Replies

I noticed alot of things wrong with the article as well. I got a good laugh about the x11 comment, though he tried to recover through qualifying.

His point about how macs handle a network was a good one though, though I think he misunderstands. They think of them as islands for a reason. They want to sell one copy of software per island, so they purposely make it un-intuitive.

^^^^^^^^^^You are supposed to start all your programs on the workstation in front of you. At most you can use data on other workstations, using an awkward "Connect to server" dialog that is like a flashback to the early days of mainframe networking.^^^^^^^^^^^^^

It's no secret that home networks are becoming prevalent. Ease of use? Linux is the frontrunner here.

How many people do you know with a home network?

His point about how macs handle a network was a good one though, though I think he misunderstands. They think of them as islands for a reason.

I think his "island" comment was referring to X11's remote terminal capabilities in client-server systems. The author is apparently unaware of the Apple Remote Desktop system. ARD is a very efficient solution, but most users don't need it. An alternate solution is VNC, which is less efficient, but it costs nothing and is interoperable on all platforms.

It's no secret that home networks are becoming prevalent. Ease of use? Linux is the frontrunner here.

Could you give an example of a common situation where desktop Linux has better ease of use? I've set up plenty of mixed networks with Linux, Windows and Macs. In my experience, Macs are much easier to set up and use than Linux or Windows for desktop usage, especially on wireless networks. Linux networking is more difficult to setup, but has the advantage of better performance for servers.