from any company who's business is producing software, Linux is a cancer.
Say again? I've been a software developer for 33 years, for a company who's business is producing software. We've used many platforms over the years, but MS Windows was never a serious part. Now all our customers want everything on Linux. In fact, after Linux became a player the customers can afford many more servers and processing setups and the whole market has exploded with opportunities for software developers.
+ 1
Linux is only a cancer to Microsoft and those companies that want to lock customers in to their OS and software. Those that have embraced Linux have created a large ecosystem where software and hardware developers have flourished. Those developers have also improved that system by giving back time and code to make improvements to the basic infrastructure of that system.
...from any company who's business is producing software, Linux is a cancer.
Tor,
Now all our customers want everything on Linux. In fact, after Linux became a player the customers can afford many more servers and processing setups and the whole market has exploded with opportunities for software developers.
koeler is right.
Given the time at which Bullmer made that famous statement. Since the birth of the PC, even back in the 8 bit "PC" days, huge fortunes have been made by those who can produce software that people find useful. Digital Research, Microsoft, Adobe, Oracle and so on and so on.
The business model at work there was "we write software, you incompetent chimps cannot, you pay us." Closed source distribution, licensing, copy protection dongles and so on.
This whole business model got reinforced by the law. No doubt after much lobbying from said beneficiaries of the software situation:
Copyright - as far as I remember it was not clear at the time of Bill Gate's 4K BASIC that one could actually copyright a binary executable, I mean, where is the creative work in that? And how is it different from a big number? Can one copyright numbers?
The DMCA - Let's make sure those lowly, software ignorant, serfs are not allowed to reverse engineer what we make and learn how we might do things. Certainly don't let them share what they discover.
Software patents - Let's make sure said peasants cannot make use of what we sell them by themselves even if they do figure out how it works.
Given all the vested interests in this closed source business model, with their billions of dollars of turn over, 70-90% profit, IPO's and ever expectant shareholders, the arrival of slightly smarter chimps who start building their own systems is a disaster. Give the General Public License, that ensures all the chimps cooperate, it is a "cancer" that will eventually kill them.
Note: When I say "chimps", "serfs", and "peasants", I don't just mean the lone geek in his basement. Although that has certainly helped, see Richard Stallman and Linus Torvalds. No, I mean the ocean of companies, large and small, the governments of the world and other institutions. All of these have realized, slowly, that having an open pool of collaboratively developed software is a much better and cheaper idea than being tied to single suppliers. Whitness the British government recently asking how to get away from needing all the Oracle licenses they use.
Since this thread is basically becoming a Linux thread, again, at least Heater. left us a choice for identifying ourselves, the Windows 10 people, that is. Lets see "chimps", "serfs", "peasants", or if you spend a lot of time in the basement, "lone geek". I know that I am not a "chimp", no matter what Darwin is trying to imply, so that leaves me with the other three. Still thinking about a choice, Thank You Heater..
In the mean time, I have had Windows 10, up and running for more than a week, no problems what so ever. Now I am thinking about purchasing the Windows 10 package, I do not want to go through the upgrade routine if and when I have some hardware malfunction. Even though the upgrade process was uneventful, I still do not want to load up Windows 8.1 Pro, and then... Now I am thinking about all those people that are having upgrade problems, what will they identify themselves with.
Now if anybody stops me on the street and asks me, should I go with Windows 10 or Linux, I will have to tell them Windows 10 of course. Now the identification is critical, maybe "lone geek", in this particular case.
The one thing that I have noticed, on this forum, the Linux pushers are really, in your face kind of people, maybe they are the "chimps". I think erco requested that the Linux pushers use the other thread, but why should they adhere to any requests, I guess the Linux pushers think they can do what ever they please, but not other people of course, maybe "serf" should apply here.
Now let me go to my basement and give the name choice some thought ...
Nooooo....It absolutely was NOT my intention to imply that you or any other users of Windows, or Mac or Oracle or anything else were "chimps", "surfs", or "peasants". That could not be further from the message I was trying to put over in my long ramble.
I'm really sorry if that is how it reads, if it really cannot be read as I intended then I will take it down or reword it. It obviously is not clear enough to avoid being taken the wrong way.
If I might try to summarize it: The message was that that was the attitude of the software industry. It's spelled out in Bill Gates' famous "letter to hobbyists" of the 1970's. Certainly I make the analogy to "surfs" and "peasants", and I even try to spell that out. We are not supposed to know how these software artefacts work (binary only, copyrighted, patented). We are supposed to be kept in the dark so that we cannot create them for ourselves. We are not supposed to own them (We don't we license use of them), we are expected to pay rent...forever.
