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

This is a discussion on Linux developers MUST consolidate and release a "master" distro for the general computer/device market. - Linux ; On Oct 8, 5:03 pm, Oxford wrote: > George Graves wrote: > > Could a company like, for instance, Adobe, release a single shrink-wrapped > > fully compiled version of its applications marked "For Linux" and have it > > ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 257

Thread: Linux developers MUST consolidate and release a "master" distro for the general computer/device market.

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

    On Oct 8, 5:03 pm, Oxford wrote:
    > George Graves wrote:
    > > Could a company like, for instance, Adobe, release a single shrink-wrapped
    > > fully compiled version of its applications marked "For Linux" and have it
    > > install as easily on ALL modern Linux distributions as it now does on PCs or
    > > Macs? If so, then you're right. But that begs another question. If all the
    > > distros are that alike, why haven't any of the major software publishers
    > > released any of their applications on Linux?.

    >
    > from my understanding Linux simply doesn't have a modern enough
    > foundation to support high level apps like PhotoShop, InDesign, etc.


    In other words, you don't understand.

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


    ....right.

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


    There already are pro-level apps on Linux. If you actually read this
    thread and comprehended it, you'd understand that.

    **** you, Oxtard.


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

    On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 22:59:15 -0000, Jesus
    wrote:

    >On Oct 8, 5:03 pm, Oxford wrote:
    >> George Graves wrote:
    >> > Could a company like, for instance, Adobe, release a single shrink-wrapped
    >> > fully compiled version of its applications marked "For Linux" and have it
    >> > install as easily on ALL modern Linux distributions as it now does on PCs or
    >> > Macs? If so, then you're right. But that begs another question. If all the
    >> > distros are that alike, why haven't any of the major software publishers
    >> > released any of their applications on Linux?.

    >>
    >> from my understanding Linux simply doesn't have a modern enough
    >> foundation to support high level apps like PhotoShop, InDesign, etc.

    >
    >In other words, you don't understand.


    Years ago Corel made a lot of noise when they introduced a shrink
    wrapped version of Linux. I was one of the suckers that bought it. It
    quickly went belly-up.


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

    Per Oxford:
    >nobody in the states uses
    >linux, nobody in japan, canada, etc.


    Few years back when I was doing contract work for a major mutual
    fund at least one of the officer-level people I worked with used
    Linux as their desktop of choice at work.
    --
    PeteCresswell

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

    In article ,
    "John" wrote:

    > "Bob Campbell" wrote in message
    > news:bob-ED5DC8.18425908102007@sn-indi.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net...
    > > In article
    > > ,
    > > Oxford wrote:
    > >
    > >> We want REAL apps, like MS Office 2008 or super high end like iWork.

    > >
    > > Um, you have that backwards. MS office is the high end. iWork is
    > > definitely low to mid end.
    > >
    > > Bob Campbell

    >
    > iWork 08 is not low end when you are talking to a bunch of Linux dweebs.
    > It is far more advanced than ANY Linux program out there.


    True, but compared to MS Office 2008 iWork absolutely is low-to-middle,
    aimed at home users. Nothing wrong with that, but Oxford calling iWork
    "super high end" is simply retarded.

    People like Oxford are the reason some people think all Mac users are
    stupid.

    As for the topic at hand, every Linux distro thinks it is "the best", so
    they will never "unite behind a single version". Thus Linux will
    continue on its current path to oblivion on the desktop.

    Bob Campbell

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

    Kier wrote:

    > > yes, and while agree for the most part... linux users forget they are
    > > mainly isolated to the poorer sections of northwest europe. and never
    > > have been able to spread beyond that region. nobody in the states uses
    > > linux, nobody in japan, canada, etc.

    >
    > Where do you get *that* incredibly dumb idea? You must have pulled it out
    > of your arse.


    the fact you spelled "ass" incorrectly according to the wealthier
    nations, proves you are living in a poor area. Linux is certainly 2nd or
    3rd place there, but here in wealthier portions of the world, nobody has
    even heard of Linux! trust me... Linux? what? Is that a star trek
    character? wasn't that a video game in 1998? A new restaurant? let's go
    sometime... etc.

