Linux Hater's Blog: Driving me insane

Saturday, February 28, 2009

Driving me insane

You know what I see a lot lately? Some luser posting some comment somewhere saying something like:

Look how far Linux has come.. it used to be that we had no drivers and you had to really choose your hardware. Nowadays, most of the drivers are there out of the box. This is better than windows!

Another fantastic example of lusers in la-la land.

In case y’all haven’t noticed, the value that a real desktop OS provides is not just in the drivers. Actually, I’d go so far as to saying it’s mostly not in the drivers. Just take a look at the Mac. People are willing to pay oodles of money for that stuff and it has the fewest drivers of any major platform.

Drivers are only just the beginning. And actually, sometimes they’re the easiest part. There’s plenty of room for standard Linux fuck-up at higher layers. Audio, for example. Mostly working alsa drivers you have (and besides, mostly everything is hda-intel these days), but a userlevel piece to manage sound? PulseAudio? Yay!

But for some reason y’all like to focus on the drivers. You know why lusers do that? Because it just happens to be the problem that people notice first. Your install Linux on your machine, your hardware doesn’t fucking show up. That’s immediate fail. Maybe some day you’ll get to a place where your hardware does show up. But does that then instantly make Linux as good as Windows or OSX? Please.

I’m actually excited to see this train-wreck happen. Once y’all have drivers, the fight will move to the next layer up. And like I said, it’s a lot harder at that layer. At least hardware doesn’t change, and most of the time, drivers just expose hardware functions. But providing sane, stable API’s, utilities, configuration GUI’s, and access to those functions to 3rd party apps with high levels of integration? Well, if X and PulseAudio are any indication, lusers will be at this for a loooong time to come.

801 flames:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 801 Newer› Newest»

Anonymous said...: And what the hell is GCC faster than? QBasic? Even freetards were calling for its immediate ousting a few weeks ago with the Firefox PGO fiasco.; March 4, 2009 at 3:26 PM
Anonymous said...: Look at all the bullshit you have to go thru installing openoffice 3.0 on ubuntu

http://monespaceperso.org/blog-en/2009/02/19/installing-openofficeorg-3-on-ubuntu-810/

Unfuknbelieveable[TM]; March 4, 2009 at 4:12 PM
Anonymous said...: YouDon'tNeedTheLastVersion(TM); March 4, 2009 at 4:19 PM
Anonymous said...: Well, that's not a very good point to make - mac users don't care for having support for tons of different devices, cause MacOS is installed on very specific hardware. Instead of writing drivers for new hard disks, sound / graphic cards (which is the hard part), they can concentrate on USB devices. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought it isn't possible to install MacOS on a PC.

And btw, Vista had some issues concerning drivers, and that really put ppl off. Now MS is in trouble and has to ship 7 sooner than it initially planned in order to keep its market share. And no, I'm not that stupid to say it's because of linux, apple is obviously the biggest contender here.; March 4, 2009 at 4:38 PM
Anonymous said...: We now need to add the public key of the repository :

sudo wget http://monespaceperso.org/blog-en/files_blog/key_ppa_office
sudo apt-key add key_ppa_office

Jesus Christ, can't this shit automatically negotiate public keys? I mean, Netscape figured this out in 1994 or something.; March 4, 2009 at 4:45 PM
Anonymous said...: Look at all the bullshit you have to go thru installing openoffice 3.0 on ubuntu

http://monespaceperso.org/blog-en/2009/02/19/installing-openofficeorg-3-on-ubuntu-810/

Unfuknbelieveable[TM]

Hey according to oiaohm lintards love that procedure and specifically ask for it on developer mailing lists.; March 4, 2009 at 4:56 PM
Anonymous said...: Instead of writing drivers for new hard disks

Uh, hard drives don't need drivers. The controllers take care of that.

it isn't possible to install MacOS on a PC.

There's a sizable community dedicated to this:

http://www.hackint0sh.org/

Now MS is in trouble and has to ship 7 sooner than it initially planned in order to keep its market share.

Windows 7 is on schedule. The XP -> Vista delay was an anomaly. Longhorn was originally scheduled for 4Q 2003. Three years product turnover time is pretty conservative, especially in IT land. Funny that Leopard's long development (and comparatively little showing) wasn't lauded as some huge failure.

OS X is digging in but almost entirely at the expense of the remaining "not Microsoft" systems. Wake me up when Windows' share slips to 80%. Besides, all these Mac people end up buying Office anyway, and Microsoft's brilliant marketing paints the MacBU as a group of pitiable suffering artists, which Mac fans just eat up.; March 4, 2009 at 5:04 PM
oiaohm said...: Again out of context.

Look at all the bullshit you have to go thru installing openoffice 3.0 on ubuntu

http://monespaceperso.org/blog-en/2009/02/19/installing-openofficeorg-3-on-ubuntu-810/

Unfuknbelieveable[TM]

You complain here about it. There is no complains about it in the Openoffice project bugzilla or mailing list.

As per normal ubuntu guys giving instructions are idiots. The one from openoffice.org its extract and run the little script called update that happens to be in the base directory. Nice even provides a little bit of graphical to do it. Ok could be better yet no one is asking for improvements.

apt-get can also pull key in directly by using 1 line. wget command does not need root to operate. The list goes on they are idiots yet no one pulls them up on this.

Ok update called install might help windows users click on the right thing. Update script also deals with conflict versions.

The true according to me. Is that no one is complaining where they can be heard. Instead complains here were there annoyance gets lots in the cloud of background noise like here. Do openoffice developers hang out here. Of course not they don't have to put up with your stupid insults.

So this complete Blog is a waste of time if you want something to improve.

I never said Lintards asked for it. No one complains about it where developers hear. So developers think everything is OK.

This is 90 percent of the problem here. People love trying to make up context and not having the balls to put there name to what they are saying.; March 4, 2009 at 5:24 PM
Anonymous said...: I never said Lintards asked for it. No one complains about it where developers hear. So developers think everything is OK.

You did say they ask for it.

Lintard developers delude themselves into thinking it's ok because they can't do any better. You continually describing them as living in a cave where they know nothing of what 99% of the population wants just reinforces stereotypes.; March 4, 2009 at 5:35 PM
burrix said...: You complain here about it. There is no complains about it in the Openoffice project bugzilla or mailing list.

we aren't here to complain about shitty software we don't use, we LAUGH at you lusers and your stupidity here...

btw, oiaohm, I respected you for a while for being so persistant, however you are overwhelmed by the truth on every claim you made, and now you keep jumping from one issue to another in order to try to convince us... so I feel sorry for you now. Can't you just face the truth?

LINUX SUX IN THE DESKTOP, IT IS A JOKE AND WILL NEVER DEFEAT MICROSOFT (OR WHATEVER EVIL CORPORATION); March 4, 2009 at 5:43 PM
Anonymous said...: Talk about out of context. The irony. oiaohm talks down to a group known as "Linux hater" about not trying hard enough to improve Linux.

Where are your balls, dude? You spend your life feeling superior to everybody and have not a single accomplishment to your name. The kernel sucks. Ubuntu sucks. Deb and RPM suck. All the while saying that only you have the answers, that everybody else is idiotic, even the programmers who have been at this since the 1980s.

So where's your project, fuckhead? You pretend to have all this knowledge and skill, but you're no better than anyone else who wastes their day battling Internet flamewars, inflating his own ego and claiming nonexistent talents.; March 4, 2009 at 5:49 PM
Kharkhalash said...: Problem here Kharkhalash you are trying to say Specialised is required. I have a very big technical problem.

Yes, your huge technical problem is obviously reading comprehension, or lack thereof, more aptly.

I'm saying different types of computing have different priorities, and as such a specialized system always outperforms a general purpose system in the task it is specialized in, and you're bantering on about Gods know what.

There is a huge mother of a overlap that for years the same stupid logic kept apart.

Nobody said there was no overlap. All I said is that there are different priorities for different tasks. I even implied that the biggest difference between a desktop and a workstation is the degree to which thinhs are prioritized. (in terms of audio, a desktop system only needs to worry about playback, on an audio workstation you need to worry about input and latency is orders of magnitude more important).

Linux Server + alterations required to support realtime saw 400% percent boosts in through put also increases in stability.

Yes, yes, I know all about Kon Colivas, locking and the CFS. Of course you're just saw the word "scheduler" and started regurgitating mailing list stuff.

It doesn't change that the scheduler a system designed for desktop use has different priorities than say an audio workstation. the big kernel lock has little to do with anything here. Look at how CFS is designed. It's a "completely fair scheduler" read as "general purpose scheduler". The point remains that on an audio workstation audio and IO have higher priority than anything else, on a server setup, things like audio and video aren't proritized, etc. All that you've spewed out here only reinforces the point I waa trying to make: Linux is a (poor) general purpose system. It's common sense that on a general purpose machine, there is no distinction between different workloads.

They scheduler and locking across server, desktop, workstation, embedded and realtime all have to be design basically the same.

On Linux, yes. because Linux is a general purpose system. And this is why Linux fails to offer any significant competition to any of the entrenched leaders in those fields. Different workloads have different prioritiesd. It's a simple fact of life.

If you don't you end up with crappy performance or instability.

Crappy general purpose performance, for sure. See the bit about SGI Tezro workstations in the post you're replying to. The performance sucks for everything _except_ what it was specifically designed for.

Even on realtime items have to be que or some device end up in a bad state.

Nobody said you didn't have to queue. Queueing is a fact of computing. A cpu can only do so much at once. The point here is which processes have priority. Something like CFS is only fit for use in a jack of all trades system.

Why does desktop, workstation and server need real-time. Simple cpu less devices that are dumb as dish water and if not answered in time will damage self.

I think what you mean by "Real time support" and what the rest of the world understands to be "real time computing" differ wildly.

Only realtime systems require realtime scheduling, due to the nature of the task. A desktop does not need to be a realtime OS.a server does not need to be realtime, neither does a workstation. In fact, these workloads just don't function well in realtime systems.

Realtime is something that only really works in embedded devices (such as anti-lock breaks on a car) where response time and latency are critical.

There is no technical difference if you want everything to work.

Yes, there is.

All of them cannot use spinlocks if you want performance. Instead must use ques.

And now you go from realtime to spinlocks. You're just babbling and hoping it makes sense, aren't you?

Solarias and QNX has been ahead in that section.

Actually, Solaris and QNX are both way ahead yes. But on completely different extremes of the spectrum. QNX is an embedded real time, microkernel-based OS. Solaris is a high performance, high reliability ultra high end server space OS.

Please go back and read your history again. XENIX did not make X86 dominate. Did not produce enough production volume to give it a major price advantage.

I stated a fact. Xenix, before being abandoned by Microsoft, outdeployed every other Unix COMBINED. That qualifies dominating a market by any yardstick. Think about what that means. Xenix ran only on x86. Therefore all Xenix systems were x86 systems. There were more Xenix, and therefore more x86 systems out there than ever other Unix system (and accompanying architecture) COMBINED.

Desktop market to be correct Dos and Windows gave the production volume.

There was no desktop market in the time of Xenix. In fact the desktop/home computer market was a direct result of DOS. The market was much smaller, and was dominated by Xenix and x86. However, the reason MS made Xenix run on x86 was because x86, even back then was a hell of a lot cheaper to produce than Sparc or Mips or Power or Alpha or any of the others.

All the big Unix's were doing quite well into 1990 with there own unique processor chips after Xenix was long gone.

And Unix was made irrelevent by that point already. Xenix didn't fade away into nothing. It was abandoned in favour of DOS. Because Microsoft saught to create a much larger market to play it. None of this, however changed that Xenix/x86 was the dominant platform before the advent of DOS and home computing.

Even when Xenix was around it did nothing to create x86 dominance.

Of course, because controlling more than 50% of a market isn't considered dominating these days.

Linux on the other hand x86 built clusters that really stuffed there cpu market.

It was only a matter of time before someone made the pointless, out of context referrence to HPC without knowing a thing about HPC, I guess.

Windows desktop had made x86 volume produced.

Obviously, Microsoft created the home computing market, which was a much, much larger market than the enterprise/mainframe market. This doesn't change the fact that Xenix made x86 the dominant architecture long before Windows or even DOS were conceived.

Without Windows Linux would never have got the supercomputer market.

Again, the referrence to HPC without knowing the first thing about HPC.

The thing with a cluster is TeraFlops are a directly proportional to the number of cores in a cluster. You throw in more cores, you get more Flops. Linux didn't take the lead inb The HPC market because of its performance. it took the lead because the cost of adding cores on a Linux cluster is just that. the cost of the core, nothing more.

A heap of cores isn't impressive. It just outputs more FLOPS. What's impressive is actual supercomputers, single HPC systems that aren't clusters. Sun, Cray and IBM are the kings there. More FLOPs per CPU, and their HPC entries aren't clusters.

That says a lot more about the performance of a real HPC OS and architecture than does "look, I can throw more core into my cluster lol".

Linux HPC is about having more cores at lower cost. Sun HPC is about delivering high performance hardware and software with fewer cores, and without the need to cluster.

Volume is key. x86 + Windows locked created volume.

I'm talking dominance, you're talking volume. again, you're gibbering unrelated nonsense. Dominance is measured by percentage of total volume, not by units.

Furthermore, I'm talking about market dominance, and you're bantering about driving down costs. Here's a news flash, you don't absolutely have to drive down costs to dominate a market. Look at Linux's utter failure ion spite of being free, as an example.; March 4, 2009 at 5:58 PM
juanito said...: *nix good for security? good b/c of its amazing shell? I am reading the Unix Hater Handbook and they pretty much bash all those and others false assumptions. Sure, the book is old but it disproves claims such as "Unix was designed with security in mind" and other myths. Read it for yourself, it is pretty funny...; March 4, 2009 at 6:02 PM
oiaohm said...: Again context ask for it. They asked for cross distribution support they got that. Now did they then ask for a installer that was user-friendly no one really has.

Context is critical. I did also say people get what they ask for. Not asking for it you don't get. Simple.

Not once have I said that the Linux Desktop does not sux.

No single person knows the future either. Never is a risky word to use you can always be proved wrong.

So it fine for me to laugh at the numbers of Virus infected Windows users out there?

Remember I don't think Linux will have to win against Microsoft on the Desktop to win. Microsoft will simply forced to die due to market not paying there price any more. Its like netbooks last 12 months more of them sold than Desktop and laptop machines. Phones again more of them sold as well.

