Linux is not hard, it's ignored - Column

Tassidar said:
On the contrary, the disaster that was Vista was released at a time when MS had very little competition. IE6 was also released around that time.
Click to expand...
All the more reason to get Windows7 with Opera/FireFox/Chrome.

superfly said:
Please qualify that statement. By itself it is complete and utter rubbish. What about Mac OS X? What about BeOS/Haiku? What about AmigaOS? What about *BSD? Never mind Linux, where Ubuntu only has about 32000 packages in it's software repository
Click to expand...
Yes, what about all those obscure things that no one uses ? Qualify - or should I say justify - my need to even consider them with a percentage of market share.

AmigaOS - pleeze - you gotta be kidding me.

superfly said:
BTW, last time I checked, you could also buy Mac software at Incredible Connection.
Click to expand...
Yeah, last isle on the right - yes, the very short one...

superfly said:
Where do you come up with this stuff? You should be writing novels, not spending your time writing nonsense about an operating system you clearly have no experience with!
Click to expand...
Why do you say that ? Surprised someone has the guts to say Linux sux ? Cause really, if you look at it realistically it pretty much does suck right from choosing a distro to installing your software on it.
 
Taqyon said:
Either way, this thread is degrading into a "windows can do this and linux can do this" thing again. So I'm climbing out :)
Click to expand...

Well, that's a reflection of reality for you - many people climb off linux cause it just can't do it.
 
Rouxenator said:
All the more reason to get Windows7 with Opera/FireFox/Chrome.
Click to expand...

So you approve of using FF / Chrome on the basis that it increases competition, but disapprove of using Linux. Surely you can see the inconsistency in your own argument?

By your argument, we should all use Windows 7, then MS can stop innovating all together, and bring out another Vista, and guess what, there's nothing we will be able to do. Linux and OSX are keeping MS on its toes.

Rouxenator, your whole argument seems to be: Linux doesn't have support therefore we shouldn't use it. This is a cyclical argument and really gets us nowhere. Obviously the more people who use Linux, the more support it will have, and the greater the competition to MS, therefore the more incentive for MS to innovate. Who wins in this scenario? Everyone except MS.

Who loses in the scenario of everyone using Windows: everyone except MS, who make monopoly profits. I'm sure you've heard of Telkom before?
 
Last edited:
superfly said:
Actually, he was a pro-Windows proponent. Take some time to actually READ.
Click to expand...
And what makes you think I disagreed with him?
Tassidar said:
So you approve of using FF / Chrome on the basis that it increases competition, but disapprove of using Linux. Surely you can see the inconsistency in your own argument?

By your argument, we should all use Windows 7, then MS can stop innovating all together, and bring out another Vista, and guess what, there's nothing we will be able to do. Linux and OSX are keeping MS on its toes.
Click to expand...
No - There is no inconsistency. I am not saying competition or open source software is bad. I am saying Linux is not up to scratch competing with Windows. Even Vista kicks it ass because it can actually run software that Average Joe has.
 
Rouxenator said:
And what makes you think I disagreed with him?

No - There is no inconsistency. I am not saying competition or open source software is bad. I am saying Linux is not up to scratch competing with Windows. Even Vista kicks it ass because it can actually run software that Average Joe has.
Click to expand...

See the edit to my previous post.
 
Unless Linux and open-source features software that can run in cut-throat, high-demand corporate environments, Corporates will continue to rather pay for OS's and Applications than take a chance with open source. Sure, many corporations use the occasional open-source app for it's functionality, but it is not the mainstream practice and I cannot see it becoming mainstream unless it has financial & formal developmental benefits/support. As I've said before, to achieve that, you need to charge for software and to charge for it, you need to market it as a feasible, viable alternative to something currently being paid for.
 
lcbxx said:
Unless Linux and open-source features software that can run in cut-throat, high-demand corporate environments, Corporates will continue to rather pay for OS's and Applications than take a chance with open source. Sure, many corporations use the occasional open-source app for it's functionality, but it is not the mainstream practice and I cannot see it becoming mainstream unless it has financial & formal developmental benefits/support. As I've said before, to achieve that, you need to charge for software and to charge for it, you need to market it as a feasible, viable alternative to something currently being paid for.
Click to expand...
Open-source enterprise software vendor Red Hat on Tuesday reported fiscal third-quarter revenue up 18 percent from the same quarter last year.

