Is this the end of Linux?

[tokenuser]

Canonical cancels Ubuntu (http://news.softpedia.com/news/Goodbye-Ubuntu-7-10-107519.shtml)

It was undoubtedly an awesome release, allowing many to make the switch from other operating systems and plunge into the Linux experience without any regret. But as we all know, all good things eventually come to an end, so here we are today, announcing the end of life for Ubuntu

[tehboris]

Isn't this a bit of a troll'esc post for a moderator? Either that or you didn't look at the title of the article.

[tokenuser]

Isn't this a bit of a troll'esc post for a moderator? Either that or you didn't look at the title of the article.Yeah. Trolling just a little.

There are so many Linux fans out there that take partial stories, headlines, and quotes from articles out of context and spin it to "prove" that Linux is experiencing rapid growth in the desktop market that when I saw this I thought I would see what the reaction would be if the tables were turned.

[computoman]

Before you go badmouthing people again I wish you would get your facts straight. I think the microsoft community is full of fud. I get tired of debunking Microsoft fud against Linux like this. Linux usage is increasing and it is a shame the Microsoft community does not have the guts to admit it. I am currently using Ubuntu 9.04 on a test machine. The only place linux is decreasing is suse linux, becuase it is getting boycotted.because of the ms/novell relationship by the linux community.

[phatlip]

Before you go badmouthing people again I wish you would get your facts straight. I think the microsoft community is full of fud. I get tired of debunking Microsoft fud against Linux like this. Linux usage is increasing and it is a shame the Microsoft community does not have the guts to admit it. I am currently using Ubuntu 9.04 on a test machine. The only place linux is decreasing is suse linux, becuase it is getting boycotted.because of the ms/novell relationship by the linux community.

Proove it then. I want numbers. Microsoft is still dominating by a long shot.

[tehboris]

Please lock this thread.

[tokenuser]

Here are some stats (Dec 08) ... as measured by the OS used to connect to the web. Its probably as valid as any other metric based on the number of users involved.

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9121938

Linux users seem to spin every sneeze on Linus as being a sign that Linux is experiencing rapid growth - largely based on download numbers, not number of machines in use.

Linux is not dead ... but it is by no means the emerging force that some might make it out to be.

[tehboris]

The trouble with any numbers provided towards this topic of description is you can make the numbers look any way you want.

The Microsoft zealots will take the numbers from the Desktop computers and perhaps only from certain countries.

Where as the Linux zealots will take the numbers from servers and desktops, may be ignore corporate desktops, or even just take numbers from say Cuba, South Africa places of limited resources who are more likely to use Linux.

Screaming at the top of your voice "WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE!? HARD NUMBERS PLEASE!!" will just result in knowing even less than you started will.

if I just take the blade server we have at work, for example, there is 95% penetration for Linux becasue only one of them is running Windows. the numbers can be spun any way you like.

Please lock.

[phatlip]

The trouble with any numbers provided towards this topic of description is you can make the numbers look any way you want.

The Microsoft zealots will take the numbers from the Desktop computers and perhaps only from certain countries.

Where as the Linux zealots will take the numbers from servers and desktops, may be ignore corporate desktops, or even just take numbers from say Cuba, South Africa places of limited resources who are more likely to use Linux.

Screaming at the top of your voice "WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE!? HARD NUMBERS PLEASE!!" will just result in knowing even less than you started will.

if I just take the blade server we have at work, for example, there is 95% penetration for Linux becasue only one of them is running Windows. the numbers can be spun any way you like.

Please lock.

Yes, numbers can be twisted to fit any particular argument. However, when the numbers vary as greatly as they do, it's a little difficult to do.

You don't need numbers to win this debate. Ask any typical person what Linux is and they'll have no clue what you're talking about. Mention Windows or a Mac and they will. Token said it best:

"Linux is not dead ... but it is by no means the emerging force that some might make it out to be."


By the way, why do you insist on this being locked?

[tehboris]

You don't need numbers to win this debate. Ask any typical person what Linux is and they'll have no clue what you're talking about. Mention Windows or a Mac and they will. Token said it best:


How do you record the results of this questioning? please lock.

[phatlip]

How do you record the results of this questioning? please lock.

According to you, there's no true way to measure market share which is complete BS. So, I tried making you think about it in very simple way but apparently that's not good enough either.

Linux represents a very small percentage of the market share (excluding servers). That's a fact which you can take or leave.

[phatlip]

Direct link to that stats Token referred to containing info up to February 2009.

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/os-market-share.aspx?qprid=9

[tehboris]

It's not simple to measure such numbers, perhaps impossible.

If there are any 'measurements' to such topics they are wrong. For any number of reasons including the parameters with which you count a computer as part of the data. A corporate environment might have Linux on every desktops, but the users aren't running that by choice, does that count? What about the time the data was collected? Real world events will change the results.

Linux most likely will have a smaller share on the desktop compared to Windows or perhaps even the mac, but any claim of how small or how big is very difficult to support. Regarding the macs, just ask Apple how many where bought. This number is possibly the most accurate number you will ever get when asking the question "How many people are using OS X?", but even that number is wrong as people run Windows and Linux on them as well.

Can any one else see why this needs locking?

[phatlip]

It's not simple to measure such numbers, perhaps impossible.

If there are any 'measurements' to such topics they are wrong. For any number of reasons including the parameters with which you count a computer as part of the data. A corporate environment might have Linux on every desktops, but the users aren't running that by choice, does that count? What about the time the data was collected? Real world events will change the results.

Linux most likely will have a smaller share on the desktop compared to Windows or perhaps even the mac, but any claim of how small or how big is very difficult to support. Regarding the macs, just ask Apple how many where bought. This number is possibly the most accurate number you will ever get when asking the question "How many people are using OS X?", but even that number is wrong as people run Windows and Linux on them as well.

Can any one else see why this needs locking?

I don't care if they're running it by choice or not. My question is are they, and just about any study you come across has similar results. Are all of these stats wrong? I see that the numbers vary, but they all show Linux in the minority (very small minority) every time.

What does the time in which the data was collected have to do with anything? That's pretty irrelevant.

Also, nobody here is debating a specific number for market share. We're simply stating it is SIGNIFICANTLY smaller than Windows.

And no, I don't see why this should be locked. We're having a discussion regarding an operating systems market share. Will you please stop saying that over and over again.

[tehboris]

I don't care if they're running it by choice or not. My question is are they, and just about any study you come across has similar results. Are all of these stats wrong? I see that the numbers vary, but they all show Linux in the minority (very small minority) every time.

What does the time in which the data was collected have to do with anything? That's pretty irrelevant.

Also, nobody here is debating a specific number for market share. We're simply stating it is SIGNIFICANTLY smaller than Windows.

And no, I don't see why this should be locked. We're having a discussion regarding an operating systems market share. Will you please stop saying that over and over again.

I thought this thread was about Linux's shrinking market share?

Well, actually I thought it was about giving the Linux evangelists some kindling to catch on to. Working on the assumption that the OP wasn't trolling this thread is about Linux's shrinking market share, which the numbers you elude to counter indicate. Numbers on such subjects can't be used reliably. ;)

[ArmpitOfDeath]

Screaming at the top of your voice "WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE!? HARD NUMBERS PLEASE!!" will just result in knowing even less than you started will.


I thought that was just the Apple fanboys, who quote completely biased and irrelevant info in turn.

Personally I abandoned the idea of partially rolling out Ubuntu to a number of workstations which will be running a Linux server-hosted app, currently running in a full OS X environment (server/client) but being ported over. Running the app suite on Ubuntu was quite attractive at first but I came to the conclusion quite quickly that I needed to run the app on a general-purpose desktop, and for me/us a general-purpose desktop is a hell of a lot more than Office, or a compatible - so we're in the process of porting the OS X apps over to Windows. A desktop Linux just can't do the job, no matter how much nerds like computoman tells is it's viable. For organisations and individuals who have limited / locked-down desktop needs OSS will do the job just fine right now, but not, ironically, for technologically agile SME's.

To the OP: Awwww... Can't pick on anyone your own size? :p

[computoman]

For the zillionth time, please use what meets your needs most.

People are under the illusion that once you get a piece of software you are stuck with it. In the open source world where source code is available, anything can be changed to meet your needs. One neat thing about open source is the ability for you or for you to have community change any application to meet your needs. I dare anyone to do that in the proprietary world. There is so much open source software that it is mind boggling. looking through the repos. I am amazed at what I see is available.

We do not just use our linux boxes just an office desktop, We do a lot more than that, we do from publishing, media development to controlling manufacturing environments. I just finished a cad project for a friend of mine. Most apps are being developed for all desktops and not on just one platform. I would like to know the name of the software that runs on mac that will not run on linux as you so desire. Sourceforge and several other sites are an excellent source of software. At this time we are trying to get all our apps to be server based so that desktops do not have to have any client software on them. We use quite a bit of thin client based linux in our private school. In fact we used vnc to talk to the Apple server to teach the mac os as if the thin client with a mac keyboard was a mac. Except for the fact that Apple does not want it to be done, you can run Apple os on a linux box in a virtual machine. In most cases if an app is web server based, it will usually run on any client platform. When I ran apache for a short time on a mac I could not tell the difference than running it on a mac or linux or a windows box except that linux was faster. We currently use an rdp client connected to a windows server to teach windows on a linux box. I am in the process of moving the mswindows server to a virtual machine on the new linux server I am building. That will eliminate one more windows box.

I also managed Apple computers when I worked at the college. Until recently even owned five or six macs to do software development. I own both Apple both desktop and server licenses. Been there done that. With my macs I ended up using the same software I used on linux, so I did not see the need to keep having to pay for mac os upgrades. I converted the ppc macs to linux. Then I only wanted to support one platform. I raided the systems for reusable parts for intel based boxes and donated what was left.

The holy and blessed Adobe is now expanding its products for linux.

[phatlip]

For the zillionth time, please use what meets your needs most.

For the zillionth time? This is the first time you mentioned people using what meets their needs. In fact, this entire time you've been debating why everyone should use Linux.


I would like to know the name of the software that runs on mac that will not run on linux as you so desire.

Heres a big one for you. Photoshop. Gimp has nothing on Photoshop. Should I name some more?


The holy and blessed Adobe is now expanding its products for linux.

Is that so? Do me a favor and name what products Apple is "expanding for Linux".

[computoman]

I am glad that you think photoshop is so good. I do not know photoshop well enough to comment about it, I do know gimp has done everything I have asked of it. My brother who works for a small newspaper likes photoshop, but he like the gimp better.

Air for one.

[phatlip]

I am glad that you think photoshop is so good. I do not know photoshop well enough to comment about it, I do know gimp has done everything I have asked of it. My brother who works for a small newspaper likes photoshop, but he like the gimp better.

Air for one.

Again, you seem to be living in another dimension where everyone uses open source software. I and I'm willing to bet just about everyone else on this forum doesn't know a single person who is a professional and uses GIMP.

Air isn't an Apple product. It's an Adobe project. The entire point is being available on cross platforms. Again, what products is Apple "creating for Linux"?

[tehboris]

I know how to use the GIMP, don't know any one else who does, but then, I don't know any one proficient at Photoshop either.

[computoman]

I never said air was from apple. When apple was said i thought it was meant generically.
Actually Apple bought the cups project.

[phatlip]

I never said air was from apple. When apple was said i thought it was meant generically.
Actually Apple bought the cups project.

You said Apple was "making things for Linux". I asked you what. You're response was Air. You were wrong. I asked again and you still haven't answered me.

[tokenuser]

You said Apple was "making things for Linux". I asked you what. You're response was Air. You were wrong. I asked again and you still haven't answered me.Psst.

Re-read what he said ...

The holy and blessed Adobe is now expanding its products for linux.

[phatlip]

Psst.

Re-read what he said ...

He's a Linux fanboy. I'm an Apple fanboy. Go easy on me. ;)

I stand corrected computoman and apologize for the mistake.

[computoman]

If I get paid enough for it, I will work with any os. The first os I was paid to use was cpm/mpm. Though the capabilities are more astounding now, the basics are still the same. Even the bickering between people who use different os's still has not changed since the beginning.

[tromoly]

Just to throw this out there, the article in the OP was saying that Ubuntu 7.10 Gutsy Gibbon was nearing the end of its supported run, in no way was it saying that Ubuntu itself was being cancelled, as is evident with 9.04 Jaunty Jackalope entering Beta in the last few days.

[computoman]

Someone admitted they were in effect just trolling.

[kzap]

Proove it then. I want numbers. Microsoft is still dominating by a long shot.
Microsoft are still dominating but Linux is getting bigger.
Although it has always been sense the DOS days and eventually it will become dominate but it can takes it time, I use linux and don't care how long it takes other people to use it.
I used to convence people to try linux now I can't be bothered if they don't want to it's there loss.
I'm happy in my DRM free, open lifestyle and as long as no one takes that away from me I could keep using this version of Ubuntu for ever.

[kzap]

According to you, there's no true way to measure market share which is complete BS. So, I tried making you think about it in very simple way but apparently that's not good enough either.

Linux represents a very small percentage of the market share (excluding servers). That's a fact which you can take or leave.
I will chose to leave it then.

