Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work? - Linux

This is a discussion on Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work? - Linux ; Peter K÷hlmann wrote: > DFS wrote: > >> Peter Khlmann wrote: >> >>> Right. For big projects, it surely is bringing down the compile >>> time. I cluster 4 linux machines in that case, sometimes even a >>> fifth one ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 134

Thread: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

  1. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    Peter K÷hlmann wrote:
    > DFS wrote:
    >
    >> Peter Khlmann wrote:
    >>
    >>> Right. For big projects, it surely is bringing down the compile
    >>> time. I cluster 4 linux machines in that case, sometimes even a
    >>> fifth one
    >>>
    >>> Too bad that it is not available for windows.

    >>
    >> Explain exactly what isn't available for Windows, dumbkopf.

    >
    > Too stupid to follow the link already provided? Figures
    >
    > But then, you are obviously unable to figure it out of the facts
    > already provided, DumbFull****
    >
    > To make it simpler for twats like you, "icecream" is handling off
    > portions of a compile job to several machines in a "compile cluster",
    > bringing down the total time to compile BIG projects.


    Peter Kohlmann: Always Ignorant (tm)
    http://www.intel.com/support/perform.../CS-023179.htm




  2. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    DFS wrote:

    > Peter K÷hlmann wrote:
    >> DFS wrote:
    >>
    >>> Peter Khlmann wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Right. For big projects, it surely is bringing down the compile
    >>>> time. I cluster 4 linux machines in that case, sometimes even a
    >>>> fifth one
    >>>>
    >>>> Too bad that it is not available for windows.
    >>>
    >>> Explain exactly what isn't available for Windows, dumbkopf.

    >>
    >> Too stupid to follow the link already provided? Figures
    >>
    >> But then, you are obviously unable to figure it out of the facts
    >> already provided, DumbFull****
    >>
    >> To make it simpler for twats like you, "icecream" is handling off
    >> portions of a compile job to several machines in a "compile cluster",
    >> bringing down the total time to compile BIG projects.

    >
    > Peter Kohlmann: Always Ignorant (tm)
    > http://www.intel.com/support/perform.../CS-023179.htm


    It is *not* *at* *all* the same thing
    That one works *only* with Intels C++ compiler and the Visual C++ compiler

    icecream and/or distcc is not limited that way.

    And also, I said that *icecream* is not available for windows, making it
    simpler to co-exist in a linux world.

    But you have always shown an incredibly bad reading comprehension
    --
    If you're right 90% of the time, why quibble about the remaining 3%?


  3. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    "DFS" writes:

    > Peter K├Âhlmann wrote:
    >> DFS wrote:
    >>
    >>> Peter Khlmann wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Right. For big projects, it surely is bringing down the compile
    >>>> time. I cluster 4 linux machines in that case, sometimes even a
    >>>> fifth one
    >>>>
    >>>> Too bad that it is not available for windows.
    >>>
    >>> Explain exactly what isn't available for Windows, dumbkopf.

    >>
    >> Too stupid to follow the link already provided? Figures
    >>
    >> But then, you are obviously unable to figure it out of the facts
    >> already provided, DumbFull****
    >>
    >> To make it simpler for twats like you, "icecream" is handling off
    >> portions of a compile job to several machines in a "compile cluster",
    >> bringing down the total time to compile BIG projects.

    >
    > Peter Kohlmann: Always Ignorant (tm)
    > http://www.intel.com/support/perform.../CS-023179.htm


    Oh no! He didn't think this "feature" was unique to Linux did he?
    ROTFLM!

  4. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    * thad05@tux.glaci.delete-this.com peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >> You have your own proprietary cad system? Really? And this application
    >> which is better than autocad is designed and implemented by one company
    >> for itself? Hmmm. That is some undertaking.

    >
    > Surprising if true, but not impossible. I've clients that have built
    > rather impressive internal systems that rival or surpass commercial
    > off-the-shelf software. They often keep it private to maintain a
    > competitive advantage. The best example that comes to mind is a
    > large, customer service oriented client that developed its own
    > helpdesk ticket system. Yes, they could have licensed an existing
    > system, but then they would be adapting their business processes to
    > the tool rather than the other way around.