Please don't read this as a slur on yourself or any user. It is intended a slur on the attitude and practices of the software industry.
Now, after I'm done with all the profuse apologies and trying to explain myself I have a little gripe of my own .... You have opened your post with the implication that I have made this a "Linux thread". Further that there are such things as "linux pushers", further that they are "in your face kind of people"
I would like to remind you that the first mention of Linux in this thread was made by...you...yes you! It's here: http://forums.parallax.com/discussion/comment/1339934/#Comment_1339934 where you open by putting down Linux. You fired the first shot. I could say "The one thing that I have noticed, on this forum, the Windows addicts are really, in your face kind of people", but I won't say that.
This triggered some kind of autism in me and I had to check. Turns out you are the number one in mentioning "linux" here. I only come in third and most of those were responses to your posts.
Here is the breakdown of "linux" references (not including this post)
What a clever person you are Heater., from now on, I will just use "the OS Heater. is talking about". And if that is not what you meant, in your post, get away from the innuendo technique, and really think about what you are about to post, unless that was your intention to begin with. So, now why don't you go to the other thread, and keep pushing the other OS that you are talking about.
And, I am still not having any problems with Windows 10, I think that is what this thread is all about.
Clever or not, I make no innuendo. I thought I was speaking plainly. I feel it's a bit unfair to be blamed for shouting about or "pushing" Linux, or any other OS, when I did not.
Please point us to the post here where I may have done that.
The subject of Linux was instigated by yourself on this thread. I have only been joining in the ensuing conversation. And why should I not?
I'm glad your OS of choice is working for you. My beef is not about the merits or otherwise of Win or OSX or even Linux for that mater. My beef is about the sorry situation we have gotten ourselves into with respect the software industry over the past three decades. Luckily that has been slowly changing in recent times.
Ray: Thanks for returning us to the topic at hand. Good to hear that Win10 is doing you right.
Kind of a pity that Cortana is the first item to be turned off for user security (per numerous reports). At least it's a part of the "free" Win10 update, as opposed to paying $180 for Amazon's Echo: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00X4WHP5E
Of course that's a speaker system too. But that's always on, with a microphone array to hear everything in the room, even while it's playing music fairly loudly. Nice tech, but even scarier than Cortana. "Orwellian", as this video claims:
So, as a Win10 adopter, you are a NAY, so, did you leave anything else out? I think erco will give you plenty of leeway. Maybe we can add in another question, how has the software industry over the past three decades have an influence of making the yay or nay decision over adopting Win10? And did this change in recent times, have any affect? Since this is a Win10 thread, lets keep it relevant.
I would like to make mention of the fact that I specifically did not post to this or the other Windows 10 thread until recently. My contempt for Microsoft flared up again after I tried to do something in Windows7 and spent 24 solid hours running update cycles to get it to work right. (4 failures and restarts, and of course I ended up getting that annoying Windows 10 update icon installed that nobody desires.)
If Microsoft made airplanes, I wouldn't fly in them and might even stay far away from airports. I don't see why it is bad to refuse to support businesses that treat customers poorly.
It isn't just Microsoft. There are a few other companies I refuse to patronize for customer abuse -- like Norton Security.
And I will never buy another Ford after having three different ones nearly kill me for each having a unique and different design flaw. Have you ever had a front wheel fall off while rolling up to a stop sign?
Linux just happens to represent human virtue and generosity being rebuked by corporate greed. But if it didn't exist, I would buy some form of Unix, preferably from a company that tries to serve its customers (Android is going over to the dark side.)
I've been a Windows user since 3.1, but Windows 10? There is simply no compelling reason to switch to it and a lot of very good reasons to avoid it. It appears from most accounts to be a serious privacy problem and it tries to take too much control of the computer away from the user and put it in Microsoft's "competent" hands. Jumping off a cliff with all the other lemmings just because something is new and "free" is pure stupidity.
Maybe we can add in another question, how has the software industry over the past three decades have an influence of making the yay or nay decision over adopting Win10?
Oh Ray, you are such a tease.
I'd love expound at length on your question but you have already made it clear that any criticism of your corporate masters is not not welcome here.
Thank You RDL2004, now I can add "stupid" to the list of identity choices I can choose from.
I guess it is a NAY for Loopy to adopt Win10, but I am not sure, I guess, somehow Ford, Norton, airplanes has some sort of influence in the mix, but again I am not sure.
