Please don't make linux=M$Window$

Please don't make linux=M$Window$

Post by Gregory Hampto » Fri, 27 Jun 2003 09:56:42



There seems to be a movement afoot to give linux seamless compatibility
with windoze.  Not that the folks over at microsuck have any motivation
to hasten this process!  The idea that linux could be a viable
alternative to windoze is great for those of us who want to be able to
operate our computers without recourse to windoze, not to mention
microsuck prices.  the greater control offered by the ready availability
of the source code is also a plus.  It comes at a cost though.  With 90%
of the market share, microsuck can count on every software development
company, and every hardware manufacturer to make sure that their
products port up to a windoze OS with little if any difficulty.  The
economic motivation to overcome any complication that may arise in a
linux environment is not nearly as great.  That leaves so many of us
searching across the internet for solutions, poring over manuals, and
trying  different configurations and patches to get things that
configure at the touch of a button in windoze to somehow finally work in
linux.

Having said that,let me say, trying to get linux to do everything
windoze does, and do it just like windoze is probably not in our
interest.  Let me explain.  If linux becomes as commercially viable as
windoze, it will pick up all the baggage that goes with it. It will
eventually become just another package of overpriced bloatware and the
community that is willing to compile and link in order to make their
programs run will be looking for another legacy OS to colonize.  Finnish
graduate students are a precious resource, it might be a while before we
run into another person with the time and motivation to write a new OS
and make the source code available.

 
 
 

Please don't make linux=M$Window$

Post by mjt » Fri, 27 Jun 2003 10:05:44



> Having said that,let me say, trying to get linux to do everything
> windoze does, and do it just like windoze is probably not in our
> interest.  Let me explain.  If linux becomes as commercially viable as
> windoze, it will pick up all the baggage that goes with it.

.... i have full confidence that Linus will not allow it. he's been
very methodical and meticulous in his approach to what Linux is
all about and how it should be implemented.

as a matter of fact, the whole "Linux movement" (or should i really
say, open source) is about freedom and doing the right thing and
personal satisfaction/gratification.

good points, Gregory, btw :)

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 Michael J. Tobler: motorcyclist, surfer,  #    Black holes result
 skydiver, and author: "Inside Linux",     #   when God divides the  
 "C++ HowTo", "C++ Unleashed"              #     universe by zero

 
 
 

Please don't make linux=M$Window$

Post by Roodwri.. » Fri, 27 Jun 2003 12:02:39



> There seems to be a movement afoot to give linux seamless compatibility
> with windoze.  Not that the folks over at microsuck have any motivation
> to hasten this process!  The idea that linux could be a viable
> alternative to windoze is great for those of us who want to be able to
> operate our computers without recourse to windoze, not to mention
> microsuck prices.  the greater control offered by the ready availability
> of the source code is also a plus.  It comes at a cost though.  With 90%
> of the market share, microsuck can count on every software development
> company, and every hardware manufacturer to make sure that their
> products port up to a windoze OS with little if any difficulty.  The
> economic motivation to overcome any complication that may arise in a
> linux environment is not nearly as great.  That leaves so many of us
> searching across the internet for solutions, poring over manuals, and
> trying  different configurations and patches to get things that
> configure at the touch of a button in windoze to somehow finally work in
> linux.

> Having said that,let me say, trying to get linux to do everything
> windoze does, and do it just like windoze is probably not in our
> interest.  Let me explain.  If linux becomes as commercially viable as
> windoze, it will pick up all the baggage that goes with it. It will
> eventually become just another package of overpriced bloatware and the
> community that is willing to compile and link in order to make their
> programs run will be looking for another legacy OS to colonize.  Finnish
> graduate students are a precious resource, it might be a while before we
> run into another person with the time and motivation to write a new OS
> and make the source code available.

Interesting points, but not everyone is here because it's the un-Microsoft.

I'm an average user, not a programmer. I'm here because Linux offers me a
better system and more freedom. If I were a member of the
"anyone-but-Microsoft" group, I'd have sprung for a Mac.

--Rod

--
Author of "Linux for Non-Geeks--Clear-eyed Answers for Practical Consumers"
and "Boring Stories from Uncle Rod." Both are available at
http://www.rodwriterpublishing.com/index.html

To reply by e-mail, take the extra "o" out of my e-mail address. It's to
confuse spambots, of course.