    Another example came up in the Feb '08 edition of Linux Journal, in an
    article about the rendering of "The Spiderwick Chronicles", by Robin
    Rowe. For example, Tippett Studio's "Furocious", a collection of
    plugins, scripts, and executables to place guide geometry on scalp
    surfaces, visualize fur, etc. Studios apparently have applications that
    they built before commercial alternatives were available, and they still
    use and maintain them with in-house programmers.

    By the way, Tippett Studios runs Fedora on Mac hardware. And Autodesk
    (owners of Maya) helped them with patches.

    --
    Conway's Law:
    In any organization there will always be one person who knows
    what is going on.
    This person must be fired.

  5. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 11:04:30 -0500, DFS wrote:

    > Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:
    >> DFS wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Wow. You've left out CAD and engineering...
    >>>
    >>> You recently slunk away several times after claiming "most serious
    >>> engineering apps" haven't been ported to Windows.
    >>>
    >>> Which apps?

    >>
    >> Proprietary.

    >
    > I figured this is why it took you so long, and so many requests, to respond.
    > You're bull****ting, and the truth is virtually every "serious engineering
    > app" has existed on Windows for years.
    >
    >
    >> I'm more than happy to watch my competitors struggle with AutoCAD.

    >
    > Bad MS-like competitive attitude. No free crapware for you.


    Catia had better look out!

  6. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 17:10:36 +0100, Hadron wrote:

    > "DFS" writes:
    >
    >> Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:
    >>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Wow. You've left out CAD and engineering...
    >>>>
    >>>> You recently slunk away several times after claiming "most serious
    >>>> engineering apps" haven't been ported to Windows.
    >>>>
    >>>> Which apps?
    >>>
    >>> Proprietary.

    >>
    >> I figured this is why it took you so long, and so many requests, to respond.
    >> You're bull****ting, and the truth is virtually every "serious engineering
    >> app" has existed on Windows for years.
    >>
    >>
    >>> I'm more than happy to watch my competitors struggle with AutoCAD.

    >>
    >> Bad MS-like competitive attitude. No free crapware for you.

    >
    > Quite shocking how this little interrogation has revealed Mr Hovnanian
    > for what he is. A closed source hypocrite and liar who is ONLY into
    > Linux for what he can take and not for what he can give up. Truly
    > amazing and possibly the filthiest, scummiest behaviour I, or Peter
    > Koehlmann, have ever witnessed amongst the "scum" and "filth" who
    > inhabit this group ..... This disgusting behaviour is on a par with
    > Windows user Peter Koehlmann claiming that "all Windows users are
    > scum". But now we know what we do about his day job, he is mabye more
    > right than I gave him credit for.


    Add him to the list.

    [Homer] the hypocrite is still at the top of the list though.
    Followed by kohlmann.

  7. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    * DFS peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:
    >> DFS wrote:
    >>>
    >>> You recently slunk away several times after claiming "most serious
    >>> engineering apps" haven't been ported to Windows.
    >>>
    >>> Which apps?

    >>
    >> Proprietary.

    >
    > I figured this is why it took you so long, and so many requests, to respond.
    > You're bull****ting, and the truth is virtually every "serious engineering
    > app" has existed on Windows for years.


    Try here:

    http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/9951

    Let us ponder the sig below.

    --
    Passionate hatred can give meaning and purpose to an empty life.
    -- Eric Hoffer

  8. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    * DFS peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:
    >
    >> Wow. You've left out CAD and engineering...

    >
    > You recently slunk away several times after claiming "most serious
    > engineering apps" haven't been ported to Windows.


    Here's a project management app:

    http://www.taskjuggler.org/FUDforum2...to=6629&rid=0&

    Though i don't like windows, i'm working on a solution for using
    taskjuggler under windows. The taskjuggler UI is great and i think
    we just have to wait until it is more easy to compile kde-apps under
    windows. There are some interesting projects out there
    (http://www.kdelibs.com/) and i have seen kde-apps running nativly
    under windows xp (p.e. kde-pim/pi, http://www.pi-sync.net/). At the
    moment it's not too complicated, to compile the commandline-version
    of taskjuggler under windows using gcc/cygwin.