    I'm trying to help you understand the larger world kier, to help you
    understand Linux is unheard of here in the States, Canada, Japan, etc.

    > > photoshop is technically free, you just need to learn where to look. so

    >
    > 'Technically free' - in other words, you recommend that people steal it.
    > We Linux users have no need to be thieves.


    No, I suggest people use PhotoShop no matter how they obtain it. GIMP is
    an embarrassment to the human race and you know it.

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

    >
    > Bull****. You're incredibly biased against Linux.


    NO. I want Linux to succeed against Microsoft. But why all the false
    starts and promises that remain unfulfilled? What is holding up the
    Linux community from creating something great?

    The FACT:

    No FOCUS..... and I'm simply here to tell it straight, not gloss over
    the false reasons you and other people like Peter keep trying to avoid.

    I'm telling you the TRUTH, so you must learn to deal with my explanation
    or disappear.

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

    >
    > Bull****.


    Ah, OSX does own 7 times more than the Linux market as of "today",
    that's a proven fact.

    Kier, have you ever traveled? If not, thus you know why Linux is not
    accepted... it's a baby Unix, it needs software, it needs certification,
    it needs to be consolidated down to 1 or 2 distros, etc.

    Unless you do that, Linux has zero future. We all know that. But do you?

    -

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

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

    > George Graves wrote:
    >
    >> > Maybe there is still hope yet, but it requires the developers to get
    >> > together, set aside their egos, and all work on a single master
    >> > distro. If they did that, Linux would beat the pants off of Vista and
    >> > OSX guaranteed, and perhaps chart the course for the whole computer
    >> > (and computer-device) industry away from the lockdown-drm-crippled
    >> > dreck that it's been floating in for a while now.
    >> >
    >> >

    >> I doubt if it would "beat the pants off" of either OSX or Vista. Even
    >> though Linux is better than Windows "anything" MS is too entrenched in
    >> the computer world, and OSX is simply too sophisticated to be displaced
    >> by an OS like Linux.
    >>
    >> But what a single distro would do would be to stimulate acceptance in
    >> the "shrink-wrap" software world to the point where they could release
    >> pre-compiled versions of their software for that one distro for one
    >> platform (PC compatible) that would be relatively safe. Not wanting to
    >> open their source-code to prying eyes is, IMHO, the single biggest
    >> reason why companies like Adobe et al don't port their software to
    >> Linux is because of the need for that software to be compiled by the
    >> user due to the non-standard configurations of various distributions of
    >> Linux on a myriad of platforms/processors.
    >>
    >> Once this happened, the MS hegemony would truly start to fall apart as
    >> there would be fewer and fewer reasons not to replace Windows with
    >> Linux.

    >
    > good post George!
    >
    > i really don't think anyone is "against" Linux, its just their own
    > internal "perceived strength" is really their "greatest weakness" when
    > they come up against very well organized, funded UNIX distros like OSX.
    >
    > they need to learn to focus on 1 or 2 distros, then let the others die
    > off, this diluted effort has killed Linux so far, but it doesn't have to
    > be.


    Who is they Oxford?

    (snip)
    >
    > -






    --
    Rick

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

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Oxford

    wrote
    on Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:07:14 -0600
    :
    > George Graves wrote:
    >
    >> Well, platform gnostics are like any other true believers. They are blind to
    >> their platform weaknesses and indeed assert that what others see as
    >> weaknesses They see as strengths. I.E, "Sure, Linux doesn't have Photoshop
    >> but we lave The GIMP and it's free while Photoshop costs six hundred bucks."
    >> We've all done it, and the point is not to denigrate Linux or its
    >> enthusiasts, but to show them that as true believers, they simply can't see
    >> their platform as enthusiasts of other platforms see it. It's like an
    >> Orthodox Jew waltzing into a Southern Baptist church and spouting off about
    >> the weaknesses he sees in the Baptist faith. The people in the church are
    >> simply not going to be very receptive to his comments.