I guess another question has to be asked, how does the ownership of a Ford, Norton software, or the possible flight in an airplane have on the reason you would be a Win10 adopter?
Somehow this thread should get back to the subject at hand, but not sure about that anymore.
I probably should have said something like "the rest of the herd" instead of "all the other lemmings", but my only experience with the cute little creatures are from the game. I didn't intend any insult.
Yes. Lemmings don't use Windows. Neither do cows or Buffalo and other herd animals. As far as I know.
In fact, of all the creatures on Earth, humans are probably number one in this "I see everybody else doing something therefore I will do same thing" behaviour.
The whole copying and imitating, learned, social behaviour evolved with our ape forebears.
"Collective"? What collective? Where? Who is their leader? Or is there a committee? Where can I join? Do I have to share all my wealth and possessions with them?
Seriously, I'm curious to know where these strange notions come from?
You know that I basically like you. But even when @erco explicitly opens up two threads, one for windows bashers and one for those who USE the new Version of Windows, You ignore it.
Again you need to derail another thread by explaining again that you do not like Windows. We all know this already, you do not need to repeat yourself over and over and over again.
Especially not in a thread stating in its first post that it is for people using Win 10. All other should please post in the windows hater thread.
But no - @Heater cant resist. Has to derail any thread. Again and again and again.
I happy where I am, on Windows 7, the last version of Windows worth using. I could probably tolerate Windows 8, which is what I'll probably use after support for 7 ends. I never did like Linux much really, it always seemed more of a hassle or more complicated than necessary to get things working right compared to Windows. But I'd take it any day over Windows 10.
Personally, I'm tired of the multi-Gigabyte OS's required nowadays by Everyone.
If space and performance are not bugging you, why worry? Just luxuriate and swim around in the ocean of cheap space we have today
Yep, got a nice USB3 64GB thumbdrive that read/writes at 120Mb/sec.
On the whole, it doesn't mean squat as you said, we have the storage and speeds we need.
But, on the H/W-side we've had orders of magnitude increases for decades, yet the OS's all seem to have come from that distant time when 20-50 people were timesharing on a mini/mainframe.
Thats a big PLUS, if you are actually working on a system that has frequent users logging on/off.
However, in every Enterprise company I've worked for since Y2K, its been a dead-end.
Companies simply buy everyone a desktop, and/or a laptop. Multi-User is of no real use to anyone, with the exception of the small number of people who actually create a seperate Admin/User account.
So all that architecture devoted to solving those problems, and the code that accomplishes it is continually dragged along, because someone decided it was easier to make everyone run a Server OS than not.
In reality, with the speeds and memory we no have, we should have systems that actually are lightning fast, responsive, etc.
This has never been much of a problem, because Intel, AMD, IBM could always crank out a new process or architecture every couple of years which picked up the slack for the bloat.
We are reaching the end as far as current understanding of phyiscs allows. Simply adding MOAR CORES isn't going to come close to helping as it has in the past.
Personally, I'm hoping some kid in Denmark or Germany decides to take a stab at re-writing Linux as a desktop some long cold winter.
Until then, I'll stop whining, and get TinyCore or similar running as a testbed for how a slim RAM-resident OS compares.
from any company who's business is producing software, Linux is a cancer.
Say again? I've been a software developer for 33 years, for a company who's business is producing software. We've used many platforms over the years, but MS Windows was never a serious part. Now all our customers want everything on Linux. In fact, after Linux became a player the customers can afford many more servers and processing setups and the whole market has exploded with opportunities for software developers.
The vast majority of online Linux Users who will berate you for not Open Sourcing your software.
At least that is what comes across on many of the Linux-geared sites. At best, I've seen little more than grumbling acceptance at having the temerity to charge others for your work.
It IS in a way similar to Heater's jest about them being commie pinko subversives.
The BSD license seems more reasonable for everyone, at least to me as a non-developer.
Have you open-sourced your software?
If so, do you then sell support?
Moderators: Please sink this thread since it's getting so OT, and less than half the replies have much to do with the original question. Thanks to those who did answer with useful info.
If anyone is at fault, I think I've been poking the Linux Users so I'll take that heat.
Heater, you made a decent comparison of the 80's-90's.
However, my issue is as stated, and also the frankly, yes, communist notion that selling your software is somehow wrong. Thats basically in a nutshell what the Linux community promulgates, and has almost enshrined in its licensing.
Let me be blunt/er.
You're a H/W and S/W guy I believe. Now imagine there was as easy a way for someone at home to copy and duplicate the work you do at your job. Just like a file or app, they could download a h/w app to some 4th gen RepRap, and pop out anything they wanted, a la Star Trek.
At SOME point, your company and every other one is going to find the market innundated with the exact same products you produce. However all of these others are simply copies and are nothing more than manf's pumping out product, with no H/W or S/W salaries paid to their non-existent employees.
At what point do the companies doing the real work throw up their hands and have to close down because everything they do is copied and on the market for a much lower price, because their copying competitors don't have to pay teams of folks like you top dollar, and basically under-cut you?
This is an analogy only, however the thrust of the point should be clear.
Companies hire people skilled to do H/W or S/W. That all adds up.
Do they, or do they not, have the right to demand some form of IP protection?
Linux eschews Open Source Software, and as such, makes the value proposition that software should be free.
Making money on the sale of software is definately frowned upon.
The suggested way around that is to sell Services or expertise.. somewhere, somehow.
That will work for Red Hat and a number of others.
However it really won't work for the countless legions of Coder's and Businesses that simply aren't geared for that.
It seems like the Linux response is, oh well, learn how or die.
Like I said, the BSD license/rationale seems a lot more realistic, and fair, to the actual developers.
However I have no problem with Linux doing what they are doing, or anyone jumping into that 'market'.
But from a 'normal' software company, it shouldn't be too hard to see why they look at Linux like a form of cancer is it?
I have made one "Nay" post here. It highlighted the forced updates in Win 10 and the false advertising as "free". I hope these are reasonable objections to state here.
Subsequently I have posted some corrections to statements made here regarding Linux, open source software and the evolution of the personal computer that I believed to be factually, historically, incorrect. I trust it is not out of line to do that on a forum. I may of course be wrong myself but that can be debated as well.
In return there has been some deliberate attempts to "pick a fight", we used to call it "baiting" back in the day, "trolling" is the word now a days I believe, for example:
"Lets see if we can get some Linux followers to start getting close to the edge. ...Visual Studio on Linux..."
"Since this thread is basically becoming a Linux thread, again, at least Heater..."
The latter is particularly galling as it was the writer of the accusation that introduced the topic of Linux here!
Now I stand accused: "Heater can't resist. Has to derail any thread. Again and again and again. Honestly, it is getting old". Hardly fair I think as it was not me that kicked off the derailing here nor perpetuated it.
I'd like to comment on some statements made recently about Open Source licensing, communism, and software copying, that I believe to be incorrect and/or misguided but I cannot, it would only lead to further accusations of "derailing", "pushing an agenda", being "communist" and so on.
Like you and no doubt others, I often wondered why our systems are so slow. Why does it take so long to boot up, or load an app or render a web page?
Like you say with the speeds and memory we now have, we should have systems that actually are lightning fast, responsive.
However, I'm not sure that the problem lies in the fact that someone decided it was easier to make everyone run a server OS than not.
Certainly there are overheads in supporting processes and providing isolation between them. All that context switching has to take time somewhere.
But, looking at the performance of typical applications today, for example this Chrome browser, it is not clear to me that the overheads of context switching are what is slowing it down significantly. When it is doing it's work it is slamming the CPU hard for as long as it takes. Any process swapping going on there is only a small percentage of the time.
My feeling is that some kid Denmark or Germany could produce a single user, desktop OS but the end result world be that our Apps would not be noticeably faster.
Meanwhile, having an OS that supports multiple isolated processes is a very good thing. Even if you remove all the "server" and multiple user stuff. It means my programs can't crash each other by accident. It means all the codes running in all the tabs of my browser are isolated from each other. We would be giving up a lot by removing support for multi-processing.
By the way, last I knew, Windows, OSX and even the OS that may not be mentioned here did not come with any server components installed out of the box.
Much of the slow boot up can be eliminated by changing to solid-state hard disk, and only mount a few partitions as required. I found this out when I purchase my first EEEpc 701-4G. Solid-state hard disks have come down in price and are worth looking into.
Any OS will dilligently check any partition it is booting before using. Bigger hard disk partitions and slower spinning hard disk are the sources of delay. I suspect the addition of a repository checking for proprietary license validity adds even more time. Try having an office with a good server and disk-less workstation.
Nonetheless, I do find global searches in Linux seem to execute more quickly than in Windows. And the ext3 or ext4 file systems don't need to be scanned as often.. another tedious waiting game.
2Gbytes was adequate storage for a modern version of Ubuntu, but my EEEpc 701-4G had 4Gbytes which allowed the user a few more applications. And I used SDcards for stored data. That all seem to indicate that anything over 4Gbytes, or maybe 8Gbytes could be unnecessary. Sadly, the EEEpc 'evolved' from originally being a Linux only device into a product with a 300Gbyte hard disk and being only sold with Windows. (Yes, MS made Asus abandon selling notebooks with Linux installed -- too cheap and too good.)
The solid-state device would start extremely quickly, search faster, just simply get a lot more productivity out of a day in front of a computer.
The other advantage is that solid-state hard disks are not damaged by the shock from dropping the device on concrete.
++++++++
So, for me .... it is a combination of performance, self-determination, privacy, and not condoning corporate bullying of the customer that got me to where I am.
Yes indeed, nothing but SSD around here for a year or two now. The single most dramatic performance boost of the personal computer ever. Well, since we switched from floppies to hard drives. Well worth the expense. Also being smaller than what you can afford as spinning disk it reminds you to prune all the cruft out of file system, less backup worries. Not that I do backups any more.
Not sure about the wait for disk checking. Mostly there is a very quick check of something or other, a full disk check only happens after many reboots (I forget how many).
Has anybody ever managed to actually find a file they were looking for with the find options in Windows?
Has anybody ever managed to actually find a file they were looking for with the find options in Windows?
All the time. In fact, very simple compared to finding relevant feedback in this thread from Windows 10 users.
It's amazing how constantly derailed this thread is. At least it's sunk now. All that's left is for me to unsubscribe from notifications, no more useful information is forthcoming.
Comments
+ 1
Linux is only a cancer to Microsoft and those companies that want to lock customers in to their OS and software. Those that have embraced Linux have created a large ecosystem where software and hardware developers have flourished. Those developers have also improved that system by giving back time and code to make improvements to the basic infrastructure of that system.
Given the time at which Bullmer made that famous statement. Since the birth of the PC, even back in the 8 bit "PC" days, huge fortunes have been made by those who can produce software that people find useful. Digital Research, Microsoft, Adobe, Oracle and so on and so on.
The business model at work there was "we write software, you incompetent chimps cannot, you pay us." Closed source distribution, licensing, copy protection dongles and so on.
This whole business model got reinforced by the law. No doubt after much lobbying from said beneficiaries of the software situation:
Copyright - as far as I remember it was not clear at the time of Bill Gate's 4K BASIC that one could actually copyright a binary executable, I mean, where is the creative work in that? And how is it different from a big number? Can one copyright numbers?
The DMCA - Let's make sure those lowly, software ignorant, serfs are not allowed to reverse engineer what we make and learn how we might do things. Certainly don't let them share what they discover.
Software patents - Let's make sure said peasants cannot make use of what we sell them by themselves even if they do figure out how it works.
Given all the vested interests in this closed source business model, with their billions of dollars of turn over, 70-90% profit, IPO's and ever expectant shareholders, the arrival of slightly smarter chimps who start building their own systems is a disaster. Give the General Public License, that ensures all the chimps cooperate, it is a "cancer" that will eventually kill them.
Note: When I say "chimps", "serfs", and "peasants", I don't just mean the lone geek in his basement. Although that has certainly helped, see Richard Stallman and Linus Torvalds. No, I mean the ocean of companies, large and small, the governments of the world and other institutions. All of these have realized, slowly, that having an open pool of collaboratively developed software is a much better and cheaper idea than being tied to single suppliers. Whitness the British government recently asking how to get away from needing all the Oracle licenses they use.
In the mean time, I have had Windows 10, up and running for more than a week, no problems what so ever. Now I am thinking about purchasing the Windows 10 package, I do not want to go through the upgrade routine if and when I have some hardware malfunction. Even though the upgrade process was uneventful, I still do not want to load up Windows 8.1 Pro, and then... Now I am thinking about all those people that are having upgrade problems, what will they identify themselves with.
Now if anybody stops me on the street and asks me, should I go with Windows 10 or Linux, I will have to tell them Windows 10 of course. Now the identification is critical, maybe "lone geek", in this particular case.
The one thing that I have noticed, on this forum, the Linux pushers are really, in your face kind of people, maybe they are the "chimps". I think erco requested that the Linux pushers use the other thread, but why should they adhere to any requests, I guess the Linux pushers think they can do what ever they please, but not other people of course, maybe "serf" should apply here.
