On 8/4/07, Linux Bangladesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Dear Zico, please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'd like to point out a > few things from your mail > > If I may ask, which part of Google is open source? I haven't found the > code for google desktop source anywhere -- even by searching with google >
http://code.google.com/projects.html Appearently you had never been a beta tester for google, and therefore > have no idea that even these failed to work at some point in time. > Ya?? Then you are a *valuable* user of *stable* Gmail??? Sorry, dude... i am using Gmail *beta*. I'm > sure if you used Windows, you would have preferred Windows 98 over ME, > and 2000 over XP and definitely XP over Vista -- since they are > comperatively more stable than the other. > I am never going to use windows. So, there is no chance for me to choose anything over anything in windows world. The idea of stability is different when you are comparing between a > desktop application, or a web based application, or an entire OS. you do > not compare the lettuce in the salad with the fish in that curry, do > you? They are both different. Likewise, the scope of stability and > performance is entirely different between the two. > I am talking about everything.... [1] In desktop application: okk... let`s go for just one application, which is very common in all platform [ Linux, Mac, Windows ]. It`s itunes of Mac. And i played this *itunes* in all three. Do you know what? It crashed in WINDOWS first. [2] In web based application: okk... another very common thing. Find your street with *Microsoft Map*. Though it`s buggy, so if you want to find *Azampur*, you will get *Graveyard of Azimpur. So, what to do? You have to go to *Google Map*. [3] Entire OS: 8-D. Do you want hear anything about *windows vs. linux*??? > You can argue that M$ products are more susceptible to viruses and > internet attacks. But if you remove that part entirely, I doubt how much > unstability you will find even in their Exchange server. > Do you want to *remove* the *virus* and *internet attacks* part??? Then what will you do with computers? Then you can use: [1] Typewriter for writing. [2] DVD player for enjoying movies. [3] Telephone for talking. Let me put it a bit more bluntly. I am merely summerizing what Sayuz has > said, and then you tell me the difference > > a. Google is encouraging Open Source by arranging competitions, > supporting projects, etc. Microsoft is encouraging Open Source by > donating money. > "Microsoft is encouraging Open Source by donating money"??? How? and where? Provide us the link please. IMO, Microsoft is contracting with Novell and Lindows in order to save themselves ( Microsoft ) from falling condition into share market. b. Google is making money by giving away Free Software that displays > advertisements and brings *them* money; Microsoft is making money by > selling the software that does not show any advertisements. (well, in > the long run, google is making more money than M$ in that way, since > that is a recurring income) > Yes, again Open Source. Google can improve their softwares by *giving away*. Do you know, how much feedback did google get after they released their *Google earth*? It really makes them improve their software. And Microsoft?? Can you show us any piece of software which is 50% non-buggy???? Now I'm stuck. I have seen so many different philosophy of Open Source! > You have seen so many different philosophies of Open Source???? I think, you have read the blog of M$ developers who explained the *Open Source* by their own. I follow this one: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/ Also, do you have any statistics on the percentage of Stable > Open Source programmes as opposed to non-stables? > Okk... If you use Debian, you know that there are three steps there: Unstable --> Testing ---> Stable. You will get a lot of *unstable* & *stable* software there. And for windows??? I think, there is only one step which is Unstable ---> BLUE SCREEN --> BLUE SCREEN I'm quite certain you don't know the history of Windows -- how it came > to being. If you did, you would have never thought Billy boy is going to > get rid of it. Specially since he has salvaged it from IBM, gave it a > new look and marketed as Windows. The easiest thing for him to would be > to give it a new piece of suit, and sell it with a new name. That's > billy boy. > If you want to live with the *history* of windows... live with it. I don`t have anything to say. But, i am living in 2007, so i don`t care about what happened in 1980 or before that time. Though i am living in 2007, so i am using kernel- 2.6.22.1. You might hate windows and billy as much as you like, but that will very > unlikely change the present scenerio. You might decide to remain blind, > but the open source community cannot afford that Luxury. > Cannot afford? Why do they need to afford it? Open Source community don`t actually so much care about money as M$ do. Anyway, I can give you 1000+ links about the power of Open Source in business, education,research and usage. Like: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/30/nokia_goes_open_source/ http://www.redhat.com/magazine/009jul05/features/cluster/ http://linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/newss/5034/1/ Best, Zico -- "wake in your bed and believe, whatever you want to believe..." http://mohibuzzaman.blogspot.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
