Posted on 12/03/2002 9:40:52 AM PST by chilepepper
i think a bit of patience is needed with Linux and Open Source: your experience in contributing to Open Source sound pretty dreadful, but the progress of Linux & OSS that past three to five years has been nothing short of spectacular. some interesting project development tools are starting to show up as well (Tinderbox SeaMonkey for example)
my memories of setting up slackware five or six years ago are pretty painful, and i've been writing code and using Unix/Solaris/VMS for twenty seven years.
i believe that some big bets are being placed on OSS right now, but some pretty big players who can keep the OSS kiddies in check, IBM in particular comes to mind. also, RedHat has been successful enough to *really* care about quality and they have added this value to their distribution, which is in fact quite automated even if not quite ready for the untrained.
in any event, it seems to me that the next two or three years are going to be extremely exciting one for computer technology...
FYI--Evolution is not remotely like Lindows or Xandros--it's an application for e-mail and calendaring--much like Lotus Notes or Outlook.
I'm pretty sure that the animal rights people would have a problem with being that cruel to the aligator.
Do you know why companies spent millions of dollars patching decades-old COBOL code to make it "Y2K" compliant instead of rewriting it from scratch with the object-oriented language du jour? Because when you rewrite anything from scratch (be it rewriting a program or re-type-setting a book), the introduction of new unknown errors is inevitable.
UNIX, BSD-UNIX, LINUX, and Windows 200 are all bound by the old programming models created by Kerrigan, Ritchee, and Wirth over 30 years ago. Structured function based operating systems are not going to hack it in the oject oriented world. And C++ is not going to hack it either.
I'm not convinced that we are moving into an object-oriented world, nor am I convinced that object-oriented development is the best way to approach developing a performance-sensitive operating system. Look into articles concerning what happens when object-oriented theory hits real-world projects. The benefits promised by object-oriented theory all-too-often do not materialize in the real world. When the benefits do materialize, it is because the project was developed in conditions that are uncommon, if not unique.
Linux will dominate the desktop when Habitat for Humanity dominates home construction.
If Habitat for Humanity could duplicate their houses as cheaply and easily as Linus Torvalds (etc.) can duplicate Linux, they probably would dominate home construction because, as I pointed out in an earlier threat, theirs were the only homes standing after Hurricane Andrew.
There are development tools for Linux beyond simply GCC (e.g. the Metrowerks CodeWarrior IDE). Then there is the Mono project.
UNIX tools for serious programming (C and C++) suck compared to windows tools. Using Visual Basic and Visual C++ on a project can turn out a finished program in months that would take years in LINUX.
If you are talking web applications or business applications, a nice scripting language would probably clean the clocks of all of the other "serious programming" options you've listed with respect to development speed and testing.
To take down Microsoft the competitor will have to do what GM did. Build an operating system that a windows user can run with zero training.
Most users don't interactwith the operating system. They interact with applications. All that is really needed is to replicate the Windows applications. And developers, both commercial and open, are working on it.
Here in Columbus Ohio there are 5 stores selling used Computers, including the Microcenter Super Store. When they can sell 3 or 4 year old machines that surf the net, do word processing and spreadsheets just fine that tells you lots of companies that are not leasing hardware are not going to upgrade. The majority of desktops may for many uses become an item like the desk it sits on. It will be replaced when it breaks or wears out. Micorsoft would like to get people on annual payment lease deals before customers figure it out.
Correct. Microsoft depends on constant upgrade cycles for funding. Unlike soap, you don't consume an OS when you use it. Unlike books, there is little incentive to keep buying new ones, once they OS you have does what you want. So where does this ultimately leave Microsoft?
Gates will be taken down... but by a clone or a system that appears to be a clone... not an alternative operating system.
An alternative operating system can also appear to be a clone. That's exactly what several Linux projects are attempting to do.
Ahem. Kernighan and Ritchie.
Microsoft is selling shiny objects to gullible PHBs, again.
Programmers write free open source as a way to gain experience, knowledge, and exposure. They use all three to get paying jobs. Once they have the paying job, they stop writing open sourse.
While this generalization may make you comfortable with the choices you've made and ease your uncertainty about the future, it's simply not true. Certainly there are people who have written code, released it under an open source and walked away, but you know very well that projects like Linux, BSD, Gnome, KDE, Apache, etc. count among their numbers long-term developers who are both volunteers and paid by their employers. As much as you would like to characterize open source as the product of garage programmers looking for real jobs, there are more than a few paid professionals from companies like IBM and Sun participating in the development of open source projects.
That is the model that UNIX UNIX programs and Windows are based upon.
The next generation based on the Component object model of C# is an order of magnitide better in both reliabitiy and maintain ability. Microsoft is spending billions on a new operating system while SUN, IBM, SuSe, and Red Hat and the others play with an antique operating system. BSD UNIX still has a character based installation. It is Model T with a crank starter, tyring to compete with a new Chevie. The BSD boys will loudly tell you they are not trying to compete. They act like they are trying to commit suicide but they can't find a sharp programmers pencil to kill themselves with Some of those boys are still playing with Silent 700's. They can't wait for 1980 to get here.
Sun is playing with yesterdays hardware and software. That is why Sun stock has dropped from 60 bucks a share to less than 4 bucks.
MS competitors are suing Microsoft. That says a lot.
No one has done a successful commercial application for LINUX. Only someone as dumb as SUN's management would try to sell an Office Suite it could not give away.
Microsoft is very vulnerable. But not from the UNIX LINUX crowd.
I'm glad you feel that way. Then M$ won't know what hit them.
Back to reality, Micro$oft does not believe what you believe, and are spending a *LOT* of effort to shoot down Linux. It won't work because the great decider, IBM, has chosen Linux, so its future is assured.
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.