[kzap]

Again, you seem to be living in another dimension where everyone uses open source software. I and I'm willing to bet just about everyone else on this forum doesn't know a single person who is a professional and uses GIMP.

Air isn't an Apple product. It's an Adobe project. The entire point is being available on cross platforms. Again, what products is Apple "creating for Linux"?
Everyone I know uses Linux it's like a cult when you are part of it you can see more clearly and can see how many others are using it like you.
I'm happy the majority of people are not using Linux they will when they are ready. The less people use it the less chance of someone writing a virus for it or big companies making non-opensource programs for Linux.

[kzap]

He's a Linux fanboy. I'm an Apple fanboy. Go easy on me. ;)

I stand corrected computoman and apologize for the mistake.
I'm a Linux fanboy and you do know MAC is based on Linux well BSD to be precise not saying that, that would make Mac's bad in anyway BSD is good and Apple just made it better, more shiny and sold it. Can you blame them for that? No and I'm fine with people using Mac or Windows to me it's there loss* not mine, whatever makes you happy.

*By loss I meen loss of money as I asume you are paying for Mac software.

[phatlip]

Microsoft are still dominating but Linux is getting bigger.
Although it has always been sense the DOS days and eventually it will become dominate but it can takes it time, I use linux and don't care how long it takes other people to use it.
I used to convence people to try linux now I can't be bothered if they don't want to it's there loss.
I'm happy in my DRM free, open lifestyle and as long as no one takes that away from me I could keep using this version of Ubuntu for ever.

Bigger? Yeah, like a quarter of a percent bigger (if that). Linux is by no means going to "blow past" Microsoft anytime soon. They're a very VERY small player at this point in time (in the desktop market) and based on current and past trends not much is changing.

[phatlip]

I will chose to leave it then.

Ugh. Okay? Do you believe in ferries and unicorns too? You might as well if your going to ignore facts and believe what you want.

[phatlip]

I'm a Linux fanboy and you do know MAC is based on Linux well BSD to be precise not saying that, that would make Mac's bad in anyway BSD is good and Apple just made it better, more shiny and sold it. Can you blame them for that? No and I'm fine with people using Mac or Windows to me it's there loss* not mine, whatever makes you happy.

*By loss I meen loss of money as I asume you are paying for Mac software.

BSD isn't Linux. I use Windows, OS X and Linux.

[computoman]

I agree that bsd is not linux, but debian and bsd are beginning to share binaries amd source code for certain projects. I no longer use osx since I dumped my g3's. I do use windows xp, dos/freedos, linux, and bsd on home systems. Also use other os's on business systems in addition to the aforementioned. You can do some amazing things with dos and qbasic on an old cpu based system.

[kzap]

BSD isn't Linux. I use Windows, OS X and Linux.
No it's not but they are similar and Unix based.

[kzap]

Bigger? Yeah, like a quarter of a percent bigger (if that). Linux is by no means going to "blow past" Microsoft anytime soon. They're a very VERY small player at this point in time (in the desktop market) and based on current and past trends not much is changing.
Linux is getting bigger I didn't say getting bigger than Microsoft but every year the total number of downloads goes up so they are getting bigger even if the total market is getting bigger too (which it is).

[tokenuser]

Linux is getting bigger I didn't say getting bigger than Microsoft but every year the total number of downloads goes up so they are getting bigger even if the total market is getting bigger too (which it is).Downloads does not equal unique installations.

People don't download 15 versions MS Windows to find the right combination of kernel/window manager, and then redownload new versions 3 months later.

[kzap]

Ugh. Okay? Do you believe in ferries and unicorns too? You might as well if your going to ignore facts and believe what you want.
I believe in God does that count, I know the facts but facts can be manipulated, personally I don't care how many people use Linux I know it's a better operating system if you don't want to believe that then it's your loss.
If you do use Linux good for you, if I didn't think Linux was good why would I be talking about it, unless I'm an idiot, I have nothing to gain from promoting Linux no one is paying me to do it, but do anyway because I want to promote freedom, which I think is the main good point of Linux like Ricahard Stallman once said; propitiatory systems and always make themselves appear to be cheaper and better vaule for money and unlesss you promote the freedom of Linux not the power people will choice them.

Basically sheep do what they are told and if the media says that Mac is worth the extra money or Windows 7 isn't as bad as Vista, then people will beleive them you have to show people the freedom of Linux to and tell them what it stands for so they can be free.

Personally I've given up people are bastard coated bastards with a bastard filling and if they want to keep shelling out money to Micro$oft for the rest of there life I couldn't care less anymore.

[kzap]

Downloads does not equal unique installations.

People don't download 15 versions MS Windows to find the right combination of kernel/window manager, and then redownload new versions 3 months later.
True, but people CAN do that with Linux whereas Windows people just could't afford to try different versions.

[abazaba]

This is coming from a very humble Ubuntu user. But I am just waiting for the day that Google puts a serious interest into Linux preferably Ubuntu.

Since the only way linux in ANY form will ever come remotely close to Windows. Is once it becomes more like windows. When nearly ever paid software company makes a version for linux. When gaming companies make versions for linux.

Which will never happen untill there is only ONE version of linux, call it what you like from Redhat to Ubuntu. There must be one Linux to rule them all. Then Linux will finally be looked at as a real contender for ANY market share over a fraction of a percent.

This will be helped greatly if Google buys/merges with Ubuntu to use for the makings of its own Linux based OS. Which will hopefully still be called Ubuntu since the name Ubuntu is picking up name reconition in the non-linux world.

[phatlip]

I believe in God does that count, I know the facts but facts can be manipulated, personally I don't care how many people use Linux I know it's a better operating system if you don't want to believe that then it's your loss.
If you do use Linux good for you, if I didn't think Linux was good why would I be talking about it, unless I'm an idiot, I have nothing to gain from promoting Linux no one is paying me to do it, but do anyway because I want to promote freedom, which I think is the main good point of Linux like Ricahard Stallman once said; propitiatory systems and always make themselves appear to be cheaper and better vaule for money and unlesss you promote the freedom of Linux not the power people will choice them.

Basically sheep do what they are told and if the media says that Mac is worth the extra money or Windows 7 isn't as bad as Vista, then people will beleive them you have to show people the freedom of Linux to and tell them what it stands for so they can be free.

Personally I've given up people are bastard coated bastards with a bastard filling and if they want to keep shelling out money to Micro$oft for the rest of there life I couldn't care less anymore.

Again, if you're going to ignore facts and believe what you fabricate in your mind there's absolutely no point talking about this. It's pointless debating something with someone who is simply going to ignore facts and believe what they want. We seriously might as well be debating unicorns.

[phatlip]

This is coming from a very humble Ubuntu user. But I am just waiting for the day that Google puts a serious interest into Linux preferably Ubuntu.

Since the only way linux in ANY form will ever come remotely close to Windows. Is once it becomes more like windows. When nearly ever paid software company makes a version for linux. When gaming companies make versions for linux.

Which will never happen untill there is only ONE version of linux, call it what you like from Redhat to Ubuntu. There must be one Linux to rule them all. Then Linux will finally be looked at as a real contender for ANY market share over a fraction of a percent.

This will be helped greatly if Google buys/merges with Ubuntu to use for the makings of its own Linux based OS. Which will hopefully still be called Ubuntu since the name Ubuntu is picking up name reconition in the non-linux world.

I've been saying the same thing for years dude. They're already getting their feet wet with Linux with Android. I think Google definitely has a few more tricks up their sleeve.

[kzap]

This is coming from a very humble Ubuntu user. But I am just waiting for the day that Google puts a serious interest into Linux preferably Ubuntu.

Since the only way linux in ANY form will ever come remotely close to Windows. Is once it becomes more like windows. When nearly ever paid software company makes a version for linux. When gaming companies make versions for linux.

Which will never happen untill there is only ONE version of linux, call it what you like from Redhat to Ubuntu. There must be one Linux to rule them all. Then Linux will finally be looked at as a real contender for ANY market share over a fraction of a percent.

This will be helped greatly if Google buys/merges with Ubuntu to use for the makings of its own Linux based OS. Which will hopefully still be called Ubuntu since the name Ubuntu is picking up name reconition in the non-linux world.
That's not the point of Linux though, if there was just one version of Linux it might as well be Windows the point of Linux is freedom whither it be freedom to choose or freedom to use.
I agree that there should be one dominate Linux, which Ubuntu is at the moment, but games company will never make games for Linux unless it is though a proprietary system, which like I said is a bit beside the point, the only way a games company will sell games for Linux is if they have control over the game and no one but them can modify or distribute it, then they will start to add things like DRM, it will be like running Windows games on Linux, which you don't want.
Linux shouldn't be like Windows as it is better than Windows.
Although I do hope a system like Onlive will come to Linux (as to port it to this platform won't be that hard) as much as I hate the idea of Onlive alot of people like it and it could bring Linux gaming to a whole new leval.

As for Phatlip you don't want to debate Linux with me that is fine, but you shouldn't trust facts to much they can always be manipulated to say whatever they want them to say. It's not that I don't beleive facts, I know they are true but I just don't care about them.

[kzap]

I've been saying the same thing for years dude. They're already getting their feet wet with Linux with Android. I think Google definitely has a few more tricks up their sleeve.
Agreed Google are the only company I know who are big enough, smart enough and committed enough to help Linux go main stream. Although they are taking there time releasing Chromium for Linux.

[phatlip]

As for Phatlip you don't want to debate Linux with me that is fine, but you shouldn't trust facts to much they can always be manipulated to say whatever they want them to say. It's not that I don't beleive facts, I know they are true but I just don't care about them.

No, fact's can't be manipulated- that's why they're called facts. Do you understand the definition of the term?

So you understand the facts, but don't care about them, and choose to believe what you want? Again, we might as well be debating flying unicorns if that's how you see it. I'm sorry, but that's a very idiotic stance to take. I'm not calling you an idiot, but this particular stance is very idiotic. That sort of logic (scratch that, there IS no logic here) makes no sense.

This is worse then the guy with his fingers in his ears saying "La la la! I can't hear you!" because you did in fact hear me, understand the truth but choose to believe otherwise.

[computoman]

You do not have to download a different distro to get a different desktop. It is just a matter of adding and removing software from a repo. Most of my machines have more than one desktop environment available depending on the look I want. In fact on my ltsp (linux terminal server) server, I probably have at least four or more, so that when a user logs in on a thin client they can choose their desktop of choice. Another feature many people do not realize s that you can have more than one desktop running at a time. So I can use both say gnome and kde at the same time through what is known as terminals. That is something you can not do on the generic mswindows or osx box./I run multiple desktops often to test software applications we have developed. Osx and MSwindows are single user oriented. linux is both single user and multiuser oriented. Xwindows via linux rules. The three finger salute is not necessary for real linux.

[abazaba]

That's not the point of Linux though, if there was just one version of Linux it might as well be Windows the point of Linux is freedom whither it be freedom to choose or freedom to use.
I agree that there should be one dominate Linux, which Ubuntu is at the moment, but games company will never make games for Linux unless it is though a proprietary system, which like I said is a bit beside the point, the only way a games company will sell games for Linux is if they have control over the game and no one but them can modify or distribute it, then they will start to add things like DRM, it will be like running Windows games on Linux, which you don't want.
Linux shouldn't be like Windows as it is better than Windows.
Although I do hope a system like Onlive will come to Linux (as to port it to this platform won't be that hard) as much as I hate the idea of Onlive alot of people like it and it could bring Linux gaming to a whole new leval.

As for Phatlip you don't want to debate Linux with me that is fine, but you shouldn't trust facts to much they can always be manipulated to say whatever they want them to say. It's not that I don't beleive facts, I know they are true but I just don't care about them.

I am not saying get rid of ALL Other versions of linxu. Just have ONE version that is say bought out by google. That version would have both the benefits of being Linux and the flexibility of getting companies behind it to code for it. Those companies would make linux versions of there games, and other applications. THIS and ONLY this would make Linux a viable OS for the masses and get what Linux people want being market share.

However if you want your ideal then write your own OS, call it Kzap OS one billion. You will have no market share and be able to do what ever you w ant for the rest of your life in that OS(assuming you don’t break the law). That OS will have NO market share and never will but at least you will have freedom. Same is true with Linux.

It is a strange world this capitalism, people want to make a living off there work. For programmers there work is the applications they make. For some crazy reason they want to live in a house and eat food, I know crazy right? The only way to do this is to Sell there work or applications, to people. IN that crazy world they have to find a way to protect there investment and as such they make it so people can’t easily or legally mod and freely distribute there applications.

Now in that crazy world there will also be people who will want to sell there product for a price but also let people do with that program what they will. Short of selling it to other people for there own profit, thus in this magical world of Linux. You will have three types of programs. One that is free and clear, Two That costs but is free and clear, and yet a Third that cost but is locked down.

Not to mention I am sure once google gets interested in Linux what ever version they choose. They will improve it and provide support for it for a price. It will NOT be a free item. The only reason they are using it on there phones it because you have to BUY the phone to get the Linux OS on there product. But Linux itself is free thus they don’t have to worry about Copyright and paying people out for there OS and apps. So the real reason they want Linux for there phone was not for the good of linux it was for the good of there profit margin. Because google is a business out to make money to think other wise is foolish.

