Between Linux and Desktop Domination - Linux

This is a discussion on Between Linux and Desktop Domination - Linux ; On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 03:15:32 -0000, spinner wrote: >On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 20:59:51 -0500, Linonut wrote: > >> * flatfish fired off this tart reply: >> >>> Linux has two things going for it: >>> >>> 1. It's ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: Between Linux and Desktop Domination

  1. Re: Between Linux and Desktop Domination

    On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 03:15:32 -0000, spinner
    wrote:

    >On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 20:59:51 -0500, Linonut wrote:
    >
    >> * flatfish fired off this tart reply:
    >>
    >>> Linux has two things going for it:
    >>>
    >>> 1. It's free.
    >>> 2. It's secure.

    >>
    >> It's fast.
    >> It's flexible.
    >> It's generally easy to maintain.
    >> It's has a ton of easy-to-get desktop apps.

    >
    >It's fun.


    Actually I'll give you that one!

  2. Re: Between Linux and Desktop Domination

    The idea is not to curb the diversity, rather to encourage the common
    strand in all of them. Just as the kernel is controlled by a "higher
    authority", it would not be too far fetched to lay down a set of
    common features that are necessary for a distro to be "certified', by
    a similarly created "higher authority". A Linux 2.5 "certified" distro
    should have similar basic functions - installation, default menu
    options, desktop layout etc - irrespective of whether it is released
    as Ubuntu or Red Hat or Mandriva. From a non expert user's point of
    view this is much more user friendly, and will increase adoption, even
    if it is not free - though not as highly priced as existing closed
    source options.

    The expert user is ofcourse free to use, develop cutting edge, niche
    products that they can use for themselves or others similarly
    inclined. But, a non expert user needs the comfort of the crowd.


  3. Re: Between Linux and Desktop Domination

    On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 21:40:04 -0500, flatfish wrote:

    > On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 20:59:51 -0500, Linonut
    > wrote:
    >
    >>* flatfish fired off this tart reply:
    >>
    >>> Linux has two things going for it:
    >>>
    >>> 1. It's free.
    >>> 2. It's secure.

    >>
    >>It's fast.

    > Depends. Most Linux's sure seem slow to me. PCLinuxos is an exception
    > as is mepis.


    Most users are not going to notice (even if it were slow, which it
    generally isn't).

    >
    >>It's flexible.

    >
    > 100000 different varietes doesn't make it better.


    There are not that many, nor anything like it, liar.

    >
    >>It's generally easy to maintain.

    >
    > Nope.


    Yes.

    >
    >>It's has a ton of easy-to-get desktop apps.

    >
    > Easy to get.
    > Difficult to use/figure out due to poor documention or a total lack of
    > documentation.


    Difficult to use? Please stop talking nonsense, flatty. Most are no harder
    to use than their Windows equivalent, sometimes easier. Many Windows apps
    are hard to use and have little documentation also. And the commercial
    distributions come with excellent manuals

    >
    >
    >>> The one thing it doesn't have is desktop users so obviously #1 and #2
    >>> are not important to the populous at large.

    >>
    >>Actually, I think it has more desktop users than you think, even in the
    >>U.S. Just ask Asus and Dell.

    >
    > Doubtful.


    Doubt away, dimbulb.

    > All these companies, along with Walmart, are testing the waters.
    > I'd love to know how many boat anchor Linux systems Walmart gets
    > returned because people think they can run Windows applications on
    > them.


    Once again you show you hatred of Linux. 'Boat anchor'? Give it up,
    flatty. Linux PCs are no less functional that Windows ones.

    > Please don't even mention wine.
    > It's a joke.


    No, flatty - YOU are a joke. You repeat and repeat and repeat your lies
    and expect us to fall for it. But no one is. I will grant Wine is not a
    solution to everyone's needs - but not everyone wants to run Windows apps.
    ANd for those that do, there is also CrossOver Office.

    --
    Kier


  4. Re: Between Linux and Desktop Domination

    Htnakirs wrote:

    >The idea is not to curb the diversity, rather to encourage the common
    >strand in all of them. Just as the kernel is controlled by a "higher
    >authority", it would not be too far fetched to lay down a set of
    >common features that are necessary for a distro to be "certified', by
    >a similarly created "higher authority". A Linux 2.5 "certified" distro
    >should have similar basic functions - installation, default menu
    >options, desktop layout etc - irrespective of whether it is released
    >as Ubuntu or Red Hat or Mandriva.


    Idiocy. You just don't get it. There's zero advantage to that, while
    having huge disadvantages in choice. You'd have all the "big" distros
    look and feel the same!

    >From a non expert user's point of
    >view this is much more user friendly, and will increase adoption, even
    >if it is not free - though not as highly priced as existing closed
    >source options.


    Nonsense.

