"George Graves" <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:0001HW.C461AF87000B9499F01846D8@news.comcast.net...

> On Tue, 27 May 2008 12:11:39 -0700, JEDIDIAH wrote

> (in article <slrng3on7b.op1.jedi@nomad.mishnet>):

>

>> On 2008-05-27, John Slade <hhitman86@pacbell.net> wrote:

>>>

>>> "7" <website_has_email@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote in message

>>> news:l5C_j.9705$DZ6.4072@text.news.virginmedia.com...

>>>> Tim Murray wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> On Mon, 26 May 2008 08:29:52 -0400, 7 wrote:

>>>>>> There are 1 million new Linux desktops installed PER WEEK.

>>>>>

>>>>> No way. Source?

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> You are out of date!

>>>>

>>>> Google is your friend.

>>>>

>>>> Go count all the press releases over the last few months.

>>>>

>>>> There are also 3 million embedded Linux gadgets sold PER DAY.

>>>

>>> You should back up your claim. It would be great if Linux were growing

>>> that fast. Where did you get that data please?

>>

>> It's hard to say. Linux is in a lot of places from phones, to

>> routers,

>> to TV's, to STBs, to mp3 players. It's probably in a lot of places where

>> it's completely invisible.

>>

>> A lot of people use Linux without realizing it.

>

> Embedded and server use is not desktops and therefore sort of irrelevant

> to

> this discussion.

 

Funny. What do you use for a internet FW/gateway or wireless?

 

Darn good chance it runs Linux with BusyBox or a BSD. Linksys/Cisco,

Netgear, D-Link?

 

LOL.

"Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@remove_mvps.com> wrote in message

news:e6gKpHDwIHA.5124@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> "George Graves" <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote in message

> news:0001HW.C461AF42000B844BF01846D8@news.comcast.net...

>> On Tue, 27 May 2008 12:14:13 -0700, JEDIDIAH wrote

>> (in article <slrng3onc5.op1.jedi@nomad.mishnet>):

>>

>>> On 2008-05-27, John Slade <hhitman86@pacbell.net> wrote:

>>>>

>>>> "7" <website_has_email@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote in message

>>>> news:43y_j.9559$DZ6.446@text.news.virginmedia.com...

>>>>> Micoshaft fraudster and asstroturfer Moshe. Goldfarb wrote on behalf

>>>>> of

>>>>> Half

>>>>> Wits from Micoshaft Corporation:

>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> h

>>>>>

>>>>> Simply untrue lies printed by micoshaft fraudsters

>>>>> on behalf of Micoshaft Corporation marketing department.

>>>>>

>>>>> There are 3 million embedded Linux gadgets sold PER DAY.

>>>>> There are 1 million new Linux desktops installed PER WEEK.

>>>>> Thats a lot of people who care.

>>>>>

>>>>> What about WINDUMMIES?

>>>>>

>>>>> WINDUMMIES CAN now get the sack for using micoshaft products!

>>>>>

>>>>> Anyone caught using IE and other strange software to browse

>>>>> or log into online services to download viruses, trojans, malware,

>>>>> crapware, spyware, botnetware are all sackable.

>>>>> It s in many companys' terms and conditions of employment.

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>> This is just plain silly. There is a ton of great software for Windows

>>>

>>> Like what?

>>>

>>> Tell me why I might want to DUMP my Linux machne so I can run all

>>> those "great Windows apps"?

>>>

>>> [deletia]

>>>

>>> ...also, one big problem with Windows is the herd mentality there

>>> which greatly undermines the idea of exploiting a diverse ecosystem of

>>> independently created software.

>>>

>>>

>>

>> You are all living in Microsoft's shadow. People talk all the time about

>> Linux innovation and freedom from the constraints of the Microsoft world,

>> but

>> this is just wishful thinking.

>>

>> Microsoft has been holding-back the entire computer industry for more

>> than a

>> decade. We are much further behind in GUI development, and workspace

>> development and in productivity development than we should be at this

>> point

>> because Microsoft holds the reigns of the entire industry. It designs its

>> OSes to follow the old application centric paradigm and as long as

>> Windows

>> works that way, the rest of the industry CAN NOT change - that includes

>> the

>> Linux world which COULD change the paradigm, but won't because people are

>> used to the way MS does things.

>

> And when MS does change the way things work, all they get is complaints.

 

Because they scewed up. Once upon a time, I thought Microsoft actually

screwed up protocols so they would not interoperate.

 

I have since come to the conclusion they don't know how their own OS is

designed so they don't know how to make it compatible. They really don't.

There was no reason (worth sh1t) given for why Kerberos was not

interoperable with the standard kerberos. Ditto DNS, LDAP, IMAP, POP3, FTP

and even Microsofts own CIFS. Lets face it, Microsoft can't read/understand

a standard let alone write to it.

 

NETBUI anyone?

 

MOOXML, another ambigious half done piece of work.

 

They spend a lot of time relearning and just trying to get it to work. Play

like junior hackers, like a basement job. They are feeling lucky if it

works Windows to Windows thus it is ready to ship.

> Computer users are responsible for holding development back because they

> want to be able to find everything in the same place as Win 3.0, and still

> use the same printer, scanner etc that they had way back when..

 

Again, because the interfaces are poorly documents, poorly designed and

change with every release. Vendors can't keep up. Heck, Microsoft has

stated a desire to roll the OS over every 3 years....do you recycle your car

every 3 years to the trash heap to keep up?

 

In the UNIX/Linux world these interfaces do change, but with backward

compatibility in mind, don't change as frequently or dramatically because

they are better thought out to start with. To top it off, the OS uses C in

a way that is relatively portable with well thought out structure. You

might get 6-10 years to change it, or maybe just some minor tweaks along the

way.

 

MS, it is a major chore. More an more are just catching on.

The problem for Linux is, what it wants to be?

 

You see, both MS Windows and Apple OS X have a very clear vision and

positioning. MS wants to be a mass market product provider for its products

can be used by ALL kinds of people and organizations for almost every

possible purpose. Apple wants to be a niche player (at least for now) so it

ensures the user experience of its products is unique and distinguished.

 

One may disagree or dislike their vision and positioning, and they do have

their own problems for the matter, but nevertheless, they all work hard

toward their vision and positioning.

 

So, what Linux wants to be? It was a nice niche product for geeks, but now

it seems want to be a mass market product. But is it a uniform consensus or

just a wish of some advocates?