Google is on the correct path. 1 OS covering everything. So live becomes simple learn 1 OS configure you phone laptop desktop....

Market is changing. Question is can MS catch up. Its getting hardder to get motherboards without Linux onboard.

Where is MS on motherboard product? Simple MS cannot afford to be drawn into that. At 1 cent per copy MS basically cannot live at that low of income. That is not the only market MS cannot afford to be draw into.

Simple all you guys here have the wrong idea. Linux basically will never need to beat Windows. Undercut and outlast.

Linux is about the only competitor with enough market coverage to strangle hold MS means to make money. Someone goes to by licenses from MS and threatens to ship Linux instead because it good enough so MS has to drop price to hold market. Cycle repeats and repeats each time profit percentages dropping until it goes negative. Forced to lay off staff at some point they lay off too many staff then are dead in water. Not enough staff left to patch there problems so no staff to create new products so implodes.

That point is coming. To avoid it MS will have to restructure some way or another. MS is dropping lots of R&D projects. That is not without long term costs.; March 4, 2009 at 6:06 PM
Anonymous said...: juanito, I'm reading more into the Handbook right now as well. Seems like the thing could have been written yesterday. Change the names of companies and dumb down the insults a bit and you'll have what's written here.; March 4, 2009 at 6:10 PM
Anonymous said...: "Linux is about the only competitor with enough market coverage to strangle hold MS means to make money."

Please. Apple has an order of magnitude more coverage than Linux in desktop and probably two orders more in embedded thanks to the iPhone. Apple dies on the server, but the previous two are far more important and harder won than server share.; March 4, 2009 at 6:15 PM
Anonymous said...: I find it funny that someone that writes so incomprehensibly has the nerve of accusing others of creating a "cloud of background noise".; March 4, 2009 at 6:23 PM
Anonymous said...: What happens when Microsoft folds? Who does the R&D? These people who were previously paid six figures to innovate new functionality--you think they'll do it for free because they're unemployed? Even if they do, what happens when somebody notices and snatches them up? Essentially, from where do improvements in Linux, and computing in general, once all the proprietary companies are put under?; March 4, 2009 at 6:30 PM
Anonymous said...: Isn't Linux the OS that passes the output of one command to another via a string that you need to run through sed or awk to get it to work right? Lame. Upgrade that shit. Powershell handles piping so much better than Linux.; March 4, 2009 at 8:07 PM
Anonymous said...: Context is critical. I did also say people get what they ask for. Not asking for it you don't get. Simple.

Yes according to you that fucked up process for installing open office on ubuntu is exactly what lintards asked for. According to you lintard devs only give users exactly what they ask for and they gave them that fucked process for installing open office on ubuntu.

How in the world would a lintard dev know that 99% of the world wouldn't go near that fucked up process for installing open office on ubuntu? Is that lintard dev supposed to be a mind reader? Is he supposed to have any knowledge of anything not asked for on his mailing list in which 5 people participate?

The above reasoning is so sound oiaohm that you can consider me convinced. But of what I'm not sure.; March 4, 2009 at 8:19 PM
Anonymous said...: Instructions to install openoffice suck because:

"UbuntuNewbiesWriting HelpfulInstructionsAreCalledIdiotsFromOtherLintards[TM]"

"As per normal ubuntu guys giving instructions are idiots"; March 4, 2009 at 8:25 PM
oiaohm said...: To be able to strangle hold a company you need to be cheep and in every market they are.

Apple is too expensive and too hardware restricting ie not broad enough coverage to strangle hold.

Apple is not suffering at moment. I don't expect apple ever to really suffer they are like high end model cars. Don't make up most of the market but there is profit there. Also Apple has already restructured by open-sourcing many key subsystems they use so reducing there maintainer-ship cost. Like high end model cars not everything in the car is unique to them.

Linux improvements will come from where they do now. Universities make up large numbers. Hardware builders. Internal customizations for companies. Basically decentralized improvements. The effect of being open source. No one company needs massive amounts of money to fund the operation. Apple is also a source of some of Linux's improvements just like some of Apples improvements come from Linux developers.

MS has to really think about restructuring. It might mean Windows comes open source so reducing maintainer-ship costs on Microsoft. Issue here what other OS does MS have to share development costs with. They have put themselves on a island in trouble.

Lot of features for windows are copies taken from universities. MS had the money to acquire the personal.

Linux supports piping like powershell. There are far stronger scripting languages than bash. Bash is Linux cmd line equal. If you need something more complex you most likely go python or perl. More complex again native code.

"cloud of background noise" I enjoy background noise areas it a good place to type different things in english without upsetting something important with bad english.; March 4, 2009 at 8:32 PM
Anonymous said...: "Linux supports piping like powershell. There are far stronger scripting languages than bash. Bash is Linux cmd line equal. If you need something more complex you most likely go python or perl. More complex again native code."

Way to fail. I was criticizing how Bash handles piping not that Bash couldn't pipe.; March 4, 2009 at 8:39 PM
burrix said...: Apple is also a source of some of Linux's improvements just like some of Apples improvements come from Linux developers.

Prove it... Did apple ever gave something back to the freetard communism-ty? I don't think so, at least, nothing useful... yeah, apple sucked the freetards for free, thats for sure.

Again, oiaohm, nothing personal, but you keep jumping from issue to issue without a clear argument, I think you are mentally retarded or something, given the amount of time you seem to dedicate to this blog...; March 4, 2009 at 8:51 PM
oiaohm said...: Open source developers suffer from something to be correct all developers do called problem desensitization.

They get use to the process of doing something complex. Over time it becomes normal. Bit like you driving a car. At first it was complex until one day you don't even notice the complexity.

If users don't speak up about stuff needing better installers developers have been working with the bad installer for so long to them its status normal. Same applies to long term windows users. They don't even notice that they pause at particular operations so preventing bluescreens and other lockups. Or Linux users automatically getting up to get coffee. Kinda funny when you have fixed the lag problem.

Desensitization is a nasty human feature. Everyone is suffering from it. Problem with crossing OS's is that you are not Desensitized to the OS you are now using so you see all the problems that a normal user of that OS would disregard. Guess what is some of the problem here Windows users don't see there defects and Linux users don't see theres. Since I swap between both OS's a lot I am constantly hitting problems on both sides because I am never perfectly desenitized.; March 4, 2009 at 8:52 PM
burrix said...: HAHAHHAHAA

dude, your "Desensitization" thing has an extremely easy cure, implemented countless years ago by Microsoft and others... its called...

cha chann...

PROJECT MANAGEMENT!
(co-starring: product management)

got it?; March 4, 2009 at 8:57 PM
Anonymous said...: Driving a car is easy, especially with automatic transmission. I mean pick it up in five minutes easy. It really can't be any simpler: big pedal, little pedal, wheel. And every car drives the same way. And the way cars drive don't change between generations, let alone between years or quarters.

Basically, cars are the antithesis of Linux.; March 4, 2009 at 9:08 PM
Anonymous said...: The instant Microsoft falls, Apple will instantly become the new evil, the new reason that Linux fails to be a success. Why? Because without Microsoft, Apple wins by default, and that will thrust a knife in the hearts of Linux advocates. Besides, the mission is to destroy all non-GPL software, not just Microsoft, who simply represents nothing more than the #1 threat.; March 4, 2009 at 9:10 PM
oiaohm said...: Sorry project management does not cure it. Vista is case in point. Testers were testing it for a long time and got desensitization to its problems. Vista was a fully project management ran operation.

The issue I am talking about is not unique to any OS. This is the problem there are a lot of problems that are not unique. Being aware of them you build better programs.

Only true cure is feedback from new people. Feedback loop broken big problem. Distributions in the Linux world to break the feedback loops.

Bugzilla is feedback management. Mail lists are also ways to provide feedback.

Even MS has crash reporting for feedback.

Ie Feedback is the cure.; March 4, 2009 at 9:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Hate to break it to you, oiaohm, but "swapping between both OS's a lot" doesn't make you special. Hell, even lame-o developers triple boot these days. You must be excessively narrow minded if you honestly believe that this audience is tied to a single OS.

As you like to say: WAKE UP. You accuse everyone of ignoring your inscrutable wisdom yet you miss the lengthy discussions about DOS, OS/2, Amiga, BeOS, MacOS (Classic and X), Solaris, FreeBSD, and whatever else I didn't type. These people have been through it all. We're not 14 year olds who know nothing other than Windows XP.; March 4, 2009 at 9:18 PM
oiaohm said...: Driving a car is easy, especially with automatic transmission. I mean pick it up in five minutes easy. It really can't be any simpler: big pedal, little pedal, wheel. And every car drives the same way. And the way cars drive don't change between generations, let alone between years or quarters.

Really so you get pulled up for not having a license? Person here is suffering from rose coloured glasses. When you start learning to drive there is a lot more to it than that. Sorry to say not every car drives the same way either. Some have more sentive brakes clutch steering. It takes a person on average who has can driving experience about 30 mins to change between cars with way different clutch brakes or steering sensitives.

I would love to put you on custom car automatic and see how long before you are wanting out. Automatic gear box with rapid gear up change on down hill. Basically a form of racing configuration to get person use to pushing car.

Low levels of Linux barely change. They are basically set in stone. I have picked up manuals for Unix 5 years before Linux existence and still had most of the information in there valid.

Graphical side Linux not that mature yet.

How does apple win by default if MS folds. Battle goes on Linux vs Apple is far more friendly than Windows vs Linux since applications do move quite simply between Linux and Apple.; March 4, 2009 at 9:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Linux culture is notorious for ignoring feedback. Hell, we even have slogans for it:

It'sYourFault(TM)
YouDon'tReallyNeedThatAnyway(TM)
It'sNotABugIt'sAFeature(TM)

And the ever popular:

RTFM n00b

Did you miss the numerous examples of bug reports ignored for years? Like that jackass Rhythmbox developer who was harassed for over two years for dock behavior that made no sense and even broke accepted UI guidelines?

Or the KDE developers who came right out and said people with critical feedback are not welcome in their project?

How about the "Dear God why did you purposely break SuSE?" arguments?

So exactly what's the motivation for providing feedback? Maybe if I bitch once a week for two years, the upstream author might get around to applying a patch that fixes a trivial bug? Or I could save time and sanity and pay a software company to deal with these problems as they have a vested interest in doing so.; March 4, 2009 at 9:29 PM
Anonymous said...: There you go again with your meandering arguments. Licensing has nothing to do with the ease of driving a car. A computer is far more challenging to operate and it does not require a license.

Likewise, almost nobody drives "custom cars". Racing? WTF? What's next, go karts?

If it takes you 30 minutes to drive a random car competently then you shouldn't be on the road. 30 seconds, no lie. Find the turn signal, test the brakes, maybe adjust seat and mirrors. That's it.

Graphical side of Linux is not mature after two decades of development? Time to hang the towel. What an embarrassment.

And, please, Apple is anything but "friendly". Flip a few events in history and they'd be the evil megacorporate monopoly. You're sympathetic only because of their market share. They're more of a threat to "open source" than Microsoft ever was, and, in many ways, their tactics are even more anti-competitive than Microsoft's.; March 4, 2009 at 9:41 PM
Anonymous said...: Ah yes, Apple, the company that doesn't even want you to be able to change your battery without them.; March 4, 2009 at 9:51 PM
Anonymous said...: And anyone who tries to compare GCC with, say, Visual C++, has no clue about compilers in general and C++ compilers in particular.; March 4, 2009 at 10:54 PM
Anonymous said...: ^ Of course that all depends on what you mean when you say "compare".; March 4, 2009 at 10:58 PM
oiaohm said...: Has the critical feedback to KDE been taken onboard yes.

Do developers sometimes refuse to listen correct. Do problem reporters also refuse to listen also correct. Human nature of I am right I need no feedback.

Failure to understand human nature gets you into all kinds of trouble.

Did the targeting the correct person work in the end. Most cases yes.

I have some custom cars I do drive. Yes I get some stupid idiots who say they can drive anything in under 5 mins.

As I said major differences. Powersteering vs non power. You have to turn the wheel way more. Even the size wheel. There are many people a year who change there wheel on there car to a smaller or larger one and end up in a wall somewhere because of the same stupidity you are saying. Even different settings in powersteering worst are the ones that adjust sensitivity with speed.

If you believe I could drop you in a car and have you drive a course straight up after 30 secound prepare time at 100 kms and hour and not crash it you are a fool. You need to know you breaking distance your turn responsiveness and so on. Those you get in the first 30 mins of driving the car normally. You can get it in 10 mins by intentionally driving to find them ok not road permitted driving by the way. Again when you first start driving a new car you don't rush it when you are in a new car because you are still learning its handling.

Basically it a case where you don't notice your automatic learning actions.

Its part of high speed chase training to teach you why you don't take someone car off the street and try to do a high speed chase. Most likely if you do that you will kill yourself or someone else because you will not have enough time to learn the handling.

Basically I don't want to go to crashed cars any more due to stupidity cause by over confendence in there driving skills. Reason why if I knew you were in the same country as you I would take you onto a test track and teach you the errors of your ideas. There is no question 30 secounds is imposable to hop in and drive a car perfectly straight up. You are blinded by the desensitization to your learning processes. You only had to live with them all your life.

Try the 1 of the expensive russian cars. Finding the way out the car is a sport let alone finding how to start the car. Yes the car is automatic steering wheel and pedels are in the same place but someone has played silly buggers with everything else including where the gear selector is placed who though push button gears with no markings on them was a good idea someone in Russia did. Yes is a real case of read the manual before driving. On top of that it has no ABS with a very big power engine. Yep its a death trap on wheels.

2 decades in development don't make be laugh. X11 had basically no major development for most of that.

Friendly in the sence Apple and Linux share common code. Not every section would Linux be fighting with Apple over. Printer drivers same for both platforms. Font rendering system releated... The list goes on.

Apple is not a large threat to Linux. Reason they have no interest of running on generic hardware.

Apple takes the top end Linux takes the bottom and it would stay that way maybe forever.; March 4, 2009 at 11:06 PM
Anonymous said...: More bullshit from oiaohm. Get a job.; March 4, 2009 at 11:09 PM
oiaohm said...: Sorry got a job.

