My employer completed migration of apps to Linux - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on My employer completed migration of apps to Linux - Ubuntu ; On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 00:43:10 +0000, Christopher Hunter wrote: >Bruce in Bangkok wrote: > >> Interesting as I see no real drop in the use of Windows here in Asia. > >That's funny - I saw *no* Windows whatsoever ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 9 10 11 12 13 LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 250

Thread: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

  1. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 00:43:10 +0000, Christopher Hunter
    wrote:

    >Bruce in Bangkok wrote:
    >
    >> Interesting as I see no real drop in the use of Windows here in Asia.

    >
    >That's funny - I saw *no* Windows whatsoever on my recent trip to China (apart
    >from the crashed desktop machines at the airport check-in). Red Flag seems
    >to be everywhere these days. The three businesses I visited all used FOSS.
    >
    >C.


    Very possible - China is China and things are controlled there... I
    thought Billy Boy made some sort of deal in China to remove something
    ot make some other change so Windows could be used?

    But for SEA, and I believe Vietnam and Cambodia, although I can's say
    personally, it is Windows all the way.

    Bruce-in-Bangkok
    (correct Address is bpaige125atgmaildotcom)

  2. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 18:27:09 -0800, Bill Baka
    wrote:

    >Joe wrote:
    >> On 2008-11-06, Bruce in Bangkok wrote:
    >>> On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 08:37:02 +0000, Christopher Hunter
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> snipe wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> See my earlier post. 350,000,000 Internet users, if we can satisfy one out
    >>>>> of 10 that gives a user base of 35,000,000. But based on the many people
    >>>>> I've moved to Linux I think we're doing a whole lot better than 1 out of
    >>>>> 10. And despite all the FUD and nay-saying in this thread, the fact is
    >>>>> that Linux *is* being eagerly embraced by corporations, governments,
    >>>>> home users, etc., because it *is* serving their needs.
    >>> Are you blind, or something?
    >>>
    >>> In the first month of sales MS sold 20 million copies of Vista,
    >>> installed on new machines, and here you are rabbiting on about a user
    >>> base of 35 million. That is approximately 53 days of Vista sales and
    >>> we all know that Vista was a dog.

    >
    >What you are not saying is how many of those pre-purchased copies of
    >Vista are now sitting in the stockroom collecting dust, or how many
    >pissed off IT guys found other jobs due to 'Employer Ignorance'.
    >That is "How many are happily using Vista versus how many are not.".
    >
    >Selling 20 million copies just got the "Mushroom managers"(*) to approve
    >the purchase Vista because of the barrage of Vista coverage on TV.
    >* means live in the dark and believe the bull**** handed them.


    You miss the whole point.

    That MS is, or in the case of the figures I quoted was, selling
    windows programs like hotcakes. That is the whole point.

    You suggest that possibly hordes of these Vista machines are hiding in
    warehouses, unused and unwanted and perhaps you are right but if so
    then MS's sales figures will reflect that information next quarter,
    and believe it or not MS will report any adverse change in income.
    They have to as firstly they have to file this sort of data with the
    US Government and secondly the have to make income figures known to
    Wall Street and do it in a creditable manner or their stock prices go
    to hell.

    Whether or not you like Windows, or not, MS is selling them to
    somebody else and doing quite well with them.

    Like many others you seem to get your facts all mixed up. On one hand
    is the technical quality of the software. On the other what sells.

    Linux and its forerunner Unix are very advanced operating systems, in
    fact that is probably their worse shortcoming. They are so versatile
    that they are very complex to configure. Read any Linux site and what
    do you read the most of? "How do I get XXX to work?" And, these aren't
    all newbies asking either. But then read the answers and note the
    numbers of incorrect answers provided by so called experts. Windows,
    on the other hand is, on the surface, a much more simple system for
    the average user to comprehend, and that is important.

    The days of every computer user being a hacker is long gone. Sure, the
    earliest computer guys were building their own machines, imputing code
    with on-off switches on the front panel and the more advanced were
    even (Wow!) saving code to a tape recorder, but those days are gone
    for ever. Now the computer has replaced the IBM Selectric Typewriter
    and IT is seen as the Typewriter Servicing Department.

    It's a commodity now Dude. And the commodity that people buy is what
    counts. You may make the best buggy whips in the whole world but how
    many do you sell?.

    Bruce-in-Bangkok
    (correct Address is bpaige125atgmaildotcom)

  3. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 19:50:30 -0600, Joe
    wrote:

    >On 2008-11-07, Bruce in Bangkok wrote:
    >>
    >> To elaborate, in Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and to a more limited
    >> extent in Singapore, illegally copied software is openly sold in shops
    >> in every computer center and other then token raids nothing is done
    >> about it.
    >>
    >> These shops are selling nearly every program ever developed for
    >> Windows; some programs for the various Apple systems and, other then,
    >> say 4 or 5 outdated Linux distros, no Linux software. Since the people
    >> running this industry, and industry it certainly is, are not stupid
    >> folks I believe that the programs offered for sale accurately portray
    >> market demands. Big, big market for windows, much smaller market for
    >> Apple and no market for Linux. In short, Linux just doesn't count in
    >> the marketplace.

    >
    >Why would it? Most Linux distros and software are free. They don't
    >take up much shelf space in any store in the world.
    >
    >Red Flag is very prevalent throughout China.
    >
    >Linux is certainly not [close to] overtaking M$ anytime soon, but the
    >places where M$ has already lost the war are enough to scare the hell
    >out of them, and that makes me happy... ;-)


    I doubt that they are in panic mode just yet. the last time I looked
    their stock was higher then either Ford or General Motors, or British
    Petroleum, for that matter.

