Board index » kylix » Re: Linux into the limelight

Re: Linux into the limelight


2004-02-04 03:49:01 AM
kylix1
p>Of course, you can choose the alternatives. Here are the basic
p>Desktops applications purchasable by and for MS desktops and their
p>Linux equivalents. I do not purpose the list below is all inclusive
p>for either
p>Micrisoft Windows desktops, nor Linux. they do, however, represent
p>the most popular.:
The main differences between that "alternatives" and prooperitary software
(including Microsoft):
1. Usually much less features.
2. Usually less stable.
3. Usually has problems with work with non US character sets.
4. Almost never able to print anything properly.
5. Do not have integration features like scripting, common storage mechanics
(structured storage).
6. Often have extremely ugly GUI.
7. Often when something wrong happening does not notify user about error.
They just silently refuse to work.
8. No or very short help.
9. Work slower. This may be not noticeable on high-end machines, but clearly
visible on low-end systems and large documents.
 
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

Ender wrote:
Quote
p>Of course, you can choose the alternatives. Here are the basic
p>Desktops applications purchasable by and for MS desktops and their
p>Linux equivalents. I do not purpose the list below is all inclusive
p>for either
p>Microsoft Windows desktops, nor Linux. they do, however, represent
p>the most popular.:

The main differences between that "alternatives" and proprietary software
(including Microsoft):
1. Usually much less features.
Would you care to describe what features are missing in detail? I do not
know of anything missing in say Open Office 1.1 that are in MS Office,
unless you are referring to Access. Then there is KNoda, which while in
beta, is still pretty good in the latest incarnation. mySQL BTW, is much
more powerful, robust, and scalable than Access. I do not even think the
Windows weenies would argue about that. :)
Quote
2. Usually less stable.\
Untrue. Many times (as a release, not beta) Open source products are more
stable. You are generalizing here, so how about specific incidents.
P.S. You might want to tell that to the 85% of all Web sites that run Apache
BTW. I am sure you can inform them how IIS is much better than Apache <G>.
I am absolutely certain many IIS sites which have become Apache ones, did
so because IIS was found to be better. :)
As stated, most of the time, released open source versions are more stable
than their commercial counterparts. Marketing does not drive Open Source,
like it does commercial software.
In fact all commercial software quality has decreased in the past five
years; be it Oracle, IBM, Borland, or Microsoft (which has never been
stellar in QC). In fact have I not heard many people say, never buy
anything from MS until it has had at least 3 service pack releases?
The reason for this is not due to inferior commercial programmers, but
rather that the programmers are not running the show in the commercial
market space.
Open source development is not driven by market force, but by programmers.
Naturally, you would have better products when programmers, not some non IT
marketing and sales managers, coupled with PMs that do not know a "for
loop" from a "do while loop", are driving development.
C'mon, even YOU would have to realize that programmers producing products
without some imbecilic and forced time line calculations (imposed by some
pin headed managers and bean counters), can do a much better job of
software development and release cycles. Of course if you would believe
contrawise, then I suggest that you resign from development and join some
marketing or sales team. :)
Quote
3. Usually has problems with work with non US character sets.
Linux has more support out of the box for internationalism than any Windows
versions of any software I have ever seen. Many versions of Linux are not
distributed in the US originally nor in English originally. For example
Suse=Germany, Mandrake=France, Red Flag= China, Knoppix=Germany , Turbo
Linux=Japan.
Quote
4. Almost never able to print anything properly.
Would you please quit making general statements without a single example? I
do not have print problems with any of the applications I listed, so please
tell me which apps you are referring to?
Quote
5. Do not have integration features like scripting, common storage
mechanics (structured storage).
Oh PUUULEASE!!! What bunk!
Open Office has a complete and full scripting language. KNoda has form
designers, report designers, etc (though it is a beta product), and Java
Script, Perl, and Python bindings. So does Gimp (Perl, Python).
Again, you make generalized comments without providing a single example. In
this case, you are obviosuly ignorant of what these Linux apps offer.
In fact since nearly every Linux application is Open Source, you can go to
the very source code and fix, modify, or personally or corporately
customize anything you wish. Try that with MS Office, Access, Publisher.
Front Page, etc.
Linux and Unix, have always contained 90% more and better scripting tools
than MS OSes ever have or ever will.
