What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
53 Comments
- geminitojanus, on 10/10/2007, -2/+18Ubuntu *already* has a real desktop userbase, and is one of the few Linux OSes to have ever shipped on a PC (from a major manufacturer even) OEM.
Canonical *already is* the next Redhat; they offer support contracts for the desktop and for servers and maintain stability and support in the same fashion as Redhat. While they haven't landed any of the big-time contracts Redhat or SuSE has, they're picking up steam every time they release and it's really only a matter of time.
Canonical cannot become the "next Microsoft" for the same reason Redhat can't; their software is GPL'd and completely belongs to the community. The more evil these companies act, the less likely the community will support those companies, and will simply ignore their versions of Linux for something else; Debian lost a big part of its userbase thanks to endless flamewars and bureaucratic debates, Redhat lost a huge amount of steam when they decided to only give the source of their server distro to people who purchased it (which spawned CentOS), the recent Novell-Microsoft deals have stirred up a huge amount of antagonism towards Novell, etc.
Finally: "corporate Linux (companies that are working with Microsoft) and community Linux (companies that haven't yet partnered with Microsoft)"???? What the $#(&^ happened to "***** You Microsoft (Companies that will _NEVER_ partner with Microsoft)"? - GMorgan, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15This makes a ridiculous assertion. That you must work with MS to be considered corporate. Red Hat makes huge sums of money and don't go near MS, all their code (if not their artwork) is Free as well.
For the last time FOSS is not anti-corporate. It is anti-proprietary which just happens to be the business practice of many corporations. There is nothing inconsistent about corporations making money off FOSS provided they do so within the boundaries of the appropriate license. Indeed many do and most corporations make some kind of contribution back.
What we are talking about is a potential divide between the sell outs and the rest. This is also a nonsense since those deals will run out in a few years and have already been nullified in practicality. A bad attempt to win advertising views off a threat that was massively overstated and now less relevant than ever. It's a pity there is so much focus on Microvell. There are real issues to deal with like LSB and desktop compatibility. - schestowitz, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12It is about Free software/Linux versus a proprieterised version of it which is controlled by other companies through IP (like SCO wanted it to be). It's not a corporate versus community divide. See:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070628105947503
"Mr. Carmony [of Linspire] asked a question, will Linux split in two factions? The answer is no. Some Linux distros will limp along a while and then die off, because they misunderstood what folks want when they choose GNU/Linux and FOSS. You can see that already. Red Hat, which refused to sign any such deal, is flourishing, for example. It’s not about code that “just works”. Apple offers that already. It’s the freedom. And we’ve proven willing to put up with some temporary frustration in order to get it. In time, FOSS will win, and all those proprietary codecs and everything else will be made available on pleasanter terms, because market share does that." - GnuTzu, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11It won't shake the very foundations regardless of how big this is.
Though I do feel a bit split between anti-tiviosation and the Torvalds view, I feel safe in knowing that the impulse to collaborate openly can't be completely snuffed out (anymore than the desire for freedom could be completely extinguished).
And, while Microsoft is trying to bargain and weasel themselves into a position of control--and that could potentially set us back a number of years, they will never be able to take ownership of the creative spirit that is open source. - bigtomrodney, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10I find it laughable that the article suggests Linspire could challenge any serious distro let alone Ubuntu. Linspire just doesn't get it at all. It is one of the few if not the only distro that I immediately write off.
- GnuTzu, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9To be clear (amending my own comment),
I don't do the the Chicken Little, sky is falling thing. Yes, there are foul things afoot, but these things have been in the news for quite a while now.
Go ahead and shout your dooms-day rallying cry--or not. Chicken Littles may come and go, but there are plenty of us that will continue to trudge along, speaking our minds, and resisting those that would seek to suck the creativity from our very souls. - dattaway, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5I just got done watching the Hacker's video on google. It described how there was a thriving homebrew computer culture and how it grew up into the corporate world, effectively killing itself. Reminds me how Linux is growing:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5464925144369700635 - brickbat, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6the word "yet" suggests it is inevitable that they will deal with Microsoft. I don't see it. The only people that lost from those deals were the people that made them. Microsoft is trying to hold back a tidal wave. Its not going to work and the longer they wait to change their business model the worse it will get for them. As for Linspire and Novell, they are now in the middle of the road and we know what happens there.