Because you can’t have your cake and eat it too, that is simply not how life works. To get what you want and it would seem to be Market Share, and to crush Windows. Then you simply have to compromise and do what needs to be done to get that goal accomplished. Because you will simply never do it in the current Linux world, as it stands today. Unless Microsoft sinks its own ship and thus anything could swoop in and take its place. Even then the same basic thing will happen.

So to think otherwise it to live in the world of make believe. Which is fine, but you will never get anything done in the real world like that. I guess as the old expression goes Rome was not built in a day. Linux Utopia will not be built without money.

[phatlip]

It is a strange world this capitalism, people want to make a living off there work. For programmers there work is the applications they make. For some crazy reason they want to live in a house and eat food, I know crazy right? The only way to do this is to Sell there work or applications, to people. IN that crazy world they have to find a way to protect there investment and as such they make it so people can’t easily or legally mod and freely distribute there applications.

Now in that crazy world there will also be people who will want to sell there product for a price but also let people do with that program what they will. Short of selling it to other people for there own profit, thus in this magical world of Linux. You will have three types of programs. One that is free and clear, Two That costs but is free and clear, and yet a Third that cost but is locked down.

Heh, good point. Anyone who thinks that all software should be free should learn how to program and write software. If they don't immediately blow their brains out, they'll agree the work software engineers do is hard work, and that those who contributed to such deserve compensation.

[computoman]

Google in charge of linux, God I hope not. The are as bad as Microsoft. I among many, do not want "one" linux. It strangles creativity. I have no problem dealing with several versions of linux. Bsd may outlast linux and windows anyway.

[abazaba]

Eh, well not ONE Linux. As long as it is Open source there will never be just one. There will just be one that google owns basically. They may keep it open to some extent but some of it will close.

Well Google maybe on the the path too evil but there was a point LONG long ago. Before the internet when Microsoft was not such a evil company. So as they say absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Just a matter of time, money, and power. Google has the money, and a lot of the power. However the people running the company are still of a semi open source nature. So who knows really. Maybe google with Linux will become what we hoped Microsoft would have turned into but didn't.

[phatlip]

I think Abazaba is referring to bring a particular distro of Linux into the mainstream and making it "their own" all while still staying true to "open source philosophy".

I don't think some of it would be closed though. Google is already doing this with Android.

[kzap]

No, fact's can't be manipulated- that's why they're called facts. Do you understand the definition of the term?

Actually they can be a fact could be 100% of Americas are gay and actually the survay that came up with that 'fact' was only asking 1% of the population. I can go with your definition if you want in which case nothing is 'fact' at all it's 'fact' as far as we know.
For example rubber doesn't carry electricity as far as we know but maybe there is a 99.99999% chance it does and we just happen to be in that 0.000001% all of our lives.
So what margin of error do you think there are on your 'fact'
Also you can get shown just certain facts like the number of Micro$oft sales in a certain part of the US that is highest to mislead you into thinking that is the fact for the entire world.

[kzap]

Heh, good point. Anyone who thinks that all software should be free should learn how to program and write software. If they don't immediately blow their brains out, they'll agree the work software engineers do is hard work, and that those who contributed to such deserve compensation.
I do know how to program and I'm still a free lovin' hippie.

[phatlip]

Actually they can be a fact could be 100% of Americas are gay and actually the survay that came up with that 'fact' was only asking 1% of the population. I can go with your definition if you want in which case nothing is 'fact' at all it's 'fact' as far as we know.
For example rubber doesn't carry electricity as far as we know but maybe there is a 99.99999% chance it does and we just happen to be in that 0.000001% all of our lives.
So what margin of error do you think there are on your 'fact'
Also you can get shown just certain facts like the number of Micro$oft sales in a certain part of the US that is highest to mislead you into thinking that is the fact for the entire world.

You're confusing fudged numbers with facts. The two aren't the same thing. A fact is a truth. A fudged number is a lie (well, usually a "white lie) but the two aren't the same.

Saying 100% of the US is gay while only surveying 1% isn't a fact at all. It's a fudged number. Saying 100% of the TESTED population answered "gay" on the other hand would be a fact.

The number's we're discussing are pretty difficult to dispute. It's rather easy to pull similar numbers from VARIOUS non bias sources all saying the same thing. We're not debating fudged numbers, what we're debating are facts. Things that are true which you're choosing and openly admitted to ignore.

[phatlip]

I do know how to program and I'm still a free lovin' hippie.

I'm probably more of a free lovin hippie than you, but I'd still like to get paid for what I do one day. Do you go to your job and work for free? I doubt it.

[computoman]

You do not have to be a programmer to use free software. There are enough programmers in the open source community to sink a battleship. You might want to know one though.

[kzap]

I'm probably more of a free lovin hippie than you, but I'd still like to get paid for what I do one day. Do you go to your job and work for free? I doubt it.
Hang on so you think you are more of a free lovin hippie than me and yet you are a capitalist who believes everything should be done for money.
If you don't like (and support) open source why are you using Linux, that's like by a fair-trade chocolate bar for the taste, it's not a bad thing but sort of missing the point a bit.

[phatlip]

Hang on so you think you are more of a free lovin hippie than me and yet you are a capitalist who believes everything should be done for money.
If you don't like (and support) open source why are you using Linux, that's like by a fair-trade chocolate bar for the taste, it's not a bad thing but sort of missing the point a bit.

I never said any of that. I didn't say I'm against open source and I also didn't say everything should be done for money. I'm just a Computer Science student spending lots of money to go to school. I'd like to make a little money one day too.

You never answered my question. Do you plan on working for free one day Mr. "Anti capitalism"?

[phatlip]

You do not have to be a programmer to use free software. There are enough programmers in the open source community to sink a battleship. You might want to know one though.


You completely missed the point. I said anyone who thinks that all software should be free should lean what it takes to make software.

I'll ask you too. Do you get paid to do your job? Why shouldn't I?

[kzap]

You completely missed the point. I said anyone who thinks that all software should be free should lean what it takes to make software.

I'll ask you too. Do you get paid to do your job? Why shouldn't I?
I personally like the communist system everyone gets paid the same amount per hour whatever they do all programs are given away free and all food and products are distributed evenly by the Goverment.
And yes I do program and would rather give my code away free than try to make money from it, anyway Jonathon Coulton gives a lot of his music away free and allows you to distribute it to whoever you like and he still makes money just not as much as he could if he was a capitalist.

[phatlip]

I personally like the communist system everyone gets paid the same amount per hour whatever they do all programs are given away free and all food and products are distributed evenly by the Goverment.
And yes I do program and would rather give my code away free than try to make money from it, anyway Jonathon Coulton gives a lot of his music away free and allows you to distribute it to whoever you like and he still makes money just not as much as he could if he was a capitalist.

You want freedom and openness yet you want communism? In another thread you just said the government can't be trusted. If that's the case, why would you want a government with totalitarian control?

You either don't understand what communism is or you're a moron. In another thread you just said the government can't be trusted. If that's

For the third time now:

Do you do your job for free?

[kzap]

You want freedom and openness yet you want communism? In another thread you just said the government can't be trusted. If that's the case, why would you want a government with totalitarian control?

You either don't understand what communism is or you're a moron. In another thread you just said the government can't be trusted. If that's

For the third time now:

Do you do your job for free?
Yes and no I distribute most of the media I get paid to edit for free unless the client says, no. In which case I can't.
I edit weeding videos and the like I'm not saying someone should not get paid to write software I believe Mozzilla are a for profit company but I still beleive in open sourse and do, do my job for free on occasion, I'm planing of directing some youtube advertisement for Linux which will end up costing me money and I will not get anything out of it.
I like the communist form of distribution of money but you are right I would never trust the goverment enough to implement such a system.
Still it would be a better system were it implimented by people I trust.

[phatlip]

Yes and no I distribute most of the media I get paid to edit for free unless the client says, no. In which case I can't.
I edit weeding videos and the like I'm not saying someone should not get paid to write software I believe Mozzilla are a for profit company but I still beleive in open sourse and do, do my job for free on occasion, I'm planing of directing some youtube advertisement for Linux which will end up costing me money and I will not get anything out of it.
I like the communist form of distribution of money but you are right I would never trust the goverment enough to implement such a system.
Still it would be a better system were it implimented by people I trust.

No, I'm not talking about stuff you do for fun and occasional get paid to do. I'm talking about the stuff that puts food on your table. Do you work for free? If so, how do you put food on your table. How do you plan on supporting a family by working for free?

[tokenuser]

I edit weeding videos and the likeWow - niche market. Good luck with that ;)

[kzap]

Wow - niche market. Good luck with that ;)
Yea well I have course work as well I'm just doing that for the money, I have a load of small projects of my own going on but none of them are for money (web films etc...)
I film other stuff as well but it's not really a business yet.
I'm also going to be getting a small part time job at a local editing studio.
But I'm not out of education yet and won't just do that when I've finished.

[kzap]

No, I'm not talking about stuff you do for fun and occasional get paid to do. I'm talking about the stuff that puts food on your table. Do you work for free? If so, how do you put food on your table. How do you plan on supporting a family by working for free?
No but that doesn't mean you can't be giving stuff away free as well.
Anyway like I said Mozilla make a profit and release Firefox for free as open source.

[kzap]

For example Felicia Day get's paid to act and that puts food on the table but she also does it for free in shows like the guild that make money though donation.
Alex Albrecht has a paid job but also releases 2 free video podcasts every week.
Some programs (and especially) games will always be sold but that doesn't make giving something away free wrong in fact ID release all there old game engines open source and then as the community add features that gives them ideas for there next engine.
I'm not sure what will happen if and when 100% of software is open sourse.
Hopefully we will have abandoned capitalism by that point and money will no longer be an object, although how we do that I have no idea.

[phatlip]

No but that doesn't mean you can't be giving stuff away free as well.
Anyway like I said Mozilla make a profit and release Firefox for free as open source.

Okay, which goes back to my original argument:

Anyone who thinks that all software should be free should learn how to program and write software.

Note the emphasis on the all. That's what I'm debating.

[abazaba]

Well it is clear that both Kzap and Phatlip have both missed my point entirely. Capitalism is not in and of itself a bad thing. Yes people make software to be consumed and at a price. People also make software to be consumed for free. Both are good things. Neither one of which should be abolished.

The point is you have to realize both exist and people want to be able to use both on there OS. Believe it or not there are linux users out there that might want to run Nero 9 or something that costs money. That is where linux loses out. Until it can pick up the slack there it will never dominate over Windows.

Now as to the issue of truth. The truth is that truth is a illusion. There is no such thing as an absolute fact. Because for there to be an absolute fact we must prove it true though out the entire universe for all eternity. This is simply impossible. Much like it is truly imposable to figure out what the real market share of Linux is. Unless you talk to EVERY SINGLE PERSON on the planet you will never know for certain. So good luck with that.

Most surveys are bias, in that a survey about linux is going to have mostly Linux users vote in it. Since most windows users have no idea what Linux is or how to use it. I mean lets even talk about a survey about lets say "Swine Flu" If you had a survey asking people if they were in a panic over it. You would most likely find that the majority of people surveyed are. IN that the people who FIND the survey are people already in a panic, because they are SEARCHING for "Swine Flu" on google or something. Thus it is false data, must like any other so called "Truth"

Thus beleave what you will. The only thing that matters is action. If you are such a firm beleaver of Linux. Then go out and make EVERYONE you know switch to Linux, by teaching them how much better it is than windows. Ask them why they use windows, Help them make an informed decision on if it is feasable for them to switch. Don't worry about who already uses Linux, because they already use it. Worry about those who don't and those who could with a little education and suport. THAT is the real "Truth" to the matter.

[phatlip]

Hopefully we will have abandoned capitalism by that point and money will no longer be an object, although how we do that I have no idea.

You should create a thread in the politics forum about why you're so against capitalism and favor communism. That would be a very interesting thread.

[phatlip]

Well it is clear that both Kzap and Phatlip have both missed my point entirely. Capitalism is not in and of itself a bad thing. Yes people make software to be consumed and at a price. People also make software to be consumed for free. Both are good things. Neither one of which should be abolished.

The point is you have to realize both exist and people want to be able to use both on there OS. Believe it or not there are linux users out there that might want to run Nero 9 or something that costs money. That is where linux loses out. Until it can pick up the slack there it will never dominate over Windows.

Now as to the issue of truth. The truth is that truth is a illusion. There is no such thing as an absolute fact. Because for there to be an absolute fact we must prove it true though out the entire universe for all eternity. This is simply impossible. Much like it is truly imposable to figure out what the real market share of Linux is. Unless you talk to EVERY SINGLE PERSON on the planet you will never know for certain. So good luck with that.

Most surveys are bias, in that a survey about linux is going to have mostly Linux users vote in it. Since most windows users have no idea what Linux is or how to use it. I mean lets even talk about a survey about lets say "Swine Flu" If you had a survey asking people if they were in a panic over it. You would most likely find that the majority of people surveyed are. IN that the people who FIND the survey are people already in a panic, because they are SEARCHING for "Swine Flu" on google or something. Thus it is false data, must like any other so called "Truth"

Thus beleave what you will. The only thing that matters is action. If you are such a firm beleaver of Linux. Then go out and make EVERYONE you know switch to Linux, by teaching them how much better it is than windows. Ask them why they use windows, Help them make an informed decision on if it is feasable for them to switch. Don't worry about who already uses Linux, because they already use it. Worry about those who don't and those who could with a little education and suport. THAT is the real "Truth" to the matter.

