New York Times Staff Editorial Promoting Linux 414
cotyledon writes "Today's New York Times editorial (Free Blah-Di-Blah) describes Linux as good for consumers and good for programmers. It recommends "Government units abroad and in the United States and individual computer users should look for ways to support Linux and Linux-based products. The competition it offers helps everyone." This is the paper's opinion, btw, and not a guest columnist."
ObSimpsons (Score:2, Insightful)
Not that I object, but this seems like an odd thing for the NYT to just come out and say. "...the possibility of invading Iraq. By the way, Linux r0xx0rs. In other news..."
Re:ObSimpsons (Score:5, Insightful)
Also odd was:
And outside programmers have long complained that Microsoft makes it hard for them to create software compatible with Windows-based computers.
What? That's the one thing just about everyone knowledgeable agrees Microsoft does well. I mean, have you noticed any shortage of third-party Microsoft apps? Of course, what they will do is crush any developer whose territory they've suddenly decided should be theirs.
Then, there's:
Wal-Mart has started selling a home computer called Lindows, which runs on Linux...
Re:ObSimpsons (Score:2, Funny)
Maybe NYT is taking a hint from 3rd world nations and figure they can get extra "funding" from Microsoft by suddenly supporting Linux
Re:ObSimpsons (Score:3, Insightful)
Besides, if you're a Linux proponent, why complain? This is a great thing to see published. Hell, I think it's a hell of an endorsement and I'm glad they did it... and I'm even a Microsoft shareholder too! (I don't see Linux as the defeat of Microsoft, rather as a challenge for ascension. Of course, I'm rooting for Linux ideaologically as well, but that doesn't mean MS can't make even more money doing their thing ad infinitum)
Re:ObSimpsons (Score:2)
Re:ObSimpsons (Score:3, Insightful)
No need for it to be tied to a specific event. It actually could be a case that one of the editors has gotten exposure to it and found out how good it was.. I did that to my roommate with RH6.0, and he turned into a bigtime Linux booster. 7.3 and it's non-RedHat bretheren are a good bit better, so I can definitely see a NYT editor going gah gah over it.
Reporters can be a snarky lot. When they find out that they've been lied to for the last decade or so, then can get downright crusaderish.
Times very pro-linux recently (Score:3, Informative)
There was the September 10th article about Hewlett-Packard firing their open source evangelist, Bruce Perens, which managed to state his case pretty well, including his outrage over the flamingly hypocritical microsoft-backed "Initiative for Software Choice" overseas lobbying group.
And there was their original September 5th article reporting on that lobbying group (and really, if there's anything that Microsoft has done that screams "We want to go to hell in a hurry!" it's creating that organization). The times tossed in a nice zinger there that hinted pretty strongly about how they feel: "(Illegally stifling choice, of course, was precisely what the federal courts in the long-running antitrust case ruled that Microsoft did in the market for personal computer software.)"
The Times articles may no longer be free, but we did write-ups of them here (sept. 5) [ms-bs.com] and here (sept 10) [ms-bs.com] and we quoted the articles fairly heavily.
neslon
Re:ObSimpsons (Score:3, Informative)
AOL is the frigggin crapolla that alters how WinSock.dll interacts with the rest of the system. I can't tell you how many times I've had to restore someone's internet connection because they innocently installed that stupid AOL software. Sounds like AOL/Netscape FUD to me.
What about, when installing AOL/Netscape/Winamp, RealPlayer no longer
Re:ObSimpsons (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, let's trust a semi-anonymous post on an unknown message board rather than the metric pantload of documentation [microsoft.com] Microsoft provides FOR FREE to developers. Then again, the portion you quoted is pretty dumb, anyway. Another poster has commented on the WINSOCK.DLL thing, so I'll comment on the other -- Windows Media Player, like any other media player, asks you what files extensions it should handle. If you don't tell it otherwise, it's obviously going to pick all of the file extensions it supports. Thus, Real Player obviously won't run on those files (well, until Real Player takes over those extensions again, like it likes to do). It's no longer tied to those file types. Don't like it? Change it. Or don't let WMP do that in the first place.
Re:ObSimpsons (Score:2)
Use the free registration generator (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Use the free registration generator (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm glad that
Re:Use the free registration generator (Score:5, Informative)
I couldn't agree with you more.
The NYTimes is asking *so* little for their content and use of their servers. Abusing their registration system is being extremely unreasonable IMHO, since for one we are not *forced* to use it.
If you don't want to give the information then don't read the articles!!
I for one would perfectly understand if NYTimes some day decides to banned links from slashdot.
*continues laments about sense of fairness in todays society...*
Re:Use the free registration generator (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Use the free registration generator (Score:3, Informative)
Or maybe you just think that the world's "paper of record" (not to mention third highest circulated periodical in the world) is going to go bankrupt in a year and sell their assets (of which their most prized one is not the second tallest building in NYC [currently under construction] but their EMAIL LIST?)
This isn't fucking googl.com. It's the New York Times. They say they're not going to spam you, they won't. They are a very tightly-run organization and to this day none of the aggregated data has been stolen. Do you shop online at all? Do you have a slashdot account? Do you go to restaurants? Do you live in fear that your data will be used against you when you do any of these things?
