux without the benefit of an OEM

>>>>> preinstalled system.

>>>>

>>>>Nice fantasy. Exactly what mechanism prevents you from leasing space,

>>>>and opening a store there selling Linux computers? (Just like Apple

>>>>does to sell Macintosh computers).

>>>>

>>>>Answer: absolutely nothing.

>>>

>>> Lack of funds. Lack of venture capitalists that won't look into what

>>> he's doing and realize he won't make any money?

>>

>> How can he make any money? Linux users don't pay for the OS and

>> certainly wont pay the hourly rate required for a computer professional

>> to install their custom kernels.

>

> Are you excluding yourself from the ranks of "Linux users"

>

>

> when was the last time you paid "the hourly rate required for a computer

> professional" to install your "custom kernels"?

>

> Or were you just blowing hot air?

>

> again?

 

He's blustering... again.

 

 

 

 

--

Rick