 
 
 

Please don't make linux=M$Window$

Post by Old Ma » Fri, 27 Jun 2003 14:08:32



> There seems to be a movement afoot to give linux seamless compatibility
> with windoze.

<snip>

This is just wrong.  There are some efforts to make distributions look like
Windows to users.  And there are some projects aimed at interoperability
with Windows protocols.  But Linux developers are fundamentally committed
to open standards.  Microsoft has a long, sordid history of undermining
open standards.  Your statement strongly suggests a movement away from open
standards and toward adoption of Microsoft "un-standards."  Simply not
true.

Quote:

> Having said that,let me say, trying to get linux to do everything
> windoze does, and do it just like windoze is probably not in our
> interest.  Let me explain.  If linux becomes as commercially viable as
> windoze, it will pick up all the baggage that goes with it.

Linux can carry, or drop, "baggage" at will.  Your will.

Quote:> It will
> eventually become just another package of overpriced bloatware and the
> community that is willing to compile and link in order to make their
> programs run will be looking for another legacy OS to colonize.

Total nonsequitur.  Look, if Lindows develops a Windows-like interface,
that's fine with me.  I'll still have other choices.  If Redhat and United
Linux want to push RPM, that's fine with me.  I'll still have other
choices.  If anyone can develop a
super-killer-corporate-desktop-and-*-distribution with all kinds of
proprietary installers and configuration utilities, charge an outrageous
price for it, and persuade Intuit to develop for it and hardware
manufacturers to provide device drivers, that's fine with me.  Linux and
GNU will remain open source.  Open source developers will continue to
develop great new applications.  Slackware will continue to keep Patrick
Volkerding in relative comfort, and I'll still be able to choose GNOME,
KDE, Windowmaker, xfce, blackbox, fvwm, or CLI.  Or, I can have that
super-killer-commercial distribution.  Choice is good.  Linux is by its
very nature an endlessly expanding set of choices.  You're worrying about
nothing.

--
Old Man

 
 
 

Please don't make linux=M$Window$

Post by Keith Benedi » Sat, 28 Jun 2003 20:22:25


<snip>

Quote:> Total nonsequitur.  Look, if Lindows develops a Windows-like interface,
> that's fine with me.  I'll still have other choices.  If Redhat and United
> Linux want to push RPM, that's fine with me.  I'll still have other
> choices.  If anyone can develop a
> super-killer-corporate-desktop-and-*-distribution with all kinds of
> proprietary installers and configuration utilities, charge an outrageous
> price for it, and persuade Intuit to develop for it and hardware
> manufacturers to provide device drivers, that's fine with me.  Linux and
> GNU will remain open source.  Open source developers will continue to
> develop great new applications.  Slackware will continue to keep Patrick
> Volkerding in relative comfort, and I'll still be able to choose GNOME,
> KDE, Windowmaker, xfce, blackbox, fvwm, or CLI.  Or, I can have that
> super-killer-commercial distribution.  Choice is good.  Linux is by its
> very nature an endlessly expanding set of choices.  You're worrying about
> nothing.

Took the words out of my mouth...Great response.

No matter what commercial entities decide they want to implement or
build, the core and continued development of the open source options
is not going to disappear unless we all suddenly became greedy and
started writing for profits alone.

Keith.

 
 
 

1. some fonts don't work with windows....please help

Hi, I'm running Red Hat 7.3 with KDE 3.0. I'm trying to find a good
readable small font for use in the terminal windows. There is a
helvetica and some others that are good, but they cause a strange
behavior...
I can't copy it to here because when I paste it looks normal. But it
looks like this:

linux font:



helvetica font:



d s a

If I copy the last one and past it it will look like the first one. If
I switch to a different desktop and switch back, the output will look
like the first one.

Maybe something to do with some echo setting? I'm using bash.

Thanks
Jim

2. Wich X ??

3. Windows question (Please don't laugh!)

4. Multi-line shell commands ?

5. Don't flame Unix, that's what makes the NET tick!

6. FFT libraries for Solaris

7. Please don't feed 'as400'

8. how to install SMTP!

9. Why don't console message appear in my ``console'' window?

10. Mklinux: 'mount' command makes X-windows blank?

11. "Linux don't detect my SCSI MCD REMOVABLE DISK, help me please!!!!!"

12. please don't read, it's only a test, thanks

13. please help, 2 Linux boxes 1 runs 1 don't ???