Posted on 11/04/2005 6:15:02 AM PST by PissAndVinegar
Nokia has begun shipping its Linux-based Nokia 770, the so-called "Internet tablet", according to the Finnish giant's direct-sales website.
The device lacks the usual Nokia mobile phone technology, relying instead on Wi-Fi (802.11b/g) and Bluetooth to connect it to a broadband connectivity host. The 770 is pitched at consumers who want to access the Internet for emailing and web browsing anywhere in their home.
(Excerpt) Read more at theregister.co.uk ...
For the tech ping..
How do you mean?
Just a joke...there's a bunch of Freepers who feel open source software is communist for some reason.
That's what I thought but I didn't know if you were from the dark side or not... ;)
I am neither an MS or Linux basher but know that, as a system admin, I will take Win2K and XP over ANY UX system as a general rule.
I use RedHat/Fedora and Suse Linux daily. (also HPUX and Solaris) Though they have their niche for some systems/apps, like MS OS's, their shortcomings are numerous:
1. Linux is not nearly as stable as most UX "cheerleaders" claim. I have to reboot most of my UX systems many more times than I do my Win2K Server and WinXP Pro systems.
2. They aren't free and most Linux-based solutions cost more than MS solutions in the long run. Our estimated labor hours to support a Linux system is TRIPLE that of our MS systems. This is a truly amazing stat as it does seem that we have to patch our MS systems many times a year. Bear in mind that our system admins average around 65K a year - their time is valuable and costly. Patching Windows and troubleshooting UX boxes are both time consuming but MS actually takes less time.
3. Linux is still not a true replacement for Windows for the end user. If you don't believe this, you don't know the "technical proficiency" of our end users.
4. End user applications for Linux just aren't available as a general rule. Yes, you can find substititions for many Windows programs but just look at your favorite software store and compare shelf space. Not even close.
Windows and *UX each have their benefits and their costs. However, if an application can run on either platform, I say from experience - give me the Windows version.
If you want a Google GMail account, FReepmail me.
I reboot my Linux servers four times a year for scheduled kernel patches. Out side of that I can count on one hand the number of times I have had to reboot any of my production state Linux boxes over the past 3 years... Linux is as stable as you build it to be, vanilla out of the box it has issues like *any* vanilla out of the box os.
Linux? we have two Linux admins and Windows admins for a similar number of production boxes of which the big database servers are Linux..
Windows and *UX each have their benefits and their costs. However, if an application can run on either platform, I say from experience - give me the Windows version.
I think *you're* experience is just as anecdotal as the *NIX "Cheerleaders" you claim make outrageous claims and your claims are just as based in your bias.. Which is better *NIX or Windows depends on so many factors anything but an individual TCO per server makes no sense..
1. Linux is not nearly as stable as most UX "cheerleaders" claim. I have to reboot most of my UX systems many more times than I do my Win2K Server and WinXP Pro systems.
Not in my experience. Win2K Server is much more stable than say WinNT 4.0 but doesn't come close to the stability of a properly configured Linux system. Many of the problems that I come across with the Windows systems is the constant "reboot to update the system" for security and system patches (which come out constantly).
2. They aren't free and most Linux-based solutions cost more than MS solutions in the long run. Our estimated labor hours to support a Linux system is TRIPLE that of our MS systems. This is a truly amazing stat as it does seem that we have to patch our MS systems many times a year. Bear in mind that our system admins average around 65K a year - their time is valuable and costly. Patching Windows and troubleshooting UX boxes are both time consuming but MS actually takes less time.
This I believe it red-herring. Yes, Linux and *NIX administrators require a steeper learning curve and that translates into dollars of training and salary but the trade off is the stability of the product. I cannot tell you how many extra hours of pay or comptime that has been paid out in my experience with people jerking around with Windows boxes that have crashed or are hung and need to be rebuilt.
3. Linux is still not a true replacement for Windows for the end user. If you don't believe this, you don't know the "technical proficiency" of our end users.
It has made a marked progress in the arena. I believe has more and more to do with users not wanting to change, which is a very strong human trait, that with the lack of software available to do their everyday tasks. But that is my opinion.
4. End user applications for Linux just aren't available as a general rule. Yes, you can find substitutions for many Windows programs but just look at your favorite software store and compare shelf space. Not even close.
This is not where many of these end-user apps reside. The vast majority are open-source software available for free download and use. You will not find them at Electronics Boutique or CompUSA. Never the less, they work.
I just wanna know how much this little jewel is gonna run me
Got one of these on order - should be with me early next week. I'll post some piccies of it displaying FR...
OSS PING
If you are interested in the OSS ping list please mail me
Surely, Fascism and Socialism must follow.
This is quite odd as I only reboot mine maybe twice a year for cleaning and what-not. Out of the sixty or so that I manage, none have required a "three-fingered salute" to solve problems.
I use RedHat/Fedora and Suse Linux daily.
The former might explain your difficulties. Fedora can be *very* quirky. Not so sure about SuSE as I haven't used it in a number of years.
2. They aren't free and most Linux-based solutions cost more than MS solutions in the long run. Our estimated labor hours to support a Linux system is TRIPLE that of our MS systems....
Nothing is free. Your labor hours *shouldn't* be quite that high, though. I mean no offense, but, it indicates to me an IT staff that isn't very *nix savvy. If you are coming from a 100% MS network, this is to be expected. After a while, administering *nix boxes is almost effortless.
3. Linux is still not a true replacement for Windows for the end user. If you don't believe this, you don't know the "technical proficiency" of our end users.
Now this I agree with 100%. There is a learning curve that can be rather steep in some cases. Most end-users do not want to fool with it.
I say from experience - give me the Windows version.
I say from my experience, don't place that cumbersome kludge anywhere near my private systems ;) Okay..I do boot into it on occasion to play HalfLife 2.
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.