Flamebait from ZDNet: Desktop Linux is dead. Buy a Mac.

[Eug]

ZDNet rant

I always take this guy's articles with a grain of salt, but nevertheless I more or less agree with some of the stuff in this article.

 

[Nothinman]

These people seem to forget that Linux was never aimed at the desktop, it wasn't created to overthrow MS like so many would like to believe. It was created because Linus couldn't afford real UNIX on the hardware it required and DOS just plain sucked.

I also think a Mac is a better desktop system, OS X is bad ass and eventually there will be ports of all the 'desktop' Linux apps.

 

[Armitage]

***schrug*** whatever...

If the proponents of desktop Linux are really honest, they will move to a Unix platform that has all the things Linux lacks: a great user interface

Ok, I can't make comparisons to OSX, but KDE is a great user interface. And frankly, I've despised the mac interface when I've had to use it previously.

a large number of applications

I have everything I need on linux. That argument is getting very tired & worn out.

support of a profitable major vendor

Why does this matter? There are plenty of companies that support linux. I prefer it that way. Choice.
And then there is the Linux community. Laugh if you want, but other than big bucks support contracts, I've found the linux community to be far more responsive & helpful then any vendor I've ever dealt with. And you have the source ... just this week I fixed a problem in an open source app because I had the source. If it were commercial, I might be waiting months for a patch or new release.

an industry guru who's taken extremely seriously

Yea, linux has that also ... FWIW.

and even the cover of Time magazine.

Uhm ... So what?

... But running OS X would actually cost these Linux geeks money, and that's something I am not sure any of them are willing to spend.

I don't use Linux because it's free, I use it because it's better. I work on expensive, high-end hardware, and have a several hundred dollars worth of proprietary software installed. I'm not worried about the cost of the OS.
I'm not interested in Mac because I see less flexibility, and less power for the dollar.

Still, if these people hated all things Microsoft as much as many of them proclaim to, you'd think rallying around Unix-based OS X would be the best way to advance their cause.

Again, I don't use Linux because I hate MS, I use it because it's better. When I do hate MS is when they abuse their monopoly position to impinge on my freedom and choice.

THESE DESKTOP LINUX people are just like the adherents to any concept that has failed in the marketplace of ideas: They don't know when to let go, and make fools of themselves as a result.

Actually, I think that better describes the industry press. Linux on the desktop is doing quite well, in its own low-key way. It's the press that can't stop shouting one way or the other (dead, or the next big thing).

 

[Eug]

<< Ok, I can't make comparisons to OSX, but KDE is a great user interface. And frankly, I've despised the mac interface when I've had to use it previously. >>

You should have a gander at OS X - it's built on top of FreeBSD. The ergonomics of the GUI is much better than previous Mac OSes. I hated everything up to Mac OS 9, but OS X is good although it's still a bit slow because of all the eye candy. The hardware is pricey though (except for the iBooks).

 

[Armitage]

Yea, I'm not dismissing OSX & Mac, maybe I'll be driving a Mac sometime soon, although I don't feel much need to change right now.
I just hate stupid articles like this one.

 

[n0cmonkey]

<< Yea, I'm not dismissing OSX & Mac, maybe I'll be driving a Mac sometime soon, although I don't feel much need to change right now.
I just hate stupid articles like this one. >>



Thats why its flamebait

 

[wildwildwes]

Though I basically agree with what he said, that article is just as worthless as all his other articles. It's just his opinions. Who cares? His articles are like lengthy slashdot posts. I can't believe he gets paid to write it.

 

[Eug]

<< Though I basically agree with what he said, that article is just as worthless as all his other articles. It's just his opinions. Who cares? His articles are like lengthy slashdot posts. I can't believe he gets paid to write it. >>

Yeah, I'd have to agree with you there. Despite his position with ZDNet, his "articles" are often just terrible. I still remember his attempt at an article about designing airplane security systems, about which he knows about as much as me, which is to say essentially nothing.