    --
    I haven't lost my mind -- it's backed up on tape somewhere.

  9. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    Hadron wrote:
    >
    > Never heard of them. Where, on the web, do they advertise? Sounds really
    > mainstream btw. Not.


    You do realize that billions of dollars are spent every year on
    software that the typical consumer will never hear about? Indeed,
    MOST software development is like that. Right now I am working
    for a company with a quarter billion dollar market cap and a name
    you have probably never hear of. They don't advertise in the
    typical consumer channel because your average joe is not in the
    market for a multi-million dollor cable television hub.

    And yet it is exactly these sorts of businesses that are driving
    expansive of Linux business desktops, and it is increased business
    use that will drive additional home use. I've been approached
    twice in my current contract by co-workers wanting advice on Linux
    systems they plan to set up at home. One of them was even the
    head of the division.

    Thad
    --
    Yeah, I drank the Open Source cool-aid... Unlike the other brand, it had
    all the ingredients on the label.

  10. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    Hadron wrote:
    >
    > "Paul Hovnanian P.E." writes:
    >
    > > Hadron wrote:
    > >>
    > >> "Paul Hovnanian P.E." writes:
    > >>
    > >> > DFS wrote:
    > >> >>
    > >> >> Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:
    > >> >>
    > >> >> > Wow. You've left out CAD and engineering...
    > >> >>
    > >> >> You recently slunk away several times after claiming "most serious
    > >> >> engineering apps" haven't been ported to Windows.
    > >> >>
    > >> >> Which apps?
    > >> >
    > >> > Proprietary. I'm more than happy to watch my competitors struggle with
    > >> > AutoCAD.
    > >>
    > >> You have your own proprietary cad system? Really? And this application
    > >> which is better than autocad is designed and implemented by one company
    > >> for itself? Hmmm. That is some undertaking.

    > >
    > > Its not really all that difficult if one doesn't have to struggle with
    > > toy operating systems and tool sets with the click and drool target
    > > market.

    >
    > I don't believe you. The kind of programmers who design and
    > implement working CAD solutions are not "click and drool", neither are
    > the target market. Or you think AutoCad is for idiots? Another Kelsey
    > perhaps?
    >
    > Don't get me wrong, there are wonderful scientific apps under Unix and I
    > guess Linux but implementing your *own* and keeping it proprietary after
    > first boasting of all the OSS greatness?


    My business is engineering, not writing software. The tools I have
    developed give me a competitive edge over my competition. My sharing
    them would be like Microsoft's giving away its source code. When they do
    that, I'll publish my tools.

    But don't expect me to hold the hands of idiot Windows users. I've done
    that before and most of my support costs were expended trying to sort
    out bugs in the underlying system.

    > It seems you've told on lie to many.

    ^^
    Doesn't your newsreader support semantic checking? What a shame! ;-)

    --
    Paul Hovnanian paul@hovnanian.com
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Procrastinators: The leaders for tomorrow.

  11. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    Peter K÷hlmann wrote:
    > DFS wrote:
    >
    >> Peter Khlmann wrote:
    >>> DFS wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Peter Khlmann wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Right. For big projects, it surely is bringing down the compile
    >>>>> time. I cluster 4 linux machines in that case, sometimes even a
    >>>>> fifth one
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Too bad that it is not available for windows.
    >>>>
    >>>> Explain exactly what isn't available for Windows, dumbkopf.
    >>>
    >>> Too stupid to follow the link already provided? Figures
    >>>
    >>> But then, you are obviously unable to figure it out of the facts
    >>> already provided, DumbFull****
    >>>
    >>> To make it simpler for twats like you, "icecream" is handling off
    >>> portions of a compile job to several machines in a "compile
    >>> cluster", bringing down the total time to compile BIG projects.