As an example of a business that is slowly (very slowly) changing its model to meet the new reality is cinemas. Last week I went to the cinema here in Amsterdam and I found that for EUR 17.50 a month you can subscribe to the cinema and come in any time you want and watch as many movies as you want.
In software the new reality is that the Free Software model is less constrained, faster to develop, more reliable, and CHEAPER. If it weren't for hardware vendors (particularly peripherals) slowing things down A LOT, it would already be dominant. In a direct comparison, Ubuntu, Fedora, etc, are already far more advanced than any Microsoft variant. Now that hardware vendors are coming around, its basically over.
Instead of these useless agreements, Microsoft should be thinking strong and hard about opening up its Vista +1 or +2 release and adjusting its business model appropriately. As an incumbent it has some advantages that it hasn't lost yet and it has the cash it will need for the transition. - FreeDeb, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Having some sort of ideal (that users should control over their own machines, for instance) doesn't make someone a "religious nut." If you think it's more important for Microsoft and Novell to make money *using their current business model* than it is for regular people to be able to do what they want with their computers, then you deserve to be out $400 for a hamstrung OS.
- reyalp, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4That wasn't an article, that was a blurb. I wish these people would write ARTICLES.
Now I'm off to go take my blood pressure medicine......and run those damn kids off my lawn. - rabidmonkey1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Just wait for a debian based Google Linux....
wait for it........... - Piedramente, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Yawn... one of the most overblown stories ever.
- MetalLizard, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I think the two opposing forces will have a long drawn out cold war. =D
- lifewithryan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Actually, the majority of the linux users I know all have "real world" jobs...few of use have zits, hairy backs maybe ;) The reason they're linux users is most likely because they've been working in the real world long enough to realize that the alternative is "crap"
- teknomunk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Programming is an art. Art takes creativity.
- JQP123, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2"You can't have everything be open source and non-proprietary."
Well, you could *if* open source alternatives were actually more desirable from the consumer's perspective. As it stands, open source is mainly focused on being a proprietary spoiler rather than a technology leader. Proprietary companies are the ones creating new products and establishing their own marketplace standards. Open Source didn't invent the mp3 player. It's only after a proprietary standard has been established that Open Source comes long with some sort of non-proprietary, work-alike, cloneware alternative. - DoubtingThomas, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Funny, I found it easier to locate and print to a networked printer on my laptop running Linux than one of my other PCs running XP. The driver and everything was available without having to download or install any additional pieces. Oh and I did it completely through the GUI, no shell scripts required. It was also just as easy to setup my WIFI connection, also 100% through the GUI. Only thing that gives me fits is 3D acceleration on my ATi mobility 9700 graphics adapter, but that's about it.
Maybe you ought to get your facts straight before you spout off you early 90's anti-linux garbage. - jeruvin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2It has more to do with embracing technology that is open and free to develop. Instead of using so much effort to get it working that energy could be used to improve the product. Ipods are unable to play .ogg files or any format that apple doesn't want. It should be the user who decides what they do with the technology.
- osc1882, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2"companies that haven't yet partnered with Microsoft"
What a ***** dick. What, did bill gates write this while he was getting a blow job?
It should be written, will never partner with the anti Christ. - bigtomrodney, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Don't be an idiot. That does not reflect in any way the state of Linux today. Not to mention if that was the case any corporation already has their NT admins who are busy writing Batch scripts to administer their domains. If you work for the kind of corporation that throws a few desktop printers onto the desktop PCs and hopes windows will sort things out then I don't think you're working for an actual corporation.
- pyrates, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You can't have everything be open source and non-proprietary. You have to support mp3, real media, windows media, mpeg2, divx, xvid, and ac3 codecs. You need to support all that. Their needs to be a standard dvd player included. That is what consumers expect. When you let politics get in the middle of it, it never is as good then if you just give consumers what they want.
