French Parliament Chooses Ubuntu 174
atamyrat reminds us that last November it was announced that the French Parliament had decided to switch to Linux. At that time the distro had not been determined. It will be Ubuntu: "[T]wo companies, Linagora and Unilog, have been selected to provide the members of the Parliament as well as their assistants new computers containing free software. This will amount to 1,154 new computers running Ubuntu prior to the start of the next session which occurs in June 2007."
I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:2)
Hmmm... As long as their servers are secure, Ubuntu is as good a choice as any other.
You said it yourself: it's a good distro for individuals new to Linux.
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:5, Insightful)
You have no clue how the Ubuntu releases work, do you? What you proposing exists since 06/2006, it is called Ubuntu 6.06 LTS [ubuntu.com]
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:2)
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:2)
Well, it's not. The changes from Warty to Hoary to Breezy to Dapper have become more progressively more conservative. Breezy to Dapper was for many people quite disappointing because not much exciting happened, just polish.
I don't know what horror stories you have heard, but every OS has bugs. All 6.06 installations I have done (some for people without a clue whatsoever) worked like a charm and continued to do so since.
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:2)
Sucks when it happens, but it is still just a bug in what is intended to be what the OP wanted.
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:1, Funny)
No passwords or incriminating data will be stored on stolen from hard drive or secondary storage ever again!
, and never suffer computer data theft or security issues from a computer hard disk again
Live CD- isathe ticket to stopping data theft from computers from secondary storage like hard disks forever!
Because No hard disk or secondary storage need be in the machine, a stolen computer reveals no data to the thieves .
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:1)
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:2)
Why? What are the fundamental differences? Support? You can buy support from Canonical, AFAIK.
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:1)
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:1, Interesting)
I must admit, though, that it's been about a year since I tried Ubuntu. Maybe it has changed. But I read the site around the time the last release (Fiesty Fawn, I think it was) came out and it didn't look like a lot had changed.
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:5, Interesting)
IMHO, the main area Ubuntu lacks is in configuration. It's a step backwards in that regard as it does require editing config files if the default doesn't cut it. Ie, if you need to change something with X you have to modify
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:3, Informative)
There also seems to lack mature features for installing 3rd party content. This might not be much of a problem for really basic desktop user, but for a standard Linux users not being able to install and run tar-balls is a real problem (ubuntu doesn't even include
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:2, Informative)
In Ubuntu or Kubuntu you need to replace both GNOME and KDE to get something stable. They apply a bunch of experimental patches to "improve" the experience, but the patches often creates more bugs.
For serious? I haven't heard about any of this, nor experienced any of its effects (to my knowledge).
There also seems to lack mature features for installing 3rd party content. This might not be much of a problem for really basic desktop user, but for a standard Linux users not being able to install and run tar-balls is a real problem (ubuntu doesn't even include /usr/local to PATH!), and they have obscured everything but /home and /mnt in the file-browsers, making it hard to access your webpage in /var/www, your source code in /src and your optional packages in /opt !!
Last I checked, hidden system folders is a Kubuntu-specific feature.
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:2)
What? I am using Ubuntu right here with GNOME, it works fine. Sure there are a few bugs, but all software has bugs (I've seen more bugs on other 'major' distros, actually). So I really don't know what you are complaining about. Perhaps you should be more specific about what bugs you have encountered.
As for Kubuntu and KDE, I don't use them, so I can't say.
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:2)
nick@nick:~$ echo $PATH
I install tarballs for various applications (including things like Loki installers) all the time. I've been doing so since Dapper and it has always worked flawlessly. When was the last time you tried Ubuntu?
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:2)
I know with Fedora, the Gnome desktop was very irritating (still is with FC6). It's KDE wasn't usable which is why the first thing I did to a Fedora install is replace it's KDE with the kde-redhat builds.
With Ubuntu I have not had these problems.
