[TriLUG] Where is Linux today?

[Tim Jowers]

An underlying strategy issue touched upon is Linux trying to be a Swiss Army
Knife. E.g Samba. Linux IS probably superior to OSX and Blows in its core
functionality and compatibility. No doubt it IS the most standard OS. E.g. I
understand Mac dev still requires some off-branch of C and not even real C
programming. Blows NEVER supports protocols of others. Linux COULD take this
strategy and have a lot fewer complaints. E.g. IMO POSIX compatibility in
Blows is basically a farce to satisfy purchasing specs. Well, you can buy
SNA Server etc. or whatever to get more compatibility/standardness from
Blows.

A lot of the complaints about Linux are of the NOT FAIR variety. E.g. video
driver X does work great or wireless card. Y does not work right. This is
not a Linux issue per se. Does all your hardware work with OSX or even
Blows? I'd argue as a core platform Linux works better than Windows or OSX:
I mean with hand-picked hardware then a person will not be able to complain
about hardware integration etc. Of course this is a market issue. Even AMD
still does a weak job supporting Linux with their video drivers. Heck, even
Sun still very poorly integrates Java with Linux/. Their RPM makes
/etc/alternatives still a pain. Anyone here work for Sun? Get it together!
:-)

"Windows programs working flawlessly"

Ahh, that would really be a problem for OSX and Linux. What I've seen from
the Windows platform is the software quality went up into the mid-1990's and
has been steadily falling ever since. E.g. GPF's are common place even in
Microsoft applications these days. I do have GPF's in Linux too unfo. E.g.
IE just dies regularly in XP whereas Gnucash dies when I try to parse a
certain QIF made from a Discover card CSV download. Software quality does
reflect how people rate an OS. I think what OSX does well is limit the SW
packages and limit the hardware configs. Someone said OSX now will support
lots more FOSS and no doubt its quality mystique will evaporate. Obviously
USB is a Godsend for Apple since it reduces the need for device drivers.
Same for Linux too.

The Linux desktop (GNU et al) has advanced so much in the last few years it
is incredible. Ubuntu, Fedora, and others are really pushing the bar.

IMO, the Linux desktop on a supported hardware is far superior to Windows XP
on a supported hardware. I suspect Linux on a supported hardware is as good
as OSX on a supported hardware. What I've seen on Vista is disappointing.
What I've seen of OSX is it looks nice. My argument for moving to OSX would
be the same as most people's argument for moving to Linux from Windows: Why
move when my platform does everything I need to do. This was not at all true
3 years ago. Today, one can run 100% on Linux for most if not all things
large and small. I'll not argue that some app vendors release superior
versions on Windows (or maybe OSX?) but my earlier point was Linux has
competitors in most all spaces.

A side point is FOSS has competitors in many, many spaces in which there are
no proprietary competitors - because of the needs for solutions in niche
markets but the inability to make huge profits in niche markets. This brings
me to what I *think* is a very important point: the actual engineer - the
person really doing the work - makes the same income whether using Blows or
Linux at a customer site. If he or she chooses Linux then they are building
on the work of others and can also benefit from collaboration; whereas if he
or she chooses Blows then they are blowing out a one-off solution. Because
of this, the Linux strategy of embracing all technologies and protocols is
superior in effectiveness, humanity, and advancement to Windows' and OSX's
of using a closed set of technology.

___  Linux has a future. The future of Windows and OSX looks like Linux !!!
______


That's my opinion,
TimJowers


On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 10:51 PM, Tanner Lovelace <clubjuggler at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I've now been up for 18 hours today and worked for 14 hours as an election
> judge.  So, take anything I say below with that in mind, please.
>
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Cristóbal Palmer <cmp at cmpalmer.org>
> wrote:
>
> > There's the problem. I don't think he implied that at all.
>
> Really?  Oh well.
>
> > I wrote my email precisely because I recognize how much you've put
> > into Open Source. You have more credibility and weight than most
> > people (I'd hazard even most people on this list) when it comes to
> > making arguments about Open Source. That's precisely why I thought it
> > was odd that your argument seemed to be that some proprietary stuff is
> > okay if there's a lot of Free stuff in or available for the package,
> > and furthermore the fight that the Fedora Project is fighting is
> > "tiresome". If you feel that way, then what hope is there for the
> > majority of people who don't have the commitment that you do?
>
> Actually, I have a lot less problem with what the Fedora project
> does with codecs than I do with the other things I mentioned:
> kernel politics.  I'm about as far removed as you can get from
> kernel politics and still be involved in open source/free software,
> so if they're bothering me I have to wonder about other people too.
> But, mainly, the confrontational nature of many of the kernel
> developers has actually come close to making me switch to
> FreeBSD.  A lot of this has to do with the stance on closed
> source drivers and the stubborn refusal to delineate a driver
> interface.  But, I very, very much respect their right to do
> whatever they want with what they created, so it isn't up to
> me to tell them what to do (far from it!).  But, I've been dismayed
> enough times by it that I've seriously thought about moving
> to FreeBSD.  The main reason I haven't for my desktop
> (which, admittedly doesn't get used as much as my laptop)
> is the trouble it would take to move from my XFS filesystem
> on linux software raid.  If FreeBSD could just read that directly,
> I probably would have already switched.
>
> As to what other people think, I don't know.  I haven't used
> a Red Hat based distro in over 3 years, so I'm definitely not
> qualified to talk about that.  But, if people have a PC and
> want to move away from Windows, I strongly recommend
> they install Ubuntu.  I make no judgements (unlike some
> people in the Fedora camp) on what Ubuntu does or doesn't
> do, but I do think they do a very good job of trying to "just
> make things work". The simple fact is that unlike all of
> us on this list, the vast majority of people really don't want
> to spend lots of extra time in front of their computers making
> it work.  They just want it to work.  I think, a lot of the time,
> Linux does work fine.  But there are some times where it
> doesn't, or where an "upgrade" breaks functionality because
> of an ideological issue (fonts seem to be a big thing there...)
> and while all of us on this list can fix things like that, the average
> user isn't going to bother.  They're going to ditch the software
> and go back to windows.
>
> So, basically, what I'd like to see is much more of an
> emphasis on making things work rather than ideological
> issues.  I have no problem with the people who put
> ideological issues first for themselves.  I just ask them
> to understand that's not where I'm coming from at this
> point in my life.
>
> > I respect and honor the work you've put into Open Source, TriLUG, and
> > Linux. I'm sorry my post came across as an attack.
>
> I didn't take it as an attack, just as a spirited disagreement.
> It's ok for us to disagree.  I understand your point of view
> but for myself, at this point in time, I'm more pragmatic
> about things and want more to look at my computer as
> a tool rather than a source of enjoyment in and of itself.
>
> Cheers,
> Tanner
>
> --
> Tanner Lovelace
> http://wtl.wayfarer.org/
> (fieldless) In fess two roundels in pale, a billet fesswise and an
> increscent, all sable.
> --
> TriLUG mailing list        : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
> TriLUG FAQ  : http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions
>