    >
    > yes, and while agree for the most part... linux users forget they are
    > mainly isolated to the poorer sections of northwest europe. and never
    > have been able to spread beyond that region. nobody in the states uses
    > linux, nobody in japan, canada, etc.
    >
    > photoshop is technically free, you just need to learn where to look. so
    > the idea of gimp replacing it is just mythical thinking.
    >
    > i've learned to have no bias regarding platforms, i just search for the
    > best and be done with it. i think if linux users will do the same
    > they'll switch on over to OSX since there really isn't a better OS at
    > this time.
    >
    > it's not about "faith" it's about being practical and currently OSX owns
    > the unix market.


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

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

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

    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


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

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Kier

    wrote
    on Mon, 08 Oct 2007 22:58:16 +0100
    :
    > On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 14:01:04 -0600, Oxford wrote:
    >
    >
    >> i really don't think anyone is "against" Linux, its just their own
    >> internal "perceived strength" is really their "greatest weakness" when
    >> they come up against very well organized, funded UNIX distros like OSX.
    >>
    >> they need to learn to focus on 1 or 2 distros, then let the others die

    >
    > Good luck with getting that to happen, moron.
    >
    >> off, this diluted effort has killed Linux so far, but it doesn't have to
    >> be.
    >>
    >> Later this month they are going to get hit with another massive round of
    >> a better UNIX that is incredibly "organized". I feel sorry for them in a
    >> way, but if they can't match this, they can't compete:
    >>
    >> http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/features/

    >
    > Yawn. Never learn, do you, Oxford>
    >


    I for one am hoping (though not all that strongly) for
    a clarification as to exactly what a "modern OS" is.
    Clearly Linux is not a "modern OS", since Oxford is so
    dead-set against it. Presumably, this means a "modern OS"
    has the following features.

    [1] Monopolicity. The general idea is that one size serves
    as a foundation for all applications.

    [2] Enchiladaness. The general idea is that the OS should
    be a "one-stop shop" for everything from network access
    to video playback.

    Granted, there are some things one would want a monopoly in,
    for example, creating files on a local drive. Otherwise
    confusion reigns.

    But that's what a kernel is *for*. :-)

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    /dev/signature/pedantry: Resource temporarily unavailable

    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


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

    On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 12:32:59 -0700, George Graves wrote:

    > On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 11:54:16 -0700, ultimauw@hotmail.com wrote (in
    > article <1191783256.814194.298860@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups. com>):
    >
    >> On Oct 6, 4:19 pm, "Randy Oaks" wrote:
    >>> wrote in message
    >>>
    >>> news:1191705624.157060.40790@w3g2000hsg.googlegrou ps.com...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> On Oct 6, 3:47 pm, Gene Jones wrote:
    >>>>> Dean Plude wrote:
    >>>>>> In my many years using linux I have come to know that to truly
    >>>>>> support and promote linux as I did with brunswick and many others
    >>>>>> is simply show
    >>>>>> large companies that there are choices in an OS and that they do
    >>>>>> not have to pay a fortune to get.I will never forget when I gave
    >>>>>> the head manufacturing engineer a Debian BO disk and simplly said
    >>>>>> check it out . that was all it took.
    >>>>>> Remember World Domination is our ultimate goal.
    >>>
    >>>>> Linux will never achieve anything close to world domination unless
    >>>>> the users unite and follow Apple's OSX direction. Now Linux has
    >>>>> pretty much become a footnote in history compared to what apple is
    >>>>> doing with UNIX.
    >>>
    >>>>> So unless that changes, it's a slow fade to black for the Linux
    >>>>> community.
    >>>
    >>>>> You guys have a chance, but you must "unite" - it's that simple.
    >>>
    >>>>> OSX is now about 9 times as large in the world, 6 years ago you guys
    >>>>> were neck and neck. What happened? No leadership is the answer.
    >>>
    >>>>> Within the next few weeks, OSX is going to be a CERTIFIED UNIX.
    >>>
    >>>>> Why isn't Linux up to this certification level?
    >>>
    >>>>> http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/unix/
    >>>
    >>>> Linux is far too fragmented to accomplish anything useful. It's two
    >>>> hundred thousand developers all trying to release their own version
    >>>> of Linux.
    >>>
    >>> Agreed. Linux is the classic case of "too many cooks in the kitchen."
    >>>
    >>> If Linux were going to succeed in the consumer market it would have
    >>> done so already. Now it's simply too-little, too-late as Linux has
    >>> absolutely zero mindset with the consumer. OSX and Vista will continue
    >>> to dominate.
    >>>
    >>>