* Here is that one line:
deb http://medibuntu.sos-sts.com/repo/ [sos-sts.com] edgy free non-free
Also, Ubuntu contains a massive amount of packages. Just make sure to enable Universe, Multiverse, and Backports (these are all official but are commented out by default in
user@localhost:~$ apt-cache pkgnames|wc -l
26362
That's 26,362 packages...
user@localhost:~$ echo $PATH
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:2)
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not sure either should be used as an enterprise's first Linux desktop rollout; Windows admins aren't accustomed to their relatively furious rate of major releases.
Debian might have been a better choice, with its slow release cycle and decent security patch rollout rate.
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:3, Informative)
There's no law saying you have to be bleeding-edge; they can perfectly well stick with Dapper, which is the current 'long term support' release. The rest of us can install pre-release versions of Feisty if we want, but it's certainly not compulsory.
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:5, Funny)
Would you care to define enterprise-ish for us non-bullshit speaking types?
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:4, Interesting)
Which of those characteristics you describe are Fedora, (Open)SUSE or Debian better than Ubuntu at?
Just to be clear, I'm not saying I think think Ubuntu is better than the others. In fact Fedora is probably my favourite disto. I just don't see how it is more "enterprise-ish" than Ubuntu is.
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:2)
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:2)
"Enterprise" systems
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:3, Funny)
enterpriseish: expensive, in such a way as to allow the head of IT to justify his large budget and hence status within the organisation; carries connotations of several very nice lunches with vendors and junkets to important conferences on an expense account.
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:1)
It's admirable they are moving to open software, but their priority should be requiring the use of standards compiling software in all government areas.
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:2)
Ubuntu uses GCC, which is a pretty standard compiler to me...
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:2)
The biggest and most critical challenge they're likely to have is directory services. I know that LDAP is up to the job, the question is, are their IT staff up to LDAP? With SUSE, they could cushion the blow by going with Novell's directory solutions.
Aside from that, I don't think it makes much difference at all which of the mainline distros they take.
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... (Score:1, Funny)
Or go for the national ? (Score:3, Insightful)
As opposed to the south-african origins of ubuntu, german origins of SuSE and american origins of RedHat
(Although I personally prefere SuSE's YaST to Mandriva's DrakConf. But public backing could boost sales of the distro and help finance more work on the config tools)
Quick French Lesson For Posters (Score:4, Funny)
throw == jet
monkey == singe
boy == garçon
Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters (Score:1, Funny)
La chaise est dans l'arbre
Mr. Balmer conduit l'autobus
Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters (Score:2)
Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters (Score:2, Insightful)
INVADE IRAQ? [Y/N] _
Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters (Score:2, Insightful)
It isn't as if the French have ever made a major correct decision...
INVADE IRAQ? [Y/N] _
While it's an interesting example, Iraq is ultimately a decision that doesn't have a "correct" answer...
The first George Bush attacked Iraq but left Saddam Hussein in power. He was widely criticized for not finishing the job.
Bill Clinton pretty much much ignored Iraq, even though he believed them to be pursuing nuclear and other WMD programs. He was widely criticized for doing nothing.
George W. Bush attacked Iraq and overthrew Saddam Hussein, but without Hussein's brutal yet stabilizing regime, the place plunged into chaos, with countless terror attacks and near civil war. Bush was widely criticized for this, even by many who supported the invasion when it was launched.
France were quite content to look the other way on Saddam Hussein's atrocities because they had a nice trade relationship with him. They were widely criticized for this "cheese eating surrender monkey" approach.
It seems like coming up with a "correct" way to deal with Iraq isn't so simple after all.
Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters (Score:3, Informative)
In 1998 when he tried to hold Saddam to account for non-cooperation with the UNSCOM regime by bombing a wide variety of targets (mostly related to WMD production) he was widely criticized for it BY REPUBLICANS. They said he was trying to "wag the dog" and that there wasn't a real threat from Saddam, it was all just hype. Go look at the actual record of events during the Clinton administration. Look at how many tons of bombs were dropped on Iraq every year of his presidency, look at how many missions were flown over the no-fly zone in Iraq, look at his public comments during re: Iraq. It's complete and total bullshit that the very same people who mocked Clinton for attacking Saddam in 1998 now try to spin it in the opposite direction.
Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters (Score:2)
You're right. He ignored Islamofascism. (But the Republicans would have also.)
They said he was trying to "wag the dog" and that there wasn't a real threat from Saddam, it was all just hype
You are referring to Clinton shooting some cruise missiles at Sudan and Afghanistan 3 days after his finger-wagging "I have not had sexual relations with that woman" speech and the day of his Grand Jury (which he lied to and was thus disbarred) testimony, and was a throw-back to the movie
Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Correction: they were widely criticized in the US.
Americans were convinced that it was part of the war against terrorism while the Frenchmen were not. Do you remember these so called Al Qaeda bases in Iraq? Or these Iraqi chemical stocks, the mobile lab? The fake British report? I do. de Villepin speech was acclaimed by most foreign countries. I stil remember it.
2. The US supported Saddam when he invaded Iran (just like France, Germany and countless of other western countries).
3. Nobody reacted when he gazed Kurds in the 80's.
4. Nobody tried to support the Shia uprising after the first Gulf war.
Of course the real US agenda was different (securing oil production, stabilization of the region, etc.) and the American agenda was in opposition with some French interests (French oil companies had secured extremely lucrative deal in Iraq prior to the invasion).
The US had a "grand vision" of the middle east (getting rid of dictators, bringing democracy and western values, securing this major oil source). the French government didn't share it and they wanted to protect their own interests. Both failed miserably.
Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters (Score:2)
The entire World reacted when he gassed the Kurds, including France. It's just that most Americans do not know that. The gassing of the Kurds made the *front page* of Le Monde [wikipedia.org], and probably the front page of every major newspaper in the World (except the US).
At the time, the US even defended Iraq casting doubts on Iraq's culpability, promising a veto in the Security Council against any sanction against Iraq, and even after the scandal broke out worldwide -- the US (Donald Rumsfeld) still loaned Saddam one billion dollars in aid which was never paid back (at the time, Donald Rumsfeld was Reagan's special envoy to Saddam Hussein).
The US had a "grand vision" of the middle east (getting rid of dictators, bringing democracy and western values, securing this major oil source). the French government didn't share it and they wanted to protect their own interests. Both failed miserably.
Nice summary, but you're still basically repeating what you've heard on American television. The French people still had a bad taste in its mouth from the War in Algeria. If anything, this was the big stumbling block in France, France had already been attacked on its home soil by Algerian terrorists. France had already tried shock and awe, it had already tried monetary rewards, kidnapping, torturing, and killing thousands of suspects and random people in Algeria -- just to try to get a little bit of information on those terrorist networks. And that didn't work -- none of it worked. Instead, France just gave up, repatriated all the Algerians that had collaborated with France, otherwise they would have all been killed if they had staid, and voila. France was humiliated, but at least it came out a little wiser for the next time around.
Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters (Score:2)
They may heve been criticized by a bunch if hicks in the US.
The rest of the world just agreed with them.
Cheers,
Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters (Score:5, Insightful)
In more recent times, their decsion to stay out of a disasterous war based on dubious evidence is looking better and better as time goes by.
Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters (Score:4, Interesting)
So far, Kubuntu (I like KDE, what can I say?) has been excellent as both a laptop and workstation platform, and I do have Ubuntu on a handful of servers. My personal choice would be Ubuntu/Kubuntu over just about anything else, and I applaud the decision and hope (uber-optimistically) that it's the beginning of this so-called tipping point for Linux on the desktop.
Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters (Score:2)
You think it was because the King of France was a democrat? Or course not. French assistance of the American Revolution was "cold war politics" solely aimed at hurting England.
And that stupid statue they gave them, how inappropriate!
And ever since, bleeding hearts have have forgotten that "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses" is not inscribed in the Declaration of Independence.
Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters (Score:2)
Actually, it was a pretty shitty decision for the regime in France to support the colonies. Our revolution inspired the French Revolution, and the French Revolution got the head cut off of the same King who supported our revolution.
Oops.
Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters (Score:2)
And that was quite an arrogant reply, ignoring, or perhaps blissfully unaware of the fact that the original comment was not meant to be informational, but amusing. It seems that some people's radar for "arrogant American comments" is turned up a little too high. I guess I'm just glad I have people like you to reply, anonymously, with summaries of the French Revolution and its causes so that you can display your prodigious recollection of your high school history class notes. Or perhaps you want me to read the wikipedia article that you so very carefully edited to remove the incorrectly placed semi-colons.
I will be certain to make sure that my next joke is perhaps aimed at China, so you can explain to me the in depth reasons for the failure of the Qing Dynasty in China. I've always been a fan of the Kievan Rus... perhaps I can make joke about Russian mail order brides and get a brief tirade about that. I know Wikipedia has articles on those topics as well I just needed someone to give me the links so I can be edified.
Dork.
Cool (Score:3, Interesting)
Frubuntu anyone? :-)
Re:Cool (Score:1)
Re:Cool (Score:2)
Re:Cool (Score:2)
Re:Cool (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Cool (Score:3, Insightful)
It is hard not to contribute while using Linux in a large organization. They've got several companies doing support and services for them and that is going to include solving bugs. If nothing else, I imagine they'll be contributing bug fixes to the french language support, which is good it being such a common language in many third world countries where Linux can be a boon.
Re:Cool (Score:2)
None (Score:2)
OT: Have anyone tried Wubi? (Score:5, Interesting)
From FAQ:
Wubi adds an entry to the Windows boot menu which allows you to run Linux. Ubuntu is installed within a file in the windows file system (c:\wubi\harddisks\ubuntu.hd), this file is seen by Linux as a real hard disk.
How do I install Ubuntu?
Run wubi, answer the few questions, reboot and select "Ubuntu" from the boot menu, go grab a coffee and when you are back Ubuntu will be ready for you.
How do I uninstall it?
You uninstall it as any other applications. In windows go to the control panel and select "Add or Remove Programs", then select Wubi and uninstall it. You can also use the uninstaller that you find in C:\wubi\uninstaller.exe.
Re:OT: Have anyone tried Wubi? (Score:4, Funny)
Actually it's a Microsoft conspiracy (Score:3, Interesting)
Now as I understand it, that's not illegal as such. It is, however, to use a monopoly to manipulate other markets.
So, ever so quietly, Microsoft is supporting Linux in general up to the point where Microsoft can no longer be seen as a monopoly.
Then it can go back to its previous predatory practices, maniulate other markets merrily, and nobody can say a word.
Have I got that right?
(I mean, it wouldn't do to see this as good news, surely?)
Re:Actually it's a Microsoft conspiracy (Score:2)
And by time OSS does that, it may have a strong enough foothold to undo MSFT anyways.
Tom
Glad I don't do my IT work in France (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Glad I don't do my IT work in France (Score:3, Funny)
So are the French.
Re:Glad I don't do my IT work in France (Score:2)
Not true. If applications do fit the purpose - it would be fine. And since they have backing of two consulting agencies, I hope they know what they do. I mean, somebody lobbied for the deal, someone sweetened the deal to the point of acceptance.
[ I know people who moved bureaucracy to Linux - it was bit involuntary move when power failure fried bunch of hard drives 5(6?) years ago. IT gave three of their old Linux servers to department so that they would at least be able to work in Web interface. And people liked Netscape more than they liked IE. So several (junk) computers there still run Linux and people use them solely for intranet portals. Anyway they really need only two Windows computers there since company has bought only two licenses for Windows book keeping software. Rest of work is done on home brew Web inranet. IIRC crucial factor of accepting Linux was availability of - and that's NOT joke - mahjong. ]
Though I too share your concerns. I really hope those two providers know what they are subscribing themselves to. But if people need only to access some web portals & KOffice/OpenOffice.org fit the bill for productivity software - why not to try?
Re:Glad I don't do my IT work in France (Score:2)
Because the first year of real bureaucratic workers using only Linux will be hell.
Why? Is it because you don't understand Linux, or is it because you think that they'll be doing something requiring a vastly different set of knowledge?