    >>
    >> Peter Kohlmann: Always Ignorant (tm)
    >> http://www.intel.com/support/perform.../CS-023179.htm

    >
    > It is *not* *at* *all* the same thing
    > That one works *only* with Intels C++ compiler and the Visual C++
    > compiler


    ROFL! Face facts, dumpkopf. You're a backpedaling idiot.




  12. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    DFS wrote:

    > Peter K÷hlmann wrote:
    >> DFS wrote:
    >>
    >>> Peter Khlmann wrote:
    >>>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Peter Khlmann wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Right. For big projects, it surely is bringing down the compile
    >>>>>> time. I cluster 4 linux machines in that case, sometimes even a
    >>>>>> fifth one
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Too bad that it is not available for windows.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Explain exactly what isn't available for Windows, dumbkopf.
    >>>>
    >>>> Too stupid to follow the link already provided? Figures
    >>>>
    >>>> But then, you are obviously unable to figure it out of the facts
    >>>> already provided, DumbFull****
    >>>>
    >>>> To make it simpler for twats like you, "icecream" is handling off
    >>>> portions of a compile job to several machines in a "compile
    >>>> cluster", bringing down the total time to compile BIG projects.
    >>>
    >>> Peter Kohlmann: Always Ignorant (tm)
    >>> http://www.intel.com/support/perform.../CS-023179.htm

    >>
    >> It is *not* *at* *all* the same thing
    >> That one works *only* with Intels C++ compiler and the Visual C++
    >> compiler

    >
    > ROFL! Face facts, dumpkopf. You're a backpedaling idiot.


    What part of "it is not working on linux *and* windows" was too difficult
    for you, DumbFull****?

    You know, that part you snipped
    --
    It's not about, 'Where do you want to go today?' It's more like,
    'Where am I allowed to go today?'


  13. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    thad05@tux.glaci.delete-this.com writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >> Never heard of them. Where, on the web, do they advertise? Sounds really
    >> mainstream btw. Not.

    >
    > You do realize that billions of dollars are spent every year on
    > software that the typical consumer will never hear about? Indeed,


    Yes Thad. Another point for stating the obvious.

    > MOST software development is like that. Right now I am working


    No. Not most SW. You KNOW I am talking about standard desktop
    installations. Not bespoke systems. We have heard of Autocad. We have
    heard of Office. etc etc. We are not talking the latest 50,000,000
    contract for Logica to write a military sim or some such.

    > for a company with a quarter billion dollar market cap and a name
    > you have probably never hear of. They don't advertise in the
    > typical consumer channel because your average joe is not in the
    > market for a multi-million dollor cable television hub.


    I dont see the relevance to dekstop SW.

    >
    > And yet it is exactly these sorts of businesses that are driving
    > expansive of Linux business desktops, and it is increased business


    What expanse of Linux business desktops? I am not seeing that in Europe.

    > use that will drive additional home use. I've been approached
    > twice in my current contract by co-workers wanting advice on Linux
    > systems they plan to set up at home. One of them was even the
    > head of the division.


    Twice? Good. But lets try not to get wrapped up in our own little Linux
    worlds. I have installed Linux on a few systems this year alone. 4 out
    of 5 couldnt be bothered to learn it and dual boot to Windows again. The
    5th loves it, but only because of MythTV (still a bitch to set up in
    some instances). I use Linux 100% for work now. But I am under no
    illusions of how widespread it is. It isn't. Please no more "I have a
    Linux job stories". I know and I admire that. But lets try and talk the
    bigger picture. Hint if I say "no one around here uses Linux" I don
    *literally* mean "no one" - just the great, great majority and you and
    me and (in the evenings) Peter Koehlmann make no big impact on that "no
    one".


  14. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    "Paul Hovnanian P.E." writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >> "Paul Hovnanian P.E." writes:
    >>
    >> > Hadron wrote:
    >> >>
    >> >> "Paul Hovnanian P.E." writes:
    >> >>
    >> >> > DFS wrote:
    >> >> >>
    >> >> >> Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:
    >> >> >>
    >> >> >> > Wow. You've left out CAD and engineering...
    >> >> >>
    >> >> >> You recently slunk away several times after claiming "most serious
    >> >> >> engineering apps" haven't been ported to Windows.
    >> >> >>
    >> >> >> Which apps?
    >> >> >
    >> >> > Proprietary. I'm more than happy to watch my competitors struggle with
    >> >> > AutoCAD.
    >> >>
    >> >> You have your own proprietary cad system? Really? And this application
    >> >> which is better than autocad is designed and implemented by one company
    >> >> for itself? Hmmm. That is some undertaking.
    >> >
    >> > Its not really all that difficult if one doesn't have to struggle with
    >> > toy operating systems and tool sets with the click and drool target
    >> > market.

    >>
    >> I don't believe you. The kind of programmers who design and
    >> implement working CAD solutions are not "click and drool", neither are
    >> the target market. Or you think AutoCad is for idiots? Another Kelsey
    >> perhaps?
    >>
    >> Don't get me wrong, there are wonderful scientific apps under Unix and I
    >> guess Linux but implementing your *own* and keeping it proprietary after
    >> first boasting of all the OSS greatness?

    >
    > My business is engineering, not writing software. The tools I have
    > developed give me a competitive edge over my competition. My sharing
    > them would be like Microsoft's giving away its source code. When they do
    > that, I'll publish my tools.


    What did you develop these tools with? From scratch, or using OSS?

    >
    > But don't expect me to hold the hands of idiot Windows users. I've done
    > that before and most of my support costs were expended trying to sort
    > out bugs in the underlying system.


    You're a little fibber :-;

  15. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    Hadron wrote:
    >
    > No. Not most SW. You KNOW I am talking about standard desktop
    > installations. Not bespoke systems. We have heard of Autocad. We have
    > heard of Office. etc etc. We are not talking the latest 50,000,000
    > contract for Logica to write a military sim or some such.


    Perhaps we should be talking about those. My point was that people
    interact daily with products and software that they do not know
    anything about. Does that make them any less 'mainstream'? Is
    Apache a 'mainstream' web server even if most of the people
    browsing the web pages served by it know little or nothing about
    it? Is it mindshare or actual use that defines the term?

    > I dont see the relevance to dekstop SW.


    If Linux manages to grab a significant slice of the business desktop
    based on that sort of product development, is that not relevant to
    the conversation?

    > What expanse of Linux business desktops? I am not seeing that in Europe.


    Perhaps you are not looking in the right places? I see plenty of
    growth here in the US, and published stats claim the US is lagging
    Europe in desktop expansion.

    > Twice? Good. But lets try not to get wrapped up in our own little Linux
    > worlds. I have installed Linux on a few systems this year alone. 4 out
    > of 5 couldn't be bothered to learn it and dual boot to Windows again. The
    > 5th loves it, but only because of MythTV (still a bitch to set up in
    > some instances). I use Linux 100% for work now. But I am under no
    > illusions of how widespread it is. It isn't. Please no more "I have a
    > Linux job stories". I know and I admire that. But lets try and talk the
    > bigger picture. Hint if I say "no one around here uses Linux" I don
    > *literally* mean "no one" - just the great, great majority and you and
    > me and (in the evenings) Peter Koehlmann make no big impact on that "no
    > one".


    If I am going to share any anecdotes regarding Linux growth, don't
    you think evidence from my 'own little Linux world' is appropriate?
    You rather I share second hand stories I read on a blog somewhere?
    I thought this was the sort of thing that advocacy groups were for
    after all (OK, we really know they are meant to draw the trolls
    away from the technical groups... but go with me on this one).

    And I don't see many people claiming that desktop Linux is suddenly
    widespread, only that it is growing (and it is). I am sorry if our
    first hand accounts of that growth upset you... but we are not about
    to stop sharing them. You have actually looked at the name on this
    newsgroup, haven't you? :P

    Thad
    --
    Yeah, I drank the Open Source cool-aid... Unlike the other brand, it had
    all the ingredients on the label.

  16. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    thad05@tux.glaci.delete-this.com writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >> No. Not most SW. You KNOW I am talking about standard desktop
    >> installations. Not bespoke systems. We have heard of Autocad. We have
    >> heard of Office. etc etc. We are not talking the latest 50,000,000
    >> contract for Logica to write a military sim or some such.

    >
    > Perhaps we should be talking about those. My point was that people
    > interact daily with products and software that they do not know
    > anything about. Does that make them any less 'mainstream'? Is


    Erm, you're moving the goalposts. AGAIN - we are talking about desktop
    SW. Or I am. The type people BUY to do a job.

    > Apache a 'mainstream' web server even if most of the people
    > browsing the web pages served by it know little or nothing about
    > it? Is it mindshare or actual use that defines the term?
    >
    >> I dont see the relevance to dekstop SW.

    >
    > If Linux manages to grab a significant slice of the business desktop
    > based on that sort of product development, is that not relevant to
    > the conversation?


    For goodness sake, you're going around in circles. I am arguing that
    for it to grab that % it MUST have a traditional retail channel for
    people to see it that are not already aware of it and its SW.

    >
    >> What expanse of Linux business desktops? I am not seeing that in Europe.

    >
    > Perhaps you are not looking in the right places? I see plenty of
    > growth here in the US, and published stats claim the US is lagging
    > Europe in desktop expansion.


    Where am I supposed to look? I am yet to visit one single business using
    it. The odd SW house attempting a port "in case", but that's about it.

  17. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    Hadron wrote:

    > thad05@tux.glaci.delete-this.com writes:
    >
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>> No. Not most SW. You KNOW I am talking about standard desktop
    >>> installations. Not bespoke systems. We have heard of Autocad. We have
    >>> heard of Office. etc etc. We are not talking the latest 50,000,000
    >>> contract for Logica to write a military sim or some such.

    >>
    >> Perhaps we should be talking about those. My point was that people
    >> interact daily with products and software that they do not know
    >> anything about. Does that make them any less 'mainstream'? Is

    >
    > Erm, you're moving the goalposts. AGAIN - we are talking about desktop
    > SW.


    Nope

    > Or I am.


    Right

    > The type people BUY to do a job.


    Oh, another goalpost move: You are talking "paid-for software"

    >> Apache a 'mainstream' web server even if most of the people
    >> browsing the web pages served by it know little or nothing about
    >> it? Is it mindshare or actual use that defines the term?
    >>
    >>> I dont see the relevance to dekstop SW.

    >>
    >> If Linux manages to grab a significant slice of the business desktop
    >> based on that sort of product development, is that not relevant to
    >> the conversation?

    >
    > For goodness sake, you're going around in circles. I am arguing that
    > for it to grab that % it MUST have a traditional retail channel for
    > people to see it that are not already aware of it and its SW.


    Balderdash

    >>
    >>> What expanse of Linux business desktops? I am not seeing that in Europe.

    >>
    >> Perhaps you are not looking in the right places? I see plenty of
    >> growth here in the US, and published stats claim the US is lagging
    >> Europe in desktop expansion.

    >
    > Where am I supposed to look? I am yet to visit one single business using
    > it. The odd SW house attempting a port "in case", but that's about it.


    Because you don't want to see it.
    Last year business in germany was questioned about linux use. Guess what:
    80% of them already where using linux, and most indicated that they would
    use it more than they did at the time of questioning

    --
    Warning: 10 days have passed since your last Windows reinstall.


  18. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 15:56:36 -0500, Linonut wrote:

    > * Snit peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >
    >> You can hire a programmer to work on any platform... sure, you can
    >> "muck" with OSS code, but realistically most companies are not going to
    >> do that. Some will... do not get me wrong - but that will be the
    >> exception and not the norm.

    >
    > There's no "mucking" with OSS. It either fits your needs, or it does
    > not. That is fairly easy to determine.


    What's funny is, he seems completely unaware just how prevalent custom
    code is, how many companies write all sorts of stuff for internal use.
    OSS just makes such tasks easier - if you can find something which does
    90% of the job, you don't have to write 90% of the code you'd otherwise
    need to write.