 

Let's put in another way, what the following two facts have in common?

 

(1) Millions of users are using Linux-based devices.

 

(2) More than 80% of Windows sales (if my memory serves me right) are coming

from system builders.

 

Ans.: The majority of users buy and use "solutions" whether it's Windows or

Linux, just like they don't build their own houses, cars, and the rest of

consumer and business products.

 

By the same token, Linux will not be a viable and meaningful alternative

unless the community is willing to pursue and team up with more system

builders to come up solutions for certain segments as an alternative for

Windows solutions. Yes, there are some system builders are doing it now,

notably, Dell is one of the well-known ones. But it is far from enough.

 

The community (which is a vague term) also needs to work "proactively" with

component vendors for providing drivers and solving compatibility issues,

instead of waiting passively for them to come up solutions. You also need

to help system builders from selecting a proper distro to system integration

to value propositions and all the way to sales and after-sales support, just

like any other serious players are doing. You don't just sit there and wait

for them to work out something for you. What kind of incentives for them to

do so?

 

Also, one would think that it's an advantage for having so many different

Linux distributions. Think again and consider how the market criticize MS

for having different Vista editions, and that is just a few. Simplify your

selections because users don't appreciate unneeded complexities and they

only want "solutions".

 

Technology by itself has no use if it cannot help people to solve issues

and/or accomplish tasks with an improved efficiency, so instead of focusing

on the debate on the technical details, the community and advocates would

have a better result and return on thinking and pursuing to provide an

integrated solution for the intended users. By an integrated solution, I

don't mean the operating system which is just a critical component as a car

engine to an automobile the computer for personal use is an example of an

integrated solution and the entire platform for business use is another one.

 

If you want to join the crowd in the market, you have to adopt how the

market operates because even giants like MS, Intel, Dell, HP, Toyota, and

countless others have to, and that is the only proven way for one to

survive.

 

 

 

"Canuck57" <dave-no_spam@unixhome.net> wrote in message

news:tJ1%j.300254$pM4.239786@pd7urf1no...

>

> "Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@remove_mvps.com> wrote in message

> news:e6gKpHDwIHA.5124@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>> "George Graves" <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote in message

>> news:0001HW.C461AF42000B844BF01846D8@news.comcast.net...

>>> On Tue, 27 May 2008 12:14:13 -0700, JEDIDIAH wrote

>>> (in article <slrng3onc5.op1.jedi@nomad.mishnet>):

>>>

>>>> On 2008-05-27, John Slade <hhitman86@pacbell.net> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>> "7" <website_has_email@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote in message

>>>>> news:43y_j.9559$DZ6.446@text.news.virginmedia.com...

>>>>>> Micoshaft fraudster and asstroturfer Moshe. Goldfarb wrote on behalf

>>>>>> of

>>>>>> Half

>>>>>> Wits from Micoshaft Corporation:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> h

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Simply untrue lies printed by micoshaft fraudsters

>>>>>> on behalf of Micoshaft Corporation marketing department.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> There are 3 million embedded Linux gadgets sold PER DAY.

>>>>>> There are 1 million new Linux desktops installed PER WEEK.

>>>>>> Thats a lot of people who care.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> What about WINDUMMIES?

>>>>>>

>>>>>> WINDUMMIES CAN now get the sack for using micoshaft products!

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Anyone caught using IE and other strange software to browse

>>>>>> or log into online services to download viruses, trojans, malware,

>>>>>> crapware, spyware, botnetware are all sackable.

>>>>>> It s in many companys' terms and conditions of employment.

>>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> This is just plain silly. There is a ton of great software for Windows

>>>>

>>>> Like what?

>>>>

>>>> Tell me why I might want to DUMP my Linux machne so I can run all

>>>> those "great Windows apps"?

>>>>

>>>> [deletia]

>>>>

>>>> ...also, one big problem with Windows is the herd mentality there

>>>> which greatly undermines the idea of exploiting a diverse ecosystem of

>>>> independently created software.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>> You are all living in Microsoft's shadow. People talk all the time about

>>> Linux innovation and freedom from the constraints of the Microsoft

>>> world, but

>>> this is just wishful thinking.

>>>

>>> Microsoft has been holding-back the entire computer industry for more

>>> than a

>>> decade. We are much further behind in GUI development, and workspace

>>> development and in productivity development than we should be at this

>>> point

>>> because Microsoft holds the reigns of the entire industry. It designs

>>> its

>>> OSes to follow the old application centric paradigm and as long as

>>> Windows

>>> works that way, the rest of the industry CAN NOT change - that includes

>>> the

>>> Linux world which COULD change the paradigm, but won't because people

>>> are

>>> used to the way MS does things.

>>

>> And when MS does change the way things work, all they get is complaints.

>

> Because they scewed up. Once upon a time, I thought Microsoft actually

> screwed up protocols so they would not interoperate.

>

> I have since come to the conclusion they don't know how their own OS is

> designed so they don't know how to make it compatible. They really don't.

> There was no reason (worth sh1t) given for why Kerberos was not

> interoperable with the standard kerberos. Ditto DNS, LDAP, IMAP, POP3,

> FTP and even Microsofts own CIFS. Lets face it, Microsoft can't

> read/understand a standard let alone write to it.

>

> NETBUI anyone?

>

> MOOXML, another ambigious half done piece of work.

>

> They spend a lot of time relearning and just trying to get it to work.

> Play like junior hackers, like a basement job. They are feeling lucky if

> it works Windows to Windows thus it is ready to ship.

>

>> Computer users are responsible for holding development back because they

>> want to be able to find everything in the same place as Win 3.0, and

>> still use the same printer, scanner etc that they had way back when..

>

> Again, because the interfaces are poorly documents, poorly designed and

> change with every release. Vendors can't keep up. Heck, Microsoft has

> stated a desire to roll the OS over every 3 years....do you recycle your

> car every 3 years to the trash heap to keep up?

>

> In the UNIX/Linux world these interfaces do change, but with backward

> compatibility in mind, don't change as frequently or dramatically because

> they are better thought out to start with. To top it off, the OS uses C

> in a way that is relatively portable with well thought out structure. You

> might get 6-10 years to change it, or maybe just some minor tweaks along

> the way.

>

> MS, it is a major chore. More an more are just catching on.