If it's the latter, you're probably being foolish. What complex tasks are bureaucrats going to be left to that require Linux-specific knowledge on their behalf? Sending and receiving email? Viewing web pages? Reading and writing office documents? These are not Linux-centric tasks. Unless they're being asked to perform system administration themselves (which would be ridiculous, this isn't their job), it's very likely everything will be fine.
If it's the former, fair enough. Someone else -likely a person with the appropriate set of skills living in France- will take the job and do just fine.
Really, what's the problem?
Re:Glad I don't do my IT work in France (Score:2)
I guarantee that the oldest/most senior users in the french government are going to call IT every time they want to do something they weren't shown how to do, or simply forgot or became too tech-timid, when they were set up with Ubuntu. Despite the fact that "OMG Windoze wantz to rulez world so it suckz" seems to be the normal opinion here, Windows XP is a solid OS with a familiar feel and, most importantly, real support from a massive dev team. As oppossed to a group of nerds who just don't want to pay for software so they build a modified version of Unix for themselves.
Your implication that "real" support does not exist for Ubuntu is utter bullshit, as Canonical sells support for it. And from a wider perspective, if the alleged computer incompetents are in fact present, chances are they'd be phoning IT up for everything regardless of the OS being used.
Are you just upset because a solution that you either don't advocate or are not familiar with might get deployed by an IT department somewhere else in the world, or do you just like to complain about Linux because a lot of people advocate it a bit too noisily? Either's fairly childish. Don't give yourself a heart-attack.
Re:Glad I don't do my IT work in France (Score:2)
Re:Glad I don't do my IT work in France (Score:3, Informative)
Once you've had a chance to actually deal with real-world users in the government enterprise environment, you know exactly what I mean. Linux is a great solution if every user has a basic grip on how to use a computer and are willing to explore and figure out how to do things. But in the real world, most aren't.
Actually, I think Linux is a lot better for this than Windows is. I've seen incompetent management types who can only access files from the "most recent" list in Word and have no idea where their files are stored or even what the whole file/folder metaphor is about. The difference is, with Linux it is fairly easy to customize the interface such that the tasks a user needs to accomplish are mapped directly to big buttons that are omnipresent and it is possible to make the one hundred random controls that those user don't ever want to touch, invisible by default. Remember we're talking about deploying in a centrally managed environment. Rolling out software and patches and even doing remote support tasks is a lot easier using Linux than Windows.
I guarantee that the oldest/most senior users in the french government are going to call IT every time they want to do something they weren't shown how to do, or simply forgot or became too tech-timid, when they were set up with Ubuntu.
Sure they will, and they'd do the same thing if they were upgraded to a newer version of Windows. The difference is the ease of accommodating them.
Despite the fact that "OMG Windoze wantz to rulez world so it suckz" seems to be the normal opinion here...
This is a strawman argument. No one but you said Windows sucks.
Windows XP is a solid OS with a familiar feel...
A "familiar feel" is an argument against all change. Change can be difficult and has real costs, but sometimes those costs are outweighed by other factors.
...most importantly, real support from a massive dev team.
Umm, Ubuntu probably has more professional, paid developers working on it than Windows does. Trying to get a flaw in Windows fixed is an exercise in frustration. Unless you are huge, good luck. You can wait till service pack 3 or the next release of Windows in another 5 years. Trying to get the same flaw fixed in Ubuntu is a matter of calling one of the two support companies that are part of this contract, or Canonical, or another Linux distro, or getting an internal employee to fix it, or hiring an independent contractor because all of those are options and have access to the source. Better yet, you can take competitive bids from all of them to see who will work most cheaply, and the same applies for new features of customizations.
Getting real support for Windows is a matter of hiring a company who will solve what they can without the source and pester MS on your behalf and hope for the best. That is the inferior support option.
As oppossed to a group of nerds who just don't want to pay for software so they build a modified version of Unix for themselves.
Are you smoking crack? Do you even know any Linux developers? Most of them work for IBM or Redhat or Motorola or Home Depot, or one of thousands of other companies that use Linux as a component of their business model. Heck we submit fixes and improvements to Linux all the time and not because Linux is license free, but because it was the best fit for our project and because customers demanded it. In fact some of our projects ran on BSD variants until customers demanded Linux for greater customizability with tools they were familiar with. Since the cheapest box we sell is about $40K, adding another couple hundred for an OS license is not really a significant expense if it had any benefits. It doesn't and has significant negatives.
The French parliament has two professional services companies for support and they are professional coders. They can buy support from Cano
Re:Glad I don't do my IT work in France (Score:2)
Real world users don't care which OS you use. Reminds me of the time when I worked for a major chain of Hotels. They created a budget on Excel and used macros which were only supported on the most current version. They spent weeks denigrating the users before they realized it wasn't the users. Users don't care. If they can get the job done with less time they just don't care. They don't care for anti-virus software. In some cases they don't get paid overtime to wait for the system to finish the scan. If you care about the environment you don't leave your system running. If you don't leave your system running you waste time with the stupid scan./rant
I've never had a user complain that they were lost on a properly configured system, Be it Windows, Mac, Linux, or FreeBSD. I have had complaints that people couldn't open a specific file because they did not have the right software for it and this was regardless of what OS they were using. If you base your operations on standards then you will never have these issues. Defacto is not a standard. Doc is not a standard it doesn't render properly even when using Microsoft products let alone third party products. It's your choice to limit yourself, it's mine not to.
Good stuff (Score:3, Informative)
Obviously that the only good decision that the french gouvernement took for a long while
Re: separation of powers (Score:2)
(Voltaire or Montesquieu ?).
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_Of_Powers [wikipedia.org] or as we're talking about France: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A9paration_des_
I see you've got a French url in your profile so you should know that or don't they teach that stuff in High School over there any more
Re: separation of powers (Score:2, Funny)
I am computer geek remember?. French or not I am not supposed to know anything before Jan 1, 1970.
:)
Defenestration in action.... (Score:2)
The neoconservatives in Texas (Score:2)
Re:The neoconservatives in Texas (Score:2)
Re:Perfect matchup (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Perfect matchup (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Perfect matchup (Score:2)
Socialist Theory? (Score:3, Informative)
P.S. You are more likely to find sodomy in the halls of the U.S. Congress - where pages really know what pain in the ass means!
Re:Surprising choice (Score:2)
Re:Surprising choice (Score:3, Insightful)
Not Part of The UK (Score:3, Informative)
Set them back a couple of years... (Score:2)
A new desktop theme is not an operating systems revolution.
Re:Set them back a couple of years... (Score:1)
Microsoft says different with their aero.
Re:Set them back a couple of years... (Score:2)
Let them eat Beryl
Re:Set them back a couple of years... (Score:2)
I'm not sure you could say that MS has been advancing faster than Linux, but there are real advancements in Vista, whether you care about them or not.
I'm sure the french have considered a great many aspects of Linux vs. Windows for their needs. Basically, it comes down to the needs they have, the cost of meeting those needs, the risk of changing or not changing, and the long term flexibility and probable costs/risks associated with it. For large companies and organizations, Linux is looking pretty good in some of those comparisons (especially the last item). You never want a single supplier for something critical to your infrastructure and the more people that move to anything not Windows, the more benefit there is to doing the same.
Re:Set them back a couple of years... (Score:2)
I'm sure there are advancements over the NT5/XP codebase, but what does Vista (not MSO, or SQL Server or Exchange) do better than Linux?
Re:Set them back a couple of years... (Score:2)
Well, I never actually claimed that Windows was better at anything than Linux, only that the Versions of Windows available today are better than the version available two years ago. Vista adds indexed searching, more granular control of sound, the UI utilizes the GPU to offload some work, etc. As for areas where Windows is ahead of Linux and OS X, I maintain a running list of the advantages of each platform over the others, which I've posted on Slashdot several times and added to and modified as a result. Right now the Windows platform wins are:
Note, I don't go into the reasons for said advantages, which is another discussion. Please feel free to comment and mention any other areas where Windows wins or loses, but only if you actually use both platforms enough to have an educated viewpoint. I'm dog tired of people bringing up some "advantage" of their favorite OS when they don't even know the state of that same technology on other platforms. Also note "Linux" is not a single platform, so different distros have different features and it is impossible to evaluate them all. I look at a few common distributions and the default setting enabled as they affect home users (I know this article was about centrally managed use which is somewhat different).
Re:Set them back a couple of years... (Score:2)
Apps available in Linux are capable of all the work that needs to be done. That they don't trap you into supporting an old unobtanium DOS 5.0 machine until it wheezes its last and brings down your enterprise for lack of replacement is not a drawback. Try the sourceforge link at the top of the page.
Linux supports more devices than any other operating system ever. Multiple vendors offer and support laptops at reasonable prices.
Permissions for the Windows package manager allow any installer to install absolutely anything, including a root kit. This is not desirable behavior in a package manager.
Having an ecosystem that supports competing malware/antimalware solutions is not an advantage, not on my planet.
Better in some ways, worse in others, advantage Windows? Huh? Did I read that right?
Second time for this old troll.
You know the wrong people. This is changing fast, and is probably already better than you think.
locate works for me. I don't know what the gui dependent use, but I'm sure there's something.
In short, all of your "windows advantages" are either old info or just plain wrong. Maybe it's time to get current?
Re:Set them back a couple of years... (Score:2)
Sorry, this is a poor argument. First, it doesn't matter if there is an application that can do every task, that still is not good enough. More applications means more functions and more workflows for doing those functions. That means I have a better chance of finding an application that does just what I want just how I want to do it. In any case, there certainly are not good replacements on Linux for many proprietary software packages written for Windows. I run Linux side by side with Windows and OS X every day, but a lot of the applications I use because they are best of breed for some task do not run, or only run in a semi-stable re-implementation of the Windows API on Linux. This is a real issue for a lot of us who actually have to work in the real world and exchange data with others.
Basically every manufacturer of laptops in the world supports Windows on their hardware including drivers. I can pick any one. Maybe half of them have proper Linux drivers. That means I have half as many choices and thus the perfect laptop from a cost/feature/hardware perspective may not work if I'm running Linux, and so I have to buy a more expensive one with features I don't need in order to run Linux. This is a real disadvantage.
Linux wins on hardware support for old systems and systems with lesser resources, but not in the above.
Actually this is true for some Linux distros as well, but that is not the main issue. Package management on Linux, in general, is much better than Windows or OS X, but Linux package management is behind in providing commercial developers with the functions and incentive needed to get them to use the Linux package managers instead of bypassing them to the detriment of users. This is a small win for Windows in a category where they are mostly behind, but it is a win.
No, having an ecosystem that lends itself to malware is a big loss I have chalked up to Windows, but having the ability to easily find and remove malware (which is admittedly rare on Linux) is a small win for Windows, again in a category where they are mostly losing.
This is a list of where each OS is ahead of others. The fact that they are ahead in some remote desktop type functions is a win for Windows. This same item is also listed for Linux to account for the items where it does better. By keeping the list positive and giving each OS credit for each way they are ahead we avoid pointless comparisons of which feature set is "better overall" which is of course pointless since it all depends on a given user's use case. Yes, this is a win for Windows and Linux.
Anyone who denies that third party devices and peripherals are more likely to be supported on Windows, is living in a fantasy world. Why is it that zealots feel so emotionally entangled with their OS that they can't admit to areas where it is deficient. In this case it has little or nothing to do with the OS itself, simply with the current market and how that influences the behavior of hardware manufacturers. That makes it no less true and someone looking for the best OS for some purpose should be accurately informed about these things. Does it somehow make you less of a man if a random Web-cam from Walmart is less likely to work on Linux than Windows?
I'm sitting in an office with 100 Linux developers. That doesn't change the realities of the situation for the common man. It is a lot more likely that your nephew will know how to fix your Windows problem than that he will know how to fix your Linux problem. It is simply a function of how many people use each OS.
On Linux the most common replacement for indexed searching of file contents (not just names) would be Beagle and it works fairly well, but it is still a bit unpolished and I don't think any distro includes it by default, at least not that I have seen. It has a GUI front end on KDE I use, but the supported filetypes don't seem to be as extensive as other OS's, and the average user would not know how to find and install such a thing.