    Bruce-in-Bangkok
    (correct Address is bpaige125atgmaildotcom)

  4. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    Joe wrote:

    >> In short, Linux just doesn't count in the marketplace.

    >
    > Why would it? Most Linux distros and software are free. They don't
    > take up much shelf space in any store in the world.


    Exactly! It's difficult for the "hard of thinking" to understand that "sales"
    has little or nothing to do with "prevalence".

    > Red Flag is very prevalent throughout China.
    >
    > Linux is certainly not [close to] overtaking M$ anytime soon, but the
    > places where M$ has already lost the war are enough to scare the hell
    > out of them, and that makes me happy... ;-)


    It's funny watching MS spinning frantically, spamming newsgroups and mailing
    lists. It's slowly dawning on them that they are in a losing position, and
    simply can't compete with "free". There is /no/ /advantage/ /whatsoever/ in
    using paid-for operating systems and software: MS will tell you that they
    provide "commercial support". Have you ever tried MS' "support"? It's an
    expensive joke!

    One of my clients made the move to FOSS from an extensive Windows server and
    desktop installation after his experience of MS' "support": he made a huge
    number of expensive phone calls to them, and seldom even got anyone able to
    speak proper English! At no time could they diagnose the problems, and their
    only suggestion ever was to "reinstall". He described his 5 server and 850
    desktop Windoze network as "an expensive disaster". Migration to SLES for
    the desktops and Red Hat for the servers (which he could reduce to 2) was
    quick and painless. Suse and Red Hat provide excellent "paid-for" support,
    not that he has had to make much use of it...

    MS "lost the plot" some while ago, and have not had a competitive product
    since Win 2000. The transition from NT 4 to Win 2000 should have been the
    end of the NT line, but because of their almost total lack of investment
    in /real/ programmers, their misunderstanding of the future market, and
    massive advertising budgets (maintained at the expense of /everything/ else),
    they are in a /very/ poor situation, without /any/ credible products.

    The FOSS community was in danger of failing to take advantage of the MS
    disaster, but the opportunities have now been recognised, and we're close to
    the point where MS' crapware will be seen as a very poor second choice for
    business.

    C.


  5. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux



    "Maxwell Lol" wrote in message
    news:878wrw8ijf.fsf@com.invalid...
    > "dennis@home" writes:
    >
    >> I don't need to see it.
    >> If it does what he states it will make the data order somewhat mixed.
    >> If he wants it debugged then he will have to post the code and agree
    >> the fees.

    >
    > If he's doing select(), then he can handle several input and output
    > files simultaneously.


    He could but that isn't what he said.
    He said he could make his application simulate AIO by using several threads
    to do whatever the application was doing before. A sure way to screw up the
    order. Which as I said may or may not matter. If its a file or a TCP
    connection it will matter.

    I have had to fix the problem before even though the group insisted it
    worked fine, yes it works fine on some systems with certain apps running but
    fails miserably if something alters the scheduling, like using a TCP
    connection on two machines rather than one. The performance can be abysmal
    too with all the extra context switching (though no where near as bad as it
    used to be in Unix's infancy when I was telling Unix developers how to fix
    the queues. (Why would anyone have thought it was OK to wake all processes
    waiting on an event rather than putting them in a queue and only waking
    one?) ;-) )


  6. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    Bruce in Bangkok wrote:

    > You miss the whole point.


    I think it might be /you/ missing the point.

    > That MS is, or in the case of the figures I quoted was, selling
    > windows programs like hotcakes. That is the whole point.


    No - they are forcing Windows on to the majority of PCs sold. That MS /still/
    offer XP as an "upgrade" amply demonstrates that /even/ /MS/ see that Vista
    is a disaster.

    > You suggest that possibly hordes of these Vista machines are hiding in
    > warehouses, unused and unwanted and perhaps you are right but if so
    > then MS's sales figures will reflect that information next quarter,
    > and believe it or not MS will report any adverse change in income.


    That's /not/ what was said or implied. Many machines are delivered with Vista
    and then have a reformat and an install of something useful. MS would still
    count this as a "sale".

    > They have to as firstly they have to file this sort of data with the
    > US Government and secondly the have to make income figures known to
    > Wall Street and do it in a creditable manner or their stock prices go
    > to hell.


    Sell now!

    > Whether or not you like Windows, or not, MS is selling them to
    > somebody else and doing quite well with them.


    No. See above. Fortunately, more manufacturers are offering Linux
    pre-installs (even including Dell), so the number of Windows copies shipped
    will decline.

    > Like many others you seem to get your facts all mixed up. On one hand
    > is the technical quality of the software. On the other what sells.


    Not at all. See above.

    > Linux and its forerunner Unix are very advanced operating systems, in
    > fact that is probably their worse shortcoming. They are so versatile
    > that they are very complex to configure.


    You're several years behind the times. Installation and configuration of
    modern Linux distros is /easier/ /than/ /Windows/ in every case. Installing
    Windows is a frustrating, irritating experience but seldom done by
    the "average" user, because Windoze came "free" with their computer!

    > Windows, on the other hand is, on the surface, a much more simple system for
    > the average user to comprehend, and that is important.