Do shell, bash. rc, or csh scripting in Windows for me please (and I do not
mean with an add on purchased scripting set, I mean out of the box). Show
me a version of Windows that ships with Python, Perl, TCL, C and C++
scripting tools that are accessible from either a GUI or a command line.
Attempting to compare Windows scripting tools to Unix scripting tools is
like asking a midget league football team to play the North Carolina
Panthers, or New England Patriots. :)
Quote
6. Often have extremely ugly GUI.
Actually, I had a real eye opener yesterday. I have been working with Suse 9
for about two weeks. I had to go to Windows for the first time in two weeks
for customer updates to a product we did in Delphi. I was actually amazed
that the Windows 2000 GUI is actually UGLIER and the fonts are jagged
compared to the Linux KDE 3.1.5 counterparts. I did not even actually
realize how advanced the Linux GUIs have become, since we rarely go to the
Windows box anymore.
The newer KDE 3.1.5 and up no longer rival their Windows counterparts, but
actually exceed them now. At least true up to and including Windows 2000.
Quote
7. Often when something wrong happening does not notify user about error.
Please provide an example of a release version where this is true. Not an
alpha or beta version of a product mind you (which you cannot get with 98%
of Windows only products), but an actual released version. Would you like
for me to point out some serious Windows and Windows apps bugs for you? I
could start with Windows whatever, MS Office, and work my way to up to
Borland Delphi and BCB, if you would like. and that is even going against
the latter two, both of which I actually like an I do not have any real
problems with the former two, except for the price.
Quote
They just silently refuse to work.
No examples listed whatsoever. So who TOLD you this? Have you tried any
application where this is true? If so, could you please inform us all,
instead of quoting some, "I worship Redmond because" article?
Quote
8. No or very short help.
That I can and will agree with. Help systems are very arcane or very
technically geeky. I compare many of them to old IBM manuals <G>.
Quote
9. Work slower. This may be not noticeable on high-end machines, but
clearly visible on low-end systems and large documents.
Some might be slower and some much faster.
Typically modern Windows GUIs are very HP intensive. I would not even think
of XP on anything less than 256 meg of Ram and an 800 mz. processor, I can
do Linux on a lot less.
I agree that MS office is faster than Open Office 1.1. But is two seconds
load time difference really worth $ 500.00? In fact, for what a new version
of office would cost me, I can buy quite a powerful machine for that same
500.00 and have the advantage of a newer faster machine that will certainly
run Open Office better than the archane Machine will run a new copy of
Office.
MS Word verses Abi-Word or KWord, you would find that the reverse is true to
your biased assetions.
I would say Excel speed and GNUMetric is about even stevens, both on modern
hardware. GNUMetric, Abi-Word, GNUCash, KWord, KPresentations, and DIA
actually require less RAM than say Office 2000 and up, Quicken, or Visio.
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

So the "Builder" seems like an alternative to Eclipse ?
-Michael
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

Quote
>Obviously in future software companies can only
>earn money on support and on solutions sold to a single customer. No
>volume fees any more.

So is this a "good thing" or a "bad thing" as far as the average consumer is
concerned? You could make a case that consumer's benefit from "volume
fees" as much as the software company.
That's a philosophical question.
It places the profit back to the developers, creating software for a
dedicated purpose (single user) and away from the sales-people, being
busy distributing multiple copies. Zero $ purchase price standard
applications free money for having the users supported individually by
consultants and having dedicated applications be developed.
Sounds like a good thing to me (being jealous and mean).
-Michael
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

Quote
4. Almost never able to print anything properly.
If I want to print a website using IE I'm mostly out of luck. To do this
with MS tools I need co cut and paste it into Word.
Opera and Firebird provide a print preview and a settable print zoom
factor. Much better !
-Michael
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

Quote
Open source is a good thing but it isn't the end all be all ideal
pontificated by the Church of Raymond.
The article states that an open source project needs quite a momentum to
be successful and provide good quality. This is why standard
applications are going to the open source world the faster the more need
is for the broader the foreseeable user base.
Commercial providers could compete with low prices here, but due to
their sales department cost they will not.
-Michael
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

On 02/04/04 14:16 +0900, pnichols wrote:
Quote
>3. Usually has problems with work with non US character sets.