Every advantage I have listed is still valid. I seem to be a lot more current than you are. Look all of these items have been debated before, by people with a lot more experience than you have apparently. All your arguments can be summed up as emotive assertions that it doesn't matter, or some other factor makes it unimportant. You did not actually find a single item where what I said was not factually correct and you were misinformed about several items. I suspect you haven't actually been using modern OS's like OS X Tiger or Windows Vista or you would recognize some of this as obvious. Emotion is no substitute for reason. If you truly care about Linux as a movement, please consider that nothing is perfect and everything could be made better, even if that means swallowing your pride and playing catchup to Windows in certain areas.
Re:why not ORACLE linux? (Score:1)
Re:trying to get a deal from MS (Score:2)
Not in this case I think. Do not forget that we are talking about French here. And bureaucracy.
It is more along populist lines: "We are using computers provided by local vendors! We are not using evil software from convicted *US* monopolist!! We are saving bunch of your tax payers' money!!!"
I mean, they have elections looming. And I think it is part of campaign to get support from local business.
Re:trying to get a deal from MS (Score:2)
Re:They have a choice (Score:2)
it effectively exists on the whim of one rich guy who could lose interest and kill it whenever he wanted.
apparently the creaks are already showing in dapper (one person above mentioned downloading an update and his gui suddenly breaking with no availible soloution) and its less than a third of the way through its supposed support cycle. Support for the less major software in universe is even worse (much of the stuff in there has simply been imported straight from debian with no testing if it actually works in the ubuntu environment).
iirc long term support releases are supposed to come every two years and are finally obsoleted completely after 5 years. Maybe i'll be convinced when they have 3 of them in support at once (two for the desktop, 3 for the server) and are doing a good job for all of them i'll be convinced, until then ubuntu must be regarded as a young and vulnerable distro.
Re:They have a choice (Score:2)
Remember we're comparing to Windows. So long as the French parliament is willing to pay for support, I doubt they'll have trouble finding a company to provide it (they have 2 now unrelated to Canonical). Also, since Ubuntu is Linux, migrating to another Linux distro can be invisible to users and result in very little change other than the build process. This is less of a risk than Windows moving in a direction incompatible with the needs of the parliament.
Umm, Dapper isn't even the stable version, is it? In any case, we're looking at this for a centrally managed solution, not a home user. No one rolls out random updates with no testing when they are supporting hundreds of machines. This simply is not a real issue for such a deployment.
Again, this is still better than Windows where installing random software in Vista may or may not work and may or may not hose your system or infect it with something. In a centrally managed situation, supported by both internal IT and a third party support company, if software is needed for these machines, it probably needs to be approved, then a test box is setup to see if it works, then it either goes back to the support company who fixes it or gets rolled out to some or all users. This is almost the same with Windows in a centrally managed environment, except if there is a broken interaction between the OS and the application, the support team has the ability to fix it in the OS, which is not the case with Windows.
All distros are young at some point, but it is not the age that is important but the level of commitment and adoption. There are plenty of old Linux distros that used to be popular but no longer are and which now suck to support because no one tests against them when developing software. Sometimes it pays to be part of the main mass, and Ubuntu is that right now. You speak as though all the support options rested on the shoulders of Canonical, but that is simply not true. For any distro, most of the work comes from outside companies. The two hired by the French parliament will likely be contributing a significant amount on their behalf and making support better for everyone. The more companies do this, the fewer problems everyone has. Such a mass is important to how well supported a Linux distro is and is a lot more important, IMHO, than how old it is.
Re:They have a choice (Score:3, Interesting)
edgy is not a long term support release, support for it will be discontinued in a relatively short timeframe and its reported to be ubuntus buggiest release to date.
You speak as though all the support options rested on the shoulders of Canonical, but that is simply not true
do any of those companies have the rescources and inclination to do thier own tracking on what security issues pertain to what ubuntu versions and backport those security fixes themselves if ubuntus long term support promises turn out to be hollow?