Board index » kylix » Re: Linux into the limelight

Re: Linux into the limelight


2004-02-05 02:20:53 AM
kylix1
"pnichols" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
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>
So Java provides support that is missing from the OS? Wow, Java is truly
the ultimate all purpose tool. Let me grab my wallet and head to the
nearest Java training classes. By the time I'm done, everything I've
learned will be either obsoleted or morphed beyond recognition so I can just
start all over again.
 
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

JQP wrote:
Quote
"Peter Agricola" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
news: XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
>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.

I fail to understand how this would be different for any shop modifying or
maintaining any legacy code. Of course, you do realize, that you are making
my main arghument against multi-language development that seems to be what
the NET fans love about DOT.NET, do you not? Many languages= many
programmers= large teams to support, update, and/or maintain the
applications written.
That being said, if the orginal open source program is written in a language
that the developers are already familiar with, then please explain how this
would be any different from maintaining or updating any other code base? Do
you think that all new programmers can come in and understand the code and
the routines that some other developer used and created for an in house
application? If you do, obviously you have never had to update or maintain
previously existing code. So then, how does your argument make it any
different between customized in house development and open source? Doesn't
matter where the code originates, the same principles will apply.
Quote

You described an often repeated fantasy concocted by geeks with little or
no business knowledge or experience.
I cannot believe you would even want to get into business practices. A
person who wishes to positively ignore and dismiss potential present and
future marketshare, is not my idea of pne who pursues a prudent and wise
business strategy.
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

JQP wrote:
Quote
"pnichols" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
news: XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
>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>

So Java provides support that is missing from the OS? Wow, Java is truly
the ultimate all purpose tool. Let me grab my wallet and head to the
nearest Java training classes. By the time I'm done, everything I've
learned will be either obsoleted or morphed beyond recognition so I can
just start all over again.
No Java privides me with the means to supply my customers with solutions,
regardless of their OS. I know that is difficult to understand, when you
practice and pontificate an OS and language religion, but nevertheless tis
reality :) :)
The only reason I promote Linux is because it a cheaper, more robust, less
hassle free solution, with far less stability and security problems. If my
customers ask, I tell them what I think and refer them to unbiased studies
and personal experience. I do not send them to an MS site, so that they can
read FUD, nor a pro Linux site so that they can read FUD. Computerworld, IS
Magazine are good sources, as are Oracle, IBM, CA, etc. Even though the
last three mentioned are certainly biased about their own products, the OS
is really immaterial to the sale of their products. Contrawise, the OS is
certainly is not immaterial to the Red Hat, Suse, Novell, and MS sites, so
why would you go there for unbiased recommendations for OS information?
BTW, quote from Oracle:
<Quote>Speaking at the company's Oracle Apps World event in San Diego last
week, chief executive Larry Ellison said Linux offered significant
performance benefits over Microsoft Windows.
He said Linux was faster and more reliable than Windows and price was only
the third reason for change.
"Within the next 12 months we will have moved our entire back end to Linux,"
Ellison said.
"It is a much better product than Windows in the data centre." </Quote>
Source: www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common
story_page/0,5744,8544292%255E15306,00.html
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

"pnichols" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
I fail to understand how this would be different for any shop modifying or
maintaining any legacy code.
It's not. This why businesses tend to "buy" rather than build whenever
possible. It's generally much more cost effective. The Open Source
mentality assumes the opposite, thus the emphasis on source code
availability.
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

JQP wrote:
Quote
"pnichols" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
news: XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
>I fail to understand how this would be different for any shop modifying
>or maintaining any legacy code.

It's not. This why businesses tend to "buy" rather than build whenever
possible. It's generally much more cost effective. The Open Source
mentality assumes the opposite, thus the emphasis on source code
availability.
What?? What does that have to do with maintaining code, which is an issue
you brought up?
I do not know what your criteria is as to what consititutes a businnes, but
at least 90-95% of IT centric businesses create their own or customize
their software to meet their specific internal business needs. Yes, I can
just see the Wal-Marts, Coscos, Fed-Exs, Sears, Home Depots, 7 Elevens,
Office Depots, etc. buying that off the shelf MS Money to maintain their
finances, and of course MS Access to handle their database chores
<ROTFLMAO>... I guess you consider PeopleSoft, SAP, or Oracle financials a
boxed program that you install and run like any other home user
software. :)
I will garantee you that in any business with an IT shop, VERY MUCH CARES
about the source code. Failure to understand this, makes it very easy to
question just how much, if any, IT experience you have.
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