Linux has more support out of the box for internationalism than any Windows
versions of any software I have ever seen. Many versions of Linux are not
I can't agree with this statement. Windows is still ahead of
Linux in terms of i18n support. Linux does pretty well for
mainstream, single-byte charsets, but multi-byte charsets are
less well supported.
trane
--
//------------------------------------------------------------
// Trane Francks XXXX@XXXXX.COM Tokyo, Japan
// Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

"Michael Schnell" wrote:
Quote

>>Obviously in future software companies can only
>>earn money on support and on solutions sold to a single customer. No
>>volume fees any more.
>
>So is this a "good thing" or a "bad thing" as far as the average
consumer is
>concerned? You could make a case that consumer's benefit from "volume
>fees" as much as the software company.

That's a philosophical question.

It places the profit back to the developers, creating software for a
dedicated purpose (single user) and away from the sales-people, being
busy distributing multiple copies.
Unfortunately not. The single user can still be an organisation with lots of
employees. You will be busy to modify "standard open software" to their
needs. So you don't have time to search for customers. You will hire a sales
person to sell your programming capacity. Then he sells more capacity then
you have so you hire another programmer, and another one and an extra sales
person and a couple of programmers. The programmers will be programmer. Only
you as President of Softco can smoke big sigars.
Quote
Zero $ purchase price standard
applications free money for having the users supported individually by
consultants and having dedicated applications be developed.

Sounds like a good thing to me (being jealous and mean).
These days companies buy standard software wich fill only partly their
needs, and they have to change their organisation to the standard software.
In the future they pick the open source software that comes most closely to
their needs and let you modify it to get exactly what they want. They can
keep this modifications for themself so competitors can not benefit from
their smart solutions.
So in the "open source future" there still will be need for programmers
_and_ sales people. The one who really benefits is the user of the software.
At least he gets software for his money he really can use and has a person
who's ass he can kick when it doesn't work properly.
Peter
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

"Peter Agricola" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
At least he gets software for his money he really can use and has a person
who's ass he can kick when it doesn't work properly.
And what happens if the ass he's been kicking is off working on a better
paying job or has moved to another state or is in the hospital or even worse
... dead?
A *big* concern of most businesses is continuity; particularly for anything
that is classified as "mission critical". There are really only a few ways
to achieve some reasonable assurance of continuity.
1) Buy a "standard" product from a large stable company.
2) Build and maintain a custom product in-house. Outside contractors are Ok
for select build projects but maintenance needs to be in-house.
3) Use a "standard" Open Source package that you are confident "the
community" will sustain and adequately maintain.
Option 1 has generally been the preferred approach whenever possible.
Option 2 is usually much more expensive than options 1 or 3 and is typically
used only as a last resort. Choosing to bastardize some Open Source package
may jump start your work but it is still basically option 2.
Option 3 is viable only for a select few applications and being a relatively
new phenomenon, it's endurance over time is an open question.
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

"JQP" wrote:
Quote
>At least he gets software for his money he really can use and has a
person
>who's ass he can kick when it doesn't work properly.

And what happens if the ass he's been kicking is off working on a better
paying job or has moved to another state or is in the hospital or even
worse
... dead?
He has the source. Just hire another developer...
At MS developers change too.
Quote
A *big* concern of most businesses is continuity; particularly for
anything
that is classified as "mission critical". There are really only a few
ways
to achieve some reasonable assurance of continuity.

1) Buy a "standard" product from a large stable company.
I described the birth of a large stable company with a President smoking big
sigars.
Quote
2) Build and maintain a custom product in-house. Outside contractors are
Ok
for select build projects but maintenance needs to be in-house.
This _is_ what is happening in the Open Source Era. It doesn't matter who
employs the developer, you get a custom product with all the sources.
Quote
3) Use a "standard" Open Source package that you are confident "the
community" will sustain and adequately maintain.
Of course you should change it to your needs!
Quote
Option 1 has generally been the preferred approach whenever possible.
Of course not! Nobody wants to pay a lot of money for a program which can
_nearly_ do what you want. It has to do exactly what you want. And if you
want tomorrow something else the software has to change to. Organisations
live!
Quote
Option 2 is usually much more expensive than options 1 or 3 and is
typically
used only as a last resort. Choosing to bastardize some Open Source
package
may jump start your work but it is still basically option 2.
Only in you proprietary world. Not in the Open Source Era. You only pay for
your modifications.
Quote
Option 3 is viable only for a select few applications and being a
relatively
new phenomenon, it's endurance over time is an open question.
This will be for 'the necessary stuff nobody uses', like the OS, The
Database, The Communication Software etc. It just is there and is only
relevant for the developer. Because everybody needs it it will be
maintained. Do you see the development of MySQL stop anytime soon? Your
client doesn't need to know wich database you are using.
Peter
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

Trane Francks wrote:
Quote
On 02/04/04 14:16 +0900, pnichols wrote:

>>3. Usually has problems with work with non US character sets.
>
>Linux has more support out of the box for internationalism than any
>Windows versions of any software I have ever seen. Many versions of Linux
>are not

I can't agree with this statement. Windows is still ahead of
Linux in terms of i18n support. Linux does pretty well for
mainstream, single-byte charsets, but multi-byte charsets are
less well supported.

trane
That could be true Trane.. I do not do many international apps. When we do,
we use Java, and Java has PDG i18N support.
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

Michael Schnell wrote:
Quote
So the "Builder" seems like an alternative to Eclipse ?

-Michael
Mmmmm, yeah, could become that I guess, albiet it is more focused than
Eclipse.
I am not "wild" about Eclipse myself, I do not like the IDe that well. The
Project Management features are good, and I do like the Plug-in technology,
just not the way the IDE is laid out.
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

"pnichols" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
That could be true Trane.. I do not do many international apps. When we
do,
we use Java, and Java has PDG i18N support.
LOL!
What!?! No international apps? How will you ever take advantage of that
huge Chinese market?
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

"Peter Agricola" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
He has the source. Just hire another developer...
Yes. And start over at square one, paying a new developer for
non-productive work as he tries to decipher modifications that the last guy
made. And then pay again for bugs caused by his lack of experience with this
particular piece of bastardized software.
How much of this before the businessman starts looking for alternative
approaches?
Quote
I described the birth of a large stable company with a President smoking
big
sigars.
You described an often repeated fantasy concocted by geeks with little or no
business knowledge or experience.
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

JQP wrote:
Quote
"pnichols" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
news: XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
>That could be true Trane.. I do not do many international apps. When we
do,
>we use Java, and Java has PDG i18N support.

LOL!

What!?! No international apps? How will you ever take advantage of that
huge Chinese market?
Uh, Did you not read the entire post, where I stated, "I do not do many
international apps, but when we do we use Java?" <G>
Besides, I take it you do not know the saying:
Know three languages, you are trilingual.
Know two languages, you are bilingual.
Know one langauge, you are an American. :)
BTW, I think you fail to see what countries changing to Linux mean in the
overall scheme of things. Whether you ever plan to do business with China,
India, Israel, Brazil, Argentina, Germany, etc. most companies are
international.
Any internation based company (like Westinghouse, Fed-Ex, Coke, Pepsi, GM,
Ford, GE, etc.) does and will. If they are using Linux based systems, you
can bet these companies will support their infrastructure, which means it
filters down or up, depending upon how you look at it.
I doubt you will ever acknowledge what is happening, because you do not want
to. That is, of course, your perogative, You will sooner or later face it,
just as you have done an about face concerning the server market, where you
used to boldly proclaim, MS owns the server and Linux is a fringe market. I
can google if you would like, to provide your prior quotes on that subject,
if you wish. :)
Of course, you might take heart that according to recent reports, small
business have adopted Linux at 40% servers, 28% desktops.