 

[fivepesos]

omg this guy is an idiot. like what people have said before me, i use linux because its better. better for everything i do, if windows was better, id use windows more often. i dont use it cause i cant afford windows, i have a cd of every windows OS since win95 sitting on my desk. and with all that, i only have one windows box on my entire network (two if you count my roommates). what about OSX, i like what ive seen so far but i dont have a box that can run it. i should realy buy one, but theyre so damn expensive.

i had to get my rant in, this article is just stupid.

 

[fivepesos]

omg this guy is an idiot. like what people have said before me, i use linux because its better. better for everything i do, if windows was better, id use windows more often. i dont use it cause i cant afford windows, i have a cd of every windows OS since win95 sitting on my desk. and with all that, i only have one windows box on my entire network (two if you count my roommates). what about OSX, i like what ive seen so far but i dont have a box that can run it. i should realy buy one, but theyre so damn expensive.

i had to get my rant in, this article is just stupid.

 

[TheWart]

Hehe, the 'oll OS war again....I mean, seriously, how many times is some "anylist" (sp..i know) going to come out and proclaim which OS is the best. I dont understand why people cant just use what they like and shuttup. It is like people are afraid of Linux or mac or whatever, so they have to bash it, to make themselves feel cool as they use M$ Windows. So what, you liek XP, and you like OpenBSD, whoopideedoo. Use what you like. I love linux, because it is diffrent, and fast, and stable, and VERY well structured and organized. I think the support one can get in the linux IRC chatrooms is amazing, and if you dont wanna use linux, do you really need to say that it is going to fail? I think linux is going to be around for a long time, especailly as companies move to it because they dont want to pay MS's "rent-an-os" fee. O well.

 

[NorthenLove]

<< ZDNet rant

I always take this guy's articles with a grain of salt, but nevertheless I more or less agree with some of the stuff in this article. >>



Here is a differrent opinion on the other side of the tracks from someone has actually used it and not blabbering about old myths about Linux.

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107-841870.html

 

[Sunner]

The guy's talking out of his ass big time.

Linux is making great strides towards more userfriendlyness.
Lindows and Mandrake are great examples, anyone who can install Windows should be able to install Mandrake.

Granted, some things are missing, like a good GUI for handling stuff like drivers, etc, but it's not like its not moving forwards.

 

[thornc]

And don't forget about Lycoris/Redmond Linux... It seems that they making a good distro..
I'll have to try it some day...
(time to save for a new hard disk )

 

[Eug]

<<

<< ZDNet rant

I always take this guy's articles with a grain of salt, but nevertheless I more or less agree with some of the stuff in this article. >>



Here is a differrent opinion on the other side of the tracks from someone has actually used it and not blabbering about old myths about Linux.

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107-841870.html >>

To be honest, I think that article is just as biased as the original one I posted. Not surprising, since the guy runs the Linux will prevail website. The article you posted basically said desktop Linux is viable, but then goes on to describe the things that need to be changed/improved to make desktop Linux viable, which says to me that it isn't yet viable.

BTW, you should check out his website, because it provides a glimpse of the problems that desktop users face with Linux sometimes (but not all times of course). It has some content, but is not slick visually and isn't very layperson-friendly either. In other words, it makes you not want to use it (it = website or OS, take your pick).

There is some great stuff for Linux, but this overly biased and unpolished Don Soegaard guy doesn't seem like a very good spokesperson for it.

 

[EmperorRob]

Oh no! I have been using Linux! I must be a moron b/c this guy says so! I should go spend $1500 on a Mac! No more Star Office!? What will I do!? And what is Star Office!?

Perhaps he just lacks the skill to use Linux or is too lazy to put forth an effort to learn? Or maybe he just takes it in the ass from Sun?