    >> Maybe there is still hope yet, but it requires the developers to get
    >> together, set aside their egos, and all work on a single master distro.
    >> If they did that, Linux would beat the pants off of Vista and OSX
    >> guaranteed, and perhaps chart the course for the whole computer (and
    >> computer-device) industry away from the lockdown-drm-crippled dreck
    >> that it's been floating in for a while now.
    >>
    >>

    > I doubt if it would "beat the pants off" of either OSX or Vista. Even
    > though Linux is better than Windows "anything" MS is too entrenched in
    > the computer world, and OSX is simply too sophisticated to be displaced
    > by an OS like Linux.
    >
    > But what a single distro would do would be to stimulate acceptance in
    > the "shrink-wrap" software world to the point where they could release
    > pre-compiled versions of their software for that one distro for one
    > platform (PC compatible) that would be relatively safe. Not wanting to
    > open their source-code to prying eyes is, IMHO, the single biggest
    > reason why companies like Adobe et al don't port their software to Linux
    > is because of the need for that software to be compiled by the user due
    > to the non-standard configurations of various distributions of Linux on
    > a myriad of platforms/processors.


    IMO you don't know what you are talking about. What makes you think the
    software would HAVE to be recompiled for each distro?

    >
    > Once this happened, the MS hegemony would truly start to fall apart as
    > there would be fewer and fewer reasons not to replace Windows with
    > Linux.






    --
    Rick

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

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

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

    >
    > yes, and while agree for the most part... linux users forget they are
    > mainly isolated to the poorer sections of northwest europe.


    You're a bigot and a liar.

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


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

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


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


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


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

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



    No, it doesn't.


    --
    Rick

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

    On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:05:21 -0600, Oxford wrote:

    > spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:
    >
    >> > Could a company like, for instance, Adobe, release a single
    >> > shrink-wrapped fully compiled version of its applications marked "For
    >> > Linux" and have it install as easily on ALL modern Linux
    >> > distributions as it now does on PCs or
    >> > Macs?

    >>
    >> Seems to work fine for google earth and opera.

    >
    > java based apps and a few open source apps are fine. but when you get
    > into "professional" level code, Linux doesn't work without a LOT of
    > extra fine tuning.
    >
    >> > But that begs another question. If all the distros are that alike,
    >> > why haven't any of the major software publishers released any of
    >> > their applications on Linux?.

    >>
    >> Oracle isn't a major software publisher now?

    >
    > Oracle works on anything, linux is nothing special there.


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

    You are SUCH a dishonest bigot.



    --
    Rick

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

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

    > yakety yak wrote:
    >
    >> > java based apps and a few open source apps are fine. but when you get
    >> > into "professional" level code, Linux doesn't work without a LOT of
    >> > extra fine tuning.

    >>
    >> OTOH, I don't have to wonder how long before Apple starts bricking
    >> computers, too.

    >
    > they'd first have to start bricking anything. so far they haven't
    > bricked any of their products in 31 years.
    >
    > sounds like you are reading false reports designed by Nokia to trick the
    > uneducated.


    Sounds like you are a little fanboi in denial.



    --
    Rick

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

    On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:03:10 -0600, Oxford wrote:

    > George Graves wrote:
    >
    >> Could a company like, for instance, Adobe, release a single
    >> shrink-wrapped fully compiled version of its applications marked "For
    >> Linux" and have it install as easily on ALL modern Linux distributions
    >> as it now does on PCs or Macs? If so, then you're right. But that begs
    >> another question. If all the distros are that alike, why haven't any of
    >> the major software publishers released any of their applications on
    >> Linux?.

    >
    > from my understanding Linux simply doesn't have a modern enough
    > foundation to support high level apps like PhotoShop, InDesign, etc.


    Dumbass... OS X is much more similar to Linux distros than to Classic
    MacOS. What the hell do you think OS X is based on?

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


    Idiot.

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



    So... what professional offices use iLife?


    --
    Rick

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

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

    > George Graves did eloquently scribble:
    >> Could a company like, for instance, Adobe, release a single shrink-wrapped
    >> fully compiled version of its applications marked "For Linux" and have it
    >> install as easily on ALL modern Linux distributions as it now does on PCs
    >> or
    >> Macs?

