Mail from ILUG-BOM list (Non-Digest Mode)
Trevor Warren wrote:
> Kiran u r missing the point completely out here. For once i state
> clearly, as we have said previously too & i repeat again we rn't
> Microsoft OS bashers out here. What we r is a ML that's a meeting
> ground for a group of indivizuals to express their views on topics
> related to the OPEN SOURCE movement, it may be GNU/LINUX or ny other
> topic related to Open source.
So if we aren't MS bashers, we can still praise Linux for qualities it
doesn't possess? That is exactly what has been happening on this list of
late. Let's stop telling ourselves how good we are. It won't get us
anywhere.
> BUT THE REASON WHY MICROSOFT'S OS'ES R OUTPERFORMED
> IS THAT , MICROSOFT LISTENS TO THE NOVICES WHEN IT NEEDS FEEDBACK
> ABOUT HOW THINGS SHOULD WORK & THEN IT IMPLEMENTS IT ; BUT LINUX CODE
> MAINTAINERS ONLY IMPLEMENT THE BRILLIANT IDEAS GIVEN BY THE GURUS
> IN THE RESPECTIVE FIELD.
> This is an acknowledged fact.
Do you reallly think so? Spend some time on any major project's
development list and you'll get your reality check. Linux code
maintainers implement whatever they think good. That's good enough
quality control, but it doesn't do anything about the newbies, the
people who will form the majority of the user base when the product is
ready for the masses.
All the serious project teams realise that and try to analyse end-user
expectations, but we here sit around talking pride in not being lusers
and discussing why IT staff ought to know Linux or aren't worth their
jobs.
We can train one thousand people to learn to use one product, or improve
one product to a level that makes it easier for one thousand people.
Which do you think is easier? Yet why do we keep scoffing at people who
say that the product is difficult to use? Why not put some effort into
improving it instead?
> A WIDER CHOICE , ISN'T IT ???. MAY BE Stability for some, may
> be performance for another, maybe low TCO for another, etc.
A wider choice at the cost of incompatibility? Isn't that what we're
trying to fight?
> Kiran , its a beautiful way of saying MS is Bad but not all
> that BAD, cause business is business & all is fair in War & love &
> business???.
I'm not saying MS is bad. I'm saying that lack of serious competition
has led MS to not maintain good quality control levels. They don't
innovate, but they're very good at sniffing out good technology and then
making their own implementations.
If you think MS is just waiting to be toppled, think again. They're
still a formidable company and they've proved that they can perform when
pushed.
> Kiran , as u follow the media very well u may have seen the way MS
> has blatently tried to kill the competition using unmawful means.
Actually, I don't follow the media anymore. Not since the beginning of
this year. I get all my news from the grapevine now. It works better
than any Internet media filtering system.
> Kiran :-) , :-) ,
> what r u trying to prove ,just b'cause
> linux can't match to the ease of use as windoZe........... ?????
> This debate could go on for ever but the balance would still
> tilt in the direction of LINUX. Betcha.
What do you think I'm trying to say? If you're thinking of ease of use,
forget it. I use GNOME on my desktop because it feels better and gives
me more control.
The issue is with telling ourselves that we're the best. Anyone who's
worked with both Windows and Linux in a commercial environment will tell
you that we're not. We're behind by a very large margin.
> LINUX,
> INSTALL IT, SHUT IT , FORGET IT !!!!!!!!!!!.
Oh yeah? Try managing one of my servers some time.
--
Kiran Jonnalagadda
http://lunateks.com
baby.sh: while true; do echo "^G^G^G^G^G"; sed -e 's/food/poop/';
sync; sync; sleep 15; done
_______________________________________________
Linuxers mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://ilug-bom.org.in/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