The Times' reputation is FAR more important for them to risk selling their data or not protecting it closely. The Times is a family run business, so they don't need a quick buck (hence they avoided the whole rush-to-the-internet-consolidate-everywhere craze) and they're not a do-it-quick web operation.
If you don't believe in the free registration fine. But don't go onto the Times web site and fill in garbage information to read these articles that you obviously want to. I still can't believe the audacity of people on the Net. They're giving you their CONTENT FOR FREE, except for a small registration form which they won't sell.
I can't help but laugh at people who think the Times is some joe-smo dot.com publication.
Re:Use the free registration generator (Score:2, Informative)
Testimonials (Score:4, Funny)
I can see the testimonials popping up on distro sites...
"The competition it offers helps everyone" - New York Times (registration required)
Solaris != Linux (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Solaris != Linux (Score:2)
Next, BusinessWeek or WSJ (Score:5, Insightful)
Good For the Consumer? (Score:3, Insightful)
There is no doubt that Linux supports the cause of breaking the MS monopoly (a good thing, whether or not MS itself is bad..that's not a debate I'm about to start). It's good for the industry, it is definitely a nice operating system for servers, programmers, and sophisticated computer users.
But Linux (in my opinion, at any rate) is NOT appropriate for the consumer as the articticle claims. The average American (and probably European too, but I can't say) consumer can run word, e-mail, the web, e-mail, and probably a few games. They are blissful on Windows, have no desire to switch over and dont really know about (nor do they care about) the Windows vs. *nix vs. whatever.
Until Linux comes to a level of user-friendliness much more advanced than it's at now, Linux is not going to enter the general consumer market. The programs are not what people are familliar to, it's not supported by ISPs and a lot of technical help groups, the installation is still complicated (we're talking about people who generally have neither the ability nor desire to so much as reinstall Windows), and neither the CLI (obviously) nor the major interfaces (Gnome, KDE, etc.) are really as user friendly and simple to use as Windows.
I generally like the NYT, but I wish they'd put a little more general thought into some issues.
Re:Good For the Consumer? (Score:5, Insightful)
You do realize that the more support that gets behind Linux, the more quickly and easily familiar programs will get written and/or ported to it, right? And the more people who use Linux on a daily basis outside of the developer world will result in a greater push toward the user interface?
The NYT isn't advocating the government yank out everyone's copy of office and stick them on "ed" - they're advocating that governments look at throwing support Linux's way, thereby resulting in increased competition and, by extension, better advances for the end user on both sides.
Re:Good For the Consumer? (Score:2, Interesting)
Red Hat Linux 7.3 + Ximian GNOME = computer my mother can use. She doesn't do a thing besides email, web, Yahoo! and AIM. She's not what you'd call computer literate, although she's not a moron by any means.
She loves it.
Give it a shot before you say it's not hard to use. I am a technical user (programmer by trade), but I wasn't a new user too long ago (7 years). IMO, [RH] Linux is as easy to install and use as any Windows OS.
Re:Good For the Consumer? (Score:5, Insightful)
Until Linux comes to a level of user-friendliness much more advanced than it's at now, Linux is not going to enter the general consumer market
Linux is very quickly becoming ready for Joe (or Jane) User. Look at recent deveopments such as Lindows or OEone's HomeBase Desktop. The momentum is building. Look at Open Office and Mozilla. Linux is not all that far away from being viable as a desktop operating system my grandmother could use. In fact, I'm convinced that I could already set up a system for her that would allow her to do everything she does now on her windows box with close to the same level of ease.
They are blissful on Windows, have no desire to switch over and dont really know about (nor do they care about) the Windows vs. *nix vs. whatever.
Well, first off, I don't know any novice users that would describe their experience as "blissful". Secondly, you're right. They don't care about windows vs. *nix. However, they do care about buying the same PC for $100 less. That's what's going to drive Linux into the consumer market - not users suddenly getting the urge to become a hard-core linux hacker.
Re:It was a bad idea to begin with... (Score:5, Interesting)
The story of my parents... :P
They are definately what could be called "average users"... They don't know exactly how their computer works except for the few programs they needed, and don't want to know more. Even using a "totally user-friendly OS such as MS Windows", they often feel dumb when in front of the computer because it won't do what they want it to do, for most of the time.
They didn't care about windows vs. *nix either, until I told them about Linux, which is what I run. They asked me the obvious question: What is Linux?. I tried to avoid "tech" talk with my parents because I know they hate it and it's really hard to always try to explain everything that seems so obvious to you because you spend so many times in front of your machine... So I just said it was an OS, like Windows, only better in my opinion, and that it's Free. Notice the capital F, instead of going all-tech, I started telling them the story of Open Source, Free Software, how MS is "evil" (they read the newspapers, they already knew that) etc...
Well guess what, a month later they ask me if they would be able to use Linux, and ask me to install it for them.
So what's the moral of that rather long story? I don't know, some folks care more than saving a hundred bucks... :)
Re:It was a bad idea to begin with... (Score:3, Interesting)
That your parents love you and could tell that Linux and Open Source ware very important to you, so they decided to give it a try because they knew it would make you happy?
Re:It was a bad idea to begin with... (Score:5, Insightful)
But you're a bigger capitalist than they are. They've bought into a monopoly -- the antithesis of a free-market economy. You have supported an open system which fosters free-market competition -- many distributions in competition, window managers in competition, and a huge number of apps that help non-Linux-centric businesses gain an advantage over proprietary competitors.
Linux is capitalism. Great ideas flourish, bad ideas are trounced, poorly marketed but technically superior ideas are salvaged from the source code of dead dot-coms. You're a fucking patriot.
Re:Good For the Consumer? (Score:2)
I still don't understand how ANYONE on
However, they do care about buying the same PC for $100 less.
Not really, because you do get a lot less. First point, by most counts, Windows OEM (aka the Microsoft tax) is nowhere near $100. I've heard that the Windows+"Office Home" (or Works or whatever new name they have for it tomorrow) costs anywhere from $115-$150 per box for OEM's - so THERE you have a point IF they're getting a good office productivity package as well. However, you can also get Open Office for Windows as well so this doesn't give a one up on Linux.
Finally, I still think it won't take long for companies like Sun to stop putting money into applications that no one is paying for.
Re:Good For the Consumer? (Score:3, Insightful)
I still don't understand how ANYONE on
Yes, I'm sure I'm biased by my technical expertise. However, it's also one of the reasons I feel I can make that assertion. I'm a software developer. I work with users every day to assure that the programs I've written are easily usable and understood. I've sat behind one-way glass and watched users interact with my software. I have a pretty good handle on what's easy for a novice to use and what isn't. Developments like Lindow's "click and run" are breaking new ground in linux's ease of use for general consumers even though we may scoff at them. If you don't think that usability has been improving and improving rapidly, go ahead and pick up an old linux book with an early version of slackware off a discount book rack then download the latest readhat
As for Windows OEM fees, while I was in college, I worked for a music store that also custom built PC's and sold retail/studio accounting packages (don't ask me how they got into that business). At the time, an OEM copy of Windows 95 was $99. I have no reason to believe this has changed [walmart.com]
Re:Good For the Consumer? (Score:2, Interesting)
Not to be overly cynical, but I think the perspective is rather skewed due more to an enjoyment and willingness to learn when confronted with the unknown. Which is something I've found somewhat lacking on average in most people. It's not just in tech, but I think in most aspects of life where we find ourselves ignorant the more geekish will enjoy digging up information and figuring it out. While most people would much rather remain ignorent and have the solution handed to them.
Re:Good For the Consumer? (Score:2, Funny)
$100 is a small price to pay for a Disney-compliant computer running a genuine made-in-america copy of Microsoft Windows XTE (Xterminate-Terrorism Edition). And remember: It's the law! ...wait, what year is it? ;)
--
Re:Good For the Consumer? (Score:5, Insightful)
No. It doesn't. Never has. Never will. Linux is a kernel, not a political platform, no matter how RMS and a subset of its users try to turn it into one. I get really tired of people assuming that all Linux users support some particular goals.
As for the tired "Linux software must be user friendly before anyone will use it" line (no matter all the evidence to the contrary)
Re:Good For the Consumer? (Score:3, Insightful)
Wrong. Linux is a kernel, and therefore is in competition with Microsoft operating systems. Anything which attempts to compete with Microsoft operating systems supports the cause of breaking the MS monopoly. The original poster did not say that Linux was written for the express purpose of destroying the MS monopoly, just that it served that end.
And remember that one of the goals of Linux, expressed by Linus, is "World Domination".
you've missed the point of the article (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Good For the Consumer? (Score:5, Insightful)
What I'm referring to its tight control and consistency in functionalities(you might argue with this but it's true). When I want to setup a machine for my secretary for word processing, I can make sure she can only use that and nothing else. This is exactly like office computers during 80s, a box standing there for a sole purpose. Most clerical clerks are not educated with the computers knowledge, fewer functions in a tool would only help them improve their learning curve and eventually increase productivity.
You may also argue that modern computer should be general purpose and user-centric. Can you imagine exactly how many hours has been wasted on handling virus outbreaks? I'm not even going to start the problems with allowing users to install their own stuffs in office computers, but you get the idea.
The modern desktop computing concept promoted by Microsoft is not as productive as the terminal-based idea promoted by IBM in 70-80s, in my opinion.
Re:Good For the Consumer? (Score:3, Insightful)
My dad was born the day the bismark sank. (he's old) He knows that you can play solitaire on a computer. That, mahjongg and email is all he cares about. He uses linux now. It's stupid simple for him to use. It doesn't crash. Despite all records to the contrary XP does in fact crash reading email.
People that say linux isn't user friendly are people that just gave up on their brains. I don't have any computer training whatsoever. I do have a normal life of parties, beer and friends. I have slept with several women. I am not a geek stereotype (who is anymore?) It does not take a computer science degree to use linux or any other operating system. Don't give up on your brain.
also, what is so simple about navigating windows? Windows has never been "point and click" it has been "click and guess".
there is nothing intuitive about the Windows ui. or the mac ui. or gnome or kde or any of the others. There's nothing intuitive about a steering wheel either. You have to learn it.
I'm on a roll now and have karma to burn. what is intuitive about the file menu? file is a menu on every program I've ever used with drop down menus. why is "print" under file? why is "quit" under file? its doens't make any intuitive sense but that's the way we've always done it and we've learned to do it that way.
windows isn't user friendly. its just never changes. you know what happens with something that doesn't change? it stagnates and dies.
Re:Good For the Consumer? (Score:3, Insightful)
"user friendly" is probably the most abused term in computing. Usually what people mean by saying something like "Linux isn't user friendly" is that it dosn't work exactly like Windows. Regardless of if XYZ "feature" of Windows actually makes much sense to the "average user" in the first place.
Re:Good For the Consumer? (Score:2)
What!?
Good now and getting better (Score:2)
I have Mandrake 8.2 running here at home. My wife and I use it for watching DVD media, listening to Mp3 files, word processing, spreadsheets, basic scheduling and general Internet usage. (Web e-mail and such.) I am very technical, but she is not. Linux works nicely in this respect. We have different logins, mine is customized to the hilt and setup for more than basic computing, hers is clean and easy to use. The nice thing is, with Linux, it is easy to keep things that way.
Guess what? This machine works fine! Heck, it is not even that nice of a machine. E-machine (ewww..), Matrox G400 video, 500 mhz PIII, 192Mb ram and some HD are not much these days. I can get another machine and do the same thing for just the cost of Closed Software licenses alone! That has got to be good for the consumer.
The only configuration I needed to do with this machine that did not work easily with the GUI is the DVD setup. Ogle is great, but due to some lame law decisions in the US, I have to get this somewhere else. If this were not the case, I know Mandrake would have intergrated this program in with the others. It is likely that, given the freedom to include DVD support, I would have had to do almost nothing to begin really using my machine.
Now I know not everyone can do this yet because of the time it might take to learn how to set things up properly, but each revision of the various distributions seems to reduce the need for this by quite a bit. One more iteration and things will work very nicely for most of what we need to do day to day.
Soon we will be able to buy a very nice workstation ready to handle all day to day computing tasks for the price of that other OS. Now with all that extra money laying around, don't you think that people will be interested in buying some additional products since they got such a deal on their base computer? I do, particularly when they realize they are spending their money for new things, not the same things over and over again each year.
A large chunk of the problem has very little to do with the performance of the Open Source / Free Software whatever method of development, it has to do with lawyers profiting off of the fear that some companies have for their withering business models.
So right now I would agree with the Times, Linux is good for consumers, not all consumers mind you, but an increasing number of them.
So really, I don't think for a minute that the editors of the Times are stupid. Like it or not, a lot of thought goes into the production of the Times; otherwise it would not have the name that it does today.
They see what I see; namely, that Linux is ready now and improving at a very nice clip. We are seeing Linux leave the early adopter stage about to enter the early majority. This is a great time because all the really good stuff happens now. Applications are being ported, new ones in process are showing up now, early ones are maturing to a very usable state.
I work in the MCAD field. Did you know that Pro Engineer is coming to Linux next year? That is major software supported by not one, but two large companies, PTC and HP/Compaq. These types don't port unless there is demand. I would say that the Times has it just about right at the moment.
How is the whole thing supposed to progress if it does not get some press at the key time? I believe that time is now. I just don't think the Times are that far off --I could be wrong, but I hope not.
Re:Good For the Consumer? (Score:2)
And just to deflect some of the counter arguments sure to come my way, yes, indeed, Linux is deficient in a couple of areas, notably games (games are a big deal, I know that) and personal finance software (there's a lot of good finance software for Linux, but they aren't hot on the service side -- direct support for on-line reconciliation and such -- that come with business relationships between the ISV and financial institutions). But as a general internet console and word processing platform, my mother-in-law does just fine.
Also, as others point out in this same discussion, the Linux market must grow before the applications base grows. There's a chicken and egg thing here. But little progress will be made so long as MS has their OEM pricing agreements and they threaten to stomp anyone who doesn't toe the line.
Re:Good For the Consumer? (Score:2, Interesting)
"What type of user are you?"
"Advanced."
"Ok! All wizards and easy-screens set to non-default."
Get Gentoo [gentoo.org] and stay ahead of the game. =P
Re:Good For the Consumer? (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, guess what? You can also buy laptops with Linux pre-installed, and you will have the same frustration trying to load Windows XP. I know, I recently helped a friend try it, and we finally gave up. He just wasn't satisfied with using XP on 640 x 480 and 16 colors.
If you really want a satisfying experience installing Linux on a desktop (or laptop), try the lastest version of Mandrake (at least 8.2, but 9.0 RC2 is pretty stable, too). Mandrake now actually does a better job of recognizing hardware than the latest Windoze does.
Same with programs like The Gimp. If your PC is factory installed with Linux, Gimp is probably included, and it will work fine for anyone that can point and click. But do you really think your average end-user is going to jump through all the hoops required to download, install and set up all the stuff they need to run The Gimp on Windows? Do you?
encouraging but superficial (Score:2, Insightful)
From the article:
If Linux spreads, Microsoft could see the first real challenge to its dominance of the operating-system software market.
It would be nice if the writer suggested why Linux has the potential spread where others, most notably MacOS, have so far been steamrolled. Instead, MacOS isn't touched on, and we aren't given any new arguments why Linux could succeed on the desktop.
It's great to see Linux being taken seriously by the Times but it would be better still to see this editorial add something fresh to the pro-Linux argument.
Re:encouraging but superficial (Score:4, Interesting)
Until it does, Apple will remain a niche. Period. The End.
Hell, even SUN is getting in on the game!
There are 100x the number of Intel-type machines out there than PPC-based. OS X would require a total new hardware investment, Linux does not.
Re:encouraging but superficial (Score:2)
The argument was about OS X becoming widespread, or being promoted as a viable office alternative. YES, it is a killer implementation. However, for it to become widespread enough to threaten Microsoft, it MUST run on Intel.
The fact is, for a business to install OS X they must trash most of their existing hardware, and that just isn't going to happen.
There are over dozen companies making chipsets and/or motherboards for Intel/AMD. How many for PPC? 3? 4? Even if it is 10, the quantity made doesn't even come close to all the x86 stuff.
Purchase prices means a LOT when a company is talking 50, 100 or 5,000 machines. When a PC will do the same thing for $500 - $1,000 less than the Mac, no accountant is going to approve $2.5 - $5.0 million *more* on the basis of OS X.
Re:encouraging but superficial (Score:2)
*quizzical expression*
*scratches head*
*moves keyboard*
*bangs head against desk three times*
*resets keyboard*
*scratches head again*
Err?
niche != irrelevance or failure (Score:2)
Seriously, I think many more people would be very happy with a Macintosh than currently own one. Put another way, I think there is 'growth potential' for the Macintosh product family.
Will Apple-made personal computers ever seriously challenge Microsoft/Intel/AMD "Wintel" dominance? Not a chance. Forget it. But what I don't get is why so many people think this is a mark of irrelevance or failure.
In truth Apple is one of the most relevant computer makers. Apple is also one of the most relevant software makers. Apple is also one of the most sucessful personal computer makers. They make tons of money, have a fiercely loyal customer base, hold one of the most recognized brands in the United States and could buy every single Linux comany with cash using only the change out from under the breakroom couch pillows. The fact that the platform that they put forth isn't a dominant one doesn't change any of that.
Sometimes I think we're all so used to hearing about some single-digit marketshare that the Macintosh platform is supposed to have that we simply lose sight of the fact that Apple is a very large, very sucessful and influential company that makes some darned nice products, too. They're in no danger of irrelevance.
Sorry about the seemingly unprovoked rant. Sometimes it just bursts out. Mod me down if you must. I can take it.
Re:encouraging but superficial (and wrong) (Score:2)
Imagine the quality cars we'd have if people were afraid to drive anything that didn't have, say, the Ford dashboard layout. "The headlight control is on the wrong side; how can people ever possibly learn to handle that?"
This is the reasoning we're hearing for why people can't learn anything but Windows. And we're getting the crappy computers that you'd expect in such a market.
But I don't think that people are that stupid. They can learn to drive Toyotas and Hyundais and Volvos and Saabs. I think they are mostly smart enough to handle KDE or Gnome or OSX.
Maybe we should be encouraging them to try something that just might be better than the worst system on the market.
Individual Support (Score:2, Insightful)
Linux was easy to configure for the Network with DHCP, Samba, and printer share. I don't think it could have been much easier. Even though I ran out of funds before every thing was done, it did prove very helpful on getting to know Linux. Now Linux is on my laptop, and I am starting to get into it more and more.
Even though the majority of home users don't know that much, I have found, that Linux is not only for the geeks. Linux is quite easy to setup and run.
"My cpu runs cooler with Linux"
EI
Halt
Re:Individual Support (Score:2)
In related news: (Score:4, Funny)
This stupid, fake comment brought to you by my boredom.
Re:In related news: (Score:2, Funny)
No less important.. (Score:2)
That's what I love about Linux, I can just use it without asking help from anyone! - sarcasm
The best part about linux is that there is a ton of knowledge out there for any newbie that wishes to delve into the mysterious world of Linux. Although, if you don't read the docs, you'll get a lot of RTFM.
I took the plunge back in 95 and have been using it every since. I tried making it my primary OS for desktop applications but that never seemed to work with where I worked and what I needed to do. However, I finally found a perfect place for Linux as my home web server/mp3 player/recipe database/caller id logger/weather station reader/firewall/etc None of which I couldn't have done without the help of the Linux gurus out there. Thanks.
"The *New* Challenge to Microsoft"? (Score:4, Informative)
Ah well, I shouldn't complain. Like they said the summer after Seinfeld had its finale: if you haven't seen it, it's new to you!
Has anyone ever wondered... (Score:5, Interesting)
I would so love to see an article like this answer questions like "What would be the effects of government adoption of Linux on employment in the technology industry?" or even "What would be the economic and social consequences of wide spread adoption of 'free software' in government?"
or maybe "Will Linux help you pick up chicks?"
ok.. maybe not the last one... but really. I think the public needs some serious media coverage of in depth issues aroun linux, "free software" and open source to help stimulate thought, and not just come off as a marketing campaign for "choice".