    >
    > Seems to work fine for google earth and opera.
    >
    >> But that begs another question. If all the
    >> distros are that alike, why haven't any of the major software publishers
    >> released any of their applications on Linux?.

    >
    > Oracle isn't a major software publisher now?
    >


    More like a networking company.


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

    On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 16:03:55 -0700, Adam Albright wrote
    (in article ):

    > On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 22:59:15 -0000, Jesus
    > wrote:
    >
    >> On Oct 8, 5:03 pm, Oxford wrote:
    >>> George Graves wrote:
    >>>> Could a company like, for instance, Adobe, release a single shrink-wrapped
    >>>> fully compiled version of its applications marked "For Linux" and have it
    >>>> install as easily on ALL modern Linux distributions as it now does on PCs
    >>>> or
    >>>> Macs? If so, then you're right. But that begs another question. If all the
    >>>> distros are that alike, why haven't any of the major software publishers
    >>>> released any of their applications on Linux?.
    >>>
    >>> from my understanding Linux simply doesn't have a modern enough
    >>> foundation to support high level apps like PhotoShop, InDesign, etc.

    >>
    >> In other words, you don't understand.

    >
    > Years ago Corel made a lot of noise when they introduced a shrink
    > wrapped version of Linux. I was one of the suckers that bought it. It
    > quickly went belly-up.
    >


    Didn't they also release a Linux version of CorelDraw?


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

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

    > On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:09:16 -0600, Oxford wrote:
    >
    >> yakety yak wrote:
    >>
    >>> > java based apps and a few open source apps are fine. but when you get
    >>> > into "professional" level code, Linux doesn't work without a LOT of
    >>> > extra fine tuning.
    >>>
    >>> OTOH, I don't have to wonder how long before Apple starts bricking
    >>> computers, too.

    >>
    >> they'd first have to start bricking anything. so far they haven't
    >> bricked any of their products in 31 years.


    All those new iBrick owners would disagree.

    >>
    >> sounds like you are reading false reports designed by Nokia to trick the
    >> uneducated.

    >
    > Sounds like you are a little fanboi in denial.


    No, Oxtard does have a point. If you just do Apple's bidding then you
    have nothing to fear.


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

    "Rick" wrote in message
    news:13glflm5luv427f@news.supernews.com...
    > On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:09:16 -0600, Oxford wrote:
    >
    >> yakety yak wrote:
    >>
    >>> > java based apps and a few open source apps are fine. but when you get
    >>> > into "professional" level code, Linux doesn't work without a LOT of
    >>> > extra fine tuning.
    >>>
    >>> OTOH, I don't have to wonder how long before Apple starts bricking
    >>> computers, too.

    >>
    >> they'd first have to start bricking anything. so far they haven't
    >> bricked any of their products in 31 years.
    >>
    >> sounds like you are reading false reports designed by Nokia to trick the
    >> uneducated.

    >
    > Sounds like you are a little fanboi in denial.
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    > Rick


    I'll second that.

    Nick


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

    On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 15:07:14 -0700, Oxford wrote
    (in article
    ):

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

    >
    > yes, and while agree for the most part... linux users forget they are
    > mainly isolated to the poorer sections of northwest europe. and never
    > have been able to spread beyond that region. nobody in the states uses
    > linux, nobody in japan, canada, etc.
    >
    > photoshop is technically free, you just need to learn where to look. so
    > the idea of gimp replacing it is just mythical thinking.
    >
    > i've learned to have no bias regarding platforms, i just search for the
    > best and be done with it. i think if linux users will do the same
    > they'll switch on over to OSX since there really isn't a better OS at
    > this time.
    >
    > it's not about "faith" it's about being practical and currently OSX owns
    > the unix market.


    Try to convince the "true believers" of that point.