- lassegs, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1@ SteveTheSultan
What the hell are you rambling about? MS IdiotXP. - GMorgan, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3I disagree with the assertion that market share will come without standard support. There will always be a new standard to support. At some point we will have to knuckle down and take the proprietary pain until we are in a position to change things directly. There is no risk of this going beyond a few codecs because there is no need to do so outside of codecs.
Of course there are other ways around this. If a distro sets up an explicit exception for countries with software patents then they could ship codecs totally free of fear. Then we could obtain market share in those patent free nations and use it to influence later decisions on standards. Of course this means they can't ship to the US which, while not being the largest market on the planet, is one of the most important markets.
In either case we still need to support standards in order to obtain sizeable market share. Perhaps a middle ground scenario would suffice, Free software for those sane countries which don't allow software patents while the other countries need to look for proprietary equivalents. - cynicist, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I guess everyone is a religious nut then.
- cquinnd, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Programming can be an art. Just as writing, painting, and building models can be arts.
But when you are doing technical writing, you limit your creativity for the sake of precision.
When you are painting houses, you replace creativity with consistency and efficiency.
If you are building the model of a collapsed bridge, you drop creativity to focus on accuracy. Because you need to learn more from the last design than from trying immediately to modify or improve on it. - bitspace, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3It's been a couple years since I tried mucking about with Linspire, and it will be infinite years before I ever do again, as it was one of the worst software experiences I've ever had. What does CNR have over any of the automatic update systems of, say, Ubuntu or Red Hat?
- geminitojanus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1They could do all of those things, but the instant they do that, ALL of Linux wins. And that's the *last* thing Microsoft wants right now.
- JQP123, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Having an "ideal" doesn't make you a religious nut. To become a real religious nut, you have to start believing that your point of view and your "ideal" is somehow "better", more moral, more righteous than the other guy who by the way, just happens to have vastly different priorities than you do. Once you can no longer see or accept any of the shortcomings of your own rhetoric, you become a "certified" religious nut.
- bromac, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1My question is: how the hell is it not predatory for MS to be trying to gain control of its largest competitor? Windows is still quite entrenched, but MS's corporate practices are so evasive it's sickening.
***** MS, and any other corporation that uses its bulk to push the populace around. We need to start revoking some corporate charters, pronto. - GMorgan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You seem to be under some assumption that Linux is a socialist paradise. We thrive on competition as much as cooperation. Where Linux has a real advantage over corporate sectors is that it is easier to do both at the same time. Do you believe KDE 4 would look as good as it does if Gnome hadn't been doing so well recently.
- jtb4, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I keep saying folks: The marriage of Ubuntu and Microsoft is going to happen. You heard it here first. Don't think MS can't or won't do it.
I know I know, I read the comments from last time I posted this, and I thought I would be flamed worse than I was. But, no I'm not joking, and as for the GPL correct me please I hope if I am somehow wrong, but can't Microsoft take Ubuntu, rebrand it MS / Ubuntu and call it a distro? Couldn't they develop it to work with Office, Exchange, MS SQL, and (god forbid) somehow Visual Studio in so-called "seamless" ways that make it appeal and seem secure to asshat IT managers who want to ride the cool Linux wave but are afraid of letting go of Windows?
OK, I know this all very sickening, but seriously, MS has no other alternative.
Someone kill me before it happens..... - lifewithryan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1iPod linux anyone?
- pyrates, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I use to prefer kde. But now I prefer gnome because it has just the right amount of features in the gui that make it useful to use.
- thefinger, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Why are there always these spats in Linux Utopia? Where is that community solidarity against big bad megacorp? You people preach some kind of love for each other, but you're so fanatical, you'll trash each other before you ever smarten up.
Besides, if a twig falls in the forest, I don't care. :) - JQP123, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1"It should be the user who decides what they do with the technology." And Apple would probably argue that the user decides when he/she purchases an iPod. Have a different idea? Develop an alternative. The marketplace is free and open and waiting.
