Board index » kylix » Re: 2004 - Year of Linux Desktop

Re: 2004 - Year of Linux Desktop


2003-12-07 02:42:38 AM
kylix2
Quote
With the newer JDK 1.4.2, I think you will see that modern Java is not that
much slower than native (unless you have antiquated hardware). Plus the
yeh as long as you have 64MB of ram for each JIT'ed app you run.
 
 

Re:Re: 2004 - Year of Linux Desktop

I think linux will take over the server and embedded spaces before it
conquers the desktop. The lack of drivers and true plag and play with
hardware is killing its acceptance. This of course isnt a problem
inherently in Linux but rather with the hardware manufacturers
developing drivers for linux. It scares a lot of hardware
manufacturers to give away their IP secrets be releasing C code for
the kernel. I can certainly understand that.
I think desktop Linux will really come into its own when the details
of the DRM Noose that will be tied around your neck in Longhorn come
out. Scary scary stuff.
 

Re:Re: 2004 - Year of Linux Desktop

I disagree. Just as Kylix was about 2 to 3 years ahead of its time, I
think it will take that much longer for Desktop to really start taking
traction. As Longhorn continuous to be delayed and under delivers,
more and more will move to Linux.
I really like programming in Pascal. If not with Borland tools maybe
with Free Pascal and Lazarus.
Jeff Undercash wrote:
Quote
Seems like Linux has come so far in such a short period of time. With the
release of Fedora, I can even play cool games like Battlefield 1942 running
Linux. I'm willing to bet 2004 is going to go down in history as the Year
of Linux. Call this my stone cold lead pipe lock. Borland had the right
idea with Kylix but they got in too early. Kylix was ahead of its time.
With respect to the Linux market, the best is yet to come. Why waste time
with .Net? Linux is the platform of the future. Is anyone willing to step
out on a limb with me and make this stone cold lead pipe lock?


--
Thomas Miller
Delphi Client/Server Certified Developer
BSS Accounting & Distribution Software
BSS Enterprise Accounting FrameWork
www.bss-software.com
sourceforge.net/projects/dbexpressplus
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: 2004 - Year of Linux Desktop

Thomas Miller wrote:
Quote
I really like programming in Pascal. If not with Borland tools maybe
with Free Pascal and Lazarus.
Yes, Lazarus is coming along nicely, and is a great clone of delphi.
However, I think there is lots left to do yet.
 

Re:Re: 2004 - Year of Linux Desktop

Quote
As Longhorn continuous to be delayed and under delivers,
more and more will move to Linux.

When Longhorn delivers even more will move to Linux, as LH seems to be
more of a threat than a blessing, tying the users in tight bounds,
spying on their data, threatening not to let them access their own data
at later times and not letting them exchange their data with no-LH
users.
-Michael
 

Re:Re: 2004 - Year of Linux Desktop

The problem with Kylix was not that it was ahead of its time but that
it was so buggy. Take threads, for example. In Delphi 6, the CLX
version of TThread would cause crashes on multiprocessor machines. (I
tested this by copying the thread example from Kylix 3 and compiling
it with Delphi 6.) This is fixed in Delphi 7 but there are lots of
other things that aren't fixed. For example, lots of the events in
the CLX version of TOpenDialog simply don't work. Andreas Hausladen
fixed that problem in his unofficial patches but the fact that they
were there to begin with shows that nobody really tested them to begin
with.
To me, it looks like Borland has called a halt on any further
development of Win32 tools. When Delphi 2 came out, they included a
copy of Delphi 1 for 16 bit development. Now with Delphi 8, you get a
copy of Delphi 7 for Win32 development. To me, that says that there
will be no further development of Delphi itself but only of "Delphi
for .Net". If I'm correct, Borland will never release a patch for
Delphi 7.
Thomas Miller < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
I disagree. Just as Kylix was about 2 to 3 years ahead of its time, I
think it will take that much longer for Desktop to really start taking
traction. As Longhorn continuous to be delayed and under delivers,
more and more will move to Linux.

I really like programming in Pascal. If not with Borland tools maybe
with Free Pascal and Lazarus.

 

Re:Re: 2004 - Year of Linux Desktop

"Michael Schnell" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
When Longhorn delivers even more will move to Linux, as LH seems to be
more of a threat than a blessing, tying the users in tight bounds,
spying on their data, threatening not to let them access their own data
at later times and not letting them exchange their data with no-LH
users.
Lots of people said pretty much the same before XP.
It's almost like the best hope for Linux on the desktop is for MS to suffer
an acute stupidity attack. Anything can happen but I wouldn't count on it.
 