Quote
>The main differences between that "alternatives" and proprietary software
>(including Microsoft):
>1. Usually much less features.
pnichols wrote:
Would you care to describe what features are missing in detail?
I do not want to write large article comparing for example MS Word and
KWord or MS Word and OpenOffice.Writer. One should try to work in one then
work in another for understanding of differences. Of course write short
article and you does not notice any differences. However OpenOffice.Writer
is closer to Word that anyone else.
Quote
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.
:-)))) while Access already years around.
Quote
mySQL BTW, is much
more powerful, robust, and scalable than Access. I do not even think the
Windows weenies would argue about that. :)
Sorry, do not work with mySQL.
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.
Well, recently i'm tried to prepare article for www.delphikingdom.ru. I'm
tried to do it in my office, where we use Linuxes. In two hours it
(OpenOffice.Writer) failed twice (crashed with SIGSEGV) on various user
actions. When i use Word i saw last crash about year ago. Word XP was never
crashed since it's installation.
Quote
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. :)
I'm not do web development. At least serious web-development. So i cannot
comment anything about IIS vs Apache.
Quote
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.
Well, why then at least once per day i'm see typical KDE information window
about some application that received SIGSEGV? Great stability! :-)))
Quote
In fact all commercial software quality has decreased in the past five
years; be it Oracle,
Actually Oracle's quality going up. I'm working constantly with their soft
and noticed there are less problems encountering. And yes, even their tools
written in Java failing not often... contrary to this there is no open
sourced software tools for Oracle (TORA around for few years but it still
buggy as hell).
Quote
IBM,
The only my touch with IBM is hardware and their AIX OS where we running our
programs. Cannot say something negative.
Quote
Borland,
Really low quality.
Quote
or Microsoft (which has never been stellar in QC).
Actually Microsoft getting better. I'm use their office products (especially
Visio), Windows XP itself and i have feeling that there are less critical
failures than previous years.
Quote
In fact have I not heard many people say, never buy
anything from MS until it has had at least 3 service pack releases?
Obviously that people use only Windows NT 4.0 and MSVC. Other products has
less than 3 sp-s.
Quote
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. :)
I'm working in commercial company. My bosses always give to me reasonable
amount of time. Of course i know there are companies that ruled by stupid
managers.
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.
I require to work with cyrillic characters. The first distro that work
relatively flawlessly with cyrillic characters is Mandrake 9.2, while
Microsoft products do this since times of Windows NT 4.0.
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?
Konqueror, Mozilla, GIMP, KWord and some others. Seems i should send
examples of print of certain documents to b.p.a.
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).
Sorry, i forgot insert word "ActiveX". So please explain to me how can i
command to OpenOffice applications to create specific documents from my
application. With many apps on Windows i may use automation interfaces.
Quote
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.
I'm not need to fix, modify and customise. I'm need to do work, do work
which bring the money instead of customize semi-raw..semi-completed tools
to do what i want.
Quote
Linux and Unix, have always contained 90% more and better scripting tools
than MS OSes ever have or ever will.
OLE Automation?
Quote
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. :)
Don't know what is Panthers, or New England Patriots. Just try to create
with shell scripts for example AutoCAD drawing from data gathered from
certain database.
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.
You should look on for example:
XINE - videoplayer (most idiotic interface)
Ark - after two or three cases i preferred to use command line
Grip - a heap of controls dropped on panels
And i'm not stated that all OSF apps are ugly. KDE-integrated apps looks
good.
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.
Run any program from KDE file manager. If something goes wrong, you will be
never notified. Huge design and implementation flaw.
Quote
Would you like
for me to point out some serious Windows and Windows apps bugs for you?
Most irritating bug was i my "beloved" MS Word until 2000 version. Placing
many embedded objects from Equation editor result in some wrong message
like "Insufficient disk space" and inability to even save document. Only
part by part copy to another document and save it separately.
Second irritating bug is Outlook Express hang-up in certain conditions -
resetting list of newsgroups for existing news server.
Quote
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.
>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?
Example. Pasting incorrect URL (correct from point of view of browser, i.e.
i can download mp3 file) into XMMS's Add URL window is possible but XMMS
just skip file when it unable to retrieve it for some unknown reason.
Without any explanation.
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?
Try to work with large documents and you feel difference. Opening 2Mb
document take about 10 sec on P4, 512Mb of RAM, as for OpenOffice.Writer as
for KWord. MS Word handle same size in less than two seconds.
Quote
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.
:-)))) I'm already has powerful machine and i'm very happy that i do not
need office work.
Quote
MS Word verses Abi-Word or KWord, you would find that the reverse is true
to your biased assetions.
See above.
Quote
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.
:-)))))))
Did you ever checking what you write?
Clean started OpenOffice.Writer.
17833 ender 15 0 39648 38m 30m S 0.0 7.7 0:02.66 soffice.bin
17858 ender 15 0 39648 38m 30m S 0.0 7.7 0:00.00 soffice.bin
17859 ender 15 0 39648 38m 30m S 0.0 7.7 0:00.00 soffice.bin
17860 ender 20 0 39648 38m 30m S 0.0 7.7 0:00.00 soffice.bin
17863 ender 16 0 39648 38m 30m S 0.0 7.7 0:00.00 soffice.bin
17864 ender 15 0 39648 38m 30m S 0.0 7.7 0:00.00 soffice.bin
After opening document 1.25Mb
17833 ender 15 0 59180 57m 36m S 0.0 11.5 0:08.64 soffice.bin
17858 ender 15 0 59180 57m 36m S 0.0 11.5 0:00.00 soffice.bin
17859 ender 15 0 59180 57m 36m S 0.0 11.5 0:00.00 soffice.bin
17860 ender 20 0 59180 57m 36m S 0.0 11.5 0:00.00 soffice.bin
17863 ender 16 0 59180 57m 36m S 0.0 11.5 0:00.00 soffice.bin
17864 ender 15 0 59180 57m 36m S 0.0 11.5 0:00.00 soffice.bin
I cannot show number for MS Word because i'm not have Windows at work, but
i'm assure you it rarely reach 15..20Mb.
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