Problem is here its not bull.; March 4, 2009 at 11:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Then lose some weight!; March 4, 2009 at 11:27 PM
oiaohm said...: Sorry I need to gain weight at moment.; March 4, 2009 at 11:29 PM
Anonymous said...: That's exactly what a fat person would say to someone on the internet who called them fat.; March 4, 2009 at 11:33 PM
oiaohm said...: Basically you out of valid arguments so have to attack person. So you will not put you names to your insults so you cannot be sued.; March 5, 2009 at 2:13 AM
Anonymous said...: ^ Of course that all depends on what you mean when you say "compare".

I mean "compare favorably". I noticed afterwards that my point has already been made earlier in the comments: GCC is *inferior* to so-called "Windows compilers", including Microsoft's Visual C++.; March 5, 2009 at 2:46 AM
Anonymous said...: "Basically you out of valid arguments so have to attack person."

Perhaps (s)he has (I'm a different anonymous), but you never had valid arguments at all. You have not substantiated even one of the several (may I say ludicrous) claims you have made. Whenever someone has tried to present facts to you, you have danced around them, changed the topic, reiterated your previous comments in a louder tone, and otherwise deflected. Facts bounce off you.

Please, try this: when you make a claim, any claim next time, back it up with some kind of proof: even a link to the Linux-loving sections Computerworld, ZdNet, The Register (but not Slashdot please) will do.; March 5, 2009 at 2:54 AM
Anonymous said...: alright crazy man, Apple have their own hardware so supporting it is easy, vista has less drivers than linux around, and windows does not come with any drivers for your hardware at all, you have to install them from a cd from the vendor.

you my sir are an idiot, at elast if your going to rant about completely stupid things, at least make it funny...; March 5, 2009 at 3:19 AM
Anonymous said...: Wait. You mean like when oiaohm tries to prove his claim with high speed car police chases that doesn't convince you?; March 5, 2009 at 4:17 AM
Anonymous said...: "BetterFeedbackLoopsWillFixLinuxOS[TM]"

"Only true cure is feedback from new people. Feedback loop broken big problem. Distributions in the Linux world to break the feedback loops."; March 5, 2009 at 4:59 AM
Anonymous said...: Sorry I need to gain weight at moment.
LOL, oiaohm, so do I!; March 5, 2009 at 5:03 AM
Anonymous said...: Failure to understand human nature gets you into all kinds of trouble.

More irony from oiaohm. I'm starting to think this guy's putting us on. I mean, a guy who blames users (customers) for all that ills Linux and haughtily demands and expects they do more lectures the rest of us on human nature? It'll never happen. Never ever. If your plan for improving Linux is that standard users need to harass developers into creating working stuff, Linux is doomed. The developers are just gonna move to something even more obscure; they don't care. They aren't paid to care.; March 5, 2009 at 7:44 AM
Anonymous said...: oiaohm's argument strategy seems illogical at first until one realizes that this is par for the course in Linux land. For example, compare the flow of the following two arguments:

Hater: "Linux sucks on the desktop."

Lover: "Linux is awesome. Look at all the Apache installs and HPC clusters."

Hater: "I don't want a cluster in my living room. I want to plug in my iPod and load music."

-----

Walker: "Cars are hard to drive. It takes forever to learn."

Driver: "What are you talking about, I've driven dozens of vehicles and they're all about the same."

Walker: "Yeah, I'll bet you'd crash in NASCAR or high speed police chases or souped up go karts."

Driver: "I don't need racing or go karts. I need to take 15 minutes to go 1 km so I can get food. Any street legal vehicle accomplishes this."

-----

It's basically the same thing: they'll take the most bombastic situation and claim it's a generality then base their entire argument around these crazy scenarios. That's why oiaohm's posts are so long and tortured: it takes a lot of effort to maintain such a spun reality.; March 5, 2009 at 8:03 AM
Anonymous said...: oiaohm's argument strategy seems illogical at first until one realizes that this is par for the course in Linux land. For example, compare the flow of the following two arguments:
You're an idiot.

Hater: "Linux sucks on the desktop."
Except that he didn't say that. Kharkhalash said that linux sucks everywhere (server, desktop, embedded).
Lover: "Linux is awesome. Look at all the Apache installs and HPC clusters."
No one ever said so in this thread, so you're an idiot.
Hater: "I don't want a cluster in my living room. I want to plug in my iPod and load music."
You're an idiot because of the previous points.

it takes a lot of effort to maintain such a spun reality.
I think that your argument boils down to: MS has 90% market share, so it's going to stay that way for ever. You could have saved readers another long post by just saying so. People entering new cars always avoid driving too fast, because their motor skills aren't adapted to the car's controls.

Conclusion: you're an idiot.; March 5, 2009 at 8:38 AM
Anonymous said...: There's a convincing argument if I ever heard one. Notice the deflection: these guys just can't resist dragging in Microsoft in any argument.; March 5, 2009 at 8:43 AM
Anonymous said...: By the way, so far Kharkhalash doesn't provide a single argument supporting that an OS cannot be suitable for the server, desktop and embedded markets.; March 5, 2009 at 8:47 AM
Anonymous said...: That argument is not difficult to support given the ample differentiated products for such tasks and the total absence of anything attempting to cover all bases outside of Linux.; March 5, 2009 at 8:52 AM
Anonymous said...: the total absence of anything attempting to cover all bases outside of Linux.
But linux already does well in the embedded and server markets. Isn't this enough to prove you wrong?; March 5, 2009 at 9:01 AM
Anonymous said...: No, not really. Its desktop share is 1% or less, and its server share appears to be dwindling. Linux embedded does okay in old-hat areas like routers (at least the ones that haven't switched to VxWorks) but is a colossal failure in newer tech that is better suited by the iPhone and Windows Mobile devices.

Linux would have a stronger chance at cornering a market with focus. By intentionally dividing resources, its developers virtually ensure Linux is never the best tool for the job because wherever one tries to apply it he must deal with the unwanted functionality of other systems.; March 5, 2009 at 9:49 AM
Anonymous said...: I'll give you the best example of an ignored bug report: the GNOME (i.e. Ubuntu) screensaver. You cannot change the settings on ANY screensaver.

For example, the screensaver that prints text to the screen and makes it sway back and forth, you can't change the text. It displays your Linux kernel information. God help you if you want to configure the 3d screensavers.

It has been YEARS since people have been complaining about this. Their solution is to apt-get another screensaver app, rather than just fix that shit. What? WHAT? Why not have THAT app by default then?

Because you're fucking asshole GNOME developers, crafted out of living fail, that is why.

You could change screensaver settings in Windows fucking 95, but not in the latest Ubuntu Jerky Jackoff.

Here, see for yourself (read the first post then scroll down to say, the 2008 posts, it's the same shit):

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-screensaver/+bug/22007; March 5, 2009 at 9:55 AM
Anonymous said...: 95? Hell, I think Windows 1 or 2 had configurable screen savers.; March 5, 2009 at 9:59 AM
Anonymous said...: I know Windows 3 did.; March 5, 2009 at 10:04 AM
Anonymous said...: Also, god damn Windows Mobile is great (and it's an open platform!!!11!).; March 5, 2009 at 10:06 AM
Anonymous said...: Pamela Jones:

That's why when Microsoft comes to your government

agency and tells you that Gartner says only 1 percent

use Linux, so you don't need to worry about so few

users, tell them Gartner has no actual idea of how

many users of Linux there are in or out of business.

Always factually correct!; March 5, 2009 at 10:36 AM
Anonymous said...: PJ is going nuts

Who wants to kill a 60 plus lady even when she acts like a bitch?; March 5, 2009 at 10:57 AM
Anonymous said...: Talk about misdirected rage. The commenter she accused of threatening her posted the most innocuous statement.; March 5, 2009 at 11:00 AM
Anonymous said...: Requirement no 1 to be a freetard:

Emotionally imbalanced personality; March 5, 2009 at 11:54 AM
Anonymous said...: "I notice that most Windoze users are only using half of their hardware. I hear that they don't have many 64 bit applications yet, whereas Linux has over 20,000 64 bit packages available"

Right, and 19,900 of them are text editors. Yeah, Win users only using half their hardware to do things like edit high-definition video, advanced photo editing, play amazing 3d games...; March 5, 2009 at 12:00 PM
Anonymous said...: "Hey according to oiaohm lintards love that procedure and specifically ask for it on developer mailing lists."

Is it me, or is that oiaohm fellow trying to peddle a lot of BS? Linux is fucked in almost every conceivable way for the last 17+ years, and this bum comes along to claim the problems will all be fixed in 2009!; March 5, 2009 at 12:07 PM
Anonymous said...: The freetards got something right. Their development is just like a bazaar--a bunch of fucktards peddling a bunch of low quality shit nobody wants.; March 5, 2009 at 1:02 PM
Anonymous said...: Linux Distros are like no-entry fee stripclubs. Yeah you know it's free, and it 'might' do the job, but clearly the quality is way below what you'd expect at a club with an entrance fee. (plus the chics are hotter on windows side, linux chics are biker chics with big fat ass and wrinkled bellies and cellulite legs); March 5, 2009 at 5:41 PM
Anonymous said...: This is what you'd find in a typical "free" entrance strip club:

http://tinyurl.com/6mhopy; March 5, 2009 at 6:01 PM
Anonymous said...: Where's the target for the dunk?; March 5, 2009 at 6:14 PM
Anonymous said...: Steps to throw ball at Linux target:

instructions for windows
========================
a.) pickup ball and throw at Linus Dunk Tank

instructions for Linux:
=======================
1.) sudo admin to terminal
2.) edit your sources list so you can add "dunklinus" package
3.) add the public key
4.) scratch your balls
5.) sniff your fingers, then repeat step 4
6.) after repeating step 4 several times, place finger in nostril and compile your boogers into crusty flakes
7.) resolve any dependencies by sticking your finger into someone elses ass and twist
8.) ok now you are ready to pickup ball
9.) change emulation from pulse to alsa so you can hear yourself think
10.) throw ball at dunk tank!

easy peasy man!

"Where's the target for the dunk?"; March 5, 2009 at 6:33 PM
Anonymous said...: I used a Win95 laptop today (just seeing if it worked after all these years), and it was remarkably functional.

It ran games such as Tyrian, and it even played avi & mpg porno clips. Using an old version of IrfanView that was installed on it, I could quickly flip through the photos on it. I was even able to open Word documents using Word Viewer.

The system was a Pentium 133 but it felt snappy.

Sure it was 800x600 resolution at 16 bit, but otherwise the experience was actually better than using GNOME in terms of functionality and ease of use. I am surprised how poorly GNOME compares to even Windows 95. I'm being honest.

It makes you wonder what planet Lintards are living on when they bash Vista, which I've had no problems with. Microsoft had everything right in terms of desktop user experience over FOURTEEN years ago.; March 5, 2009 at 6:47 PM
Anonymous said...: Sure it was 800x600 resolution at 16 bit

How is this different from Linux, other than the upgrade from 8 bit?; March 5, 2009 at 7:26 PM
.net prick said...: Yea at the end of the day Linux is still not up to par with Windows 98. That is why Windows 2000 has more markeshare than linux. Linux just plain sucks as a desktop os.

Speaking of marketshare:

Global IT firm predicts Linux will have 20% desktop market share by 2008
http://www.linux.com/articles/30873

From the article (written in 2003):
...
He also says that large numbers of enterprises that have already delayed or skipped Windows upgrades to save money during difficult economic times are coming to a point that they will have to upgrade to maintain productivity levels. These companies will be looking closely at the experiences of the first large enterprises to embrace Linux on the desktop.
...

A lot of the old linux articles could be republished by simply changing the dates.; March 5, 2009 at 7:34 PM
Anonymous said...: McNutt says that Linux reduces administration costs in large installations of 1,000 desktops and up because it is more scriptable and well-documented than Windows.

Well documented? HAHAHAHA. Good one.

This was written in 2003 and we're still talking about administration solely as a function of scripts? Come on, NT and Novell had tools in the early 90s.

McNutt feels that Linux is particularly strong in remote management

Please. Other than Apple's Remote Desktop, nothing holds a candle to Terminal Services, and Linux has no answer at all to Active Directory. Anyone who claims OpenLDAP with 6 months of amateurish hacking is just as good hasn't actually tried it. Even Apple's professionally designed OpenDirectory is no substitute.; March 5, 2009 at 7:44 PM
Anonymous said...: It makes you wonder what planet Lintards are living on when they bash Vista...

Windows Vista makes new age freetards (not arm chair programmers happy with their ugly window managers) envy to death.

Such envy turn into anti-Windows Vista BS across the Web.

Those new age freetards are then joined by software companies that sell video editing software. Employees of those companies fill the Web with more BS due to their financial loses to Movie Maker.

Everytime you read BS about Vista, just take a hard look at the writers and their hidden agendas: envy and financial loses.

All I can say to new age freetards and employees of non-Microsoft video editing software is FUCK YOU.; March 5, 2009 at 7:57 PM
Anonymous said...: Video clip from the past

Listen to Stewart Cheifet saying "except for the fact you must be a Bill Gates' hater, why should anybody wanna put Linux on their machines..."

In the video, you can see the applications offered by Red Hat 6.1 with a "Start" mechanism shamelessly copied from MS Windows. Notice also the fucked up GNOME spreadsheet.

As Cheifet mentioned, Byte gave a Linux award at the time the magazine had stopped its print edition. As always, media losers are the ones that embrace Linux.

This video clip is part of a Computer Chronicles episode aired in December 1999.

Linux, Red Hat 6.2, Corel Office Suite [12.9MB WMV]; March 5, 2009 at 8:14 PM
.net prick said...: Is XP an Open Door for Open Source?
Linux will likely get a boost as an alternative for cash-strapped schools, local goverments, and companies in developing countries

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/oct2001/tc20011025_5316.htm

Excerpt:
EXTENDING PC LIFESPANS. Thus, Giga Information Group estimates that Linux runs on about 5% of desktop computers worldwide and at least 30% of corporate servers. Whatever the actual number, Linux' share of the desktop market is growing. Kusnetzsky believes that by 2005, Linux will have surpassed the Mac's operating system and officially capture the No. 2 spot -- and that it will continue to become more widely used in the U.S. and abroad.; March 5, 2009 at 8:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Man, there's a guy that should never appear on TV.