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

    On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 16:29:26 -0700, Rick wrote
    (in article <13glfamgu0hrfb6@news.supernews.com>):

    > On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 12:32:59 -0700, George Graves wrote:
    >
    >> On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 11:54:16 -0700, ultimauw@hotmail.com wrote (in
    >> article <1191783256.814194.298860@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups. com>):
    >>
    >>> On Oct 6, 4:19 pm, "Randy Oaks" wrote:
    >>>> wrote in message
    >>>>
    >>>> news:1191705624.157060.40790@w3g2000hsg.googlegrou ps.com...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> On Oct 6, 3:47 pm, Gene Jones wrote:
    >>>>>> Dean Plude wrote:
    >>>>>>> In my many years using linux I have come to know that to truly
    >>>>>>> support and promote linux as I did with brunswick and many others
    >>>>>>> is simply show
    >>>>>>> large companies that there are choices in an OS and that they do
    >>>>>>> not have to pay a fortune to get.I will never forget when I gave
    >>>>>>> the head manufacturing engineer a Debian BO disk and simplly said
    >>>>>>> check it out . that was all it took.
    >>>>>>> Remember World Domination is our ultimate goal.
    >>>>
    >>>>>> Linux will never achieve anything close to world domination unless
    >>>>>> the users unite and follow Apple's OSX direction. Now Linux has
    >>>>>> pretty much become a footnote in history compared to what apple is
    >>>>>> doing with UNIX.
    >>>>
    >>>>>> So unless that changes, it's a slow fade to black for the Linux
    >>>>>> community.
    >>>>
    >>>>>> You guys have a chance, but you must "unite" - it's that simple.
    >>>>
    >>>>>> OSX is now about 9 times as large in the world, 6 years ago you guys
    >>>>>> were neck and neck. What happened? No leadership is the answer.
    >>>>
    >>>>>> Within the next few weeks, OSX is going to be a CERTIFIED UNIX.
    >>>>
    >>>>>> Why isn't Linux up to this certification level?
    >>>>
    >>>>>> http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/unix/
    >>>>
    >>>>> Linux is far too fragmented to accomplish anything useful. It's two
    >>>>> hundred thousand developers all trying to release their own version
    >>>>> of Linux.
    >>>>
    >>>> Agreed. Linux is the classic case of "too many cooks in the kitchen."
    >>>>
    >>>> If Linux were going to succeed in the consumer market it would have
    >>>> done so already. Now it's simply too-little, too-late as Linux has
    >>>> absolutely zero mindset with the consumer. OSX and Vista will continue
    >>>> to dominate.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> Maybe there is still hope yet, but it requires the developers to get
    >>> together, set aside their egos, and all work on a single master distro.
    >>> If they did that, Linux would beat the pants off of Vista and OSX
    >>> guaranteed, and perhaps chart the course for the whole computer (and
    >>> computer-device) industry away from the lockdown-drm-crippled dreck
    >>> that it's been floating in for a while now.
    >>>
    >>>

    >> I doubt if it would "beat the pants off" of either OSX or Vista. Even
    >> though Linux is better than Windows "anything" MS is too entrenched in
    >> the computer world, and OSX is simply too sophisticated to be displaced
    >> by an OS like Linux.
    >>
    >> But what a single distro would do would be to stimulate acceptance in
    >> the "shrink-wrap" software world to the point where they could release
    >> pre-compiled versions of their software for that one distro for one
    >> platform (PC compatible) that would be relatively safe. Not wanting to
    >> open their source-code to prying eyes is, IMHO, the single biggest
    >> reason why companies like Adobe et al don't port their software to Linux
    >> is because of the need for that software to be compiled by the user due
    >> to the non-standard configurations of various distributions of Linux on
    >> a myriad of platforms/processors.

    >
    > IMO you don't know what you are talking about. What makes you think the
    > software would HAVE to be recompiled for each distro?


    Then why is most open source software distributed that way?
    >
    >>
    >> Once this happened, the MS hegemony would truly start to fall apart as
    >> there would be fewer and fewer reasons not to replace Windows with
    >> Linux.



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

    [snips]

    On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 13:37:21 -0700, George Graves wrote:

    > Sorry. Open Office is open source, that doesn't count as a professional level
    > program.


    It's open source, that doesn't count? Funny, I thought the request was
    for a professional level program, not a closed source program. Nice to
    watch you shift the goalposts, though; any other forms of dishonesty you
    care to spew at us?

    Yes, well, I think we can safely write you off as a drivelling moron.

    Plonk.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast