Linux developers MUST consolidate and release a "master" d..

chrisv wrote:
> ultimauw wrote:
>
> > Maybe there is still hope yet,
>
> Not for you. You're doomed to be stupid forever.
>
AWWWW Did I upset the little shillbot?

ultimauw.RemoveThis@hotmail.com wrote:

> > Agreed. Linux is the classic case of "too many cooks in the kitchen."
> >
> > If Linux were going to succeed in the consumer market it would have done so
> > already. Now it's simply too-little, too-late as Linux has absolutely zero
> > mindset with the consumer. OSX and Vista will continue to dominate.
> >
>
> Maybe there is still hope yet, but it requires the developers to get
> together, set aside their egos, and all work on a single master
> distro. If they did that, Linux would beat the pants off of Vista and
> OSX guaranteed, and perhaps chart the course for the whole computer
> (and computer-device) industry away from the lockdown-drm-crippled
> dreck that it's been floating in for a while now.

yes, and I've told them SEVERAL times they need to concentrate on just
one or two distros and let the others die off. they just can't compete
until they take this advice.

chances are now zero that they can't rally around and heed this advice.
they are mostly young kids with no skills outside of playing games or
hacking.

linux had a chance during the late 90's but blew it. now OSX is the main
UNIX distro by a 7 to 1 margin... all because Apple knew about design
and understood high quality computing.

linux is a total mess now, and it's very sad. I thought at least they
would have 1% of the market, but it still hovers around .76 percent. Not
good when Apple has jumped to 6.4% in recent months.

-

ultimauw wrote:

> Maybe there is still hope yet,

Not for you. You're doomed to be stupid forever.

*plonk*

On Oct 7, 3:16 pm, Oxford <colalovesm... RemoveThis @mac.com> wrote:
> ultim... RemoveThis @hotmail.com wrote:
> > > Agreed. Linux is the classic case of "too many cooks in the kitchen."
>
> > > If Linux were going to succeed in the consumer market it would have done so
> > > already.

Not necessarily. Remember, Linux competes with a company who blocks
all access to the retail display space. A Linux customer must
purchase and install Linux without the benefit of an OEM preinstalled
system.

The OEM is not allowed to tell the customer exactly which machines can
easily be configured to run Linux, and which machines should NEVER be
used to run Linux. The customers usually figure this out for
themselves, but the OEM can't put this in advertizing or catalog
descriptions without getting Microsoft's prior written approval, which
never seems to come in time for the ad deadlines. The OEM just has to
keep falling back to a "safe" ad that has been approved. Often, both
ads are submitted the same day, but Microsoft seems to delay the Linux
ad past the known deadlines.

Most contracts I deal with, if the approver doesn't provide written
approval or revisions within 7 days, it is treated as an automatic
approval, but it seems that Microsoft must only respond within "a
reasonable time" - not sure what that means - maybe some time within
the decade?

The OEM can't make changes to the configuration without Microsoft's
prior written approval either. Again, if two versions are submitted,
the Microsoft-only version gets approved within a day, the one
involving competitors will be revised - perhaps within a year AFTER
the product release date.
That whole "reasonable time" thing again.

> > > Now it's simply too-little, too-late as Linux has absolutely zero
> > > mindset with the consumer. OSX and Vista will continue to dominate.

I wouldn't say that. There are billions of Linux licensed devices,
and almost 1 billion internet users access Linux systems such as
Google every day. They send their e-mail through Linux routers, they
protect their LAN with Linux firewalls, go to a coffee shop or
restaurant and connect via a Linux powered WiFi hub. The PC may be
purchased with Windows, but it may be running Linux as a VMWare
appliance, as a Virtual PC client, or it may be Linux working as the
primary operating system and Windows that is running as the
Virtualized Client. Running Windows as the VM client makes back-up,
recovery, and system management much easier, and the extra clock-
cycles burned in virtualization calls are offset by better
optimization of disk access and memory management.

> > Maybe there is still hope yet, but it requires the developers to get
> > together, set aside their egos, and all work on a single master
> > distro.

Funny, that's not what IBM, Dell, and HP are saying. Most of the OEMs
like the idea of 2-3 competitors competing for access to the
preinstalled desktop. If they could have their way, all of them would
allow all of their distributions to be installed and started as either
the primary OS using a boot manager, or as a virtualized client. Most
like both Red Hat and SUSE for the server market, and many also like
Ubuntu for the client market. Others, including Linspire, Xandros,
and PCLinux are also willing to give very generous terms.

Unfortunately, Microsoft seems to be unable to approve any
configuration which involves any configuration of any product other
than the Microsoft standard Package. Furthermore, if the OEM makes
such requests, it often takes a while for the drivers for other
systems to be approved.

It seems that Microsoft has all the lawyers it needs for it's "Loyal
Customers", but there seems to be a single lawyer who speaks very
little English, as a 3rd language, who can't approve anything for
months, or even a year or two.

It seems that Microsoft must respond within a "reasonable time". Most
contracts I deal with, a specific time such as 5 business days is used
instead. If a response is not provided within that time period, it is
automatically approved.

Rex Ballard
http://www.open4success.com

On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 13:16:30 -0600, Oxford wrote:

> ultimauw.DeleteThis@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> > Agreed. Linux is the classic case of "too many cooks in the kitchen."
>> >
>> > If Linux were going to succeed in the consumer market it would have
>> > done so already. Now it's simply too-little, too-late as Linux has
>> > absolutely zero mindset with the consumer. OSX and Vista will
>> > continue to dominate.
>> >
>> >
>> Maybe there is still hope yet, but it requires the developers to get
>> together, set aside their egos, and all work on a single master distro.
>> If they did that, Linux would beat the pants off of Vista and OSX
>> guaranteed, and perhaps chart the course for the whole computer (and
>> computer-device) industry away from the lockdown-drm-crippled dreck
>> that it's been floating in for a while now.
>
> yes, and I've told them SEVERAL times they need to concentrate on just
> one or two distros and let the others die off. they just can't compete
> until they take this advice.
>
> chances are now zero that they can't rally around and heed this advice.
> they are mostly young kids with no skills outside of playing games or
> hacking.
>
> linux had a chance during the late 90's but blew it. now OSX is the main
> UNIX distro by a 7 to 1 margin... all because Apple knew about design
> and understood high quality computing.
>
> linux is a total mess now, and it's very sad. I thought at least they
> would have 1% of the market, but it still hovers around .76 percent. Not
> good when Apple has jumped to 6.4% in recent months.
>

I find it funny how everyone takes the statistic of one irrelevant web-
server of any actual value.

That said, what do you think is happening? The efforts *are* consolidated.

All distributions use the same kernel.
The same desktop managers.
The same browers.
The same software.
The same e-mail software.
The same newsreaders.
The same everything.

The only main significant difference between any distributions is what
they come with out of the box. That's largely irrelevant.

So how is this not consolidated?

So redhat has different package management than ubuntu does. Big friggin
deal....they still use the same software and kernel.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

君のこと思い出す日なんてないのは
君のこと忘れたときがないから

Stephan Rose wrote:

>> linux is a total mess now, and it's very sad. I thought at least they
>> would have 1% of the market, but it still hovers around .76 percent.
>> Not good when Apple has jumped to 6.4% in recent months.
>>
>>
> I find it funny how everyone takes the statistic of one irrelevant web-
> server of any actual value.

"Everyone", or just trolling idiots like Oxtard?

In article <1191792966.660220.310560.TakeThisOut@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
Rex Ballard <rex.ballard.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not necessarily. Remember, Linux competes with a company who blocks
> all access to the retail display space. A Linux customer must
> purchase and install Linux without the benefit of an OEM preinstalled
> system.

Nice fantasy. Exactly what mechanism prevents you from leasing space,
and opening a store there selling Linux computers? (Just like Apple
does to sell Macintosh computers).

Answer: absolutely nothing.

--
--Tim Smith

Rex Ballard wrote:
> On Oct 7, 3:16 pm, Oxford <colalovesm... RemoveThis @mac.com> wrote:
>> ultim... RemoveThis @hotmail.com wrote:
>>>> Agreed. Linux is the classic case of "too many cooks in the
>>>> kitchen."
>>
>>>> If Linux were going to succeed in the consumer market it would
>>>> have done so already.
>
> Not necessarily. Remember, Linux competes with a company who blocks
> all access to the retail display space. A Linux customer must
> purchase and install Linux without the benefit of an OEM preinstalled
> system.

I certainly see your point. But, if you don't like Microsoft's terms, don't
agree to them. Kick MS out the door. Do the right thing.

In message <reply_in_group-2A5541.16163207102007.TakeThisOut@news.supernews.com> Tim
Smith <reply_in_group.TakeThisOut@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

>In article <1191792966.660220.310560.TakeThisOut@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
> Rex Ballard <rex.ballard.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Not necessarily. Remember, Linux competes with a company who blocks
>> all access to the retail display space. A Linux customer must
>> purchase and install Linux without the benefit of an OEM preinstalled
>> system.
>
>Nice fantasy. Exactly what mechanism prevents you from leasing space,
>and opening a store there selling Linux computers? (Just like Apple
>does to sell Macintosh computers).
>
>Answer: absolutely nothing.

Lack of funds. Lack of venture capitalists that won't look into what
he's doing and realize he won't make any money?

--
You can get more with a kind word and a 2x4 than just a kind word.

On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 01:07:42 +0200, OK wrote:

> On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 14:45:12 -0500, Stephan Rose <nospam DeleteThis @spammer.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 13:16:30 -0600, Oxford wrote:
>>
>>> ultimauw DeleteThis @hotmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> > Agreed. Linux is the classic case of "too many cooks in the
>>>> > kitchen."
>>>> >
>>>> > If Linux were going to succeed in the consumer market it would have
>>>> > done so already. Now it's simply too-little, too-late as Linux has
>>>> > absolutely zero mindset with the consumer. OSX and Vista will
>>>> > continue to dominate.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> Maybe there is still hope yet, but it requires the developers to get
>>>> together, set aside their egos, and all work on a single master
>>>> distro. If they did that, Linux would beat the pants off of Vista and
>>>> OSX guaranteed, and perhaps chart the course for the whole computer
>>>> (and computer-device) industry away from the lockdown-drm-crippled
>>>> dreck that it's been floating in for a while now.
>>>
>>> yes, and I've told them SEVERAL times they need to concentrate on just
>>> one or two distros and let the others die off. they just can't compete
>>> until they take this advice.
>>>
>>> chances are now zero that they can't rally around and heed this
>>> advice. they are mostly young kids with no skills outside of playing
>>> games or hacking.
>>>
>>> linux had a chance during the late 90's but blew it. now OSX is the
>>> main UNIX distro by a 7 to 1 margin... all because Apple knew about
>>> design and understood high quality computing.
>>>
>>> linux is a total mess now, and it's very sad. I thought at least they
>>> would have 1% of the market, but it still hovers around .76 percent.
>>> Not good when Apple has jumped to 6.4% in recent months.
>>>
>>>
>>I find it funny how everyone takes the statistic of one irrelevant web-
>>server of any actual value.
>
> When does it become rlevant then? 10 servers, 100? 1'000? What about
> 40'000?
>
> http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=2
>
> 0.8% after 15 years of free availability? Linux will never make it. Face
> it.
>
> Meanwhile:
>
> http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5&qpcustom=Windows
+Vista

Because *who the hell* is hitslink.com!?

Their statistics don't represent the entire web.

Their statistics don't represent users that go to google.com.

Their statistics don't represent users that go to yahoo.com.

Their statistics don't represent users that go to microsoft.com.

I could go on...

Their statistics ONLY represent users that go to THEIR servers. So what
servers, of what significance, do THEY host and what content? Different
content attracts different users which also influences statistics.

What significance does one single server companies' statistic that likely
doesn't even capture 1% of all users have to do on a world-wide scale?

Ultimately their statistics are utterly meaningless.

About the only statistic I would give any credit to would be Google.com's
statistic just simply because it is a neutral site that isn't going to
favor linux, microsoft or mac users. And it is a site that virtually
everyone uses.

Google.com however does not show their statistics. Smart move.

And, if you still don't get it....here is an example;

marketshare.hitslink.com claims 0.8%

www.w3schools.com claims 3.4%

So who is right now? Is it 0.8%? Is it 3.4%?

If you don't answer that question with "Neither one" then you probably
don't nor ever will get it.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

君のこと思い出す日なんてないのは
君のこと忘れたときがないから

On Oct 7, 6:12 pm, "HeyBub" <hey....DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
> Rex Ballard wrote:
> > On Oct 7, 3:16 pm, Oxford <colalovesm....DeleteThis@mac.com> wrote:
> >> ultim....DeleteThis@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>>> Agreed. Linux is the classic case of "too many cooks in the
> >>>> kitchen."

> >>>> If Linux were going to succeed in the consumer market it would
> >>>> have done so already.
>
> > Not necessarily. Remember, Linux competes with a company who blocks
> > all access to the retail display space. A Linux customer must
> > purchase and install Linux without the benefit of an OEM preinstalled
> > system.
>
> I certainly see your point. But, if you don't like Microsoft's terms, don't
> agree to them. Kick MS out the door. Do the right thing.

Not as easy as it sounds. Remember, Microsoft gets less than 1% of
it's revenue from Windows licenses sold directly to retail customers.
Remember, those customers would be those who went to CompUSA, Staples,
or BestBuy and purchased a "Full Version" of Windows XP or Vista. Of
those, even most of those purchases are made as emergency recovery
media for systems that have already been licensed under OEM or
Corporate licenses. Typically, those who would pay $500 for Windows
at a retail store are those who are likely to lose thousands or
hundreds of thousands of dollars in commissions or bonuses if they are
unable to make a critical presentation to a prospective customer on
the verge of signing a contract.

For 99.9% of all PC users, the Windows operating system was installed
whether they wanted it or not. Even if they wanted a PC without
Windows, the OEM had to pay for the license, not for that specific
machine, but for a pool are "bucket" of licenses that often exceeds
the number of machines actually produced by as much as 20%. OEMs do
this to get deeper discounts. In many cases, the cost of 120% of
their need has a lower total cost than an order for 80% of their need
due to steep discounts for exceeding the minimum threshold.

Microsoft uses similar tactics with corporate customers. Many
companies must license PCs for every employee, even if many of those
employees don't use PCs as part of their job. Even the Janitor gets a
Windows license.

Even in the face of all this, end users still install Linux, often
using VMWare converter to relgate Windows or Vista to a secondary role
as a virtualized "application". Even many corporations are
discovering that the same advantages of virtualized server systems
provides similar benefits to those using virtualized desktop and
laptop systems. With USB drives dropping to $100 or less, VMWare
player available for free, and VMWare converter also available for
free, it's now quite trivial to generate a virtualized VMWare client,
save it to a USB drive, convert the machine to Linux, install VMware
Player, recover the VMWare client, and have a Windows system that can
be fully recovered as often as needed.

The bigger advantage is that different appliances can be created for
different systems. For example, one can be customized for
presentations, another for collaboration, another for project
management, and another for application development or other
specialized uses.

Micrsoft is beginning to realize that Linux has created a "Better
Windows than Windows", but realizes that it still controls licenses
and intellectual property rights critical to the success of such a
strategy. This may be one of the reasons why Microsoft expressly
forbids the use of Vista Home edition as a Virtualized client (pushing
the client to order directly from OEMs and upgrade to Vista Business
Edition rather than purchasing retail PC versions).

The irony is that rather than hurting Microsoft, Linux has actually
turned out to be a BOON to Microsoft. Microsoft is now getting
premiums, possibly as much as 20% (anyone have hard numbers?) for the
Vista Business edition upgrade, from OEMs. The premium also gives
OEMS the ability to sell the same machines with XP Professional
instead of Vista Business.

Ironically, the Retailers are the ones getting burned badly. Home
Basic is sitting on the shelves and prices of "Vista Only" systems
have fallen drastically. Meanwhile, "Linux Ready" machines,
especially those with higher resolution monitors, are back-ordered,
hard to keep in stock, and prices are remaining quite firm (producing
higher profits than Vista only machines).

It could be interesting to see how much longer the OEMs continue to be
willing to let Microsoft continue their anticompetitive practices.
There seems to be a substantial market for "Linux Ready" machines
using 64 bit processors, WSXGA and WUXGA displays, OpenGL or FireGL
graphics cards, Linux friendly WiFi cards such as Intel's, and Linux
optimized storage, such as SATA/300 hard drives and SATA laptop
drives.

Microsoft designed Vista Home edition to be a "Showdown" with Linux,
and has found that they have lost. Vista Friendly Linux hostile
systems containing DirectX-10 video cards, WXGA graphics, Atheros WiFi
cards, and Linux hostile versions of Intel Core 2 chips have not been
selling well, in fact, they have now been reduced to clearance
prices. Many retailers are even having a hard time selling the
display models.

Per Stephan Rose:
>The only main significant difference between any distributions is what
>they come with out of the box. That's largely irrelevant.

Well, I tried dabbling in Linux a couple of times. Last time
around, I installed Ubuntu. Had to do something or other - and
the OS' prompt was to log out and log back in again.

Dutifully logged out.

When I tried to log back in again, it wanted a UserID and
Password.

Somebody, somewhere probably knows the default ID/PW for that
particular distro/install - but there was zilch in the install
procedure about it and I Googled for about 45 minutes without
success.
--
PeteCresswell

On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 11:54:16 -0700, ultimauw wrote:

> On Oct 6, 4:19 pm, "Randy Oaks" <ro....RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> <bones4jo....RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1191705624.157060.40790@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Oct 6, 3:47 pm, Gene Jones <ja....RemoveThis@janus.com> wrote:
>> >> Dean Plude <xenop....RemoveThis@charter.net> wrote:
>> >> > In my many years using linux I have come to know that to truly
>> >> > support and promote linux as I did with brunswick and many others
>> >> > is simply show
>> >> > large companies that there are choices in an OS and that they do
>> >> > not have to pay a fortune to get.I will never forget when I gave
>> >> > the head manufacturing engineer a Debian BO disk and simplly said
>> >> > check it out . that was all it took.
>> >> > Remember World Domination is our ultimate goal.
>>
>> >> Linux will never achieve anything close to world domination unless
>> >> the users unite and follow Apple's OSX direction. Now Linux has
>> >> pretty much become a footnote in history compared to what apple is
>> >> doing with UNIX.
>>
>> >> So unless that changes, it's a slow fade to black for the Linux
>> >> community.
>>
>> >> You guys have a chance, but you must "unite" - it's that simple.
>>
>> >> OSX is now about 9 times as large in the world, 6 years ago you guys
>> >> were neck and neck. What happened? No leadership is the answer.
>>
>> >> Within the next few weeks, OSX is going to be a CERTIFIED UNIX.
>>
>> >> Why isn't Linux up to this certification level?
>>
>> >>http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/unix/
>>
>> > Linux is far too fragmented to accomplish anything useful. It's two
>> > hundred thousand developers all trying to release their own version
>> > of Linux.
>>
>> Agreed. Linux is the classic case of "too many cooks in the kitchen."
>>
>> If Linux were going to succeed in the consumer market it would have
>> done so already. Now it's simply too-little, too-late as Linux has
>> absolutely zero mindset with the consumer. OSX and Vista will continue
>> to dominate.
>>
>>
> Maybe there is still hope yet, but it requires the developers to get
> together, set aside their egos, and all work on a single master distro.
> If they did that, Linux would beat the pants off of Vista and OSX
> guaranteed, and perhaps chart the course for the whole computer (and
> computer-device) industry away from the lockdown-drm-crippled dreck that
> it's been floating in for a while now.

Your are missing the idea that the reason there are so many distros is
that many people want different things. You are missing the point that
many of the things added to or improved in one distro can be directly
added to another.



--
Rick