Printable View
Thats one thing i dont agree with---people bash MS for crappy output like winME and the 9x/3.1 series famous Blue Screen of Death. But Linux hasnt been so great in past incarnations either. ;-)Quote:
Originally posted by Catscratch:
People bash Windows and Microsoft for one reason alone: they are not the underdog.
------------------
------
Pat D.
Visit a music site I write for:
http://www.geocities.com/mjareviews
It's sad to see that this place is starting to fill up with Slashdot trolls. Neither Bill's, Linus' nor anybody else's body parts have any relevance here.
This was a thread about Open Source, not MS vs. Linux.
In my opinion Open Source will continue to coexist with proprietary source for a long time. I really don't see one of them disappearing, as each provide for a basic need: Open Source is mainly a work of passion, and proprietary source is simply more profitable. And also proprietary source can mobilize vaste amounts of money to get thing done on time. Open Source projects tend to be a little more sluggish in development (Mozilla) with a very few exceptions (KDE).
Note that this is not saying that Open Source can't be profitable. Just that at the moment I believe it's easier for propretary source developers to turn a profit.
------------------
It's nice to be good, but it's good to be nice.
Apparently nobody has ever heard of Open Source software developed for the win32 platform. Although there are many more applications written for 'nix that are open sourced, its not all inclusive. Open source is a concept, regardless of which platform you code for.
------------------
"Software is like sex, it's better when it's free"
--Linus Torvalds
I take it you dont like slashdot? As a regular reader of slashdot i take offense to your remark!! I am not a TROLL!! Mebe a goblin but sure as hell not a TROLL!!
Linux is a real life example of how an open source OS can be the equal of an extremely well-funded closed-loop OS. Many small businesses and large corporations are using Linux, be the reason cost, configuration, stability, etc.
This in turn was been beneficial to Windows users, as it pressures MS to innovate. In the server world, MS is finding that they have to increase the integrity of their product, add new features, and maintain costs. Many advances MS makes in this regard are folded back into it's consumer OSs at a later date. Without Linux's, would MS's current OS development plans be as aggressive?
It's the premise of capitalism--that marketplace competition leads to better products at better prices. You don't have to side with one OS or the other to benefit from their mututal existence.
------------------
[=====]
###### Eat my jelly sandwich
[=====]
Quote:
Originally posted by Bateluer:
I bet you that Linux has more loop holes than windows, they are just not exposed for a number of reasons.
1. hatred of MS
2. Linux is not a major OS
3. Linux users have a good view of Linus Torvals arse.
Unix, however, IS a major operating system and is what Linux was based on. I personally mostly use MS products for the simple reason that there are more applications out there that Windows supports. However, I would suggest that Linux, which was designed for programmers by programmers, is more secure than Windows 2000, which was designed for mainstream by programmers. Also, it gives a hacker or programmer the satisfaction of "one upping" someone by showing that they have found an exploit. Good hackers WANT to show what they have found and help the community as a whole, which is the entire intent of the Linux project.
------------------
Expect the worst, hope for the best....reboot.
I partly see your point, but if your stuff is Open Source and somebody like me who submits bug fixes on stuff frequently fixes a bug in it don't you win even if you aren't a programmer?
Quote:
Originally posted by Catscratch:
I believe open-source is only worthwhile for those that can take advantage of it, i.e. programmers. Other than a little QBASIC, I don't know crap about programming so it's totally useless to me.
It does have some good qualities however. When a bug is found, it can be more quickly patched. On the other hand, loopholes can be more quickly exploited.
------------------
Q: How many UGA students does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: Two, one to call a friend at GT and another to follow the directions.
Linux is certainly not flawless, no OS is. But it can be argued that opensource software in general (not just OS's) have there flaws, especially major ones, fixed quicker.
Quote:
Originally posted by Bateluer:
Ever see the first Star Wars movie? Specifically the meeting with Tarkin and Vader and the rest of the officers discussing the missing plans.
One of the was saying that it was impossible for the Death Star to have a weakness, i.e. you.
Another responded by saying that 'if the rebels have obtained a complete technical readout of this battle station, it is possible that they may find a weakness and exploit it." i.e. Me
You can goto a book store a buy a book of the linux source code, also known as a complete technical readout. Linux can be dissected with ease to find overy single weakness. The only reason these weaknesses are not exploited is that the people who know about them despise microsoft and have their head of Torvalds rear end.
------------------
Q: How many UGA students does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: Two, one to call a friend at GT and another to follow the directions.
DID I NOT SAY THIS WAS NOT A WAR ABOUT OS'S? Jeeze..a little defensive some people are.
As has already been said, Open Source does not refer to just OS's, it is a theory for software distribution. Linux is not the only Open Source OS, nor is Windows the only Closed Source OS. There are programs that are Open Source for all platforms I have ever seen, they are just less popular on OS's like windows that don't have built in compilers. Believe it or not, there are even closed source programs for Linux.
What made me start this discussion more then anything was Mac OSX, which is highly reliant on Open Source code but which has yet to give much back to the Open Source community.
------------------
Q: How many UGA students does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: Two, one to call a friend at GT and another to follow the directions.
This is true.Quote:
Originally posted by jtshaw:
I partly see your point, but if your stuff is Open Source and somebody like me who submits bug fixes on stuff frequently fixes a bug in it don't you win even if you aren't a programmer?
I don't think open-source is a bad thing, but both good guys and bad guys are able to see it. If I were a programmer and gave my software away for free, I still wouldn't open-source it.
------------------
Size does matter, unless yours is bigger than mine.
Recently tattooed and loving it!
Yahoo! Messenger ID: ntkerneljock