I think you missed my point actually. I have nothing against free, open source software. I have no problem with it co-existing with paid software.

I just don't believe that all software should be free. People work hard to create it and there's nothing wrong with those individuals being paid for such.

[kzap]

Well it is clear that both Kzap and Phatlip have both missed my point entirely. Capitalism is not in and of itself a bad thing. Yes people make software to be consumed and at a price. People also make software to be consumed for free. Both are good things. Neither one of which should be abolished.

The point is you have to realize both exist and people want to be able to use both on there OS. Believe it or not there are linux users out there that might want to run Nero 9 or something that costs money. That is where linux loses out. Until it can pick up the slack there it will never dominate over Windows.

I don't think either will be abolished but I was trying to make the point that Linux isn't made of commercial software and never will be.

Now as to the issue of truth. The truth is that truth is a illusion. There is no such thing as an absolute fact. Because for there to be an absolute fact we must prove it true though out the entire universe for all eternity. This is simply impossible. Much like it is truly imposable to figure out what the real market share of Linux is. Unless you talk to EVERY SINGLE PERSON on the planet you will never know for certain. So good luck with that.
The point I was trying to make well done you seem to be much better at making my points than me. :)


Most surveys are bias, in that a survey about linux is going to have mostly Linux users vote in it. Since most windows users have no idea what Linux is or how to use it. I mean lets even talk about a survey about lets say "Swine Flu" If you had a survey asking people if they were in a panic over it. You would most likely find that the majority of people surveyed are. IN that the people who FIND the survey are people already in a panic, because they are SEARCHING for "Swine Flu" on google or something. Thus it is false data, must like any other so called "Truth"

Another well made point


Thus beleave what you will. The only thing that matters is action. If you are such a firm beleaver of Linux. Then go out and make EVERYONE you know switch to Linux, by teaching them how much better it is than windows. Ask them why they use windows, Help them make an informed decision on if it is feasable for them to switch. Don't worry about who already uses Linux, because they already use it.
I've given up on that now :mad: So many people just don't want to hear about it and it's so hard to get them to switch you would think I didn;t like them but I'm now sadly taking the attitude of "I will tell you what linux is and how to use it but I'm not going to convince you if you don't use it, it's your loss" which I a shame but I just got bored of fighting with people I was trying to help.
Although I have now got my enite Church on Ubuntu and that's where I will stop, I have a podcast promoting and reviewing open source video games but I've stopped preaching Linux, to the public anyway.

[kzap]

You should create a thread in the politics forum about why you're so against capitalism and favor communism. That would be a very interesting thread.
Good idea though I have a couple of political threads going at the moment. I was thinking of doing that though.

[kzap]

I think you missed my point actually. I have nothing against free, open source software. I have no problem with it co-existing with paid software.

I just don't believe that all software should be free. People work hard to create it and there's nothing wrong with those individuals being paid for such.
I thoughts that's what you where getting at when you asked me if I would do my job for free.
I just thought for a minute you where one of those people who thought open source was wrong as it was stopping people who sell software from making a living, which you are obviously not.

[computoman]

People seem to forget it is free as in freedom not free as in free beer.

[phatlip]

People seem to forget it is free as in freedom not free as in free beer.

No, it's free as in free beer. I don't recall ever paying for Linux. Ever.

Though I do realize there are a few distros you pay for.

[kzap]

No, it's free as in free beer. I don't recall ever paying for Linux. Ever.

Though I do realize there are a few distros you pay for.
But that's not the point of it, Richard Stallman says you should never advertise Linux just because it is free (as in beer) because other companies could make there systems appear more cost effective.
The main point of it is that is free as in freedom, you can do what you like with it.
Using Linux because it is free as in beer like I said is like buying fair-trade chocolate for the taste, it's not a bad thing todo but completely missing the point and another chocolate but could claim they taste better (and may well do).
It IS free as in beer but it is also free as in the freedom and that is the point of it, it's not meant to just be a free OS it is meant to be a liberating OS that also happens to be free.
Also something can't be a free as in freedom with out being free as in beer otherwise you wouldn't be free to give it away, make copies or distribute it.

[phatlip]

But that's not the point of it, Richard Stallman says you should never advertise Linux just because it is free (as in beer) because other companies could make there systems appear more cost effective.
The main point of it is that is free as in freedom, you can do what you like with it.
Using Linux because it is free as in beer like I said is like buying fair-trade chocolate for the taste, it's not a bad thing todo but completely missing the point and another chocolate but could claim they taste better (and may well do).
It IS free as in beer but it is also free as in the freedom and that is the point of it, it's not meant to just be a free OS it is meant to be a liberating OS that also happens to be free.
Also something can't be a free as in freedom with out being free as in beer otherwise you wouldn't be free to give it away, make copies or distribute it.

I wasn't talking about marketing. I was just correcting him in saying Linux isn't free as in beer- because it is.

And for the record, Microsoft already does TCO comparisons with Linux and makes the argument they're more cost effective. So that's nothing new from the competition. The price of the operating system is free though. There are other costs in the equation, but there are with almost everything.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver/compare/windows-server-vs-red-hat-linux.mspx

[computoman]

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver/compare/windows-server-vs-red-hat-linux.mspx

Considering the source (—Rim Kadi, American University of Beirut) that is not much validity to me.

Considering it is not stated where the facts came from, I doubt the validity. From my own experience using both Microsoft and Linux products, I have never seen Micosoft software more secure than linux. Everyone knows that Microsoft never publishes vunerabilities when they should. The only thing I can possibly think is thet they set the linux software up themselves and had no clue or did not take the time to set it up properly and securely. More MSFUD.

As an aside: http://gizmodo.com/5234955/conficker-worm-hits-us-hospitals-infecting-computers-and-equipment

No, it's free as in free beer. I don't recall ever paying for Linux. Ever.

LINUX IS NOT FREE AS IN FREE BEER. Though a lot of developers do not charge for their software is a coincidence. LINUX IS FREE AS IN SPEECH. Even Ubuntu charges for commerical support. Centos is RedHat Enterprise without the RH logos. So you can get Redhat Enterprise at no initial cost. You do have to pay for RH Enterprise Support if you get the branded software with logos. I alo know quite a few distributions that are sold. BSD is probaly more freedom oriented than linux.

[kzap333]

LINUX IS NOT FREE AS IN FREE BEER. Though a lot of developers do not charge for their software is a coincidence. LINUX IS FREE AS IN SPEECH. Even Ubuntu charges for commerical support. Centos is RedHat Enterprise without the RH logos. So you can get Redhat Enterprise at no initial cost. You do have to pay for RH Enterprise Support if you get the branded software with logos. I alo know quite a few distributions that are sold. BSD is probaly more freedom oriented than linux.
I would disagree with that, the software is free the support is a completely separate product.
And although there are commercial Linuxs (I don't know what the plural is) they are not a huge part of the Linux market, I'm guessing that most Linux users uses it (but not solely) because it is free, but I could be wrong there.

[tokenuser]

I would disagree with that, the software is free the support is a completely separate product.
And although there are commercial Linuxs (I don't know what the plural is) they are not a huge part of the Linux market,I'd disagree with you there ... commercial Linux (or Linux with a paid support contract ... because they are essentially the same thing) runs on a lot of the backend servers out in the real world. THAT is the market that supports Linux for the end user. Without the business server side of a Linux distro, developers would not be paid to work on the Linux that gets used free on desktop.
I'm guessing that most Linux users uses it (but not solely) because it is free, but I could be wrong there.I'm guessing that most Linux users use it because:

They are cheap.
They have older computers they are trying to stretch to the limits.
They are hobbiests, and this is their hobby - 50 years ago it would have been Ham radio.
They have way too much time on their hands.
They kick arse at minesweeper and solitaire (esp in coop mode with spinning cube desktop interfaces ... TAKE THAT Microsoft with your platform that everyone develops to). Oh wait. No coop in minesweeper.
They have a Windows install on another partition for when they need to do some real work.
They feel a strange attachment to Neko.


... but I could be just as wrong.

[kzap333]

I'd disagree with you there ... commercial Linux (or Linux with a paid support contract ... because they are essentially the same thing) runs on a lot of the backend servers out in the real world. THAT is the market that supports Linux for the end user. Without the business server side of a Linux distro, developers would not be paid to work on the Linux that gets used free on desktop.
Sorry I was talking about Linux desktops I should have made that clear. You are right about servers though.

I'm guessing that most Linux users use it because:
They are cheap.
They have older computers they are trying to stretch to the limits.
They are hobbiests, and this is their hobby - 50 years ago it would have been Ham radio.
They have way too much time on their hands.
They kick arse at minesweeper and solitaire (esp in coop mode with spinning cube desktop interfaces ... TAKE THAT Microsoft with your platform that everyone develops to). Oh wait. No coop in minesweeper.
They have a Windows install on another partition for when they need to do some real work.
They feel a strange attachment to Neko.
... but I could be just as wrong.
I would say you were wrong there you are getting Linux enthusiasts muddled up with Linux users I used to be an enthusiasts and that's what got me into Linux but I know use it as my mane OS and everyone else in my family use it without a duel boot, ironically I'm the only one in my family who has Windows installed and that is only for one program.
My dad owns a small charity and he is thinking of switching all there computers over too Ubuntu.

[kzap]

Sorry I was talking about Linux desktops I should have made that clear. You are right about servers though.


I would say you were wrong there you are getting Linux enthusiasts muddled up with Linux users I used to be an enthusiasts and that's what got me into Linux but I know use it as my mane OS and everyone else in my family use it without a duel boot, ironically I'm the only one in my family who has Windows installed and that is only for one program.
My dad owns a small charity and he is thinking of switching all there computers over too Ubuntu.
Sorry this post seemed to be in my old account, anyway I assume you know it's me.

[phatlip]

Considering the source (—Rim Kadi, American University of Beirut) that is not much validity to me.

Considering it is not stated where the facts came from, I doubt the validity. From my own experience using both Microsoft and Linux products, I have never seen Micosoft software more secure than linux. Everyone knows that Microsoft never publishes vunerabilities when they should. The only thing I can possibly think is thet they set the linux software up themselves and had no clue or did not take the time to set it up properly and securely. More MSFUD.

As an aside: http://gizmodo.com/5234955/conficker-worm-hits-us-hospitals-infecting-computers-and-equipment



LINUX IS NOT FREE AS IN FREE BEER. Though a lot of developers do not charge for their software is a coincidence. LINUX IS FREE AS IN SPEECH. Even Ubuntu charges for commerical support. Centos is RedHat Enterprise without the RH logos. So you can get Redhat Enterprise at no initial cost. You do have to pay for RH Enterprise Support if you get the branded software with logos. I alo know quite a few distributions that are sold. BSD is probaly more freedom oriented than linux.

Jesus, do you people read? All I was doing was pointing out that Microsoft already does marketing like this.

I didn't say it was true, I didn't say I believed it.

And Yes, for about the millionth time, Linux- the operating systems is almost always free. Again, if you read you would know I'm not talking about other related costs such as support. Almost everything has related costs. What I'm saying is you can go on the internet, download a distro for FREE (as in free beer) and use it.

As I already stated and pointed out by Token, there are a few paid distros but most offer their product for free.

[kzap]

Jesus, do you people read? All I was doing was pointing out that Microsoft already does marketing like this.

I didn't say it was true, I didn't say I believed it.

And Yes, for about the millionth time, Linux- the operating systems is almost always free. Again, if you read you would know I'm not talking about other related costs such as support. Almost everything has related costs. What I'm saying is you can go on the internet, download a distro for FREE (as in free beer) and use it.

As I already stated and pointed out by Token, there are a few paid distros but most offer their product for free.
I know Microsoft use that tactic that's why I brought it up.
And I agree that Linux is free although you can buy a few distros Red Hat I think is one.
But it is mostly free as beer and speech.

[computoman]

There is so much ignorance about open source

Yes a lot of developers do give away linux distros, but that does not mean that all distributions or parts of the distributions are free as in free beer. Contrary to popular belief, not all linux distributions are under the same license and some are not free as in free beer. You have to read the fine print of the license on each individual distribition and the programs included in the distribution to be sure..... This especially holds true also on desktops. The same is even more true of application software that runs on linux boxes. Also too the source maybe freely available, but the bianries ae not. Again read the fine print. I know quite a few programs that are fully copyrighted for linux. I am sure that RMS would go ballistic over this thread. Busybox has sued quite a few people who thought that everything in linux was free as in free beer. There are some companies who claim to be be open source, but if you read the fine print, they are anything but that. Some companies will give away the source code for a price with certain limitations as to what you can distribute or redistribute. . Even with all that too you have to be careful how you use media codecs (playing mp3's and the like) and device drivers (i.e. video card drivers) in linux. Some of them are not free IN THE US. Other countries may be different. You have to be careful. The linux community is working hard to eliminate them by providing free and open source equivalents,

[kzap]

There are some companies who claim to be be open source, but if you read the fine print, they are anything but that. Some companies will give away the source code for a price with certain limitations as to what you can distribute or redistribute. . Even with all that too you have to be careful how you use media codecs and device drivers in linux. Some of them are not free IN THE US. Other countries may be different. You have to be careful. The linux community is working hard to eliminate them by providing free and open source equivalents,
But most are free to download, as in you don't pay for them, they would have a download link on there website otherwise, right?
I mean shareware and trailware are free as in beer.
And don't even start on codecs they are a completely different topic entirely, I could talk fro ages on them and the legalities of playing DVDs you brought on Linux.

