Posted on 06/19/2005 6:41:20 AM PDT by Willie Green
NEW YORK - Theo de Raadt is a pioneer of the open source software movement and a huge proponent of free software. But he is no fan of the open source Linux operating system.
"It's terrible," De Raadt says. "Everyone is using it, and they don't realize how bad it is. And the Linux people will just stick with it and add to it rather than stepping back and saying, 'This is garbage and we should fix it.'"
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Ill grant you that, heck I though I did when I said "the only one that comes to mind is licensing model, and that is a big one.. Microsoft has proven the business decisions trump technology, which is what both myself and the OP was saying..
Who says the most technically superior OS should "dominate"
Nobody...
OS threads are boring
And yet here you are..
Using the first link in your last post, we find this at the top:
As near as I can tell there are a wide range of hardware "issue's" that can cause this.
Hardware, as I expected. Going back to your original request, to search Google for "\Windows\System32\Congfig\System", well I tried that, but only got one hit, changing it to "\Windows\System32\Config\System" and looking at the second link to Experts Exchange, a fairly reliable site for tracking down issues, the final posts there also indicate hardware:
I had this AGAIN yesterday. different machine to last time but the same site and identical hardware.
I'm narrowing down to a hardware problem on the video card, power supply, or the mobo.
Also drive me nuts turned out to be some bad ide cables supplied with the motherboards.
While other issues could be the cause of some of these problems, there does seem to be a significant amount of solutions based on hardware problems, even bad cables. Which is what my experience would tell me - if the problem recurrs on a freshly formatted system, then hardware is likely the cause, especially if you're using cheap components. Make sure you have the latest XP-compatible BIOS firmware in your computer, try a different hard drive and cables, different RAM, etc. Again, good luck.
By "business friendly" I take it you mean they can take code without compensation of any kind. Wanting something for nothing is what you always accuse Linux people of doing.
And you are woefully misinformed if you think accidentally releasing a derivitave work of another's code that includes your code means that your work can be confiscated. You essentially have two choices: make your work GPL or go to court with the copyright owners of the works you distributed without a license and get rightfully reamed.
To put it in proprietary terms you can understand: If you start selling PCs with a modified Windows without a license, you usually have two choices: retroactively pay the licenses plus a penalty and get a contract for future licenses, or go to court against Microsoft and get rightfully reamed.
They're both the same concept, only in the GPL world the out of court settlement payment isn't in cash, but in labor.
The central case, a 2003 suit against IBM (IBM ), an important corporate promoter of Linux, has degenerated into a messy contract dispute with no intellectual-property issues left on the table. SCO's threats to sue companies that use Linux have almost entirely evaporated.
That's certainly true. They lost Daimler/Chrysler spectacularly, the IBM case is languishing with the judge ready to grant extremely damaging summary judgements the moment discovery is over, and their Autozone case is looking worse every day, with SCO lying to the court ("misstatements" in Autozone's polite writing).
But open-source proponents also have to get their own intellectual-property house in order.
That's true. Many of these projects, especially Apache, have produced patent-worthy code, at least in today's warped environment. They should have built up their own patent arsenal to cross-license.
The GPL not only requires that any programs licensed under it be freely distributed but also that any modifications made to the software, or any other software derived from it, are themselves automatically covered by the GPL.
I know, having to follow a license in order to distribute another's code is just such a strange concept.
, and few disputes involving it have gotten to court, so case law has done little to clarify its meaning.
Correct. In this country everybody but NuSphere (who lost) has backed down immediately and complied, even Cisco. Germany has had cases successfully prosecuted for netfilter/iptables because home router manufacturers didn't think they had to comply with a license to distribute the works of others.
I think the problem a lot of us have goes with the old IBM adage "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM." I'll bet a large chunk of the MS servers were bought just because it's MS and that's what they're used to, without any cost analysis. I know that's what the government does.
Im talking about the technology not the device. it was far easier for companies to produce VHS unints than jump through hoops to make betmax..
Exactly. That was basically my point. :)
People who complain that Linux is too hard to install for grandma are trying to enforce standards on Linux that Windows doesn't meet. The only difference between the two is that Windows usually doesn't have to be installed since it comes with most machines on the market. Windows upgrades, also, would not be a thing I would allow grandma to do. I would set up automatic upgrades on that machine (bot Windows and linux have this feature).
Apple's implementation is a hybrid. They don't use the BSD kernel, only the rest of BSD to handle the higher-level stuff, passing everything to the Mach kernel for low-level handling. But in this case Mach is compiled into BSD instead of being standalone with message passing between them.
I actually find it easier than Windows.
I did until I found the Silver color scheme. Never could stand the Crayola theme.
I haven't done a desktop linux in a long time. I have a SUSE 9.2 kicking around my flooded office somewhere.
When I get un-pissed off enough to go back to work, I might dry it out and give it a shot on any of my computers that are not ruined.
This weekend sucked some serious ass.
Wow. Sounds serious. :)
On a more serious note, though, I have not tried Suse personally. I picked up a copy of Novell's Linux Desktop 9 on DVD over the weekend. I intend to try it out via VMware sometime in the next week or two.
Of course it is!
Linux is for everybody.
(*rimshot*)
I'm going to the corner now and will be feeling awful for the very bad thing I just did :D.
It's worse. It's for hobbyists. ;)
Running Xandros and HAVE NOT had to use command line.
I knew your "use whatever works best for you" above wouldn't last long, heck you couldn't even make it to the next thread without launching insults against MS users. Obviously just can't control yourself, no news to anyone that knows you.
No I'm not, I'm obviously well informed if I understand the license and how it's used in the industry even better than it's rabid supporters.
Read a few lines down: MS has a great development environment and is a great app server - I have little use for it outside of that, except as a desktop os. Still, it has it's place.
If you want to spend a small fortune license Windows to do file-and-print when you could do *nix/samba for free, well, if it works for you.....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.