    >The expert user is ofcourse free to use, develop cutting edge, niche
    >products that they can use for themselves or others similarly
    >inclined. But, a non expert user needs the comfort of the crowd.


    This situation already exists - there's large "crowds" behind any of
    the big distros.


  5. Re: Between Linux and Desktop Domination

    * flatfish fired off this tart reply:

    > On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 20:59:51 -0500, Linonut
    > wrote:
    >
    >>* flatfish fired off this tart reply:
    >>
    >>> Linux has two things going for it:
    >>>
    >>> 1. It's free.
    >>> 2. It's secure.

    >>
    >>It's fast.

    >
    > Depends. Most Linux's sure seem slow to me. PCLinuxos is an exception
    > as is mepis.


    I wouldn't know. I use Debian, and I don't run Gnome or KDE. When you
    start up Gnome or KDE apps, some churning goes on.

    But I find file operations, compiling, general window handling, etc. to
    be much more peppy than Windows XP.

    >>It's flexible.

    >
    > 100000 different varietes doesn't make it better.


    I'm not talking about that. I pretty much stick with Debian. I'm
    talking about being able to run the fluxbox WM, but then run kcontrol to
    configure the appearance of KDE apps, run xfce-mcs-manager to control
    the appearance of gtk/gnome apps, pick the geramik theme which follows
    the settings made in kcontrol.

    I'm talking about being able to download using Firefox or wget,
    depending on what's up, and setting up a number of screens to do work
    behind the scenes, even when I'm logged off.

    I'm talking about being able to have multiple logins to the same box,
    even in graphical mode, and yet also be able to connect to Windows boxes
    using VNC or RDP (you only get one login in Windows, and one screen in
    Windows, which is strange since it does have built-in support for
    multiple desktops (winstations) -- I guess it has something to do with
    client access licenses).

    And don't forget about all the services you can run. You can run more
    of them, they're much cheaper to run, and they run faster, in Linux.

    The windows managers have configurable keystrokes to control a large
    number of desktop function (maybe Windows does too). Hell, in fluxbox
    you can even program in a keystroke to remove the window decorations,
    for bordless invisible windows.

    >>It's generally easy to maintain.

    >
    > Nope.


    Huh? Where you been living, in an aquarium? apt-get (and related
    programs) is a godsend. I don't use 'em for this, but you can even
    upgrade your kernel, grub setup, and proprietary Nvidia drivers with it.

    >>It's has a ton of easy-to-get desktop apps.

    >
    > Easy to get.
    > Difficult to use/figure out due to poor documention or a total lack of
    > documentation.


    Huh? Most GUI apps are simple to anyone used to the GUI paradigm. And
    never heard of Google?

    >>> The one thing it doesn't have is desktop users so obviously #1 and #2
    >>> are not important to the populous at large.

    >>
    >>Actually, I think it has more desktop users than you think, even in the
    >>U.S. Just ask Asus and Dell.

    >
    > Doubtful.


    Hey, even in the insular world in this part of the U.S., I see its usage
    growing.

    > All these companies, along with Walmart, are testing the waters.


    And finding them fairly comfy, it seems.

    Certainly the Vista kerfluffle has provided some impetus for this, as
    people are /really/ being inconvenienced by this latest gavage. Hell,
    it even makes the Mac ads.

    > I'd love to know how many boat anchor Linux systems Walmart gets
    > returned because people think they can run Windows applications on
    > them.


    Why would people be running Windows applications on them? They're good
    to go out of the box! They're not boat anchors. If anything, a Windows
    box starts out as a boat anchor, capable only of browsing, unless the
    vendor bundles software with it.

    > Please don't even mention wine.
    > It's a joke.


    I haven't, myself, had a need to use wine in a couple years now, for
    home use.

    For work stuff that just can't be done under Linux, Win 2000 in a VM
    session is just fine.

    I just realized the other day that, if Windows suddenly disappeared, I
    wouldn't miss it at all.

    --
    Tux rox!

  6. Re: Between Linux and Desktop Domination

    Linonut wrote:

    >However, just try getting people to stick to the distro's stock window
    >manager, stock P2P client/server, stock office suite, stock browser,
    >stock console, stock games, stock printing system.
    >
    >It'll never happen.
    >
    >In fact, so many people would be so mad about the restrictions that
    >they'd spawn their own distros, and we'd come full circle.
    >
    >You need to remember one thing. Linux distros are the way they are
    >because people want it that way, and they can do it.


    Clearly true, to even a child.

    This is why this issue is the "acid test" that seperates those who are
    in the right, and those who are in the wrong.

    And when I say wrong, I mean they either very stupid and/or they are
    immoral assholes.

    "Funny" how all the anti-Linux people are also anti-choice, huh? Or
    am I mistaken?