It is like the abortion argument. You can argue that women have rights, or kids have rights, but when people ask and answer tough questions it stimulates thought rather than emotion.
Re:Has anyone ever wondered... (Score:2)
Because inside every journalist beats the heart of a wannabe politician.
Re:Has anyone ever wondered... (Score:2)
They think they're the fucking "fourth estate," arrogant bastards. They "make the news," rather than "report facts and events." The "news" exists as either a way to push an agenda, as entertainment, or both. Local news is especially crap. Every night, local news runs a "Be afraid! Tune in to figure out about what!" story. "News" outfits think their job is to tell you what to think. Right down to Peter Jennings' smirk when he mentions things he doesn't like.
"The three branches of government: Money, Television, and Bullshit" -- P.J. O'Rourke
Re:Has anyone ever wondered... (Score:5, Informative)
Metropolitan newspapers are intended for a wide variety of people -- not just engineers or CEOs or marketing managers. They can't assume that everyone knows what you (as a Slashdot reader) consider "obvious." If you want more in-depth info, usually you will have to look to a specialized publication. Some papers like The NYT and The Washington Post take something of a stab at specialized, more in-depth articles, but they relegate them to weekly sections (Circuits and Fast Forward, respectively) because there just isn't enough demand among their readers to justify that kind of depth on a daily basis on the same topic. Other topics, such as Business or Sports, get daily sections because they have the necessary following.
Papers do target certain minimum reading levels with their writing. For example:
- The New York Times is written for someone at least a sixth-grade reading level.
- Newsday is written for someone at least a fourth-grade reading level (and it really pushes to put its papers in New York area classrooms).
- USA Today is written for someone at the picture-book reading level.
Incidentally, this editorial is a mixed blessing. On the one hand, it validates Linux in the eyes of many people who never would have considered the OS and alternative to Windows. On the other hand, Microsoft can now point to this article and argue that there's no need for government intervention in its affairs because the company "obviously" has serious competition from Linux.Knowledge != intelligence (Score:3, Insightful)
You must be confusing knowledge with intelligence. Most people are ignorant about technology issues relative to slashdot readers. It does not mean that they are stupid.
Important issues can be discussed in a way that does not insult the reader's intelligence and without requiring a lot of background knowledge.
All people are born ignorant. They are made stupid by education.
Re:Has anyone ever wondered... (Score:4, Insightful)
"Yes, Judge Jackson viewed our practices as an abuse of monopoly power three years ago, but the computer industry moves very quickly, and things have changed since then. Microsoft is facing stiff competition that was not a threat to its dominance three years ago, as noted in a recent New York Times editorial. Placing restrictions on the company will cripple its ability to compete with this serious challenger."
Bear in mind that no one, including Microsoft, denies that Microsoft has a monopoly in the operating system business because monopolies are not illegal. It's illegal to use your monopoly to crush competition and extend your dominance into other areas, as Microsoft did with Internet Explorer (and, arguably, other programs, but that's not the focus of the trial). In other words, if you can amass such great power, good for you. But with that great power comes great responsibility. You have to change your business model from the kind of cutthroat tactics a competitive startup uses to the kind of tactics the government uses to ensure the market and consumers are protected.
Microsoft was found guilty of abusing its power, and the sentence is important because it must prevent Microsoft from abusing this power in the future (punishment is optional, at the judge's discretion, depending on the amount of harm Microsoft has done).
In the end, the sentence is all that really matters. If Microsoft's sentence is a slap on the wrist (or worse, a donation of 500,000 copies of Windows to schools and libraries, which increases Microsoft's power), the years of effort that have gone into curbing the company's abuses will have been for nothing and Microsoft will be encouraged to press the market even harder. In such a case, consumers will be worse off because the trial took place.
(In case you're wondering, I worked on coverage of the antitrust trial in Washington from the beginning to end of the Jackson era, though I was not my newspaper's reporter on the subject.)
Re:Has anyone ever wondered... (Score:2)
I'm not one to get over-excited about the quality of journalism anywhere, not just in the U.S., but I think you're posing questions that are more appropriately addressed by specialized press outlets, not "general purpose" publications like the NYT. Don't forget that the concepts of open source, closed source, free software and all the rest have next to no exposure or impact outside the IT industry.
Re:Has anyone ever wondered... (Score:3, Informative)
The poster made the point that when newspaper articles confront the real issues and ask tough questions instead of taking the simple easy to understand approach it stimulates real debate and that is a Good Thing(tm).
The poster is not likening the software industry to the abortion industry but drawing a comparison between the media's COVERAGE of abortion and free software.
Jeez...
Re:Has anyone ever wondered... (Score:2)
I'm sure (Score:2)
Ah, good (Score:5, Funny)
So when did the paper itself become self aware?
Re:Ah, good (Score:2)
BEWARE! (Score:2, Funny)
Fortunately, I have a lighter. I don't think the paper has thought that far ahead, but what would you expect from ground-up trees? You've seen how the rainforest protects itself: "Hey, everybody! Hold still and play dead... I'm sure they'll all go away."