[computoman]

But most are free to download, as in you don't pay for them, they would have a download link on there website otherwise, right?
I mean shareware and trailware are free as in beer.

Not necessarily/ You still have to read the fine print. Some links are out of the US where laws are different than in the US. You can download Microsoft Windows 7 but that does not make it free. There are so many licenses it does make it hard. I only download linux binaries and source from sites I know go to the trouble to check licenses. I have seen on more than one occasion where software was pulled from linux distros where there was an issue of freedom. I do contribute to projects. I do not expect a free ride.


And don't even start on codecs they are a completely different topic entirely, I could talk fro ages on them and the legalities of playing DVDs you brought on Linux.


I do think it is under the same realm. It is legal or it is not. Just as simple as that. Dell does a good job when selling new machines with linux supposedly of purchasing rights so dvd's can be played under linux. I will admit there is a gray area when if you bought a windows box or a dvd player with codecs and then use linux instead of MSwindows. Dvd's though are not the only issue. Techically just playing your own music encoded with mp3 is illegal under some circumstances. I know several sound engineers that went to ogg files and dumped mp3 to stay out of contoversy. Until the self serving media czars get a clue, there will be issues.

[kzap]

Not necessarily/ You still have to read the fine print. Some links are out of the US where laws are different than in the US. You can download Microsoft Windows 7 but that does not make it free. There are so many licenses it does make it hard. I only download linux binaries and source from sites I know go to the trouble to check licenses. I have seen on more than one occasion where software was pulled from linux distros where there was an issue of freedom. I do contribute to projects. I do not expect a free ride.
But Windows 7 is free as in beer, that's the point, you don't pay money. You download it and you don't give them any money.
That's the point of free as in a beer, it's NOT free as in speech as there are terms and conditions but it doesn't cost you anything at the moment of download.

[tokenuser]

But Windows 7 is free as in beer, that's the point, you don't pay money. You download it and you don't give them any money.
That's the point of free as in a beer, it's NOT free as in speech as there are terms and conditions but it doesn't cost you anything at the moment of download.Ummm. Yeah ....

Win7 is a free download for a time expired version of the software. Its a great strategy ... MS know that people will get copies by "other means", and install them, so this time instead of needing an MSDN or corporate license, they are allowing anyone to download and try it. But these are trial version, and have a time limit on them that will reduce the functionality on "x" date.

At which point you say "wow that was great, but damn, I now need to buy a license to continue using it."

No such thing as a free lunch. Hook the punter, reel them in, and then lift their wallet.

[phatlip]

There is so much ignorance about open source

Yes a lot of developers do give away linux distros, but that does not mean that all distributions or parts of the distributions are free as in free beer. Contrary to popular belief, not all linux distributions are under the same license and some are not free as in free beer.

Ummm, yeah dude. We know. We discussed this already. Quite a few times actually. Please read.

AGAIN

Most distros are free, a few you have to pay for. But the majority are free to download and use.

[kzap]

Ummm. Yeah ....

Win7 is a free download for a time expired version of the software. Its a great strategy ... MS know that people will get copies by "other means", and install them, so this time instead of needing an MSDN or corporate license, they are allowing anyone to download and try it. But these are trial version, and have a time limit on them that will reduce the functionality on "x" date.

At which point you say "wow that was great, but damn, I now need to buy a license to continue using it."

No such thing as a free lunch. Hook the punter, reel them in, and then lift their wallet.
Yea and what a lot of my (M$ using) friends don't know is that when the time expires they will not be able to access any of there files unless they buy the full version, so essentially they will have to buy it to access all there files.
Fortunately I have convinced them to setup 2 partitions one just for the OS and one for files which is a safe thing to do anyway encase the OS breaks.

Fortunately I don't have to worry about this as I'm almost 100% open source XP will be the last OS I pay for (as I build all my PCs now).
I only use Windows for 1 peice of software and that only works on XP so there is not point upgrading as soon as KdenLive gets a little better I'll be 100% open source.



I'm going to clarify (what I think anyway) free as in beer and free as in speech mean because those fraising a thrown around alot when talking about open source and I'm not sure everyone has the same meaning for them.
Free as in speech: means you can do what ever you like with it, give it away, copy it, lend it, modify it,
Free as in beer: there are noo upfront costs, you may have to pay for it latter along the line, you may not get all the features for free and there may be terms and conditions but to get a copy of the product you don't need to hand over any money at first.
Now I don't know how something can be free as in speech without being free as in beer as if you wouldn't be allowed to make coppies of and give away something you paid for.

That's just what I think anyway there may be diffrent interpritations.

[computoman]

Allegedly, Microsoft is so hard up to see it's product out there that it is now allowing updates to pirated versions of their software. We would not use Microsoft software even if it was free. Though I still have licenses from when we did use it. Too many security issues and other problems. One thing I like about linux is that I do not need both server and desktop versions of the os depending on what I am doing. linux can be or converted to be both a desktop or a server by just adding or removing software from a repo. The newest Microsoft would probably run on only one of our machines. Linux runs on all of our existing equipment. Linux also runs on our production routers and Microsoft will not. We even ran linux on a linksys nslu2 which was easily used it as a media, file, and web server. Microsoft software can not do that. I can not wait to run linux on a "Sheeva plug" or the equivalent. We even run linux on diskless cheap thin clients. We can even run a remote sesskon from an apple or a windows box. Linux is just compatible with the equipment we have and Micosoft software is not. linux is more multiuser friendly.

Thin client lab: (At the time this picture was taken the server was an 800mhz amd duron cpu clone based machine running k12ltsp on Fedora. Each diskless pxe boot thin client is running a different desktop of gnome, kde3.x, and xfce all from the same server). More thin clients are connected, but not shown. This setup is great for small business and can be easily upgraded to for pos usage in retail shops, inexpensive student labs for schools, or for a call/support center. The original setup cost me only 300 dollars for all the equipmet including the server including a bit of horsetrading.

http://computoman.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/cropped-testxg81.jpg

Microsoft licensing alone would eat your lunch on this set up.

[phatlip]

Linux Market Share Passes 1% (http://www.berkeleylug.com/?p=43)

Posted on the Berkeley Linux Users Group website. Kind of hard to say that's a bias source AGAINST Linux.

1%! Watch out Microsoft! 1% is a big number!

/sarcasm

Don't get me wrong. I think I would much rather see Linux in the majority than Windows. I'm just realistic in knowing that's not going to happen anytime soon.

[kzap]

Linux Market Share Passes 1% (http://www.berkeleylug.com/?p=43)

Posted on the Berkeley Linux Users Group website. Kind of hard to say that's a bias source AGAINST Linux.

1%! Watch out Microsoft! 1% is a big number!

/sarcasm

1% is a big number for a free OS, and looking at the trend it is increasing fast.
There will need to be something to give Linux the big push to get it main stream though.
At one point I thought it was the netbook market and while there is still hope for that as netbooks are getting more powerful more and more are running Windows.

[computoman]

Linux Market Share Passes 1% (http://www.berkeleylug.com/?p=43)

Posted on the Berkeley Linux Users Group website. Kind of hard to say that's a bias source AGAINST Linux.

1%! Watch out Microsoft! 1% is a big number!

/sarcasm

Don't get me wrong. I think I would much rather see Linux in the majority than Windows. I'm just realistic in knowing that's not going to happen anytime soon.

If you read theoriginal page correctly, it would have said their program "netapplications" has that kind of usage. it had nothing to do with the internet usage as a whole. Linux usage is actually probably nearer to 50 percent than 1 percent.

[phatlip]

If you read theoriginal page correctly, it would have said their program "netapplications" has that kind of usage. it had nothing to do with the internet usage as a whole. Linux usage is actually probably nearer to 50 percent than 1 percent.

So half the desktops in the world use Linux. What kind of drugs are you on exactly?

[drunken-bastard]

Don't get me wrong. I think I would much rather see Linux in the majority than Windows. I'm just realistic in knowing that's not going to happen anytime soon.

People used to say the same thing about Firefox. "Anytime Soon" will come sooner then you think.

[computoman]

Let us see how many MSWindows machines are still running after the free period of w7 runs out. The tide is already turning. Where I work only one out of forty machines are running Microsoft windows. Once the major games get ported to linux, I expect the general public use of Microsoft will decline rapidly.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0424/breaking10.htm

You know MS is hurting if they do this:

http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/01/windows-7-rc-and-xp-given-extensions-on-life-well-into-2010/

[phatlip]

Let us see how many MSWindows machines are still running after the free period of w7 runs out. The tide is already turning. Where I work only one out of forty machines are running Microsoft windows. Once the major games get ported to linux, I expect the general public use of Microsoft will decline rapidly.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0424/breaking10.htm

You know MS is hurting if they do this:

http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/01/windows-7-rc-and-xp-given-extensions-on-life-well-into-2010/

Most machines aren't running Windows 7. It's a release candidate. It's intended for testing.

50 percent of desktop computer's aren't using Linux. If you think that you're either on drugs, delusional or know nothing about computers.

Try less than 10%.

[phatlip]

People used to say the same thing about Firefox. "Anytime Soon" will come sooner then you think.

Linux has been around for how long now? What is it's market share again?

Firefox on the other hand came out only a few years ago and grew at an extremely rapid pace from the start.

That and Firefox is only a web browser.

[computoman]

I never said linux was on 50 percent of the desktops. You did not read it carefully. Most ms desktops are xp. Ms is trying to stop support for those systems. The users will have to move to something else soon. Everyone thought Noah was wrong for building an Ark.

[phatlip]

I never said linux was on 50 percent of the desktops. You did not read it carefully.

Well, we ARE talking about desktops. What you said is:

Linux usage is actually probably nearer to 50 percent than 1 percent.

I did read it carefully. If you're talking about something else you should say so.

Most ms desktops are xp. Ms is trying to stop support for those systems. The users will have to move to something else soon.

Yeah, they'll move to either Vista or Windows 7. A couple people may get a Mac. Very few will do Linux.

Everyone thought Noah was wrong for building an Ark.

Drugs as I suspected.

[kzap]

Most machines aren't running Windows 7. It's a release candidate. It's intended for testing.

50 percent of desktop computer's aren't using Linux. If you think that you're either on drugs, delusional or know nothing about computers.

Try less than 10%.
I have to agree with you there it's no way 50%, I would be happy with a 1% market share for Linux, open source programs are a good way to get people in to Linux, I used to get people using almost 100% open source software then it was soo easy for them to switch over.
The problem is Linux is marketing, or rather the lack of it.
Sadly it always appears the next big break though it around the corner (I'm not saying it's not) Like I said I honestly thought that break though was netbooks, if Onlive is released of Linux that would help alot.

[computoman]

No one can say who will get what, but I see too many news reports where Microsoft software is being dumped en masse. Even IBM with its thousand of desktops uses linux as the main desktop. The only place where MS is growing is where they are giving way MSWindows and all kind of free hardware. In the odf vs ooxml controversy, It was proven that ms allegedly used dirty tricks to try to make ooxml standard. See www.groklaw.net for details. Even here in Texas they have virtually outlawed the use of MSVista in state government. The tide is turning.

[kzap]

No one can say who will get what, but I see too many news reports where Microsoft software is being dumped en masse. Even IBM with its thousand of desktops uses linux as the main desktop. The only place where MS is growing is where they are giving way MSWindows and all kind of free hardware. In the odf vs ooxml controversy, It was proven that ms allegedly used dirty tricks to try to make ooxml standard. See www.groklaw.net (http://www.groklaw.net) for details. Even here in Texas they have virtually outlawed the use of MSVista in state government. The tide is turning.
I really hate to say this but thousands won't make a difference, sure it will help but one large company switching a couple of thousand computers over to Linux is a rain drop in an ocean.
There are already over 500 million computers in the world so a thousand isn't that big a number.

[computoman]

I really hate to say this but thousands won't make a difference, sure it will help but one large company switching a couple of thousand computers over to Linux is a rain drop in an ocean.
There are already over 500 million computers in the world so a thousand isn't that big a number.

Actual it is more like tens of thousands at a time and not just one company it is many companies, governments, and school systems, but I did not want to browbeat the point.

[kzap]

Actual it is more like tens of thousands at a time and not just one company it is many companies, governments, and school systems, but I did not want to browbeat the point.
Yea I haven't known governments have been switching for a long time, my dad used to work in the NHS and they had to use Micorsoft as they were under onctract that they would get it at a reduced price and everyone who worked there could take a free copy home as long as EVERYONE in the company used it, most of the IT technitions I saw when I went there just a a virtualbox they could switch on when anyone was walking round and used Linux most of the time.
Anyway if the NHS and schools start to use Linuc that will be the tipping point I think, if people are brought up from primary school on opensourse then they are much more likly to use it when they are older, I just don't want to get my hopes up.

[computoman]

what is nhs?