 

[Barnaby W. Füi]

people like this need to quit sitting on a cucumber and get a life.

if you dont like linux, dont use it. many people have no problem using it and will continue to do so whether or not some ignorant zdnet guy bashes them with mostly irrelevant arguments.

:disgust:

 

[hans007]

the only reason people are saying desktop linux is dead. is that 2 years ago, you linux freaks were saying that it was developing so fast and would take over the OS world. they are just telling you i told you so.


I use KDE at school. its pretty good, i actually like it better than old MAC oses i've used like OS8 and 9 but i've never used 10. KDE isnt bad, just linux still doesnt have a lot of the software i used, and untarring tarballs and install scripts and making my kernel, though i can do it, just isnt as easy as the addnew hardware wizard and hitting next next finish to install apps.

 

[fivepesos]

<< and untarring tarballs and install scripts and making my kernel, though i can do it, just isnt as easy as the addnew hardware wizard and hitting next next finish to install apps. >>


agreed, which is why we need an automated software install like apt or ports. what u want u want mozilla? apt-get install mozilla. it can realy be that easy. unfortunately the linux standard base is moving towards rpms, blah. hopefully, ximian's red carpet will be on most distros which helps out a lot.

 

[Mr. Burns]

LOL. I saw this a few days ago and had a good laugh. I've read many articles writen by this guy and he's an absolute moron. I think this is the same guy who couldn't figure out the product activation on microsoft office and complained because it stopped working on him while he was travelling. (Right--after warning him probably 100 times...) This is the sort of guy who can barely figure out how to work his computer in windows and he thinks that we should listen to his grand vision of the future of technology. I wish he would just stop talking, it's painful.

 

[earthman]

Heh, have you checked out Apple's prices? You could build a better PC for less than a quarter the price of most Mac models, thats just a simple fact. I read that Steve Jobs got something like 980 million in salary and bonuses last year, so I feel no need whatsoever to donate any more. I'll help the small businessman down the street instead.

 

[EmperorRob]

WORD

Down with the MAN.

 

[Eug]

<< Heh, have you checked out Apple's prices? You could build a better PC for less than a quarter the price of most Mac models, thats just a simple fact. I read that Steve Jobs got something like 980 million in salary and bonuses last year, so I feel no need whatsoever to donate any more. I'll help the small businessman down the street instead. >>

? His salary is $1 actually. He got some nice bonuses, but you're way off with the numbers. He does own stock though, so any growth there increases his own wealth.

iBooks are cheaper than comparably spec'd PC laptops. PowerMacs are quite expensive though. iMacs are a tad pricey too, but not by as much, since they come with LCD screens, a better form factor, and two OSes, as well as lots of reasonably good software. Some come with DVD-RW/CD-RW too. OTOH, home built PCs come with no OS and no software. (I have both PCs and an iBook, and I build my own PCs.)

 

[hans007]

i really dont think ibooks are that cheap. an i book is like $1300 for the cheap one with a 12" a dvd, and a 600 g3. i look in the fry's ad today and there is a 900mhz athlon compaq with a 14" and a dvd for 850-50 rebate. not to mention more ram and hdd. and also the g3 ibooks are barely fast enough to run osx while a athlon 900 can easily run winxp.

the other thing is i dont understand how these zdnet writers get their jobs. i mean the guy doesnt write particularly well and he doesnt know all that much about pcs.

 

[n0cmonkey]

<< i really dont think ibooks are that cheap. an i book is like $1300 for the cheap one with a 12" a dvd, and a 600 g3. i look in the fry's ad today and there is a 900mhz athlon compaq with a 14" and a dvd for 850-50 rebate. not to mention more ram and hdd. and also the g3 ibooks are barely fast enough to run osx while a athlon 900 can easily run winxp. the other thing is i dont understand how these zdnet writers get their jobs. i mean the guy doesnt write particularly well and he doesnt know all that much about pcs. >>



How much have you used OS X on a g3 iBook? If the answer is no, STFU. Thanks.