I was away from normal email, but when checking my inbox via my iPhone I was able to see a lot of messages on this thread. I thought "Wow, a lot of people sure are excited to talk about Linux!" I should have realized it was a flame war. I'd like to just take a moment to note a few things. * Re: Collusion between Intel and Microsoft to somehow harm Linux * Having just finished a twelve year tour at Intel where I maintained a distribution of Open Source tools across multiple Linux distros, and before that, multiple flavors of vendor-supported *nix, I can tell you this isn't true. If you think Microsoft and Intel get together for group love fests and anti-linux strategy sessions, think again. Microsoft and Intel are strategic partners. They will work with each other to when necessary to fix problems. Strategic business partners do that in every industry. Beyond that Intel doesn't give a damn how many PCs are running Windows, and how many are running Linux. What they care about is that it is Intel iron under the hood. Intel wised up very quickly to the fact that x86 architecture was the dominant architecture for Linux, and that a lot of big-iron companies were willing to embrace Linux because no one strictly controlled it. Linux is deemed very much a part of Intel's strategic plan - so much so quite a few of the top kernel developers are now employed at Intel in the Open Source Technology Labs. Moblin - Intel's SDK/OS for the Atom processor, is also part of the Open Source Technology Center and is fundamentally based on Linux. Where Intel has to tread carefully is that they cannot trumpet the virtues of Linux over Windows too loudly - to some degree their hands are tied. But in the market where Linux makes money - the enterprise computing environment - Linux wins the day on its own merits. Consider the fact that Bing runs over Linux clusters before disputing that claim too loudly. (Not to mention, check out the Halloween Documents.) Moving on to some of Bob's comments: On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 1:45 PM, bob <r_a_wilkinson at yahoo.com> wrote: > Although I loved Linux compared to DOS, there just wasn't any quality, > user friendly office productivity software. > At the time you performed this assessment, Linux was a home-brew attempt at providing a POSIX compliant kernel whose functionality was based on the design and principles of Unix, and whose goal was to be a "free Unix", in essence. Office productivity wasn't the goal of the GNU/Linux at that time, and the vast majority of its users would have you pry their emacs or vi editors from their cold, dead hands before they would resort to the steaming pile of stink that is Word. In short, your off-hand dismissive assessment is an apple's to oranges comparison based on ignorance. That doesn't make your observation any less valid objectively - or your decision to stick with windows any less logical. If I were in the same position I was in years ago, I would sill have to > go with Windows because of the lack of quality, user friendly > productivity software. AS much and as fast as Linux had evolved, it > still can't compete in the office environment with non-techie users. > Sadly, Windows can't compete in an office environment with non-techie users either. I support a predominantly windows environment for a concrete company now. I challenge you to find a less technical user base. Just today, while helping someone set up something as stupid-simple as an email signature, I ran into html rendering inconsistencies in two different Microsoft products that added up to some immense frustration. Now... if your complaint is that Word doesn't exist on Linux, well... that's partly true. You can run Word through Wine if you really want to. But that said, Open Office has met all of my WYSIWYG needs for office apps, and I'm convinced after two months of learning pains my support load would be lower if the environment was running over a good Linux distro. The most important point though, is that Linux lovers need to stop > arguing with me and fix the problems. If you don't, Linux will always > be inferior to Windows for the masses. But then.... isn't that what > some of you really want? > Bob, if you can't read this paragraph and see just how blindly conceited this is, then do me a favor. Open up your virtual suitcases, pack your things, and find another community to crap on. Kind regards, -Rob On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 1:45 PM, bob <r_a_wilkinson at yahoo.com> wrote: > I started using Linux back in the DOS days when the company I worked for > wanted me to study the differences between the new Microsoft Windows OS > that was just introduced, and Linux for the work place. > > Although I loved Linux compared to DOS, there just wasn't any quality, > user friendly office productivity software. > > About 2 years ago I heard of Ubuntu and gave it a try. WOW what a > difference. I am using Linux more and Windows less every day... on my > home computer. > > If I were in the same position I was in years ago, I would sill have to > go with Windows because of the lack of quality, user friendly > productivity software. AS much and as fast as Linux had evolved, it > still can't compete in the office environment with non-techie users. > > Give me some GOOD OCR software and much better hardware compatibility, > and I will change my mind, throw out Windows, and never look back! > > The most important point though, is that Linux lovers need to stop > arguing with me and fix the problems. If you don't, Linux will always > be inferior to Windows for the masses. But then.... isn't that what > some of you really want? > > > _______________________________________________ > TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota > tclug-list at mn-linux.org > http://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mn-linux.org/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20100204/a17f6246/attachment.htm