Why Linux won't succeed - A view from an experienced user - Linux

This is a discussion on Why Linux won't succeed - A view from an experienced user - Linux ; On Fri, 8 Aug 2008 09:04:12 -0700 (PDT), Greenhorn wrote: >On Aug 8, 5:58*am, Llanzlan Klazmon wrote: >> On Aug 9, 12:44*am, "Hans" wrote: >> >> > 4) Linux doesn't really run on old hardware. >> >> Okay I'd better ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 126

Thread: Why Linux won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

  1. Re: Why Linux won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    On Fri, 8 Aug 2008 09:04:12 -0700 (PDT), Greenhorn wrote:
    >On Aug 8, 5:58*am, Llanzlan Klazmon wrote:
    >> On Aug 9, 12:44*am, "Hans" wrote:
    >>
    >> > 4) Linux doesn't really run on old hardware.

    >>
    >> Okay I'd better install Vista on my 256Mb PII. Does that make you feel
    >> better?


    >Fact is that what somebody does with antique hardware doesn't really
    >matter.


    I don't consider a 12 month phone to be an antique. I had a samsung mp3 phone
    back around '01 and in less than 12 months, windows media player upgraded and
    made the phone's software unuseable. That's what you get when a company
    relies on proprietary software for their device support.

    Fortunately, the software on my linux box kept working perfectly.

    There are tons of people with hardware less than a year old who were ****ed
    over by microsoft's vista. Buy a new computer, ain't that lovely. Then
    you discover that your shiny new all-in-one fax/copier/printer won't work etc.

  2. Re: Why Vista won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    On Fri, 8 Aug 2008 21:40:58 +0200, Hans wrote:


    > Why all this nonsense about "Vista"? The article is about Linux. COLA has
    > become group with Windows bashers only, you just proved that.
    > Why do you Linux zealots always feel the urge to compare linux with another
    > OS?


    When you are attempting to advocate an operating system that despite being
    free for 15+ years, has barely managed 1 percent of the desktop market, and
    I'm being generous, it's best to focus on the *mistakes* of the
    competition.


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

  3. Re: Why Linux won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    On Aug 8, 12:24 pm, RonB wrote:
    > Hans wrote:
    > > 4) Linux doesn't really run on old hardware.

    >
    > Yeah, it does. You may not use the same distribution of Linux, or the same
    > desktop, on all platforms, but you don't have to. That's the advantage of
    > having a choice.
    >
    > --
    > RonB
    > "There's a story there...somewhere"


    I am right now using Linux (Ubuntu 7.10) on vintage 2000 hardware. Is
    that old enough?

  4. Re: Why Linux won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 19:40:03 +0100, Andrew Halliwell wrote:

    > Cork Soaker wrote:
    >> Andrew Halliwell wrote:
    >>> TomB wrote:
    >>>> On 2008-08-08, Hans wrote:
    >>>>> 4) Linux doesn't really run on old hardware.
    >>>> Ah, where's the time the opposite was stated :-p
    >>>>
    >>> All the time, probably because linux DOES really run on old hardware.
    >>>
    >>>

    >> Amazing how I hear all this **** about Linux not working.
    >>
    >> I have it working on old and new hardware, perfectly. This either means
    >> I'm lucky OR everyone who fails to run Linux is some sort of retard.

    >
    > You forgot the third option.
    > They DECIDED they were going to fail before they started and did
    > everything within their power to ensure that failure.
    >
    > Lot of effort to go to just to complain, really.


    Yup, that's it. The wintrolls are successful failures. The way the
    wintrolls go on about linux, they make themselves look *so* incompetent
    that it's a wonder they can find the "Power On" switch.

    --
    Is a M$ "Certificate of Authenticity"
    for Vista, a junk bond?

  5. Re: Why Vista won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    Hans wrote:

    > "Richard Rasker" schreef in bericht
    > news:g7i5cp$sfu$1@saturn.z74.net...
    >> Hans wrote:
    >>
    >>> The fundamental issue with Vista seems to be the developers and their
    >>> bosses who are responsible for the OS. Quite simply, they hold a rather
    >>> schizophrenic view of Vista. They paddle Vista as an "advanced, more
    >>> secure OS", but know that it's nothing more than an overbloated piece of
    >>> crapware which performs miserable even in comparison with XP, and forces
    >>> users to all sorts of costly "upgrades" in both hardware and software.
    >>> In fact, most computer users do NOT want Vista. They want an OS which
    >>> does
    >>> what THEY want.
    >>> 1) Vista makers don't listen or understand what ordinary users want, but
    >>> instead created a resource-guzzling monstrosity with all kinds of
    >>> user-policing mechanisms, artificial limitations and other highly
    >>> undesirable treats. In their eyes, all computer users are pirates and
    >>> criminals who need to be restricted in what they can do with their
    >>> machines.

    >
    > Why all this nonsense about "Vista"? The article is about Linux.


    Your incoherent ramblings consisting of old prejudices, untruths and FUD
    hardly deserve the qualification "article".

    > COLA has become group with Windows bashers only, you just proved that.


    Please spend some time and effort to learn reading and counting. The
    majority of "OS bashing" posts here feature trolls like yourself,
    badmouthing Linux, not Linux advocates talking down Windows -- even though
    this /is/ a Linux advocacy group, where comparisons between the advantages
    of Linux and drawbacks of Windows are quite on topic.

    > Why do you Linux zealots always feel the urge to compare linux with
    > another OS?


    I merely demonstrated that your comments are at least equally appropriate
    when applied to Vista instead of Linux, if not considerably more so.

    Richard Rasker
    --
    http://www.linetec.nl

  6. Re: Why Linux won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    RonB wrote:

    >Hans wrote:
    >
    >> 4) Linux doesn't really run on old hardware.

    >
    >Yeah, it does. You may not use the same distribution of Linux, or the same
    >desktop, on all platforms, but you don't have to. That's the advantage of
    >having a choice.


    Hell, I was just reading the Ubuntu requirements - something like a
    1GHz CPU with 256M RAM. That's *ancient*. Hell, the 5-year-old PC my
    daughter uses is a 3GHz P4 with a GB of RAM - obviously quite
    sufficient to run any OS out there (except Visduh, of course).


  7. Re: Why Linux won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    Linonut wrote:

    >* TomB peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>
    >> I have Debian running on a freaking PENTIUM frrom the late nineties.
    >> Beat that :-p
    >>
    >> It's the only way I still can make use of the thing...

    >
    >I gave away an old Pentium with Linux. Once the guy could obtain a
    >newer computer, he sold it for a pittance to someone else who was
    >interested in toying with Linux.
    >
    >I had another Pentium system, but cannibalized it and tossed the mobo.


    Eww... Pentium is quite old now. IMO, you gotta at LEAST have a CPU
    with fast L2. The early Celerons with on-chip L2 were good, fast
    chips - will blow a Pentium into the weeds.


  8. Re: Why Linux won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    On 2008-08-08, chrisv wrote:
    > RonB wrote:
    >
    >>Hans wrote:
    >>
    >>> 4) Linux doesn't really run on old hardware.

    >>
    >>Yeah, it does. You may not use the same distribution of Linux, or the same
    >>desktop, on all platforms, but you don't have to. That's the advantage of
    >>having a choice.

    >
    > Hell, I was just reading the Ubuntu requirements - something like a
    > 1GHz CPU with 256M RAM. That's *ancient*. Hell, the 5-year-old PC my
    > daughter uses is a 3GHz P4 with a GB of RAM - obviously quite
    > sufficient to run any OS out there (except Visduh, of course).


    I run a MythTV frontend on a 1Ghz machine with 265M RAM.

    That's the spec of an AppleTV btw...

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

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

  9. Why Linux is Succeeding - A view from an experienced user

    On 2008-08-08, chrisv claimed:

    > Hell, I was just reading the Ubuntu requirements - something like a
    > 1GHz CPU with 256M RAM. That's *ancient*. Hell, the 5-year-old PC my
    > daughter uses is a 3GHz P4 with a GB of RAM - obviously quite
    > sufficient to run any OS out there (except Visduh, of course).


    I ran Clarkconnect, 3.0 or thereabouts, on a Pentium laptop, P-133,
    48M. It handled usenet. I ran the same thing on another identical
    laptop. It did mail.

    Both could have handled more. Not the full-fledged deal, but I could
    have easily put both mail and news on one machine, then used the other
    for proxying, if I hadn't already set up another machine to handle
    that part of things.

    At one time I ran an early Mepis (circa 1999/2000, running KDE as a
    desktop) on one of those beasts. It wasn't pretty, but it worked. Puppy
    was much more capable. Even a Puppy from today would run on one of
    those.