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=school+districts+using+linux&fp=OlAWEoQSgPM

All of the former USSR is converting to linux also.

[kzap]

what is nhs?

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=school+districts+using+linux&fp=OlAWEoQSgPM

All of the former USSR is converting to linux also.
Sorry I forgot you don't have it in the US. :confused:
National Health Service, it's the health service in the UK, I assume everything in the US is private?
Basically all the hospitals in the UK (except a few super expensive private ones).

[phatlip]

Sorry I forgot you don't have it in the US. :confused:
National Health Service, it's the health service in the UK, I assume everything in the US is private?
Basically all the hospitals in the UK (except a few super expensive private ones).

We'll have both soon! :)

[tromoly]

Linux market share is ~2% (http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php)

I will say, there are alot more Linux machines popping up than you'd think. The new Student Center at my (current) school installed 50 machines that are running openSUSE as thin clients (correct term?) that only run FireFox, and they're almost constantly in use.

[phatlip]

, and they're almost constantly in use.

By computer science and information system majors. ;)

:P

[tromoly]

By computer science and information system majors. ;)

:P

Hah nah, since they're thin clients (not sure if it's the right term, but yeah) that run FireFox, everyone uses them to check their facebook / myspace.

I use them too, after I reboot the machine and run Crunchbang off my USB drive :P

[phatlip]

Hah nah, since they're thin clients (not sure if it's the right term, but yeah) that run FireFox, everyone uses them to check their facebook / myspace.

I use them too, after I reboot the machine and run Crunchbang off my USB drive :P

Nice!

Linux, Windows, OS X, two tin cans attached by a copper wire- students WILL find a way to get on Facebook.

haha

[computoman]

Linux market share is ~2% (http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php)

I will say, there are alot more Linux machines popping up than you'd think. The new Student Center at my (current) school installed 50 machines that are running openSUSE as thin clients (correct term?) that only run FireFox, and they're almost constantly in use.

thin client refers to the hardware platform not always what os/software is used. They definately are kiosks.

[computoman]

You would be surprised what you can do with thin clients...... Some can be easily converted to servers, routers, mythtv frontends, and etc.

[kzap]

You would be surprised what you can do with thin clients...... Some can be easily converted to servers, routers, mythtv frontends, and etc.
We had a thin client as our home PC a couple of years back (must have been pre-200) I didn't now what it was then but it had a very expensive solid state drive, booted up fast and we could only install one game on at a time (when it was running windows).
We just brought one recently for a friend of the family who we where always doing tech support for she had a computer that was had been upgrading to Windows 96 when she got it and people had just been upgrading it for her ever sense in the end it got to expensive to fix that it was cheaper to buy a £30 thin client off ebay and stick Xubuntu on it for her.

[computoman]

I do not know the exchange rate, but that sounds about right. I have a bunch of compaq t20/30's I use as thin clients, but they pxeboot and load the os from a p3 equivalent server. No upgrades to the thin clients really required. You have to be careful though when buying thin clients. Do not get one without the ps and as is. That usually means they are junk or parts are missing. it took me 6 thin clients to make 4 good ones of the t30/s, but I still came out ok for what I paid for them. Also too a lot of thin clients are not x86 compatible or have so little memory/flash to e effective. I know I bought a sun thin client for 5 bucks. It is sitting in the closet. I could set up a sun server or install the linux software addon to support it, but why bother. it is in the computer museum. I may find a use for it some day. people are always doing retro stuff. Maybe it could be hacked......

[tromoly]

thin client refers to the hardware platform not always what os/software is used. They definately are kiosks.

Ah thanks, I couldn't think of anything else to call them, and with how little software they run thinclient seemed to make sense.

On a side note, the kiosks at school have the USB ports shut off and USB booting disabled in the BIOS, I was able to change the settings on one computer but another I tried had locked BIOS so I couldn't use that one, seems they haven't bee completely thorough with their BIOS locking.

[computoman]

I have been a student, instructor, and worked in the IT department of a college. so I have seen all sides. Systems are locked down for your protection. Remember that is not your personal equipment to do with as you please. In most cases IT departments, do not want to lock down equipment, but need to for security and legal reasons. Especially with all the usb security and privacy hacks, I can understand about the ports being locked down. Years ago their used to be boot viruses on floppy disks. I remember having to mass clean thousands of machines at a time before virus detection software was readily available. When you have only several techs to do this, it is a nightmare. One of the early viruses locked MSWord documents, I have seen students in tears becuase they could not get into their homework because of the viruses and thought they would flunk out. Students were threatening to sue the school because of it. The school allowed students extra time to turn in coursework. Unlocking student and staff documents was our top priority, till the issue was resolved. Fortunately technology has advanced enough not to have to deal with that kind of problem so much anymore. The school becomes liable if some irregularies become a problem. Also too most colleges have special rules for using computer labs. Some states like Texas have some very strick rules about tampering with computer equpment up to the level of a felony. It would be in your best interests to follow the school guidelines. Even experenced LICENSED penetration testers have pre signed contracts set up to provide them utmost legal protection before they will even look at a machine or machines. Hackers are destined to be the new digital scapegoats. Today with advanced switches, it is very easy to track down a system and who is using a system. I unfortunately have seen several students kicked out of school over the student not following computer use guidelines. That being said, I was probably no angel in my early days, but now I do try to do things according to Hoyle after having been on the other side of the fence and have had to deal with all those issues. Just because a door is unlocked, does not automatically give you the right to enter. There is a certain amount of assumed privacy. i.e. I am sure the college would appreciate if you did not take advantage of the unlocked usb port or bios. The good news is that at that same college I was at, they do offer computer courses with labs for college credit, where you can do all of those neat kinds of things such as penetration testing in a controlled environment. My brother teaches one of them.

[kzap]

I have been a student, instructor, and worked in the IT department of a college. so I have seen all sides. Systems are locked down for your protection. Remember that is not your personal equipment to do with as you please. In most cases IT departments, do not want to lock down equipment, but need to for security and legal reasons. Especially with all the usb security and privacy hacks, I can understand about the ports being locked down. Years ago their used to be boot viruses on floppy disks. I remember having to mass clean thousands of machines at a time before virus detection software was readily available. When you have only several techs to do this, it is a nightmare. One of the early viruses locked MSWord documents, I have seen students in tears becuase they could not get into their homework because of the viruses and thought they would flunk out. Students were threatening to sue the school because of it. The school allowed students extra time to turn in coursework. Unlocking student and staff documents was our top priority, till the issue was resolved. Fortunately technology has advanced enough not to have to deal with that kind of problem so much anymore. The school becomes liable if some irregularies become a problem. Also too most colleges have special rules for using computer labs. Some states like Texas have some very strick rules about tampering with computer equpment up to the level of a felony. It would be in your best interests to follow the school guidelines. Even experenced LICENSED penetration testers have pre signed contracts set up to provide them utmost legal protection before they will even look at a machine or machines. Hackers are destined to be the new digital scapegoats. Today with advanced switches, it is very easy to track down a system and who is using a system. I unfortunately have seen several students kicked out of school over the student not following computer use guidelines. That being said, I was probably no angel in my early days, but now I do try to do things according to Hoyle after having been on the other side of the fence and have had to deal with all those issues. Just because a door is unlocked, does not automatically give you the right to enter. There is a certain amount of assumed privacy. i.e. I am sure the college would appreciate if you did not take advantage of the unlocked usb port or bios. The good news is that at that same college I was at, they do offer computer courses with labs for college credit, where you can do all of those neat kinds of things such as penetration testing in a controlled environment. My brother teaches one of them.
I'm part of a group of people in our school who try and hack the system, not for any black hat or white hat reason just to see if we can (old school hacking), or course we never sign into the rooms with our real names or use our own accounts, but it's just a bit of fun to use the electron room booking program to book our a room for "cheese melting classes" (inside joke don't ask) plus we hate the IT technicians at our school because they no nothing at all about computers and where hired on how well they performed in the interview (the sign of a good nerd is they don't perform well in an interview :)).
BTW we don't hack the bois (usually) we just look for default guest accounts that have not been disabled and work our way up from there.

[computoman]

Please read your school's computer use policy and take heed. I am sure they have one. It is for me not to judge, but I do think your attitude is a bit self righteous, Where I used to work, our admins would have qualified for gestapo status. I was so glad not to have to deal with those bean brains after i left there. They were not nerds on anyones scale. In anycase that did not give me the right to skirt the rules. Though I did bend the rules to help instructors teach and students get educated while under my supervision. Technically I had the right to do it. Anyway, all our computer areas had cameras and the admins watched them fervently when fishy things would happen on switches. Newer routers do inspect packets and can trigger an alarm if an alternate os is being used or other issues become evident. Not logging in is no gauranty of not being detected. Most admins would let you do what you want to collect enough evidence to hang you so to speak.

If it were me I would not admit to anything on a worldwide blog where anyone can see it. it could come back to haunt you. Even potential employers are examing blogs about potential employees. Personally I think that is a bit like nazi mentality, but it does happen. As an example, I have another daughter that I have never met. I did not find out about her till recently Her mother and friends could not believe how much information I collected about them while trying to find my child. In fact my daughters mother had moved to another city. I still found her via internet info. Just a word to the wise.

[kzap]

Please read your school's computer use policy and take heed. I am sure they have one.
I have many times and I'm not breaking the rules as I'm am not changing or viewing other people private data or any of the other things agents the rules.
I don't think I'm hurting anyone by what I'm doing. Just a bit of fun I would tell the techies how I got in to get them to fix it but they don't like me when I point out problems to them

[tokenuser]

Be careful. It might not be part of the schools computer use policy, but there are provisions for prosecution under UKs Anti Terrorism law enacted in 2001.
If you are at a public university (I think you said you were home schooled, so I assume that was for highschool, but even if you are still in highschool ...) there are a whole slew of statutes you could be found guilty of if someone wanted to get rid of you.

If you are going to skirt the law, you need to make sure you don't draw attention to yourself.

I dont think what you are doing could be called hacking anyway. Guessing guest accounts and passwords? Please ... thats like walking into a 7/11 ... the doors are always open.

Suggest you hunt down a copy of "Hacking Exposed". I have a "first edition" but its been revised several times since then and will REALLY teach you how to hack.

[kzap]

Be careful. It might not be part of the schools computer use policy, but there are provisions for prosecution under UKs Anti Terrorism law enacted in 2001.
If you are at a public university (I think you said you were home schooled, so I assume that was for highschool, but even if you are still in highschool ...) there are a whole slew of statutes you could be found guilty of if someone wanted to get rid of you.
Actually collage, I'm not sure on the US school system but I was home schooled up to year 7 (age 11) then I was in school for a bit now I'm at collage.


I dont think what you are doing could be called hacking anyway. Guessing guest accounts and passwords? Please ... thats like walking into a 7/11 ... the doors are always open.
Yea I would call it hacking the trick is you guess the guest password for the computer (not loging on to the network) then try an get access to the network, make an admin account and log onto that, to see if you can, leave a little note (if you are not too scared) and then delete the account. The you just wait for them to upgrage the system (which takes ages) and try again. Once you know how to do it you don't go that ruote agian (as that's boring) if I ever managed to get access to anything I really shouldn't (like student personal files), I wouldn't look and I think I would know I was in over my head and tell them how to upgrade the system.


Suggest you hunt down a copy of "Hacking Exposed". I have a "first edition" but its been revised several times since then and will REALLY teach you how to hack.
I might track that one down I have a few e-books on the subject but nothing much, the fact is hacking is a skill it can be used for good or evil, I just (try) and do it for the chalange.

The fact is if I wanted to hurt the schools IT department I would just open up one of the computers and disconnect the fan or download a load of virus onto a USB stick and plug that in, but as much as I dislike them I don't go out of my way to damage the system.
I tried talking to them about Linux once, they know what it is but don't know anything about it :(

[kzap]

I dont think what you are doing could be called hacking anyway. Guessing guest accounts and passwords? Please ... thats like walking into a 7/11 ... the doors are always open.
No it's probably not but at-least I'm not a script kiddie, like some of the people I know.
They just download apps to try and hack the system for them and then try to damage it.
The funny thing is they actually download them off the schools Internet connection onto there account.
But that's not cool or fun,

[computoman]

There is so much much free computer equipment that is available, why not set up your own personal hacking project at home. Set up a system that should be foolproof and then try to defeat it. That is what I did. If you can not do that, why not take a course where you can do that and get credit for it such as a computer hardware or penetration testing class. Where I live, the computer user groups set up special projects for kids/young adults to do hacking under supervision. We have set up contests to see who wins the penetrators or the admins. After you have played the penetrator, you are then asked to play the admin. All this is done in a controlled evnvironment. See if there are any local user groups that do that where you live.

Just a thought:
What you have done does not impress me at all with your mickey mouse exploits. Just because you do not like someone does not give you the right to step on them. It might not be hacking per se, but it is tampering. People who do those kinds of things are ripe for being scapegoats, if not criminal prosecution depending on the laws where you live. That does not even consider the civil liabilities you or your parents could incur. With all due respect, you do not have enough experience to know whether what you are doing is harmful or not nor is it your decision to decide what you can or can not do. It is a shame to see someone have such a narcissistic attitude to think there is no responsibility for their actions. We (that includes my brother) used to teach up at the Texas prison system. We saw a lot of inmates who started out like that with the same kind of attitude. I suggest you temper your brains and unfettered curiosity with a little bit of common sense and respect for other people's property. Please leave the college equipment alone except for legitimate activity and then find another outlet for your thirst for computer knowledge.

