Linux SUCKS and should never be used by human beings.

[drag]

I've got scripts I've made for calling up windows and doing different actions.

For instance I have the GTK version of Emacs open running pretty much constantly in server-mode. In this mode I have 'emacsclients' programs that open various text files and such. When they open a file it sends it to the already running emacs session and opens up in a new buffer. I have 6 virtual desktops open with various windows and other crap running. I open up a text file from the command line, from the web browser (say, 'show source') or from the file manager it doesn't matter. They all open it up using emacsclient.

Then by hitting one of those extra 'multimedia' buttons on my keyboard it goes and finds the emacs session for me, brings it to whatever virtual desktop I am on, moves it to the front, and focuses on it. It's easy and with the Emacs gui I can use key bindings (setup for vi-like bindings) or use the mouse or anything else I want. It's pretty mindless and it's instant.

I don't even have to alt-tab.

That's just one example.

The emacs-find button actually runs a bash script, which I wrote and tested from teh command line. Took me a whole 7 minutes to write it. Here it is:
if wmctrl -R emacs-snapshot-gtk; then true ;else emacs-snapshot-gtk;fi

It tries to switch to emacs, if it fails it just launches a new editor.


Another example is my media player. My keyboard is just a 'HP Internet keyboard', and it only has one button for media playing.
For music I have 'mpd' running in the background. Its just a service that runs with no GUI or command line or anything that runs and just plays music. I can play most common formats on it no problem, and I have several internet music feeds I use from it.

If I hit the play/pause button on my keyboard it toggles pause/play.
If I hit alt-play then it plays the next song.
if I hit ctrl-play then it plays the previous song.
if I hit ctrl-alt-play then it stops it.
if I hit shift-play then it either launches the GUI front-end for it, or if a GUI front end is already running it will find it, bring it to the front and change focus to it.

From that Gui-front end I can see the album art, or even read lyrics if I wanted to. I mostly use it just for building playlists.

I have a system monitoring application that runs in the background. Uses up almost no resources. Shows cpu load for each core. Has a graph with the history of cpu usage for the past 5 minutes or so. Has file system usage, network usage graphs and speeds, disk IO speed and graph, list system load, lists the top 4 most cpu intensive applications, top four most memory intensive applications, lists the number of current network connections, lists the seven newest connections by ip address and port.

I can view it with a simple keypress to switch desktops to a empty desktop, or a keypress to 'show desktop'.


I have multiple ways to launch applications. Only one of them requires a mouse.
1. hit the search button on my desktop.
This launches beagle-search. In there I type the name or the sort of application I want.
For instance if I search for python I get:

* launcher for python shell for python 2.4
If I hit enter it will launch it. Otherwise I can use the arrow buttons to show the other 2 selections, which is a interpretor for version 2.5, or IDLE Python integrated development envrionment.
* a Folder that contains a ebook for python development
* A montypython skit I downloaded from google video.
* some python scripts (3 are shown, 7 are aviable)
* A website from my browser history
* 31 links from my RSS feed reader.

If I search for 'card' I get:
* Gnome Blackjack game.
with extra results for Gnome Solitare game, and a application for displaying sound card information.
* 8 text files
* and 29 results from RSS feed reader.

and so on and so forth.

Also I have a 'beaglefs' user-space file system. I can 'mount' searches as directories that will gather results and make sym links to them and it will continue to gather them on the fly.
Like a virtual folder.

The second method for launching applications is through the gmrun application.
I hit Alt-F2 to launch it.
I has tab support and will allow me to cycle through possible application matches. It's quick. As long as I know the first 2-3 letters of the application name it takes me about 3 seconds to find it and launch it, if that.

The third method is to run applications from a terminal. This is usefull for things that require special switches for unusual functionality.
I hit my 'favorites' button on the keyboard and it will find a terminal, bring it to the front and change focus to it. If there is no terminal aviable then it launches one.


The the last method I use is through the debian menu. I can access it through right clicking on teh background or through the menu applet I have stuffed into one of the corners of the screen. Applications are not arranged according to maker, but the are arranged according to functionality. Like if I want 'Gimp' I go through app >> graphics >> The Gimp.


Needless to say the one were I am forced to use the mouse is the one that I use least. Although I can navigate through it with the keyboard arrow keys. I may end up binding a key to the menu, but I don't care anough to do that right now.

I also re-mapped my keyboard to get rid of the caps-lock key.


Then there are other silly things like that that I do. Sure it takes a bit to set them up, but it'll save me time over the long haul and also cuts down on distractiosn by a large margin when I am trying to concentrate on something. I don't have to stop typing and go hunting and pecking all over the place.

And I know that normal people wouldn't doing stuff like that, but it doesn't realy matter to me right now. If they want to have a fully GUI system to clicking around all day they can use full-on KDE or Gnome and most everything is GUI based.

 

[Doom Machine]

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze

Originally posted by: Doom Machine

Originally posted by: nweaver

Originally posted by: Doom Machine
vista is the most intuitive os out there, i've used many,i cant speak about macs os 10 or upcomming leopord, havnt used them and no one could count how high a number of linux distro's i havnt used, but vista is so informative anyone who never used a computer can navigate it
vista is teh definition of dummified. the one in all solution thats all GUI with simple step by step process's that explain what your options are.
if my g/f can get on xp for the first time ever useing a computer and navigate...then i know vista is very intuitive.

for a new user, linux is the os that requires learning, you even have to learn to browse the web,research different distros just to figure out which one to download

what would you do if Windows didn't come on your computer?

it didnt, even an old radioshack tandy i used back in the early 80's had no os either but if you kept up with the forum you would notice i never speak for myself personally but rather on behalf of the majority of computer users who arnt enthusiastic about learning an OS but rather the tools thats on it.

anyone can use a linux box that has been set up

lol, where exactly? dell, alienware? must be nice to know someone to set it all up for you for free

also FYI i have total 5 computers in my house, only 1 i use for myself but i have one other that i had installed both suse 10 and xandros 4.0 at seperate times...neither of which solved my g/f from whining about this or that...wah, i cant find my recipies...wah i want to install this but cant figure out how...wah, whats this thingy do, wah, what does this mean....wah...wah...wah

yeah thats all the crying i heard about those till i bought an imac for the kitchen and some reciepe/tax/financial...etc software for her to easier use, you know the stuff with manuals and help menus so i dont have to listen to questions...and her son cedric, i had to point him to the firefox icon to get online.....i never showed him anything in the XP one, it was no brainer for him in windows cause internet can be browsed from any open window, plus the words internet explorer kinda give it away vs firefox or opera which the words alone has no meaning to the internet. and him being a typical teenage boy, he now doesnt use the linux one rather xp cause he can play his games on it and browse the web just the same rather than switch back in forth pointlessly to do the same thing he can do on the one that has his games

And before you say anything, there is a high likely hood that my perception of intuitive

well to be clear i think of intuitive as several things

>1 click step or a step by step process thats guided
>clear,available information about what your seeing (help icons on each window or balloon tips for example)
>software with names that are directly relevant to what its for (seamonkey browser for example does nothing to tell anyone thats its an internet browser.)
pretty much everything in vista has app names associated, windows mail,movie maker..etc
>everything GUI and no keyboard interaction...its amazing how many people "peck" and look at the keyboard as they type, thats counter productive and time consuming.

i dont need all that...most of you guys dont need all that, thats the difference between enthusiasts and pretty much everyone else as i doubt any of them are even reading this thread to begin with going back to an earlier question to nothingman and couple others that keeps getting ignored ..what do you hope to achieve in this thread?
perhaps the same achievments you'd make in a abortion vs non abortion thread

Umm...excuse me...but typing on the keyboard is counter-productive??? Holy sh!t, And I was starting to find the mouse counter-productive (except for the copy/paste thing). And no, I'm not being sarcastic. I'm far FAR FAAAAR more productive using the keyboard then the mouse on a daily basis. Using the mouse you need to click on the icon, go to whatever menu you need to do whatever you need, click on whatever menu you need, blah blah blah, and then appy, done, whatever.