It's in the print edition, too. (Score:2, Informative)
We mustn't forget that competition is the cornerstone of a free economy and that Microsoft makes a significant contribution to technological innovation. Without Microsoft's constant competitive pressure on OSS developers, the quality of open source software would suffer. Certainly Microsoft has shown that it is more than willing abuse its monopoly status and it is the duty of the Department of Justice to protect the consumer against economic hegemony. Under the Bush administration, the DoJ is failing to perform its duty. In spite of this, my sincerest admiration goes out to the OSS kernel and application developers who choose to challenge the Giant rather than merely whine about its existence.
sm
Got your registration right here (Score:2, Informative)
pass: spamfree
This was posted some time ago in the discussion of another NYT article. I've been using it (for reading articles linked by
Russ
communitarian...? (Score:2)
However, ...
Government units abroad and in the United States and individual computer users should look for ways to support Linux and Linux-based products. The competition it offers helps everyone.
That last comment is definitly worth highlighting as the only useful thing in the "Editorial".
Re:communitarian...? (Score:2)
Re:communitarian...? (Score:2)
Even Merriam-Webster has it... (Score:2)
Re:communitarian...? (Score:2)
A good endorsement is one thing... (Score:2)
You know that if all the movie critics in the world give props to this year's hot indie film, almost no one will go see it. Put it in wide release, and get some hype behind it, and you've got yourself a blockbuster.
I think it's about time we got a "desktop distro" that nears the foolproof quality of Windows, has a tremendous user guide, and has easy to use dumbed down setup tools involved. It's about time everyday people started recommending Linux because "it's easy" and "its better than Windows".
We knew this already, though. Just repeating it for emphasis, cause I feel that strongly about it.
This article just panders to thte Linux minority (Score:2, Interesting)
That's a joke.
The people who think that Linux will rise up to crush the oppressor are either delusional or horribly misinformed.
While Linux has made, and will continue to make inroads due to its technical superiority, Microsoft still has the lion's share of market share, and an absolutely enormous amount of money.
Really, to think of Microsoft and the Linux community as fighting for supremacy is like imagining a battle between a human and an ant colony. The human may not be able to destroy the ant colony (or may get one colony, while many others remain in the yard), due to its diffuse nature, but the human will never be seriously threatened by it.
--
http://ragnar.nilmop.com [nilmop.com]
Missing the point (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux has had more success than Microsoft in the embedded space. It's giving Microsoft a run for its money in the server space - at least keeping market share away from Microsoft, if not actively grabbing it. It completely dominates in the supercomputer space, where Microsoft has no presence. So far, Linux has had very little impact in the desktop space, but that seems likely to change over the long term.
Over time, it's actually very likely that Microsoft's traditional sources of revenue will erode significantly, because of Linux and open source in general. Office suites are a case in point: on the one hand, you have Microsoft experimenting with licensing schemes where they try to charge consumers $100's per year for the use of their product, while on the other hand, you have very competitive free alternatives that have been improving at a dramatic rate and are increasingly being noticed by organizations ranging from the governments of the U.S., Germany, and Peru, to colleges and companies with specialize needs. If Microsoft fails to get the world to switch to an office-suite-as-service model, and I think they will fail, Linux and open source will have played a big role in that.
That doesn't mean Microsoft is doomed. But they'll be forced to focus on and stick to spaces where they can compete effectively against "free" software - such as the big business world, where the consultants you can deploy are at least as important as the out-of-the-box software you provide.
In fact, Microsoft has been moving "upmarket" in this sense for a long time, which is one reason they began losing the support of small developers and companies: back when it sold DOS and early versions of Windows, Microsoft needed all the support it could get, and big business treated it as a minor side issue; now, big business loves Microsoft, and vice versa. If you're not a Fortune 1000 company, you're effectively little but a potential annoyance to Microsoft, a source of revenue that can't be supported in a cost-effective way.
Because of this, you can expect to see small business moving to Linux also, in servers to start with but later for workstations also, as Microsoft products become less and less suitable (Exchange, anyone?) and Linux becomes more and more off-the-shelf and automated (a la Red Hat network.)
In short, the New York Times is a little behind the times - they're acknowledging a grassroots trend that has been building for years, and that is already a reality. But they're quite timely in another sense, in that the effectiveness of Linux as a competitor to Microsoft has only just begun. It's only been four years since the Halloween documents opened many people's eyes to Linux, and the landscape has changed dramatically since then. Check back in 2006, and see how Microsoft has changed as a result. My bet is it'll be dramatic, although the specifics are hard to predict.
Conspiracy theory (Score:2, Interesting)
In that case, NYT.com should do browser detection. (Score:3, Funny)
Nice Times Piece, But AOL Client Would Be Better (Score:2)
why and ui (Score:3, Interesting)
As for all the people saying, "yes, Linux used to be unfriendly, but now it's just as good as Mac or Windows," that would have a lot more credibility if the same people hadn't been saying exactly the same thing for the last seven years or so. The fact is, it hadn't caught up then, and it hasn't caught up now.