Gotta say, though, I forgot how totally atrocious GNOME once was. And this is whatever version that was included with RedHat 6.1; I remember using it even before that. That shit's totally unusable. No wonder I couldn't bring myself to try it again until 2001 or so.; March 5, 2009 at 8:28 PM
Anonymous said...: No matter how many old articles you present, the "date shifting" advocates will claim that Linux only really started growing 24 months ago and that it's about to explode.; March 5, 2009 at 8:36 PM
Anonymous said...: So we have Windows Vista which can edit HDV, for "free" using Windows Movie Maker, and at this point Linux doesn't have any viable video editing apps even for Standard Definition.

Linux has what, Kino, which does almost nothing beyond grabbing shit off the tape, and Cinelerra which crashes if you even stare at it the wrong way.

Meanwhile on the Windows platform you have a choice of multiple versions of multiple apps at various price points, from Sony Vegas to Adobe Premiere. And of course the free Movie Maker. But of course Linux is all about freedom of choice, right?

Of course there is/was the Lumiera project, which is/was trying to build a video editor. Their last major goal was designing a logo for the project. Despite having no code or even a plan, they decided they totally needed a logo. I think even that failed.

Once again, this is not a joke by any means. See for yourself, check to the "Logo Contest" link:

http://www.lumiera.org/; March 5, 2009 at 8:37 PM
Anonymous said...: Cinelerra? Wow, there's a name from the past. Is that still developed? I remember it sucking hard like five years ago. Meanwhile, Mac and Windows video editing software has gotten exponentially more awesome. Even once ratty stuff like $50 Vegas knocks my socks off.; March 5, 2009 at 8:54 PM
Anonymous said...: Lots of people have nothing better to do than design logos for software that doesn't exist.; March 5, 2009 at 8:57 PM
Anonymous said...: Those guys where just being optimistic. Besides, everyone knows that Linux has really only been taking off in the last eighteen months.; March 5, 2009 at 9:08 PM
.net prick said...: God that video was funny.

The bitter linux cheerleader in the hawaiian shirt er I mean tech journalist was at least canned along with that magazine.

I wonder if Corel threw the award in the trash along with anything else connected to their failed venture into linux.

The most common way to fail in linux land is to expect the users to actually pay for something. God forbid they actually have to contribute a few bucks to support their platform. The problem is that they develop an entitlement mentality as I'm sure most of you have seen. They are also more than willing to use a mediocre alternative if it means saving 10 or 20 bucks.
Screw any programmer that doesn't want to work for free. They need to find the free time to compete with commercial programmers who are paid 6 figures to work 50 hour weeks.

Linux users are some of the cheapest people on the planet. I would guess that they are even worse for ad-clicks than digg referrals.

http://www.geek.com/articles/news/corel-not-helped-by-linux-20000622/; March 5, 2009 at 9:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Windows is such a piece of shit. It probably still uses binary.; March 5, 2009 at 9:20 PM
Anonymous said...: It's worse than mere entitlement, the mantra progresses infinitely. Just look at drivers. First they want hardware companies to release specifications so that the "community" can write its own driver. Then they want the company to write the driver.

Now Linux has both the specification and the driver. Not good enough. They don't like the license of the driver or it's not fully open. Eventually the driver is sourced under an acceptable license. Good enough? No. Now the company is expected to join mailing lists and IRC channels to support and maintain the driver and to keep on top of sudden and bizarre interface changes.

Phew, finally there, right? No! Because we decided we're totally rewriting this framework and the company better get with the program if they expect the 0.79% market to ever buy any of their products ever again. If the company refuses at any step, the "community" blackmails said company with a series of slanderous articles, which move quickly through the Slashdot/Digg/zdnet garbage network.

All this for a group of people who proudly admit they "shop" for computers in piles of discarded food.; March 5, 2009 at 9:42 PM
Anonymous said...: From the Corel article:

Linux will get there in the end (4:20pm EST Fri Jun 23 2000)
I'm still waiting for the day I can trash my copy of Win98.

I wonder if he's still waiting. Windows 98 is still better than Linux, stabler even if we're discussing 3D graphics or hot pluggable USB.; March 5, 2009 at 9:49 PM
Anonymous said...: But the community makes such outstanding drivers like... uh... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... need some help here.; March 5, 2009 at 9:50 PM
.net prick said...: I came across this gem earlier:

Your linux tech tip for the day,
FROZEN BUBBLE
http://www.linuxjournal.com/video/better-solitaire-frozen-bubble

"Now there are a whole bunch of dependencies of course"

Yea it looks like 25 mb of depedencies needed for a fucking knock-off of a 90's arcade game. Good lord linux is a parody of itself.

I also like how he gleefully points out that the linux version works the best...twice. As if anyone fucking cares.; March 5, 2009 at 9:52 PM
Anonymous said...: I hear Linux's support for ISA 3Com Ethernet adapters and OKI 9 pin dot matrix printers is top notch, almost as good as Windows 3.; March 5, 2009 at 9:53 PM
Anonymous said...: I think the employee would be in deeper shit when caught replacing Windows with Linux on his work computer than for playing games.; March 5, 2009 at 9:56 PM
Anonymous said...: 25MB? I thought Linux was supposed to be free of bloat. Whatever the fuck bloat is in terms of computing.; March 5, 2009 at 9:57 PM
Anonymous said...: Wait, I'm supposed to be excited by yet another Puyo Puyo clone? Aren't there 10,000 versions of these just on Windows? And I'm sure most of them weigh in at less than 25 MB. Hell, that's probably about the size of the MAME emulator and ROM set combined.; March 5, 2009 at 9:59 PM
Anonymous said...: Golden Eye for the N64 is only 16.5MB if that puts it in perspective a bit.; March 5, 2009 at 10:04 PM
Anonymous said...: Bloat is whatever the GNOME developers feel you don't need, or can't implement because they've coded themselves into a corner. Such as being able to change the settings on your screensaver.

What about these idiots who install Fluxbox on systems that have Core 2 processors and 4gb of RAM, because they are fighting against bloat? They spend all day worrying about the resources used by their fucking computer, running GkrellM. Because computers were made to not fully use their hardware to the maximum.; March 5, 2009 at 10:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Linux is free of bloat!

In terms of executable size? Well, no. See, GCC, GLIBC, and BINUTILS aren't all that compact. In fact, mainstream distributions like Fedora basically take up as much room as Vista and still don't provide the functionality, unless you consider 500 text editors a productive use of computer resources.

In terms of dependencies/prerequisites? No, our shared library system is totally fucked up. Half these dependencies aren't even used by other programs...that's why we need 15 new libraries even on a well used system.

In terms of lacking obsolete, redundant interfaces? Um, well...we need to support 18 sound interfaces because we can't decide which one sucks the least or even how to reduce this to 17.; March 5, 2009 at 10:10 PM
Anonymous said...: 25mb is huge for a 2d puzzle game. At gametap the original is 1.3mb.

http://www.gametap.com/play/gameDetails/120053050; March 5, 2009 at 10:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Yeah, and Goldeneye had digital audio, scripted scenarios, multiplayer, dozens of maps and weapons.; March 5, 2009 at 10:15 PM
Anonymous said...: @March 5, 2009 10:09 PM

What's funny is that 2000/XP still runs faster on old hardware than these concoctions. These minimalist environments seem so efficient and awesome until you load Firefox or OpenOffice that were compiled with GCC.

And, even with XP on a Pentium II you'll rarely see widgets draw. Even on a Pentium 4, GTK's rendering weaknesses show.; March 5, 2009 at 10:21 PM
Anonymous said...: I much prefer this place without the constant assault of the freetard brigade with their barely understandable and overly emotional diatribes.; March 5, 2009 at 10:23 PM
Anonymous said...: They can't let it going. Knowing somebody out there despises their OS just eats them to the core.; March 5, 2009 at 10:31 PM
Anonymous said...: It seems as freetards feel as they own the verb 'to hate'.

Don't freetards understand all they do is to bring that verb upon them?; March 5, 2009 at 10:35 PM
.net prick said...: Linux/Unix is still the primary development platform for code around the world because it has faster and better compilers like GCC.

Hi,

You must be new to the cult. I think you might have been mistakenly given one of the older brochures for new cult members. The newer version has no claims regarding GCC performance.

GCC actually isn't commonly used because it is the best, its ubiquity has more to do with the gpl license.

This is in fact old news. You can check with your senior cult members at slashdot if you want.

Intel C/C++ Compiler Beats GCC
http://slashdot.org/developers/02/01/26/1328215.shtml

But more importantly GCC is available for Windows which makes me wonder if you have any idea as to how full of shit you actually are.; March 5, 2009 at 10:45 PM
Anonymous said...: Except on Windows GCC can't dynamically link libraries by default.; March 5, 2009 at 10:48 PM
.net prick said...: And in Linux vc++ isn't even available.; March 5, 2009 at 11:03 PM
linsux said...: Lusers and Freetards are such an optimistic bunch, does anyone else find this comment from an A1 Freetard Luser as humorous as I did?

"I still have the same problem with 3d graphics module setup.

I can't use the desktop effects at all, (white screen) and the kernel-rebuilds give un-intelligent errors during install.

The nvidia xxx.run package will not install.

And the coprocessor is not recognised.

But other than programs crashing (freezing or closing) when saving changes,

I think it is really good."

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/mandriva-30/any-feedbak-on-mandriva-2009-beta2-667399/#post3290940

There's just no holding a man like that down.; March 6, 2009 at 1:54 AM
Anonymous said...: I used a Win95 laptop today (just seeing if it worked after all these years), and it was remarkably functional.
Are BSODs part of the function?

A lot of the old linux articles could be republished by simply changing the dates.
You wish.

Everytime you read BS about Vista, just take a hard look at the writers and their hidden agendas: envy and financial loses.
So almost everyone but MS has hidden agendas regarding Vista? Talk about twisted reality. So far, I know of nobody that likes Vista, only one of my friends installed it and dumped it after 6 months of use.

To the diligent researchers of history (this includes the jerkface and his company): it still doesn't stick. Better find a new one.; March 6, 2009 at 2:29 AM
Anonymous said...: You don't think Linux articles could be republished with the dates changed? Linux works like the fucking Chinese zodiac, except every year is the Year of the Linux Desktop.; March 6, 2009 at 4:11 AM
Anonymous said...: Hi Guys,

I understand there are Linux users that "dump" legal copies of vista because they hate it.

Please, we need to be "geen" about this. Do not dump precious vista cd/licenses away. Instead send them here, so that we may recycle and "free" people enslaved to use Linux.

Help us save the Planet from governments that force people to use Linux!; March 6, 2009 at 4:54 AM
Anonymous said...: So far, I know of nobody that likes Vista, only one of my friends installed it and dumped it after 6 months of use.

I don't know anyone who likes, let alone use, Linux. Your point?

Every Windows version is bashed to death... until it has completely dominated the market.

Why don't you lintards try something new? Bashing Windows it's not making Linux better.; March 6, 2009 at 5:04 AM
Anonymous said...: Actually windows 95/98/ME has more usefulness and usability than any of your late model LinuxOS.

Seriously!

And BSOD, I would rather chance getting BSOD (which is more rare than you think) than use linux.

Everyone knows BSOD is mostly caused by faulty ram or bad video drivers, which is easier to diagnose than getting Linux to run compiz without hard locking or breaking opengl apps.

At least the fonts look way better on windows, there are a ton of software still available (and still work) for it,there are more way more games and productivity software.; March 6, 2009 at 5:04 AM
Anonymous said...: Everyone knows BSOD is mostly caused by faulty ram or bad video drivers

That was not the case with Windows pre-XP. Windows 9x was indeed a shitty family of operating systems. We've been over that already. Around 1998, people actually preferred an unreliable but user-friendly OS with lots of apps over another system way more robust but made by geeks with hacker mentality and no quality applications available.

Lintards today are yet struggling to grasp that basic lesson.; March 6, 2009 at 5:31 AM
Anonymous said...: Indeed, win9x was obviously not the best of the windows family. But you are correct, many people passed over other operating systems due to the standardization, and ease of installing/buying programs for windows 95.

Linux today is just so, so, .."tired".

Time to play with OpenSolaris 2008.11 which even includes Openoffice 3. Are you listening LinuxOS with the "YouDon'tNeedTheLatestVersion[TM] mentality?

http://java.sys-con.com/node/775288

There's a new kid on the block, and you can bet as people embrace the standardization of a single UNIX platform (OpenSolaris), there is good money to be made for everyone. I only hope Novell/Canonical/RedHat can see that Linux is no longer interesting to develop for. And that OpenSolaris is a true contender as an alternative free OS. Time will tell, but OpenSolaris/BSD is gaining traction as better alternatives than Linux for Desktop/LAMP applications.; March 6, 2009 at 6:55 AM
Kharkhalash said...: Again context ask for it. They asked for cross distribution support they got that.

What, you mean LSB? Nobody takes that seriously, and you know it.

Now did they then ask for a installer that was user-friendly no one really has.

a) People have been asking for that for years.
b) It shouldn't need to be be asked for. Any, even half assed developer should be able to make the assumption that ease of use is something users want. It isn't rocket science.

Context is critical.

You keep saying that word... I don't thin it means what you think it does.

I did also say people get what they ask for.

I want a pony!

Not once have I said that the Linux Desktop does not sux.

No, you just kept bantering about how it;s good enough, gets the job done, etc. Way to stick to your argument.

No single person knows the future either.

When pointless drivel fails, resort to even more pointless rhetoric. Classic.

So it fine for me to laugh at the numbers of Virus infected Windows users out there?

Actually, you'd be laughed into shame. Infected Windows users? Like the users themselves are infected with computer-syphilys? Do you think before you speak? Do you bother proof reading? Do you think in general?

Now, if you were talking about infected Windows computers, sure, go ahead. It's pointless, though. See, unlike delusional freetards, nobody who uses Windows denies the existence of malware or the sheer amount of infected machines in the wild. (unlike freetards who insist that Linux can't get infected, google it, many worms targeting Unix and Linux exist out in the wild, as a proof of concept).

Now, you'll get ridiculous if you try to argue that Windows is malware prone by design, and that the cluelessness of the user has no baring on security.

You bork up your system pretty bad when you're running as admin/root on any system. You bork up your system pretty bad when install arbitrary junk on any system.

You'd be ridiculed if you try to argue that malware writers don't target Linux because they can't or because it is more secure by design.

a) Unix wasn't designed for security.

b) the security schema, especially ACLs is archaic compared to Windows ACLs.

c) Windows targets the mass-market, Linux does not. that makes all the difference. mass-market -> ease of use and convenience. Convenience and security are more or less mutually exclusive.

d) Windows commands 89% of the market. Any OS that dominant is going to be targeted by malware. In contrast, Linux barely commands 0.8% of the market. There's no incentive to write malware for it, it barely even qualifies as a niche. Where's the collateral damage? Where's the massive botnet? Where's the slew of stolen personal data? Where's the point?

e) the only thing that makes Linux a difficult platform to write malware for,on a technical level, is also what keeps it from ever obtaining a dominant market position, as well as what makes it such a nightmare to deploy third party applications on: fragmentation, the lack of stable API/ABI, no unified standardized interfaces or frameworks, etc.

Malware, after all, is application software. Any system which eases the process of writing software, eases the process of writing malware, and vice versa.

ease of use and convenience are the antithesis to security.

Remember I don't think Linux will have to win against Microsoft on the Desktop to win.

Win what exactly? Why does t always have to be about winning and losing? As long as it is unwilling to coexist with the other players, Linux is doomed to fail.

Its like netbooks last 12 months more of them sold than Desktop and laptop machines. Phones again more of them sold as well.

And there were more bus tickets sold than phones, and possibly more toasters and coffee machines sold than either. Netbooks are a passing trend, right now they're more appealing to consumers due to rough economic times (we're in a global recession, if you haven't noticed). People aren't buying full desktop systems, because, let's face itm, they aren't cheap. Netbooks are, so they'll go for netbooks, which they know aren't a replacement for a desktop or notebook.

Further, people don't buy desktops every quarter, or even every year. comparing netbook sales in the middle of a global recession to PC sales is skewed at best.

Try comparing netbook sales now, to PC sales during a mass upgrade sale, or the release of a new Windows OS, and put things into context. Think logically, someone who has a core2 with 2gb of ram feels no need to buy a new system this quarter,or even next quarter, or the one after. Do you really believe they're going to replace that system with a netbook, once the c2d system isn't up to snuff?

Furthermore, the sale of phones hurting MS's bottom line? They don't sell phones. They just have a mobile OS that can run on them. It's like saying chocolate bars are a danger to MS's bottom line because they outsell computer electronics.

Google is on the correct path. 1 OS covering everything. So live becomes simple learn 1 OS configure you phone laptop desktop....

One OS which is their custom OS. Do you really think google runs something like off-the-shelf RHEL? Do you really think the GPL forces them to share changes that they aren't distributing?

Do you honestly think that the Android OS is the same OS as on a desktop? If it is, expect the Android to fail epically, just like OpenMoko did.

Microsoft also uses one OS for everything. How is Google right and Microsoft wrong here?

You really do need to understand the concept of BestToolFortheJob(TM). You use the tool best suited to your needs, period. If that's the same OS for everything, fine, as long as it works for you. But don't try to make this into a "(entirely customized to their needs) Linux is good enough for Google, it should be good enough for you" argument, because we all know that's where you're trying to take this, and we all know that it's a baseless one.

And if you're trying to use "google does this, therefore it is right and just" to try to support your argument that there's no design-level distinction between a desktop, phone, workstation, server, embedded OS, you're off your rocker.

Market is changing. Question is can MS catch up. Its getting hardder to get motherboards without Linux onboard.

Technology is advancing. that's different than a changing market. Micrtosoft doesn't compete in instant-on tech, so this is a stupid example for you to use. The instant-on OS is used to load another OS. this will not replace traditional computers, and it's ultimately irrelevant if the system ends up running Windows anyway, which is will.

You fail to accept that if these instant-on systems are going to sell, they're going to have to be able to boot into Windows. But "getting harder to find non -Linux motherboards?" You're either joking, being sarcastic, or the only place you're looking is in your basement.

Where is MS on motherboard product? Simple MS cannot afford to be drawn into that. At 1 cent per copy MS basically cannot live at that low of income. That is not the only market MS cannot afford to be draw into.

Ever stopped to think that that market is pointless for them to enter, especially when those machines are going to run Windows anyway?

Undercut and outlast.

If you had any trace degree of credibility left, you destroyed it with this statement, because you very clearly do not understand the implications of starting an undercutting war.

undercutting is a very short term, very shortsighted , and very flawed strategy. You will get the extra sales at first yes. But you need to ship more units/take on more contracts/work harder for the same profits.

that may be fine and dandy, until someone,in turn undercuts you, and you have to cut into your profits again. But hey, you're getting more contracts!

Then comes another round of undercutting, it becomes unprofitable to do business, companies start going under, people lose jobs, the industry suffers, the economy suffers. But who cares, right, you're getting 20x the contracts, making half the profit.

Then it dons upon you,that fuck, you can't afford to pay your employees anymore, and you go bankrupt.

Then the industry learns from its mistakes, and prices go back up to normal. Most sensible markets don't compete on price. They compete on quality, customer satisfaction, polish, ease, support and speed of delivery. Competing on price only comes into the equation where all other things are equal, and they never are. That's where the old adage "you get what you pay for" comes into play. That's why people are suspicious of products competing solely on price.

Furthermore, you seem to think that an undercutting war in the IT industry would only hurt Windows. It's not that simple. It hurts everyone trying to sell an OS or software: Sun, IBM, Novell, Red Hat, and undercutting war hurts them, too. They need to be able to sell their OS and pay their employees, too. (what you thought RHEL and SLES were free? Or worse, that Linux is largely developed in people's spare time, or by jobless hobos?).

And where would Linux be without its corporate funding which employs so many kernel and software developers? That's right, exactly where it was 10+ years ago, before it got corporate backing.

I'm willing to bet you weren't using Linux back then. I was. I remember how stupidly, and pointlessly painful it was.

To top things off, it's hilarious that beyond not understanding the implications of undercutting a market, you fail to take into account that despite Linux doing precisely that for over a decade, it has utterly failed to gain any significant share or offer any meaningful competition in any market. You'd think you freetards would learn by now, that competing only on price doesn't work, when that's the only advantage you have over anyone else.

Linux is about the only competitor with enough market coverage to strangle hold MS means to make money.

"enough marketshare" HAHAHAHAHAHA.
"strangle hold" You clearly don't know what that term means. A stranglehold is what Microsoft has on the OS market.

Market share has nothing to do with this. Apple more than an order of magnitude more market share than Linux, but licensing and EULAs forbid PC OEMs from packaging it with their hardware. That's why they use Linux as a pressure tactic.

Someone goes to by licenses from MS and threatens to ship Linux instead because it good enough so MS has to drop price to hold market.

HAHAHA. OEMs don't threaten to ship Linux "because it's good enough", "good enough" doesn't even factor into the equation. Most PCs OEMs offer DrDOS as an alternative to Windows, as well. Are you suggesting that this is because DOS is "good enough", too? Way to contradict every single argument you've made in this thread, in one fell swoop.

No, OEMs threaten to go with Linux simply, and solely because it isn't Windows. You have to ask yourself though, would these OEMs sell anywhere near as many units without Windows? The answer is no, they wouldn't, at least not in direct proportion to the increase of boxed Windows sales.

Cycle repeats and repeats each time profit percentages dropping until it goes negative.

Right, because Microsoft has no other profitable products. *COUGHoffice/vs/winserver/adCOUGH*.

And they don't have products which help entrench Windows in the enterprise setting. *COUGHexchange-and-active-directoryCOUGH*

You've clearly never run your own business or sold a product. Microsoft is barely cutting into their buffers (buffers are a padding beyond your profit margins).

You think MS wouldn't put their foot down if OEMs started to demand they cut into the actual profit margins? Do you honestly believe that Windows is the core of Microsoft's business?

What, did you think Windows being so easy to pirate was a result of incompetence? It's intentional, did you never notice that MS doesn't really go after software pirates, and just does the bare-minimum required to make it seemlike they're trying to curb piracy of Windows?

They could give away Windows and still be hugely profitable, but they don't. Why would you give away something which people are willing to pay for?

Windows is more of a platform than a product: Every copy of Windows is a potential copy of Office, a potential copy of VS, a potential copy of exchange server, etc.

Every copy of Windows further entrenches ActiveDirectory, Exchange, SharePoint, etc.

Every copy of Windows is further incentive for hardware manifacturers to produce drivers, and pay to have their drivers reviewed at certified.

Every copy of Windows in use is further incentive for third parties to write software targeting it, further entrenching Windows.

I don't stop at Windows, it doesn't even begin with Windows anymore. Windows only enables Microsoft to produce profit from their other products.

Forced to lay off staff at some point they lay off too many staff then are dead in water. Not enough staff left to patch there problems so no staff to create new products so implodes.

This is why I hate Linux, and Linux evangelists. It's not about delivering a better product, it's not about fair competition, it's not about making the end user's life easier. It's about killing Microsoft with absolutely no regard for the human cost. No, here laying off countless developers is seen as a good thing because it "helps Linux" by hurting Microsoft. Those, now jobless developers are seen as casualties of war, their families whom they can no longer support, are collateral damage. The extent to with this hurts the IT industry isn't even an afterthought because Freetards have no foresight.

Or perhaps you've come to terms with the mess than Linux is and figure it isn't worth the effort to actually improve the product, ergo, the only way to deploy your vastly inferior product is to remove the choice by destroying the competition?

Furthermore, do you really thing these developers are going to magically start working on Linux now that they have no jobs?

moreover, whose going to do all the R&D Microsoft, in this hypothetical dystopian future of yours, can no longer afford to invest billions into? Red Hat? Novel? Microsoft invest more into R&D than either company is worth.

MS is dropping lots of R&D projects. That is not without long term costs.

They absolutely are not. Otherwise, shareholders would not sill be complaining about the R&D budget.

Unless you're referring to the amount of R&D projects that don't end up in a product. Then I'll have to laugh at you, since you've never done R&D, don't understand the purpose of R&D, and have never worked in a tech company, let alone one with an R&D devision.

Research is often done for the sake of research and progress. The fact of the matter is, just as in any science, only a very small subset of research has the immediate potential of being able to be monetized in a product. Do you really think that even the legends themselves, Bell Labs, productized every single one of their research projects? How many hundred, if not thousands of scrapped projects are there to every gem?

Do you really believe that Bell Labs pumped out Unix, then Plan9 and called it a day?

Do you really think the GUI was the only thing PARC at Xerox worked on?

Hell how many projects has Google scrapped? Now keep in mind that for every one that has actually made it to the public, dozens, if not hundreds never even see the light of day.

The reason R&D funding gets cut is usually because shareholders don't understand the purpose of R&D. They want a product that will revolutionize the market now, not next week, not a year from now, not ten years from now. They don't think longterm, and don't understand that instantly marketable, let alone revolutionary ideas are a one-in-a-billion occurrence.

R&D is a longterm commitment, Shareholders are in it for the short term. See the conflict?

How many open source projects ever end up being widely deployed or being useful? 1%? And that's a very generous figure. It's the same idea (except R&D is about research and innovation, not creating 20,000 text editors that do the same).; March 6, 2009 at 6:56 AM
Anonymous said...: "They could give away Windows and still be hugely profitable,...people are willing to pay for?"

Exactly. people are willing to pay for something that has easy to google support, quality of available applications, and good hardware support. Moreover Linux evangelist can't figure out that a common "platform" base is very beneficial. Linux is not a platform, it is a fragmented convoluted MESS!

OpenSolaris is a new kid, and if I were to go into the UNIX based office environment as a consultant, I would use OpenSolaris instead.

Also ZFS file system brings additional benefits for specialized mission critical applications.

In-filesystem snapshots, pooled storage, revertable snapshots, transferable and saveable snapshots, thin-provisioning, automatic rebuild using hot-spares, multiple-copy storage even on non-redundant hardware, checksums of all data and metadata, in-filesystem compression, the ability to swap out drives for larger ones and automatically have the space available right away.

Truly Sun is on to something, and I hope it catches on. Because havigg a real competitor to Windows/OSX ia always a good thing, it will keep them to drive and innovate and lower prices. But most of all, provide more value and opportunity to those working in the IT fields.; March 6, 2009 at 7:17 AM
Anonymous said...: No, the bulk of Windows 9x problems were still the result of faulty hardware/drivers. In fact, such flaws affected 9x even more due to the newness of a consumer oriented 32 bit preemptively multitasking system and the concessions made with regards to memory protection.; March 6, 2009 at 7:51 AM
Anonymous said...: Windows 9x in fact did not have complete memory protection. It was a shitty product, yes, but it was built for its time, with priorities on backward compatibility and acceptable performance on the computers that were available then.; March 6, 2009 at 8:46 AM
Clark said...: Sorry I don't actually have a comment about this particular article. What I want to say is "Finally!!! A site I can read to blow off steam over all the FUD/BS I come across every day concerning Linux or open source software.

I'm a Linux system administrator, have been for going on 10 years now. I've also been using Linux (started with slackware back before it even reached a 1.0 release) for even longer. I also happen to like Microsoft Windows and have spent a number of years as an admin for Windows servers and also Netware in the past. We use Linux to provide email, web hosting, blogs and a content management system to over 60,000 people.

I say all this just to show that I do actually have just a little bit of real world experience with using Linux.

I come across totally bogus claims and hype about Linux versus Windows all the time. And after years and years of this it's frankly time for a site like yours.

Not because it may or may not have any facts but just as an antidote to all the stuff I have to read to stay up to date on what's happening in the Linux world.

Granted I don't know how long your site has been around, I just came across a reference to it today. But I'll be coming back each and every day now that I know your site is around.

Keep on splashing that cold water on the faces of those Linux fanatics.; March 6, 2009 at 10:45 AM
Anonymous said...: I too fell for the lies of the desktop Linux crowd. Till I wised up and realized what am I making my life more difficult for? Why am I going without quality software and trying to come up with alternative (and always substandard) ways to do things on Linux that I could easily do with Windows?

The worst though is all the yapping about hardware, and the inevitable criticism that Vista needs a whole 4gb of RAM to run and DT Linux runs well on low RAM.

Besides the fact that neither are true, what opened my eyes was when I went to upgrade and found that 1gb of RAM for my system cost about $15. From the way Lintards constantly argue that point, you'd think a stick of RAM cost more than a stealth bomber. What the hell are Lintards complaining about with this whole RAM thing? If you can't afford extra RAM at those prices, then seriously you shouldn't be using a computer.; March 6, 2009 at 11:26 AM
Anonymous said...: I contend that the windows 98 era was about the time that many people who now hate linux first looked into linux as an alternative.

Windows 98 had major problems. It was fast as hell but program crashes brought the whole system down. It also had the serious bit rot problem where it became sluggish over time. So many, myself included began exploring linux as an alternative.

Fast forward to today and windows has fixed the problems that drove some people away from windows 98. Meanwhile linux is still spouting the same arguments and excuses that it did back then.; March 6, 2009 at 12:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Welcome aboard Clark! And again, we bitch about Linux to blow off steam, but also to kick the Linux community some common sense because we have been (and still are ) waiting for a true alternative to windows, or at least the holy grail of a single linux standard base and depository.
Linux development nowadays has mostly been stagnant and chaotic, and we need to make some noise to wake these people up and make some hard choices for the sake of innovation.; March 6, 2009 at 12:19 PM
Anonymous said...: From the way Lintards constantly argue that point, you'd think a stick of RAM cost more than a stealth bomber.

This attitude is a holdover from the mid-90s and prior when RAM cost was comparable to military equipment. Since 2000, however, one could max out his system for $300 or less, and the whole "save the kilobytes" campaign become moot. Plus, as you said, Linux is anything but lightweight, especially when handling redundant frameworks and toolkits.; March 6, 2009 at 1:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Just tested a livecd of opensolaris 2008.11, runs pretty good. I was able to connect to WPA wireless network without keyring applet getting in the way.

OS system fonts were not too big and not too small, rendered very well and easy to read without looking childish. Icons and categories are where they should be, easy to navigate around.

Firefox fonts out of the box on google news were rendered nicely, arial looks like arial w i t h o u t being spaced far apart like in many other Linux distros. Openoffice 3 was not preinstalled, but at least it's in the main repository. Web surfing over an extended time seems pretty good, I didn't get the dreaded "DNS resolution lag" that seems to happen on linux distros. Overall there is a certain smoothness and polish to OpenSolaris 2008.11, and I was able to turn on Compiz and run for an extended time without the hard lock pc freeze that seems to affect Ubuntu, otehr Linux based distros.

Again OpenSolaris is nice, and I hope they continue to make Gnome the only DE available (if only to set a desktop API standard), and I hope other developers take notice and start writing applications to it.

At least in Solaris, there seems to be some sort of direction going on.

Give it a try:

http://opensolaris.org/os/downloads/; March 6, 2009 at 1:16 PM
Anonymous said...: I contend that the windows 98 era was about the time that many people who now hate linux first looked into linux as an alternative.

Your story mirrors mine. While I dabbled with Linux prior, a series of disastrous Windows 98 installs led me into a permanent move. Looking back, my Windows problem was certainly driver related, as it's not normal for an install to finish then go into never ending GPF 15 minutes later.

I thought Linux was awesome until Windows 2000 came on the scene. I stuck with it due to inertia but admitted internally that had 2000 came out earlier I never would have switched. By XP SP2 I could no longer justify using Linux at all as a desktop system, especially given the reduction of time I had to diagnose problems and that ridiculous libpng version conflict that Debian took months to resolve.

But yeah, listening to the arguments is like going back in time ten years. BSODs, DLL hell, and constant Explorer crashes died in the 90s. And it's so amusing listening to a new generation passionately argue that solutions to issues that existed even before Linux are "just around the corner".

I recommend the UNIX Haters Book, linked to as a download within the first few entries. The issues it raises are eyeopeners--not because the book has some unique angle or insight but because despite a publishing date of 1994 half the stuff in there still applies. And, surprise! Lacking consistent user and development platforms are covered!; March 6, 2009 at 1:27 PM
Anonymous said...: Has anyone ever told this tool, that Linux is the culmination of the efforts of thousands, that take it upon themselves to fix something or modify it to work more appropriately when they see something that requires it? I suppose they probably have but he and those that subscribe to this person's madness are simply to ignorant to comprehend such a thing, let alone capable of performing such actions. Well, enjoy the hell that is Microsoft. (and to morons who mention how great OSX is, keep in mind they spent the money on how it looks and proprietary BS that they didn't share back to the community, after using UNIX from Nextstep that included code from Free/NetBSD (amoung other open source inclusions). Use your brain and you'll recognize that it's easy to make a better piece of software when you build on top of the open source that people will compare it to).; March 6, 2009 at 1:48 PM
Anonymous said...: oh and to pipe in Linux it's as simple as:

>

as in:

echo "hello world" > helloworld.txt

wow, that was soooo hard.; March 6, 2009 at 1:56 PM
Anonymous said...: The worst though is all the yapping about hardware, and the inevitable criticism that Vista needs a whole 4gb of RAM to run and DT Linux runs well on low RAM.

I always found that quite funny. Lintards claim that most people only need a web browser, a music player, and little more. Well, guess what, dear lintards. To do that you don't need 4GBs of RAM on Vista anyway.

Fast forward to today and windows has fixed the problems that drove some people away from windows 98. Meanwhile linux is still spouting the same arguments and excuses that it did back then

That is so true. You know, I bought all that crap about how Linux development is so blazingly fast compared to Micro$ofzz and the usual yadayadayada. Truth is, when I woke up, Windows had fixed its major problems. Sure, it's still can be annoying and it's far from perfect, but it has achieved to be robust enough and secure enough while maintaining its ease of use, no matter what lintards would want you to believe.

Has anyone ever told this tool, that Linux is the culmination of the efforts of thousands, that take it upon themselves to fix something or modify it to work more appropriately when they see something that requires it?

Dude, that is pure la-la-la wishful thinking. Wake up. The picture you'll find it's not pretty, but at least it's real.; March 6, 2009 at 2:08 PM
Anonymous said...: Use your brain and you'll recognize that it's easy to make a better piece of software when you build on top of the open source that people will compare it to).

This is the kind of statement that just reinforces the hatred of the lintard community.

So according to the lintard it's easy to take the open source base and create a better piece of software. But if it's so easy why wouldn't the lintards just create better software themselves? Why would the lintards stop short of creating better software and then get mad at people who don't stop short? I mean according to the lintard it's easy.

Lintards are so delusional that they don't quite comprehend how their own arguments make them look like idiots.

Has anyone ever told this tool, that Linux is the culmination of the efforts of thousands, that take it upon themselves to fix something or modify it to work more appropriately when they see something that requires it?

Or perhaps this lintard is telling us that the thousands of people in the linux community don't see any requirement for a top notch linux desktop os. If they did surely they swoop in and fix or modify the current linux desktop os's. Wouldn't they? I mean it is easy right?; March 6, 2009 at 2:27 PM
Anonymous said...: I'm always a little perplexed at the "these people do it for free so we should all be grateful" arguments. I think pro bono lawyers do good work, but I'm not grateful due to my not benefiting directly from their services. In fact, were my progressed somehow blocked by a pro bono lawyer (as Linux is known to block my computing progress), I'm likely to show the opposite of gratitude.

Besides, it isn't even true. The "Linux was cobbled together by part timers" is a straight up myth. The bulk of Linux contributions originates from the same source as other software projects: corporate interests.

Otherwise, I am grateful for all the freeware out there. Computing wouldn't be the same without these efforts. However, I draw the line at elevating GPL freeware over "non-free" freeware, especially since the latter is usually higher in quality.; March 6, 2009 at 3:02 PM
Anonymous said...: These people can't even get their stories straight. Is Apple friend or foe to open source? It doesn't really matter to us rational people because the added value Apple brings is painfully obvious, but the "community" can't even agree on whether Apple has actually contributed anything whatsoever back.

You better set this guy straight, oiaohm. He's tearing apart your argument and he's on your side!; March 6, 2009 at 3:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Has anyone ever told this tool, that Linux is the culmination of the efforts of thousands, that take it upon themselves to fix something or modify it to work more appropriately when they see something that requires it?

Wishy-washy rhetoric aside, have you ever stopped to think that this is precisely why it isn't a consumer/mass-market OS?

We've debated the merits of the Cathedral over the Bazaar a thousand times here, I advise looking up older threads to bring yourself up to speed.

Have you copnsidered that a distributed, bazaar development model isn't actually a feature, nor a selling point for using an operating system?

Stable ABI/APIs, standardized, unified toolkits, interfaces and frameworks, convenience, ease of use, polish, good design, non-fragmentation, application support, good hardware support, consistency, system integration, etc, etc, these are features that are selling points. These are things people care about.

I suppose they probably have but he and those that subscribe to this person's madness are simply to ignorant to comprehend such a thing, let alone capable of performing such actions.

TakeYourHeadOutOfYourAss (TM)

Well, enjoy the hell that is Microsoft.

(and to morons who mention how great OSX is, keep in mind they spent the money on how it looks

Translation: They hired UI designers, which is what anyone releasing a serious product should do. But this infuriates me because I want a polished interface, too, but can't have one.

and proprietary BS that they didn't share back to the community,

There's nothing in the propritary bits (Quartz, Cocoa, Carbon, Quicktime, etc) to share back. Those had always been proprietary Nextstep and/or Apple technologies.

after using UNIX from Nextstep that included code from Free/NetBSD (amoung other open source inclusions).

Nextstep was a direct fork of 4.3 BSD, FreeBSD was a fork of 4.4 BSD.
OpenBSD was forked from FreeBSD, NetBSD was forked from OpenBSD.

Besides, "taking Unix from Nextstep?" OS X is the next evolutionary step of Nextstep, so some cannibalistic frankenstein hack of it.

As previously mentioned, The core frameworks are derived from Nextstep's proprietary frameworks, which were additions made by NeXT, On top the 4.3 BSD core, with no relation to the BSD core.

XNU (The kernel) is open source. Darwin (The Unix subsystem) is also pen source.

WebKit was based on KHTML, and all the modifications were shared back, the was a giant bitch-fest in KDE land about it, because they didn't like the format in which Apple delivered their changes (They rewrote large chunks of the codebase, and as such it was a hassle for the KDE team to implement the changes), there's even talk now of moving Konqueror to WebKit.

FreeBSD code that was modified for use in Darwin has been shared with the FreeBSD team, although Apple had no obligation to do so. Ask around the FreeBSD community, they'll tell you the same.

Use your brain and you'll recognize that it's easy to make a better piece of software when you build on top of the open source that people will compare it to).

Use your brain and realize that

a) The BSD code in Darwin has no relation to Linux code, even the common userland tools. BSD is Unix. Linux is not.

b) The whole Nextstep derives from FreeBSD angle is utter bollocks. Nextstep predates FreeBSD, and NextStep was always proprietary. Apple, however, does borrow from FreeBSD, but does share changes back (for example, it was Apple who removed the Giant Kernel Lock from FreeBSD)

c) The was no "open source" at least not as freetards and the fsf view it in the time of Berkeley's BSD.

d) The parts that distinguish OS X/Nextstep from the other BSDs are not based on any open source code, Cocoa derives from proprietary Next frameworks, and Carbon is an pre-Apple-buying-NeXT Apple framework, that was introduced, IIRC, in OS 9.

e) You have no idea what you're talking about (TM).; March 6, 2009 at 3:11 PM
Anonymous said...: "oh and to pipe in Linux it's as simple as:

>

as in:

echo "hello world" > helloworld.txt

wow, that was soooo hard."

That is redirecting output not piping (also called forwarding).

Piping is: command_one | command_two

Where command_two is intended to use the output of command_one to perform its function.

A real example would be: man vim | less

Regardless, I was talking about how Bash passed data from one command to another via the pipe. Where the fuck did you get the idea that I said piping wasn't possible? My argument was based on the fact that piping could in fact be done. You're a fucking idiot. Go back to school and learn how to read.; March 6, 2009 at 3:12 PM
Kharkhalash said...: but the "community" can't even agree on whether Apple has actually contributed anything whatsoever back.

The Linux/GNu community likes to pretend Apple hoards all their changes, that the proprietary frameworks are full of BSD code, and this is a textbook case of why FreeBSD should have gone GPL.

The BSD community, especially the FreeBSD community, whose more interested in building a high performance OS than stupid religious politics, will tell you a completely different story.

I take the BSD community's word for it, personally.; March 6, 2009 at 3:15 PM
Anonymous said...: And if you don't trust me, read it from one of your own: http://w3.linux-magazine.com/issue/78/Bash_vs._Vista_PowerShell.pdf

-- You can skip to the Forwarding section if you don't want to read the whole thing.

Even this guy admits that Bash "cannot compete" with the way Powershell handles piping.; March 6, 2009 at 3:17 PM
Anonymous said...: ... and to morons who mention how great OSX is...

OSX is better described as FreeBSD on steroids with fancy GUI and expensive hardware.

BSD Timeline; March 6, 2009 at 3:18 PM
Anonymous said...: The BSD community, especially the FreeBSD community, whose more interested in building a high performance OS than stupid religious politics...

Still, the BSD crowd was in bed with the Linux crowd in 2002-2004:

"Over to Alan Cox on the VM system.
"alc : Nothing to say."
Usenix 2002 FreeBSD Developer Summit III

FreeBSD SMP Project (Alan Cox began to contribute)

BSD - Linux Crowd 2004 Photos; March 6, 2009 at 3:38 PM
Anonymous said...: The KDE explosion over Apple's KHTML changes was hilarious. Apple read the license, understood it, and contributed back according to the license letter and spirit. Not good enough. The freetards couldn't understand professional level code and demanded Apple break it up and spoonfeed the changes back.

Don't these people actually read the license before basing an entire project off it? What Apple did is *exactly* what the GPL set out to accomplish.; March 6, 2009 at 3:41 PM
Anonymous said...: Ever notice that if you make an argument about how something should be more useful or easier to use the Linux crowd will refute your argument by telling you how it currently works? Like if I want certain features in the Hardware Management application in some Linux distro the counter argument will be a step-by-step procedure on how to do it as it currently stands. That's great and all but it doesn't have anything to do with the argument I'm making.; March 6, 2009 at 3:44 PM
Anonymous said...: @March 6, 2009 3:44 PM

Or claim that what you're trying to do has no use, has already been done elsewhere, or won't be as valuable as your expectations.

All these arguments plus yours are nicely summed up with:

YouDon'tReallyNeedThatAnyway(TM); March 6, 2009 at 3:48 PM
Kharkhalash said...: The KDE explosion over Apple's KHTML changes was hilarious. Apple read the license, understood it, and contributed back according to the license letter and spirit. Not good enough. The freetards couldn't understand professional level code and demanded Apple break it up and spoonfeed the changes back.

What makes it even more hilarious is how the FreeBSD team reacted to similar, massive changes/rewrites from Apple, even though, in this case, Apple was not even required to share their modifications.

The FreeBSD team was gracious about it, they thanks Apple for the help, and got to work on implementing the changes. They never complained about it, even though it took them a year (if not more) just to implement the removal of the Giant Kernel Lock.; March 6, 2009 at 4:14 PM
Anonymous said...: This is one of the many reasons I love windows as a desktop OS. There is always someone making some really neat things for free:

Check out this WINDOWS app, which is like a hulu plugin for windows media player

http://tinyurl.com/de9qj3

The rest of you on Linux I'm very sorry, you'll have to make do with choppy flash videos, screen tear, and/or possibly no flash sound or all three.; March 6, 2009 at 4:49 PM
Anonymous said...: BitTorrent > Hulu; March 6, 2009 at 11:37 PM
Anonymous said...: Anyway, free software on Windows is still progress towards free software. THE REVOLUTION CAN NOT BE STOPPED BITCHES.

And yeah I say this as a person who makes money writing closed source shit. It's very obvious to me that this won't last forever.; March 6, 2009 at 11:40 PM
Anonymous said...: ^"closed source shit"

You are probably being very accurate here. Please, join in the revolution, and contribute ONLY to open source.; March 6, 2009 at 11:56 PM
Anonymous said...: The KDE explosion over Apple's KHTML changes was hilarious. Apple read the license, understood it, and contributed back according to the license letter and spirit. Not good enough.
Apple originally sent the KDE guys a tarball with the patches without any history. This is definitely not in the spirit of the license, no matter what you or Kharkhalash (who doesn't really provide any argument so far, he just takes advantage of the fact that oiaohm is dyslectic) think, as they were almost impossible to use. Later they understood their mistake and launched webkit as an OSS project.

Of course, don't let the facts get in your way. And you call others fanatics.; March 7, 2009 at 1:41 AM
Anonymous said...: Anyway, free software on Windows is still progress towards free software. THE REVOLUTION CAN NOT BE STOPPED BITCHES.

I don't think it can't denied that there are some high quality open source software out there. True Crypt, for example, is one of my favorites. (I find Firefox quite overrated, by the way)

In any case, it's desktop Linux which is pathetic, not every piece of OSS out there. It's no wonder that they're easier to install, even to keep updated, and works faster on better on Windows.; March 7, 2009 at 2:24 AM
Anonymous said...: Actually the KDE project itself is frikn hilarious. It's a blatant ripoff of the windows desktop UI that Lintards o so love to badmouth.

If I wanted to run an alternative OS, it needs to have it's own distinct difference away from windows. OSX does this, Gnome does this, KDE does not.

I just wish KDE devs work instead on porting their KDE apps to GTK. The sooner the better for everyone.

"The KDE explosion over Apple's KHTML changes was hilarious"; March 7, 2009 at 8:02 AM
Anonymous said...: Anyway, free software on Windows is still progress towards free software. THE
REVOLUTION CAN NOT BE STOPPED BITCHES.

Free / open source software development as done in the past few years doesn't
work.

The bazaar model failed...

A make-sense freetard says so:
Video Part 1
Video Part 2
Video Part 3; March 7, 2009 at 8:43 AM
Anonymous said...: @March 7, 2009 1:41 AM

Please reference the "spoonfeed" clause of the GPL. Thank you.; March 7, 2009 at 9:18 AM
Anonymous said...: A make-sense freetard says so:

I wish the video's producer spliced in the slides. 45 minutes of this guy's jittering is tough to take.; March 7, 2009 at 9:49 AM
Anonymous said...: I wish the video's producer spliced in the slides...

Slides [PDF]; March 7, 2009 at 10:24 AM
Anonymous said...: Sorry, these are the slides for the videos from above.; March 7, 2009 at 10:28 AM
Anonymous said...: Actually, thanks for the first slide show set. It's yet another example of "date shifting" advocacy.; March 7, 2009 at 10:53 AM
Anonymous said...: Here are the videos for that first set of slides:
Introduction
Part 1 a
Part 1 b
Part 2 a
Part 2 b; March 7, 2009 at 11:28 AM
Anonymous said...: So we have this guy to blame for gconf and gnome-terminal? And who names their kid "Havoc"?; March 7, 2009 at 11:33 AM
Anonymous said...: What they said in one of the PDF files:

Linux needs:

Consistent Single Platform
- Same operating system APIs and even binaries can be
used:
- Handheld to desktop to server
- Every CPU architecture of interest
Minimizes costs:
● Training
● Porting
● Management

Problem is, noone really "owns" or guides linuxOS, and they won't work with one another. Look at all the wasted effort creating new DE managers like XFCE, Enlightenment, Fluxbox (what is this return to windows 95 gui BS?), even a bastard win95 clone ReactOS. And the many package managers out there, Yum, apt, Deb, Pacman, WTF!!!!

LinuxOS is too late, it WILL NEVER be mainstream, and will forever be stuck in the stone age@! LinuxOS of today is less of an OS than Windows 95 is! At least Windows 95 (outside of 32bit memory protection) had all the proper pieces in place for a manageable,developer friendly OS.

The future will not be Linux, it's too fragemented and licensing issues are a mess. The future will be BSD or Solaris, but Solaris I think will win out (because some fucktards decided KDE is cool). Fuck that KDE bullshit and thatsilly ass k shit everywhere, with that silly asss gear looking crap icons, and that ugly ass recycle bin, O come on KDE, at least upgrade your fucken trash can icon it still looks like SHIT!; March 7, 2009 at 1:16 PM
.net prick said...: Hey Guys,

Though calling it Linux OS is fine for general use the more accurate term is Linux CF since technically Linux is not an operating system but in fact a clusterfuck of competing operating systems that share the same kernel.

You may also refer to it as gnu/linux CF or gnu/linux/clusterfuck if you would like.

Thank you.; March 7, 2009 at 3:31 PM
Anonymous said...: Dear FreeBSD Desktop devs,

Please with all my heart, dump the travesty called KDE, and instead put Gnome on your desktop distros.

Once you do this a lot of applications will port over fine, and you will instantly gain market share away from Gnu linux [ClusterFuck].

WHy not use KDE?

-It's fucken ugly, they got that K and Gear bullshit going on everywhere in every panel
-The KDE icons are like Superman Bizarro world fucked up versions with the WRONG isometric view and shit, it's so fucked up and so annoying that I'm writing about it.
-KDE just have too much shit to going on to configure. Really, I know the dearth of software in gnu/linux [ClusterFuck] makes the DE more interesting. But I figure if you take away KDE, then maybe you can concentrate on more important stuff... like Applications?
-Please for goodness sake, dump all the TUX kids linux education software, it's a frikn travesty that looks like circa windows 3.1!
-Look hell froze ok? Even Linus Torvalds is using Gnome so that should tell you something!
-Gimp -nuff said, it's just crappy all over with a capital "C" ok?
-evolution- More like "de-evolution", it barely matches outlook98
-openoffice-dudes it's 2009, do some ribbon toolbar shit, I'm tired of the sad 90's style toolbar. And once you do this, you will also get rid of the lintard critics that keep wishing for old ass interfaces.; March 7, 2009 at 5:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Linux Hater spotted in public; March 7, 2009 at 5:18 PM
Anonymous said...: That linuxlock.blogspot.com is a fucking joke. You know what? You put Linux on a a user's laptop/desktop, they will never EVER call you for help again.

I put a post on his blog to dare and show his face over here and comment..just try it lol; March 7, 2009 at 5:55 PM
Anonymous said...: That note at linuxlock.blogspot.com probably contains a bunch of BS.

Probably the linuxlock.blogspot.com dude was the one that start it all.

The Linux crowd is best known for:

ABC
CBS
FOX
NBC

Fuck the linuxlock.blogspot.com dude for his BS.; March 7, 2009 at 6:30 PM
Prakash said...: So ,this Link explains about Pulseaudio part :
Please read!
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2009/02/20/why-would-anybody-need-pulseaudio; March 7, 2009 at 7:12 PM
Anonymous said...: And the only sensible reply on that PulseAudio post:

"Maybe people wouldn’t hate PulseAudio so much if it weren’t shoveled onto us in a non-working condition with a shitty inscrutable interface."; March 7, 2009 at 9:08 PM
Anonymous said...: Prakash, I visited your site, and I find it very interesting and introspective. Your view also mimics my view toward my own religion. Thanks for sharing your pragmatic and balanced view.

In many ways Linux fanatics are also extremists/cultists; they do not care to recognize other operating systems that other people like to use, but they keep spreading messages of hate against MS.

I think the mantra I teach to my own kids is:

don't let anyone think or decide for you. No matter what thought, religion, operating system you choose, always recognize that people will make their own choices as well, so you must always be respectful and expect the same in return.

That said I still think Linux (as it now stands) sucks!; March 7, 2009 at 9:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Come to think of it, that describes F-Spot, and what else.. oh yeah, 90% of all apt-get-able software.; March 7, 2009 at 9:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Thankfully Picasa works fine on Linux. But F-Spot is good enough anyway.; March 7, 2009 at 11:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Wintards assault Linux users with violence because they don't understand technology only terrorism.; March 7, 2009 at 11:19 PM
Anonymous said...: YouDon'tUnderstandOurSuperiorHaxxorSystem; March 8, 2009 at 1:56 AM
oiaohm said...: Yes, yes, I know all about Kon Colivas, locking and the CFS. Of course you're just saw the word "scheduler" and started regurgitating mailing list stuff.

It doesn't change that the scheduler a system designed for desktop use has different priorities than say an audio workstation. the big kernel lock has little to do with anything here. Look at how CFS is designed. It's a "completely fair scheduler" read as "general purpose scheduler". The point remains that on an audio workstation audio and IO have higher priority than anything else, on a server setup, things like audio and video aren't proritized

Funny thing look closer. Audio and video can be proritized in the real time versions of Linux kernel without much effort. There is no need for different kernels to do them. Changing the proritization can be done from userspace without much effort.

Kharkhalash Linux is already in a price cutting war. It basically starts at Zero dollars and works up. End result for Microsoft is basically destruction. Same as what has happened to every other OS to face Linux. As soon as that OS does not have a feature that makes it better than Linux it dead.

Is Active directory and exchange in the open source gun sites for competition answer is yes.

Lot of Open source projects don't depend on money from end users. There is many ways to get money for development. End user path is open to a price war killing you. Support contracts less likely. Ie provide a service more resistance to price cutting. Provide software that only has to be paid for once in coding way open to price cutting. Microsoft depends on that over pricing and not providing services.; March 8, 2009 at 4:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Let's examine an oiaohm post by way of a lintard to english translation:

Funny thing look closer. Audio and video can be proritized in the real time versions of Linux kernel without much effort. There is no need for different kernels to do them. Changing the proritization can be done from userspace without much effort.

Blah blah blah...linux can do it, I win...No I can't explain why linux can do it but never ever does...blah blah.

Kharkhalash Linux is already in a price cutting war. It basically starts at Zero dollars and works up. End result for Microsoft is basically destruction. Same as what has happened to every other OS to face Linux. As soon as that OS does not have a feature that makes it better than Linux it dead.

Linux falls further behind other os's in terms of desktop features every year but somehow when linux catches up all other os's are dead. It's just around the corner(TM).

Is Active directory and exchange in the open source gun sites for competition answer is yes.

Somehow I believe that by making this statement it will come true. Even though those programs have been in the open source gun sites for many many years and never been challenged. By bringing it up now as though it's a new development and just around the corner...I win.

In summary. Blah Blah delusional blah blah...I win.; March 8, 2009 at 4:36 AM
Anonymous said...: Both MS and OSX can afford to give out their OS for "free" if they ever wanted to. But as of now, they don't because it is a value added product and they can charge for it. Why give it away free when people are willing to pay, and even in poor countries, they willing to pirate MS and OSX.

If we compare operating systems to environments, Linux platform is like a dust bowl with real estate nobody wants (even when new and given free). When you buy real estate in Linux, all you can do is walk outside, browse dust storms cuz that's all the action there really is...except maybe masturbation.

YouDontNeedThatApplicationOrFeature[TM]

MS and OSX is like a tropical island paradise where all the hot chics are topless, lots of shopping and restaurants,free beer, lots of people doing business, communication going on, entertainment, movies, dining, golf, flying, surfing, dancing, more important stuff like fucking real people. It's a happening place where people like to be in everyday and willing to pay for it.
WelcometoPartyvilleYoucanDoAnythingYourHeartsDesire![TM]; March 8, 2009 at 6:55 AM
Anonymous said...: Microsoft doesn't make enough money from it's other products for a free Windows to be sustainable.; March 8, 2009 at 11:02 AM
Anonymous said...: Yeah, Picasa on Linux, a WINDOWS app that Google wrapped in a special version WINE that they propped up just for that purpose.

Love the shitty unaliased fonts, slow startup, missing features (since they're Win only), and Win95 theming. Picasa on Windows, like every other app, runs much better, looks much better, and even moreso in this case since it IS a Windows app.

For god's sake, if you're going to be running Windows apps because your own apps don't cut it, why not *omg idea* just run Windows in the fucking first place?; March 8, 2009 at 11:07 AM
Anonymous said...: "
Kharkhalash Linux is already in a price cutting war. It basically starts at Zero dollars and works up. End result for Microsoft is basically destruction. Same as what has happened to every other OS to face Linux. As soon as that OS does not have a feature that makes it better than Linux it dead.
"

Then why isn't it dead now? Why isn't it dead five years ago? Why isn't it dead ten years ago?

What other operating systems died because of Linux?

Believe it or not, and perhaps you'll learn this in an economics class, but products do compete in areas other than price.; March 8, 2009 at 11:14 AM
Anonymous said...: Linux killed VMS, fo shizzle. Any computer running VMS is now either dead or in jail.; March 8, 2009 at 11:52 AM
Anonymous said...: I don't use Picasa on Linux, so I can't comment on it's quality. Really Nautilus and the GIMP is enough for syncing pictures for me.; March 8, 2009 at 12:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Hey you can utilize F-Spot, it's included with Ubuntu.; March 8, 2009 at 12:22 PM
Anonymous said...: By bringing it up now as though it's a new development and just around the corner...I win.

