Hadron wrote:
High Plains Thumper writes:
Future is in virtualisation and thin clients. It is easier
to manage a handful of "terminal servers" serving thin
clients instead of a slew of thick clients.
For who? Not for joe soap at home. They dont want their
private shit being mangled by dorks like you. They want to pay
videos, games, audio etc. They want a thick client. YOu seem
to think this "networking" for centralised resources is some
sort of new thing. Err, it's not.
Your incompetence is showing, Hadron. Where is your common
sense? *Most* home users are *unmanaged* (by a local server that
is). I was referring to thin client usage in a corporate work
environment.
Also you put words in my mouth that I did not say. Thin clients
are not a new concept, but until now have been overall not widely
used in office environments.
In April last year, Microsoft did an "about face" and now is
working to support thin clients, albeit at roughly twice the
cost of their thick client licenses. They are not yet
supporting per user license. (One has 1,000 machines but
only 500 users must pay 1,000 licenses, not 500.)
There are merits in this as the servers maintain the
software, an upgrade to a server upgrades all thin clients.
Also having software managed at server level has better
control over viruses, trojans, root kits, etc. Server can't
be back doored or "bypassed" through an infected thick
client, since thin client is essentially a terminal. Backups
are simplified since they are done as server level. It is
inherently easier to backup user files.
I have never worked on a SW project where the compiling/build
environments were stored on the local machine. Sure some check
outs could be, but generally we worked on the network - for
obvious reasons (which you feel the need to describe (wrongly)
at length).
Your incompetence is showing again, Hadron. You completely
ignored what I wrote about the merits of thin clients and insert
your own views based on your work environment, not the
environment of others.
Your total lack of knowledge here is shocking. What "thin
clients" are you talking about? HTML? What? Java? AJAX? What?
Your total lack of contribution follow-up in this thread is a
self-indictment.
This is where Linux shines. With Linux running an
alternative to Windows API's to run software applications
negates the need for the Windows operating system. Vista is
the best thing that ever happened to Linux.
And yet Mono is being actively developed. And who are they
copying? Yup .... And guess what? MS make servers too. In fact
MS servers are currently displacing Linux servers. But you
knew that.
Not everyone uses Mono. Are MS servers displacing Linux ones?
Care to share your source? Oh, and it better not be another
Yankee group study.
Microsoft. Where did you want to go today?
I still remember Corel Linux showing, "Where do you want to
go tomorrow?" when mouse was hovered over the "Start"
button. :-)
Linonut'esque in it's unfunniness.
Oh, so now it is a Linonut thing. Way to go, Hadron. As Peter
would say, 'Another fine "true linux advocacy post" from the
"true linux advocate", "kernel hacker", "emacs user", "swapfile
expert", "X specialist", "CUPS guru", "USB-disk server admin",
"defragger professional", "newsreader magician", "hardware
maven", "time coordinator" and "email sage" Hadron Quark, aka
Hans Schneider, aka Richard, aka Damian O'Leary.'
As Microsoft and some major software houses with heavy
Microsoft ties will not want "food taken off their plate"
(AKA maintain the monopoly), the FUD campaigns against Linux
and other alternative operating systems will continue.
What FUD campaign?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt
[quotes]
Contemporary examples
Although once it was usually attributed to IBM, in the 1990s and
later the term became most often associated with industry giant
Microsoft. Said Roger Irwin:[8]
“Microsoft soon picked up the art of FUD from IBM, and
throughout the 80's used FUD as a primary marketing tool, much as
IBM had in the previous decade. They ended up out FUD-ding IBM
themselves during the OS2 vs Win3.1 years.”
Although the Halloween documents (leaked internal Microsoft
documents ) say that "OSS is long-term credible … [therefore] FUD
tactics cannot be used to combat it."[9], in fact Open source
(OSS) and the GNU/Linux community in particular are widely
perceived as frequent targets of Microsoft FUD:
* Statements about the "viral nature"[10] of the GNU General
Public License (GPL),
* Statements that "...Linux infringes 235 Microsoft's
patents..." before software patent law precedents were
established. [11]
Notes and references
8. ^ Irwin, Roger (1998). What is FUD. Retrieved on 2006-12-30.
9. ^ Open Source Initiative. "Halloween I: Open Source
Software (New?) Development Methodology"
10. ^ Press release from Microsoft which has viral nature of
open-source quote
11. ^ Parloff, Roger (2007-05-14). Microsoft takes on the free
world. FORTUNE. Retrieved on 2007-11-04.. Microsoft's licensing
chief claimed that specific examples have been given in private,
in: Parloff, Roger. Legal Pad, MSFT: Linux, free software,
infringe 235 of our patents..
[/quotes]
Best form of freedom is for people to simply try Linux and
other FOSS software out, judge for themselves.
Well, its out there. Its free. So what's stopping them. Oh
yes. You and your kind scare them off.
Oh really? Hadron is a Linux advocate - NOT.
--
HPT
|
|