    >You can't stop it. Nobody can.
    >
    >Thank Stallman and Torvalds for that!


    Thanks!


  7. Re: Between Linux and Desktop Domination

    * Kier fired off this tart reply:

    > No, flatty - YOU are a joke. You repeat and repeat and repeat your lies
    > and expect us to fall for it.


    You did notice his post where he gloats about a troll he did back in
    '99?

    > But no one is. I will grant Wine is not a
    > solution to everyone's needs - but not everyone wants to run Windows apps.
    > ANd for those that do, there is also CrossOver Office.


    And VMware, QEMU, Win4Lin...

    --
    Tux rox!

  8. Re: Between Linux and Desktop Domination

    * flatfish fired off this tart reply:

    > On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 03:15:32 -0000, spinner
    > wrote:
    >
    >>On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 20:59:51 -0500, Linonut wrote:
    >>
    >>> * flatfish fired off this tart reply:
    >>>
    >>>> Linux has two things going for it:
    >>>>
    >>>> 1. It's free.
    >>>> 2. It's secure.
    >>>
    >>> It's fast.
    >>> It's flexible.
    >>> It's generally easy to maintain.
    >>> It's has a ton of easy-to-get desktop apps.

    >>
    >>It's fun.

    >
    > Actually I'll give you that one!


    I still remember my first days with Linux. I had to reboot fairly
    often, just to see how to make some settings. (This was in the days
    when we had only one computer, before I realized I could set up any old
    box for free).

    So it took me about a month to get comfy with Linux.

    But it was a big thrill to connect to the internet with it, and I was
    hooked after a couple days.

    Then I found out how easy it was to Google for solutions to problems
    such as "how to burn a CD", which back then meant loading the ide-scsi
    module and adding a kernel boot parameter, then mastering Jörg
    Schilling's oddball SCSI notation.

    Linux has come a long way since then.

    And today it is fairly easy (online) to get a barebones system with no
    OS, and plenty of power, and have perfectly useful Linux box without
    even the Microsoft tax.

    And even mainstream vendors are starting hop on board.

    We may yet get back to the competitive market situation we had in the
    80's.

    --
    Tux rox!

  9. Re: Between Linux and Desktop Domination

    chrisv writes:

    > Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >
    >>Kier wrote:
    >>
    >>> Hadron trolled:
    >>>>
    >>>> Sounds like common sense in trying to get Linux accepted to me - the
    >>>> more people who concentrate on a single version the more bugs will be
    >>>> fixed and the more HW verified to work with Linux. It's a win win.
    >>>
    >>> How is removing everything that makes Linux good a win?

    >>
    >>It is. For MS
    >>That is the reason Hadron Quark is so intend of it

    >
    > Yep. **** like Quack would love to alienate the freedom-loving OSS
    > developers, by making them get approval from some "higher authority"
    > before they could make and release the things that they want to do.
    >


    No I wouldn't. But I would like to see more organisation to ensure that
    effort is not wasted. What do you do for OSS Plonker?

    --
    Q: Why don't lawyers go to the beach?
    A: The cats keep trying to bury them.

  10. Re: Between Linux and Desktop Domination

    Hadron wrote:

    > chrisv writes:
    >
    >> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>
    >>>Kier wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Hadron trolled:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Sounds like common sense in trying to get Linux accepted to me - the
    >>>>> more people who concentrate on a single version the more bugs will be
    >>>>> fixed and the more HW verified to work with Linux. It's a win win.
    >>>>
    >>>> How is removing everything that makes Linux good a win?
    >>>
    >>>It is. For MS
    >>>That is the reason Hadron Quark is so intend of it

    >>
    >> Yep. **** like Quack would love to alienate the freedom-loving OSS
    >> developers, by making them get approval from some "higher authority"
    >> before they could make and release the things that they want to do.
    >>

    >
    > No I wouldn't. But I would like to see more organisation to ensure that
    > effort is not wasted. What do you do for OSS Plonker?
    >


    And naturally it is you and your ilk who would do the "organisation" needed.
    Making sure linux gets unatractive as soon as possible, right, Hadron
    Quark?

    Like introducing WGA, WPA and DRM. Which is what you told the ubuntu-group.

    After all, without those linux users are just a "bunch of thieves",
    right, "true linux advocate", "kernel hacker", "emacs user", "swapfile
    expert", "X specialist", "CUPS guru", "USB-disk server admin", "defragger
    professional", "newsreader magician", "hardware maven" and "time
    coordinator" Hadron Quark, aka Hans Schneider, aka Richard, aka Damian
    O'Leary?

    Come on, tell us all about the need to have WGA, WPA and DRM in linux. I am
    certain people here are all ears

    Come on, you dishonest lying twit, explain that
    --
    Try to be the best of whatever you are, even if what you are is
    no good.


+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2