    Entirely wrong! Most users *never* install an operating system. A fairly
    substantial proportion of them will even /buy/ /a/ /new/ /computer/ when
    Windows fouls up (as it invariably does), because they assume that the
    computer is "faulty". You wouldn't believe the number of "nearly new"
    machines that can be bought for (effectively) nothing because of this.

    C.

  7. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux



    "Christopher Hunter" wrote in message
    news:6nie3uFlooa8U1@mid.individual.net...
    > Bruce in Bangkok wrote:
    >
    >> You miss the whole point.

    >
    > I think it might be /you/ missing the point.
    >
    >> That MS is, or in the case of the figures I quoted was, selling
    >> windows programs like hotcakes. That is the whole point.

    >
    > No - they are forcing Windows on to the majority of PCs sold. That MS
    > /still/
    > offer XP as an "upgrade" amply demonstrates that /even/ /MS/ see that
    > Vista
    > is a disaster.


    Rubbish.
    M$ do not determine what a manufacturer puts on their PCs.

    If you want to start making PCs you can sell anything you want.
    The manufacturers put windows on because that is what people want.

    It would be cheaper not to put windows on if they had the same scale of
    production but they don't because virtually nobody wants a PC without
    windows.
    It is the lack of scale which is why Linux PCs cost more than windows PCs
    from the main manufacturers.
    If you go to a small shop the linux ones are cheaper but they still cost
    more than a windows Dell of similar spec.

    >
    >> You suggest that possibly hordes of these Vista machines are hiding in
    >> warehouses, unused and unwanted and perhaps you are right but if so
    >> then MS's sales figures will reflect that information next quarter,
    >> and believe it or not MS will report any adverse change in income.

    >
    > That's /not/ what was said or implied. Many machines are delivered with
    > Vista
    > and then have a reformat and an install of something useful. MS would
    > still
    > count this as a "sale".


    It is a sale.
    They also know how many are activated and those figures are available if you
    want to look.

    >
    >> They have to as firstly they have to file this sort of data with the
    >> US Government and secondly the have to make income figures known to
    >> Wall Street and do it in a creditable manner or their stock prices go
    >> to hell.

    >
    > Sell now!
    >
    >> Whether or not you like Windows, or not, MS is selling them to
    >> somebody else and doing quite well with them.

    >
    > No. See above. Fortunately, more manufacturers are offering Linux
    > pre-installs (even including Dell), so the number of Windows copies
    > shipped
    > will decline.


    They aren't yet.

    >
    >> Like many others you seem to get your facts all mixed up. On one hand
    >> is the technical quality of the software. On the other what sells.

    >
    > Not at all. See above.
    >
    >> Linux and its forerunner Unix are very advanced operating systems, in
    >> fact that is probably their worse shortcoming. They are so versatile
    >> that they are very complex to configure.

    >
    > You're several years behind the times. Installation and configuration of
    > modern Linux distros is /easier/ /than/ /Windows/ in every case.
    > Installing
    > Windows is a frustrating, irritating experience but seldom done by
    > the "average" user, because Windoze came "free" with their computer!


    The average user doesn't have to install windows and despite what you say it
    is easier to install windows.
    Especially when you have the PC manufacturers recovery disks.

    >
    >> Windows, on the other hand is, on the surface, a much more simple system
    >> for
    >> the average user to comprehend, and that is important.

    >
    > Entirely wrong! Most users *never* install an operating system. A fairly
    > substantial proportion of them will even /buy/ /a/ /new/ /computer/ when
    > Windows fouls up (as it invariably does), because they assume that the
    > computer is "faulty". You wouldn't believe the number of "nearly new"
    > machines that can be bought for (effectively) nothing because of this.
    >


    Well when you are selling to the masses there are bound to be some who can't
    use windows, what makes you think linux would fair any better in those
    hands?
    At least with windows you can take it into a shop and they will restore it
    for about 30.
    Or even free if you know which shop or know one of the other 99% of windows
    users that understand how to do it.


  8. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 17:13:13 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    > dennis@home wrote:
    >>
    >> I don't need to see it.
    >> If it does what he states it will make the data order somewhat mixed.
    >> If he wants it debugged then he will have to post the code and agree
    >> the fees.
    >>
    >>> Say! You might be /just/ the guy to explain the ins and outs of MD5
    >>> sums!

    >>

    > Well mind if i don't take you up on that. You are the second person who
    > appears to be talking out of their arses.


    Dennis, is it true? You have more than one arse?

    --
    Lionel B

  9. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 08:55:03 +0000, Christopher Hunter
    wrote:

    >Bruce in Bangkok wrote:
    >
    >> You miss the whole point.

    >
    >I think it might be /you/ missing the point.
    >
    >> That MS is, or in the case of the figures I quoted was, selling
    >> windows programs like hotcakes. That is the whole point.

    >
    >No - they are forcing Windows on to the majority of PCs sold. That MS /still/
    >offer XP as an "upgrade" amply demonstrates that /even/ /MS/ see that Vista
    >is a disaster.
    >
    >> You suggest that possibly hordes of these Vista machines are hiding in
    >> warehouses, unused and unwanted and perhaps you are right but if so
    >> then MS's sales figures will reflect that information next quarter,
    >> and believe it or not MS will report any adverse change in income.

    >
    >That's /not/ what was said or implied. Many machines are delivered with Vista
    >and then have a reformat and an install of something useful. MS would still
    >count this as a "sale".
    >
    >> They have to as firstly they have to file this sort of data with the
    >> US Government and secondly the have to make income figures known to
    >> Wall Street and do it in a creditable manner or their stock prices go
    >> to hell.

    >
    >Sell now!
    >
    >> Whether or not you like Windows, or not, MS is selling them to
    >> somebody else and doing quite well with them.

    >
    >No. See above. Fortunately, more manufacturers are offering Linux
    >pre-installs (even including Dell), so the number of Windows copies shipped
    >will decline.
    >
    >> Like many others you seem to get your facts all mixed up. On one hand
    >> is the technical quality of the software. On the other what sells.

    >
    >Not at all. See above.
    >
    >> Linux and its forerunner Unix are very advanced operating systems, in
    >> fact that is probably their worse shortcoming. They are so versatile
    >> that they are very complex to configure.

    >
    >You're several years behind the times. Installation and configuration of
    >modern Linux distros is /easier/ /than/ /Windows/ in every case. Installing
    >Windows is a frustrating, irritating experience but seldom done by
    >the "average" user, because Windoze came "free" with their computer!


    I'm not several years behind times although I may be several weeks
    behind times.

    I recently installed OpenSuse 11.0 on a computer. At the end on the
    installation everything worked except for the printer and a USB Wi-Fi
    adapter I use when on the boat. So... I contacted Canon, "got a Linux
    driver for your printer?" Nope, have got this source code thingy that
    might work." Downloaded thingy. "make thingy". computer says "no have
    compiler and other dependencies".

    Installed copy of Windows XP. At the end of the installation
    everything worked except for the printer and the wi-fi adapter. Went
    to the printer box, stuck Canon supplied CD in drive, drive starts and
    loads drivers. Went to Wi-Fi box and stuck vendor supplied CD in
    drive, drive starts and loads drivers. Everything works.

    I still don't have the compiler installed because I can't access the
    web because the Wi-Fi doesn't work and the distro is in Bangkok while
    I'm in Phuket, a thousand K away.

    Now don't bother to give me any BS about "well, you ought to know how
    to fix it" as I do know how to fix it, but just answer me honestly -
    which installation went the smoothest. Which was the easiest?

    >
    >> Windows, on the other hand is, on the surface, a much more simple system for
    >> the average user to comprehend, and that is important.

    >
    >Entirely wrong! Most users *never* install an operating system. A fairly
    >substantial proportion of them will even /buy/ /a/ /new/ /computer/ when
    >Windows fouls up (as it invariably does), because they assume that the
    >computer is "faulty". You wouldn't believe the number of "nearly new"
    >machines that can be bought for (effectively) nothing because of this.


    Good Lord C what kind of people do you associate with? I don't think I
    ever met someone so stupid as to sell away the computer because the
    software needed re-loading. Get a mate to load it for him, maybe, but
    not sell a perfectly good computer... If I did I'd probably have more
    computers then I do now :-)


    ..

    Bruce-in-Bangkok
    (correct Address is bpaige125atgmaildotcom)

  10. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 08:03:58 +0000, Christopher Hunter
    wrote:

    >Joe wrote:
    >
    >>> In short, Linux just doesn't count in the marketplace.

    >>
    >> Why would it? Most Linux distros and software are free. They don't
    >> take up much shelf space in any store in the world.

    >
    >Exactly! It's difficult for the "hard of thinking" to understand that "sales"
    >has little or nothing to do with "prevalence".
    >
    >> Red Flag is very prevalent throughout China.
    >>
    >> Linux is certainly not [close to] overtaking M$ anytime soon, but the
    >> places where M$ has already lost the war are enough to scare the hell
    >> out of them, and that makes me happy... ;-)

    >
    >It's funny watching MS spinning frantically, spamming newsgroups and mailing
    >lists. It's slowly dawning on them that they are in a losing position, and
    >simply can't compete with "free". There is /no/ /advantage/ /whatsoever/ in
    >using paid-for operating systems and software: MS will tell you that they
    >provide "commercial support". Have you ever tried MS' "support"? It's an
    >expensive joke!
    >
    >One of my clients made the move to FOSS from an extensive Windows server and
    >desktop installation after his experience of MS' "support": he made a huge
    >number of expensive phone calls to them, and seldom even got anyone able to
    >speak proper English! At no time could they diagnose the problems, and their
    >only suggestion ever was to "reinstall". He described his 5 server and 850
    >desktop Windoze network as "an expensive disaster". Migration to SLES for
    >the desktops and Red Hat for the servers (which he could reduce to 2) was
    >quick and painless. Suse and Red Hat provide excellent "paid-for" support,
    >not that he has had to make much use of it...
    >
    >MS "lost the plot" some while ago, and have not had a competitive product
    >since Win 2000. The transition from NT 4 to Win 2000 should have been the
    >end of the NT line, but because of their almost total lack of investment
    >in /real/ programmers, their misunderstanding of the future market, and
    >massive advertising budgets (maintained at the expense of /everything/ else),
    >they are in a /very/ poor situation, without /any/ credible products.
    >
    >The FOSS community was in danger of failing to take advantage of the MS
    >disaster, but the opportunities have now been recognised, and we're close to
    >the point where MS' crapware will be seen as a very poor second choice for
    >business.
    >
    >C.


    We seem to be talking about two different things here. You seem to be
    talking about a network and I'm talking about a single user, personal
    computer.

    If you want to talk about which system is better from a technical
    point of view, better network server, etc., then there is no argument
    that Linux is superior and I have never argued that there was (except
    Unix...:-). However I have been taking the point of view of the what I
    see as the "typical user" and while I know that in reality there is
    probably no such thing I do know hordes of people who, as was posted,
    by you?, don't know how to copy a file. My point is that there are
    many, many more of these people then there are knowledgable people and
    it is these unskilled people who make up the bulk of the computer
    buyers. And they are keeping MS happy.

    Bruce-in-Bangkok
    (correct Address is bpaige125atgmaildotcom)

  11. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    Christopher Hunter wrote:
    > Bruce in Bangkok wrote:
    >
    >
    >> Interesting as I see no real drop in the use of Windows here in Asia.
    >>

    >
    > That's funny - I saw *no* Windows whatsoever on my recent trip to China (apart
    > from the crashed desktop machines at the airport check-in). Red Flag seems
    > to be everywhere these days. The three businesses I visited all used FOSS.
    >
    > C.
    >



    I didn't go to China, but I saw the BSOD on the Bird Nest Stadium from
    my living room chair in Kansas.

    So did the rest of the world I would guess.


    --
    John

    No Microsoft, Apple, AT&T, Intel, Novell, Trend Micro, nor Ford products were used in the preparation or transmission of this message.

    The EULA sounds like it was written by a team of lawyers who want to tell me what I can't do. The GPL sounds like it was written by a human being, who wants me to know what I can do.

  12. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    Joe wrote:

    > Why would it? Most Linux distros and software are free. They don't
    > take up much shelf space in any store in the world.
    >
    > Red Flag is very prevalent throughout China.
    >
    > Linux is certainly not [close to] overtaking M$ anytime soon, but the
    > places where M$ has already lost the war are enough to scare the hell
    > out of them, and that makes me happy... ;-)



    Actually, Micr0$lut has never overtaken GNU/Linux -- in the important
    areas where it really matters. ;-)

    Should I list a few? OK:

    Price (the OS, and the required AV/Adware/Spyware/Malware add-ons)
    Freedom (libra)
    Availability
    Stability
    Security
    Configurability
    Updates
    Upgrades
    Platform architectures
    Power
    Networkability
    Services
    Cardio-health....

    Care to add to the list?

    I only see Micr0$lut ahead in the numbers game. And since it is all
    guesswork, even that is highly questionable, and not worth the newsgroup
    space to even discuss it.

    IOW, "Who cares?"!

    Let's move on to something on-topic with Ubuntu, eh.


    --
    John

    No Microsoft, Apple, AT&T, Intel, Novell, Trend Micro, nor Ford products were used in the preparation or transmission of this message.

    The EULA sounds like it was written by a team of lawyers who want to tell me what I can't do. The GPL sounds like it was written by a human being, who wants me to know what I can do.

  13. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    On 2008-11-07, dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >
    > "Christopher Hunter" wrote in message
    > news:6nie3uFlooa8U1@mid.individual.net...
    >> Bruce in Bangkok wrote:
    >>
    >>> You miss the whole point.

    >>
    >> I think it might be /you/ missing the point.
    >>
    >>> That MS is, or in the case of the figures I quoted was, selling
    >>> windows programs like hotcakes. That is the whole point.

    >>
    >> No - they are forcing Windows on to the majority of PCs sold. That MS
    >> /still/
    >> offer XP as an "upgrade" amply demonstrates that /even/ /MS/ see that
    >> Vista
    >> is a disaster.

    >
    > Rubbish.
    > M$ do not determine what a manufacturer puts on their PCs.
    >
    > If you want to start making PCs you can sell anything you want.
    > The manufacturers put windows on because that is what people want.
    >
    > It would be cheaper not to put windows on if they had the same scale of
    > production but they don't because virtually nobody wants a PC without
    > windows.
    > It is the lack of scale which is why Linux PCs cost more than windows PCs
    > from the main manufacturers.
    > If you go to a small shop the linux ones are cheaper but they still cost
    > more than a windows Dell of similar spec.


    That is completely wrong. The reason it is cheaper to ship with
    Windows is because of the sale of "Value Added" apps. The hundreds of
    useless software applications, like AOL, the DVDRW software, the DVD
    player, and so on, that are all slimmed down versions that are paid
    advertising. When Dell sells you a Vista PC, they also include all of
    these apps, and each of the software vendors pays a per-copy price to
    have their software included, in the hopes that the users will upgrade
    to the full version, for a price.

    You add 20 or 30 of these apps to a PC, and the sale price of the PC
    is less than the price of the hardware alone. There are no such apps
    in the Linux world, so there is no such discount when selling a Linux
    box.

    In my previous life, I spent 9 years at a VAR. The main reason for
    choosing the current Windows offering was that without it, you
    couldn't compete (in price) with other VARs that did.

    >
    >>
    >>> You suggest that possibly hordes of these Vista machines are hiding in
    >>> warehouses, unused and unwanted and perhaps you are right but if so
    >>> then MS's sales figures will reflect that information next quarter,
    >>> and believe it or not MS will report any adverse change in income.

    >>
    >> That's /not/ what was said or implied. Many machines are delivered with
    >> Vista
    >> and then have a reformat and an install of something useful. MS would
    >> still
    >> count this as a "sale".

    >
    > It is a sale.
    > They also know how many are activated and those figures are available if you
    > want to look.


    Where. I have not seen any publically available stats on the number
    of Vista copies that have been activated. And it still wouldn't count
    the number that were activated before they were subsequently removed.

    >
    >>
    >>> They have to as firstly they have to file this sort of data with the
    >>> US Government and secondly the have to make income figures known to
    >>> Wall Street and do it in a creditable manner or their stock prices go
    >>> to hell.

    >>
    >> Sell now!
    >>
    >>> Whether or not you like Windows, or not, MS is selling them to
    >>> somebody else and doing quite well with them.

    >>
    >> No. See above. Fortunately, more manufacturers are offering Linux
    >> pre-installs (even including Dell), so the number of Windows copies
    >> shipped
    >> will decline.

    >
    > They aren't yet.
    >
    >>
    >>> Like many others you seem to get your facts all mixed up. On one hand
    >>> is the technical quality of the software. On the other what sells.

    >>
    >> Not at all. See above.
    >>
    >>> Linux and its forerunner Unix are very advanced operating systems, in
    >>> fact that is probably their worse shortcoming. They are so versatile
    >>> that they are very complex to configure.

    >>
    >> You're several years behind the times. Installation and configuration of
    >> modern Linux distros is /easier/ /than/ /Windows/ in every case.
    >> Installing
    >> Windows is a frustrating, irritating experience but seldom done by
    >> the "average" user, because Windoze came "free" with their computer!

    >
    > The average user doesn't have to install windows and despite what you say it
    > is easier to install windows.
    > Especially when you have the PC manufacturers recovery disks.


    That is not "Installing". That is running a recovery image. Dell
    ships these for Ubuntu, as well.

    For a ground-up installation, though, in most cases, Ubuntu is much
    quicker and easier to install that Windows. A full Windows install
    includes over an hour of waiting for the initial install, then waiting
    while hardware is detected, swapping disks several times (should you
    have all of them) to get the drivers installed, hitting the internet
    to add the current drivers for the devices you don't have the disks
    for, another chunk of time to run Windows update, then the install of
    your antivirus and anti-spyware software. Now you are at a point
    where you can undertake the tedious task of installing all of the apps
    you use, one at a time, with 20 user dialog boxes during the install.

    Now, after several hours, you have a working box. Then you get to put
    it on the internet to find out that your virus defs from this morning
    do not cover that new virus you just got, and you get to mess with
    that.

    The biggest problem in an Ubuntu install is getting some newer
    hardware to work due to lack of sufficient drivers. This has gotten
    much better, but it is still an issue, especially with a new laptop.
    It can be frustrating, but in most cases a few minutes of research
    will yield positive results, and you're on your way.

    My desktop came with Vista installed. It took 30 minutes, from
    beginning to end, to remedy that. Same with the kids' desktop. My
    laptop took a little longer, because the Atheros 5006 Wireless
    adapter wasn't supported by madwifi at the time, and I had to hunt
    down XP drivers to get it to work under ndiswrapper. Total time:
    about 45 minutes.


    >
    >>
    >>> Windows, on the other hand is, on the surface, a much more simple system
    >>> for
    >>> the average user to comprehend, and that is important.

    >>
    >> Entirely wrong! Most users *never* install an operating system. A fairly
    >> substantial proportion of them will even /buy/ /a/ /new/ /computer/ when
    >> Windows fouls up (as it invariably does), because they assume that the
    >> computer is "faulty". You wouldn't believe the number of "nearly new"
    >> machines that can be bought for (effectively) nothing because of this.
    >>

    >
    > Well when you are selling to the masses there are bound to be some who can't
    > use windows, what makes you think linux would fair any better in those
    > hands?
    > At least with windows you can take it into a shop and they will restore it
    > for about £30.
    > Or even free if you know which shop or know one of the other 99% of windows
    > users that understand how to do it.
    >


    I am not one of those Linux purists. Windows has done plenty of
    things OK. The UI on XP was decent, and XP was fairly reliable, so
    long as you kept it clean of viruses. Vista, on the other hand, is a
    pain in the ass. I have it on one machine, and I've gotten to the
    point that I have it auto log on and run Windows Media Center at boot.
    My only interaction with it is through a remote control, except for
    the annoyance of needing to reboot it every couple of days when Media
    Center locks and won't start back up right without a boot.

    As soon as I build a new machine for the Entertainment system, with
    hardware fully compatible with MythBuntu, Vista will be eliminated
    from my house.

    And I've yet to go to any business with more than 10 users that has
    ANY copies of Vista running. They are all sticking with XP.


    --
    Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
    joe at hits - buffalo dot com
    "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
    time..." - Danny, American History X

  14. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    On 2008-11-07, Bruce in Bangkok wrote:
    >
    > We seem to be talking about two different things here. You seem to be
    > talking about a network and I'm talking about a single user, personal
    > computer.
    >
    > If you want to talk about which system is better from a technical
    > point of view, better network server, etc., then there is no argument
    > that Linux is superior and I have never argued that there was (except
    > Unix...:-). However I have been taking the point of view of the what I
    > see as the "typical user" and while I know that in reality there is
    > probably no such thing I do know hordes of people who, as was posted,
    > by you?, don't know how to copy a file. My point is that there are
    > many, many more of these people then there are knowledgable people and
    > it is these unskilled people who make up the bulk of the computer
    > buyers. And they are keeping MS happy.


    This is true, but those people do not buy Windows because they care
    about having Windows. They buy Windows because that is what they use,
    either at Work or School. If M$ starts losing market share in the
    business community, those same people will want whatever the company
    moves to.

    A friend of mine lives in Cleveland, working for a large insurance
    company. When they switched from Windows to Redhat linux, he switched
    at home. As he is not a computer guy, there was a learning curve, but
    that was all right with him. He had the computer at home so he could
    work from home, so all he cared about was that it was the same as what
    they used at work. That seems to be the bulk of computer users.


    --
    Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
    joe at hits - buffalo dot com
    "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
    time..." - Danny, American History X

  15. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux



    "Joe" wrote in message
    news:slrngh89ig.ps0.joe@barada.griffincs.local...

    > That is not "Installing". That is running a recovery image. Dell
    > ships these for Ubuntu, as well.
    >
    > For a ground-up installation, though, in most cases, Ubuntu is much
    > quicker and easier to install that Windows. A full Windows install
    > includes over an hour of waiting for the initial install, then waiting
    > while hardware is detected, swapping disks several times (should you
    > have all of them) to get the drivers installed, hitting the internet
    > to add the current drivers for the devices you don't have the disks
    > for, another chunk of time to run Windows update, then the install of
    > your antivirus and anti-spyware software. Now you are at a point
    > where you can undertake the tedious task of installing all of the apps
    > you use, one at a time, with 20 user dialog boxes during the install.


    That isn't how to install windows.
    You boot vista, select install, answer four or five questions, wait 35 mins.
    *if* it hasn't recognised you network card, install the drivers.
    Let it run windows update to get the remaining drivers.
    Then add AV (avg or avast).

    >
    > Now, after several hours, you have a working box. Then you get to put
    > it on the internet to find out that your virus defs from this morning
    > do not cover that new virus you just got, and you get to mess with
    > that.


    Odd that soem of use have never had a virus even though we are on the
    Internet all the time.
    Some users must be far more susceptible to virus infections than others,
    just as they are likely to answer phishing emails.

    >
    > The biggest problem in an Ubuntu install is getting some newer
    > hardware to work due to lack of sufficient drivers. This has gotten
    > much better, but it is still an issue, especially with a new laptop.
    > It can be frustrating, but in most cases a few minutes of research
    > will yield positive results, and you're on your way.


    Yes, but it takes knowledge of what you actually have to find the answers,
    lots of people don't know what a NIC is or if they have an nvidia 8400M
    graphics chip.
    They don't need to with windows, they do with Ubuntu.

    >
    > My desktop came with Vista installed. It took 30 minutes, from
    > beginning to end, to remedy that. Same with the kids' desktop. My
    > laptop took a little longer, because the Atheros 5006 Wireless
    > adapter wasn't supported by madwifi at the time, and I had to hunt
    > down XP drivers to get it to work under ndiswrapper. Total time:
    > about 45 minutes.


    Try that with someone that doesn't know what Atheros is.

    >
    >
    >>
    >>>
    >>>> Windows, on the other hand is, on the surface, a much more simple
    >>>> system
    >>>> for
    >>>> the average user to comprehend, and that is important.
    >>>
    >>> Entirely wrong! Most users *never* install an operating system. A
    >>> fairly
    >>> substantial proportion of them will even /buy/ /a/ /new/ /computer/ when
    >>> Windows fouls up (as it invariably does), because they assume that the
    >>> computer is "faulty". You wouldn't believe the number of "nearly new"
    >>> machines that can be bought for (effectively) nothing because of this.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Well when you are selling to the masses there are bound to be some who
    >> can't
    >> use windows, what makes you think linux would fair any better in those
    >> hands?
    >> At least with windows you can take it into a shop and they will restore
    >> it
    >> for about £30.
    >> Or even free if you know which shop or know one of the other 99% of
    >> windows
    >> users that understand how to do it.
    >>

    >
    > I am not one of those Linux purists. Windows has done plenty of
    > things OK. The UI on XP was decent, and XP was fairly reliable, so
    > long as you kept it clean of viruses. Vista, on the other hand, is a
    > pain in the ass. I have it on one machine, and I've gotten to the
    > point that I have it auto log on and run Windows Media Center at boot.
    > My only interaction with it is through a remote control, except for
    > the annoyance of needing to reboot it every couple of days when Media
    > Center locks and won't start back up right without a boot.


    So what's wrong with it then?
    My vista MCE machine has been running for months and never locks up.
    I can trust it to record TV without any bother.
    If yours is so unreliable there is something wrong with it and it needs
    fixing.
    Mine is an ancient Shuttle with a Hauppauge pci and a Hauppauge USB tuner
    providing the two channels.
    Vista is running in 1G RAM with two 250g drives and a 8G stick to provide
    readyboost, which reduces paging.

    >
    > As soon as I build a new machine for the Entertainment system, with
    > hardware fully compatible with MythBuntu, Vista will be eliminated
    > from my house.


    Why not build new hardware to fix your vista machine?
    And which newbie is going to install and get MythTV to work?
    Remember most windows users are newbies.

    >
    > And I've yet to go to any business with more than 10 users that has
    > ANY copies of Vista running. They are all sticking with XP.


    That is sensible.
    They already have systems in place and there is no point in replacing them.
    M$ know this and allow people to use XP on the Vista license as they allowed
    200 on their XP license and 3.1 on 95 in the past.


  16. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    After takin' a swig o' grog, Erik Funkenbusch belched out
    this bit o' wisdom:

    >> One of the best references on this whole general topic is this:
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Interesting quote from that article:
    >
    > "glibc 2.1 and later provide a generic implementation written for standards
    > compliance rather than performance."
    >
    > So even Linux doesn't have performance in mind when it wraps AIO with
    > standard functions.


    Another ignorant person who conflates GNU and Linux.

    In any case, you don't need to use glibc's functions. Try libaio.

    --
    Slous' Contention:
    If you do a job too well, you'll get stuck with it.

