The Traps of Linux...&open source software

[betty]

I received a link to an interesting book:

The Traps of Linux...

The author argues that open source infrastructure is much more expensive in long-term calculations. I think there is something true in this position. But my friend thinks the book is scandalous. What do you think about this...?

betty

[Cobra]

I think someone stands to make a lot of money from this book...

Linux is free. If you try it and don't like it, go back to Windows. No harm done, no money spent. I run Mandrake Linux 9.2 on my PC and it goes nicely. Just trying to figure out how to make it see my dual LAN motherboard so it can connect to the Internet!

Cobra

[housepig]

the author's bias and misinterpretation of "free (as in speech) software / open source" is in the first frigging page.

Instead, the Open source code intends to offer to its users completely free programs, capable implement the same job, i.e. to avoid any software expenses.

No, the open source code intends to offer the user the freedom to utilize, customize, improve and market commerically. it's not about money (free as in beer) it's about freedom (free as in speech).

Linux / Open Source / Free Software is not necessarily non-commercial (without price). In many cases it is, but it does not have to be.

click here for an opposing viewpoint.

[pacmania_2001]

And once again the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

[flaninacupboard]

standardisation is good. a tool that someone has used before they can use again even in a different form.

customisation is good. if you need a tool to do a specific job, something that gets it -nearly- done is not good enough. it has to be right for you.


A good example is a car, cars are the same. you have a pedal to make it go fast, a pedal to slow it down and a wheel to make it turn. in countries more advanced than america you also have a pedal to change gears....

Now, a forumla one car is still a car - but it has been tweaked and perfected beyond a degree someone going to the shops needs. the seat is made for the driver, the pedals are adjusted for the driver. these guys are the PC equivalent of Power Users.

We have both in real life, we also have both in computer life.

[gmatov]

Flan,

I must take some umbrage with your inflammatory accusation. Around 1910 the upstart Americans were changing gears with their feet.

They soon learned that it was easier with a little stick on the column or the floorboard.

Should you advanced people decide that a push pedal was more convenient for "race car drivers" with no, what is the equivalent of "manual dexterity" when applied to the foot, bipedal dexterity (?), and must have the foot depress the clutch, AND change gear, I do not think that makes you superior.

Actually, it seems you should have invented the automatic transmission that probably 99 % of the world uses.

I am still jamming gears, and I have learned to hate it. A bitch to transfer the coffee cup to the other hand when you upshift. Spills the coffee, doncha know?

Cheers,

George

[flaninacupboard]

the rolly eyed smiley should show i'm just having some fun

It just always amuses me when in american films someone gets in a car and says "i can't drive stick!!!!" or gives it a go and screws up. most of use over here can't afford to run an auto over a manual, and i don't think they'd handle our windy narrow hilly streets too well - you just get a lot more control with a manual setup, and a smoother ride. i also find the engine braking when dropping down a gear helpful if road conditions are poor, less chance of locking your wheels and going in a ditch.

We solved the coffee problem by driving on the correct side of the road, and sitting in the correct place in the car. 8)

[DereX888]

We solved the coffee problem by driving on the correct side of the road, and sitting in the correct place in the car.

hahahaha I'd submit it for the funniest line of this board if anyone organize such contest

[gmatov]

Flan,

I was amused too, when my 16 yr old daughter would come home from a party and tell me hercar was blocking someone in, and a boy would say "I'll go move it for you, oh, no, I can't it's a stick shift!", or she'd be in a car with a boy who'd borrowed it from his dad, and stall it half a dozen times at a stop sign. "I wanted to tell him move over, I'll drive."

After she wrecked her first Audi 5 speed, and I found her another car, she told me she was afraid it would be an automatic, and she'd never driven 1 except in driving class in school. Still drives a 5 speed Dodge pickup, though their car is an automatic.

Over here, a lot of the cars come standard with auto, pay extra for a stick.

Never thought to drive on the other side, nor sit on the other side. If it keeps the coffee from spilling, I'll give it a go.

Cheers,

George

edit: This thread is linux related, and I have not mentioned it. Sorry.

One has to look at whose ox is being gored when you see a book such as that. On whose payroll could the author be?

I wouldn't go so far as to say that MS would pay for such a work, but there have been studies sponsored by them that do give the impression that TCO of Linux is higher than the MS product. I personally think that would depend on whether you can find enough Linux savvy support personnel.

When everybody and his brother has an MCSE, the salaries come down. When it is hard to find a Linux Ace, his salary will be high. When an OS runs as well as most Linux does, there will be less call for a barn full of gurus.

When IBM decides that it is a good OS, good enough to install on their server offerings, you have to wonder whether you too should go for it.

And, as mentioned above, you DL, install, try, if you reject it, no money lost, just time. You buy XP Pro, don't like it, 200 bucks gone, unless you can take it back for refund.

And, the DL will work on 1 or 1000 machines without a validation check as in XP.

I've DL'd them all and will have to install again soon, as I haven't been using it lately, maybe on the new machine in the other room, soon as I get 2 others back to their owners, g'daughter and a friend.

[mujahid7ia]

Couldn't even get through the first page, grammar like that...

[stiltman]

And, the DL will work on 1 or 1000 machines without a validation check as in XP.

I've install XP on 1000 machines and have never had a validation check
I don't even have to enter the CD key...