Using the command line. 1 click on the console. type for 2-3 seconds, press enter, and then your done.

you just proved it...1 click on icon or 1 click then 2-3 seconds for typing ...gee which is faster, DUHH!( i'm glad you can type btw, many people cant or do you think everyone is as good at as you?)
and if gui's wernt as productive...then why do most of the popular os's use gui's?..hmmm

I forgot, where did I install that damn application again? Is it in c:\program files? or elsewhere? I don't know! I'll have to look.

if you install elsewhere besides default, thats your own counter productive technique, not the os's
since your so fond of the keyboard alone, you press winkey then start typing immediatly and press enter, no mouse required and your files are right there

speaking of counter productive..your post is that as well

also FYI ever heard of HOTKEYS? click keyboard and any app you want, maybe direct it to your program files folder so you can find stuff if your so pc illiterate

 

[ShawnD1]

I don't understand why anybody is arguing against the use of a GUI or how Windows fundamentally works since KDE/Linux are moving towards a Windows-style way of being used.

I installed Kubuntu a few days ago and the layout is so similar to Windows XP that I can zip around and get things done without learning too much. Kubuntu has a list of installed applications which can be uninstalled with the click of a button; that is a feature taken directly from Windows. Kubuntu has an automatic update system that is very similar to that of Windows; you click the updates you want then hit ok, you do not need to type anything. The icon and wizard for wireless internet are exactly the same as that in Windows XP SP2 (not sure who had the idea first, but it's good they both have this). The Samba networking wizard, similar to the one in Windows, made it easy to connect to my Windows network and start sharing files. Konqueror now has a tab system where it previously did not; it evolved the way Internet Explorer did.

The distinctions between Linux and Windows are becoming fewer and fewer. Whether or not Linux should be "used by human beings" is debatable, but the question of GUI or no GUI is not.

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze
In windows, i open load up applications using the run command. takes shorter amount of time.

It takes you less time to click on Run, then type "C:\Program Files\Program15\Program15.exe" than it does for you to click on the "Program15" icon in the Start Menu?

My perception of intuitive = Makes logical sense.

You seem to use the word logic as if the things that you like are the only logical things and that everything else is by default illogical.

In Linux all your system binaries are located in /usr/sbin (makes complete sense)

"C:\Windows\System32" makes sense too, though they are not all in that directory.

non-system binaries are locationed in /usr/bin (makes sense)

Or /opt. Or /usr/opt. Or wherever else the program feels like putting it. In Windows the default location is "C:\Program Files\". That makes sense to me.

all config file are in /etc (makes sense)

Now that is very much lacking in Windows.

files on your desktop are in /home/<user>/Desktop (makes sense)

"C:\Users\Hyperblaze\Desktop" makes sense too.

I want to find a file, I have better chances finding the damn file if I do a search for it. I should not need a search.

If you don't know where it is, yes, you have to search for it. You've never used which, whereis, or find before?

I want to check out my account. C:\document and settings\<user>\<whatever other directories>

It's just "C:\Documents and Settings\Hyperblaze\". Other things are subdivided from there, but would you really like everything crammed into one directory? In Vista it's "C:\Users\Hyperblaze".

I forgot, where did I install that damn application again? Is it in c:\program files? or elsewhere? I don't know! I'll have to look.

Just like your beloved /usr/bin directory, the default location for any sane program is "C:\Program Files\". Can you change that? Sure. Can you change it in Linux? Sure. Why do you have problems with remembering that directory?

Windows is far from perfect, I don't think that anyone outside of the most rabid fanboy circles will argue that it is, but your citicisms of it here in this post are very shallow. Is Windows more intuitive than a default Debian or Red Hat install? Maybe. It's certainly more intuitive than some of the OSes and environments that I've used and it's certainly not so unintuitive that it warrants switching to Linux on that point alone.

 

[drag]

I don't understand why anybody is arguing against the use of a GUI or how Windows fundamentally works since KDE/Linux are moving towards a Windows-style way of being used.

I don't think it's against the use of the GUI.

They are argueing against the use of the command line, which is silly. Scripting and command line has always been faster for most stuff. You script it once then it's just a keypress or a 4 letter word and 'enter'.

The GUI has the advantage that it gives visual clues on what and how you can do stuff, so it's easier to pick up.

Personally I beleive the combination of command line and gui is the best. In windows the CLI is in it's own little world, the division between the GUI and the command line is huge and it's a either or choice. With Linux the command line and the GUI can be integrated into one another.