Quote
>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.
Ender wrote:
:-)))))))

Did you ever checking what you write?

Clean started OpenOffice.Writer.

17833 ender 15 0 39648 38m 30m S 0.0 7.7 0:02.66 soffice.bin
[...]
After opening document 1.25Mb

17833 ender 15 0 59180 57m 36m S 0.0 11.5 0:08.64 soffice.bin
[...]
Addition:
KWord - show roughly same numbers. Slightly less.
Quote
I cannot show number for MS Word because i'm not have Windows at work, but
i'm assure you it rarely reach 15..20Mb.
How i'm found machine with Windows in our office. MS Word with largest
document (~700K) found take at it's peak 17Mb and 10 in average.
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

Ender wrote:
Quote
Well, recently i'm tried to prepare article for www.delphikingdom.ru. I'm
tried to do it in my office, where we use Linuxes. In two hours it
(OpenOffice.Writer) failed twice (crashed with SIGSEGV) on various user
actions. When i use Word i saw last crash about year ago. Word XP was
never crashed since it's installation.
Funny that. I've tried to open a document template created in
WordXP and it crashes Word2003.
You're showing hardware problems.
[...]
Quote
17833 ender 15 0 39648 38m 30m S 0.0 7.7 0:02.66 soffice.bin
17858 ender 15 0 39648 38m 30m S 0.0 7.7 0:00.00 soffice.bin
17859 ender 15 0 39648 38m 30m S 0.0 7.7 0:00.00 soffice.bin
17860 ender 20 0 39648 38m 30m S 0.0 7.7 0:00.00 soffice.bin
17863 ender 16 0 39648 38m 30m S 0.0 7.7 0:00.00 soffice.bin
17864 ender 15 0 39648 38m 30m S 0.0 7.7 0:00.00 soffice.bin

