Comments on: Get On With It

by: Stephen Bunn

Sat, 01 Sep 2007 02:08:23 +0000

Stop using “Linux” If it tick’s you off so much, don’t use it.

I think people are forgetting.. no they never learned in the first place, that “Linux” is merely the Kernel and all those applications you are using most likely come from GNU… you know the guys that created that software, not to “take out Microsoft” but to bring Freedom to its users..

so if you don’t appreciate the Freedom and its not good enough for you, don’t use it. If your end goal is to make it “compatible” with Windows.. why don’t you just use Windows?

by: Ken Hess

Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:39:50 +0000

I think the whole point of the article is that now since SCO has lost this ridiculous battle–we can now all go back to work on making Linux better. Many people, developers and integrators alike, were putting their Linux tasks on hold to see how all this washed out before proceeding. I know several people who abandoned Linux completely and have refocused on OS X.
Our progress, and I am referring to our collective progress on Linux, has been retarded for the past 3 years. Now that the witch is dead (SCO), it is time we pick up where we left off and go forward.

by: nuxser

Wed, 29 Aug 2007 06:05:09 +0000

Like many others you pointed out that many of the “drop in replacements” are not yet ready.

Also, like many others, you have pointed out that OSS world full of choices is confusing.

Nothing new. And of course no solution provided.

I believe in defined API but not unified Desktop/App. Choices are there for to choose. Bad quality of options should not mean that we get rid of choices.

Specially while I beleive that KDE and Gnome must have a common ground and am a big fan of KDE. But never saw Gnome as to be some inferior option. Its just a different option.

My point being like many apps, KDE and Gnome are two paths to choose with pro/cons coming with it.

While it will be great to have Linux to be a drop in replacement for Win, who says its a wannabe Win clone. Thats not the point.

by: Jason Perlow

Wed, 29 Aug 2007 02:45:58 +0000

viasb: I think that works fine for PDA and other embedded versions of Linux, when you can run an entire application out of a compressed archive (the original Palm OS Garnet does it this way) but for larger desktop OSes it may be impractical to do this.

by: viabsb

Mon, 27 Aug 2007 20:12:18 +0000

I think the biggest problem about Linux Distros is the Package Management.
Why MUST exist a management of packages at all?
Take a llok at http://www.gobolinux.org/ and answer: why do we HAVE to have a Package Management?
It is not easier to have a Program directory and put ALL the aplication on it?

by: readiness

Fri, 24 Aug 2007 03:42:44 +0000

SCO the wicked witch? I think not. At best (worst) they were one of the flying blue monkeys.

by: Jason Perlow

Fri, 24 Aug 2007 03:26:55 +0000

Goes to show how most people didn’t give a rat’s ass what SCO did.

It might go down in history as a threat that never really had any fangs, but it was a huge distraction in time and financial resources, and it had a significant impact on those enterprise environments which had concerns that they too would be litigated or inherit legal problems by moving to Linux. Many environments didn’t care, but a lot did.

by: Jason Perlow

Fri, 24 Aug 2007 03:21:14 +0000

Ransom:

Would this be the same Ransom I know and Love? Good to see you — and I always thought UnitedLinux was a great idea ahead of its time.

by: Jason Perlow

Fri, 24 Aug 2007 03:17:38 +0000

I was going to say “I find the argument unconvincing there’s so much diversity…” etc.

by: Jason Perlow

Fri, 24 Aug 2007 03:16:11 +0000

Andrej:

I find the argument that because there’s so much more diversity that Linux is less of a worm or virus target. It’s much more logical to say that because of the Linux/Unix style architecture where applications are treated as applications and not welded into the underpinnings of the OS (and because the OS is Open Source, thus allowing a faster fix turn around time) that it’s more secure, not due to the diversity. You could just as easily say Solaris 10/OpenSolaris is as secure as Linux, or even the BSDs, because they are Open and have a Unix architecture, not because they have diversity.