Product endorsement? (Score:2)
Re:Here's my question... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Here's my question... (Score:2)
And BTW, a lot of people care what the editor of a newspaper thinks. About a lot of things. You don't become editor of the NYT by being a moron. He's probably at least as smart (however you want to define it) as you and his education is greater than yours in probably a multitude of areas (he does read the NYT everday which can be fairly informative on occasion). Admittedly he's not a technological expert, but I've already explained why I think that's a good thing.
Re:Here's my question... (Score:3, Interesting)
A New York Times reader is about 36% more likely than the average affluent head of household to hold a college or postgraduate degree; 34% more likely to have a household income exceeding $100,000 and is 49% more likely to be a top manager.
These are the people who can actually do something about introducing linux into a company. Remember, there's no such thing as bad publicity, so if you even just make them aware that alternatives exist, that's a start. Providing a positive review is just bonus.
Re:Here's my question... (Score:3, Insightful)
The positions taken in editorials published in newspapers are not the random jottings of any editor who just happens to have an opinion. They are considered the institutional voice of the newspaper and can carry significant weight in their communities. The editorial stances of the NYT often have national and global impact.
While basic editing is a skill eveyone working at a newspaper needs to possess, editors are paid to manage staff and reporters, decide what stories are covered, determine story placement in the paper, etc.
The technical expertise of this particular editorial writer is irrelevant. The Times is making an economic and business argument for Linux, not a technical argument. The piece's thrust is that Linux provides a viable competitor to Linux, which the Times sees as laudable and something that should be encouraged.
Re:For those that don't have subscription (Score:3, Interesting)
This is an extremely odd choice of words. I would have used 'cooperative', wouldn't you? I wonder if their intent was to conjure up another commun- word. We may never know.
Re:For those that don't have subscription (Score:5, Informative)
This is an extremely odd choice of words. I would have used 'cooperative', wouldn't you? I wonder if their intent was to conjure up another commun- word. We may never know.
Communitarian has a very specific meaning that describes a recently-popularized political philosophy. Both Bill Clinton in the US and Tony Blair in the UK have talked about their political philosophy as inspired by communitarian ideas. As the name implies it proposes that communities are a central political unit.
You can find out more at places like: RadicalMiddle [radicalmiddle.com]
I believe that calling the Open Source movement communitarian has some useful connotations.
Re:For those that don't have subscription (Score:2)
Re:For those that don't have subscription (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't mean to be a jerk about it, but doesn't the line "Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company" mean anything here?
Quite seriously, regardless of your personal beliefs regarding intellectual property rights and wrongs, and subscription news services: How is it that we pat a news organization on the back for paying lip service to our favorite operating system, and then infringe on their copyrights?
Re:For those that don't have subscription (Score:2, Funny)
Easy.... We are assholes and hypocrits!!
Re:For those that don't have subscription (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:For those that don't have subscription (Score:3, Informative)
The thing is that the sum total of copyrighted material out there is practically infinite. You couldn't possibly check every Slashdot post against that large of a set of information (not to mention aLL pOSSiBLE trANSfOrMatIONS) even if they had access to all of it.
Re:Wow! (Score:2)
Re:ah what does NYT Digital Presses Run On? (Score:2)
You should also note that quite a few newspapers run their presses of some sort of Unix, some in tandem with Macs. This may be mostly the smaller papers (the one's I've had contact with), but that setup seems to work for quite a few.
Re:Arent they supposed to suck? (Score:3)
So why doesn't Slashdot just stop linking to nytimes.com then? They have stated that their general policy [slashdot.org] is to not link to registration-required sites, so why should NY Times be any different? The link has them saying that NY Times has "a lot of high-quality" stories...so do lots of registration-required sites. They also say that NY Times was grandfathered in...wtf is that supposed to mean? People may be getting tired of reading "Free Registration Required" on every other Slashdot link despite a Slashdot policy that is meant to curb this, but personally I am much more annoyed by having to register there in the first place.
Re:Arent they supposed to suck? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:FUD? (Score:2)
While this is an extreme scenario, sourceforge is full of projects that aren't going anywhere.
We all assume, for instance, that a hole in Apache will be quickly closed by a thousand coders from around the world. But there's no guarantee. Guarantees and contracts are FORMAL parts of the business world. Do you understand yet what the statement is saying?
If you base some project that puts your career on the line, you want to be as sure as you can that it's not going to dissapear because the team behind it got bored, changed their mind, got in a flame war and split up, or whatever.
We already know MS uses closed source. It doesn't need to be repeated. But they pay employees to come in and work on the source every day. This leaves at least the impression that work will be done.
I got no problem with linux, I got no problem with windows, os/2 beos or C64 Basic. But call it like it is, take the blinders off.
Linux is not above criticism. If you think it is, you're worse than any MS marketing drone.
Re:Well how about this, NYT? (Score:2)
What is wrong with requiring registration to read an article? Would you rather just pay for read it? They are giving you something that you want in exchange for something they want. What could you possibly have against that?
Is all you want a life full of freebies? Next you will be wanting "open source" pizzas, and "open source" clothing. It's a surprise you don't want "open source" housing.
-BrentIs Registering at Slashdot Evil, Too? (Score:2)