Now let me go to my basement and give the name choice some thought ...
Ray
Nooooo....It absolutely was NOT my intention to imply that you or any other users of Windows, or Mac or Oracle or anything else were "chimps", "surfs", or "peasants". That could not be further from the message I was trying to put over in my long ramble.
I'm really sorry if that is how it reads, if it really cannot be read as I intended then I will take it down or reword it. It obviously is not clear enough to avoid being taken the wrong way.
If I might try to summarize it: The message was that that was the attitude of the software industry. It's spelled out in Bill Gates' famous "letter to hobbyists" of the 1970's. Certainly I make the analogy to "surfs" and "peasants", and I even try to spell that out. We are not supposed to know how these software artefacts work (binary only, copyrighted, patented). We are supposed to be kept in the dark so that we cannot create them for ourselves. We are not supposed to own them (We don't we license use of them), we are expected to pay rent...forever.
Please don't read this as a slur on yourself or any user. It is intended a slur on the attitude and practices of the software industry.
Now, after I'm done with all the profuse apologies and trying to explain myself I have a little gripe of my own .... You have opened your post with the implication that I have made this a "Linux thread". Further that there are such things as "linux pushers", further that they are "in your face kind of people"
I would like to remind you that the first mention of Linux in this thread was made by...you...yes you! It's here: http://forums.parallax.com/discussion/comment/1339934/#Comment_1339934 where you open by putting down Linux. You fired the first shot. I could say "The one thing that I have noticed, on this forum, the Windows addicts are really, in your face kind of people", but I won't say that.
This triggered some kind of autism in me and I had to check. Turns out you are the number one in mentioning "linux" here. I only come in third and most of those were responses to your posts.
Here is the breakdown of "linux" references (not including this post)
Rsadeika: 14
Loopy: 12
Heater: 11
Tor: 5
koehler: 4
pik33: 4
kwinn: 2
This chimp is throwing his bananas at you
And, I am still not having any problems with Windows 10, I think that is what this thread is all about.
Ray
Clever or not, I make no innuendo. I thought I was speaking plainly. I feel it's a bit unfair to be blamed for shouting about or "pushing" Linux, or any other OS, when I did not.
Please point us to the post here where I may have done that.
The subject of Linux was instigated by yourself on this thread. I have only been joining in the ensuing conversation. And why should I not?
I'm glad your OS of choice is working for you. My beef is not about the merits or otherwise of Win or OSX or even Linux for that mater. My beef is about the sorry situation we have gotten ourselves into with respect the software industry over the past three decades. Luckily that has been slowly changing in recent times.
Kind of a pity that Cortana is the first item to be turned off for user security (per numerous reports). At least it's a part of the "free" Win10 update, as opposed to paying $180 for Amazon's Echo: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00X4WHP5E
Of course that's a speaker system too. But that's always on, with a microphone array to hear everything in the room, even while it's playing music fairly loudly. Nice tech, but even scarier than Cortana. "Orwellian", as this video claims:
Ray
If Microsoft made airplanes, I wouldn't fly in them and might even stay far away from airports. I don't see why it is bad to refuse to support businesses that treat customers poorly.
It isn't just Microsoft. There are a few other companies I refuse to patronize for customer abuse -- like Norton Security.
And I will never buy another Ford after having three different ones nearly kill me for each having a unique and different design flaw. Have you ever had a front wheel fall off while rolling up to a stop sign?
Linux just happens to represent human virtue and generosity being rebuked by corporate greed. But if it didn't exist, I would buy some form of Unix, preferably from a company that tries to serve its customers (Android is going over to the dark side.)
I'd love expound at length on your question but you have already made it clear that any criticism of your corporate masters is not not welcome here.
Excellent trolling by the way.
I guess it is a NAY for Loopy to adopt Win10, but I am not sure, I guess, somehow Ford, Norton, airplanes has some sort of influence in the mix, but again I am not sure.
I guess another question has to be asked, how does the ownership of a Ford, Norton software, or the possible flight in an airplane have on the reason you would be a Win10 adopter?
Somehow this thread should get back to the subject at hand, but not sure about that anymore.
Ray
You missed out "lemming" in your list of identity choices. Lemmings are cute.
And no, they don't have mass suicidal tendencies, another myth created by another of our corporate overlords (Disney).
In fact, of all the creatures on Earth, humans are probably number one in this "I see everybody else doing something therefore I will do same thing" behaviour.
The whole copying and imitating, learned, social behaviour evolved with our ape forebears.
Ray
"Collective"? What collective? Where? Who is their leader? Or is there a committee? Where can I join? Do I have to share all my wealth and possessions with them?
Seriously, I'm curious to know where these strange notions come from?
You know that I basically like you. But even when @erco explicitly opens up two threads, one for windows bashers and one for those who USE the new Version of Windows, You ignore it.
Again you need to derail another thread by explaining again that you do not like Windows. We all know this already, you do not need to repeat yourself over and over and over again.
Especially not in a thread stating in its first post that it is for people using Win 10. All other should please post in the windows hater thread.
But no - @Heater cant resist. Has to derail any thread. Again and again and again.
Honestly, it is getting old.
Mike
Yep, got a nice USB3 64GB thumbdrive that read/writes at 120Mb/sec.
On the whole, it doesn't mean squat as you said, we have the storage and speeds we need.
But, on the H/W-side we've had orders of magnitude increases for decades, yet the OS's all seem to have come from that distant time when 20-50 people were timesharing on a mini/mainframe.
Thats a big PLUS, if you are actually working on a system that has frequent users logging on/off.
However, in every Enterprise company I've worked for since Y2K, its been a dead-end.
Companies simply buy everyone a desktop, and/or a laptop. Multi-User is of no real use to anyone, with the exception of the small number of people who actually create a seperate Admin/User account.
So all that architecture devoted to solving those problems, and the code that accomplishes it is continually dragged along, because someone decided it was easier to make everyone run a Server OS than not.
In reality, with the speeds and memory we no have, we should have systems that actually are lightning fast, responsive, etc.
This has never been much of a problem, because Intel, AMD, IBM could always crank out a new process or architecture every couple of years which picked up the slack for the bloat.
We are reaching the end as far as current understanding of phyiscs allows. Simply adding MOAR CORES isn't going to come close to helping as it has in the past.
Personally, I'm hoping some kid in Denmark or Germany decides to take a stab at re-writing Linux as a desktop some long cold winter.
Until then, I'll stop whining, and get TinyCore or similar running as a testbed for how a slim RAM-resident OS compares.
The vast majority of online Linux Users who will berate you for not Open Sourcing your software.
At least that is what comes across on many of the Linux-geared sites. At best, I've seen little more than grumbling acceptance at having the temerity to charge others for your work.
It IS in a way similar to Heater's jest about them being commie pinko subversives.
The BSD license seems more reasonable for everyone, at least to me as a non-developer.
Have you open-sourced your software?
If so, do you then sell support?
OK, I'll call Time-Out.
If anyone is at fault, I think I've been poking the Linux Users so I'll take that heat.
Heater, you made a decent comparison of the 80's-90's.
However, my issue is as stated, and also the frankly, yes, communist notion that selling your software is somehow wrong. Thats basically in a nutshell what the Linux community promulgates, and has almost enshrined in its licensing.
Let me be blunt/er.
You're a H/W and S/W guy I believe. Now imagine there was as easy a way for someone at home to copy and duplicate the work you do at your job. Just like a file or app, they could download a h/w app to some 4th gen RepRap, and pop out anything they wanted, a la Star Trek.
At SOME point, your company and every other one is going to find the market innundated with the exact same products you produce. However all of these others are simply copies and are nothing more than manf's pumping out product, with no H/W or S/W salaries paid to their non-existent employees.
At what point do the companies doing the real work throw up their hands and have to close down because everything they do is copied and on the market for a much lower price, because their copying competitors don't have to pay teams of folks like you top dollar, and basically under-cut you?
This is an analogy only, however the thrust of the point should be clear.
Companies hire people skilled to do H/W or S/W. That all adds up.
Do they, or do they not, have the right to demand some form of IP protection?
Linux eschews Open Source Software, and as such, makes the value proposition that software should be free.
Making money on the sale of software is definately frowned upon.
The suggested way around that is to sell Services or expertise.. somewhere, somehow.
That will work for Red Hat and a number of others.
However it really won't work for the countless legions of Coder's and Businesses that simply aren't geared for that.
It seems like the Linux response is, oh well, learn how or die.
Like I said, the BSD license/rationale seems a lot more realistic, and fair, to the actual developers.
However I have no problem with Linux doing what they are doing, or anyone jumping into that 'market'.
But from a 'normal' software company, it shouldn't be too hard to see why they look at Linux like a form of cancer is it?
Subsequently I have posted some corrections to statements made here regarding Linux, open source software and the evolution of the personal computer that I believed to be factually, historically, incorrect. I trust it is not out of line to do that on a forum. I may of course be wrong myself but that can be debated as well.
In return there has been some deliberate attempts to "pick a fight", we used to call it "baiting" back in the day, "trolling" is the word now a days I believe, for example:
"Lets see if we can get some Linux followers to start getting close to the edge. ...Visual Studio on Linux..."
"Since this thread is basically becoming a Linux thread, again, at least Heater..."
The latter is particularly galling as it was the writer of the accusation that introduced the topic of Linux here!
Now I stand accused: "Heater can't resist. Has to derail any thread. Again and again and again. Honestly, it is getting old". Hardly fair I think as it was not me that kicked off the derailing here nor perpetuated it.
I'd like to comment on some statements made recently about Open Source licensing, communism, and software copying, that I believe to be incorrect and/or misguided but I cannot, it would only lead to further accusations of "derailing", "pushing an agenda", being "communist" and so on.
Ah well. Such is life on the internet.
Like you and no doubt others, I often wondered why our systems are so slow. Why does it take so long to boot up, or load an app or render a web page?
Like you say with the speeds and memory we now have, we should have systems that actually are lightning fast, responsive.
However, I'm not sure that the problem lies in the fact that someone decided it was easier to make everyone run a server OS than not.
Certainly there are overheads in supporting processes and providing isolation between them. All that context switching has to take time somewhere.
But, looking at the performance of typical applications today, for example this Chrome browser, it is not clear to me that the overheads of context switching are what is slowing it down significantly. When it is doing it's work it is slamming the CPU hard for as long as it takes. Any process swapping going on there is only a small percentage of the time.
My feeling is that some kid Denmark or Germany could produce a single user, desktop OS but the end result world be that our Apps would not be noticeably faster.
Meanwhile, having an OS that supports multiple isolated processes is a very good thing. Even if you remove all the "server" and multiple user stuff. It means my programs can't crash each other by accident. It means all the codes running in all the tabs of my browser are isolated from each other. We would be giving up a lot by removing support for multi-processing.
By the way, last I knew, Windows, OSX and even the OS that may not be mentioned here did not come with any server components installed out of the box.
News just in:
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/08/even-when-told-not-to-windows-10-just-cant-stop-talking-to-microsoft/
I forgot to say there is one very important reason for having a multi-user os. There are at least two users, you and the vendor of the OS !
Any OS will dilligently check any partition it is booting before using. Bigger hard disk partitions and slower spinning hard disk are the sources of delay. I suspect the addition of a repository checking for proprietary license validity adds even more time. Try having an office with a good server and disk-less workstation.
Nonetheless, I do find global searches in Linux seem to execute more quickly than in Windows. And the ext3 or ext4 file systems don't need to be scanned as often.. another tedious waiting game.
2Gbytes was adequate storage for a modern version of Ubuntu, but my EEEpc 701-4G had 4Gbytes which allowed the user a few more applications. And I used SDcards for stored data. That all seem to indicate that anything over 4Gbytes, or maybe 8Gbytes could be unnecessary. Sadly, the EEEpc 'evolved' from originally being a Linux only device into a product with a 300Gbyte hard disk and being only sold with Windows. (Yes, MS made Asus abandon selling notebooks with Linux installed -- too cheap and too good.)
The solid-state device would start extremely quickly, search faster, just simply get a lot more productivity out of a day in front of a computer.
The other advantage is that solid-state hard disks are not damaged by the shock from dropping the device on concrete.
++++++++
So, for me .... it is a combination of performance, self-determination, privacy, and not condoning corporate bullying of the customer that got me to where I am.
Yes indeed, nothing but SSD around here for a year or two now. The single most dramatic performance boost of the personal computer ever. Well, since we switched from floppies to hard drives. Well worth the expense. Also being smaller than what you can afford as spinning disk it reminds you to prune all the cruft out of file system, less backup worries. Not that I do backups any more.
Not sure about the wait for disk checking. Mostly there is a very quick check of something or other, a full disk check only happens after many reboots (I forget how many).
Has anybody ever managed to actually find a file they were looking for with the find options in Windows?
All the time. In fact, very simple compared to finding relevant feedback in this thread from Windows 10 users.
It's amazing how constantly derailed this thread is. At least it's sunk now. All that's left is for me to unsubscribe from notifications, no more useful information is forthcoming.
Mark me down as was a YES, now a NO except for a dumb gaming drive.