[phatlip]

What you're doing doesn't sound like hacking to me. Regardless, I wouldn't do it. It's really not worth getting yourself in trouble over something so stupid.

I admit, when I was in high school, I did some shady things on the computers too. But looking back, I realize how stupid and pointless it was, and wasn't worth risking getting suspended or worse.

Another thing, you should respect your schools property. You mentioned you're in college, so remember that equipment is there because people like YOU pay to go to school. Wasting someones time with things like this waste time and wasted time is wasted money. Fixing something stupid you did is money which could have been spent on something beneficial to your education.

[kzap]

What you're doing doesn't sound like hacking to me. Regardless, I wouldn't do it. It's really not worth getting yourself in trouble over something so stupid.

I admit, when I was in high school, I did some shady things on the computers too. But looking back, I realize how stupid and pointless it was, and wasn't worth risking getting suspended or worse.
Probably not hacking but I won't get suspended over it (though I have been for other things).

Another thing, you should respect your schools property. You mentioned you're in college, so remember that equipment is there because people like YOU pay to go to school. Wasting someones time with things like this waste time and wasted time is wasted money. Fixing something stupid you did is money which could have been spent on something beneficial to your education.
I think I'm probably on par with the IT techies on how many computers we have fixed, and I do lessons as well.
Most of the time when I help out in the LSD (Learning Support Department no the drugs) they ask me to fix a problem before they call on the techies although I always fix it from my user I would never use an admin account in front of them.

[computoman]

We used Deepfreeze from Faronics in for the desktops our labs at the schools where I used to work. Just rebooting took care of most problems. That made it real easy for the lab assistants. If there was a hardware/networking issue then a workorder could be put it. Usually because updates and etc were done most every night, we would know about issues before the labbies did. We locked the bios and changed admin passwords often. If a student was no longer in a class then those accounts were locked down for later removal. All student accounts were automatically locked down and then removed later. We also used a proxy server to keep internet usage clean. Our firewalls did quite a bit of packet inspections.

I used to love to go in the labs as if I was a student and covertly watch people who were obviously not doing what they should. Students and lab assistants who knew me usually kept quiet when I came into the labs. They knew I was there for a reason if I did not start a conversation immediately. If It was obvious that mischief was going on, I would email the network admin to close the port that particular machine was connected to. Sometimes the admin would monitor those ports for a bit before closing it. Since we did most of our own wiring, our staff pretty much had the switches memorized on how they were cabled.

Since we had a fast network, students and non-students would love to come in and play network games with their own laptops. We would monitor network packets and mac addresses randomly to keep the network clean. Our police department did escort a few people off campus on a rare occasion. Usually educating the game players involved was enough. Of course instructors would bring in their laptops also, but that was ok.

[kzap]

We used Deepfreeze from Faronics in for the desktops our labs at the schools where I used to work. Just rebooting took care of most problems. That made it real easy for the lab assistants. If there was a hardware/networking issue then a workorder could be put it. Usually because updates and etc were done most every night, we would know about issues before the labbies did. We locked the bios and changed admin passwords often. If a student was no longer in a class then those accounts were locked down for later removal. All student accounts were automatically locked down and then removed later. We also used a proxy server to keep internet usage clean. Our firewalls did quite a bit of packet inspections.
Yea our schools system is much simpler, all the programs are installed on one big hard-drive on the network.
You log-on to the network with your user-name and password and all programs are loaded off the network (and it's SLOW), they use a proxy for Internet and you can't use a proxy site to unblock it (I figured that out but tolded them because I agree with every thing they are blocking).
They don't bother removing usernames of people who have left my sisters boy friend used to come into school after he had fineshed (he was in a gap year) just to use the internet.
Oh, the school do block the telnet protocole (no idea why),
but I now know the wepkey to get onto the network (I admit I used a program to get that) they would let you go on the network but they had to connect it for you and as my laptop wasn't running Windows they didn't know how to connect it and refused to give me the proxy and wep key, so I just found it out.

Since we had a fast network, students and non-students would love to come in and play network games with their own laptops. We would monitor network packets and mac addresses randomly to keep the network clean. Our police department did escort a few people off campus on a rare occasion. Usually educating the game players involved was enough. Of course instructors would bring in their laptops also, but that was ok.
Our school network is so slow if we want to play anything needing more bandwidth than DooM (we play that alot) we just bring in our own network hub and eithernet cables or use our wireless.

[computoman]

Your school needs a revamp of the IT infrastructure. Years ago, back in the dos days we had all the apps on the server, but novell network was pretty fast and secure. After the school went from Novell to Microsoft WinServers, there were nothing but problems. I was always having to add patches and bandaids for it to work optimally. I think they are still Ms oriented. My original college alma mater dumped MS and is now mostly unix/linux. In our own business we use Redhat Fedora based ltsp (linux terminal server project). The apps stay on the server but the apps also run on the server. Each thin client is just an input/output terminal so to speak. It is fast. We also run a lot of web based apps from an internal only separate Debian based lamp server to take the workload off the ltsp server. You could say we have our own cloud, but we do not use wireless. I have set up a standalone wireless honeypot to see if there are any hacker wannabees around. You ought to read the book "The cuckoos nest" by cliff stoll or watch the pbs video.

[kzap]

Your school needs a revamp of the IT infrastructure.
I've been telling them that for YEARS, they won't lesion because I'm a student. They have just convinced the head to give them a load more money to upgrade all the computer what I've been trying to say is the bottle neck is not with the computers it's with the age old server but they say in a very patronizing "let's try it our way first, we'll look at the server later but upgrading the RAM and processors will alway make computers faster because of the way they work" while I don't disagree with this the slow part with the computers is logging and loading application off the server when they are loading the computers are already fast enough, When you try to log on at the beginning of lunch (when everyone else is logging on) it can take around 15 minutes, no joke!

[computoman]

Servers do not have to be super powerful if set up right. But that is besides the point. There are seven steps to system analysis. I bet so far they were all not used. At least they have arrived at the first step of recognizing a problem. It could be that the pipes (network cabling and switches/hubs) are the biggest issue. If I had permission, i would run a packet analyzer on the the network to see what is going on. Besides unauthorized network activity. you can have a defective network interface card do what is called screamming, It floods the network with packets and will definately slow things down just like a ddos attack You might have machines send packets of protocols no longer used. I know where I used to work once we went to straight tcpip,and eliminated Appletalk, the Novell, and other protocols network activity was better. I could go on with other things to check. There needs to be additional stress testing of the existing server. Maybe it needs to be optimized interms of disk space and the services running on it. I could go on and on. The images and hd's of the workstations also need to be tested and optimised. I could go on and on. There is a lot of work that needs to be done before making a wholesale decision. My point is that there is a lot that could be done without spending any additional money at all. I had a client who had an allinone printer. She no longer wanted it. She said it was broken. I cleaned it up and now I have a free hp allinone printer. Your network might need new equipment, but good old fashion mantenance including virus and spyware detection for all machines including the server might be what it needs most first. Since I have not been there it is not for me to judge. Maybe that is what management is also thinking. In any case they should have eveidence to have considered more than one altenative during the steps of systems analysis.

[kzap]

Servers do not have to be super powerful if set up right. But that is besides the point. There are seven steps to system analysis. I bet so far they were all not used. At least they have arrived at the first step of recognizing a problem. It could be that the pipes (network cabling and switches/hubs) are the biggest issue. If I had permission, i would run a packet analyzer on the the network to see what is going on. Besides unauthorized network activity. you can have a defective network interface card do what is called screamming, It floods the network with packets and will definately slow things down just like a ddos attack You might have machines send packets of protocols no longer used. I know where I used to work once we went to straight tcpip,and eliminated Appletalk, the Novell, and other protocols network activity was better. I could go on with other things to check. There needs to be additional stress testing of the existing server. Maybe it needs to be optimized interms of disk space and the services running on it. I could go on and on. The images and hd's of the workstations also need to be tested and optimised. I could go on and on. There is a lot of work that needs to be done before making a wholesale decision. My point is that there is a lot that could be done without spending any additional money at all. I had a client who had an allinone printer. She no longer wanted it. She said it was broken. I cleaned it up and now I have a free hp allinone printer. Your network might need new equipment, but good old fashion mantenance including virus and spyware detection for all machines including the server might be what it needs most first. Since I have not been there it is not for me to judge. Maybe that is what management is also thinking. In any case they should have eveidence to have considered more than one altenative during the steps of systems analysis.
Yea my dad used to donate old computer parts to the school it took them a while to get them in circulation though.
I might pass that message along to them, they may listen if it is not coming from a student but an anonymous Internet person.
There system of solving a problem is usually throwing money at it though, I can't believe that our they are now claiming an IT specialism (basically claiming more money from the Government because they have good IT systems and teachers)

[computoman]

Good luck.

[kzap]

Good luck.
Thanks, I'm on study leave at the moment but I could e-mail them (with their school address).

[computoman]

Most management people are likely to ignore those kinds communications. You might be better off getting someone in the community that is considered an expert to to present the idea at a public meeting. If you want justice you have to come with clean hands.....

[kzap]

Most management people are likely to ignore those kinds communications. You might be better off getting someone in the community that is considered an expert to to present the idea at a public meeting. If you want justice you have to come with clean hands.....
True, my mum is on the board of Governors and although she doesn't know much about computers I could tell her my dad said it, he used to be a techie for the NHS then got promoted to IT manager then moved to being a general manager now he works as a manager for some charity (away from home) doing nothing todo with IT but if they think he made the sujestjion they might lission.
Anyway I haven't got any more lesson anyway, just revision now till my exams so I won't be in the building.

[tromoly]

Back on linux:

Installed Crunchbang on my spare machine (Intel PIII on an Intel D815EFV MoBo, 512MB PC133, 80GB WD IDE HD), and when I remove apps through Synaptic they still show up in the right-click menu system and don't go away; likewise, any apps I install don't show up in the right-click menu. I have a feeling I may be ditching either Crunchbang or atleast OpenBox in the near future on it.

Anyways, resume the conversation.

[computoman]

I usually use the command line apt-get instead, but I will almost bet that they are left there so that at some later time, you can reinstall them if you wish. Remember you are loading packages from a repo not your local machine under normal circumstances, You do not want to delete anything from the repo. It should not hurt anything. sudo apt-get autoremove should blean things up if there are any haning packages.

[kzap]

Back on linux:

Installed Crunchbang on my spare machine (Intel PIII on an Intel D815EFV MoBo, 512MB PC133, 80GB WD IDE HD), and when I remove apps through Synaptic they still show up in the right-click menu system and don't go away; likewise, any apps I install don't show up in the right-click menu. I have a feeling I may be ditching either Crunchbang or atleast OpenBox in the near future on it.

Anyways, resume the conversation.
Good idea,
conversation mode: on
Is there are menu editor or something, sometimes I found in Gnome application do go from the menu and I have to edit it manually.

P.S. this was't a general Linux thread in the first place but I can't remember what it was about so thanks for getting it back (a bit more) on topic/

[computoman]

Why not start a new thread. I am tired of see the useless title.

[kzap]

Why not start a new thread. I am tired of see the useless title.
Done The Wonders Of LINUX! :D http://revision3.com/forum/showthread.php?t=28124

[computoman]

Consider becoming involved in the local group first to meet a few people. Houston linux users group via Hal-pc.

Chill out,.... It was not you. Most of the community has rebelled against the commercial aspect entering decision making computing forums. So much, but not all of the media has misrepresented linux(i.e OGara) so that there might be a reason for the exception. Most linux people in linux are grass roots and very open. DO SOME RESEARCH FIRST. I am sure that Richard Stallman would love to give you his opinion. I have not heard of that meeting and suspect that it would be unfair for me to comment in any more detail. What I would suggest you do is to go to the area linux fests such as the Southeast linuxfest on June 13 next week or to the Ohio linux fest later this year. There are pleanty of linux forums on the net where questions are welcomed. One of the most popular ones is thethelinuxlink,net, linuxquestions,org, ,linux planet.org, and many others.

http://www.southeastlinuxfest.org/
http://www.ohiolinux.org/
www.groklaw.net

[dam7ri]

BSD isn't Linux. I use Windows, OS X and Linux.

But OS X is BSD.

[phatlip]

But OS X is BSD.

I wouldn't say OS X IS BSD. Yes, BSD is under the hood, but if you take a Mustang engine and put it in a Honda Civic, it's not a Mustang. Get what I'm saying?

What was the point in saying OS X is BSD anyway? I was never arguing that. I said Linux isn't BSD.

[dam7ri]

I wouldn't say OS X IS BSD. Yes, BSD is under the hood, but if you take a Mustang engine and put it in a Honda Civic, it's not a Mustang. Get what I'm saying?

What was the point in saying OS X is BSD anyway? I was never arguing that. I said Linux isn't BSD.

After reading 14 pages of your miopic view of what "free" software is, it is obvious that you are not fully aware of the subject that you are feigning knowledge of. I am well aware of the fact that Linux is not BSD. The point of saying that was to inform you that use are using "free" software, and you paid for it. Read on, it gets more interesting.

First, OSX is BSD. Changing the window manager doesn't change the OS. If you want to use car analog, a more appropriate one would be installing a Ferrari kit on an MR2 doesn't make it a Ferrari; wait, I think I just defended my point. BTW, Apple has since hired BSD developers to improve OSX.

Second, the GPL makes no reference to cost. "Free", as defined by the GPL, means freedom, specifically the freedom to use, modify, and redistribute software (regardless of cost). In fact, Richard Stallman advocates the sale of free software. The only restriction that the GPL imposes is that upon redistribution, the recipient receives the same freedom to use, modify, and redistribution that you exercise (something that is noticeably lacking in the BSD license).

Third, the "free", as in cost, that you seem to think is evil is BSD. You know that "hippie" software that provided Windows 2000 and all of its successors with a reliable networking stack and Apple with a modern OS is mandated by U.S. federal law to be free of charge, because its initial development was funded by tax dollars. The BSD license allows the Apples and Microsofts of the world to TAKE the software and turn around and sell it. So, not only are said companies taking the results of tax funded programs, but they actually have the right to impose a fee for us to use it; or you could use BSD (for free) or Linux, and optionally pay for it.

As far as TCO, what Microsoft never includes in their analysis is the costs for all of the additional hardware and software required to keep the damn thing running, read as: anti-virus, firewalls, backup, and all of those other wonderful things that make getting hit in the head repeatedly with a ball-peen hammer less painful than running Windows. Oops, I think I just pointed out how facts can be manipulated. Damn me and my ability to recognize how Microsoft presents half-truths as facts. I won't go into the rest of Microsoft's FUD campaign.

[tokenuser]

But OS X is BSD.OS X is not BSD.

OS X is Darwin (the kernel) plus Aqua (Windows Manager).

Darwin is open sourced and there are a number of opensource projects based upon it.

Darwin is at best a grandchild of BSD (4.4), via both the OS X Server kernel and the FreeBSD kernel which shared some code with BSD 4.4.

But when it comes down to it, does it really matter? Very few people interactdirectly with the OS. Its all about the WM - in this case Aqua.

[dam7ri]

Darwin is at best a grandchild of BSD (4.4), via both the OS X Server kernel and the FreeBSD kernel which shared some code with BSD 4.4.


Actually, the Darwin kernel is a merge of the Mach 3 kernel and BSD components (networking, api's, and such), kind of like Nexenta incorporating the Solaris kernel with Ubuntu, or Debian's two BSD projects (Debian/NetBSD and Debian/FreeBsd), but that is neither here nor there.

My overall point is that Windows and Apple fanboys love to criticize "free" software as a bane to IT, with little to no knowledge of how their precious platform of choice (there is an interesting word) relied on it.

[tokenuser]

The OSX Server Kernal was Mach 3 ... which descended from NextSTEP.

But, as I said ... does anyone really care??

As for the free software issue ... it is only the Linux users who seem to think that PC and Mac users have problems with free/open software. Ask who is running OpenOffice on a Mac, or AVG on a PC.

As a PC and Mac user, and a Linux user in the server world, the biggest single advantage Windows and OSX has over Linux is standardization.

When you are talking Linux, what are you talking about??

Ubuntu? Gentoo? SuSE? Redhat? Lindows <shudders>?
Are you talking Gnome or KDE? or some hybrid specifically for a single purpose?

Taking the argument that there are 15 different versions of Windows, the difference is that all 15 of those will run the same software (OK, there are some exceptions for server software) and it will look/feel the same on each platform.

But, don't throw the "Mac and PC users don't like open/free software" argument out there ... because it is patently false.

[dam7ri]

Ask who is running OpenOffice on a Mac, or AVG on a PC.

AVG is not open; it is free of cost. Again, free as in beer is totally different than free as in speech. Please stop mixing the two. Software can be either, neither, or both. If it is free as in beer but not as in speech, it is freeware. If it is neither, it is proprietary. If it is free as in speech but not as in beer or both, then it is free/open.

When you are talking Linux, what are you talking about??

Ubuntu? Gentoo? SuSE? Redhat? Lindows <shudders>?
Are you talking Gnome or KDE? or some hybrid specifically for a single purpose?


Take your pick. Try any one of them. Try all of them. The level of standardization among the huge number of distros is truly amazing, considering anyone could do whatever they want with it. Any departure from the norm is isolated to that distro, and probably for a specific reason (GoboLinux comes to mind). All of the commands I run on my Debian laptop work on my Ubuntu server and my friend's Fedora laptop, and I know where to find my hosts, xorg.conf, and menu.lst files on any of them. I still bang my head against the desk trying to remember that ipconfig doesn't work in 9.x; I have to use winipcfg, and NT uses chkdsk, while 9.x uses scandisk. That doesn't sound like standardization to me, but then architecturally, the NT and 9.x families are not even the same. So, where exactly is the standardization?

As far as WM/DE's, I don't concern myself with trivialities like aesthetics, considering I can make KDE look like Gnome, and vice versa. I can make fluxbox look like Vista, but who would want that.

Taking the argument that there are 15 different versions of Windows, the difference is that all 15 of those will run the same software (OK, there are some exceptions for server software) and it will look/feel the same on each platform.

That is not entirely true. M-Audio does not provide drivers for their Winman 1X1, for anything but 9.x, USB support never got backported to 95, I have an HP CD burner that works with 2000 but not XP, Metal Gear Solid (and several other games) will only run on 9.x, and there is even software out today that will run on XP, but not 2000. Heck, Microsoft can't even figure out how to get all of the vendors on board for 64-bit drivers, creating yet another divide in their own platform.

[computoman]

Lindows has been extinct for a while, and most people never considered it mainstream linux. I do not use every version of linux, but I am sure I could pick up gentoo or any of them just by learning a few keywords. They all do the same thing if not exactly the same way. No different than taking the time to learn osx or mswindows.

Linux is not a one trick pony like mswindows or osx. I prefer my own standardizations, and not what some proprietary company says my standardization should be. That is the difference. We enjoy the freedom and diversity in linux. Forcing everyone to use the same kind of operating system is like expecting everyone to speak the same language. That is not going to happen.

One thing I like about linux is I can convert between a workstation, server, and embedded device all without having to purchase and extra os and development platform for the same hardware. With a proprietary software you have to spend extra big bucks for each version.

I have upgraded through several versions of linux all without even reformatting the drive. It is just a matter of package replacement. No multiple three finger salutes just to upgrade software either.

When I was running same version Debian on ppc, arm based sytems, and intel machines, I had to on occasion recompile code for the different platforms. Not a big deal. Maybe that is why at this time, Ms did not want to support arm based machines. I guess it was too complicated for them. MS does not know how to handle diversity. The unix, linux, and bsd world has been supporting various hardware platforms for years. A few differences in the os's is no big deal for us.

The kernel for most distros is the same. It is just the add on programs where you have variety. I run kde apps on gnome and gnome apps on kde. Most linux software will run on most distros unchanged. There is always the exception.

Mswindows and Apple osx are completely different and will not run the same code. Why are you not complaining about that if you are so much for standards. By the way, Kde also runs on mswindows.

More and more companies are going to linux for networked based devices as well as desktops and servers. That includes Cisco and many other companies. Even ibm dumped microsoft for linux. For an os that is not supposed to be standard, Why are so many companies going to it?

Linux runs my robots, desktops, servers, network storage, routers, multimedia devices, and anything with a cpu. MSWindows and Apple OSX will not run on half that stuff. Microsoft and Apple are not the one with standards........

[phatlip]

After reading 14 pages of your miopic view of what "free" software is, it is obvious that you are not fully aware of the subject that you are feigning knowledge of. I am well aware of the fact that Linux is not BSD. The point of saying that was to inform you that use are using "free" software, and you paid for it. Read on, it gets more interesting.

First, OSX is BSD. Changing the window manager doesn't change the OS. If you want to use car analog, a more appropriate one would be installing a Ferrari kit on an MR2 doesn't make it a Ferrari; wait, I think I just defended my point. BTW, Apple has since hired BSD developers to improve OSX.

Second, the GPL makes no reference to cost. "Free", as defined by the GPL, means freedom, specifically the freedom to use, modify, and redistribute software (regardless of cost). In fact, Richard Stallman advocates the sale of free software. The only restriction that the GPL imposes is that upon redistribution, the recipient receives the same freedom to use, modify, and redistribution that you exercise (something that is noticeably lacking in the BSD license).

Third, the "free", as in cost, that you seem to think is evil is BSD. You know that "hippie" software that provided Windows 2000 and all of its successors with a reliable networking stack and Apple with a modern OS is mandated by U.S. federal law to be free of charge, because its initial development was funded by tax dollars. The BSD license allows the Apples and Microsofts of the world to TAKE the software and turn around and sell it. So, not only are said companies taking the results of tax funded programs, but they actually have the right to impose a fee for us to use it; or you could use BSD (for free) or Linux, and optionally pay for it.

As far as TCO, what Microsoft never includes in their analysis is the costs for all of the additional hardware and software required to keep the damn thing running, read as: anti-virus, firewalls, backup, and all of those other wonderful things that make getting hit in the head repeatedly with a ball-peen hammer less painful than running Windows. Oops, I think I just pointed out how facts can be manipulated. Damn me and my ability to recognize how Microsoft presents half-truths as facts. I won't go into the rest of Microsoft's FUD campaign.

OS X isn't BSD. An explanation as to why was already pointed out by Token in the posts above mine.

As far the rest of your rambling, I have no idea where that came from. You're making it out as if I'm against Linux and open source software. I'm not. Please show me where I said free software was evil. I didn't. You seem to have fabricated a dispute in your mind. It never happened. I in no way shape, or form suggested that free software is evil. I'm serious. You literally made that up. What made you come to such a conclusion all because I said Linux is free? I mean, really.

What I said was very simple. Linux is free as in cost (excluding TCO, you can get online and download countless distros free of charge) and free as in freedom to "do what you want".

I have nothing against Microsoft. I have nothing against Apple. I have nothing against Linux.

You're waging a war over a very simple thing I said. Calm down.

[tokenuser]

AVG is not open; it is free of cost. Again, free as in beer is totally different than free as in speech. Please stop mixing the two. Software can be either, neither, or both. If it is free as in beer but not as in speech, it is freeware. If it is neither, it is proprietary. If it is free as in speech but not as in beer or both, then it is free/open.I understand the distinction, but I suspect you dont, and have jumped on a meme without understanding its full background and implications. My examples were illustrating both types of free.

The open source movement pisses me off royally.

As a software professional, I expect compensation for my work, and derivatives of my work. If you dont value your time, why should anyone else?

When people throw the FLOSS (yes, I know the "L" stands for Libre - liberty ... free as in speech) argument at me I ask them when the last time they wrote code or contributed code to a project. I also ask them when was the last time they used a compiler.

The stock answer to both of those is "never ... but I could if I wanted to."

Really? I could drive my car at 200MPH down the freeway, but it doesn't make a racing car driver. I can apply a bandaid to a cut, but it doesn't make me a surgeon. I could change a parameter in a config file (following instructions I downloaded online), and compile in a new driver to a Linux distro, but it doesn't make me a programmer*.

The fact someone "could" do something, doesn't mean that they can or should do it.

Go into souceforge and look at the projects in there. There are some pretty impressive applications under development ... and stalled at 25%, because without adequate compensation, and without a developer valuing their own time and putting a price on its worth, thats all they will ever be - 25% complete.

At least they will be free as in beer and free as in speech.


*According to the nice piece of paper on my wall, I am actually a computer scientist, majoring in software engineering. Odd thing is I was using Minix in the early 90s, and just threw out my Slackware distro circa 1994 recently - along with my Windows 95 floppies. I kept my old MacPascal discs (1988) for some reason ... I want to try loading them back up on my laptop.

[computoman]

The open source movement pisses me off royally.

As a software professional, I expect compensation for my work, and derivatives of my work. If you dont value your time, why should anyone else?


Build it and they will come.......

With the economy the way it is, chances are that open source will have a bit more of a struggle in the short run, but do better in the long run as the economy gets better. Most of the successful developers succeed by giving the software away and then charge for "premium" (regular support is free) support and specialty software add-ons. Eventually if your product is good enough you will be bought out by a large company. Then in effect you will get paid quite a bit more than if you did piecemeal sales. if you sell seeds, you won't get much, but if you let the seeds grow into plants, the plants will sell for more and you get more seeds to grow more plants to sell.

By the way, Microsoft used to give their software way before becoming a large company.

[darknessgp]

I kind of wish Linux would die... Maybe we could see some better open source OSes get made.

[tokenuser]

I kind of wish Linux would die... Maybe we could see some better open source OSes get made.Bring back BeOS :(

[dam7ri]

I kind of wish Linux would die... Maybe we could see some better open source OSes get made.

And I thought I had a drinking problem.

[computoman]

I kind of wish Linux would die... Maybe we could see some better open source OSes get made.


No one is stopping you from developing your own os. BSD is an alternative os. In fact if you do a web search you will find there are dozen of os's besides linux. All without any os going by the wayside. In fact there is an os called Haiku that is supposed to be based on beos.

Rumor has it that Google will soon come out with their own os. More Fun!!!!