____/ BearItAll on Thursday 06 December 2007 14:11 : \____
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> ____/ BearItAll on Wednesday 05 December 2007 11:15 : \____
>>
>> Will you still be on teh intranets? Good. :-) So there probably will never
>> be a goodbye.
>>
>
> I will still be in my groups, you know how it is, these groups start as
> common interest techie things then gradually move on to a social group. I
> don't think anyone really remembers why the groups were started in the
> first place, if the same things were news groups we would all be called
> trolls because not a single post is on topic.
You used to be in the SUSE newsgroup when I posted there regularly. No trolls
there, other than crossposted junk.
>>> So ignoring MS in that area would be a terrible mistake, these silly OS
>>> wars we have now will become more and more insignificant as the years
>>> roll on until the time comes when people don't actually know what OS is
>>> running their applications, they shouldn't need to know.
>>
>> "OS wars" is probably the wrong term to use. The OSes are tools. There is
>> a broader picture. There is a network and a system that is controlled by
>> and exists to serve the users. There are also networks on system that are
>> there to give Big Vendors control of people.
>
> Of all the things you say Roy this is the type that I find most disturbing,
> when you first started you were a little bit anti-big-boys, that gradually
> changed to anti-anyone making a big profit, but now there is a fare bit of
> the paranoid involved.
No, all one has to do is look the loss of rights. DRM, for example, is said to
be a case of taking away your rights and selling them back to you.
> No one controls people, people go where they want to go. If a big (or small)
> vendor or service offers something people want at a price they are willing
> to pay then they will attract those people, if people do not want it we
> call it a flop. No whips and chains involved, just choice.
Choice can be taken away if competitors suffocate.
> So for example we have the likes of Citrix and remote MS applications, the
> same thing in pure Linux form would be much faster with much less resource
> overhead with no loss of security. But that isn't what the majority want at
> this time, right now they want familiar remote applications, which is MS
> applications.
>
> No whips no chains just a product that is out there ready to use and in
> fammiliar territory for the majority of users. I have always said MS have
> done remote applications wrong, there is no need for the excessively slow
> systems (on opening an application), but still they have the product out in
> the market place, being used in real office work, and Linux does not.
>
> The Linux equivelant is not there for people to choose, do a search and what
> you will find is the Google office, which I would say works fairly well, it
> is certainly growing in popularity. I used it for a time, but found it
> frustrating, it never quite does what you were hoping for. But the range of
> applications is still quite small.
>
> The fact that we already have every component in place and can fairly easily
> (for us in tech world) run remote apps, just isn't enough. A secure tunnel,
> then xforwarding, so what is missing from that?
>
> Well, two things are missing. First try to find someone willing to host, bet
> you struggle. The only way is to get a dedicated remote server, the cost of
> hosting just went up, but take a close look at the bandwidth price list,
> because a typical office host will knock the socks off a typical web host.
> But once you have your host you can install and expose any applications
> that exist on Linux, there isn't a single Linux application that can not be
> forwarded, it's built in, no work to do (sorry, there is work to do, you
> have to set one single line in the conf file).
>
> But we are missing something else, few of our applications can share
> processing between the host and the client. You can forward the display,
> the usual way which gives good screen responses, low bandwidth is fine
> because very little is traveling between host and client, cheap low grade
> client machines can be used because all of the processing is on the server.
> Great so far. But interaction with the user can be absolute crap. I bet
> many on here are like me, gotten used to typing blind because today the
> Internet is a bit slower than normal and you have learnt to ignore the
> screen and just keep typing, load up a picture or two in your remote
> Writer, and you soon see that the 'Show as link' option is a god send.
> Where is our problem? That is simple, we need a bit of work on term,
> probably via java.
>
> But it isn't there right now and certainly isn't there is a form that an MS
> person can jump into and feel immediately comfortable.
>
>
> I was on Linux from the start, mainly because of UNIX, Linux made a great
> client and a server for testing bits of code right from it's early days.
> But do you want my absolute true opionion of Linux and where it is going?
>
> Well right now Linux as a server is a fantastic product, there is nothing
> out there to touch it, not even UNIX. But there is a real reason why that
> may not continue to be true, which I will tell you in a moment.
>
> As a client, Linux is an amazing product, I can't remember last time I had
> one of the major applications crash on me.
>
> But still I think that Linux is in more danger of failing now than it ever
> was.
>
> Not many were really bothered about bums-on-seats in the Linux world, many
> like myself don't care at all what OS people sit at, so long as me and my
> Linux are not shut out from the places we want to go. That works, I can go
> where ever I fancy and Linux can come with me, or take me there.
You appear to be missing several factors here:
1. PCs are we know them are being replaced by appliances, including mobile
devices.
2. Web services make an operating system like gOS very suitable for the large
majority of the population.
3. GNU/Linux is thinner than its counterparts.
4. With or without a GPU (think of Compiz-Fusion versus KDE 4 with Plasma),
Linux is becoming attractive to both users and developers.
5. ...
> So whats the problem? Why do I think Linux has reached a critical danger
> point?
I strongly disagree. As you know, I'm watching the news closely and I have
reached the point where I can barely keep track of the places and devices and
nations that are moving to GNU/Linux on the desktop. I'm just posting a sample
here. Now, add the fact that Vista and Leopard are both considered flops in
the sense that they are a step back w.r.t. predecessors. You can't say this
about Linux, GNOME, or even KDE.
> That is simple, it is going the wrong way.
>
> First the servers:- The servers are rock solid and are in fact getting even
> more rock solid (yeah I know, I never claimed to be a writer did I?).
>
> But where is mono? Have no doubt about it, .Net 3.x is an amazing product.
> There are niggles of course, there is the odd bug, but still application
> writing with it is a snip, it isn't too far off drag-n-drop development.
>
> That makes it very attractive to new developers, it makes for easy money.
The jobs market is flooded by demand for Linux skills and it is companies like
Google that net all the big money at the moment. The .NET Kool-Aid can be
compared to the Ruby on Rails hype. There are amazing things happening in the
world of programming. P/Ls like C are becoming dinosaurs.
> Then they add a thing called WPC, this time you don't even need a
> development language to program, a great deal can be done with drag and
> drop, which is made even easier if you know it well enough to drag on the
> support components before you drag on the controls, now it can do even more
> on your behalf.
>
> But currently which UNIX/Linux server can host this? Go on, do a seach.
> Right now you could nip to your local computer shop and buy any Windows PC
> to use to design/build/compile and run your NET application, all with easy
> tools all with free tools. That is not what Linux is doing, we are behind.
>
> People will use .NET 3.x, not because they are dragged kicking and screaming
> against their own will. They will use it because it is simply too good to
> bypass.
>
> So where is mono? I can tell you, mono is currently in no man's land, try a
> very simple project in mono, almost anything you fancy. The first place you
> will get stuck is in the first lib you access, where is the document to
> tell you what the arguments are? Oh, found it, it says 'We are sorry this
> document is not available'. Some are and there is a pattern to which ones
> are written, the pattern is simple, those things that tend to be most
> interesting from a programmers point of view are written, those things that
> are dull or too difficult from a programmers point of view are 'Document
> not written...'.
>
> Mono is too far behind NET 3.x and unless they is a swift kick up someone's
> arse it doesn't stand a chance of catching up. That is a critical part of
> modern and future computing, and we have hardly left the starting blocks.
>
> The server OS is irrelevant to users, they want their applications and their
> extended office, we are not ready for them so they are going in droves the
> the one that is ready.
Rob, you're once again comparing a Microsoft framework with one that attempts
to mimic it (making it a second-class citizen). That's like saying that
Windows is better than GNU/Linux on the desktop because Windows has better
win32 compatibility than WinE. You need to judge separate frameworks based on
their own merits. The same goes for things like OOXML support in OOo or
Gnumeric.
> Clients, what is wrong there? Dig out one of your old Linux clients, switch
> it on. Now sit it side by side with your current squeaky clean client. Do
> you see a problem? No? Well I do, there is little to choose between them.
>
> The newer one is more stable than the old one, the new one covers more
> hardware, the new one has more ... erm ... well, more what?
>
> Does it have more applications? No it doesn't, the Lion's share of the
> applications we all use on Linux have a base in either UNIX or in Sun
> workstations or as copies of a MS application. GUI in itself is an
> application shell, but using a GUI to present what was already there is not
> a new application, it is just a different way to present to the user, a
> pretty box instead of a term screen is not inovative, it is just
> presentation.
>
> Go down your menus and tell us what is new, but to count as new there has to
> be no equivelant on that old Linux you have next to you and it mustn't be
> simply a new interface on an already existing application/utility.
>
> Why is it like that, are there none out there able to advance computing?
> Linux has got the greatest of the innovators, I am not one of them, the
> only ideas I have have to do with what to put in my sandwich. Sourceforge
> to me is like a tomorrows world of the future, I used to help in there, but
> it is beyond my capabilities now. But a huge amount of what is done goes
> down the pan (called shelved or passed-on), the new linux populous that we
> have attracted over a few years now are simply not interested in 'new',
> they want familiar comfort zones and nothing else.
So things like WordPress (formerly b2) which run many millions of Web sites are
somehow insignificant? As I pointed out yesterday, even Microsoft uses
WordPress (with LAMP stack). That all came from SF.
> That is one of the main reasons that I like Novell and still hold them in my
> mind as the leaders in their field. Simply because they are not afraid to
> take a chance, they are not afraid to try something new, risk advances us
> far more quickly than 'comfort zone' development ever will. But who is
> depicted as Linux's greatest enemy after MS? Well it's Novell, and all
> because they signed an agreement that the activists do not like. I don't
> give a diddly squat what bits of paper Novell sign, if Novell are putting
> out good products and advancing Linux with new directions and take-a-chance
> development then they can stand on the 1st place box on my podium.
I know that you're fond of SLES and SLED and I know you haven't anything
against Novell. The story to be told is very long, but Novell is helping
Microsoft deform Linux into a 'cheap Windows' that is actually not so cheap in
terms of cost, because of software patents. The whole concept of "Linux will
win by its own merits" goes down the toilet. Mono, Moonlight, OOXML... all
second-class citizen on a desktop/server that is _no longer free_ (Microsoft
collects royalty). Is /this/ your idea of the path to Linux success? Can you
foresee Linux laughing down at Microsoft with a stack that
contains .NET/Silverlight/OOXML?
> So there we have it, I love Linux and as I have said it is an amazing
> product, server and client, but as I have also said I do not believe that
> the current direction of the vast majority of currently popular Linux will
> advance Linux, instead I believe it will be it's downfall. Who would have
> thought it, it should be that the more users you have the more chance of
> success you have, but it isn't like that at all, instead we have a great
> product that is carrying the weight of ten elephants so that it can't move
> or turn or do anything usefull any more, too much is holding it back and
> what is holding it back isn't Linux, it is it's users.
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | "All your archives are (sic) belong to Google"
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Mem: 515500k total, 444996k used, 70504k free, 1988k buffers
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
|
|