Total revenue for the quarter, which ended Nov. 30, was US$194.3 million, up from $165.3 million a year earlier, the company said.

"We outperformed, in general, relative to most technology companies, but this quarter we really hit our stride," said CEO Jim Whitehurst .

Subscription revenue powered the growth, as did strong bookings, particularly in North America, Whitehurst said. Subscription revenue grew more than 21 percent, to $164.4 million, and made up about 85 percent of total revenue.

"For the seventh consecutive quarter, all of our top 25 deals that were up for renewal not only renewed but did so at 120 percent of the prior year's value," Whitehurst said, on a conference call announcing the results.

The company's net income was $16.4 million, or $0.08 per share, down from $24.3 million or $0.12 per share a year earlier. A litigation settlement reduced earnings by $0.03 per share.

Red Hat's top 30 deals included 14 contracts over $1 million, and one over $5 million, said Charlie Peters, Red Hat's executive vice president and chief financial officer. Twenty-three of the deals called for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Advanced Platform, and eight called for Red Hat's JBoss enterprise server software. One deal was primarily for virtualization deployment.
Click to expand...

Whitehurst expressed confidence that Linux, and open source in general, would continue to make inroads into large enterprise environments. He noted that, in October, the U.S. Department of Defense had issued guidance that clarified permissible use of open-source software within the defense agencies. "The DOD recognizes the importance for speed and agility, and they see the benefits of open source as the means to achieve these goals in its infrastructure," Whitehurst said.
Click to expand...
Sauce

This at a time when most companies were in a downturn.

Anyone who was ever fool enough to believe that Microsoft software was good enough to be used for a mission-critical operation had their face slapped this September when the LSE (London Stock Exchange)'s Windows-based TradElect system brought the market to a standstill for almost an entire day. While the LSE denied that the collapse was TradElect's fault, they also refused to explain what the problem really wa. Sources at the LSE tell me to this day that the problem was with TradElect.
Click to expand...

It never, ever came close to achieving these performance goals. Worse still, the LSE's competition, such as its main rival Chi-X with its MarketPrizm trading platform software, was able to deliver that level of performance and in general it was running rings about TradElect. Three guesses what MarketPrizm runs on and the first two don't count. The answer is Linux.

It's not often that you see a major company dump its infrastructure software the way the LSE is about to do. But, then, it's not often you see enterprise software fail quite so badly and publicly as was the case with the LSE. I can only wonder how many other Windows enterprise software failures are kept hidden away within IT departments by companies unwilling to reveal just how foolish their decisions to rely on archaic, cranky Windows software solutions have proven to be.
Click to expand...
Linky

You were saying?
 
Not good enough. If Linux really was that good it would have been on every desktop and workstation by now.
 
Excellent article !

Open source software will rule in the end for the simple reason that it's open
 
Not a bad post actually - ok then, I'll give it two years and see what it comes with by the time Windows 8 is out.
 
porchrat said:
So what now you are too lazy to go and download OpenOffice for free? You would prefer to go to Makro and buy MS Office at what is in my opinion a ridiculous sum of money?

There are alternatives out there. As I said I run Linux and I don't need a single Windows program. If you are too lazy or inept to Google "MS Office Linux alternatives" then you honestly shouldn't be running a computer let alone discussing Windows vs. Linux.

Unless you are doing something like Graphic Design and need access to Photoshop or something of that nature I really don't understand why people use Windows.
Click to expand...

even doing graphic design- I use ubuntu and wine to run photoshop and it runs perfectly even on extremely large files...

TBlaar said:
I think we should have MORE distros!!!!!

Look at the healthy competition happening in the ADSL market nowadays, with there being many providers... same can be said for Linux...

A while back, Redhat got so big, they had plans of making a new release a proprietary release, ie. you had to pay for it!!! The competition between the distros keep things free, updated and maintained!
Click to expand...