>

>

>

>

>

George Graves wrote:

> On Tue, 27 May 2008 12:11:39 -0700, JEDIDIAH wrote

> (in article <slrng3on7b.op1.jedi@nomad.mishnet>):

>

>> On 2008-05-27, John Slade <hhitman86@pacbell.net> wrote:

>>>

>>> "7" <website_has_email@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote in message

>>> news:l5C_j.9705$DZ6.4072@text.news.virginmedia.com...

>>>> Tim Murray wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> On Mon, 26 May 2008 08:29:52 -0400, 7 wrote:

>>>>>> There are 1 million new Linux desktops installed PER WEEK.

>>>>>

>>>>> No way. Source?

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> You are out of date!

>>>>

>>>> Google is your friend.

>>>>

>>>> Go count all the press releases over the last few months.

>>>>

>>>> There are also 3 million embedded Linux gadgets sold PER DAY.

>>>

>>> You should back up your claim. It would be great if Linux were growing

>>> that fast. Where did you get that data please?

>>

>> It's hard to say. Linux is in a lot of places from phones, to

>> routers,

>> to TV's, to STBs, to mp3 players. It's probably in a lot of places where

>> it's completely invisible.

>>

>> A lot of people use Linux without realizing it.

>

> Embedded and server use is not desktops and therefore sort of irrelevant

> to this discussion.

 

 

It is YOUR claims thar are irrelevant to this discussion

while the OP is a complete micoshaft sponsored lying asstroturfer.

 

Linux advocacy is about the WHOLE Linux thing.

That is 3 million embedded Linux gadgets sold PER DAY, the millions of Linux

servers, most of the world's supercomputers, and 1 million Linux desktop

installs per week.

 

Linux is free to copy, modify the source code and distribute

to heart's content.

 

http://www.livecdlist.com

http://www.distrowatch.com

7 wrote:

> George Graves wrote:

>

>

>>On Tue, 27 May 2008 12:11:39 -0700, JEDIDIAH wrote

>>(in article <slrng3on7b.op1.jedi@nomad.mishnet>):

>>

>>

>>>On 2008-05-27, John Slade <hhitman86@pacbell.net> wrote:

>>>

>>>>"7" <website_has_email@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote in message

>>>>news:l5C_j.9705$DZ6.4072@text.news.virginmedia.com...

>>>>

>>>>>Tim Murray wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>>On Mon, 26 May 2008 08:29:52 -0400, 7 wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>There are 1 million new Linux desktops installed PER WEEK.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>No way. Source?

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>You are out of date!

>>>>>

>>>>>Google is your friend.

>>>>>

>>>>>Go count all the press releases over the last few months.

>>>>>

>>>>>There are also 3 million embedded Linux gadgets sold PER DAY.

>>>>

>>>>You should back up your claim. It would be great if Linux were growing

>>>>that fast. Where did you get that data please?

>>>

>>> It's hard to say. Linux is in a lot of places from phones, to

>>> routers,

>>>to TV's, to STBs, to mp3 players. It's probably in a lot of places where

>>>it's completely invisible.

>>>

>>> A lot of people use Linux without realizing it.

>>

>>Embedded and server use is not desktops and therefore sort of irrelevant

>>to this discussion.

>

>

>

> It is YOUR claims thar are irrelevant to this discussion

> while the OP is a complete micoshaft sponsored lying asstroturfer.

>

> Linux advocacy is about the WHOLE Linux thing.

> That is 3 million embedded Linux gadgets sold PER DAY, the millions of Linux

> servers, most of the world's supercomputers, and 1 million Linux desktop

> installs per week.

>

> Linux is free to copy, modify the source code and distribute

> to heart's content.

>

> http://www.livecdlist.com

> http://www.distrowatch.com

>

You're on drugs or drunk or both right?

Being delusional is part of your life style right?

Frank

On Wed, 28 May 2008 12:32:55 -0700, 7 wrote

(in article <Hri%j.10837$DZ6.5371@text.news.virginmedia.com>):

> George Graves wrote:

>

>> On Tue, 27 May 2008 12:11:39 -0700, JEDIDIAH wrote

>> (in article <slrng3on7b.op1.jedi@nomad.mishnet>):

>>

>>> On 2008-05-27, John Slade <hhitman86@pacbell.net> wrote:

>>>>

>>>> "7" <website_has_email@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote in message

>>>> news:l5C_j.9705$DZ6.4072@text.news.virginmedia.com...

>>>>> Tim Murray wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> On Mon, 26 May 2008 08:29:52 -0400, 7 wrote:

>>>>>>> There are 1 million new Linux desktops installed PER WEEK.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> No way. Source?

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> You are out of date!

>>>>>

>>>>> Google is your friend.

>>>>>

>>>>> Go count all the press releases over the last few months.

>>>>>

>>>>> There are also 3 million embedded Linux gadgets sold PER DAY.

>>>>

>>>> You should back up your claim. It would be great if Linux were growing

>>>> that fast. Where did you get that data please?

>>>

>>> It's hard to say. Linux is in a lot of places from phones, to

>>> routers,

>>> to TV's, to STBs, to mp3 players. It's probably in a lot of places where

>>> it's completely invisible.

>>>

>>> A lot of people use Linux without realizing it.

>>

>> Embedded and server use is not desktops and therefore sort of irrelevant

>> to this discussion.

>

>

> It is YOUR claims thar are irrelevant to this discussion

> while the OP is a complete micoshaft sponsored lying asstroturfer.

 

They are irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. The end user doesn't care what's

powering his PDA, Cellphone, digital camera, automobile or set-top cable TV

box. He just cares what features it has and that it works. There's no

advocacy involved and if you guys are using embedded systems to bolster your

numbers, then you're being dishonest as far as I see it. Embedded systems are

NOT a consumer choice and never will be.

On 2008-05-28, George Graves <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 28 May 2008 12:32:55 -0700, 7 wrote

> (in article <Hri%j.10837$DZ6.5371@text.news.virginmedia.com>):

>

>> George Graves wrote:

>>

>>> On Tue, 27 May 2008 12:11:39 -0700, JEDIDIAH wrote

>>> (in article <slrng3on7b.op1.jedi@nomad.mishnet>):

>>>

>>>> On 2008-05-27, John Slade <hhitman86@pacbell.net> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>> "7" <website_has_email@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote in message

>>>>> news:l5C_j.9705$DZ6.4072@text.news.virginmedia.com...

>>>>>> Tim Murray wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> On Mon, 26 May 2008 08:29:52 -0400, 7 wrote:

>>>>>>>> There are 1 million new Linux desktops installed PER WEEK.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> No way. Source?

