Subj : Re: Open Source Leaving Microsoft Sitting on the Fence? To : comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux From : swift Date : Fri Jul 23 2004 05:59 am In article <58ZLc.305998$Gx4.162010@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, Nick Landsberg wrote: >GHZ machine, rather than run away. This puts >even more money in M$'s pockets. Don't know how soon the tide >will turn. Their licensing strategy may accelerate >the trend but not for a while yet. Remember, the vast majority >of the folks who use computers are not computer literate >and will accept whatever spit is thrown at them because >they don't know any better. > To be fair, both M$'s business and Open source have advantages and disadvantages. Because M$ has sole control over Windoze, it is on average more stable, if at the expense of innovation. I'm surprised by how so many binary distributions of Win32 applications run across platforms. M$ makes sure that the external view of its platform is one of stability and consistency, whether this is true internally or not. Linux stuff tends to be constantly changing, which is probably the view internal to organizations. I used to have some problems with .dll compatibilities but that's nothing compared to the madness of Linux .so and package dependencies. M$ installation/uninstallaion used to be a fiasco, but it has straightened out over the years. Linux installation remains highly iffy; one can't even decide whether source or binary distributions make more sense. Because Linux is democratic, a user has to go all over the place to pick up apps and libs. There are so many distributions and competing basic packages that one has to wonder if that's necessary for getting things done. How many window managers and desktops do we really need? There's too much confusion. The various Linux distributions all require different installation/maintenance procedures. M$ at least tried to consolidate the configuration methods across the WinXX platforms. M$ also does a better job of supporting its obsolesced products, such as Win9x, whereas Linux bugs tend to linger because the Linux distributors just move on to the next distribution. On the bright side, Linux users do get to learn a lot if they are willing to put in the time, because they get to see under the covers. If they are patient enough, they could conceivably fix the world. Linux offers variety, which is both a blessing/feature and a curse/shortcoming. I suppose canned distributions of Linux, such as Lindows, may fare better in terms of stability and support, because features are lot more limited. -- Keep it brief: http://www2.paypc.com/mailrules/ .