For example, I have a POP account with my ISP so that I only get mail to one of my machines and it gets deleted off the server. I like it that way, but it means that I only get mail on my laptop.
Now I could sync the machine between bot machines, but it's easier just to go:
ssh -X tweety evolution
(tweety being the hostname of my laptop)

And have the Evolution email program pop up locally on my desktop. I have keys setup so that it's secure and I don't need to use a password.

 

[Auryg]

The real question is - is it worth taking all the time to learn and remember how to do stuff in the console? For me, it's not.

And with Vista, you don't have to search for a program icon. Hit start, then type in the search box the name of the program. Done, and so easy my grandma could do it.

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: drag
ssh -X tweety evolution
(tweety being the hostname of my laptop)

And have the Evolution email program pop up locally on my desktop. I have keys setup so that it's secure and I don't need to use a password.

I think Windows Vista has now included this feature. In Windows XP, Remote Desktop could only load the entire desktop. In Windows Vista, Remote Desktop can load individual programs. It's more like Citrix now

And yes Linux does come with a lot of cool features. Kubuntu came with a Remote Desktop client and server; to get that in Windows you need to buy XP Pro or Vista Business. I think X11 itself can be run from a remote computer, so every Linux computer can be used as a dummy terminal.

 

[Nothinman]

"C:\Windows\System32" makes sense too, though they are not all in that directory.

That and MS dumped a whole lot more than just binaries in there, there's virtually no organization.

Or /opt. Or /usr/opt. Or wherever else the program feels like putting it. In Windows the default location is "C:\Program Files\". That makes sense to me.

/opt is one of the many ugly holdovers from commercial unix and pretty much no one uses it on Linux.

And Program Files makes sense on the surface, but once you dig a little deeper it gets confusing. Like what is the point of Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft Shared and Program Files\Common Files\system, if you look they both contain parts of the same components. And there's more examples too, like how \Windows\system32\config not only holds the main registry hives but also the event logs for some reason. And I don't think anyone will ever figure out why they decided to put the BSD sockets text config files in Windows\system32\drivers\etc, even the path itself is contradictory.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: Auryg
The real question is - is it worth taking all the time to learn and remember how to do stuff in the console? For me, it's not.

And with Vista, you don't have to search for a program icon. Hit start, then type in the search box the name of the program. Done, and so easy my grandma could do it.

In my system I hit the search button on my desktop and find applications, files, emails, addressess, websites from history, websites from search, dictionaries, metadata on files.

Vista's application search is replicating functionality I've had with Linux for a year or so now.


Also the command line has had autocomplete for applications (much much superior then what you get through the windows CLI). So the search feature in Vista is replicating something I've had from the command line for over a decade.

I think Windows Vista has now included this feature. In Windows XP, Remote Desktop could only load the entire desktop. In Windows Vista, Remote Desktop can load individual programs. It's more like Citrix now

Yep.

But does remote desktop support 3D acceleration?
X over Ssh does. (this is one of the big deals behind AIGLX)

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: drag
But does remote desktop support 3D acceleration?

According to some guy on a forum, no it does not.

 

[Doom Machine]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

"C:\Windows\System32" makes sense too, though they are not all in that directory.

That and MS dumped a whole lot more than just binaries in there, there's virtually no organization.

whats not organized? all the temporary files in a folder called Temp no less, cache for cache? real hard, no sense in seperating windows required files outside of a single folder.

programs in programs folder....holy $hit imagine that.
user folder for each individual...i can only imagine that chaos if they all used the same folder

then you applications....windows mail (gee wonder what that does) Internet Explorer (could i possibly explore the internet with this?) windows journal (can i write memoirs here?)

nontheless i never had an application/game/video or nothing that required me to dig into the windows folder anyway, so other than nibbing most people in general should have no business in it

you should actually try using the OS your speaking of, it might help.

 

[Hyperblaze]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze
In windows, i open load up applications using the run command. takes shorter amount of time.

It takes you less time to click on Run, then type "C:\Program Files\Program15\Program15.exe" than it does for you to click on the "Program15" icon in the Start Menu?

My perception of intuitive = Makes logical sense.

You seem to use the word logic as if the things that you like are the only logical things and that everything else is by default illogical.