- JQP123, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1The real problem is that these mean, evil, non-innovative companies keep producing cool products like the iPod that consumers actually want to use. And of course, consumers are stupid and just don't get it so they buy into it. There should be a law or something to protect consumers from themselves.
- Pixelante, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1But artists need money.
- Crito, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1The more I listen to Linus, the more I like RMS and GPL3.
- roguetrick, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Aye, they could do that. Only problem with it is Microsoft's distro will be inferior to the regular Ubuntu distro for reasons that makes it so sickening for you. So folks would just use Ubuntu.
- maz2331, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0We've seen this recently with Oracle attempting to make a linux distro that was basically just a clone of RedHat. They pretty much ended up going nowhere fast with it.
- maz2331, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0And what will happen if the Supreme Court just rules software unprotectable under Patent Law? They've made a few really strong hints about going in that direction lately. The whole patentability of software (and "business methods") is based on a single ruling of the DC Circuit Court, not in statute law. The supremes have recently given them a couple really stinging reversals on patent issues, and are quite likely to give more.
All this patent wrangling is going to have to slow down radically before it sinks the entire US software industry. - Circuitsoft, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Nah, RockBox FTW! - Faster, Lighter, and does enough.
- fkr3, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1The article makes a ridiculous assertion, that there isn't already a divide between corporate and community linux. The divide's clearly defined - in one corner you've got companies managing distros just like any other company with the exception they don't charge directly for the software, and in the other corner you've got millions of people who just want free software.
- michuk, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Heie is another article that practically comparse a corporate and community editions od GNU/Linux -- "Business vs Community: Xandros and PCLinuxOS compared": http://polishlinux.org/linux/xandros/business-vs-community-xandros-and-pclinuxos-compared/
- JQP123, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1"The coming divide" is basically a religious war. Many in "the community" despise corporations and think they are nuisance that shouldn't exist. At the same time, they have unbounded faith that these same corporations who just happen to control most of the world's desktops will somehow see the light, disavow one of their own and embrace "the community" with love. Afterwards, members of the community will move to the Middle East to address the conflict between Jews and Muslims.
- schotty, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1The old management knew what good software was, but had zero clue on why FLOSS was better or had the potential to be better.
Now that Carmony is gone, perhaps a CEO can be put in place that does get it. Being a Linspire customer, initially to check it out in its full, I must say that CNR is GREAT. However, that said, Fedora and Ubuntu have software managers that are catching up quite quickly and are totally free.
Unless CNR can get out to everything Linux and get any software that chooses to become part of it, it will wither and die at its current pace, and that would be a bad thing. CNR is a cakewalk and definitely what a Windows covert should be allowed to see if they are not a computer saavy individual.
Personally I think Red Hat or Canonical will have improved on their delivery systems to surpass CNR and make their already top notch OS's that much better. That is what FLOSS is and has done, and if the past is any indication, will do in the time to come. - cricoste90, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3Like the great Steve Balmer said: "...community linux is a cancer that attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it touches...characteristics of communism that people love so very, very much about it"
CORPORATE LINUX FOR THE WIN!
WE DON'T WANT COMMUNISM! - nephilimx, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0"And once and for all, cease the use of products like the iPod. If the media device will not support us, then we will no longer support it.
I fully realize this sounds like an extremist approach, but with the patent issues flying back and forth, it might not be a bad idea to further embrace the open source media alternatives with a little more zest."
whats making a ipod plug-n-play style plugin for linux, got to do with patients? - JQP123, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1As the winner will be the one with the better economic foundation.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0The real problem with the Linux community is that most of the Linux users are zit faced geeks who have never worked in the real world. The real Linux money is in servers, clusters, mainframes and movie graphics. Let Microsoft have the desktop and gaming market. Windows users are non technical appliance operators who use computers as a tool. The CEO's of "Commercial Linux" know that Linux is a technical tool for making serious money.
-
Show 51 - 53 of 53 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is