Competition is always a good thing, but im a little torn on this issue- unity can sometimes be better.
how many outstanding programmers are working on each linux distro at the moment, just imagine what they could do if they worked together, each taking one area and improving it- I guarantee that within a few short years linux would run circles around windows in every area. The problem is, at the moment, each person has their own vision and there is a lot of reinventing the wheel going on.

That is why I am all for the Ubuntu juggernaut- as it grows in popularity more and more people are going to start to get on board.


lcbxx said:
Unless Linux and open-source features software that can run in cut-throat, high-demand corporate environments, Corporates will continue to rather pay for OS's and Applications than take a chance with open source. Sure, many corporations use the occasional open-source app for it's functionality, but it is not the mainstream practice and I cannot see it becoming mainstream unless it has financial & formal developmental benefits/support. As I've said before, to achieve that, you need to charge for software and to charge for it, you need to market it as a feasible, viable alternative to something currently being paid for.
Click to expand...

Im all for commercial programs in linux- all we need are companies such as adobe to get on board.
I think this will happen as more and more government institutions move to opensource.
 
Rouxenator said:
Not good enough. If Linux really was that good it would have been on every desktop and workstation by now.
Click to expand...

not true- I can give you countless examples of products that are over priced and clearly inferior that have taken the markets- the world runs on marketing, its as simple as that.
business 101- you dont need a better product, only for people to think it is better.
 
ave said:
not true- I can give you countless examples of products that are over priced and clearly inferior that have taken the markets- the world runs on marketing, its as simple as that.
business 101- you dont need a better product, only for people to think it is better.
Click to expand...

Good point. To illustrate:
How much does "taste" really matter? You probably remember a classic ad campaign of the early 1908s, "The Pepsi Challenge." Pepsi developed the campaign to tell an interesting story. In 1972, "exclusive" drinkers, those who drank over Coke and those who drank only Pepsi, made up 18% (Coke) and 4% (Pepsi) of the soft drink population. By the early 1980s, those who drank exclusively Coke dropped to 12% and those who drank exclusively Pepsi had increased to 11% of the soft drink population. Pepsi decided that this increase was based on the taste of their soft drink and set out to prove their point with "The Pepsi Challenge."

In shopping malls, grocery stores and other public locations, Pepsi conducted blind taste tests. In these televised spots, consumers were asked to pick the soft drink they liked better, without knowing whether the cola they tasted was Coke or Pepsi. As results came in, it became apparent - Pepsi tasted better than Coke - 57% of testers chose Pepsi and only 43% chose Coke. Showing blind taste tests on TV commercials was innovative and the results of the taste test sparked a revolution... remember new Coke?
Click to expand...

Nearly 30 years later, in the summer of 2003, neuroscientist Read Montague conducted this classic taste test with a fMRI (functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging) machine, which tracks blood flow to different regions of the brain. His subjects took the Pepsi Challenge and Montague watched their neural activity. In the blind taste test, the blood flow showed half the subjects preferred Coke and half preferred Pepsi. Yet, when subjects were told which brand they were drinking, their neural activity demonstrated that three-fourths favored Coke. This was quantitative proof that brand affects customers' choices.
Click to expand...
Saucy link
 
ave said:
not true- I can give you countless examples of products that are over priced and clearly inferior that have taken the markets- the world runs on marketing, its as simple as that.
business 101- you dont need a better product, only for people to think it is better.
Click to expand...

The world also runs on products where my mother can ask the tannie next to her how to save her email attachment, or to make her new printer the default. Is Linux simple and uniform enough to work for the majority of pc users - who are computer illiterate?
 
i dont quite understand how people can bash things they know nothing about , iam sure its quite easy when you've been on one side of the stick, but iam pretty sure everyone on this tread that is backing up linux and is a user , migrated from windows , so they stand on pretty firm ground when debating comes into play.so try it . be that as it may. if you like windows stick with windows , if you like linux stick with linux , the last thing we need is to convince people that linux is better and for a linux take over , all that will happen is that the developers most of which work for free will get lazy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X