Hadron Quark wrote:
> "rwwff@xxxxxxxxx" <rwwff@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > advocacy of Open Source Linux. Ten years ago, do you think there were
> > a million PCs running Linux? I don't.
>
> No. And there weren't 600 Million Windows PCs either. What is this path
> you are taking?
Simple user count to indicate sustainability of "zee movement" as it
were. As long as the absolute user count continues to increase, there
become more warm bodies and grey matter exposed to Open Source. The
more people exposed to it, the more potential programmers who might add
a few (?hundred?) hours of their time to the mix. The more programmers
in the virtual "shop" the more Open Source apps that come into
existence.
In general, once an Open Source app comes into existence, it doesn't
then cease to exist. Its a one way, creation process.
> > In any event, thats pretty dang cool if you ask me.
> >
> Its only cool if you treat it as a bit player. OSS isnt there to be a
> bit player.
Of course its a bit player, but its a bit player that will continue
growing for DECADES. And thats a good thing for everyone.
> %'wise Linux could & should be doing better. The head in the sand antics
> of a lot of Linux users prevents this - rather than recognise problems
> and address them they merely shoot the messenger.
I think you're overrating their influence in either direction. All
this "I hate MS" stuff is annoying, but it doesn't change the fact that
Linux (slackware for me) is a powerful tool and a perfect match for
some of the things I do. That is not effected by their "hate MS"
behavior, and it wouldn't be effected if they were to ignore MS and
just talk about things Linux is really good at.
> The only thing that worries me is the noticable trend for some Linux
> distros to be chasing their own tail in an effort to be more user
> friendly and "Windows like" - introducing a slew of issues.
Let'em do as they wish. The point is to create lots of choices and
possibilities; not to form some uniform coalition that will displace
Mac from the number two slot.
> market share increases so will the range of HW exposed to Linux - and
> Linux driver support is not in the same league as Windows for obvious,
> capitalist, reasons.
I've never been particularly impressed with the driver argument.
Perhaps just as a result of bad luck or whatever, but Windows has given
me more driver headaches than Linux. Worst offender has usually been
with changing video drivers, but a couple notable network card issues
also. Again, perhaps just luck, but I've never had Linux fail to
find a network card, and I have had at least two instances of Win XP
failing to find and identify a network card. No biggy in the big
scheme of things, just the reason why I'm not impressed with the driver
argument.
Basically, pick your hardware to match the software that you want to
run. I would hope no one buys a GeeWhiz Video card for the purpose of
owning a GeeWhiz Video card. Rather, they want to run some game or
media thing that requires the GeeWhiz Card, and that software runs on
Mac or Win or Solaris, or Linux, or whatever.
|
|