  19. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    "Kelsey Bjarnason" stated in post
    e5i965-e6h.ln1@spanky.localhost.net on 1/19/08 8:45 AM:

    > On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 15:56:36 -0500, Linonut wrote:
    >
    >> * Snit peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>
    >>> You can hire a programmer to work on any platform... sure, you can
    >>> "muck" with OSS code, but realistically most companies are not going to
    >>> do that. Some will... do not get me wrong - but that will be the
    >>> exception and not the norm.

    >>
    >> There's no "mucking" with OSS. It either fits your needs, or it does
    >> not. That is fairly easy to determine.

    >
    > What's funny is, he seems completely unaware just how prevalent custom
    > code is, how many companies write all sorts of stuff for internal use.


    Who is? Me? Not at all. But for most things in most companies people do
    not "muck" with the code - they use it. There are, of course, exceptions.

    > OSS just makes such tasks easier - if you can find something which does
    > 90% of the job, you don't have to write 90% of the code you'd otherwise
    > need to write.


    But you do need to figure out that code and hope that it is well written and
    then have people who are not the original coders try to add their own style
    to it. Sometimes this is not a big deal. Sometimes it is.




    --
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
    nothing. - Edmund Burke


  20. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    [snips]

    On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 13:42:58 -0800, raylopez99 wrote:

    >> Yeah, and again, serving up web pages and email and news and bandwidth
    >> isn't "serious work". ┬*The fact that millions of people rely on just
    >> such services, day in and day out, to run their business, never mind
    >> simply enjoy the experience, simply doesn't matter.

    >
    > You can do that with ADO.NET, ASP.NET, MS SQL Server, MS Access or a
    > simple online service running under Unix. Routine.


    You obviously don't work in any field depending on or providing serious
    net services. MS Access? Snicker.

    >> Meanwhile, that said, I use word processing and spreadsheeting pretty
    >> much daily, in Linux, tossing documents back and forth between other
    >> office workers, most of whom use Windows and MS Office - and they are
    >> blissfully unaware that I'm not using MS products, because the products
    >> I use are so damn good they can actually use MS's formats... where,
    >> last I checked, the MS apps cannot use _their_ formats.

    >
    > So you export to .doc and .xls. Good for you, you're smarter than I
    > thought.


    I export to those _if necessary_. You know, like when dealing with
    crippled CSS apps that can't handle open formats, and where the source
    isn't available to make 'em understand those formats.

    Fortunately, OSS apps aren't so crippled, and they *do* allow me the
    option to work as I need to. Yet again, OSS wins out over CSS. Funny
    how that keeps happening, time and time and time again.

    >> Plus email, of course; we chuck emails around constantly. ┬*I don't do
    >> many slide shows, but the apps are there to do 'em. ┬*Then again, I
    >> haven't seen *anyone* doing a slide show in about three years; not sure
    >> how this qualifies as "serious work" when serving up web pages and
    >> email doesn't.

    >
    > PowerPoint is a slide show.


    I *know* what PowerPoint is, thank you very much. What I said was I
    haven't seen anyone *use* slide shows in ages. Our folks put together
    real - as in in-your-hands, take-a-copy-home - promotional materials and
    the like. Slide shows? How... quaint

    >> PDF? ┬*Hey, does MS Office allow you to export to PDF, the way the stuff
    >> I use does?

    >
    > Yes. There's a print driver from Adobe for that.


    No, I said does *MS Office* do this? Apparently not, or you would have
    said so.

    >> Don't care. ┬*Guess what? ┬*I'm *in* the Linux world, insofar as using
    >> Linux day in and day out - and use every one of those formats, other
    >> than ppt, daily, and with Linux apps.


    > Well, you're not in the corporate world, since everybody uses PPt


    Right. You base your determination on what a person's workplace is like,
    what sort of work they do, based on whether or not they use a
    presentation manager.

    Hint for you, dumb****, even in the places I've worked where they *do*
    use such things, it ain't the guys who *do* the work that use 'em... it's
    the sales guys.


+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast