Full article.
All I can say is with Linux getting this kind of backing from such a high profile player, MS had better make Longhorn decent.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
IBM puts cash behind Linux push
- Thread starter edesignuk
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
All I can say is with Linux getting this kind of backing from such a high profile player, MS had better make Longhorn decent.
We can only hope they fail like they did with OS/2. Fortunately, IBM has always been pretty inept with software. They can throw all the money they want at Linux, but that doesn't change the fact that it, designwise, is Unix: a relic from the days before most of us were born when "everything is a file" actually made sense as a "philosophy." Unless IBM can break some *major* ground, it will be pushing one of the most scatterbrained, user-unfriendly operating systems ever onto people's computers.
broken_keyboard said:
Yes I read an article about "living with Linux"
The article clearly stated that Linux had become a lot better than what it used to be, but it still could not match OS X and Windows in userbility on a daily level.
Some of the bad things that they mentioned was that there were so many drivers for hardware that does not exist for Linux yet
Platform said:Yes I read an article about "living with Linux"
The article clearly stated that Linux had become a lot better than what it used to be, but it still could not match OS X and Windows in userbility on a daily level.
Some of the bad things that they mentioned was that there were so many drivers for hardware that does not exist for Linux yet
I think Linux is not for everyone (me included). I used to enjoy hacking around with low level operating system stuff, but nowadays I want it to just work, so I can get on with whatever I'm supposed to be doing. I think it's main advantage over other OSs is that it is so configurable, but that is a mixed blessing.
I dunno, it seems to me that Linux truly is the OS of the future, though it is still in an unfinished state. I expect to see more work done with blending the Linux OS with various proprietary GUIs a la OS X. Or maybe people will just become increasingly computer savy and learn how to use Linux better.
Linux has great speed and stability - two items that are in doubt with Longhorn.
Linux has great speed and stability - two items that are in doubt with Longhorn.
alex_ant said:
Don´t forget MacOS is based on BSD - Unix. Furthermore, Linux is not user - unfriendly. It´s just a kernel and everyone is free to set up a systen based on the Linux - kernel to his desires. The latest KDE - Desktop is more user - friendly than the product out of Redmont. Also Apple did appreciate KDE´s efforts by basing Safari on khtml.
MacOS still rulez
All I said was what I said: Unix is ancient and braindead. No, not everything on the planet is Unix based besides Windows and OS400 and OS390, not by far - you just think it is because Unix is all you know, because Unix is what everybody always ascribes the buzzwords to and says is the best. "Powerful!" "Stable!" "Flexible!" "Standard!" Historically these statements have never been any more true for Unix than any other OS. Its success has been extremely Microsoftian: the inferior, commercially-acceptable Goliath winning out over the less well-known, less well-funded, technologically superior Davids. And I can give plenty of examples if you want them...daveL said:
Unix is a way of doing easy things the hard way. It's a way of putting the computer above the user and guarding sacred knowledge. It is anti-democratic, anti-progress, elitist, technocratic at its very core.
Apple and Unix are one of the most curious synergies because, philosophically, Unix is the most anti-Mac OS in existence. OS X is overall a good OS *despite* its Unix underpinnings. My pet theory is that Apple/Jobs use Unix in order to 1) play it safe; 2) play off the "powerful/stable/flexible/standard" myths; and 3) get labor from ideological geek developers who will work for free on Darwin.
That is the very epitomy of user-unfriendly.09872738 said:
No it isn't, I guarantee you it isn't, because it can't be more user-friendly if you need to know that there is such a thing as "Linux," but Linux is not an OS, it's just a kernel, and there are many different distributions of Linux which use various different graphical interfaces, one of which is called KDE, which is a desktop environment, unlike some other distributions which do not use complete desktop environments, but rather only window managers, but anyway back to KDE, there is a fair amount of software for it, but some isn't *for* it per se, but will work in it anyway, but won't look the same because it's written for a competing desktop called GNOME, which by the way is also on your computer and which you can invoke at any time, because two desktop environments is actually better than one, because it gives you a choice between the obscure irrelevant software ideology *you* prefer!!!
This is all well and good, rah rah khtml etc., my point was that Unix is a dinosaur and it is.
Sorry, I've been in this business for over 30 years, and you have no idea what you're talking about.alex_ant said:
So, tell us, oh enlightened one, which OS should we bow to? BeOS (the OS with no apps)? Are we worthy of your knowledge (since you offer no alternatives)?
alex_ant said:
Ja... but you seem to hate all Unix, I was just talking about Linux.
I actually think some of the Unix ideas are really good. The hierarchical filesystem is so simple and yet lets you model many common data situations without a database. The idea of piping commands together in the shell is very powerful. Also the idea the everything is a file serves to give you a simple interface (open, seek etc.) to a great variety of devices.
C'mon, it's not all bad
Look, when I say that Unix/Linux sucks, I am not saying that I think everything else is oh so great. I'm saying just that Unix/Linux sucks. I understand that I sound negative, but I think I'm actually positive because I want computers to be more advanced than they are today, and I think Unix/Linux are a philosophical and technical retreat to the dark ages. There is no single system that gets it all right. What there have been, is a lot of systems that have furthered progress in operating systems and computer science in general only to be snuffed out by more popular, politically acceptable systems from companies like IBM, Sun, HP, and Microsoft.daveL said:
If you want to talk about BeOS: Of course BeOS had no apps. What it did have were things like an innovative and advanced implementation of pervasive multithreading, a robust and useful database filesystem, and a highly optimized core for low-latency I/O. Do you want to ignore all this because it had no apps? Let's talk about Multics, let's talk about VMS, let's talk about NeWS, TOPS-20, the Lisp Machine, NeXT (Unix core I know, but they got the graphical part right), Cedar-Mesa, ITS... Mac OS!!!! I'm not saying any of these are necessarily great by themselves, I'm saying they all had at least several great ideas that were smooshed under Unix's foot. If you take a stroll down the path through history of OSes killed by one factor or another, you will find *a lot* of innovation that has been either ignored or directly attacked by the Unix vendor hegemony. Unix doesn't care about any of this. It lives inside its own world, where everything it does, it does the "correct" way, because "that's the way it has always been done." It *never advances.* That is the way I see it kind sir.
It's like saying counting on your fingers lets you model many common math situations without math. A database filesystem is SO much more powerful and can even facilitate hierarchy if you want it to, but it will never gain popularity in Unix because Unix's proponents will say "Why would you need that? We have SYMLINKS!!!!!!" (*puts head in hands*)broken_keyboard said:
(Unix, btw, didn't invent the hierarchical filesystem, although I will give it credit for attempting one in a few instances)
"Unix pipes = powerful" is a popular myth. What they certainly are though is highly fragile and unflexible and unportable and prone to catastrophic consequences as a result of programmer error and a lot harder to learn and manage than higher-level solutions.
Everything is a file works fine when you need to communicate in ASCII, like in earlier decades when devices were simple and could be controlled by simple byte streams. It was even really cool then. But we don't use line printers anymore - we use laser or inkjet printers that require complex control languages, we use sound cards that have multiple channels and advanced mixers and DSPs onboard, we use advanced scanners and video capture cards with hardware compressors and software modems. Unix/Linux are still struggling to cope with all of this, and where they do succeed, it is almost always with a nonstandard, hack-job implementation for which user-level software needs to be custom-tailored. This is not good design. Unix is being dragged into the 21st century kicking and screaming.
(And this is only how "everything is a file" breaks down with devices. Unfortunately it applies to more than devices - it applies to everything!)
alex_ant said:
Ok, i understand, you don´t like it. All right.
But please, if you don´t like it, state just that. Do not post any factoids. You apparently have your personal dispute with *nixes, what is, however, no reason to be dishonest.
alex_ant said:
Correct in some way. Usually *nices are made for servers. They don´t have to be user friendly. They have to be stable, secure. There´s no need for a sophisticated, hyper-userfriendly GUI on a web-server. It just has to serve web - content 24/7
"Do not post any factoids" ??? I'm only trying to make a point, do I have to stop using facts now? Of course this is only my opinion, and the reason I'm presenting all this evidence is to try to sway people who will read it into agreeing with me. That's how argument works....09872738 said:
The article said:
I'm not asking for world peace and an end to global poverty here... I just wish people would expect more from their software. Mediocrity is so entrenched, most people don't know it doesn't have to be that way. This is the fight Mac advocates fight every day. We know we have a superior system. We need to make sure we keep in mind what, ideologically, *makes* our system superior, and keep up the fight to spread these ideals.
It's not Unix that makes the Mac better!!