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> You are out of date!

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Google is your friend.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Go count all the press releases over the last few months.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> There are also 3 million embedded Linux gadgets sold PER DAY.

>>>>>

>>>>> You should back up your claim. It would be great if Linux were growing

>>>>> that fast. Where did you get that data please?

>>>>

>>>> It's hard to say. Linux is in a lot of places from phones, to

>>>> routers,

>>>> to TV's, to STBs, to mp3 players. It's probably in a lot of places where

>>>> it's completely invisible.

>>>>

>>>> A lot of people use Linux without realizing it.

>>>

>>> Embedded and server use is not desktops and therefore sort of irrelevant

>>> to this discussion.

>>

>>

>> It is YOUR claims thar are irrelevant to this discussion

>> while the OP is a complete micoshaft sponsored lying asstroturfer.

>

> They are irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. The end user doesn't care what's

> powering his PDA, Cellphone, digital camera, automobile or set-top cable TV

 

They should be. Like anything else, those choices will determine whether

or not the product is useful or just an annoying pile of crap.

 

Whether or not your Cable Set Top box is a Linux powered Tivo or not

is VERY relevant. Someone else here also likes to whine how important

the iPhone is because of this.

> box. He just cares what features it has and that it works. There's no

> advocacy involved and if you guys are using embedded systems to bolster your

> numbers, then you're being dishonest as far as I see it. Embedded systems are

> NOT a consumer choice and never will be.

>

 

Why should we restrict advocacy to mere "consumers"?

 

--

 

The social cost of suing/prosecuting individuals |||

for non-commercial copyright infringement far outweighs / | \

the social value of copyright to begin with.

 

 

 

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services

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

http://www.usenet.com

In article <Ggl%j.173142$rd2.60361@pd7urf3no>,

"Canuck57" <dave-no_spam@unixhome.net> wrote:

> Good for you. But you didn't answer. Do you have a Linksys/Netgear/D-Link

> or other WAP running Linux? How about the cell phone? What about the web

> cam?

 

Who cares? I have a Linksys router with Linux. A friend of mine has

the same model of Linksys router, without Linux. However, they operate

identically, and the only way I know mine has Linux and his does not is

that we looked up the serial numbers on a site that tells you which ones

have Linux and which ones don't. They have the same functionality, and

the same web interface.

 

That Linux is used in some routers is of no relevance whatsoever when it

comes to choosing a desktop system.

 

--

--Tim Smith

In article <0001HW.C4630BB6000E1607F01846D8@news.comcast.net>,

George Graves <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote:

>

>OS is installed in ROM by the manufacturer (in this case, Apple), I.E. its

>embedded. You don't get to choose it just like you can't choose the OS

>embedded in your car, your cell phone, or your cable TV box. It's just THERE.

 

Sort of like the OS that comes in your new Gateway or your new

Dell, huh?

 

1/2 :-)

>Jeeze, you're stupid.

 

 

Well, ya know, the desktop might be the only part of the world you

ever see but without all those Unix servers quietly working away in the

background you wouldn't need Google to search the web because it would be

*real* *small*

On May 28, 4:23 pm, w...@panix.com (the wharf rat) wrote:

> In article <0001HW.C4630BB6000E1607F0184...@news.comcast.net>,

> George Graves  <gmgrav...@comcast.net> wrote:

>

>

>

> >OS is installed in ROM by the manufacturer (in this case, Apple), I.E. its

> >embedded. You don't get to choose it just like you can't choose the OS

> >embedded in your car, your cell phone, or your cable TV box. It's just THERE.

>

>         Sort of like the OS that comes in your new Gateway or your new

> Dell, huh?

>

>         1/2 :-)

>

> >Jeeze, you're stupid.

>

>         Well, ya know, the desktop might be the only part of the world you

> ever see but without all those Unix servers quietly working away in the

> background you wouldn't need Google to search the web because it would be

> *real* *small*

 

No. You have it wrong. You are stupid.

"George Graves" <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:0001HW.C4630CD2000E5894F01846D8@news.comcast.net...

> On Wed, 28 May 2008 12:32:55 -0700, 7 wrote

> (in article <Hri%j.10837$DZ6.5371@text.news.virginmedia.com>):

>

>> George Graves wrote:

>>

>>> On Tue, 27 May 2008 12:11:39 -0700, JEDIDIAH wrote

>>> (in article <slrng3on7b.op1.jedi@nomad.mishnet>):

>>>

>>>> On 2008-05-27, John Slade <hhitman86@pacbell.net> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>> "7" <website_has_email@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote in message

>>>>> news:l5C_j.9705$DZ6.4072@text.news.virginmedia.com...

>>>>>> Tim Murray wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> On Mon, 26 May 2008 08:29:52 -0400, 7 wrote:

>>>>>>>> There are 1 million new Linux desktops installed PER WEEK.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> No way. Source?

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> You are out of date!

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Google is your friend.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Go count all the press releases over the last few months.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> There are also 3 million embedded Linux gadgets sold PER DAY.

>>>>>

>>>>> You should back up your claim. It would be great if Linux were growing

>>>>> that fast. Where did you get that data please?

>>>>

>>>> It's hard to say. Linux is in a lot of places from phones, to

>>>> routers,

>>>> to TV's, to STBs, to mp3 players. It's probably in a lot of places

>>>> where

>>>> it's completely invisible.

>>>>

>>>> A lot of people use Linux without realizing it.

>>>

>>> Embedded and server use is not desktops and therefore sort of irrelevant

>>> to this discussion.

>>

>>

>> It is YOUR claims thar are irrelevant to this discussion

>> while the OP is a complete micoshaft sponsored lying asstroturfer.

>

> They are irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. The end user doesn't care

> what's

> powering his PDA, Cellphone, digital camera, automobile or set-top cable

> TV

> box. He just cares what features it has and that it works. There's no

> advocacy involved and if you guys are using embedded systems to bolster

> your

> numbers, then you're being dishonest as far as I see it. Embedded systems

> are

> NOT a consumer choice and never will be.

 

I laugh at your ignorance.

 

Embedded low maintenance, low cost and reliable devices ARE what people

want. And Linux rules this roost. Vista isn't going to run on a ultra-low

power portable device like a RIM/*Berry. Dream on.

 

People will migrate to cost, functionality and value. If the batteries run

down in an hour because Vista wants to defrag "automatically" they are not

going to give a crap. They will pick the model that does the same thing but

lasts 5 times longer and costs less than Vista itself. In this realm of

appliance devices, Microsoft is too unreliable, fat/bloated and over priced.

I am not going to buy a $200 cell phone and load $400 Ultimate anything.

 

Microsofts business model is decaying. And if it is anything like the

mainframe days the following occurs.

 

-500M desktops say run a MS-OS.

-Market shrinks to 350M as people use other "appliances", prices go up

-Prices goes up 33% as MS does not want to show lower sales, Win98, $98,

Vista U $400+

-Market shrinks to 220M as it costs too much for MS-OS, appliances bloom,

Eee PC

-Prices goes up another 33% as MS does not want to show lower sales

 

The last one is where we are about to be.

 

Most mainframers in the end dumped mainframes not because of the hardware,

but with fewer customers for a given software packages the support price

increases drove them off of mainframes. As vendors with a reduced user base

raised costs to the users to maintain viability.

 

This WILL happen again. MS is over priced, over valued and quite a bit more

susceptible to a switch change by consumer demand than was

IBM/Sperry/Amdahl. Happened with IBM, Apple (IIe), Digital, Tandy-RS and

others. History is just repeating itself and Microsoft is on the falling

edge this time.

 

Win7 will not be cheap. It is in a increasing saturated market and more

price competitive than ever.

 

Ballmer may throw some more chairs, he breaks windows nicely. I wouldn't

invest in MSFT unless I was made VP of Common Sense at MSFT with a big

stick.

"JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message

> Why should we restrict advocacy to mere "consumers"?

 

We are not.

On Wed, 28 May 2008 16:37:06 -0700, Canuck57 wrote

(in article <C0m%j.174853$Cj7.45767@pd7urf2no>):

>

> "George Graves" <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote in message

> news:0001HW.C4630CD2000E5894F01846D8@news.comcast.net...

>> On Wed, 28 May 2008 12:32:55 -0700, 7 wrote

>> (in article <Hri%j.10837$DZ6.5371@text.news.virginmedia.com>):

>>

>>> George Graves wrote:

>>>

>>>> On Tue, 27 May 2008 12:11:39 -0700, JEDIDIAH wrote

>>>> (in article <slrng3on7b.op1.jedi@nomad.mishnet>):

>>>>

>>>>> On 2008-05-27, John Slade <hhitman86@pacbell.net> wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>> "7" <website_has_email@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote in message

>>>>>> news:l5C_j.9705$DZ6.4072@text.news.virginmedia.com...

>>>>>>> Tim Murray wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> On Mon, 26 May 2008 08:29:52 -0400, 7 wrote:

>>>>>>>>> There are 1 million new Linux desktops installed PER WEEK.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> No way. Source?

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> You are out of date!

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Google is your friend.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Go count all the press releases over the last few months.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> There are also 3 million embedded Linux gadgets sold PER DAY.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> You should back up your claim. It would be great if Linux were growing

>>>>>> that fast. Where did you get that data please?

>>>>>

>>>>> It's hard to say. Linux is in a lot of places from phones, to

>>>>> routers,

>>>>> to TV's, to STBs, to mp3 players. It's probably in a lot of places

>>>>> where

>>>>> it's completely invisible.

>>>>>

>>>>> A lot of people use Linux without realizing it.

>>>>

>>>> Embedded and server use is not desktops and therefore sort of irrelevant

>>>> to this discussion.

>>>

>>>

>>> It is YOUR claims thar are irrelevant to this discussion

>>> while the OP is a complete micoshaft sponsored lying asstroturfer.

>>

>> They are irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. The end user doesn't care

>> what's

>> powering his PDA, Cellphone, digital camera, automobile or set-top cable

>> TV

>> box. He just cares what features it has and that it works. There's no

>> advocacy involved and if you guys are using embedded systems to bolster

>> your

>> numbers, then you're being dishonest as far as I see it. Embedded systems

>> are

>> NOT a consumer choice and never will be.

>

> I laugh at your ignorance.

>

> Embedded low maintenance, low cost and reliable devices ARE what people

> want. And Linux rules this roost. Vista isn't going to run on a ultra-low

> power portable device like a RIM/*Berry. Dream on.

 

Low cost and reliable devices ARE what people want. I agree. But nobody cares

HOW the manufacturers achieve that goal any more than they care, for

instance, what microcontroller runs the engine management system in their

car.

> People will migrate to cost, functionality and value. If the batteries run

> down in an hour because Vista wants to defrag "automatically" they are not

> going to give a crap. They will pick the model that does the same thing but

> lasts 5 times longer and costs less than Vista itself. In this realm of

> appliance devices, Microsoft is too unreliable, fat/bloated and over priced.

> I am not going to buy a $200 cell phone and load $400 Ultimate anything.

 

The still don't care what's under the hood. You continue to miss the

essential point here. If Linux is the cheapest embedded system and the system

that will lower costs, fine, but the consumer doesn't care about that. They

care only about the results and most won't know whether the appliance in

question is running embedded Linux or some proprietary embedded OS and most

importantly, they won't care.

>

> Microsofts business model is decaying. And if it is anything like the

> mainframe days the following occurs.

>

> -500M desktops say run a MS-OS.

> -Market shrinks to 350M as people use other "appliances", prices go up

> -Prices goes up 33% as MS does not want to show lower sales, Win98, $98,

> Vista U $400+

> -Market shrinks to 220M as it costs too much for MS-OS, appliances bloom,

> Eee PC

> -Prices goes up another 33% as MS does not want to show lower sales

>

> The last one is where we are about to be.

>

> Most mainframers in the end dumped mainframes not because of the hardware,

> but with fewer customers for a given software packages the support price

> increases drove them off of mainframes. As vendors with a reduced user base

> raised costs to the users to maintain viability.

>

> This WILL happen again. MS is over priced, over valued and quite a bit more

> susceptible to a switch change by consumer demand than was

> IBM/Sperry/Amdahl. Happened with IBM, Apple (IIe), Digital, Tandy-RS and

> others. History is just repeating itself and Microsoft is on the falling

> edge this time.

>

> Win7 will not be cheap. It is in a increasing saturated market and more

> price competitive than ever.

>

> Ballmer may throw some more chairs, he breaks windows nicely. I wouldn't

> invest in MSFT unless I was made VP of Common Sense at MSFT with a big

> stick.

 

I gotta be honest with you. I don't care about Microsoft either.

George Graves wrote:

> On Wed, 28 May 2008 12:32:55 -0700, 7 wrote

> (in article <Hri%j.10837$DZ6.5371@text.news.virginmedia.com>):

>

>> George Graves wrote:

>>

>>> On Tue, 27 May 2008 12:11:39 -0700, JEDIDIAH wrote

>>> (in article <slrng3on7b.op1.jedi@nomad.mishnet>):

>>>

>>>> On 2008-05-27, John Slade <hhitman86@pacbell.net> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>> "7" <website_has_email@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote in message

>>>>> news:l5C_j.9705$DZ6.4072@text.news.virginmedia.com...

>>>>>> Tim Murray wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> On Mon, 26 May 2008 08:29:52 -0400, 7 wrote:

>>>>>>>> There are 1 million new Linux desktops installed PER WEEK.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> No way. Source?

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> You are out of date!

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Google is your friend.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Go count all the press releases over the last few months.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> There are also 3 million embedded Linux gadgets sold PER DAY.

>>>>>

>>>>> You should back up your claim. It would be great if Linux were growing

>>>>> that fast. Where did you get that data please?

>>>>

>>>> It's hard to say. Linux is in a lot of places from phones, to

>>>> routers,

>>>> to TV's, to STBs, to mp3 players. It's probably in a lot of places

>>>> where it's completely invisible.

>>>>

>>>> A lot of people use Linux without realizing it.

>>>

>>> Embedded and server use is not desktops and therefore sort of irrelevant

>>> to this discussion.

>>

>>

>> It is YOUR claims thar are irrelevant to this discussion

>> while the OP is a complete micoshaft sponsored lying asstroturfer.

>

> They are irrelevant as far as I'm concerned.

 

WTF?

And who might you be precious?

 

Its pretty clear you must be irrelevant to Linux Advocacy

as far as Linux Advocacy is concerned!

 

Linux advocacy is about the WHOLE Linux thing.

That is 3 million embedded Linux gadgets sold PER DAY, the millions of Linux

servers, most of the world's supercomputers, and 1 million Linux desktop

installs per week.

 

Linux is free to copy, modify the source code and distribute

to heart's content.

 

http://www.livecdlist.com

http://www.distrowatch.com

On Wed, 28 May 2008 21:25:12 -0400, 7 wrote:

> That is 3 million embedded Linux gadgets sold PER DAY, the millions of

> Linux servers, most of the world's supercomputers, and 1 million Linux

> desktop installs per week.

 

You say that something like 80 times a day (that's hyperbole) but I must have

missed that post where you back it up.

On Wed, 28 May 2008 21:49:59 -0400, Tim Murray wrote:

> On Wed, 28 May 2008 21:25:12 -0400, 7 wrote:

>> That is 3 million embedded Linux gadgets sold PER DAY, the millions of

>> Linux servers, most of the world's supercomputers, and 1 million Linux

>> desktop installs per week.

>

> You say that something like 80 times a day (that's hyperbole) but I must have

> missed that post where you back it up.

 

7, aka mjcr, is a Linux loon.

He doesn't back anything up with facts.

He makes up the story as he goes along.

 

--

Moshe Goldfarb

Collector of soaps from around the globe.

Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:

http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

"JEDIDIAH" <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message

news:slrng3rha9.pve.jedi@nomad.mishnet...

> On 2008-05-28, George Graves <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote:

 

>> They are irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. The end user doesn't care

>> what's

>> powering his PDA, Cellphone, digital camera, automobile or set-top cable

>> TV

>

> They should be. Like anything else, those choices will determine

> whether

> or not the product is useful or just an annoying pile of crap.

>

> Whether or not your Cable Set Top box is a Linux powered Tivo or not

> is VERY relevant. Someone else here also likes to whine how important

> the iPhone is because of this.

 

Who would want a tivo when they can have a sky+?

Sky+ doesn't use linux and it is better (cheaper, easier to use, better

picture quality, less power, etc.) so that argument doesn't hold water.

 

Its people who insist on linux however bad the results are that cause

problems, not the people who will use the best solution whether its linux or

anything else. They have it right, you are just irrational.

Tim Murray wrote:

> On Wed, 28 May 2008 21:25:12 -0400, 7 wrote:

>> That is 3 million embedded Linux gadgets sold PER DAY, the millions of

>> Linux servers, most of the world's supercomputers, and 1 million Linux

>> desktop installs per week.

>

> You say that something like 80 times a day (that's hyperbole) but I must

> have missed that post where you back it up.

 

 

Google is your friend.

Just count up all the press releases.

Linux is distributed freely and you are free to copy and install on

as many places as you want.

 

To get independently verifiable low end of the figures, you need to sit down

and count all the numbers in press releases.

On May 23, 6:00 pm, "Moshe. Goldfarb" <brick.n.st...@gmail.com> wrote:

> http://www.applematters.com/article/about-linux-and-why-nobody-seems-...

>

> " The general consensus seems to be that Mac users are the sort who want

> the best in quality, no expenses spared Windows users are those who're

> looking for the best bang for their buck (generally in the short term) and

> Linux users are the ones who want everything for free, particularly

> software."

>

> " Some Linux users are easily dazzled by superfluous and completely useless

> effects (wobbly windows, blatant overuse of transparency, etc.) and assume

> that it must be better than Mac OS X because it's so cosmetically made-up

> and then there are others who only need the Terminal and can keep typing on

> it whole day long."

>

> " The problem with the Linux community is that, like any community, it has

> members with widely varying interests and preferences and the open source

> developers are developing hundreds of distributions to try and cater to

> every single whim and fancy of these members. The result is a cornucopia of

> free software, software that has been developed at the expense of the hard

> work and time of some of the most skilled developers on the planet, and yet

> does not have a single product that is complete in and of itself and is

> generating any profit at all."

 

Duh, there's reason it's called FREE OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE!!! the point

is not profit, it's a better end result. one of the key features is

INTEROPERABILITY! this means that we can use one program that is

really really good at, say, ripping music, and then one that is really

really good at burning discs. this means that we have more choice as

to what we do, and how we do it.

> " There is no way whatsoever that thousands of developers sitting in front

> of their computers in different corners of the world and spending only

> their non-working hours trying to develop something that they know isn't

> going to make them any money, are ever going to come up with anything good

> enough to seriously challenge software from companies like Microsoft and

> Apple. There is just no chance at all."

 

you know what free open source has done? hmm... i wonder... what is

the code that runs Android, the phone platform from Google. more to

the point, what runs google? the world's BIGGEST and most powerfull

search engine? Linux servers, among other things.

> " Linux has been around for more than a decade now and it's nowhere near

> challenging either Mac OS X or Windows. The vast majority of hardware and

> software makers around the world are still shipping products that are

> incompatible with Linux."

 

mainly because microsoft subtly threatens them with pulling their

dealer agreements.

> " There's no guarantee that the camera you bought today and is compatible

> with your Ubuntu installation will work with Fedora Core too should you

> change your mind in a few days, as is a common practice among the Linux

> enthusiasts."

 

just so you know, in windows generic drivers have myriad issues, in

linux, they work almost every time with little or no issue. this means

that even without the propietry drivers we can use this hardware.

anyway, if a company like ASUS makes a linux based laptop, i think

it's safe to say that they are going to make more hardware for us.

> " All of this and more are reasons enough to ignore Linux. Linux users are

> never quite sure which one is the best distribution around. They have

> debates in their own community with twenty different users vouching for

> twenty different variations. They constantly have to keep figuring out

> workarounds to make all their software and hardware work together. They

> can't just go out and buy a new accessory, assured in the knowledge that it

> will work. They are afraid to upgrade, lest things go wrong."

 

the point of a distro is that you have range of product. we can use a

lightweight version for a low end computer, or use Ubuntu or PCLOS for

someone who has little experience. this means that you aren't stuck

with windows xp vista or good old 2000.

 

maybe this person should try using linux for a week, as i know for a

fact he did with windows or mac.

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, rbchinchen@gmail.com

<rbchinchen@gmail.com>

wrote

on Thu, 29 May 2008 14:33:14 -0700 (PDT)

<35eb7a80-7ae1-459e-92ed-753ad63ed7c7@x19g2000prg.googlegroups.com>:

> On May 23, 6:00 pm, "Moshe. Goldfarb" <brick.n.st...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> http://www.applematters.com/article/about-linux-and-why-nobody-seems-...

>>

>> " The general consensus seems to be that Mac users are the sort who want

>> the best in quality, no expenses spared Windows users are those who're

>> looking for the best bang for their buck (generally in the short term) and

>> Linux users are the ones who want everything for free, particularly

>> software."

>>

>> " Some Linux users are easily dazzled by superfluous and completely useless

>> effects (wobbly windows, blatant overuse of transparency, etc.) and assume

>> that it must be better than Mac OS X because it's so cosmetically made-up

>> and then there are others who only need the Terminal and can keep typing on

>> it whole day long."

>>

>> " The problem with the Linux community is that, like any community, it has

>> members with widely varying interests and preferences and the open source

>> developers are developing hundreds of distributions to try and cater to

>> every single whim and fancy of these members. The result is a cornucopia of

>> free software, software that has been developed at the expense of the hard

>> work and time of some of the most skilled developers on the planet, and yet

>> does not have a single product that is complete in and of itself and is

>> generating any profit at all."

>

> Duh, there's reason it's called FREE OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE!!! the point

> is not profit, it's a better end result.

 

Define "better". Moshe isn't exactly sure what it

means...and I can't say I know what it means precisely

anyway, as Windows is provably better in one area: profits.

Of course, that's not exactly going to endear the IT

manager whose box keeps crashing because a virus sneaked

through.

> one of the key features is

> INTEROPERABILITY! this means that we can use one program that is

> really really good at, say, ripping music, and then one that is really

> really good at burning discs. this means that we have more choice as

> to what we do, and how we do it.

 

That's not interoperability, merely good multitasking. -)

Interoperability (IMO, anyway) relates to things such as

communicating with and/or developing software for Solaris

nodes, Windows nodes, FreeBSD nodes on a Linux box.

Another "axis" relates to machine type one can develop

Linux software for ix86, arm, m68k, ppc, and other

hardware.

 

And yes, Linux is extremely good at interoperability.

 

Still, good multitasking helps it's one less thing to worry about.

>

>> " There is no way whatsoever that thousands of developers sitting in front

>> of their computers in different corners of the world and spending only

>> their non-working hours trying to develop something that they know isn't

>> going to make them any money, are ever going to come up with anything good

>> enough to seriously challenge software from companies like Microsoft and

>> Apple. There is just no chance at all."

>

> you know what free open source has done? hmm... i wonder... what is

> the code that runs Android, the phone platform from Google.

 

Not free...yet. One can identify qemu 0.8.2 in there,

but it's been mangled in several interesting ways -- among

them the development of Yet Another Flash File System.

(Yes, that's what it's called! It's a module addition to

the Android standard kernel, named 'yaffs2', and readily

retrofittable to a stock kernel. Apparently it's optimized for

Flash-based devices such as USB memory sticks.)

 

Also, 'tools/emulator -qemu -M ?' returns a result that

includes 'android_arm' someone's diddled in there a bit.

 

(Trying to run with -M integratorcp926 pegged my CPU,

but didn't do anything horribly interesting otherwise.)

 

I think Google engineer(s) might be a little nervous about

their modifications. I hope they resolve this soon.

> more to

> the point, what runs google? the world's BIGGEST and most powerfull

> search engine? Linux servers, among other things.

>

>> " Linux has been around for more than a decade now and it's nowhere near

>> challenging either Mac OS X or Windows. The vast majority of hardware and

>> software makers around the world are still shipping products that are

>> incompatible with Linux."

>

> mainly because microsoft subtly threatens them with pulling their

> dealer agreements.

 

I'm not sure "incompatible with Linux" is the right

phrasing here, though. Of course part of the issue is

that, rather than OEMs designing products compatible with

Linux, Linux basically has to de-engineer (often with OEM

help) already-designed products.

 

This ultimately leads to a similar result but may not be nearly

as efficient.

 

Of course, Microsoft will not want to sit still and let Linux

take advantage of its work...assuming Microsoft's doing that

much work here, apart from supporting a framework which lets

driver writers do what's needed.

>

>> " There's no guarantee that the camera you bought today and is compatible

>> with your Ubuntu installation will work with Fedora Core too should you

>> change your mind in a few days, as is a common practice among the Linux

>> enthusiasts."

>

> just so you know, in windows generic drivers have myriad issues,

 

Which version of said drivers? Apparently, there's been

no less than *four*, though I'm not that knowledgeable.

I can readily identify, though, what appears to be the

following driver variants.

 

- Win 3.1 variants, which are MS-DOS variants. These are by now

extremely decrepit, and am not sure they count.

 

- Win95 (or maybe LBA, which *predated* Win95). VxDs in particular

were well known successors to DOS TSRs ... and about as ugly.

 

- WinNT, a radical departure from Win95, though not quite as

radical perhaps as attempting to port an old DOS TSR to a

Linux text console.

 

- WinXP, which I believe rewrote WinNT drivers underneath

for some reason.

 

- WinVista, which changed them *again*, leading to some major

annoyances as nVidia didn't roll fast enough.

 

Yeah, that highly stable driver foundation Windows offers! Not.

(Screensavers are even worse, as I understand it...but I digress.)

> in

> linux, they work almost every time with little or no issue.

 

And I doubt they've mutated all that much since version 1.2.

It's easily possible to check, too...dig up an old 1.2

kernel, see what's happened to the NE2K driver (which is

an absolutely ancient card by now).

> this means

> that even without the propietry drivers we can use this hardware.

> anyway, if a company like ASUS makes a linux based laptop, i think

> it's safe to say that they are going to make more hardware for us.

 

Assuming they in fact make hardware, as opposed to merely

assembling it. -) But if they're going to provide a

Linux bios, then they'll definitely want to have drivers

in that bios -- and hopefully

>

>> " All of this and more are reasons enough to ignore Linux. Linux users are

>> never quite sure which one is the best distribution around. They have

>> debates in their own community with twenty different users vouching for

>> twenty different variations. They constantly have to keep figuring out

>> workarounds to make all their software and hardware work together. They

>> can't just go out and buy a new accessory, assured in the knowledge that it

>> will work. They are afraid to upgrade, lest things go wrong."

>

> the point of a distro is that you have range of product. we can use a

> lightweight version for a low end computer, or use Ubuntu or PCLOS for

> someone who has little experience. this means that you aren't stuck

> with windows xp vista or good old 2000.

>

> maybe this person should try using linux for a week, as i know for a

> fact he did with windows or mac.

 

s/Linux/Ubuntu/, or perhaps Fedora, Debian, or a number of other

distros. I'll admit I'm not sure which one to recommend I happen

to like Gentoo but that's a stickshift to most other distro's automatic

transmissions.

 

Still, getting one's feet wet with Ubuntu might be very good experience.

 

--

#191, ewill3@earthlink.net

Windows Vista. Now in nine exciting editions. Try them all!

** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

"rbchinchen@gmail.com" <rbchinchen@gmail.com> writes:

> On May 23, 6:00 pm, "Moshe. Goldfarb" <brick.n.st...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> http://www.applematters.com/article/about-linux-and-why-nobody-seems-...

>>

>> " The general consensus seems to be that Mac users are the sort who want

>> the best in quality, no expenses spared Windows users are those who're

>> looking for the best bang for their buck (generally in the short term) and

>> Linux users are the ones who want everything for free, particularly

>> software."

>>

>> " Some Linux users are easily dazzled by superfluous and completely useless

>> effects (wobbly windows, blatant overuse of transparency, etc.) and assume

>> that it must be better than Mac OS X because it's so cosmetically made-up

>> and then there are others who only need the Terminal and can keep typing on

>> it whole day long."

>>

>> " The problem with the Linux community is that, like any community, it has

>> members with widely varying interests and preferences and the open source

>> developers are developing hundreds of distributions to try and cater to

>> every single whim and fancy of these members. The result is a cornucopia of

>> free software, software that has been developed at the expense of the hard

>> work and time of some of the most skilled developers on the planet, and yet

>> does not have a single product that is complete in and of itself and is

>> generating any profit at all."

>

> Duh, there's reason it's called FREE OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE!!! the point

> is not profit, it's a better end result. one of the key features is

> INTEROPERABILITY! this means that we can use one program that is

> really really good at, say, ripping music, and then one that is really

> really good at burning discs. this means that we have more choice as

> to what we do, and how we do it.

 

You are obviously clueless as to what OPEN SOURCE means. It is nothing

to do with "choice".

>

>> " There is no way whatsoever that thousands of developers sitting in front

>> of their computers in different corners of the world and spending only

>> their non-working hours trying to develop something that they know isn't

>> going to make them any money, are ever going to come up with anything good

>> enough to seriously challenge software from companies like Microsoft and

>> Apple. There is just no chance at all."

>

> you know what free open source has done? hmm... i wonder... what is

> the code that runs Android, the phone platform from Google. more to

> the point, what runs google? the world's BIGGEST and most powerfull

> search engine? Linux servers, among other things.

>

>> " Linux has been around for more than a decade now and it's nowhere near

>> challenging either Mac OS X or Windows. The vast majority of hardware and

>> software makers around the world are still shipping products that are

>> incompatible with Linux."

>

> mainly because microsoft subtly threatens them with pulling their

> dealer agreements.

 

You of course have proof of this?

>

>> " There's no guarantee that the camera you bought today and is compatible

>> with your Ubuntu installation will work with Fedora Core too should you

>> change your mind in a few days, as is a common practice among the Linux

>> enthusiasts."

>

> just so you know, in windows generic drivers have myriad issues, in

> linux, they work almost every time with little or no issue. this means

 

You are joking?

> that even without the propietry drivers we can use this hardware.

> anyway, if a company like ASUS makes a linux based laptop, i think

> it's safe to say that they are going to make more hardware for us.

 

You seem to be drunk or somewhat retarded. You are waffling on about

seemingly unrelated things now.

>

>> " All of this and more are reasons enough to ignore Linux. Linux users are

>> never quite sure which one is the best distribution around. They have

>> debates in their own community with twenty different users vouching for

>> twenty different variations. They constantly have to keep figuring out

>> workarounds to make all their software and hardware work together. They

>> can't just go out and buy a new accessory, assured in the knowledge that it

>> will work. They are afraid to upgrade, lest things go wrong."

>

> the point of a distro is that you have range of product. we can use a

 

Huh? A range of product? What are you talking about.

> lightweight version for a low end computer, or use Ubuntu or PCLOS for

> someone who has little experience. this means that you aren't stuck

> with windows xp vista or good old 2000.

 

And the other 497?

>

> maybe this person should try using linux for a week, as i know for a

> fact he did with windows or mac.

 

After they have checked their HW works with it of course.