Linux Is No Vista Killer

Dude, you SO do not have a CLUE what you are talking about. I have been a Winblows user for YEARS, never having heard of Linux before. I tried it 3 months ago and I have never looked back. Winblows offers me NOTHING in comparison to Linux. Linux provide productivity automatically, whereas Winblows provides calculator and notepad. Ooo... I can feel the hair standing on my neck. I think it's time you opened your eyes and looked at the facts clearly, rather than choosing Winblows out of blind ignorance. Every application I would ever want to use from Winblows, I can use an equivalent or superior on Linux (my preferred OS being Kubuntu). Winblows steals ideas from other OSs, so therefore MS has a LOT of catching up to do. They need to invent something of their own for once instead of stealing from Mac and Linux. REMEMBER, I have only used Linux for the last 3 months, used Winblows for YEARS prior, and I have been thoroughly satisfied with Linux and what it has to offer. Never had a single issue with my computer, which is an AMD Athlon XP 2500+ with ATI Radeon 9200 and SoundBlaster Live! 5.1, among other things. You don't have to be jealous of Linux any more. Walk toward the light.

No Vista has accomplished something.

Vista's biggest killer is ......wait for it.....

Vista.

Good day.

Joe, great article! I wanted to rise to your defense before the Linux / anti-Microsoft people start their attack.

Why Stuart Scott?

The whole idea is to keep the top guys in management out of the suspicion and you set the new guy up to take the fall.

That's why I think it's like this.

If I was Ballmer I would let the lower guys on the totem pole in the company carry out the plan and then have a way out when the lawyers said the discovery wasn't going to be going Microsoft's way. The top guy would be the CIO in charge of new technology and that's what Scott was. Markevich was the guy in charge of the Microsoft infrastructure and Scott was the guy in charge of new technology in Microsoft for using before it went out to customers.

So everybody below Scott would be using VCSY technology and only Scott and some engineers and laywers would know. That way Ballmer could wait until the point in the case where the lawyers said "we're not going to be able to beat this" and then he could fire Scott for some company "violation" he got conned into and poof the trouble would go away.

What would Scott say? Ballmer could say they found out he was using VCSY technology and they got rid of him the most unembarassing way they could and then he could tell the lawyers to cut a deal.

"Keeping people quiet" never works. You have to "Keep people stupid" and then cut their throats when the investigation gets too close. Poof no problem.
-------------------------------------------------
...fired November 2, 2007 with only explanation: "fired for violating company policies".

Odd.

The one guy most central to any discovery efforts in VCSY v MSFT fired on the same day a ruling was to be given on the discovery phase of VCSY v MSFT.

Very odd.

Microsoft put out a news article about Scott taking on co-CIO role with Ron Markezich December 5, 2006. One day before VCSY returned to OTCBB from SEC delisting. Patrick Tinley, CEO of CDC/Ross was fired the same day.

Scott had left GE and taken the Microsoft position July 2005.

VCSY was cleared by SEC investigation begun December 1, 2004 - one day after VCSY was granted the 6826744 patent.

Very very odd.

Gee, I'm already too late :( Great article anyway Joe.

Here's what I need to do everyday on my PC:

1 - Use web design software, such as Dreamweaver.

2 - Use page layout software, such as InDesign.

3 - Use graphics software, such as Illustrator and Photoshop.

Unfortunately, Adobe has cornered the market on all of these apps...however, most of these tools work really, really well. And if they don't, I can call or e-mail Adobe for assistance.

Can I do the same thing on Linux?

Tell me Joe... in:
"an updated Vista PC with adequate RAM and memory"

what would you call -adequate-? 2GB ... 4GB?

I am running Linux on 256MB RAM! and it WORKS
Vista does not even INSTALL on 256MB.

Go, try Linux... tell me if you come back.

And, sorry... there is no "supported applications"... it is the other way around... applications that -only- work with Windows (and many of them, dont even run in Vista), and that is not a problem of Linux, it is called market power... and as long as people like you continue buying this kind of empty arguments of the -benefits- (or the WOW, duh!) of Windows... we will continue as now... so, you are guilty for that too :)

Greetings from Argentina...

p.s: go and install Linux, not a server installation... a desktop one, as i cant imagine what your face would be if you see a command line (ever in your life... oh, not cmd.exe)...

What I need to do is run Cad like Autodesk, and 3D Studio Max. Are the Linux people here talking about using a PC like an Internet Device. Do you actually do anything with Linux that does not require the internet? Like make movies, do architecture, rat tracing, game development, accounting etc...

Is the term for Desktop now meaning an internet appliance and used for internet stuff. Workstations means running none internet applications like CAD/CAM, Accounting, Marketing Design, Web Design, etc..?

Is there a difference between a Home Desktop and a Work Desktop?

If all I want to do is surf the internet write some java code and download my email then get Linux, Mac, or turn your PS2 into an internet device.

Just tell me what Linux application I can get that the respected companies of that market will accept. Just like when Lawyer would only work with Word Perfect even thought there where other choices. The above post mentions Adobe products what complementary Linux products are out there for Designers? What application for CAD or 3D modeling?

Even if Linux does have pure none interne application will the markets accept content built using those tools.

Like Joe is saying it has to do with the application and not just internet applications.

Then the question is can Vista runs those or are we Talking Windows 2003?

I-Man watch out there is a black helicopter flying around you home. Did you get a degree in conspiracy theory - master FUD - see you still doing your mass spam posting how many board do you post your spam on?

I totally agree on that Windows XP is the Vista-killer. I use both XP (at home) and Vista (at work) and I am fluent on Linux too.

The reason I don't go to Linux is lack of the programs I use daily: Office 2007, dozens of games, tools for my devices (mp4 player, bluetooth earphones, smartphone...)

I also feel comfortable on Windows. Never had a security exploitation, nor virus and I know how to deal with faulty applications and/or drivers. Why should I use Linux?

My best regards.
UM

PD 1: I know there are semi-equivalent software on Linux but... Staroffice is not exactly Office 2007, and the same for other applications.

PD 2: Linux is free I know. My Windows licence is included in the cost of the hardware and as time goes by, the licence's cost vanishes.

PD 3: No, I don´t need open source. I am not interested on modifying the applications.

People do not use Linux or Windows, they use applications that run on those. They couldn't care less what the app is running on. So my-is-bigger-than-yours type posturing is stupid. As someone who uses both Linux and Windows (dual boot XP/Mandriva) I have to say I prefer Linux, mainly because of applications. Abiword for writting, Amarok for music, Opera for web, Evolution for mail, Krusader file manager, Celestia desktop planetarium, they are all better than anything (including commercial apps) Windows has to offer. Windows is there for games and a few programs, like Photoshop.

There is really no need to take cheap shots about hardware on either Vista or Linux. As we all know drivers are responsibility of manufacturers, not Microsofts or whoever is developing Linux distributions. So by blaming hardware problems on either Windows or Linux you are either very ignorant (doubtful) or trying to incite reaction from Linux/Windows users (in this case Linux), which is childish and stupid.

Someone mentioned that Windows is included in the price of hardware. That's not really true. What is true is that OEM's are prevented from selling naked PC's, so you really have no choice but to buy Windows licence with it. As someone who has bought naked PC's for the last 15 years (you can get them in smaller shops), the price difference is significant, I would've had to pay $150 extra for an OEM Windows XP install last year, but I already had a copy for my old machine.

I hope you get the metaphorical coffee cleaned up, it gets sticky if it stays in the imaginable keyboard for too long.

It seems to me that there is an OS for every person out there. Some people require specialized programs to do their jobs, some of these only run on Windows, end of discussion.

But every single time this question comes up, you tech analyst people seem to conveniently forget about the vaaaaaaaaaaaaast amount of computer users who could switch to Linux overnight and would hardly notice the difference. The icons they click to check mail would look different, but that's about it.

I just have to scratch my chin and wonder why, when Linux is offered as an alternative to Windows, the reaction I hear is scornful laughter followed by a mentioning of Adobe's products and occasionally CAD programs. And that's it. No more. Nothing about the incredible stability, the amazing desktop, etc. Because let's face it, not even Windows users are that delusional.

It sounds more and more like Adobe is the only reason you wouldn't even consider another OS. If that's the case, it seems like Windows realistically ought to enjoy a market niche of maybe 10% of users, rather than the world domination it has now.

So Joe, you expect all windows apps to run on Linux, from what you just wrote,quote: "Linux doesn't run any of my Windows applications, which are the ones most people use—or want."

And why do you expect that??? Will Windows run all Linux native apps and games??? No, not even one of them. Turnabout is fair play. The fact is Linux has free open source apps and games that can replace most windows apps. If you want to use your Windows program in Linux, you might be able to run some of them with Wine or Crossover, which is more than you can do trying to run a Linux program in Windows. There is one place that Linux does fail to completely run a Windows program, that is a Windows Virus. You need Windows for that.

Now, if you are so locked into M$ Window$, and just have to have the latest version of it to run on your new Ferro Laptop, courtsey of M$, then good luck to you. It appears that Neil is your co-author these days. Your articles have been not worth reading anymore, sorry. Good Luck.

Joe,

You lost all credibility with me at the following line: "Linux doesn't run any of my Windows applications, which are the ones most people use—or want."

Um, no.

People want to browse the web, to send and receive emails, to write letters or other documents, to maybe use a spreadsheet once in a while.

Sometimes, they want a little more.

I could bleat on (note how I cast myself in the light you expect) about WINE solving the problems of not running Windows apps, but the simple fact is that people don't want Windows applications.

They just want applications.

Curiously, Vista "breaks" people's computer experience because it changes too much, and Office 2007 is even worse at that.

Furthermore, most people only use Windows because it's what comes with the machine. Low OEM prices are the people's opiate, and Microsoft knows this.

Give people a free "naked" machine, and then let them use Windows XP+Office 2003, or Vista Home Basic+Office 2007, and Ubuntu.

Then tell them the price of each of those "off the shelf", retail.

Guess which one they'll pick if they're paying?

(Curiously, some of those that don't pay may then later find a niggle and pay. If they do, will they be able to move back to Windows easily, or will they find more niggles with Windows because of their experience? Anyway...)

People really don't want Windows applications.

They want applications that do the job, use familiar concepts, and work.

Linux can do that; it's been doing it for a while.

And I've tried moving Windows from one machine to another. Many times. Frankly, I think you were lucky, as it never really worked for me. Bluescreens, failure to recognise hardware, and other nastiness. It works eventually, but it's slow and painful and you're better off just moving your data and re-installing applications if you can.

And that's a fact that's pretty much OS neutral, in my experience...

But to me, that's all irrelevant. People don't want Word. Not as an application. "Word" is simply a synonym for "word processor" - if you gave them Word 2007, they'd be as unhappy as if you'd given them Word 2.0 for Windows. They want a word processor that works as they expect it to, and won't care if it's WordPerfect, Word, OpenOffice.Org's Writer, AbiWord or anything else.

Which means that as long as there's changes for changes' sake in Microsoft's new products, adoption will be slow regardless of whether or not it's ready technically...

"Linux can do that? Linux is notoriously fickle about hardware—and mere mortals shrivel up and die before the great altar to Linus Torvalds when installing hardware drivers. Vista drivers are easy compared to Linux."

I would be laughing about your claims, if it wouldn't be sad that you didn't do any research before writing such a non-sense article.
I changed not only the GPU like you, but the motherboard, the RAM and the CPU some omths ago. Only the harddisk with Ubuntu Linux stayed the same. Guess what?
I didn't even notice something had changed. I did not have to install a single driver. Everything worked out of the box. Can YOU do that? No.

"Simple Vista improvements like driver download support offer huge usability advantages for consumers and can reduce support headaches and support costs for OEMs."

It looks like you trying to be funny but fail miserably.
Fact: Apart from proprietary graphic drivers and some wireless chips, which I have to download first, everything works.
I don't need to install printer drivers. I plug the printer in and print. No driver installation, no configuration, no rebooting needed.
New graphic card driver? I restart my desktop, takes about 3 seconds. Not my whole computer.
In fact, I can't think of a device where I would have to do more than plugging it in.

What about a package manager for Windows? What, nothing?
Proper font rendering? Not this time? ClearType got even worse with WPF? My bad.
Consistent user interface? Compare WMP, IE, Word, Excel, MovieMaker, Notepad.
Does Microsft have to play catchup?
No, that wouldn't be enough. They should stop playing, start working seriously and maybe they produce something in the next decade which will be worth buying.
But at the moment, Windows doesn't even run Amarok.

Bye.

I can't believe how hard the posters on the VCSY Ragingbull message board are trying to cover up the Stuart Scott issue.
Deception cuts deep!

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=BB:VCSY

I think Scott was the safety valve on Ballmers plan to use VCSY technology and have a contingency ready in case the plan didn't work out. They could dump Scott when the VCSY case got too thick and make it look like Scott was the guy that pushed for the infringement. They could tell him they were going to get him out of the company without embarassing Microsoft and without making him have to take the responsibility for infringing so they said he was being fired for a company violation.

All this is speculation but it makes sense because we know Ballmer knows how to pull some crafty stunts.

Look at what chinadotcom did with Pat Tinley. They dumped him. They made him CEO three months before that and when VCSY made it through the SEC investigation the chinadotcom managment had a ready made scapegoat ready to hack.

I work for a Fortune 100 company. They just did a pilot program testing four desktops, RHEL, SuSE Linux, Novell Linux, and MacOS. Novell came out on top but not quite ready to replace XP as the corporate standard. The decision? Stick with XP and reevaluate in two years.

I agree with the statement above. Vista is the Vista killer. I'm betting that in two years, we'll decide to switch to a flavor of Linux rather than to Vista.

Here's the kicker that shows Scott would be the first to try out any VCSY technology Microsoft had. "If Scott's IT initiatives sound a lot like Microsoft's software marketing strategy, they are. He's expected to be the first implementer of any technology coming to market "

It's in here.
http://www.informationweek.com/windows/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=Z0Z4QBMNPZCTIQSNDLRCKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=201806860

Quotes from Joe Wilcox and my responces:
"" Yeah, I spit out my coffee, too.

It's Linux that has the catching up to do."
----------------------------------------------------
What have you been spiking the coffee or M$ Koolade with, hbetter cut back so you can think a little more clearly. Vista has some major catching up to do, probably the truth is it will never catch up just like ME and MS will just release another OS to sell to the unsuspecting public, like Seven something.
----------------------------------------------------
Quote: "XP is what most people use now, not Linux."
----------------------------------------------------
The one sentance that by itself makes some sort of sense. But what about the future? XP is history soon, if you believe MS. I for one do not believe anything MS has to say. Vista is not a contender, and never will be. Yes it will and has made money, but it is and will hurt MS desktop market share.
--------------------------------------------------
Quote: "The support network for Windows is huge compared with Linux."
--------------------------------------------------
Yes, this is true. Because there is so many things broken or flakey with Windows, especially Vista that their needs to be a huge support network. Linux mostly just works without problems, and help is more for users who don't know how to do something. For them they can go to the user forums of their linux distros and read the FAQ, user manuals, or wiki, or search thru the questions on the forum, or join the forum and ask their questions. And its free.
--------------------------------------------------
Now here is where Joe must had had a twelve pack too much of that spiked coffee, Quote:

"Recently, I swapped the hard drives between two Gateway 295C Tablet PCs. The major component difference was the graphics accelerator. The one model had an ATI Mobility Radeon HD 2300 accelerator and the other integrated Intel graphics. When booting up after the hard drive switch, Vista loaded a generic and inadequate VGA driver, which is sensible. Within minutes, Windows Update had identified the correct video driver and made it available for download.

Linux can do that? Linux is notoriously fickle about hardware—and mere mortals shrivel up and die before the great altar to Linus Torvalds when installing hardware drivers. Vista drivers are easy compared to Linux."
--------------------------------------------------
First off, XP (and probably Vista) if you switch the hard drive with an installed OS on it to another computer, it will probably not work. As the HAL (hardware app layer) is changed. You might get lucky, and be able to re-activate it, if the license supports it. If the hardware is very close, such as switching a hard drive from one thinkpad model to the next nearest one, you might get away with it. Actually, this is a major pain with XP and Vista, and one of the major reasons to jjust dump Windows. Windows 98 second edition and perhaps 2000 were better in this requard of switching out hardware. Although, you had better have your cad files on the hard disk in advance. Now all these problems are so you will pay again for windows, check the eula, most xp and vista licences are only for the orginial motherboard and bios. Flash the bios, and there is a good chance that xp and Vista will have to be reinstalled. Its part of the M$ WGA, to make sure your pay. Change out 4 parts and windows requires an reactivation for example. I do this for a living Joe, I know.

Linux, on the other hand, depends on the distro. SimplyMepis has worked on every hard drive that I have switched to other computers, unless, the hardware is not supported. Most hardware is supported. Mepis supports sata drives, while xp requires a sata driver to be installed from a floppy disk during installation. Not so easy on a new laptop without a floppy drive that comes with Vista DRM.

Vista has less driver support than Linux. How about all them good printers out their without Vista drivers? How about all the old hardware running xp that cannot upgrade to Vista. Odds are it will work real well on Linux.

Wake up Joe and smell the real coffee. Sure M$ is bankrolling your site now, but what happens when all this pro MS drivel drives off all but Neil?

Perhaps, MS will conclude that they should spend money on some other site that has real readership.

Steve, you wrote

"New graphic card driver? I restart my desktop, takes about 3 seconds. Not my whole computer.
In fact, I can't think of a device where I would have to do more than plugging it in."

Come on Steve, do you not even bother to check what your writing is even plausible or do you just assume people are gullible?

For instance, no matter what OS you were running you would still have to restart the whole computer, unless of course you are able (and willing) to change the graphics card with the system still powered on.

I would like to see you just restart your desktop after swapping a graphics card Steve, when you have done this you can post a link to youtube and we can all watch in amazement.

one correction to my post. Try switching that xp or Vista hard drive to another computer that is not the same motherboard. IE a different computer. Odds are you cannot, but Linux probably will.

Microsoft is being maneuvered into position to be sectioned out and segmented like a cow destined to be stew.

General Atlantic has been moving behind the scenes for years to accomplish what's coming and the nitwits forgot what a powerhouse the foreign IT community can become once they're cut loose from the American IT monopolies.

How long have VCSY Shareholders known?
Since the beginning. lol

By: Portuno_Diamo
29 Mar 2004, 12:24 AM EST
Msg. 128884 of 202544
(This msg. is a reply to 128880 by popjason.)

pops ' The reason none of these coincidental dots have no direct connection may be due to two things:

(1)VCSY is off on a path that is surprisingly like C. Feeney's technological vision but not linked to his work.
or
(2) VCSY is off on a path that is part of C. Feeney's technological vision.

We know previous General Atlantic Partner alumni seem to be found in developments that mirror the work Feeney's company is pursuing. The recent post concerning Symphony Technology and Industri-Matematik illustrates just how convenient such a low flying network can be.

We also know Feeney employed Wade and others to create an electronic international financial transaction network decades ago. We know his vision is in that vein with multiple business opportunities radiating around that ultimate vehicle.

We know that VCSY was created to produce a global international telephonic distributed database with embedded smartcard technology as far back as 1999.

We know the company seems to have made partnerships to carry out such a plan since 2000 with little publicity beyond partnering announcements.

There are multiple undeniably tantalizing parallels between the work VCSY has been and is currently doing and the work being supported and managed by General Atlantic Partners - Feeney's company and largest technology VC fund in the world.

The first question we must answer is: if item 1 is true then VCSY is trying to emulate the old man without any hope of having any help or any intersecting activity with him.

And the question we are faced with in item 2 is if 2 is true, why are their NO direct connections between what VCSY is doing and what Feeney et al are doing?

Therefore:

(1) It could be that Wade and Valdetaro and Davison and Macauley and the rest are deluded technocrats hoping against hope that they can gin up something to catch Feeney's eye so he will employ their developments in his enterprise.

(2) It could be that VCSY is in fact a holding company and think tank specifically put together to foster new technology to bring about Feeney's ultimate vision - that being personal mobile computers capable of acting as electroinc transaction agents for individuals anywhere in the world. If this is true, VCSY should be engaged in a number of areas having to do with this sort of vision yet never have a directly traceable connect between Feeney's work and VCSY's until the entire system is ready to come into its own.

It behooves us to investigate some of what Feeney has done to see if there are any lineups that emulate conections (since a person like Feeney studiously avoids publicity and therefore hides connections within his own work at any level).

The prime impetus in Feeney's work may be found in First Data's efforts to make credit cards obsolete and supplant them with individual electronic bank vaults in the form of smartcards and ultimately personal chips.

I realize how this sounds to you. I know it seems to be the height of pompous detachment from reality to suggest something as inconsequential as VCSY seems to be would be in some way a cog in the machine of one of the great technology venture capitalists of our time.

But you should detach yourself from cynicism for a moment to answer a few questions:

1) Why was VCSY chosen as the integration agent to put together the distributed smartcard system for Transtar?

Transtar being the pet project of the "father of the magnetic stripe card" J. Svigals who happens to also hold the patent for the latest generation smartcard devices. Svigals could have chosen many many different integrators to achive his vision - yet he chose VCSY.

2) Why was VCSY chosen to integrate Now Solutions as a spin-off from Ross Systems?

There certainly must have been something beyond simply finding someone with 6 million dollars to buy part of Now from Arglen and engage in a partnership with the previous owner of Now Solutions - Ross Systems. Either VCSY had technology to integrate with Ross Systems iRenaissance HR or Arglen/Ross engaged VCSY with the express intent of crippling the company by entangling their livelyhood in Now Solutions then attempting to take Now Solutions from them. (Arglen has settled in this matter and we await Ross' settlement. So what was the original story here? and if players like Arglen and Ross were involved...who asked for the involvement and for what reason?).

3) Now look at the following news announcement from 2001:

Government Computer News
July 16, 2001; Vol. 20 No. 19
Trade commission manages travel online
BY DIPKA BHAMBHANI | GCN STAFF
'The International Trade Commission has moved a step closer to paperless travel management with a system that went online in April.'
'"Under SmartPay, [ITC] had a travel agent," said Tony Marshall, vice president of Zegato, "but they had no travel automation. They had to pick up a phone and call the travel agent.?"'
'...Now ITC travelers make their own reservations using Zegato software and the SmartPay cards.'

Naturally the "smartpay cards" are 2001 smartcard technology.

Now - Pointing to further work by Zegato:

http://www.vcsy.com/press/042210012003.htm
Globalfare.com and Its Partner, Picasso Travel, Agree to Provide Leisure Travel Fulfillment to the Government Client Base of Zegato Solutions
TUESDAY, APRIL 22, 2003 10:01 AM
"LOS ANGELES, April 22 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Globalfare.com, Inc. (Globalfare), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Vertical Computer Systems, Inc., today announced it has entered into a services agreement with Zegato Solutions, Inc. to provide leisure travel fulfillment for the governmental client base of Zegato Solutions, Inc. Globalfare has also entered into an arrangement with Picasso Travel, Inc. whereby Picasso Travel will provide air, hotel and other travel options through Globalfare to Zegato Solutions, Inc."

As of today we do not know the progress of this partnership. Because there have been no further PRs, it is easy to assume nothing is happening. But in an arena governed by a pattern of secrecy (and especially if the paternal seed for such patterns finds secrecy a vital working formula) one would do best to assume that, unless the company has announced a failure or dismissal of this partnership, the partnership must still be in force and advancing.

Don't think so? Then you have that right, but other aspects of the company's business indicate this is precisely how they work. They speak only when a deal is formulated or changed. Other than that they do not speak. They are actually not required to say anything more than to point out material developments in business and to post quarterly and annual filings of financial state. So they do just that and, under times of duress, perhaps not even that by choosing to go pink.

Now - notice the list of involvements Vertical professes to engage:

Form 10KSB for VERTICAL COMPUTER SYSTEMS INC

7-Aug-2003

Annual Report

MARKET PRODUCT OWNERSHIP VERTICAL COMPUTER %
------ ------- --------- -------------------
Human Resources and Payroll emPath 6.2 Now Solutions 60.00%
Government Sector- Emergency Response ResponseFlash Vertical Computer 89.00%
Publishing Content NewsFlash Vertical Computer 100.00%
Higher Education UniversityFlash Vertical Computer 100.00%
Franchises/Independent Agent AffiliateFlash Vertical Computer 100.00%
Database connect XML Emily Agent Vertical Computer 100.00%
Emily XML Scripting Language Emily Vertical Computer 100.00%
Travel Globalfare Vertical Computer 100.00% *
Public Sector e-Procurement Service PublicBuy.net InetPurchasing 2.5% *
Smart Cards TranStar Smartcard TranStar 0.0%

* Vertical Computer is also entitled to receive royalties on sales of certain iNet Purchasing products and smart cards by TranStar.

There are a couple things one must ask when considering the Zegato partnership... why did Zegato choose Globalfare? We don't know the state of the Globalfare/Zegato partnership announced April 22, 2003 - but I do seem to remember an announcement regarding the Transtar/VCSY partnership around that time - in that the VCSY/Transtar partnership was dissolved and VCSY retained a 3% ownership with royalties of Transtar business.

Then VCSY entered into a program to fit into Zegato's system shortly thereafter.

I do not see VCSY chasing any other form of business other than the HR/travel/accomodations/purchasing stages of business leveraged with distributed data transactions involving content publication and communication via portable smart devices on an international basis.

What do you see when you look at the core of Feeney's GAPartners efforts? ERP software and services with HR/travel/accomodations/purchasing at the core along with emphasis on global data transactioning via smart devices.

My question to anyone is: What sort of connecting information are you wanting to see from companies that do most of what they do in the dark - precisely so you and competitors do not see?

Some will argue that all companies are trying to work with smartcards and electronic HR/travel/accomodations/purchasing and electronic transactions... partially true: SOME companies are working in those areas but many companies are not able. Only a few offer some of the capabilities necessary, Only a handful offer all the capabilities.

VCSY has demonstrated an ability to enter into partnerships involving key areas critical to development of just the sort of businesses Feeney is most interested:

HR management (Now Solutions)
Travel management (GlobalFare/Zegato)
Purchasing (iNetPurchasing)
Content and information distribution (GIS/Responseflash)
Smartcard data distribution (Emily/Apollo/Transtar)

The cry from those who wish to point out VCSY's failings is that nothing has become of these efforts.

I would like for someone to demonstrate to me that these efforts have failed.

No-one here can demonstrate that failure because the company has not offered a further explanation. You can believe what you want, but failure of any of these efforts would be a material development in the company's activity and would require a form of announcement from management.

Ongoing development toward maturity does not require further explanation.

In addition, if you examine the historical flow of technology and visit the dates for a number of General Atlantic developments and parallel technology efforts started by VCSY, you will see a number of highly improbable coincidences.

I view these coincidences in a total view to see whowhat and where is involved. This is what lead me to believe the Arglen connection was a bad deal due to European telecom interests and bad blood between Miller and Feeney. I appear to be right in that at least Arglen and Thurn und Taxis have had bad blood toward VCSY from the get-go.

I also wonder just what all these floating connections will reveal. But I do know these coincidences are more than just mirages. They are concrete dates and times and more than curious content that signal partners dancing without touching in a crowded room.

Linux is a decade behind Windows for the average user.Like it or not that's the way it is. The only thing that I find the Linux user base and supporters to excel in comparison to Microsoft the last couple of years is arrogance, their false claims and spreading FUD about Windows.

I Like MS Supporters. Decade in Linux development terms can be 3 months.

Next three months combined profile system. Ie group policies. Most of the container tech so you don't have to pick Linux Distro's any more. Just install as many as you need.

Scary enough a working WinFS system. So its a little hard to say 10 years behind. 12 months maybe.

The pointing to MS Office is a common one. OpenOffice.org is not in a class to completely compete with it. KOffice something windows users have not seen is very close. Note krita in KOffice is also completion to Photoshop. Don't worry KOffice will be released on windows so you MS loves can stay at home.

OpenLina project running Linux applications on Windows Mac and Linux. So yes Linux applications everywhere.

LSB 3.2 most Linux developers are waiting for. End of having to build stuff for Linux Distributions.

Status Quo is about to get a huge mother of a shake. Since users will be able to reduce there MS need without swapping to Linux straight up.

Now that is not the real issue. Linux desktops are forcing new hardware out that is not able to run Vista. Anyone want to place bets on XP being fully extended to 2009 at least.

Sorry MS you screwed up with Vista computer sizes are not going to just keep on expanding to run your OS. Power usage has become critical. Vista running using under 5 watts I don't see happening any time soon.

Heh...It looks like Joe Wilcox needs to go a long way before he catches up with SJVN, or even Linux, for that matter.

Microsoft's flagship operating system isn't fir for installation, much ready for prime time, Joe.

Keep preaching to the choir, buddy; because you certainly aren't cutting it with the pedestrian crowd that could teach you a lot about Linux--the casual user.

Maybe you might try installing an Operating System sometime--windoze or Linux--because I don't think you can hack it in the real world where some of us don't get pre-loads.

The mistake in this article is that it doesn't consider WHY people want M$ Office. It's *NOT* because M$ Office is better integrated, has better featuires, or has better performance. It's mainly because people don't know they have a choice. Users find it on their office desktops or bundled in their PCs. And often they are told not to fiddle with what management has decided to put on their computers. And, of course, there's the FUD from Redmond.

In terms of usability, Linux has all the applications desktop users need. OpenOffice does most of what M$ Office does and a few more things that M$ Office can't. Other common applications are also avauilable such as a web browser (Firefox), e-mail client (Thunderbird, Evolution), messaging client (GAIM), graphical file manager (Thunar, Nautilus, Konqueror), graphics and drawing tools (GIMP, OpenOffice Draw), and so on, are available and are of very high quality.

Vista, however, has to catch up on security, where it is nowhere near Linux. Stability is another place where Vista is far behind. Then there's hardware support. Linux had made great strides here and installing drivers isn't a problem (if you have to do it at all). Then Linux is also ahead in IPv6 support.

Vista is far ahead in the FUD department, however, and it seems that's where Micro$oft has decided to focus a lot of its energies. Instead of innovation, Micro$oft threatens litigation.

As usual.

This article is such a troll. It's like something out of usenet. And this guy gets paid for this?!

Quote: "Linux doesn't run any of my Windows applications"

Why should it? It's not Windows, thank God! It's got equivalent applications which work just as well as the Windows ones. If you are desperate to run a Windows-only app then you've got WINE, Crossover or VMWare to help.

Quote: "Linux is like the foreign auto with missing parts, but nothing more important than a couple wheels, brakes or steering column."

How do work that one out? When you get windows you only get a seat and steering wheel. If you want to do any work (drive) you need to buy Office, Graphics program, IDE, etc (i.e. the rest of the car). In any Linux distribution you get the keys to the whole car (and a full tank) which will work flawlessly.

Quote: "In my testing, an updated Vista PC with adequate RAM and memory [sic] performs extremely well�and delivers a much better experience than Windows XP."

What's the difference between RAM and memory? Or is it just that Vista needs so much of the stuff that you need name it twice >)

You failed to mention Windows' favourite application 'Activation'! Any kind of hardware change results in having to phone MS to allow /you/ to use /your/ computer. That's one feature which I'm glad Linux doesn't include.

And to the people who reckon you can't do any 'real' work on Linux. Just think about it next time you watch a Disney animation. They are all developed and rendered using Linux software. And these things bring in hundreds of millions of dollars. Yeah, no good for real work... :-p

Oh and google, and several governments, and ...

Linux runs on all of my PC's including my laptop 512MB RAM & 32MB graphics card. Try getting Vista to work on that !
Most people do want Microsoft Office including my current employer until he saw me running an Excel macro on Open Office then he said "I didn't know Linux could do that".
Vista will not recognise my 4GB of RAM. It reports it as 3.25GB. I have tried messing around with DEP & PAE to no avail.
Linux reported 3.25GB too, so I clicked on the openSUSE system update, and now I have 4GB RAM.
CAN VISTA DO THAT. NO!!!

SVJN is much too nice to you. If he would have critized your dumb "Android is an insult to any user"-article, hew would have had much more material to write about than you have right now. He maybe paints the image a bit too shiny, but you are more apart from reality than he is.

Let's be sensible!

For anyone who has minimal requirements and doesn't need MS compatibility, Linux is fine. Dell's adoption of Ubuntu Linux may make Linux a viable proposition in time.

I have dumped Linux and gone back to good old Windows XP Pro. Why? SuSE Linux's developers issued a kernel update that made my system unstable. I looked at Ubuntu but version 7.10 was a mess for the first couple of weeks. (Apple's Mac OS is based on Unix and looks good in its 10.5 iteration but Apple's hardware has quality-control problems and the support is abysmal.)

I actually went out and bought a copy of XP when it was first released. Over the years, I have found XP to be pretty reliable and got used to its eccentricities. In the words of Apple's advert, 'it just works'. Linuxs works but you're more at the mercy of people who get bees in their bonnets. Linux proponents need to remember that most people get a PC to do work, to play, or follow their hobbies - they don't get a PC to spend their time tinkering with the OS.

You tried Linux lately? Kubuntu 7.10 detected my graphics drivers without any problems whatsoever. Can get more out of Linux/Compiz eye candy than from Vista, on far cheaper hardware.

(Also, I forget the URL, but you can get Vista eye candy on XP with some themes, without forking out for the extra hardware that Vista requires you have).

Analogies? Vista is like a mega truck taking up all the lanes, running over and hooting at whomever, breaking down whenever; Linux may still require some tweaking to the body work, but runs more reliably...!

I think the point people often miss, which is the case here, is that Linux was never meant to be an emulator!

They focus on trying to make Linux emulate Windows and run its applications and, not surprisingly, often hit a dead end. But if that's what you want, just install Wine, or download VMware server for Linux, create a Windows guest and run your Office apps on it.

As folks have pointed out here, Linux comes with many alternative applications that can do most of what their Windows counterparts do. And just like it was with Windows, hardware support is now orders of magnitude better.

The real challenge is to break that infamous Windows-is-the-de-facto-standard culture.

Perhaps we'll be able to break that culture if people start opening their mind and experimenting new things...

**yawn**
You linux fanboys are as predictable and blindly biased as the numerous self-professed conservative republicans in this country. I have run Vista since beta 1 and watched as it's stability and performance improved. I have run Ubuntu, Suse, Red Hat, and Fedora. These are more in line with Windows 95 in terms of development maturity, operability, and functionality. Compete with Vista? Get real people. I truly envoy your states of delirium. Eternal sunshine... All of Vista's "problems" have been related to the hardware community catching up than the OS itself. Like Joe said you idiots can have linux. Me and the rest of the modern world will be running Vista! peace.

All those stupid FUD. I haven't invested much time in maintaining Linux since I switched from Gentoo back to Suse. There is nothing to do, It just works.

Oooooooh. I bow in front of you and your "modern" wisdom 3DES. And you're absolutely right; if Vista is nothing but a half-baked product, blame those who make the hardware, it's all their fault! Pretty ironic that you get to call others blindly biased idiots; just as ironic as evan talking about arrogance.

I think like Tornado. Windows is Windows and Linux is Linux. Those who expect to get a Windows clone with Linux are fools; that's not what it's meant to be.

And Joe, sorry, but your latest articles have been really poor. Please try putting less emphasis on quantity and more on quality.

Really a nonsensene article. Sorry to read such low-level journalism here.

Arrogance doesn't have a place in technical commentaries.

Joe! You're such a hack, man. I seriously don't grok how you get paid for pieces of sycophant food like this.

"Let's be sensible! For anyone who has minimal requirements and doesn't need MS compatibility, Linux is fine." --Arthur Norton

Oh! Let's *do* be sensible, indeed!

Here's the short-list of my minimal requirements:
Online access to installation media.
A non-disk-image, one-disc installation that takes less than 30 minutes from first boot to full usability...only rebooting once.
A system environment that never crashes. Period.
The ability to boot to multiple kernel images!
Solid hardware support without having to kiss some vendor's butt, hunt for driver CDs or disks, or download drivers and sneakernet them to a machine.
I need a widely-accepted and open scripting language with lightning-fast shell execution, as well as a shell environment that does a lot more than just showcasing "dir/a".
I need the ability to specify which environment I will boot into (GUI or CLI), and if said environment is to be single-user or multiuser mode.
I need several compiler and development environments.
I need immediate, broad-range archival compression algorithm support.
I must have sound and video editors, hex editors, DVI editors and viewers, SVG editors, ps/pdf creation programs, "over the wire" backup utilities, disk imaging, partitioning and partition recovery utilities...at the time of installation.
I refuse to do without network mapping and diagnostic utilities and security software.
My choice of GUI environments, from ridiculously 3-D and heavy, to lean and mean.
I need wordprocessing, spreadsheeting, graphics processing, database functions and lucid contact management "out of the box" with microsoft document compatibility from mso95 to present mso releases, because some people are still stuck in the legacy software paradigm. [*]
It's obvious that I need native ISO Open Standard Document compatibility, because I exchange information with people all over the globe.
Various CAD/CAM programs must be immediately installable, if not already installed.
Several browsers should be at my fingertips (all impervious to MSWindows compromises) realplayer, flash and java preinstalled and configured.
I should have at least 3 or 4 IM/IRC clients, that speak all protocols, available to my collaborative needs.
I should have my choice of several email clients. All impervious to MSWindows compromises.
(S)ftp clients, ssh access to my web server, a firewall that actually does something.
ImageMap editors, Link Status Verifiers and stylesheet editors and deguggers are required from the get-go.
Lucid CD and DVD burning/mastering software installed with the OS.
Various servers and server components must be immediately available to me. I should have the option to have Apache installed for me at the time I install the OS.
Full access to all system logs, configuration files and system settings. In human readable formats.
Package/update management processes which practice full disclosure and control over the end result.
The ability to login to and fully control any machine in my infrastructure, from the machine I am sitting at now, including stopping and starting any service, installing and removing software, and fully updating the Operating System via ssh.
The ability to install virtually any program to serve my needs with a few key-strokes or mouse-clicks; and no discs, or product keys.

Now...go get your XP or Vista retail CD/DVD...the one you bought off the shelf at CompUSA or BestBuy.

Sit down at a machine that is CAT5/5e/6/7, GboE, or fiber-connected to an Internet gateway, with a pair of virgin, 750GB, SATA hard drives.

Start installing.

By the time that you're done, if you claim that MSWindows can do more than even a tenth of my list, above, you're blowing smoke from your nether regions. You've also blown at least a couple hours of your time.

I know. I've done it.

You misstated the situation, Andy. Maybe MSWindows is fine for your modest needs, but I actually do something with a computer, you know. Linux is just about the only the OS that has the chops for my needs.

"SuSE Linux's developers issued a kernel update that made my system unstable."

That was obtuse. It's pretty obvious why you're happier with MSWindows.

Always keep GRUB/LILO entries for your newest kernel as well as the three preceding kernel iterations.
"That way, if a new kernel results in anomalous behavior, you can boot back into your earlier kernel image...which DOES WORK."
{smile}

[*] We've been using both StarOffice and OpenOffice for literally years, and submitting documents to those who claim that we are REQUIRED to use MSOffice for the sake of compatibility. We have yet to have it noticed, much less have a document or presentation rejected because of it.

So, if anyone is resting on document compatibility as an objection...that was moot years ago.

Somebody way up near the top said that the need for Windows can be reduced to people who need Adobe apps plus some CAD/engineering software.

1 - No, that reply is flabby logic. The need for THOSE TWO PEOPLE is Adobe + CAD/engineer.

2 - To say that people use apps, not operating systems, is missing the point. People use what they're comfortable with. That's Windows.

I have trained entry-level workers for the past nine years on a Windows app, week-in, week-out. In 1998-2000, it was pure hell when I encountered an older employee or anybody else who hadn't used a GUI-based operating system before. The whole mouse concept was foreign to them. We'd sit them down in front of Solitare for 15-20 minutes and they'd be fine. Believe it or not, even Mac users had problems with Windows.

As time progresses, though, I have encountered less and less people who have problems with Windows. Why? Because they use Windows at home, or at another job. Now everybody we train -- even those we are converting off DOS systems -- know how to use a mouse, use Windows, etc., because they do it at home, at other jobs, etc.

The Mac users -- those that are in a Mac bubble at home or school or other jobs -- still have a few problems with Windows.

I have tried to make the argument for my partner to use a Mac at home. After all, most of the work computing is just surfing and playing a few web-based games, like on Yahoo. He doesn't see truly what is "easier" about the Mac, and this guy is an excellent programmer! It just looks different, and he won't use it.

He and I will gladly continue to use Vista and XP, warts and all. It's what we like, it's what we know.

Look -- Linux may be more stable than Windows, and you may be able to find a desktop environment in Linux that is as flashy as Mac or Windows, and you may have equiv. apps out there for Linux... but who really cares?

People want what they're familiar with. Windows, due to Microsoft's monopoly, is what everybody is familiar with. You don't have to like that fact, but it's still a fact. All the whining in the world isn't going to change it.

Here's another point -- software developers make money selling Windows apps. I can tell you right now that if my company's app was Mac or Linux-based, I wouldn't make 1/10th the money I'm making now. We couldn't get businesses to convert their desktop O/S to Linux. We surely couldn't expect them to buy expensive Macs, either!

Perhaps if a company could take the Apple approach and sell good hardware WITH Linux on it, get it into a mass market retail store and get more people to WANT to buy it, then Linux for the desktop will have a viable future.

Until then...

Centerfield13 Linux already is working on that. Top of line motherboard with Linux embed in. Yep a not removable OS.

CAD is a program thing. There are commercial equals.

So you want windows fine. I will give you windows. 1 windows XP/Vista box to 10 seats. Local Linux firefox and other applications.

This system gives you all the functions of windows with less power use and less cost.

Its not a either OR game. You can have both Linux and Windows. Gives you the best cost per seat. Best power usage and complete function of Linux and windows.

I agree making Linux software at moment is not highly profitable. Problem is lack of a common ABI that covers everything needed. But with openlina it will be since that will give you 100 percent market coverage. They very thing .net promised and has not provided. Reason Linux binaries running perfectly well on Windows, Mac OS and Linux even blending in with native applications.

There is a market big one. Clock is ticking.

Joe
I am glad that you have finally realised the SJVN is an idiot!
That has been known for quite a long time, so please do not ever quote him again !
As for the comments ...well ... Joe I feel that the "Linux community" has swapped over from "Linux Watch" and are commenting here instead, all these commenters are so biased it's just not funny anymore.
And it seems that the more "moderate" commenters have left this site and that you are now left with likes of Chips, Marco and (heaven help you) I-Man, and other side of the arguement... there is none, they are no longer here !!
In my view you now have only anti microsoft commenters left here, the others have given up !!!

I am not exactly Anti Microsoft. I am not seeing that Microsoft has a answer.

Last time between 1998 and 2000 When everything was in the same kind of boat MS did not have a answer either. Instead bleed market until killer feature ADS was released.

Only one major difference then Linux had no device market share to use. Its now has 40 percent device market share to use. Japan desktop sales are slowing and being replaced by the device market. If this is a on going trend and expands. MS is in trouble. Note MS has less than 5 percent in the device market. A large section of that is there own X boxs.

Dismissing Linux as a possible Vista killer is jumping to far. There is a risk that Vista is going to kill the home desktop market completely. Top end business is going to come under attack threw intergation.

Now final and scary problem new hardware is being built for the desktop that can never run Vista. This is different to any other time in MS history. Normally the new hardware is normally big enough to run the New OS. Not having hardware produced too weak. So the natural old hardware will die and we have to move to Vista may not happen.

Basically things have gone wrong for Microsoft we want to know the damage. Not be told to put our head in the sand. That MS is a big company so it will win. Sorry MS is a small company. Value far less than hardware makers. Most of the major NAS and Device makers using Linux are many times bigger than Microsoft and they will have no question about taking MS market share its profitable.

Oh dear! Linux fanboys are almost as passionate as Mac fanboys but passion is no substitute for logic.

The plain fact is that most of us just want to perform tasks with our PCs and XP allows us to do just that. Over the years, XP has matured and gives such good service that many people prefer it to Vista, which - in its turn - may also mature (though the DRM stuff is a turn-off). Though Apple is selling more kit these days, it has its own problems (viz. the new iMac 'freezing' and the bugs in Leopard) - once you've looked at Time Machine and Cover Flow, you've seen the real improvements and they're usually not enough to make you 'convert'. The Linux world is in a state of flux. I left SuSE 10.1 because an updated kernel used a compiler version that hadn't been made available to me; as a result, my graphics went haywire. User reports of installing Ubuntu and Kubuntu 7.10 vary from ecstatic to suicidal. The other 'distros' are a mixed bag.

I'm OS-agnostic. I just want to get work done and it's easier in XP than in Linux - in my experience. I used VMware under Linux but the openSUSE developers decided to change the way that USB was supported and 'killed' VMware (it seems to be fixed now). Lately, UIDs have begun to be used instead of directory references, which is great because each drive is now identified uniquely but bad for the user because the UIDs are strings of (apparently) random digits! As usual, it's horses for courses: if Linux suits you, fine; if Mac OS is for you, fine; I just prefer XP. If I have to move from XP, it will be to something that offers me as much and more - it has to be better from my point of view not that of a developer or salesman.

WONDERFUL reality check joe. Thank you. And in customary form, the linux-tards get emotional. Somebody (joe) called their God a fat man with skimpy underware, and now its religous.

Thanks again joe. Fairly written piece.

This post simply shows the arrogance and/or lack of knowledge the writer has about any operating system that was not released by Microsoft.

It also shows a fairly large lack of knowledge concerning applications- other than those that run on Microsoft operating systems.

Presenting a one-sided viewpoint may make a writer look good to the corporate bean-counters- and the Boss- but it will not help your credibility in the market.

The above article does speak of some matters of contention in desktop operating system choice, but the conclusions it states are either false or misleading.
They are not correct.

Is Vista perfect? No, far from it.
The Windows-centric market has proven that with the extension to XP's service life and the problems Microsoft has had getting Vista adopted by users, both private and corporate.
Is it all bad?
Again, for some, and for some uses, no.
But XP is largely better according to THE OPERATING SYSTEM MARKET.

Is linux perfect? No.

I use linux, and even I can not deny that.
But the operating system itself is more solid and secure.

The main issue linux has is NOT even application compatibility although that does exist: not a failure of linux, but of the people who develop the software, for not porting applications to the operating system.

The main issue linux has is NOT hardware compatibility although there are, again, some problems there. This is somewhat less of an issue:
hardware that complies with published standards generally just WORKS in linux. Hardware that does not follow standards, but requires special drivers (and drivers that are usually "Not Certified" by windows as well) is more of a problem, but in many cases, even these devices have drivers.

The main issue linux has is NOT software support.
Support is freely available through online forums and communities, and this support tends to be better than the free support provided by Windows-centric communities or Microsoft.
For those who really WANT to pay for support, and not have to learn anything about the system they use, there are a lot of paid support options for linux as well.

Desktop linux has two main problems at this point:
1: Differing software package management systems mean that installing software is not always just a "point and click" process. It can be, but is not always, and those who are NOT familiar with linux may not find the easy ways to do things.

2: Misleading information posted by in blogs, articles and press releases.
Like this one.

Windows Vista will eventually achieve a level of success, merely due to the marketing machine of Microsoft, aided by the lower costs of the hardware itself.
Imagine if that 2GB of memory that Vista really needs cost $800 USD instead of $150...
Same thing with cpu speeds and video cards (specifically for gaming.)

Now imagine that I can run the same or similar software, with fancier 3D graphical desktop features in a system with 512mb of ram, half the cpu speed and a video card that costs $50 USD-

Oh wait- that's right, I can.... Using linux.

Upon re-reading my comment I realized that I missed a couple of pertinent pieces of information-

A very large number of Windows applications can be run successfully in linux using compatibility layer software (such as CrossOver Office or wine.)

For many applications there are applications in linux which have perfect or near perfect compatibility with Windows software titles- thanks to the programmers who have written software to work with common formats.
Word and Excel are two of these that work perfectly for me.

Joe, I think you missed the point. Steven's automaker comparison goes even deeper. A comparison that I believe even Steven missed in his own argument.

American automakers didn't loose market because the Japanese build cheaper better cars. They lost market because they couldn't or didn't build cheaper better cars. In other words they lost market because they couldn't keep up.

The current state of things quickly becomes irrelevant when you look at it from the perspective of evolution and improvement. Window's development process is broken, period.

Linux's small steps with minor version releases and this feeling of perpetual "beta" state has made more progress in less time than both Windows and OS X put together.

I started using Linux for business functions back in 2000. It was then only limited to server applications and working as network storage or routing devices. By 2001 with the advent of licensing 6.0 and all the rent-a-soft ideas coming from Redmond we evaluated the possibility of moving part of our systems to Linux. By the end of 2002 and early 2003 the ideas was a no go. Major linux distros had trouble auto mounting CD ROMs and more so USB drives. Linux was the laughing stock of the Windows community in terms of desktop usage.

About two years later I published a little picture at Extremetech showing my Linux desktop burning a CD, streaming audio from the web, viewing a DVD and chatting with my webcam on. A year later by early 2005 the Linux desktop already had transparency. Of course David Coursey was all over Vista(Longhorn back then). Talking how great it was going to be when it came out "this" year.

The word "this" must have been some secret codename that meant 2007. Because they kept saying "this" year, "this" year and it actually never came out the year those articles got published. Not even Mary Jo Foley got it right.

Of course all the Windows fan boys were all off when they said it would be a cold day in hell the day some major PC seller started shipping Linux. Well today we do have them. With a sense of poetic justice I may add. At about the same time Vista launched.

One must note that even Vista's flagship feature "Aero" can only be run on a few machines with high end graphics cards. A whole lot more systems can run Beryl (now Compiz Fusion) without a hickup. For a review of that go to youtube and look up Beryl. You'll quickly realize it outshines anything Aero has to offer.

More so Vista trashed the one golden feature Windows had. Application and driver support. All the things that were wrong with Linux suddenly became apparent in Vista. It was as if during the first months of this year Vista was a big step back from XP.

Meanwhile Linux kept evolving. It might not be up to speed with Windows. Let me correct that. Application developers may not be up to speed with Linux and thus haven't released many of their apps for it. That of course doesn't mean Linux is deficient. More so the fact that a lot of applications exist for Windows doesn't mean it isn't deficient. Window's development process is slow and sluggish. It isn't up to speed with the competition. It isn't even up to speed with what it used to be.

All the blind Microsoft supporters here are only driving more nails in the coffin. Do realize that change is needed and quickly if Windows is to keep pace. Particularly in a competitive web and networked market we see emerging today.

Do remember that in the beginning the Japanese sold small little cars that only poor high school and college kids drove. Everyone made fun of them, the cars and the brand names. Today the same brands carry some of the most high end cars in the market.

Do you all remember how Balmer and Gates used to laugh at Linux? Well Balmer stopped laughing a while back. That is good. He is still in the patents litigation floor. I'd wish he'd just go up a few more floors to the "lets get a good, reliable and maintainable product out the door" floor. He knows what can happen if he doesn't. He's from Detroit.

"Oh dear! Linux fanboys are almost as passionate as Mac fanboys but passion is no substitute for logic."

This, of course, is why the 'Linux fanboyce' use and understand self-respect, logic, critical thinking, Operating Systems, power switches, et al...and, of course, Linux.

"I left SuSE 10.1 because an updated kernel used a compiler version that hadn't been made available to me; as a result, my graphics went haywire."

Issues with nVidia or ATi, huh? I'm betting on ATi, myself. You have that certain 'quality' about you...but, anyways...thanks for the repetition, as well as confirming that you weren't competent to use even SuSE.
Sheesh! Even Fedora offers you the option of booting to your earlier kernel...this is older than RH6.0. Where have you been...beta testing Longhorn and astroturfing web logs?

"User reports of installing Ubuntu and Kubuntu 7.10 vary from ecstatic to suicidal."

Thanx for the laugh. Nobody serious about Linux speaks Shuttleworth's name even in a joking conversation.

"I'm OS-agnostic."

{gasp!} You don't say? You, obviously, aren't a student of Greek, either; but I have to say that you are spot-on with that admission. Thanks for sharing.

"I just want to get work done and it's easier in XP than in Linux - in my experience."

You need more experience, and you need to actually use a computer for work, instead of just email and surfing for porn .WMVs.

Yes but look closer vicky. This year Linux guys are taking ATI and Nvidia into there own hands.
Nvidia have provide better drivers for years to Linux. But by linux standards they are still crappy. So Teams are now reversing Nvidias cards. AMD is handing over the specs. So one day no drivers to install at all since you will have you Nvidia and ATI card drivers out box.
Biggest bug bear for Linux in business is having to use MS Exchange servers.
"User reports of installing Ubuntu and Kubuntu 7.10 vary from ecstatic to suicidal." Sorry to say that is about the same rating XP gets. Vista is more like a high for a few days then a month or two of I will get passed the problems then 100 percent turning suicidal due to warped problems.
Ubuntu is not that bad. Vista the Lemon takes beating I would say a 2003 maybe a 2004 linux might do it. But we are 2007.
Click install like windows is in the works for Linux.
There is logic vicky. More Linux laptops on way. More Linux Desktops on way. Bottom edge of market is going to come under 200 dollars for a desktop case and under 400 dollars for a laptop. How are we going to stay selling product effective and stay full windows in a market like that. Vista alone is worth more than the laptop. Even worse this new bottom level hardware cannot run vista.
Ie High end sports car for limited numbers ie Vista, XP. Linux low end. This is a problem. Linux Low end does not mean giving up Windows software in business either. The said bit is out box the Linux Low end will be getting more software for nothing. Nothing been said by the Microsoft supporters have explained how they win. Does not help that the home computer market is slowly dieing. People have more important things to do with there time.
I have to be able to make a profit selling it and not get under cut all the way. Currently Linux items are really threating to kill lots of my markets.

"'Linux' doesn't run any of my Windows applications,...

No, not those special Windows *Wares and Virus apps the last time I checked.

What a rude rant from "vicky from brook"! I wonder why some people seem incapable of discussing technological issues calmly and sensibly.

I have used computers since the 1970s (IBM and Burroughs mainframes, DEC VAXes, CP/M machines, IBM PCs, etc). In my time, I have solved a fair number of computer-related problems and enjoyed it. Now, however, I just want a system that works. Yes, I could spend time undoing the botched update that SUSE sent out but, quite frankly, I can't be bothered. Before 'openSUSE' came on the scene, I never had a problem with updates or incompatibility from one release to the next and I have neither the time nor the patience to debug the latest SUSE experiment. If the Linux proponents want Windows users to try their OS, let alone to switch, they will have to be more considerate and disciplined.

I believe in freedom and I do not castigate other people for the choices that they make. I also believe that competition is healthy and that a successful Linux and Mac OS would be good for the user.

Microsoft's business practices are, to put it charitably, questionable. Sooner or later, if competition is to get a chance, the OS and applications sides will have to be separated fully; the failure to do that after the DOJ and States proved their cases is a disgrace.

Nonetheless, people who buy PCs just want to do whatever they got the machines for. If that's only e-mail or word-processing, so what? There is room for everyone, from dedicated hacker (not cracker) to casual user. OS wars are as pointless as architecture wars and other such nonsense. The PC is, for many of us, just a commodity now. If it's a hobby for some, good luck to them.

BTW: nasty remarks about porn merely show the hollowness of your arguments.

vista works with swapping hard drives ?

At least until XP, windows barfs if you did that. It wouldn't even boot or even if it did, you couldn't do anything because even the mouse/KB wouldn't work for me. This was with nvidia card on both machines.

Linux, OTOH, when I took the HD to another m/c with ( different) nvidia card and whole set of different h/w, worked fine, incl h/w accelerated 3D and all the common h/w ! XP could NEVER do that.

Try it ! Move it to a different PC where it was not installed.

People never remember their history. The same complaints were made when XP came out. But Microsoft kept improving it and now it is the preferred OS, same thing will happen with Vista.

And no, the Device driver installation for Linux doesn't work like XP or Vista, I've done it and I know, Linux is a Geek OS, a majority of people are not Geeks (I on the other hand like playing under the hood).

Linux crusaders tend to denegrate anybody who says Linux is not ready for the desktop. They also tell people who are trying to learn how to use Linux that they are idiots, they should already know that. Not something that draws people to Linux.

And programming for Windows XP gives me Millions more desktops to target than Linux. I make much more money programming Windows desktop software. It's a fact. The Linux people write Micro$oft with the dollar sign as if it is something that is denegrating, but I have a family to feed and Money is the way to feed them, I can't afford to be a crusader. Maybe in politics but not with my lively hood (at least not for the war between Linux and windows, it doesn't mean world destruction even if the Linux crusaders think it does).

jrh
I totally agree with everything that you have said.
I wish you could have a talk to Chips and Marco, boy would you put them in their place ...finally !!

Quote:

And programming for Windows XP gives me Millions more desktops to target than Linux. I make much more money programming Windows desktop software. It's a fact. The Linux people write Micro$oft with the dollar sign as if it is something that is denegrating, but I have a family to feed and Money is the way to feed them,

End of Quote

A good reason for you to program for Microsoft, also a good reason for me to use Linux.

It's the hardware requirements that make Vista insane. I'm getting fairly good performance running Ubuntu as a home desktop on a Pentium III with 256 mb RAM that I bought for 60 dollars. No 3D games, no goofy 3D desktop, but all the useual home and office amenities, including You tube, music and video, DVDs. On a sixty dollar computer. With a brand new OS that I downloaded for free.

I wasn't a computer geek when I started to use Linux, but I did have to become one. It's not the OS itself that makes Linux difficult for ordinary users; it's the lack of support. If people had to download and install Vista themselves, they would fare no better. Preinstalled and preconfigured Linux (now offered by Dell and WALLMART) should change the picture dramAtically. I hear that the 200 dollar Linux Desktop that Walmart is selling is doing well. The picture is changing... but having found it challenging (albeit rewarding) myself, I know that the usability issue is real.

But for most people, the issue of applications is a mirage. I really don't think most people need these expensive Windows applications, certainly not nonprofessionals. A commercial artist might prefer photoshop, I've never used it so I don't know its any better than the gimp, but I can't imagine why a student or home user would need Microsoft Office. My last experience with Word was Word 2000, which had more bells and whistles than a Coney Island Fun House, and was about as conducive to actual writing.

I question the idea that Windows applications are inherently superior. Maybe some of the really expensive ones have an advantage, (or maybe not) but try to imagine life without adware, spyware, or crapware. I know it sounds like a hardship, but you do get used to it!

"I buy the analogy of Japanese transportation in the 1880s. So ... Linux still has 110 years of development work and channel partner building before Windows is ever threatened." - I bet IBM thought similar years ago about the desktop computer shortly before their typewriter sales travelled in the direction of /dev/null

Please remove your head from your ass and smell the competition...

WOW! WORST ANALOGY EVER!

Are you saying that the PC took IBM by surprise? Who do you think invented the PC?

Nevertheless, I think I'm on your side of the debate. "Compared to Windows, 110 years of development" from the Linux community takes about ten years.

I've been using Linux for just over five years, and I'm still amazed at the development I've seen in the time that it took for Microsoft to squeeze out Vista.

And, though the issue of usability is real, let's remember that it's ephemeral. Linux is harder when you don't know how to use it, easier when you do know how to use it.

These days, the command line is only necessary for configuration tasks (and not in all distros) and that means that when Linux starts to come preinstalled, it's not really going to be an issue... BUT the thing about the command line is that when you don't know how to use it, it's a pain, but when you do know how to use it, it's like butter. The command line cuts through the most boring tasks, particularly when you add scripting... and the integration of the command line into the desktop gui means that it's always a choice. Therefore it's always a servant, never a master. It only helps, it cannot hurt.

Yeah yeah I know most people think the command line is poison, but for once, lets talk about reality instead of perception. The reality is that Linux is a more advanced operating system because it gives me two tools and allows me to choose which one I prefer on a moment by moment, taks by taks basis, while Windows generally hands me one tool. It took me a couple of years of using Linux to start using the command line, and now I promise you that it's going to save me countless thousands of hours over the rest of my computing lifetime, and until Windows matches it, I'm not going back.

Arthur Norton wrote:

Yes, I could spend time undoing the botched update that SUSE sent out but, quite frankly, I can't be bothered. Before 'openSUSE' came on the scene, I never had a problem with updates or incompatibility from one release to the next and I have neither the time nor the patience to debug the latest SUSE experiment.

(Sigh) You're talking about openSUSE 10.1, aren't you?

I was a SUSE user doing that period and, that was indeed a disaster. Some skilled users were able to get it running okay, but I went back to 10.0 while they worked it out.

OpenSUSE released a remastered version of 10.1 that worked fine, but it only came out a few weeks before 10.2.

It's fair for you to bring up the 10.1 debacle, it's not fair to use it to represent all of SUSE's history, or all of Linux. SUSE 10.0 worked great. The remastered 10.1 workwed great. OpenSUSE 10.2 worked great. I've switched to Debian, but I hear good things about 10.3.

Damn I'm late. When did Microsoft-watch.com become a comedy portal??

The bit about Linux not running any software you'd want, specially Office was hilarious! Props to Joe Wilcox. You should start touring, email me when you're doing stand-up in the South Florida area.