Linux killer!

Jim Cornette fc-cornette at insight.rr.com
Wed Nov 2 03:30:37 UTC 2005


STYMA, ROBERT E (ROBERT) wrote:

>Tim:
>
>  
>
>>Though there are cases, and this seems like one of them, where this is
>>next to impossible.  Not because Linux can't do the task, but because
>>the server deliberately excludes clients.  There's any number of
>>internet services which are deliberately designed to only work with
>>Windows, for no good reason.  Not *just* because they can't figure out
>>how to support everyone, but sometimes because they want to be
>>deliberately obstructive.
>>
>>    
>>
>....
>  
>
>>I'm not so sure that Linux even wants to be a direct replacement for
>>Windows, just a viable alternative for those who want it.  
>>For those who
>>want Windows, there is Windows.
>>
>>    
>>
>A fair number of people would like to see Linux make inroads into
>the business desktop arena.  As PC's became popular in the 1980's
>Windows had a leg up on the competitors like OS2 because of their
>popularity in the consumer market.  Unix's were popular among those
>who were educated in technical fields because it was freely available
>to universities.  Inroads made in the consumer market may help 
>Linux in the business desktop.  If nothing else, the lessons learned
>in this area will make Linux more polished.
>
>I agree with your statements about companies being deliberately obstructive.
>Microsoft has good reason to be obstructive.  Also companies like
>Symantec, Network Associates (McAfee), and other companies who make
>their business working around flaws in Windows have good reason to 
>see Linux not grow.
>
>Bob Styma
>
>  
>
Running a system where you need to pay "protection" in order to not have 
your shop destroyed or your hard drive broken sounds like a racket to 
me. Most the windows users that I know do not have antivirus or spyware 
software on there machines and they are rampant with malware of all 
sorts. There should be protection from these from Microsoft with no 
charge and using an automated new virus definition upgrade.

For these users to come over to Linux would introduce a large number of 
users that run unpatched  Linux boxes. There needs to be a system to 
upgrade these systems automatically by default. Linux has the 
possibility to run updating programs in the background and keep the 
common user for desktops unknowingly a reduced risk from having patched 
instead of unpatched systems.

Multimedia is somewhat of an issue for it to not work by default. With 
yum and multimedia oriented repositories available now, multimedia not 
installed by default is only an initial inconvenience that can be dealt 
with.

Jim

-- 
QOTD:
	If it's too loud, you're too old.




More information about the fedora-list mailing list