Re:Re: 2004 - Year of Linux Desktop

rbwinston < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in
Quote
When Delphi 2 came out, they included a
copy of Delphi 1 for 16 bit development. Now with Delphi 8, you get a
copy of Delphi 7 for Win32 development.
I hadn't thought of that. Chilling, isn't it? But hopefully just a
coincidence!
 

Re:Re: 2004 - Year of Linux Desktop

Quote
"Michael Schnell" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
news: XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
>When Longhorn delivers even more will move to Linux, as LH seems to be
>more of a threat than a blessing, tying the users in tight bounds,
>spying on their data, threatening not to let them access their own data
>at later times and not letting them exchange their data with no-LH
>users.
JQP wrote:
Lots of people said pretty much the same before XP.
It's almost like the best hope for Linux on the desktop is for MS to
suffer an acute stupidity attack. Anything can happen but I wouldn't
count on it.
:-))))) 100% correct. It is linuxists who constantly spread FUD about M$
Windows. For those who paranoid, settle your PC behind firewall and don't
allow any data to send to MS servers.
 

Re:Re: 2004 - Year of Linux Desktop

Quote
It is linuxists who constantly spread FUD about M$
Windows.
Nope, it's MS themselves. Read the XP EULA. it clearly says that when
accepting it and using XP, you allow MS to spy on all your data and
modify them without asking you and that they are not to be held liable
for any damage done.
-Michael
 

Re:Re: 2004 - Year of Linux Desktop

MS>Nope, it's MS themselves. Read the XP EULA. it clearly says that
MS>when accepting it and using XP, you allow MS to spy on all your data
MS>and modify them without asking you and that they are not to be held
MS>liable for any damage done.
I'm read EULA and do not see any such things... Please quote this part of
EULA (especially that part where EULA clearly said "that using XP, you allow
MS to SPY ON ALL YOUR DATA AND MODIFY THEM without asking you that and they
are not to be held liable for any damage done"). It seems you heard one or
another paranoid linuxist scream and believe in it. BTW, word "modify" in
EULA used only in one context
"Product activation. [...] You may also need to reactivate the Product if
you modify your computer hardware or alter the Product."
In addition, all statements about MS activity has the form "MS may do
something", not "you must provide something". That means - disable automatic
updates, install good personall firewall disabling access to microsoft sites
and be happy.
Second thing. "... your data and modify them without asking you..."
deffinitely contradict with local laws (at least with russian laws). Laws
forbid any unauthorized data access and modification. Document included such
statements automatically counted as invalid, so user of product may use it
in any way as it want.
 

Re:Re: 2004 - Year of Linux Desktop

"Ender" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
>>It is linuxists who constantly spread FUD about M$
>>Windows.

MS>Nope, it's MS themselves. Read the XP EULA. it clearly says that
MS>when accepting it and using XP, you allow MS to spy on all your data
MS>and modify them without asking you and that they are not to be held
MS>liable for any damage done.

I'm read EULA and do not see any such things... Please quote this part of
EULA (especially that part where EULA clearly said "that using XP, you
allow
MS to SPY ON ALL YOUR DATA AND MODIFY THEM without asking you that and
they
are not to be held liable for any damage done"). It seems you heard one or
another paranoid linuxist scream and believe in it. BTW, word "modify" in
EULA used only in one context
I believe it was actually in the EULA for windows media player, and had to
do with DRM.
ISTR verbage saying that if illegally obtained IP, (mp3 files, movies,
ebooks, etc) was
detected M$ reserved the right to disable them.
Mike
 

Re:Re: 2004 - Year of Linux Desktop

MM>I believe it was actually in the EULA for windows media player, and
MM>had to do with DRM.
MM>ISTR verbage saying that if illegally obtained IP, (mp3 files,
MM>movies, ebooks, etc) was detected M$ reserved the right to disable
MM>them.
I'm curious how they can disable DivX movie written on the CD? Or illegally
obtained mp3 files also located on read-only media?
 

Re:Re: 2004 - Year of Linux Desktop

Ender wrote:
Quote
I'm curious how they can disable DivX movie written on the CD? Or illegally
obtained mp3 files also located on read-only media?
who said that they could?
--
.. P.
 

Re:Re: 2004 - Year of Linux Desktop

Quote
>I'm curious how they can disable DivX movie written on the CD? Or
>illegally obtained mp3 files also located on read-only media?
P>who said that they could?
Mike Mormando:
"ISTR verbage saying that if illegally obtained IP, (mp3 files, movies,
ebooks, etc) was detected M$ reserved the right to disable them."
IMHO, having right to do something without actual possibility - stupid air
shake.