  17. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    Bruce in Bangkok wrote:

    > My point is that there are many, many more of these people than there
    > are knowledgable people and it is these unskilled people who make up the
    > bulk of the computer buyers. And they are keeping MS happy.


    Funny you should say that. I've just been in Japan, and the biggest selling
    machines right now are the Linux sub-notebooks. Their "average" computer
    user isn't at all interested in which OS they use, as long as it works
    properly. Both Linux and XP versions of these little computers are
    available, but the XP ones just gather dust - they cost almost twice as much
    as the Linux ones, and their performance is appalling.

    The "average" Japanese computer user is finding Linux easy enough to use.
    Perhaps they're just more intelligent than the average American...

    I just received a one month old Dell 1525 with Vista on it from a friend. A
    quick look through its hard drive (it won't boot any more) showed that it was
    riddled with innumerable pieces of malware of all sorts, despite having
    endless anti-this and anti-that software. As far as its owner was concerned,
    it was broken beyond repair. I recovered all their data and burned it to a
    couple of CDs so they shouldn't lose anything they'd saved. Installation of
    Ubuntu took just over 15 minutes and everything "Just Worked", but the owner
    of the machine had gone to a local computer shop and bought another one with
    Vista on it... Some people never learn!

    C.

  18. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    Bruce in Bangkok wrote:

    > I'm not several years behind times although I may be several weeks
    > behind times.


    You are if you think Linux is more difficult to install than Windoze!

    > I recently installed OpenSuse 11.0 on a computer. At the end on the
    > installation everything worked except for the printer and a USB Wi-Fi
    > adapter I use when on the boat. So... I contacted Canon, "got a Linux
    > driver for your printer?" Nope, have got this source code thingy that
    > might work." Downloaded thingy. "make thingy". computer says "no have
    > compiler and other dependencies".


    Your USB wireless-thingy /should/ be easily resolved, and (I don't mean to be
    rude but) only a fool would buy /any/ Canon product. All Canon stuff is
    overpriced junk, and even /they/ are beginning to recognise that they're
    losing sales to manufacturers who /do/ provide Linux drivers (like HP and
    Epson).

    > Installed copy of Windows XP. At the end of the installation
    > everything worked except for the printer and the wi-fi adapter. Went
    > to the printer box, stuck Canon supplied CD in drive, drive starts and
    > loads drivers. Went to Wi-Fi box and stuck vendor supplied CD in
    > drive, drive starts and loads drivers. Everything works.


    You had *no* applications installed at this point, and first connection to
    the 'net (to get the innumerable Windoze and anti-virus updates) would
    guarantee infection with the latest malware nasty, rendering the installation
    effectively useless...

    > Now don't bother to give me any BS about "well, you ought to know how
    > to fix it" as I do know how to fix it, but just answer me honestly -
    > which installation went the smoothest. Which was the easiest?


    No comparison. If you had a proper supported printer, you'd have had no
    problem, /and/ a comprehensive suite of useful programmes if you installed
    Linux.

    >>> Windows, on the other hand is, on the surface, a much more simple system
    >>> for the average user to comprehend, and that is important.

    >>
    >>Entirely wrong! Most users *never* install an operating system. A fairly
    >>substantial proportion of them will even /buy/ /a/ /new/ /computer/ when
    >>Windows fouls up (as it invariably does), because they assume that the
    >>computer is "faulty". You wouldn't believe the number of "nearly new"
    >>machines that can be bought for (effectively) nothing because of this.

    >
    > Good Lord C what kind of people do you associate with? I don't think I
    > ever met someone so stupid as to sell away the computer because the
    > software needed re-loading. Get a mate to load it for him, maybe, but
    > not sell a perfectly good computer... If I did I'd probably have more
    > computers then I do now :-)


    A friend of mine used to work for a well-known computer chainstore. Analysis
    of their sales showed that slightly over 40% of them were to people who "just
    needed re-loading"! The general populace are /entirely/ stupid when it comes
    to computers...

    C.

  19. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >
    > "Maxwell Lol" wrote in message
    > news:878wrw8ijf.fsf@com.invalid...
    >> "dennis@home" writes:
    >>
    >>> I don't need to see it.
    >>> If it does what he states it will make the data order somewhat mixed.
    >>> If he wants it debugged then he will have to post the code and agree
    >>> the fees.

    >>
    >> If he's doing select(), then he can handle several input and output
    >> files simultaneously.

    >
    > He could but that isn't what he said.
    > He said he could make his application simulate AIO by using several
    > threads to do whatever the application was doing before. A sure way to
    > screw up the order.


    Oh dear. You had better tell Zeus that. Thats what they do and they only
    manage to be a few orders of magnitude faster and less memory intensive
    than Apache. Now I know why whenever I went to te server for page A, I
    got page b instead. How come no one else has ever noticed it?

    ;-)


  20. Re: My employer completed migration of apps to Linux

    On Fri, 7 Nov 2008 07:34:17 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Erik Funkenbusch belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >>> One of the best references on this whole general topic is this:
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> Interesting quote from that article:
    >>
    >> "glibc 2.1 and later provide a generic implementation written for standards
    >> compliance rather than performance."
    >>
    >> So even Linux doesn't have performance in mind when it wraps AIO with
    >> standard functions.

    >
    > Another ignorant person who conflates GNU and Linux.


    Gee, doesn't every call it GNU/Linux?

    > In any case, you don't need to use glibc's functions. Try libaio.


    Then you're not using "portable" code, like Ignoramus insists.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 9 10 11 12 13 LastLast