ok, this may be a tangent to the original post, but I can't let this pass. I am a freetard/linux dude and don't have a problem with that. I also prefer working in gnome to working in Windows XP/Vista/7 or MacOSX. I don't think Linux is best for everyone, but that's where I prefer to live. That is my full disclosure.
I am not a "major Linux enthusiast" but I am not "complaining about this (sic desktop) all the time" and I don't think it's garbage compared to other desktop platforms. Out of curiosity, which "major Linux enthusiast" has complained that GNOME and KDE are garbage? On the contrary, I find long time Microsoft PC guys saying that Linux (specifically Ubuntu) is worth checking out. Here is a reference to back my statement: < http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2342703,00.asp>. I would really like to hear details of why you (or anyone else) thinks NTFS is better than a Linux alternative, specifically ext3 since it's probably the most pervasive. What exactly do you think NTFS introduced in '93 that ext3 can't match? BTW, don't drop unfounded comments on someones platform and then request that this "not digress into an OS-war". Lloyd On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 7:09 PM, opinali <[email protected]> wrote: > On 27 abr, 09:45, Christian Edward Gruber > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hahahahahahahahahahahahahah. That's awesome. What a wonderfully > > naive assertion. > > If linux was a platform with merit, it would have met some degree of > > success on the desktop... > > If you mean Linux Desktop Platform (GNOME, KDE and all that including > its totally crappy video and sound stacks...), yes it is garbage and > even major Linux enthusiasts complain about this all the time. A good > kernel makes not a good desktop platform; and Linux is not even one of > the best kernels in many respects - let's not digress into an OS-war, > but the desktop market leaders are superior to Linux in important > aspects even in the core tech (e.g. see Linux's pathetic advanced- > filesystem story, it's not yet in the place that Windows was >10 years > ago with NTFS.) On the other hand, Linux _does_ have some degree of > desktop-type success in new niches like mobile devices, where Linux > _is_ clearly superior to the competition (surely beats the pants off > WinMob and Symbian). So, thanks for validating my argument. ;-) > > > These kinds of statements are ridiculous, because they assert > > underlying causes of success that are simply not provably so. The guy > > could be right, but the assertion of causation is without merit. > > The simple fact is that great programming languages - at least when > combined with good implementation, tooling, libraries and other basics > - will always gain SOME respectable market share and have a long-term > story with a thriving ecosystem (even if a relatively small one, e.g. > Python). Objective-C never managed to have that kind of success, on > any platform where it did not benefit from _massive_ protectionism. > Ada is another interesting case: it was promoted and imposed for years > by the US govt, but failed to gain any traction outside the government > contracts that mandated its use or its satellite industries. Yet, Ada > was arguably a superior language if compared to Obj-C; you could use > that as evidence that quality=>success does not necessarily hold... > but life is more complicated that this, when I wrote "merit" I didn't > mean only a good formal design or powerful/innovative features, there > are other important factors, like some good alignment with the > technology and the problems of the developer community at each time, > the fitting in a larger ecosystem (e.g. LAMP prompting the 'P' > languages), etc. > > A+ > Osvaldo > > > cheers, > > Christian. > > > > On Apr 27, 2010, at 8:42 AM, opinali wrote: > > > > > If Obj-C was a language with > > > merits, it would have met some degree of success in other platforms. > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Java Posse" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<javaposse%[email protected]> > . > > For more options, visit this group athttp:// > groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Java Posse" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<javaposse%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