In Linux all your system binaries are located in /usr/sbin (makes complete sense)

"C:\Windows\System32" makes sense too, though they are not all in that directory.

non-system binaries are locationed in /usr/bin (makes sense)

Or /opt. Or /usr/opt. Or wherever else the program feels like putting it. In Windows the default location is "C:\Program Files\". That makes sense to me.

all config file are in /etc (makes sense)

Now that is very much lacking in Windows.

files on your desktop are in /home/<user>/Desktop (makes sense)

"C:\Users\Hyperblaze\Desktop" makes sense too.

I want to find a file, I have better chances finding the damn file if I do a search for it. I should not need a search.

If you don't know where it is, yes, you have to search for it. You've never used which, whereis, or find before?

I want to check out my account. C:\document and settings\<user>\<whatever other directories>

It's just "C:\Documents and Settings\Hyperblaze\". Other things are subdivided from there, but would you really like everything crammed into one directory? In Vista it's "C:\Users\Hyperblaze".

I forgot, where did I install that damn application again? Is it in c:\program files? or elsewhere? I don't know! I'll have to look.

Just like your beloved /usr/bin directory, the default location for any sane program is "C:\Program Files\". Can you change that? Sure. Can you change it in Linux? Sure. Why do you have problems with remembering that directory?

Windows is far from perfect, I don't think that anyone outside of the most rabid fanboy circles will argue that it is, but your citicisms of it here in this post are very shallow. Is Windows more intuitive than a default Debian or Red Hat install? Maybe. It's certainly more intuitive than some of the OSes and environments that I've used and it's certainly not so unintuitive that it warrants switching to Linux on that point alone.

Note who I was having the argument with. I was actually thinking fight fire with fire.

Doom Machine seems to think the Windows OS is the end all be all of operating systems.

I disagree. I tried the informative approach. Didn't seem to work.
Then I tried the shallow approach. And then got nick picked by you. I just can't win

PS: if I actually made a valid point, it wasn't my intention. Woops.

 

[Hyperblaze]

Originally posted by: Doom Machine

Originally posted by: Nothinman

"C:\Windows\System32" makes sense too, though they are not all in that directory.

That and MS dumped a whole lot more than just binaries in there, there's virtually no organization.

whats not organized? all the temporary files in a folder called Temp no less, cache for cache? real hard, no sense in seperating windows required files outside of a single folder.

programs in programs folder....holy $hit imagine that.
user folder for each individual...i can only imagine that chaos if they all used the same folder

then you applications....windows mail (gee wonder what that does) Internet Explorer (could i possibly explore the internet with this?) windows journal (can i write memoirs here?)

nontheless i never had an application/game/video or nothing that required me to dig into the windows folder anyway, so other than nibbing most people in general should have no business in it

you should actually try using the OS your speaking of, it might help.

so basically, it's up to YOU to dictate what actions users can have when using Windows?

Have you ever heard yourself speak? Get it through your damn head. Not everyone is like you or thinks like you (Thank Goodness for that). The Windows operating system seems to be perfect for you. Go ahead and use it. Other folks have different perceptions of Windows and Linux and will use whatever the heck they need to get the job done.

There's no sense in reasoning with you, you are a pure windows fanatic.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: nweaver

Originally posted by: Nothinman

this thread sums up why linux won't go mainstream

Yea because installing Windows is so seamless and effortless. Whenever I install XP and it doesn't have drivers for my NIC, video, wifi, sound, etc who is to blame? MS or the hardware manufacturers?

Hardware folks, because MS can't be to blame. It's only the fault of Linux that it doesn't have drivers...


On common theme I have seen lately is that missing and/or crappy vista drivers are the fault of nvidia/creative/hardware, where as in linux, those same folks take the stance that the crappy drivers/installs for 3rd party stuff is the distro's fault.

People blame linux for lacking drivers and 3rd party software because linux has made it almost imposible to release drivers or 3rd party software that works on linux.

No one cares if windows doesn't support XYZ out of the box because the hardware will come with a disc allowing the user to install the required software. When linux starts having the samething no one is going to complain about drivers support.

 

[Nothinman]

whats not organized?

Anything. Inside of \Windows I see patch uninstall files, a pointless clock video, bitmaps, log files, executables, ini files, etc. Inside of \Windows\system32 I see the same, only a lot more of it.

so other than nibbing most people in general should have no business in it

That's completely irrelevant, the fact that you don't have to see it in your day to day use doesn't mean that it's magically organized.

 

[Nothinman]

People blame linux for lacking drivers and 3rd party software because linux has made it almost imposible to release drivers or 3rd party software that works on linux.

"Almost impossible"? I would think that Intel, HP, AMD, nVidia, 3Com, IBM, etc would disagree with that.

 

[drag]

In Linux the way things are orginized is designed to make things easier for networking.

For instance.. If I want to have easy-to-manage applications on lots and lots of clients it makes a difference.

So you have
/lib
/bin
/sbin

then you have
/usr/lib
/usr/bin
/usr/sbin

then you have
/usr/local/lib
/usr/local/bin
/usr/local/sbin

Then there are a few others mixed in there like share and such, but that's not very important to what I want to get across.

So with the /bin /lib/ and /sbin are sort of the minimally required applications and tools to get the system off the ground and get it into a state were I can run applications.

So I can setup the systme to boot to those then mount /usr on a share from a NFS server. That way I can have all the applications and everything managed and installed centrally in a single location.

So it's simple. However most of the time people are still going to want to have most of the OS installed the way it's done by default.

So for those people you can just have /usr/local/ be a mount from nfs. That way any special applications that I want to install I can install from one computer and then they will automaticly be aviable on all the computers without any extra effort on my part. The machines don't even need to be on or anything like that.

with /home and tmp that's pretty easy. With /home users have individual folders that only they have rights to, and then with /tmp that is a folder _everybody_ has read-write rights to.

So it's simple. The rest of the OS is essentially read-only to everybody except for root.

The directory structure is designed to be used in a distributed environment. With simple, but absolute, file system permissions which the security of the system is based around.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

People blame linux for lacking drivers and 3rd party software because linux has made it almost imposible to release drivers or 3rd party software that works on linux.

"Almost impossible"? I would think that Intel, HP, AMD, nVidia, 3Com, IBM, etc would disagree with that.

That and the majority of enterprise applications and services.
Take Oracle for instance. They sell more databases for Linux-based systems then any other OS out there.

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: drag

Originally posted by: Nothinman

People blame linux for lacking drivers and 3rd party software because linux has made it almost imposible to release drivers or 3rd party software that works on linux.

"Almost impossible"? I would think that Intel, HP, AMD, nVidia, 3Com, IBM, etc would disagree with that.

That and the majority of enterprise applications and services.
Take Oracle for instance. They sell more databases for Linux-based systems then any other OS out there.

This is sort of the ironic duality of Linux. Much of the Linux community is about open source and screw businesses and everything should be free, but the people who actually keep this thing afloat are companies who use it to make money. I'm thinking of IBM in particular. They're the biggest contributor of Linux code, probably the biggest contributor of Linux desktops (their "workstation" computers can come with Linux preinstalled), and they're one of the biggest supporters of trying to get more people and businesses to use Linux.
It's interesting how open source hippies are on the same side as Big Blue on this one.

 

[postmortemIA]

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Originally posted by: drag

Originally posted by: Nothinman

People blame linux for lacking drivers and 3rd party software because linux has made it almost imposible to release drivers or 3rd party software that works on linux.

"Almost impossible"? I would think that Intel, HP, AMD, nVidia, 3Com, IBM, etc would disagree with that.

That and the majority of enterprise applications and services.
Take Oracle for instance. They sell more databases for Linux-based systems then any other OS out there.

This is sort of the ironic duality of Linux. Much of the Linux community is about open source and screw businesses and everything should be free, but the people who actually keep this thing afloat are companies who use it to make money. I'm thinking of IBM in particular. They're the biggest contributor of Linux code, probably the biggest contributor of Linux desktops (their "workstation" computers can come with Linux preinstalled), and they're one of the biggest supporters of trying to get more people and businesses to use Linux.
It's interesting how open source hippies are on the same side as Big Blue on this one.

Well maybe RedHat has domination because IBM sells boxes with RH in them, and RH is specialized to Linux, where IBM has own OSes. I like RH's business model. Everything they produce ends up as open source.

 

[drag]

Well maybe RedHat has domination because IBM sells boxes with RH in them, and RH is specialized to Linux, where IBM has own OSes. I like RH's business model. Everything they produce ends up as open source.

Redhat dominates because they provide a nitch product in the Linux world, which is a professionally supported and enterprise oriented Linux distribution.

They not only have systems which they pledge to support for at least 4 years, which is unusual, but they also carry out a crapload of work on Linux. A massive amount of work on the Linux kernel, GCC, and lots of other related stuff that is important to servers.

Their distribution is geared specificly also for getting certifications for numerous different propriatory/enterprise application and application stacks. Applications for scientific computing, warehouse management systems, and that sort of thing. The next closest is Suse.

Nobody else realy does that. Take Ubuntu, for instance. Sure they have professional support options and such, but they realy don't do much development on their system. The most they do kernel-wise is shoehorn patches into it from newer kernels.

In otherwords if your situation requires professionally support operating systems by third parties then Redhat is the only real choice, with Suse coming up close behind.

I don't know how much IBM has to do with it. IBM contributed some technology that made 2.6 Linux substantially more enterprise-friendly then 2.4 performance/scalability-wise. But SGI did a hell of a lot also.

In terms of sales I think that HP is number #1 in Linux sales and IBM is 2nd with Dell pretty close I think. Not sure.

 

[drag]

It's interesting how open source hippies are on the same side as Big Blue on this one.

Like everybody else it's all self-interest.

Not that there is anything wrong with that. Self-interest is ultimately behind all advances in human sociaty.


For example take:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2073771,00.

The Software Freedom Law Center is doing it's best to help Microsoft defeat AT&T in court, which will ultimately reverse that 1.5billion lawsuite that Microsoft recently lost to Alcatel-Lucent for software patent violations.

In case you don't know Software Freedom Law Center is a orginization that specializes in providing pro-bono lawyer services for Free software developers. It's headed by Eben Molgen, which is the law history professor that is helping RMS write GPLv3 and helped write GPLv2.


edit:

This is sort of the ironic duality of Linux. Much of the Linux community is about open source and screw businesses and everything should be free, but the people who actually keep this thing afloat are companies who use it to make money. I'm thinking of IBM in particular.

There is absolutely nothing to do with Free software or Open Source software that says you can't charge money for software.

It has never been about 'screw business'. It's about 'yeah freedom'. Lots of businesses make money from denying freedoms and charging for access, which is contrary to Free/Open source software, but it's actually very very very pro-capitalist, pro-freemarket system. No single company will ever be able to seize control of Linux by restricting access to it, but they can dominate the market simply by being better then other people at it.

And the entry to market is very low. You can easily make compatable products and such things. There is no lock in, you can always go to another vendor, therefore people involved in open source software businesses sustain themselves by keeping their customers happy rather then figuring out how to lock them into their paticular BS program or licensing sceme.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: drag

Originally posted by: Nothinman

People blame linux for lacking drivers and 3rd party software because linux has made it almost imposible to release drivers or 3rd party software that works on linux.

"Almost impossible"? I would think that Intel, HP, AMD, nVidia, 3Com, IBM, etc would disagree with that.

That and the majority of enterprise applications and services.
Take Oracle for instance. They sell more databases for Linux-based systems then any other OS out there.

So total that is what 100 products maybe a few thousands? Yeah that is some great third party support.

 

[kedlav]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: drag

Originally posted by: Nothinman

People blame linux for lacking drivers and 3rd party software because linux has made it almost imposible to release drivers or 3rd party software that works on linux.

"Almost impossible"? I would think that Intel, HP, AMD, nVidia, 3Com, IBM, etc would disagree with that.

That and the majority of enterprise applications and services.
Take Oracle for instance. They sell more databases for Linux-based systems then any other OS out there.

So total that is what 100 products maybe a few thousands? Yeah that is some great third party support.

Third Party Support for Unix based Commercial systems is pretty good. For gaming, its poor though. Methinks that's his point.

 

[drag]

Third Party Support for Unix based Commercial systems is pretty good. For gaming, its poor though. Methinks that's his point.

Yep thats about that.

If you think that Linux application support for the corporate world is limited your simply not paying attention.