[flaninacupboard]

I don't even have to enter the CD key...

Oooohhhhhhh! i'm reporting you for warez!!

I believe XP homo needs validating but XP pro does not. not sure on the cd key thing though

[stiltman]

I don't even have to enter the CD key...

Oooohhhhhhh! i'm reporting you for warez!!

I believe XP homo needs validating but XP pro does not. not sure on the cd key thing though

sysprep

[gmatov]

I don't know XP, no XPerience.

I have read those who have posted about re-validating their machines after changing hardware.

Whether that is XP Home Ed, or all XP versions, except Corporate, because you do buy either a batch of licenses at once, or an OEM such as Dell, Compaq, HP, where the install files are recompiled, or whatever, to that makers special BIOS, hence, not able to install to a non-that brand machine. And, you get no CD Key, as you don't even get a CD.

Regardless, should you DL a flavor of Linux freeware, you still have no requirement to validate, nor purchase any licenses. Unlike, I might add, any flavor of Windows, which used to be usable on 2 machines, so long as you could use only 1 at a time, such as a PC and a laptop.

What is sysprep, anyhow? System Preparation? And that is....?

Cheers,

George

[Cobra]

I had no trouble with my Windows XP activation even when I moved it onto my new machine. It just gave me a number to ring and it was an automated response giving me a new activation key. Sorted, fair play Microsoft.

Linux is nice, but can't do anywhere near as much for the new user as Windows can. For example, my Mandrake Linux (9.2 Download Edition) needs drivers to see my LAN ports (I have dual on-board LAN), and I need to compile what I think might update it to see my gigabit port. What do I know about compiling? I downloaded a compiler, but I needed a compiler to compile the damn compiler! Arrgghh!! I'm getting GCE (or is it GCC) from a friend tomorrow, so I should be sorted...

Windows XP should, however, be renamed to FP for Fisher Price. From the looks of things, Fisher Price played a huge role in the GUI!

Cobra

[DereX888]

Cobra, funny thing - Windows "Fisher edition" is what I said in the summer of 2001 after installing XP Pro CE first time Except for Fisher-style GUI I havent found much difference from Win2K there. Plus playing with WinXP Home Ed later I came to conclusion that M$oft have no chance in creating really good OS *ever* (I gave them a chance of standing tall in 99 when Win2K came out, but after seeing intentionally 'dumbed down' version WinXP HE with its idiotic enforcement of FAT32 right of the box, I realised there is no chance for M$oft to do it right ever. ditto)

Since its a Linux thread I'd give my opinion on the subject, altough Im not a 'pro'

I tried many of linux flavors since I laid my hands on 1998 Caldera's Open Linux first. Since then I install (an still uninstall quickly ) most of newest releases about 2-3 times a year. It is just last year (2003) when finally Linux had reached the level of Windows95 in the layman's terms. What I mean by that? just a simple detection of all available hardware during OS installation on a 1997 233MHz machine, which I still keep for such tests. Believe me or not, up until RedHat 8 no Linux could properly detect what that old junk Windows 95B could. On such old and outdated machine.
And I still haven't found one linux distro that could do what I use my main computer for: capturing, encoding, authoring, burning.
Perhaps it is possible, but I am just long time PC user, not a code writer. I dont want to learn i.e. how to compile a compiler (as someone else pointed it out), I firmly believe PC should do it itself.
Im not bashing Linux here. I see great potential for it, even though Windows is getting more and more stable (I dont have any crashes on my Win2K boxes for ages). But I think the biggest misunderstanding 'Linux people' do is lack of common sense. Majority of people would ditch Windows for Linux had it had at least Windows95's level of user friendliness, if you know what I mean. Many of my friends installed Linux distros now and in the past, and 99% of them return to Windows within weeks. Main reason? No, not the lack of games as some people suggest. Most of us dont play games only on their computers. Its the lack of unified compilers (installers/uninstallers) that drives them away from linux. As one of my friends put it: "I downloaded this/that, but it just sits there in linux partition". Well, answers like "compile it" IMHO are unacceptable. No matter how inferior is Windows compared to Linux, even a child can double click .exe and install whatever they want.
Face it: most of us don't need linux's security, and this is the only 'strength' where Linux excells. The other superior feature of Linux - stability- already fade away. I have my capturing box running Win2K for months at the time, other Win2K ones dont crash either, altough they are rebooted every month or so due to installed windows' patches that require it.
There is lots of software for Linux out there, some really great stuff (i.e. simple Gimp). But majority of those who would give Linux a try dont know how to install (and uninstall) them. Whatever they chose to be added during Linux installation (usually entire 'package') is whatever they will have there forever (or until they get to conclusion they need Windows back because they dont know how to add whatever they need more). Most of people dont even know how to modify installed 'packages' on their Linux distro, much less adding something downloaded. That is the major obstacle with Linux. I think most of linux coders are such geeks they dont realise that average Joe doesnt even have a clue about what compiler is, and such average Joe is not going to spend time learning on how to "compile a compiler". Thats what M$oft understood long long time ago, and thats what made Windows dominating the world now. Its not Bill Gates who shove Windows down our throats, its actual people's choice of whats easier (but not neccesarily better) for them.

Wow, Im sorry for such long post. I'd say more, but I gotta go back to work now