After opening document 1.25Mb

17833 ender 15 0 59180 57m 36m S 0.0 11.5 0:08.64 soffice.bin
17858 ender 15 0 59180 57m 36m S 0.0 11.5 0:00.00 soffice.bin
17859 ender 15 0 59180 57m 36m S 0.0 11.5 0:00.00 soffice.bin
17860 ender 20 0 59180 57m 36m S 0.0 11.5 0:00.00 soffice.bin
17863 ender 16 0 59180 57m 36m S 0.0 11.5 0:00.00 soffice.bin
17864 ender 15 0 59180 57m 36m S 0.0 11.5 0:00.00 soffice.bin

I cannot show number for MS Word because i'm not have Windows at work, but
i'm assure you it rarely reach 15..20Mb.
My Linux system shows it using 48MB, but then I'm on a 1.5GB system.
Using 512MB would reduce that quite considerably.
Running XP an a 256MB system, Word2003 at startup uses 25MB,
loading a 2.5MB doc and it goes upto 30MB memory usage.
Your 36MB does not seem all that bad. With OO, it starts at
48MB and goes up to 64MB, and this on a 1.5GB system.
B
--
www.mailtrap.org.uk/
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

Ender wrote:
[...]
Quote
How i'm found machine with Windows in our office. MS Word with largest
document (~700K) found take at it's peak 17Mb and 10 in average.
This means nothing unless you tell us how much memory
it has to begin with.
B
--
www.mailtrap.org.uk/
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

Quote
Ender wrote:
[...]
>How i'm found machine with Windows in our office. MS Word with largest
>document (~700K) found take at it's peak 17Mb and 10 in average.
Bob { Goddard } wrote:
This means nothing unless you tell us how much memory
it has to begin with.
Ok. Going to bother secretary again... At start Word XP take ~9Mb, after
loading 700K document it take 13Mb.
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

Bob { Goddard } wrote:
Quote
Funny that. I've tried to open a document template created in
WordXP and it crashes Word2003.
As i understood Word2003 is .NET application? It must show largest numbers
because of CLR. And .NET app crashes? Too bad... you breaking my heart and
this all may end that i fall in love with Linux... :-)
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

"pnichols" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
What?? What does that have to do with maintaining code, which is an issue
you brought up?
You seem to be missing the context. Look further back in the thread to see
who brought up what.
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

Ender wrote:
Quote
>Ender wrote:
>[...]
>>How i'm found machine with Windows in our office. MS Word with largest
>>document (~700K) found take at it's peak 17Mb and 10 in average.

Bob { Goddard } wrote:
>This means nothing unless you tell us how much memory
>it has to begin with.

Ok. Going to bother secretary again... At start Word XP take ~9Mb, after
loading 700K document it take 13Mb.
No, you misunderstand. How much physical memory
does the PC have to begin with? No how much memory
does the app take.
B
--
www.mailtrap.org.uk/
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

Ender wrote:
Quote
Bob { Goddard } wrote:
>Funny that. I've tried to open a document template created in
>WordXP and it crashes Word2003.

As i understood Word2003 is .NET application? It must show largest numbers
because of CLR. And .NET app crashes? Too bad... you breaking my heart and
this all may end that i fall in love with Linux... :-)
I'm not using it as a .NET app. It's running on a standalone
system.
B
--
www.mailtrap.org.uk/
 

Re:Re: Linux into the limelight

Quote
>Bob { Goddard } wrote:
>>This means nothing unless you tell us how much memory it has to
>>begin with.
>Ok. Going to bother secretary again... At start Word XP take ~9Mb,
>after loading 700K document it take 13Mb.
BG>No, you misunderstand. How much physical memory does the PC have to
BG>begin with? No how much memory does the app take.
Sorry i'm barely understand in what amount of memory you interested. I
mistaken when i wrote about Windows and Office versions.
Our secretary work with Windows 2000 Prof, 128Mb of total physical RAM.
Before MS Word 2000 start it has 64Mb of free physical RAM, after start it
has 55Mb of RAM free, after loading ~700K document it has 51Mb free.
My home PC is Windows XP with 384Mb ot total physical RAM.
Before MS Word XP start it has 148Mb of free physical RAM, after Word XP
start it has 134Mb of RAM free, after loading ~1.4Mb document (60 pages with
rich graphic) it has 121Mb free.