Also known as:

Linux Really Started Taking Off just 18 Months Ago (TM), a special case of moving goalposts.; March 8, 2009 at 1:18 PM
Anonymous said...: I hope the altercation version told by the linked advocate isn't what he told the cops because that story reeks of missing information. Sure, the FOSS advocates have no problem believing that random "Geek Squad" types have no qualms about randomly starting fights with Linux advocates, but a more rational person might question why a someone might run toward a total unknown with the intent of starting a fist fight. Even irrational people don't do stuff like this; you need to be certifiable. Plus, a guy that unhinged would have a history of such incidents and would likely be in jail already.

Just a guess, but, assuming an altercation (physical or verbal) occurred at all, I'm betting blog guy somehow provoked the van guy. He could have told them that it was his God given duty to starve to death all that associate in any way with Microsoft. This account seems believable given that advocates already say such things electronically.; March 8, 2009 at 1:34 PM
Anonymous said...: It's easy to tell who has actual business experience and who thinks that tech knowledge automatically translates into authority in any random field.

Financial decision makers don't look at "price", they look at "cost". In fact, "price" is rarely brought up in financial discussions unless focusing on one particular aspect of a larger environment. And, above price and even cost is "value".

Way, way back, I guess in the 98/NT4 days, advocates fought on grounds of cost with the infamous "TCO" mudslinging. They seem to have retreated back to price as of late, but even top dog advocates, like Stallman, never argued based on value. They claimed individual freedom obtained by source code availability was an order above value, totally eschewing the issue.; March 8, 2009 at 1:46 PM
Kharkhalash said...: Funny thing look closer. Audio and video can be proritized in the real time versions of Linux kernel without much effort. There is no need for different kernels to do them. Changing the proritization can be done from userspace without much effort.

Funny thing is how you have absolutely no reading comprehension, nor any footing in reality.

I never argued that you couldn't change priorities in a scheduler. Though I do find it cute that you decided focus in on just the aspect how how the scheduler is set up, that's only one aspect of a system.

What I was arguing is that a specialized system is designed differently than a general purpose one, and honestly, you can't argue against that, no matter how much you want it to be true. It isn't.

And your response is "but linux am can change priorities lol" That's no the point. Nobody said that it couldn't. It's a general purpose OS, it's supposed to be flexible, but that doesn't magically make it designed for any given task.

There are tradeoffs in design. And I'm done repeating this over and over, a general purpose system optimized for a given task is not a specially designed system. A general purpose system is designed with general purpose use in mind, there are tradeoffs and limitations. Jack of all trades, master of none, it, by design, cannot compete with a specialized system.

Optimization is only half of the equation, design is the other. As amusing as this is, however, I am not here to give you a crash course in systems design.

Furthermore, you keep going on about Real Time operating systems. You've made it painfully obvious that you don't have the slightest inkling of what realtime computing entails. Realtime is a very specific function that is only really suited for realtime workloads. You don't seem to understand that realtime computing just doesn't work in a desktop, server, or workstation environment, because none of these systems are realtime systems.

I'm willing to bet that it may shock you to learn that Linux is not a realtime system (though there exists RTLinux, which isn't in the main kernel tree).

Kharkhalash Linux is already in a price cutting war.

And yet, after 15 years of being given away, it was failed to achieve anything of consiquence. This only serves to reinforce the argument that there are things other than price to compete on. It's basic economics and business 101: You don't compete on price unless all other things are equal. This is obviously not the case.

So what does this mean? Could it mean that Linux compete on price only, because it can't compete on anything else?

It basically starts at Zero dollars and works up.

I take it you've never bought RHEL or SLES, or an TLS support contract from Canonical.

End result for Microsoft is basically destruction.

Which is why, once again, after 15 years, Microsoft still holds 89% of the market, it's closest competition is older versions of Windows.

Linux is still an order or magnitude behind Windows 2000 in usage, and the iPhone OS is set, assuming current trends continue, to overtake Linux is usage share.

And that's especially why OS X (although not in direct competition with Microsoft, believe it or not) is the most used non-Microsoft OS on the market, despite Apple's patently ridiculous profit margins.

Could it possibly be because they aren't competing on price? Because there providing something extra?

Same as what has happened to every other OS to face Linux. As soon as that OS does not have a feature that makes it better than Linux it dead.

Can you even name one such OS?

Is Active directory and exchange in the open source gun sites for competition answer is yes.

AD and Exchange have been in OSS' crosshairs for a decade, and there has been no progress. You talk as though it's a static target, but the fact remains that Microsoft is developing both at a much faster pace than OSS can keep up with.

Wishing for it won't make it happen. Do I think that maybe, given enough effort, focus and funding both will be replaced one day? Of course, and I welcome it.

But do I think, that as it stands, OSS has the focus to do it? Not a chance.

Thing is promises of a better future some indeterminate period of time is not a selling point. People don't care. People want what works NOW, because people have work to do.

Lot of Open source projects don't depend on money from end users.

Most of the successful ones rely on corporate funding. Many unsuccessful ones solicit donations from end users, however.

Some sell support, like Canonical.

Others, and this may shock you to learn, operate like any other proprietary software vendor, such as Novell, and to a lesser degree Red Hat. Because Linux isn't viewed as religion, it's viewed as a product that they sell.

End user path is open to a price war killing you.

Again, Microsoft can give away Windows as still be hugely profitable, they don't. They Windows because people are willing to pay for it.

Doesn't the fact that a free option exists, yet people are still willing to pay for Windows (or OS X) say anything to you?

Support contracts less likely. Ie provide a service more resistance to price cutting.

Until someone undercuts your support.

Provide software that only has to be paid for once in coding way open to price cutting.

Because continual development of a product is free, obviously. And programmers don't need food, or a roof over their heads.; March 8, 2009 at 1:52 PM
Anonymous said...: Most people don't use Linux as their OS for the same reasons most people don't shop for clothes at the Salvation Army: they have minimum standards. Any resources available beyond providing the basic necessities are spent on improving quality of life. Included in this mix are better quality food, clothes, and operating systems.

People would gladly choose Salvation Army clothes over freezing, but, absent such a scenario, they'll just go to TJ Maxx and get a wardrobe for $100. Likewise, Linux would be widely used were it the only option, but, failing to be the best choice for the vast majority of computer users, it's utilized about as often as the Salvation Army clothing store.; March 8, 2009 at 2:24 PM
Anonymous said...: A must read discussion from 1996

Exclusively for LHB

Teaser: "The upshot of this is that right from the opening 'Windows' screen, Microsoft has got us somewhat outclassed (free Unix operating systems) and have already detected the mouse and modem at the point that we're still loading a kernel off a floppy."

Linus Torvald's conclusion:

From: torva...@cc.helsinki.fi (Linus Torvalds)
Subject: Re: Historic Opportunity facing Free Unix (was Re: The Lai/Baker paper, benchmarks, and the world of free UNIX)
Date: 1996/04/25
Message-ID: <4ln60a$vg@kruuna.helsinki.fi>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 151429341
references: NELSON.96Apr15010553@ns.crynwr.com Dpz1qL.n1G@deere.com kevinbDqC2K2.CAH@netcom.com
content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
organization: University of Helsinki
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups:

In article kevinbDqC2K2....@netcom.com,
Kevin Brown kev...@netcom.com wrote:
>
>The ultimate key to the server market is the client market. The
>reason for that is that there are many more instances of clients than
>servers, and the disparity between clients and servers will continue
>to decrease as commodity hardware becomes more powerful and as client
>OSes continue to gain server capabilities.

Halleluja! The above comment needs to be framed and handed out to UNIX vendors (and others too, I ahve to admit).
Anybody who concentrates on the server side of things is _dead_ in the water when the client people come loaded for bear.

Nice graphical sysadmin programs aren't the answer. People will wade through sh*t up to their eyebrows and be _happy_ without them (yes, even your "average" user will accept cryptic and hard-to-use textual setup files if you have reasonable defaults: look at windows .ini files).

Yet all the unix vendors fall over backwards to try to make some silly program that makes sysadmin look easy. Nobody really cares - I suspect that the standard "it's too hard to administer" thing people say is really a "there is nothing there I _want_ to administer", yet silly vendors keep doing the sysadmin programs..

STOP doing the damn glitzy admin stuff: it's a secondary issue at _most_ if even that. If you don't have the applications, people won't care about the admin stuff either, because there simply isn't anything they want to administer.

The last two vendor unixes I saw (I won't name names) both came with graphical tools for doing disk striping etc. NEITHER of them had any applications loaded at _all_, and their shell didn't even have command line editing on by default (This is 1996, folks, we don't need no steenking editing facilities!). No wonder people flock away in droves and hope for the "saviour" NT - at least MS has been known to put a few games etc with the basic distribution.

Linus

Thirteen years later, poor freetards are still trying to catch with Microsoft Windows!; March 8, 2009 at 2:24 PM
Anonymous said...: Links to the discussion from above:

A Performance Comparison of Unix Operating Systems on the Pentium

Slides

Discussion

Quote: "The fact is that it's already too late for UNIX on the desktop."

Note: The slides have a small problem. Nevertherless, you can still read the slides backwards.; March 8, 2009 at 2:48 PM
Anonymous said...: I think it's time to coin a new term:

CouldHaveBeenWrittenYesterday(TM)

We're still watching the crotch-kicking toolkits and still lack standard APIs. Readers probably thought Hubbard exaggerated with his "12 different distributions of their software" remark, but that turned out to be hugely conservative!

But all of these are "features", right? Freedom?; March 8, 2009 at 3:05 PM
Anonymous said...: This isn't about "windows killed my dog and raped my wife", this is
about "what the heck is it about Windows that's caused the damn thing
to take over the world and when are we finally going to pull our heads
out of the sand and stop chanting nahnahnahnahnahnah-I can't hear
you!-nahnahnahnahnah! like a bunch of kids arguing at recess?"

Best quote in that linked discussion, and proof that nothing has changed.

LH already said it: freetards will never learn. Sigh.; March 8, 2009 at 3:27 PM
Anonymous said...: This isn't about "windows killed my dog and raped my wife", this is
about "what the heck is it about Windows that's caused the damn thing
to take over the world and when are we finally going to pull our heads
out of the sand and stop chanting nahnahnahnahnahnah-I can't hear
you!-nahnahnahnahnah! like a bunch of kids arguing at recess?"

Best quote in that linked discussion, and proof that nothing has changed.

LH already said it: freetards will never learn. Sigh.; March 8, 2009 at 3:27 PM
Anonymous said...: It only gets better in the next paragraph.

You can debate all
this from a standpoint of denial and impassioned stories of how
Windows95 isn't *your* favorite operating system for ten million
different reasons, but it still won't go one iota towards explaining
why UNIX has fallen so far behind, despite a decade of such great
promise, nor will it assist us in deciding what we have to do in order
to try and improve the situation.

That is from 1996.; March 8, 2009 at 3:55 PM
Anonymous said...: Twelve years later it still a problem. Freetards aren't interested in improving they're interested in seeing their competition fail.; March 8, 2009 at 7:51 PM
Anonymous said...: Way, way back, I guess in the 98/NT4 days, advocates fought on grounds of cost with the infamous "TCO" mudslinging. They seem to have retreated back to price as of late, but even top dog advocates, like Stallman, never argued based on value. They claimed individual freedom obtained by source code availability was an order above value, totally eschewing the issue.
You found it, everybody is lying to make you use linux. Either this or some people refer to short-term gains (freedom from lock-in), mid-term (upgrades independent of the whims of MS & intel), or long-term (much lower TCO, much better quality). Of course, companies that aren't tied to MS benefit immediately from lower TCO.

I'm willing to bet that it may shock you to learn that Linux is not a realtime system (though there exists RTLinux, which isn't in the main kernel tree).
Why isn't a real-time OS suitable for a desktop?

And yet, after 15 years of being given away, it was failed to achieve anything of consiquence. This only serves to reinforce the argument that there are things other than price to compete on.
Do you live in a cave?

Doesn't the fact that a free option exists, yet people are still willing to pay for Windows (or OS X) say anything to you?
People are used to Windows, they don't really care about it or linux. They use whatever makes their job easier.

Until someone undercuts your support.
MS can't do this, nobody else can.

Because continual development of a product is free, obviously. And programmers don't need food, or a roof over their heads.

There are programs that are considered a commodity. Programmers can always work for in-house development of special-purpose software.

Thirteen years later, poor freetards are still trying to catch with Microsoft Windows!

So does the rest of the world, buddy.; March 9, 2009 at 5:43 AM
Anonymous said...: You found it, everybody is lying to make you use linux. Either this or...

No, it's definitely the first one.; March 9, 2009 at 6:32 AM
Anonymous said...: YouOnlyUseWindowsBecauseYouAreUsedToIt(TM); March 9, 2009 at 7:19 AM
Anonymous said...: Yes that why windows for warships is compiled on gcc, oh wait... LOL; March 9, 2009 at 7:28 AM
Anonymous said...: The "used to Windows" argument fails when considering once heavy Linux users that switched to Windows or Mac. The Linux Hater audience is heavy with this type.; March 9, 2009 at 8:36 AM
DamnRight said...: "Discussion from '96" Anonymous, thanks for the link! You can really see how crystal clear Hubbard's insight was -- obvious stuff to anyone with eyes to see, really -- and how thick the denial was in the gaggle of zealots. It's pretty comical how swiftly and efficiently Microsoft pummeled them and to this day, they still have to realize it actually happened and how and why it happened.

It's no wonder that Hubbard works at Apple now. Now if he only could convince the powers that be to just swap to the FreeBSD kernel for OS X instead of that horrid Darwin concoction ...; March 9, 2009 at 8:56 AM
Anonymous said...: @March 9, 2009 7:19 AM:

YouOnlyUseLinuxBecauseItsNotWindowsTM); March 9, 2009 at 10:25 AM
Anonymous said...: "MS can't do [under cut support costs], nobody else can."

Please explain why it would be impossible for an entity to price their support services under the current price of any given company.; March 9, 2009 at 10:55 AM
Anonymous said...: http://dot.kde.org/sites/default/files/koffice20beta7.png

LOL! Can you say AMATEUR?; March 9, 2009 at 11:20 AM

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 801 Newer› Newest»

Linux Hater's Blog

Saturday, February 28, 2009

Driving me insane

801 flames:

Got anything rant-worthy? or just plain stupid?

Hater Merch

Greatest Hates

Old grudges (archive)

Linkydinks

Hater Wannabes

Offshoots