    NT 4.0 was too crippled to run on anything that lowly unless you
    were/are willing to put up with the disk thrashing constantly. And that
    garbage is more than 10 years old already, not far from the age of the
    machine. In fact, about the last Windross that wouldn't drag a machine
    with those specs to a grinding halt was 98. That was only slightly less
    crappy than 95.

    "Hans" Quirk is delusional. His title needs to be changed, which I took
    the liberty of doing for him.

    --
    Microsoft is to operating systems and security as McDonalds is to
    gourmet cooking.

  10. Re: Why Vista won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 21:40:58 +0200, Hans wrote:

    > "Richard Rasker" schreef in bericht
    > news:g7i5cp$sfu$1@saturn.z74.net...
    >> Hans wrote:
    >>
    >>> The fundamental issue with Vista seems to be the developers and their
    >>> bosses who are responsible for the OS. Quite simply, they hold a
    >>> rather schizophrenic view of Vista. They paddle Vista as an "advanced,
    >>> more secure OS", but know that it's nothing more than an overbloated
    >>> piece of crapware which performs miserable even in comparison with XP,
    >>> and forces users to all sorts of costly "upgrades" in both hardware
    >>> and software. In fact, most computer users do NOT want Vista. They
    >>> want an OS which does
    >>> what THEY want.
    >>> 1) Vista makers don't listen or understand what ordinary users want,
    >>> but instead created a resource-guzzling monstrosity with all kinds of
    >>> user-policing mechanisms, artificial limitations and other highly
    >>> undesirable treats. In their eyes, all computer users are pirates and
    >>> criminals who need to be restricted in what they can do with their
    >>> machines.

    >
    > Why all this nonsense about "Vista"? The article is about Linux. COLA
    > has become group with Windows bashers only, you just proved that. Why do
    > you Linux zealots always feel the urge to compare linux with another OS?


    ... maybe because it is the point of the group?

    The charter of comp.os.linux.advocacy is:

    For discussion of the benefits of Linux compared to other operating
    systems.

    --
    Rick

  11. Re: Why Vista won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 18:03:53 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:

    > On Fri, 8 Aug 2008 21:40:58 +0200, Hans wrote:
    >
    >
    >> Why all this nonsense about "Vista"? The article is about Linux. COLA
    >> has become group with Windows bashers only, you just proved that. Why
    >> do you Linux zealots always feel the urge to compare linux with another
    >> OS?

    >
    > When you are attempting to advocate an operating system that despite
    > being free for 15+ years, has barely managed 1 percent of the desktop
    > market, and I'm being generous, it's best to focus on the *mistakes* of
    > the competition.


    You keep trotting out the same old lie. You refuse to acknowledge the
    impact of Microsoft's monopoly power. You refuse to acknowledge that
    people strenuously resist change.

    Apple, who once had large market share is still in single digits after
    years below 3%.

    You could at least try out some other lie.

    --
    Rick

  12. Re: Why Vista won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 19:14:38 -0500, Rick wrote:

    > On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 21:40:58 +0200, Hans wrote:
    >
    >> "Richard Rasker" schreef in bericht
    >> news:g7i5cp$sfu$1@saturn.z74.net...
    >>> Hans wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> The fundamental issue with Vista seems to be the developers and their
    >>>> bosses who are responsible for the OS. Quite simply, they hold a
    >>>> rather schizophrenic view of Vista. They paddle Vista as an "advanced,
    >>>> more secure OS", but know that it's nothing more than an overbloated
    >>>> piece of crapware which performs miserable even in comparison with XP,
    >>>> and forces users to all sorts of costly "upgrades" in both hardware
    >>>> and software. In fact, most computer users do NOT want Vista. They
    >>>> want an OS which does
    >>>> what THEY want.
    >>>> 1) Vista makers don't listen or understand what ordinary users want,
    >>>> but instead created a resource-guzzling monstrosity with all kinds of
    >>>> user-policing mechanisms, artificial limitations and other highly
    >>>> undesirable treats. In their eyes, all computer users are pirates and
    >>>> criminals who need to be restricted in what they can do with their
    >>>> machines.

    >>
    >> Why all this nonsense about "Vista"? The article is about Linux. COLA
    >> has become group with Windows bashers only, you just proved that. Why do
    >> you Linux zealots always feel the urge to compare linux with another OS?

    >
    > .. maybe because it is the point of the group?
    >
    > The charter of comp.os.linux.advocacy is:
    >
    > For discussion of the benefits of Linux compared to other operating
    > systems.


    Well we can see the "...other operating systems part" however the benefits
    of Linux part seems to be MIA.


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

  13. Re: Why Vista won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    "Rick" stated in post
    wJKdnZ_WCsPzfAHVnZ2dnUVZ_rvinZ2d@supernews.com on 8/8/08 5:14 PM:

    > The charter of comp.os.linux.advocacy is:
    >
    > For discussion of the benefits of Linux compared to other operating
    > systems.


    And yet you call me all sorts of names, fabricate stories about my views,
    etc. I wish you were better able to stay on topic.

    The place where one could complain about my going off topic, if one were
    pedantic, is that I often talk not just about benefits Linux has but places
    where Linux could improve and *become* better than the alternatives in those
    areas.

    Then again, you have often whined about others being "topic police" when you
    go off topic.

    --
    I know how a jam jar feels...
    .... full of jam!


  14. Re: Why Vista won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    "Rick" stated in post
    wJKdnZ7WCsNjfAHVnZ2dnUVZ_rvinZ2d@supernews.com on 8/8/08 5:17 PM:

    > On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 18:03:53 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >
    >> On Fri, 8 Aug 2008 21:40:58 +0200, Hans wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> Why all this nonsense about "Vista"? The article is about Linux. COLA
    >>> has become group with Windows bashers only, you just proved that. Why
    >>> do you Linux zealots always feel the urge to compare linux with another
    >>> OS?

    >>
    >> When you are attempting to advocate an operating system that despite
    >> being free for 15+ years, has barely managed 1 percent of the desktop
    >> market, and I'm being generous, it's best to focus on the *mistakes* of
    >> the competition.

    >
    > You keep trotting out the same old lie. You refuse to acknowledge the
    > impact of Microsoft's monopoly power. You refuse to acknowledge that
    > people strenuously resist change.


    The fact that OS X is growing and Linux isn't, tells you that
    OS X is offering things that Linux is not.

    I prefer Shuttleworth's world view. Much more likely to lead to improvement
    in Linux and actually help Linux get past the 1% user base.

    > Apple, who once had large market share is still in single digits after
    > years below 3%.
    >
    > You could at least try out some other lie.




    The fact that OS X is growing and Linux isn't, tells you that OS X is
    offering things that Linux is not.
    - Mark Shuttleworth (founded Canonical Ltd. / Ubuntu Linux)


  15. Re: Why Vista won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    * Rick peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 18:03:53 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >
    >> When you are attempting to advocate an operating system that despite
    >> being free for 15+ years, has barely managed 1 percent of the desktop
    >> market, and I'm being generous, it's best to focus on the *mistakes* of
    >> the competition.

    >
    > You keep trotting out the same old lie. You refuse to acknowledge the
    > impact of Microsoft's monopoly power. You refuse to acknowledge that
    > people strenuously resist change.


    He refuses to acknowledge that, even on the desktop, his number is a
    lie.

    And in technical arenas? Moshe won't go near that, because Linux has
    had some very good success stories.

    > Apple, who once had large market share is still in single digits after
    > years below 3%.


    --
    I reverently believe that the maker who made us all makes everything in New
    England, but the weather. I don't know who makes that, but I think it must be
    raw apprentices in the weather-clerks factory who experiment and learn how, in
    New England, for board and clothes, and then are promoted to make weather for
    countries that require a good article, and will take their custom elsewhere
    if they don't get it.
    -- Mark Twain

  16. Re: Why Vista won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 17:31:49 -0700, Snit wrote:

    > "Rick" stated in post
    > wJKdnZ7WCsNjfAHVnZ2dnUVZ_rvinZ2d@supernews.com on 8/8/08 5:17 PM:
    >
    >> On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 18:03:53 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Fri, 8 Aug 2008 21:40:58 +0200, Hans wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> Why all this nonsense about "Vista"? The article is about Linux. COLA
    >>>> has become group with Windows bashers only, you just proved that. Why
    >>>> do you Linux zealots always feel the urge to compare linux with
    >>>> another OS?
    >>>
    >>> When you are attempting to advocate an operating system that despite
    >>> being free for 15+ years, has barely managed 1 percent of the desktop
    >>> market, and I'm being generous, it's best to focus on the *mistakes*
    >>> of the competition.

    >>
    >> You keep trotting out the same old lie. You refuse to acknowledge the
    >> impact of Microsoft's monopoly power. You refuse to acknowledge that
    >> people strenuously resist change.

    >
    > The fact that OS X is growing and Linux isn't, tells you that OS X
    > is offering things that Linux is not.
    >
    > I prefer Shuttleworth's world view. Much more likely to lead to
    > improvement in Linux and actually help Linux get past the 1% user base.
    >
    >> Apple, who once had large market share is still in single digits after
    >> years below 3%.
    >>
    >> You could at least try out some other lie.

    >
    >
    >
    > The fact that OS X is growing and Linux isn't, tells you that OS X is
    > offering things that Linux is not.
    > - Mark Shuttleworth (founded Canonical Ltd. / Ubuntu Linux)


    No specifics. No specific problems, no specific suggestions for solutions
    to the problems that weren't named.

    --
    Rick

  17. Re: Why Vista won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 20:17:46 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:

    > On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 19:14:38 -0500, Rick wrote:
    >
    >> On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 21:40:58 +0200, Hans wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Richard Rasker" schreef in bericht
    >>> news:g7i5cp$sfu$1@saturn.z74.net...
    >>>> Hans wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> The fundamental issue with Vista seems to be the developers and
    >>>>> their bosses who are responsible for the OS. Quite simply, they hold
    >>>>> a rather schizophrenic view of Vista. They paddle Vista as an
    >>>>> "advanced, more secure OS", but know that it's nothing more than an
    >>>>> overbloated piece of crapware which performs miserable even in
    >>>>> comparison with XP, and forces users to all sorts of costly
    >>>>> "upgrades" in both hardware and software. In fact, most computer
    >>>>> users do NOT want Vista. They want an OS which does
    >>>>> what THEY want.
    >>>>> 1) Vista makers don't listen or understand what ordinary users want,
    >>>>> but instead created a resource-guzzling monstrosity with all kinds
    >>>>> of user-policing mechanisms, artificial limitations and other highly
    >>>>> undesirable treats. In their eyes, all computer users are pirates
    >>>>> and criminals who need to be restricted in what they can do with
    >>>>> their machines.
    >>>
    >>> Why all this nonsense about "Vista"? The article is about Linux. COLA
    >>> has become group with Windows bashers only, you just proved that. Why
    >>> do you Linux zealots always feel the urge to compare linux with
    >>> another OS?

    >>
    >> .. maybe because it is the point of the group?
    >>
    >> The charter of comp.os.linux.advocacy is:
    >>
    >> For discussion of the benefits of Linux compared to other
    >> operating systems.

    >
    > Well we can see the "...other operating systems part" however the
    > benefits of Linux part seems to be MIA.


    Lying bigot.


    --
    Rick

  18. Re: Why Vista won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 17:30:24 -0700, Snit wrote:

    > "Rick" stated in post
    > wJKdnZ_WCsPzfAHVnZ2dnUVZ_rvinZ2d@supernews.com on 8/8/08 5:14 PM:
    >
    >> The charter of comp.os.linux.advocacy is:
    >>
    >> For discussion of the benefits of Linux compared to other
    >> operating systems.

    >
    > And yet you call me all sorts of names, fabricate stories about my
    > views, etc. I wish you were better able to stay on topic.
    >
    > The place where one could complain about my going off topic, if one were
    > pedantic, is that I often talk not just about benefits Linux has but
    > places where Linux could improve and *become* better than the
    > alternatives in those areas.
    >
    > Then again, you have often whined about others being "topic police" when
    > you go off topic.



    .... For discussion of the BENEFITS OF LINUX compared to other operating
    system, not for pushing other operating systems.


    --
    Rick

  19. Re: Why Linux won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    TomB wrote:
    > On 2008-08-08, JEDIDIAH wrote:
    >
    >> I have an old laptop that's literally being kept alive by Linux.
    >> If it were running it's original copy of XP it would have been
    >> burnt out by now. This is a 6+ old year laptop.
    >>
    >> How much older does the hardware have to be?

    >
    > I have Debian running on a freaking PENTIUM frrom the late nineties.
    > Beat that :-p


    OK, I had suse running on a 486...
    I could probably still do that if I could be bothered to rebuild it.
    (currently disassembled in the spare room gathering dust)
    I'd need to pick a distro that's not optimised to 586 to install on it but
    it's easily doable.
    --
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | |
    | Andrew Halliwell BSc | "ARSE! GERLS!! DRINK! DRINK! DRINK!!!" |
    | in | "THAT WOULD BE AN ECUMENICAL MATTER!...FECK!!!! |
    | Computer Science | - Father Jack in "Father Ted" |

  20. Re: Why Vista won't succeed - A view from an experienced user

    "Rick" stated in post
    wJKdnZTWCsO0cAHVnZ2dnUVZ_rvinZ2d@supernews.com on 8/8/08 6:04 PM:

    > On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 17:31:49 -0700, Snit wrote:
    >
    >> "Rick" stated in post
    >> wJKdnZ7WCsNjfAHVnZ2dnUVZ_rvinZ2d@supernews.com on 8/8/08 5:17 PM:
    >>
    >>> On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 18:03:53 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On Fri, 8 Aug 2008 21:40:58 +0200, Hans wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> Why all this nonsense about "Vista"? The article is about Linux. COLA
    >>>>> has become group with Windows bashers only, you just proved that. Why
    >>>>> do you Linux zealots always feel the urge to compare linux with
    >>>>> another OS?
    >>>>
    >>>> When you are attempting to advocate an operating system that despite
    >>>> being free for 15+ years, has barely managed 1 percent of the desktop
    >>>> market, and I'm being generous, it's best to focus on the *mistakes*
    >>>> of the competition.
    >>>
    >>> You keep trotting out the same old lie. You refuse to acknowledge the
    >>> impact of Microsoft's monopoly power. You refuse to acknowledge that
    >>> people strenuously resist change.

    >>
    >> The fact that OS X is growing and Linux isn't, tells you that OS X
    >> is offering things that Linux is not.
    >>
    >> I prefer Shuttleworth's world view. Much more likely to lead to
    >> improvement in Linux and actually help Linux get past the 1% user base.
    >>
    >>> Apple, who once had large market share is still in single digits after
    >>> years below 3%.
    >>>
    >>> You could at least try out some other lie.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> The fact that OS X is growing and Linux isn't, tells you that OS X is
    >> offering things that Linux is not.
    >> - Mark Shuttleworth (founded Canonical Ltd. / Ubuntu Linux)

    >
    > No specifics. No specific problems, no specific suggestions for solutions
    > to the problems that weren't named.


    Shuttleworth:
    Rather than saying: "GNOME wins, KDE looses" I'd like us to
    say: "How can we get this communities to sit down and talk to
    each other"? ... I'm very interested in finding out, how to
    get those two communities working closer together, how to get
    more collaboration, more sharing. Both at the level of
    technology but also at the level of best practices /
    processes.
    ...
    I'd like to see both desktops focusing on a common
    infrastructure. And we've already seen that, a lot of the
    Freedesktop initiatives have been embraced by both projects -
    HAL, d-bus for instance.

    This also applies to other software projects, if you name
    your project g-something or k-something your are articulating
    a very specific user experience. Projects should really look
    to the whole Linux desktop and see how they can appeal to
    both sides.
    ...
    The fact that OS X is growing, tells us that Windows is
    weakening. The fact that OS X is growing and Linux isn't,
    tells you that OS X is offering things that Linux is not.
    One of those is the pace of change, the level of innovation.
    You really have to give credit to Apple for driving
    innovation.
    ...
    And at the moment we [the free software folks] don't offer
    a particular easy place to go and express your technology.

    Question:
    What do you see as the main obstacles holding back the
    success of the Linux desktop?

    Shuttleworth:
    I think we don't yet deliver a good enough user experience. I
    think we deliver a user experience for people that have a
    reason to want to be on the Linux platform, either because of
    price or because of freedom. If that was your primary reason,
    Linux is the right answer.

    But if you are somebody who is not too concerned about price,
    who is not too concerned about freedom, I don't think we can
    say the Linux desktop offers the very best experience. And
    that's something we have to change, that's something I'm
    committed to work on, focusing increasing amounts of
    resources of Canonical on figuring out on how we actually
    move the desktop experience forward to compete with Mac OS X.

    Shuttleworth:
    Second thing is, we just can't do this only on GNOME or just
    on KDE, we need to figure out on how to move the whole Linux
    desktop platform forward. I suspect if we hire a bunch of
    upstream developers they will be across both GNOME and KDE.

    I think the Apple guys have a very good point when they say
    we should let designers lead the definition of the user
    experience.


    --
    Is Swiss cheese made out of hole milk?


+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast