Are other operating systems ever going to catch up with Linux?

[Bar0n]

Uh, no it wasn't:

Yeah, it was, my words were:
"Linux does not offer that, certainly none of the free options do anyway."

You won't pick Linux over Windows, for monetary reasons, if you require accountability and a direct line of support. Or in other words, why would a large company switch to Linux if they're not going to be saving that much money anyway (excluding retraining of staff, finding Linux alternatives for some applications, etc.)?

 

[10i]

FNB run Ubuntu and they are a large company...

 

[SauRoNZA]

The cloud is an excellent concept and one that I am using when I have broadband.

My own objection is having to deal with cloud-only solutions. If the toll road is too expensive, I need an alternative route even if it is gravel and dusty.

Time is needed for the world to catch up but the device vendors and systems designers do not anticipate realities existing in their largest market. To merely say that society will catch up is perhaps a bit short-sighted. It would be a good idea of the OS and hardware developers of this world design systems according to the needs of users, not the other way around.

But this is left completely and utterly in the hands of the consumer.

If you can't do the Cloud...then don't do the cloud as simple as that.

Nobody is forcing it on you. If there's a cloud-only technology and you can't cloud...then don't choose that technology.

It's really that simple.

 

[porchrat]

Yeah, it was, my words were:
"Linux does not offer that, certainly none of the free options do anyway."

Those words came right after a long paragraph about needing accountability and implying that Linux doesn't offer it, but Linux does offer that. One could even argue that should one find bugs or errors the company responsible for maintaining the code will still rectify the problem once made aware of it anyway, free of charge.

The fact remains major Linux distros do offer corporate level support. They always has as far as I am aware.

You won't pick Linux over Windows, for monetary reasons, if you require accountability and a direct line of support. Or in other words, why would a large company switch to Linux if they're not going to be saving that much money anyway (excluding retraining of staff, finding Linux alternatives for some applications, etc.)?

You'd need to demonstrate that the Windows option is cheaper and more effective than the Linux option to make that claim.

You're continuously trying to make it sound like this isn't a reason to pick one over the other, like it doesn't matter. You're the one that brought the point up as though it does matter, you're the one that said companies need accountability and heavily implied that that is why they should choose Windows over Linux. Come off it.

 

[ToxicBunny]

People pirate Windows only because of their ignorance in not knowing about legitimate FOSS alternatives. Part of the reason why I regard most Windows users as not smart and uninformed. Also too lazy to do proper homework.

About OS X. I lack the emotional energy to repeat what I had written many times before, but my DUMB statement is based upon practical experience of myself and a number of Apple certified technicians in my circle of friends. I do not grab things out of thin air as I do not deal with opinions but with facts. Get broader experience as your limited exposure is insufficient to afford you a fuller understanding.

As for MS Windows: its is being pushed into the cloud, both as OS and its apps such as Office. The idiots in Seattle think that all the world enjoy freely available, lavishly dished out broadband. This is while more than 4 out of 7 people globally have NO internet and NEED standalone machines. In Africa, still about 80% have NO internet access. There has been growth in infrastructure over the past ten years, maybe a bit less, when 3G was being rolled out slowly. It will take another decade or two to have it really in place. Users need to find alternatives to ensure they don't get painted into a corner. Even in our cities, signal distribution is a big issue - Cape Town is a city rated amongs the very best globally, yet broadband infrastructure here seems to be haphazard. Travel across the entire Peninsula and see how many times there just is either no signal or 2G at best.

Perhaps you should read the original post before you post again.

You may actually want to go and educate yourself about MS's product roadmap before pontificating about something you clearly have no actual clue about.

 

[SauRoNZA]

You may actually want to go and educate yourself about MS's product roadmap before pontificating about something you clearly have no actual clue about.

Never mind the fact that staying on the older versions solves all these problems.

If you don't need the Cloud...Don't get the cloud.

 

[ToxicBunny]

Never mind the fact that staying on the older versions solves all these problems.

If you don't need the Cloud...Don't get the cloud.

You can do that if you choose. But MS are not in any way shape or form dropping the on-premise versions of their software.. if anything they're ramping up the roll out of those versions alongside their cloud offerings.

 

[SauRoNZA]

You can do that if you choose. But MS are not in any way shape or form dropping the on-premise versions of their software.. if anything they're ramping up the roll out of those versions alongside their cloud offerings.

Yes yes I know.

I just meant if they were going all cloud the simplest solution is staying on the cloud-free version.

 

[ToxicBunny]

Yes yes I know.

I just meant if they were going all cloud the simplest solution is staying on the cloud-free version.

I should hope you know ..
The remainder of my post was mostly aimed at MacLindroid who is somewhat unfamiliar with MS's product roadmap it seems.

 

[mintydroid]

My 2 cents from someone who is not in the IT sector. I just play around with computers as a hobby.

I currently only own one windows 7 device which my SO uses and was bought some time ago, the rest are all linux. I've got a server come desktop and a nuc both running Linux Mint 64 bit. It's not hard to use. The Windows way of thinking just needs to be changed. It offers some sort of exclusivity without the Apple price tag. Both the of them use about 8 gigs for OS and hover around 1 gig of ram usage which Windows will struggle to match. I've also got Raspberry Pi's which run Raspbmc. MS currently don't offer anything for devices such as this.

The way I see the future panning out is with a full blown OS on you're phone and just dock it and use it as a pc. Hardware is advancing drastically and will mean no need for fancy apps to get everything to talk to each other. Right now Ubuntu seems to be heading up that front.

Secondly, I think a console that can run a full blown OS and dish out Samba for example would sell like hot cakes. It's something that is sorely missing in the market. Maybe something along the lines of the Valve's Steam console. I have only read discussions of linux being implemented but nothing final. This will also give linux greater exposure.

 

[Bar0n]

You're continuously trying to make it sound like this isn't a reason to pick one over the other, like it doesn't matter. You're the one that brought the point up as though it does matter, you're the one that said companies need accountability and heavily implied that that is why they should choose Windows over Linux. Come off it.

Thank you, random stranger on an internet forum, for apparently knowing my thoughts and what I mean better than I do myself.

 

[garyc]

You won't pick Linux over Windows, for monetary reasons, if you require accountability and a direct line of support.

From a contractual point of view accountability implies penalties if expectations are not met. Microsoft explicitly exclude any accountability in their contracts. This is the general state in the software world and accountability can not be used as the basis for choosing one OS over another.