IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source? - Linux

This is a discussion on IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source? - Linux ; "High Plains Thumper" wrote in message news:48087283$0$22077$6e1ede2f@read.cnntp.org... > RonB wrote: >> jim wrote: >> >>> If so, this will be the death knell for Linux. >> >> Has absolutely *nothing* to do with IBM's Linux markets. It >> would be ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 55

Thread: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?

  1. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?


    "High Plains Thumper" wrote in message
    news:48087283$0$22077$6e1ede2f@read.cnntp.org...
    > RonB wrote:
    >> jim wrote:
    >>
    >>> If so, this will be the death knell for Linux.

    >>
    >> Has absolutely *nothing* to do with IBM's Linux markets. It
    >> would be replacing IBM's office PCs, currently running
    >> Windows, with Mac computers.
    >>
    >> Get a grip.

    >
    > It's another Wintroll. IBM embraced Linux by replacing a goodly portion
    > of Windows computers already with Linux in its offices.


    This is absolute bull****. IBM has on several occasions come out with press
    releases of how they "PLAN" on putting linux on the desktop. But less than
    1% of desktops at IBM have been replaced with linux. And less than 1% is
    for all practical purposes zero despite all the talk of how they "plan" on
    doing it.

    > I put little faith in the truthfulness of the article.

    So when it comes to what IBM plans to do people are supposed to believe a
    retard like you instead of IBMs own words.



    > --
    > HPT



    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  2. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?


    "RonB" wrote in message
    news:uQVNj.81$vj3.69@newsfe07.lga...
    > jim wrote:
    >
    >> Where the hell is the growth? Other than stories posted here, what third
    >> party can attest to the adoption of Linux on the desktop in any
    >> substantial numbers?

    >
    > Did I say anything about "desktop." Read with comprehension, than go on to
    > one of your rants.
    >
    > Could Linux's relatively small desktop presence have something to do with
    > the fact that Micro$haft has a monopoly on OEM OSs?


    No, it couldn't. That's a bull**** excuse for not taking proper action.

    Tell Mac users that MS has a monopoly on the desktop.

    jim



  3. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?

    * jim peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > Where the hell is the growth? Other than stories posted here, what third
    > party can attest to the adoption of Linux on the desktop in any substantial
    > numbers?


    Gartner.

    DELL.

    Asus.

    > From March-2003 to March-2008 Firefox went from 4.2% market share to 37%
    > market share. In that same time period, Linux went from 2.2% to 3.9%.
    >
    > That's 0.3% growth per year VS Firefox's 6.5% annual growth.
    >
    > Something is very wrong with the way Linux is being marketed to the masses.
    > Something free (if it is useful) should not be adopted so damned slowly.
    >
    > As K's Choice puts it.........
    >
    > "Something's wrong...
    > Something's wrong...
    > Something's wrong...
    > Something's wrong..."


    Indeed. I would have expected Linux to be adopted more rapidly by the
    masses. It has not met my own personal original expectations.

    But it has nothing to do with ease of use.

    It is simply that it is extremely difficult to wedge a new system into a
    hardware market dominated and, to a large extent, controlled by one (two
    if you count Intel) company.

    --
    When you want to do your homework, fill out your tax return, or see all the
    choices for a trip you want to take, you need a full-size screen.
    -- Bill Gates

  4. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?

    * jim peremptorily fired off this memo:

    >
    > "RonB" wrote in message
    > news:ZJTNj.52$vj3.45@newsfe07.lga...
    >> jim wrote:
    >>
    >>> If so, this will be the death knell for Linux.

    >>
    >> Has absolutely *nothing* to do with IBM's Linux markets. It would be
    >> replacing IBM's office PCs, currently running Windows, with Mac computers.
    >>
    >> Get a grip.

    >
    > Get your beak out of the snow and learn something about how this affects how
    > Linux is viewed.
    >
    > People get spooked when (if) companies like RedHat and IBM opt NOT to put
    > Linux on the desktop. This affects how many people are willing to test or
    > try Linux as an OS alternative to Windows.
    >
    > If you can't see this, please don't waste our time here.


    Speak for yourself.

    --
    The next generation of interesting software will be done on the Macintosh,
    not the IBM PC.
    -- Bill Gates, BusinessWeek, 26 November 1984

  5. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?

    * jim peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > Linux has no VB.


    Bull****.

    > Linux's VB must be EASY to learn and use. To hell with speed or even
    > functionality at first. Sacrifice EVERYTHING for ease of use and correct
    > the rest as soon as you can. You can make it faster, more powerful and
    > whatever in later versions....make it easy to use NOW.
    >
    > Make it extensible. VB allowed 3rd parties to develop (and profit from)
    > components that made VB easier and more powerful. Do that too.
    >
    > Make it profitable. VB apps could be sold. The source code could be kept
    > secret and the people that did all of that hard work to produce the apps and
    > third party components could also make a profit.
    >
    > People like food and heat and homes and cars. If they can get those things
    > coding for Linux, they will. If they can't they will code for Microsoft
    > OSs.
    >
    > Everyone has bills to pay. Help them pay their bills and they will help you
    > pay yours.


    You are way off base.

    Way off base.

    --
    The next generation of interesting software will be done on the Macintosh,
    not the IBM PC.
    -- Bill Gates, BusinessWeek, 26 November 1984

  6. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?

    * jim peremptorily fired off this memo:

    >> Lemme guess here. You're thinking that what Joe Sixpack and Granny
    >> Gusterfluster are pining for most in Linux is ...
    >>
    >> ... a programming language?

    >
    > No. What I am thinking here is that people dont buy OS's because they
    > "want" an OS. They buy an OS because they want to run the software that
    > runs on it. Software sells operating systems. Microsoft learned this years
    > ago. Linux still hasn't caught on.


    Bull****. Don't try to tell us that Linux doesn't have a whole lot of
    software ready to use right now, and that it is mostly easy to use.

    Next you will tell us that Ubuntu doesn't exist.

    > That being said, you have to make it so damned easy to write software for
    > your OS that any idiot can do it AND PROFIT FROM DOING SO. When you do, the
    > idiots will come and they will code.


    Linux has the first part. There are so many ways to write software for
    Linux (and software that will also run on Windows with a rebuild) -- how
    do you think all these thousands of Linux apps came to be?

    So the "idiots", as you call them (you wouldn't perchance be a Microsoft
    programmer, would you?) have already come, and they are coding like
    crazy.

    Where Linux falls flat is the profit part. Only in non-commodity
    software, and in services, can you expect to profit from writing Linux
    software.

    > Will the idiots' software be stellar, enterprise applications? No. Not at
    > first. Just as it was with VB, people will write simple apps. Then, they
    > will write more complex applications as RealBASIC (or whatever tool you give
    > them) matures.
    >
    > First, the geeks will use it. Then, seeing how cheap and easy it is to
    > write applications for a small business, small businesses will adopt it.
    > Then, seeing as how people use at home what they use at work, people will
    > take Linux home and use it.


    This is /already/ happening. And it has /been/ happening for over 15
    years.

    > The portal to the desktop is via small business. It's how Microsoft
    > started - on the small business desktops. To get small businesses, Linux
    > use and development has to be both cheaper and easier than staying with
    > Microsoft.
    >
    > The cheap part is done.....now you have to make it so easy to code a Linux
    > app that the mailroom clerk can become a Linux programmer in 30 days or less
    > (like he could using VB on Windows).


    There's where you go wrong. First, making coding easy has already been
    done in a number of different languages.

    Second, getting the app written is one thing. Getting it usable by the
    general population is another thing, and it is a couple of orders of
    magnitude more difficult to do, and there is no short-cutting that
    process.

    >>> No VB for Linux = no hope for the Linux desktop.

    >>
    >> (This guy never heard of Perl, Python, or Tcl/Tk, apparently.)

    >
    > Compared to VB, they suck.


    Sorry, guy, you have lost /all/ credibility with me.

    You will get no more opportunity to FUD from me.

    --
    The worst programs are the ones where the programmers doing the original
    work don't lay a solid foundation, and then they're not involved in the
    program in the future.
    -- Bill Gates

  7. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?

    * jim peremptorily fired off this memo:

    Hard at work today, eh Jim? Is it your day to shadow Linux users?

    --
    I'm a great believer that any tool that enhances communication has profound
    effects in terms of how people can learn from each other, and how they can
    achieve the kind of freedoms that they're interested in.
    -- Bill Gates

  8. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?

    * jim peremptorily fired off this memo:

    Hard at work today, eh Jim?

    Did you draw the short straw today?

    --
    It's fine to celebrate success but it is more important to heed the lessons
    of failure.
    -- Bill Gates

  9. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?


    "Linonut" wrote in message
    news:KM1Oj.9558$tG6.1859@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
    >* jim peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >
    > Hard at work today, eh Jim? Is it your day to shadow Linux users?


    Every once in a while I get caught up in the thought that maybe today is the
    day that they will listen. That maybe today someone with more technical
    expertise in Linux than I have will listen and make the changes needed to
    truly challenge Microsoft on the desktop.

    But.....soon enough....people like you beat me back into the reality that
    Linux has no marketing prowess or potential....that Linux is doomed to stay
    a niche OS and that Microsoft will reign supreme on the desktop - virtually
    unchallenged except for Apple.

    Sorry that you couldn't find those numbers to back your argument.

    Maybe next time, eh?

    jim



  10. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?

    jim wrote:

    > Linux has no VB.


    Linux does have a decent proprietary VB-like system called RealBasic
    http://www.realbasic.com/. And it has a piece of crap open source
    VB-pretender called Gambas http://gambas.sourceforge.net/

    I don't see any point in building proprietary RealBasic apps for the tiny
    market of Linux cheapos.



  11. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?

    jim wrote:
    > "Linonut" wrote in message
    > news:KM1Oj.9558$tG6.1859@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
    >> * jim peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>
    >> Hard at work today, eh Jim? Is it your day to shadow Linux users?

    >
    > Every once in a while I get caught up in the thought that maybe today
    > is the day that they will listen. That maybe today someone with more
    > technical expertise in Linux than I have will listen and make the
    > changes needed to truly challenge Microsoft on the desktop.



    Weren't you here a few months ago bragging that you could save desktop
    Linux?

    "Still, give me a Linux Distro team (even a volunteer one) that is open to
    trying my ideas just once, and I will unseat Microsoft in less than 5 years.
    No excuses, no backing down and no more
    Linux-as-a-second-class-OS-on-the-desktop. If I could get those volunteers,
    I would make Balmer cry."

    That's you, right?

    You and a handful of volunteer coders are going to beat the Microsoft
    Corporation in a market they've dominated for 17 years? LMAO!!!

    Quit pie-in-the-sky daydreaming and get back to work - you have VB programs
    to write for paying customers.




  12. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?

    On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 03:12:29 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:


    > Huh?
    >
    > No, IBM is doing both platforms. Don't ever trust CNET, whose writers mainly
    > use Macs.


    Black helicopter alert.....
    The straps on your tinfoil suit are too tight Roy Schestowitz.

    > Lotus Notes 8.5 to fully support Ubuntu Linux 7.0 in mid-2008


    We've been hearing that for years.
    I'm not saying it isn't true but I will believe it when I see it.



    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  13. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?

    On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 04:05:52 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:

    > RonB wrote:
    >> jim wrote:
    >>
    >>> If so, this will be the death knell for Linux.

    >>
    >> Has absolutely *nothing* to do with IBM's Linux markets. It
    >> would be replacing IBM's office PCs, currently running
    >> Windows, with Mac computers.
    >>
    >> Get a grip.

    >
    > It's another Wintroll. IBM embraced Linux by replacing a goodly
    > portion of Windows computers already with Linux in its offices.
    > I put little faith in the truthfulness of the article.


    No they haven't.
    You are lying once again High Plains Thumper.

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  14. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?

    On 2008-04-18, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, jim
    >
    > wrote
    > on Thu, 17 Apr 2008 20:36:40 -0400
    ><12SNj.44646$Er2.39701@bignews6.bellsouth.net>:
    >> If so, this will be the death knell for Linux.
    >>
    >> http://www.cnet.com/8301-13505_1-9920531-16.html?tag=bl
    >>
    >> You people should have listened to me and made Linux as easy to program for
    >> noobs as VB made it for Windows.

    >
    > OK, one more time, with feeling:
    >
    > LINUX DOES NOT SUPPORT PROGRAMMING!
    >
    > Hell, it barely supports operating system functions and
    > can't even boot without something like GRUB or LILO --
    > at least not off a hard drive.
    >
    > If you want to complain, kick KDE/Qt and or Gnome/GTK for
    > better development tools. Don't blame the house foundation
    > for the flimsy cardboard walls.
    >
    >> Hell, Mac programming is easier than Linux
    >> programming and Macs are kicking Linux's ass as a result.
    >>
    >> The ONLY thing that will save Linux's dreams of desktop acceptance (much
    >> less domination) is adoption by the masses. The only thing that the masses
    >> will adopt is something that is EASY to mold into what they want it to be.
    >>
    >> No VB for Linux = no hope for the Linux desktop.


    I dunno. What hot "must have" VB applications are out there for
    Windows exactly? Is there anything in terms of Win32 software that
    would make me want to dual boot my main desktop box?

    Probably not...

    >
    > Absolutely correct. Visual Basic is a powerful, intuitive
    > GUIfied piece of crap -- but it is useful and most people
    > are familiar with it. It can also be adapted to .NET
    > webservers with ease. It also doesn't have annoying blue shrimp.


    [deletia]


    --
    OpenDoc is moot when Apple is your one stop iShop. |||
    / | \

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  15. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?

    On 2008-04-18, jim wrote:
    >
    > "RonB" wrote in message
    > news:uQVNj.81$vj3.69@newsfe07.lga...
    >> jim wrote:
    >>
    >>> Where the hell is the growth? Other than stories posted here, what third
    >>> party can attest to the adoption of Linux on the desktop in any
    >>> substantial numbers?

    >>
    >> Did I say anything about "desktop." Read with comprehension, than go on to
    >> one of your rants.
    >>
    >> Could Linux's relatively small desktop presence have something to do with
    >> the fact that Micro$haft has a monopoly on OEM OSs?

    >
    > No, it couldn't. That's a bull**** excuse for not taking proper action.
    >
    > Tell Mac users that MS has a monopoly on the desktop.


    Go into the Apple store and ask for "random Win32 app".

    Check the response.

    Apple is doing well as a niche vendor today. However, before Jobs
    took back the reins and cleand house Apple was in a distinct decline.
    The fact that he took over is the only reason that today Apple has
    a modern OS, very visible advertising, a successfully corporate store
    and a successful consumer product that serves to help Apple stay alive.

    There could be identical stores for Linux in the same malls and
    the Lemmings would still whine about "lack of desktop presence".

    --
    OpenDoc is moot when Apple is your one stop iShop. |||
    / | \

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  16. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?

    On 2008-04-18, DFS wrote:
    > jim wrote:
    >> "Linonut" wrote in message
    >> news:KM1Oj.9558$tG6.1859@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
    >>> * jim peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>>
    >>> Hard at work today, eh Jim? Is it your day to shadow Linux users?

    >>
    >> Every once in a while I get caught up in the thought that maybe today
    >> is the day that they will listen. That maybe today someone with more
    >> technical expertise in Linux than I have will listen and make the
    >> changes needed to truly challenge Microsoft on the desktop.

    >
    >
    > Weren't you here a few months ago bragging that you could save desktop
    > Linux?
    >
    > "Still, give me a Linux Distro team (even a volunteer one) that is open to
    > trying my ideas just once, and I will unseat Microsoft in less than 5 years.
    > No excuses, no backing down and no more


    Linux is an open system. If you have an idea that will set the world
    on fire you can start working today. If it's worthwhile, other people will
    get onboard and help out.

    This is Linux, if you have a grand plan then carry it out.

    [deletia]

    There are no excuses. Either you are making this happen yourself or
    you are just a mindless talking head that we should all just ignore.

    --
    OpenDoc is moot when Apple is your one stop iShop. |||
    / | \

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  17. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?


    "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    news:slrng0hjbq.1tb.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
    > On 2008-04-18, DFS wrote:
    >> jim wrote:
    >>> "Linonut" wrote in message
    >>> news:KM1Oj.9558$tG6.1859@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
    >>>> * jim peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>>>
    >>>> Hard at work today, eh Jim? Is it your day to shadow Linux users?
    >>>
    >>> Every once in a while I get caught up in the thought that maybe today
    >>> is the day that they will listen. That maybe today someone with more
    >>> technical expertise in Linux than I have will listen and make the
    >>> changes needed to truly challenge Microsoft on the desktop.

    >>
    >>
    >> Weren't you here a few months ago bragging that you could save desktop
    >> Linux?
    >>
    >> "Still, give me a Linux Distro team (even a volunteer one) that is open
    >> to
    >> trying my ideas just once, and I will unseat Microsoft in less than 5
    >> years.
    >> No excuses, no backing down and no more

    >
    > Linux is an open system. If you have an idea that will set the world
    > on fire you can start working today. If it's worthwhile, other people will
    > get onboard and help out.
    >
    > This is Linux, if you have a grand plan then carry it out.
    >
    > [deletia]
    >
    > There are no excuses. Either you are making this happen yourself or
    > you are just a mindless talking head that we should all just ignore.


    So I should show you your mistakes AND fix them for you?

    jim



  18. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?

    * jim peremptorily fired off this memo:

    >> There are no excuses. Either you are making this happen yourself or
    >> you are just a mindless talking head that we should all just ignore.

    >
    > So I should show you your mistakes AND fix them for you?


    You are not even showing "us" "our" mistakes, jimbo.

    You are simply emitting your opinion, and that is that.

    --
    Your most unhappy customers are your greatest source of learning.
    -- Bill Gates, Business @ The Speed of Thought (1999)

  19. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?

    jim wrote:

    >"RonB" wrote:
    >>
    >> Could Linux's relatively small desktop presence have something to do with
    >> the fact that Micro$haft has a monopoly on OEM OSs?

    >
    >No, it couldn't. That's a bull**** excuse for not taking proper action.
    >
    >Tell Mac users that MS has a monopoly on the desktop.


    Idiot. M$ has monopoly power in the market. The OEM's MUST use
    Micro$oft products.


  20. Re: IS IBM snubbing open Linux foir Mac's closed source?


    "chrisv" wrote in message
    newsvqh04dr3bvnt0bo06mg6kdmo4c6i3js3u@4ax.com...
    > jim wrote:
    >
    >>"RonB" wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Could Linux's relatively small desktop presence have something to do
    >>> with
    >>> the fact that Micro$haft has a monopoly on OEM OSs?

    >>
    >>No, it couldn't. That's a bull**** excuse for not taking proper action.
    >>
    >>Tell Mac users that MS has a monopoly on the desktop.

    >
    > Idiot. M$ has monopoly power in the market. The OEM's MUST use
    > Micro$oft products.
    >


    You ain't too bright are you boy?

    --- "The OEM's MUST use Micro$oft products." Note the heavy emphasis on
    "*MUST*" which is beyond idiotic. Notice that Dell sells machines with
    Ubuntu. Lenovo sells machines with Suse. Walmart sells linux machines. As
    does Asus and Everec. Then there's Tuxmachines and Emperor linux and all the
    various other companies that sell linux machines. So tell us again how OEM's
    *MUST* use MS products.

    Come back when you get a clue because you're just a mindless moron that
    continues to repeat the same pathetic excuses that you losers used back in
    the 1990's.




    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast