FLOSS Pays

FUD: You can’t make money with FLOSS.
Truth: FLOSS pays.
It’s the least expensive way to provide any service in IT and users and customers love it.“The mobile search market is experiencing out-of-control growth. Mobile searches have increased 200% year over year in 2012, and it’s predicted that within the next year, mobile will become the primary way people access Google’s services. But despite early reports, Google isn’t doomed from a sudden shift to mobile.

Far from it – the opposite in fact! Google has managed to transform itself into a “mobile first” company. Currently, the majority of Google’s $8B run-rate mobile revenue derives from advertising (excluding Motorola). That’s why the company is totally restructuring the way its pay-per-click advertising platform, AdWords, works – Google wants more businesses advertising on mobile, so it’s making mobile PPC radically simpler with the introduction of enhanced campaigns, as well as new mobile conversion types, offer extensions and a mobile app ad type, all specifically created to address mobile-centric use cases.”


see Google's Mobile Apps, Software, and Devices.

So, everyone with a decent business-plan gets cost-effective IT and sales from FLOSS. It’s obvious that no licensing fees and software shared cooperatively among millions of programmers reduces the cost of IT, the essential element of any business these days.

Google uses Linux everywhere and adds it’s own code on top of that to provide wonderfully popular services and opportunities to earn revenue through advertising. There has never been software so popular so fast as Android/Linux, not even M$’s stuff. They took decades to do what Google has done in five years and Google’s stuff is growing while M$’s is stagnant. This is not a blip but a major shift in how IT and business is done.

Red Hat, Canonical, Suse and othes are going concerns being accepted as the new infrastructure of IT in every corner.

If GNU/Linux pays dividends for huge businesses, why not you? I recommend Debian GNU/Linux and all the FLOSS applications you want from their huge repositories. Just add what you want using APT, the world’s best package manager. A few clicks does it all, upgrading/installing OS and applications.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

61 Responses to FLOSS Pays

  1. bw says:

    “OEM are not going to miss a chance to pocket the full cost of Windows.”

    Not true at all. That is just a misinterpretation of the childish notion that people are price buyers. People who cannot afford things might buy something affordable rather than nothing at all, but the difference in price between a Windows computer and a Linux computer, if there is any, is so slight that it really does not matter in a buying decision.

    The OEM is not going to trade a few bucks of license cost savings for the massive costs of having to provide widespread support for Linux for their retail customers and for the equally massive costs that would be associated with even beginning to educate them as to the differences and sell them on accepting Linux instead of Windows.

  2. oiaohm says:

    The biggest problem trying to count Linux users. Is the fact there machines that are running Linux now did not leave the factory with that in most cases.

    There are some like lots of freedos machines kinda in the face they are only for one group.

  3. oiaohm says:

    George Wilson the proof is in the fact the basically OS Less machines at high end with warranties that do not destroy data. Sell for the same price as Machines installed with Windows.

    The Windows machine warranties include the right to nuke the hard-drive contents.

    George Wilson in fact its not the Australian bush. The claim about super well supported is being smart enough to look for machines that cannot be for sale to windows users. Its kinda straight in your face.

    Dell Precision T7600 and Dell Precision T7600n are basically the same price. You find the same with HP and other what some would call OS machines.

    The difference T7600 has Windows and a data not respecting warranty, T7600n has a data respecting warranty and strangely has a OS bundled that it cannot run.

    Exactly why would Dell and others be making something they cannot sell. They would not.

    George Wilson so who other than Linux users would be buying T7600n.

    That is the problem. When you go through the machine lists the only party who would be buying this stuff is Linux users.

    So Linux sales hides in Freedos bundled machines.

    George Wilson every bit of my claims that Linux is supported can be checked out.

    This is why bw is a troll idiot. Bw never explained why the strange machine exist.

    There is another advantage for OEM using the Freedos solution. It avoids parties complaining that there distrobution is not shipped when another one is.

    Linux machines enter the market in the high end in a strange way. Effective way. High end is normally better resourced than your general home user. High end have company images that you use.

    The reason why Linux is hard to see in OEM’s is how OEM’s are dealing with Linux fragmentation.

    Yes bw and George Wilson. You have both complained about Linux fragmentation. Did it not cross your mind that OEM might have worked out there own solution to being stuck in that problem. Not ship Linux and ship something stupid that does not run on the hardware most of the time on a loss cd in box.

    Yes freedos is not even copied onto the hard-drive is just a disc in box you throw in bin. Its normally out of date by the time the machine lands anyhow.

    George Wilson and bw and ted did you ever go looking and for once in your life take the presume that Linux might be supported. And something about Linux makes it strange.

    Linux fragmentation makes it strange. If Linux solved it fragmentation its machines would become more visible. OEM are not going to miss a chance to pocket the full cost of Windows.

  4. George Wilson says:

    Oiaohm wrote:

    TL;DR

    The Australian Bush claims: Linux is super and well supported.

    Words fail when the drivel piles up sky-high.

    And I’d like to see proof that Linux users value their data more than Windows users.

  5. oiaohm says:

    bw Dell pays for Red-hat and others to certify those N class machines. They only do this because it causes sales.

    Other vendors on there N class equals pay distributions to certify them.

    So yes those N class machines are supporting the Linux desktop.

    The problem is do Linux users really want a computer with a OS pre-installed.

    Linux networks are normally replicated images of each other. Those N class come out box configured to network boot. Plug into network and they image to the company image. All software all security setting done.

    This works out externally brilliantly.

    Why default boot order of a Dell N class.
    Harddrive
    Cdrom
    usb
    Network
    No OS on harddrive causes it to go boot the next two. Once the Harddive is configured its locked down.

    This is the big problem High end Linux users don’t want a OS installed on the machine. A OS installed on the machine just allows a machine to be running that does not have the company image on it.

    The hard thing for idiots like you to get bw is we have two different markets.

    General Consumer that wants to walk in and pick up a machine with a OS installed ready to go.

    High end business that wants machines installed with software identically. Absolutely identically. This is simpler to achieve if the machine turns up with a blank hard-drive.

    bw you are aware you cannot buy a volume license of Windows to install on a N class machine. You require a pre existing windows License to upgrade from.

    So N Class machines are not for Windows users. N Class machines cost sightly more than a Machine with Windows. And Dell and other are selling them.

    So bw what OS is being installed on those sales. It would be a very dumb pirate to be buying a N class.

    This is your problem N class machines sales don’t add up for pirated copies of Windows. Thinking they are a paper weight out box. And the only other OS certified to run on them other than Windows is Linux.

    So bw how is this not supporting Linux.

    Linux users want a particular thing OEM’s are providing it.

    The reality is you have said no Linux machines. The reality is high end Linux machines are mostly sold without OS even that that machine costs more than buying the same machine with Windows on it.

    Companies are willing to pay more for safer data handling than what Windows is worth. So every N class sold dell gets to pocket the cost of Windows.

  6. bw says:

    “So we have two very different Desktop Computer markets”

    Only in your dreams. I cannot believe how you are progressing in your illusion that selling computers without an OS is the same as supporting Linux. It is as bizarre as your “Warranty is a License” notion. What will you do next?

  7. oiaohm says:

    ted http://community.linuxmint.com/hardware/search
    Select apple press search. Yes most are certified by one distribution or another. There are a hand full that are not.

    bw the main reason you buy a type N and you are a Linux user. Is that you want if the machine stops under warranty and you need it serviced it will not have the data on it destroyed.

    In fact a defective hard drive on a type N you will get a phone call asking if you want it sent to a data recovery firm or sent back to you to perform you own data recovery before it sent back to the maker for replacement.

    bw this behaviour is normal for all major OEM’s providing Linux certified hardware is to provide a machine with a data destruction free warranty.

    bw Linux users and Windows users want two different things.

    Linux users value their data a lot more highly.

    The problem is here bw you have presumed Windows and Linux consumers are identical. Linux consumers are after slightly different things. Big one to Linux Consumers there data is import important than the computer running.

    bw us Linux users also think its a complete laugh that dell send you out a computer with a OS disc that never works on that computer and never can work on that computer. Only reason its in the box is to keep Microsoft mouth shut and you get told that if you ring up support attempting to install it.

    Mind you if a N machine goes back with a copy of Windows non legal installed you will never see it again. Type N from dell are for Linux users to service the Linux market.

    The problem here bw there are different markets. Linux is more dominate in desktop in markets where data loss is not a valid option.

    So we have two very different Desktop Computer markets. One that is quite small that data is important is dominated by Linux(use to be Unix). One that data is not that important that is dominated by Windows.

    So Linux is not going to disappear. Its also not insane IT officers.

    Share trading is becoming a classic example bw. More and more share traders are using type N or other maker equal machines. Because they do need exact records of there trades not to be destroyed in the warranty repair process. Second reason is Windows cannot send network packets fast enough to trade effectively against the Linux based stock exchanges.

    bw type N services a very particular set of markets. Markets Microsoft on the desktop does not properly support.

  8. oiaohm says:

    bw there are 22 type N produced by dell. These are OS less machines.

    –The evidence that Dell supports high end Linux is that it supplies a configuration of one workstation model that does not come with Linux and does not even work?–
    Common for type N out box they don’t boot up into a OS and the OS disc with them don’t work.

    The warranty on a type n is different. When you send a Windows machine back to Dell they might blank the harddrive and install a new OS to fix the problem or attempt to fix problem. Any data lost on that hard drive is your problem you agreed to it in the contract with dell. A type N in warranty the hard drive/hard drives will be left untouched.

    Basically type N say we will not install an OS or doing anything that will result in the destruction of your data in case of hardware fault.

  9. Ted says:

    “(yes apple desktops and laptops most are Linux certified)”

    Please supply some evidence for this assertion.

  10. bw says:

    “Dell offers two Linux choices. Ubuntu low end…High end is …freedos… so it does not run.”

    Pardon my laughter! The evidence that Dell supports high end Linux is that it supplies a configuration of one workstation model that does not come with Linux and does not even work? lol

    I guess that, with such little acceptance of Linux, this seems like a breath of fresh air! I think that it is just the handwriting on the wall saying “Good luck! You are on your own. Be careful, now!”

    “When are you going to accept Linux Desktop is here to stay”

    “Stay” is possibly too broad of a term to be useful. Sure it will stay with you computer hobby folk and the small fraction of commercial users who have IT departments with a screw loose as have been featured here on a number of occasions. It is a haven for the die-hard Unix fan with its grepping and awking and other odd mnemonic constructions. It is not what the vast majority of people use, though, and it never will be.

    Argue all you want about some obscure bits and bytes in something called a “kernel” that somehow make iPhones the same as Linux or even tablets, but it is not the same thing at all to anyone with any reason to care what was behind the screen of their phone. In the PC world, you know the thing you carry around and open up and type on and use your wireless mouse or else is sitting on your desk in your office ready for your input, Linux does not have a real existence.

  11. oiaohm says:

    bw and you remain such a idiot.

    –When Dell offers a Linux choice, for example, it is typically on just the low end model of a series, namely their least capable processor and their cheapest model.–

    Dell offers two Linux choices. Ubuntu low end preconfigured that disappear from time to time..

    High end is like this Dell Precision T7600n.

    Yes it so called comes with a disc of freedos. Funny enough freedos is not compatible with that hardware so it does not run. Its mostly in the box so MS cannot say it shipped without an OS. Yes complete stupid. You might as well say comes with no OS and is Redhat Certified along with many other distributions.

    bw Linux people fairly much want OS less in high end. We place our own OS images on the hardware customised the way we like. Its really a waste of time the OEM putting an OS on there.

    bw Dell has not had a on and off relationship with high end models and Linux users. Neither has any major OEM vendor.

    Yes the xxxxn models are all Linux certified models. The non n with Windows on it is exactly the same hardware.

    bw you are the arrogant one who is presuming far too much.

    If you have not noticed the most common thing the Linux world calls for is OS Less.

    bw you are arrogant because you don’t get way. Linux is not motherboard locked. So we get a new computer we can take the old harddrive out the old computer and place in new or clone to the new computers hard-drive and keep on going.

    Linux people don’t have to re-customise there installs every new machine. In business Linux machines are paved in with company images or you ask the OEM to ship out with your company image pre-imaged into the machine.

    bw Linux high end has different service requirements from OEM’s and OEM’s do grant Linux this.

    bw you have been in a car crash you have broken almost every bone in your body but every is fine because you survived it.

    Basically survive using something does not mean its good for you.

    Linux will survive has been in the high end of OEM provides for the past 10 years. Linux is not a new kid on block in high end workstations.

    You keep on trying to play the new kid on block. Linux is not the new kid on block. Microsoft Trolls repeat say Linux Desktop will die out. It has not.

    When are you going to accept Linux Desktop is here to stay bw. OEM’s are providing high end models for Linux users. Low end models are a little lacking.

    Install Own/Company OS is Linux Users nature.

  12. bw says:

    “OEM would not do the certification process.”

    There is little evidence that they do so on very many product lines. When Dell offers a Linux choice, for example, it is typically on just the low end model of a series, namely their least capable processor and their cheapest model. I don’t see that as an sort of dedicated support or testing process.

    “Windows user deserve to be abused by crap hardware. Because Windows users can survive with it”

    For one so handicapped with poor language skills and lack of understandings of business practices and legal issues, you remain so arrogant! Of course Windows users can survive with today’s PCs. Windows has been the mainstay of personal computing for 20 years and Microsoft has been the standard of comparison for a decade longer than even that. We will survive, but will you?

  13. oiaohm says:

    bw
    “And very few will know that and even fewer will care one bit.”
    Something to come aware of if very few cared OEM would not do the certification process.

    Even if only a very few know it does not change that its in the stores.

    “I am sure we can all survive in spite of your refusal.”

    The problem here business random spats where hardware goes off-line cost money. So business care.

    Sorry its all about money. Lot of companies buyers use Linux Certification as a method to get decent hardware.

    bw you always want to play that there is nothing Linux suitable on the shelf. The reality you are not looking for the Linux suitable stuff.

    Also like every other MS troll you are like Windows user deserve to be abused by crap hardware. Because Windows users can survive with it.

    bw so you are a person who would drive around in a lemon car. Don’t expect everyone to be happy about that. Some of us don’t want lemon cars on the road at all.

  14. bw says:

    “I can also fairly well safely predict something Linux certified will be there ”

    And very few will know that and even fewer will care one bit.

    “I don’t want to be picking up the pieces of Windows users with broken machines due to items not there fault.”

    I am sure we can all survive in spite of your refusal.

  15. oiaohm says:

    bw again Clueless. Linux Certified covers models that ship Windows installed by default.

    –I can safely predict that there will be many Windows computers for sale at my local stores and on line and from surplus dealers whenever I have an interest in acquiring one. —

    I can also fairly well safely predict something Linux certified will be there except it will have Windows or Chromeos or OS X on it.(yes apple desktops and laptops most are Linux certified)

    You know how Windows users end up telling people not to allow Windows Update to replace drivers because it breaks things. If they were using a Linux Certified machine running windows they don’t have to worry about that problem. That problem is that generic drivers don’t work. Generic drivers work its way simpler to keep upto date with current drivers on Windows.

    Reality here bw is that Windows users are hurt by crap hardware. Linux certified lists is the faster way to locate the good from the crap.

    I might be frustrated buying the machine bw that I have a copy of Windows I don’t want. But I am not frustrated by on going problems buying Linux Certified neither are Windows users who buy Linux Certified machines.

    bw if you were not clueless you would not be making out all that Windows stuff on shelf is good. About 50 percent of the stuff on shelf with Windows is junk due to being land mined due to OEM errors that have not been fixed.

    Linux does run on lots non certified perfectly due to hacks in kernel that detects the faults and works around them. In fact this detection is many times more dependable than Windows Update driver provide system.

    bw lack of Linux certified is a problem for Windows users. Microsoft stupidly allows Microsoft certification to pass with OEM standard broken drivers installed then have those Microsoft certified machines explode in poor users faces when they hit Windows update and install everything.

    bw only a clueless argues what you do. Non clueless are really annoyed that finding Linux certified requires taking or access lists because its not branded on the computers.

    OEM’s don’t want to put Linux certified branding on mostly because it will result in them being stuck with the junk.

    Purchases will more commonalty by the device with more certifications on it even if they never use the certification if its written on the box or a sticker on the machine.

    bw basically I don’t want to be picking up the pieces of Windows users with broken machines due to items not there fault.

  16. bw says:

    “Last night, I was at a party and there were piles of smartphones all over and only one or two heavier machines.”

    At least there were a couple. Around here, you can go to a dozen parties and may never even see one, so I think things will just get worse for PC party goers.

    All levity aside, though, I do not think that the rise of smart phones and tablets has any effect at all on the characteristics of the PCs that continue to be purchased by people who likely have a smart phone and a tablet as well. The PC will be Wintel or, sometimes, a Mac. Computers purchased with Linux are like hen’s teeth.

    “People with iThingies were actually regretting having paid more for less in comparison with Android/Linux thingies.”

    That never happens at the parties I go to, but you do live in a different world.

  17. bw wrote, “This is not a technical issue, but rather one of social perception and practice.”

    Where have I heard this “you get what you pay for” nonsense? Oh, yes, North American automobiles and TVs. There are a lot fewer of them produced today. See Detroit. Social perceptions can change and they have. People are buying small cheap computers and loving them. Last night, I was at a party and there were piles of smartphones all over and only one or two heavier machines. Welcome to the new reality. Oh, yes, most of the gadgets run on */Linux. People with iThingies were actually regretting having paid more for less in comparison with Android/Linux thingies.

  18. kozmcrae says:

    “I assume kozmcrae will shortly join and spout something about “crimes against humanity”.”

    George Wilson pokes the beast to see if it’s still alive. It is.

  19. bw says:

    “the time when M$ could command OEMs to ship only M$’s OS are long gone”

    I don’t think that they ever could do that completely, but I do agree with you about the situation today. Many more people are using Macs than in the past and you see them featured on almost every newsman’s desk on TV. I think you are all wet about Linux, though. At its very best, it is only a low-price sort of choice in retail and Linux models rarely seem to survive to the next round of promotions.

    This is not a technical issue, but rather one of social perception and practice. I have seen the analogy used of Sony’s Betamax and the competing VHS technology. Many say Betamax was superior, but VHS won out in the end due to the same sort of sales activities. More companies were incented to push VHS and that is what the public ultimately chose. Today, they have similarly picked Windows, correctly or incorrectly as you may want to argue, but that is the final word.

    Linux may linger, but it will not ever prevail.

  20. George Wilson says:

    There are more regions selling GNU/Linux on retail shelves each year and M$ cannot command the tide to reverse.

    Then why do you regularly whine about there being no Linux PCs on the shelves?

  21. bw wrote, “Meanwhile, back in the states, the beat goes on.”

    USA used to be tops in a lot of things, but no longer in numbers of PCs purchased, Internet-connected users and even Wintel is in decline. It may be around indefinitely but the time when M$ could command OEMs to ship only M$’s OS are long gone. There are more regions selling GNU/Linux on retail shelves each year and M$ cannot command the tide to reverse.

  22. bw says:

    “Basically you are clueless talking bw.”

    At least my cluelessness does not become frustrated by reality! I can safely predict that there will be many Windows computers for sale at my local stores and on line and from surplus dealers whenever I have an interest in acquiring one. On the other hand, your tortured analyses of how Linux is on the rise are constantly belied by what happens daily.

    Dell or HP offer a Linux version on occasion and it is heralded by the Linux fans as a sure sign that a wonderful Linux springtime has arisen, but the offer is gone shortly thereafter. Maybe the people at DangDang or such are scooping up all the production and keeping it hidden in China. Or Timbuktu. Or whatever place you want to point to next.

    Meanwhile, back in the states, the beat goes on.

  23. oiaohm says:

    bw –OEMs who supply Windows preloaded go through an integration and test procedure to ensure that everything is working.–
    Its not just linux who run into trouble. Users do find out when they upgrade Windows as well about some of these breakages.

    In fact the test procedure is run the Microsoft Testsuite. Foxcom a few years back this was hell when it was wrong.

    bw
    –If the hardware differs from some common design used to establish a generic driver, it is likely because the OEM thinks that such a deviation gives it an advantage over their competition in terms of functionality. They simply make it work correctly with an appropriate driver.–

    In fact you are dreaming and in la la land again. All cases for deviation from generic drivers that is generic driver incompatible is less functionality not more. All generic driver designs in fact include places to include extra functionality without breaking the generic mode. Yes OEM can feature add without breaking generic support. Broken generic driver support is OEM defect.

    Basically you are clueless talking bw.

    Now item have no driver Linux and Windows in generic mode will disregard. So disruption to OS should be nothing.

    bw
    “Anyone wishing to supply Linux instead must do the same or will always have this sort of problem. Since the OEMs are not likely to bother with the many Linux versions littering the landscape, most of them will never get the OEM’s attention and so will always suffer from this sort of syndrome.

    It is just another reason, at the end of the day, for OEMs to ignore Linux. Too much pain, too little gain.”

    Then why does Dell HP…. Provide system certified to run Linux. This moron logic does not pass even the most simple inspection.

    In fact I take the Linux list as model to buy list even for Windows. Issues are less even with Windows.

    Sorry bw there is a large enough base not to ignore Linux.

    I have shown the certification sites before.

    About time you pull your head out sand.

    Basic things like stuffed up ACPI is found by running http://biosbits.org/download/ for legacy.

    There is also a standard test-suite for EFI as well. Funny enough lot of samsung systems got out door without that being run since running that suit bricks them. Windows applications doing particular things bricks them.

    Yes not correctly tested hardware running Windows or Linux you could end up with a paper weight not a computer.

    This is the serous bad problem bw. Its not in the consumers advantage for quality control being skipped by OEMs. Or OEM using drivers to patch over firmware defects so the remain like land mines. Yes clean install windows machine with same version of Windows on motherboard, bricked is possible on some motherboards.

    bw you want to turn this around to a Linux only problem. Reality non tested and not to standard firmware is a issue for anyone running OS on that hardware. The question is when will it catch up with you.

    bw really you have to do a clean reinstall some cases you are forced to use a Windows disc without makers drivers. So every one of these bugs against generic drivers at this point raises it ugly head.

    Sorry generic drivers not working is just as much a Linux problem as it is for Windows. The question is will you notice before you up the creek without a paddle.

  24. bw says:

    “This is why you cannot take any generic Windows clunker and expect Linux to work perfectly”

    You draw the wrong conclusion here, but what else is new? OEMs who supply Windows preloaded go through an integration and test procedure to ensure that everything is working. They do not need to use generic drivers, supplied as mere starting points, because they are engineering their drivers to suit requirements. After all, they only have to do it once in order to sell a million or more units to their customers who do not have the sorts of problems you pretend that they have.

    If the hardware differs from some common design used to establish a generic driver, it is likely because the OEM thinks that such a deviation gives it an advantage over their competition in terms of functionality. They simply make it work correctly with an appropriate driver.

    Anyone wishing to supply Linux instead must do the same or will always have this sort of problem. Since the OEMs are not likely to bother with the many Linux versions littering the landscape, most of them will never get the OEM’s attention and so will always suffer from this sort of syndrome.

    It is just another reason, at the end of the day, for OEMs to ignore Linux. Too much pain, too little gain.

  25. ram says:

    Another thing that helps FLOSS pay is that, for example, if my company needs an application extended in a certain way, we can pay a proven FLOSS developer of that application and that feature is added. The fee has always been quite modest as the FLOSS developers can build on the huge library of other FLOSS software. It doesn’t hurt our company if the result is FLOSS and the whole rest of the world gets it too. Our problem has been solved, and at very modest costs.

  26. oiaohm says:

    George Wilson the biggest and most common item to cause a Windows computer to die before 10 years old is the hard drive.

    This is where compatible Linux hardware comes in. PXE network boot has stabilised by the year 2000. So machines over 5 years old can with Linux have there hard-drives stripped out and be getting OS files from central file server.

    Windows 3.11 use to support this mode. Microsoft removed it in Windows 9x.

    There are key features why Windows cannot run on 10 year old hardware. The fact you need hard-drives compatible with that hardware is one of them. Linux 10 year old has PXE network card hard drive can be provided over network.

    Ok before you point to http://www.thogan.com/blog/windows-xp-vista-7-iscsi-boot This in a business sense is a very quick way to end up in breach of EULA. Microsoft license on Windows does not give allowance for network running. You are only allowed 1 installed active copy per computer. That copy is not allowed to be shared.

    So virtual hard-drive per computer. Yes this does add up on disc space.

    Something 5 year old + you really don’t want to risk License issues.

  27. oiaohm says:

    George Wilson as normal MS troll.
    https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/SystemRequirements

    –Not something from 10 years ago you found in the garbage.–

    As long as a 10 year old machine is still work and you have put decent amount of ram into it a Ubuntu full desktop version will run. Quite well.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celeron A Coppermine processor is over 10 years old released in the year 2000 in fact.

    You only need 700 MHz processor some year 2000 Coppermine are over 1Ghz processor the photo on the wiki page is of a box of a year 2000 Coppermine 733 that is just big enough to turn over Celeron Desktop. Yes there are Intel Celeron of Pent III Coppermine chips.

    George Wilson so 12 year old hardware is acceptable as long as it still runs and is Linux compatible. Not all motherboards from then are compatible.

    Ok what about those without enough ram. They make great thin terminals. Due to deaths they will normally at some point get enough ram. A lot were fitted in the year 2000 with 256 meg ram cards and you have 3 slots. So 2 machines die and 1 takes all the ram hello.

    https://help.ubuntu.com/community/HowToCookEdubuntu/Chapters/HardwareRequirements 233 with 128 megs of ram. Oldest of those is about January 1997. Or 15 year old hardware.

    Yes a Linux command line server if you are nuts could be sitting on 1998 hardware wise or 14 year old hardware.

    George Wilson so fairly much anything that still worked out to 15 year old a Linux person can use one way or another. The question becomes should you not can you.

    George Wilson next then raw cpu power stopped increasing over 5 years ago. So if you programs are not multi threaded you will not gain on newer hardware from 5 years ago in many major way.

    Multi core/Multi threaded programming has had to come because clock speeds could not just keep on going faster.

    George Wilson Linux hardware requirements for most Linux distributions is 12 year old hardware or better for desktop.

    So 10 year old in the garbage and be the right bit of garbage not really.

    Linux is about extending life of the hardware you have. Second hand in garbage could be there for good reasons. Because is broken.

    Now in a school upgrading machines Linux mean to take the 10 year old machine+ that have been working fine and recycle them onto a modern updating OS so providing more students with seats todo things is a very valid usage.

    George Wilson you have never read the specifications of any of the distributions you named. All of them accept 10 year old+ hardware and run on it quite well.

  28. oiaohm says:

    Robert Pogson sorry I was a little out of order in my writing the process start time is only with starting applications was what I was attempt to say with “This is only when you are starting application”. There are others that effect general running like memory management, crappy network stack…. That also play into the slow down.

    Networking under windows is about 50 percent of speed what Linux can do without using usermode drivers(yes this is a faster but less secure way).

    The speed differences are all over the shop basically. Ram consumption is also higher under Windows.

  29. oiaohm says:

    bw
    –“Yes hibernate properly to disc and switch off is a good thing at times.”

    That is what Windows hibernate does, of course, and I use it when I am going to have to take the laptop somewhere away from the kitchen table. As long as it is sitting there, the adapter is plugged in, too, and sleep mode, where it only goes to low power settings, is just fine, too.–
    Double check this. Some windows laptops will bite you on ass since hibernate with AC in can equal duel mode to ram and to disk. You windows hibernate with AC adapter in you remove AC adapter the battery will flatten in some of them. This is embedded controller related not doing what the OS told it to. This one is not fixable in some laptops or desktops for Windows or Linux. All you can remember is remove AC before hibernate on laptops. OK it find on desktops since when you turn off at wall there is no battery or is it. Yes causes higher power consumption in hibernate mode even on a desktop.

    bw
    –Maybe you clods should get the Linux source and fix that problem, eh? Isn’t that what open source is all about? Don’t you know how to fix it?–

    This takes time and lag due to specifications of how hardware makers have stuffed it up. If you want to have a bastard of a time with windows try not installing the ACPI drivers from the maker and using the generic to standard drivers to talk ACPI to control the embedded controller. You will find lots of Windows machines are broken when checked to standard its drivers hiding the fact from end users.

    Linux developers do fix it in the end. Reversing can take time. It can take 12 months+. So by the time the hardware works it obsolete. The hibernate problem will go away for Linux as more standard conforming and documented motherboard embedded controllers get out there.

    This is why you cannot take any generic Windows clunker and expect Linux to work perfectly. Heck it may not in fact be working perfectly with Windows just the user is not looking close enough to notice.

  30. George Wilson wrote, “Foul? Wasn’t necessary. Microsoft had the best solutions.”

    Quoting Joachim Kempin
    Tuesday, December 16, 1997:
    “current PC technology is totally sufficient for most office tasks and consumer desires and that any performance bottleneck is not in today’s PCs but in today’s COM pipes. This in itself might slow down replacement cycles and life time shortening until we find true MIPS eating appIications – a priority not only INTEL should subscribe to.”

    At the same time GNU/Linux was accelerating because all kinds of improvements were made. I never saw hardware that would run that other OS nearly as well as GNU/Linux. Add to that the malware and re-re-reboots and it’s no contest. I used that other OS from the 1980s until 2001 regularly and later when I had to and I never saw any improvement of that other OS but GNU/Linux worked like a charm immediately it was installed.

  31. George Wilson says:

    No, it’s not. That characteristic affects all of IT. People need the latest hardware just to make that other OS bearable. Not so with GNU/Linux where anything made in the last ten years is usable.

    Only if you believe your own press. Download a major distribution today — OpenSUSE, Fedora, Ubuntu — you need a decent computer. Not something from 10 years ago you found in the garbage.

    And it’s once again clear that your pathological Microsoft hatred impairs your judgment. I have a notebook here from mid-2008. It wasn’t modified or upgraded in any way. It ran Windows Vista, it ran Windows 7 and it now runs Windows 8. Granted, I did clean installs instead of upgrades, but still, curiously enough Windows 7 performed better than Windows Vista and Windows 8 performs better than Windows 7. However is that devilry possible?

    It is part of the design of M$’s OS that performance was never the first consideration.

    Good thing that the market disagrees with you.

    It was always about lock-in and market-share by fair means or foul.

    Foul? Wasn’t necessary. Microsoft had the best solutions.

    They even deliberately destroyed performance so people would blame the hardware and buy new PCs with a new licence.

    People bought new hardware because they wanted to. A PC usually is replaced within 3 to 5 years (closer to 5). Do you really think it’d be different with Linux pre-installed on PCs? Once the support for a distribution ran out people would most likely also buy a new PC.

    That’s more than built-in obsolescence. It’s sabotage of hardware people own.

    Sabotage? So the Microsoft technician came during the night while you were asleep and tinkered with the hardware?

    That’s theft.

    Theft? Was something physically removed? Because that is the definition of theft.

    That’s enslavement.

    Right. Another bullshit comparison. The victims of modern slavery will be forever grateful to you for being on their side.

    I assume kozmcrae will shortly join and spout something about “crimes against humanity”.

  32. bw says:

    “Yes hibernate properly to disc and switch off is a good thing at times.”

    That is what Windows hibernate does, of course, and I use it when I am going to have to take the laptop somewhere away from the kitchen table. As long as it is sitting there, the adapter is plugged in, too, and sleep mode, where it only goes to low power settings, is just fine, too.

    “how much hardware hibernate with Linux does not work. Or power management with Linux does not work”

    Maybe you clods should get the Linux source and fix that problem, eh? Isn’t that what open source is all about? Don’t you know how to fix it?

  33. oiaohm wrote of M$’s poor performance as an OS, “This is only when you are starting application.”

    No, it’s not. That characteristic affects all of IT. People need the latest hardware just to make that other OS bearable. Not so with GNU/Linux where anything made in the last ten years is usable.

    It is part of the design of M$’s OS that performance was never the first consideration. It was always about lock-in and market-share by fair means or foul. They even deliberately destroyed performance so people would blame the hardware and buy new PCs with a new licence. That’s more than built-in obsolescence. It’s sabotage of hardware people own. That’s theft. That’s enslavement.

  34. oiaohm says:

    Robert Pogson Not everywhere in Windows is evenly horible. Processes starting times in kernel is 6 times longer on Windows. Ok that not used all the time. This is only when you are starting application.

    If it was just that problem. When users were not starting as many processes. 3 times as active processes is part memory management in Linux kernel being more effective. Switching between processes in windows requires more cpu time under Windows.

    There are a long list of errors in Windows Kernel. Result is less active processes. More cpu time to start processes. Worst network transfer speeds…

    Only party that can fix these is Microsoft.

    You find a lot of charlatans selling programs so called to fix these problems and be like snake oil pretend todo something but do nothing really.

  35. oiaohm wrote, “a Linux kernel system can start over 6 processes in the time it takes Windows kernel to bring up 1.”

    I don’t know if that is true or not but I do know a particular hardware usually has no problem running 3 times as many active processes than that other OS. Dave Richards observed that too. He wrote that the typical server running that other OS was set up for a single task while GNU/Linux could to a bunch. He estimated that it took three times as much hardware to do the same work as GNU/Linux. An example that amazed me frequently was that I could take a computer lab of ancient PCs and make all the users and all their processes run nicely on a single newer PC which would end up being the teacher’s control-panel. The first time I saw that, the result was knocking the socks of students and making my jaw drop as I watched “top” when students came to the lab the first time after the installation. At that time I ran 30 students on a single 32bit 1.8gHz processor with only 1.5gB RAM. The students were used to XP on 32bit processors with 64mB RAM. It was magical. GNU/Linux got the job done for far fewer CPU-MHz and far less RAM. XP was crashing frequently. Not one student lost a file after we switched to GNU/Linux. From then on I knew that other OS was a broken toy.

  36. George Wilson wrote, “Why did Google basically choose to only peruse the Linux kernel in both Android and Chrome OS? Because they knew exactly that the Linux userland is crapola.”

    Nonsense. Google explicitly concentrated on Android because Linux would make them hardware-independent and there are tons of Java programmers on the planet who could crank out many thousands of apps for Android/Linux given the SDK. Those choices made bootstrapping to retail shelves a speedy process. Nothing at all about the GNU/Linux userland. Chrome OS is more in-house. They again used Linux to make it hardware independent and shoehorned their browser into a complete user-environment. That’s purely socking it to M$, completing the job that NetScape started so many years ago. The fact that they chose two fronts on which to work shows that they saw a bigger picture than shipping a product. They wanted to change the face of IT rapidly ensuring that M$ no longer had a hand on Google’s throat. Nothing about the GNU/Linux userland.

    Google did not so much bypass GNU/Linux as create two new fronts on the war on Wintel. That’s a great decision when facing a powerful enemy. Given enough attacks any enemy can be overcome. OEMs and retailers now have many choices of non-Wintel stuff to place before consumers and consumers in some places have a free market, defeating years of monopoly.

  37. oiaohm says:

    George Wilson
    http://mirror.linux.org.au/pub/linux.conf.au/2013/mp4/RealTime_Response_on_Multicore_Systems_It_Is_Bigger_Than_I_Thought.mp4

    Here is a classic 4096 core super node causing RCU in the Linux to kinda go down bad path. Fault was in smaller systems as well.

    The shock is 20 mili lag seconds that is general PC 4 to 8 core is is about the same as wanted on a Supercomputer.

    George Wilson the simple reality I can bring more videos in from different companies in different places of the Linux kernel were the huge supercomputer dig out hidden problems.

    If you have watched what fixes come from work to make supercomputers perform fix up desktop issues in performance.

    You will also notice this video goes off into small embedded. That suffer from RCU jamming due to no work load. Guess what happens on a desktop when someone walks away at times.

    Bug in supercomputer results in a stack of fixes that assists desktop. Bug in desktop also can end up helping supercomputer.

    George Wilson its just a shocking reality there is not as much difference on a super computer, desktop computer and embedded something computer on how resource handling must happen. Basically it either happens right or system performance suffers at worse dead locks.

    So Linux desktop is gaining from Android work on the Linux kernel and other parts.

  38. George wrote, “supercomputers running Linux increase the productivity of the Linux desktop. That was the implication.”

    So, you think having Linux running smoothly on super-computers is a handicap to desktops? That’s a leap of illogic. It is reasonable to assume that what works well on a super-computer will run well on a desktop. I don’t need to assume it. I have seen it. When I chucked that other OS in schools, problems with IT vanished and we got on with work. Schools that I set up years ago are still purring with the same hardware. Compare with that other OS that slows down, picks up malware like sticky feet pick up dirt, and needs to phone home. It’s no contest. GNU/Linux wins easily.

  39. George Wilson says:

    You accept the fact that Linux controls the realm of supercomputers and that they are important.

    No. You and Pogson both stated as a fact that supercomputers running Linux increase the productivity of the Linux desktop. That was the implication.

    Care to back that up? Or are you too entangled in your own delusions? Robert at least was “creative” enough to bring up Google. But you mentioned supercomputers for no reason at all: “Hey, the Linux Desktop sucks, but we have at least supercomputers!”

    Great Maker!

  40. oiaohm says:

    bw you do give a dam when your battery is flat and you put the laptop into hibernate with a 90 percent full battery. Does pay to know what form of hibernate you are using. Yes hibernate properly to disc and switch off is a good thing at times.

    bw by the way one of the reasons why Linux has not been popular is how much hardware hibernate with Linux does not work. Or power management with Linux does not work. This all comes down to being able to talk to the Embedded controller on the motherboard and have it do the right thing. So how long would you use your laptop if it would not hibernate properly.

    bw what is in stores varies country to country.

    George Wilson
    –But anyway, why doesn’t Google’s supercomputer appear on the Top 500 list? Oh, that’s right, because it is no supercomputer!–
    http://www.alertra.com/blog/2012/googles-world-dominating-supercomputer

    Sorry Google does have a supercomputer at there disposal it is used for lots of things inside google. Just its not one of the very large ones but is not small either. They don’t allow third party benching as required to enter the TOP 500 list. TOP 500 only lists those supercomputer that have been benchmarked.

    –Because they knew exactly that the Linux userland is crapola–
    George Wilson you need to stick nose into chromium OS source code. Most of the normal gentoo user-land is there. Stick nose into Android and you also find sections of the Linux normal userland. So they did not call all the Linux userland crapola.

    Google did not just take the kernel.
    –Recognize that only the Linux kernel is worth your while and build everything else yourself, so that people won’t have to bother with the horrendous Linux user experience.–
    So this is over stepping since Android and ChromeOS include many more parts from a normal Linux desktop.

    George Wilson lot of core issues with GNU/Linux Desktop are being fixed by what Google wants for ChromeOS and Android. Why because they share common parts. Lot more common parts than just the kernel.

    Helios is right and wrong. Every advantage is a disadvantage.

    The infighting in the Linux world allows more options to be tried. Does create marketing issues.

    See bw and George Wilson your arguments have exploded in your face now you need to change topic.

    Maybe we are willing to wait a little longer George Wilson. We have waited this long. Google hardware is more Linux friendly than most of the Microsoft supporting crap that had been converted in the past.

    bw and George Wilson the key thing Linux needs is compatible hardware. ChromeBook devices and unlockable Android devices from having working power management and other key parts to make an OS work well. Linux install on these devices performs better in a lot of ways than the hardware Linux users have been putting up with.

    Of course bw and George Wilson you would like us to give up and accept we have lost. We were told we would never make 1 percent. Steam shows us at approaching 3 percent of market.

  41. kozmcrae says:

    Linux on the Desktop sucks. And the world knows. No supercomputer is going to change that.

    George Wilson dispenses pure FUD and comic relief. “No supercomputer is going to change that.” You just contridicted yourself. You accept the fact that Linux controls the realm of supercomputers and that they are important. That Linux sucks on the desktop is your opinion. Millions of other people don’t share your opinion. Pointing out the fact that there are more people using Windows than Linux is just pointing out that there are more people who have yet to try Linux.

    George, you are a Microsoft blowhard troll. You are working yourself up to self destruction.

  42. George Wilson says:

    http://widefox.pbworks.com/w/page/8042318/Process

    One of the big problems is how long it takes to start a process under windows. 5,376K cycles vs 719K cycles

    No, oiaohm, the problem is that you randomly pull data from a wiki, ignorant of the fact that the author of said wiki himself has attached the following note to the “cycles” comparison (I have emphasized the important sentence):

    when there is no alternative, sometimes outdated references must be used – for older OS versions – e.g. NT, old hardware, or benchmarks done with very different criterion, or due to basic difference in OSes. In these cases, no direct comparison should be made, so the comparison is not coloured.

    Nothing more needs to be said here. Go back to your happy place.

  43. George Wilson says:

    I have met many users of that other OS who decried […]

    Is this where I am supposed to counter with the many Linux users I have met who decried Linux? No, I can’t, because you’d be unable to accept that this is the truth. Just as you are unable to accept the truth that for most people using Windows is by and large problem-free.

    BS! Ever used Google? Many millions of ordinary folks use it many times per day. They get awesome performance for the web application that searches the web for them because Google runs on a super-computer.

    Oh my God! Of course they get “awesome performance”! You think they could sell people their web “experience” if it was slow as molasses?

    But anyway, why doesn’t Google’s supercomputer appear on the Top 500 list? Oh, that’s right, because it is no supercomputer!

    Well, since I knew that you’d resort to Google as “proof”, let’s take this one step further.

    Why did Google basically choose to only peruse the Linux kernel in both Android and Chrome OS? Because they knew exactly that the Linux userland is crapola. That was indeed the right choice. Recognize that only the Linux kernel is worth your while and build everything else yourself, so that people won’t have to bother with the horrendous Linux user experience. Google engineers can tolerate the pain of having to work with Linux, Google’s users cannot. That coincides with the fact that Google won’t mention Linux is used in their products. Their reasoning is sound:

    Because Linux Users can’t be trusted to behave if they are taken out into public.

    He went on to explain that the powers that be (of which he is not one but within that circle) simply don’t want anything getting in the way of Google’s march to their phone, tablet and computer market supremacy. Their Chromebook slayed the numbers this Christmas season and many within the marketing effort at Google believe NOT associating their brand with Linux may have helped tremendously.

    Oh, don’t take my word for it. Just read it yourself at the blog of Helios.

    Linux on the Desktop sucks. And the world knows. No supercomputer is going to change that.

  44. bw says:

    “There are Linux systems out there that can start clean faster than restoring a hibernate.”

    And no one gives a tinker’s damn. It doesn’t work as a selling point and that is why you do not see Linux PCs in stores touting that as any advantage. You are doomed to wallow in such frustrations forever because you cannot see the hopelessness of your stupid ideas.

    There are no Linux computers in stores and there are very few available on-line. If the internet usage statistics can be believed and Linux use is really as high as 1%, then it is because of dweebs like yourself installing Linux on computers that were originally sold with Windows installed or even built from scratch out of spare parts. There is only a very tiny business involved with selling Linux computers and it is so small as to be insignificant compared to the main computer businesses.

  45. oiaohm says:

    bw
    –Step back and think about it rationally, if you can stay on your meds long enough for them to take effect. If all these ills were constantly plaguing the Windows users of the world, would not someone somewhere have come to effectively address them and sell a solution?–

    Go and take some meds yourself. You are in your dream world again. They cannot address it without the Windows source code and the right to ship alterations. bw only 1 party can fix these issues Microsoft. No third party can since Microsoft will not allow anyone other than them to ship Windows custom kernels based on their source code.

    http://widefox.pbworks.com/w/page/8042318/Process
    One of the big problems is how long it takes to start a process under windows. 5,376K cycles vs 719K cycles

    So a Linux kernel system can start over 6 processes in the time it takes Windows kernel to bring up 1. This is internal Windows kernel design issue.

    I can pull timings on others as well bw. All of them are not fixable by third parties. Now if you are using something that will run into them like Eclipse IDE going Linux or OS X is beneficial.

    bw charlatans are making a killing selling items to so called fix up Windows performance problems. When they cannot. Its the good old snake oil salesmen. Windows users are that desperate to fix the problem they fall for it.

  46. oiaohm says:

    bw something to be aware with. A Linux system with a 30 second start time has in fact loaded more into ram than a Windows system with a 2 min start time.

    I see you are avoiding rebooting. Essentially instantly. Its not instantly.

    http://linux.die.net/man/8/pm-hibernate Suspend to ram fairly much no matter the OS on x86 hardware is 3-5 seconds.

    –If I need to it away, I use hibernate to store current state and it re-starts in just a few seconds.–
    Your time is off. Sorry starts in a few seconds no. “require 15 to 45 seconds.” Large block of that 15 seconds is not the OS but the Embedded Controller on the motherboard setting up hibernate mode. So not an OS caused time event. So yes 15 seconds to hibernate 15 seconds to restore if you are lucky.

    You most likely think the laptop is hibernated when the screen goes black under Windows. Power is required for at least another 10 to 30 more seconds on average past that point under Windows to suspend. Windows also appears to stall in bios due to the way its boot-loader restores a hibernate image.

    Basically you are not paying attention with a stop watch bw. There are Linux systems out there that can start clean faster than restoring a hibernate. You want to confirm something as a developer is not working because of something old running you may want to reboot the complete machine.

    Developers how fast you can reboot is important at times. General desktop users not so much.

    Yes there are downside to this path depending on hibernate for speed.

    Yes bw a few simple tricks have made you believe a 15 to 45 second resume is only a few seconds or maybe you are not doing what you think you are doing.

    Or maybe your machine is using pm-suspend-hybrid and not telling you. This is nice an ugly. You hibernate and it suspend to ram as well so your battery is still running down.

  47. bw says:

    “Eclipse IDE”

    ???

    Hey! I looked up “dweeb” in my Funk and Wagnall’s and there was your picture!

    I don’t think that one passes muster. As much as you all go on and on about sluggishness it is not much of an issue anywhere and certainly not a primary factor in user purchase decisions.

    Step back and think about it rationally, if you can stay on your meds long enough for them to take effect. If all these ills were constantly plaguing the Windows users of the world, would not someone somewhere have come to effectively address them and sell a solution?

    “That dog can’t hunt!”, as is said colloquially. People do not go into their local computer store or department and say “Quick! I need something to fix my internal kernel lag!” There are a few charlatans who advertise on-line virus cleaners on the premise that they will speed up response and they probably do, but that is by way of killing a lot of parasite programs running on the machine and, in any case, they message is not an OS change, but a one-time or periodic scrubbing of junkware.

  48. oiaohm says:

    bw
    –Who cares? Windows has no lag problem in the view of its users. Try to find something that people actually care about where Windows is deficient and Linux is a clear-cut solution. Bet you can’t find one.–

    Sorry users complaining about computer being non responsive even that they have a bigger faster computer. Traces to some of these internal kernel lag issues.

    You are making up crap to say users don’t care. They do care they do complain about it. Microsoft is unable to fix it.

    bw
    –Try to find something that people actually care about where Windows is deficient and Linux is a clear-cut solution. Bet you can’t find one.–

    Eclipse IDE. http://www.beyondlinux.com/2011/06/25/speed-up-your-eclipse-as-a-super-fast-ide/ All those hacks are required to bring Windows version of Eclipse into ball park.

    The ramdisk is not required under Linux or OS X. Kernel memory and disc cache management in both of them do a better than Windows.

    I can find more bw. There are a lot of examples where windows falls in heap.

    Lot of java stuff its a clear cut solution for performance to go Linux bw. Even with mono higher performances are recorded running .net stuff non windows.

    When you get on to web site development you find otu to your high annoyance that Apache and IIS on Windows is slower than on Linux running Apache what is one of the slower Linux web servers.

    Sorry bw the faults are real here. No amount of lieing will change it. I can bring bench after bench and user hack after user hack with user still complaining that cannot get Windows to perform.

  49. bw says:

    You harp on the startup time, I have noticed, but my sense of it all is that I and the people around me rarely see that. My desktop computer in the bonus room upstairs and my wife’s Dell all in one in the study are simply on continuously and go into power save mode automatically if not touched for about 15 minutes.

    They awaken essentially instantly when the mouse is jiggled. My laptop, that I am using now, is usually sitting on the kitchen table and when I am not using it, I close the lid and it goes into sleep mode, again to be awakened instantly when the lid is raised and the mouse is clicked. If I need to it away, I use hibernate to store current state and it re-starts in just a few seconds.

    As to the EULA, I never read it, so I do not understand your remarks. I buy computers like everyone else, either at a local store or on-line from Dell (or Computer Geeks where I got this laptop cheap as a Dell refurbished model) and it comes with Windows and there doesn’t seem to be any problem with EULAs crippling my use.

    I remember a week or so ago where you showed that Microsoft wants an additional license if I were to rent my PCs out to others or even loan them, but I don’t do that. Even if I did, I would still feel very secure if I were to loan my laptop, say, to my neighbor for a few days and would not expect to have Microsoft agents knocking on my door to protest.

    I suspect that such a clause in the EULA would falter in court since it is not clear that such a contract restriction was allowable. Lack of consideration, for starters. Lawyers can write what they want, but the courts ultimately decide what is the law.

  50. George Wilson wrote, “How exactly do supercomputers boost the users’ productivity? You know, the productivity of users who are actually not using supercomputers but their own computers.”

    BS! Ever used Google? Many millions of ordinary folks use it many times per day. They get awesome performance for the web application that searches the web for them because Google runs on a super-computer. If it did not run Hadoop-like stuff on many thousands of computing nodes, that performance would not be there. Google does enormous amounts of distributed computing and data-storage.

  51. bw wrote, “Try to find something that people actually care about where Windows is deficient and Linux is a clear-cut solution. Bet you can’t find one.”

    I have met many users of that other OS who decried slow logins, long time to open a new window, malware, slowing down, re-re-reboots, unbootability, before I even met them and after I showed them GNU/Linux running side by side on the same hardware they added software updates and general sluggishness to the list. e.g. At one high school, logins were taking 2 minutes to a usable desktop from power on but on the same hardware just 30s with GNU/Linux. At places where I used the old machines as thin clients I showed them starting new applications in less than 2s to a usable window when that other OS was around 10s. You bet ordinary folks noticed the difference. I also showed them the difference between GPL and EULA. Everyone understood M$ was turning PCs into crippled machines.

  52. bw says:

    “make lag problems stand out ”

    The reason why Linux is so obscure in terms of PC users is partly due to its advocates focusing on non-issues like this that are not important to users even if they were ever to heard about them. You might as well argue about how many angels could dance on the head of a pin.

    Who cares? Windows has no lag problem in the view of its users. Try to find something that people actually care about where Windows is deficient and Linux is a clear-cut solution. Bet you can’t find one.

  53. oiaohm says:

    George Wilson
    –How exactly do supercomputers boost the users’ productivity? You know, the productivity of users who are actually not using supercomputers but their own computers.–
    Ok what is the latency requirement inside a super computer node. Same as the desktop computer or less. Ok what about super computer grade hardware running stock exchanges. Latency even lower again.

    The reality here is lot of Linux kernel performance improvements for desktop users has been triggered by supercomputer needs not by desktop users. Also due to super computers bigger scale minor multi core errors that are almost not noticeable on a desktop that show up as major lag events on a supercomputer node. Yes a lot of minor not noticeable lags equals a lot of lag.

    George Wilson some of Microsoft windows problems is that its not tested on big enough hardware to make lag problems stand out to the developers.

    Power management in Linux kernel is being very heavily triggered by Mobile device usage.

    George Wilson there are videos one by an Intel employee and one by a IBM employee at different Linux Conferences talking about this very issue.

    The shocking reality is all these types of computers have very similar requirements.

  54. George Wilson says:

    “There’s a reason Linux is chosen for super computers George… ”

    There’s a reason that supercomputers are of no importance to Uncle Joe and Aunt Jane.

    How exactly do supercomputers boost the users’ productivity? You know, the productivity of users who are actually not using supercomputers but their own computers.

    Mythical bullshit. Proven by kozmcrae who had to resort to supercomputers in a desperate attempt to score a point.

  55. kozmcrae says:

    But for the most part the suggestion that Linux will boost your productivity (exceptions like, for example, ILM in the other post not withstanding) is just mythical bullshit.

    There’s a reason Linux is chosen for super computers George… People can’t wait a hundred years for the answer to an equation to come out. They also can’t be doing reboots the first Tuesday of every month when a bunch of patches are forced upon them. Those are good reasons to not use Microsoft. They are productivity killers. Calling it mythical BS is FUD. But you’re a troll and FUD is your business. That and comic relief.

  56. oiaohm says:

    George Wilson there are many things where Linux does boost your productivity. There are also areas where it does not.

    Java compliers run faster on Linux than Windows. The design and quality of the two OS’s Memory and Process management are to blame.

    Thin terminals. Due to Linux memory and process management again Linux terminal server will support more than a Windows terminal server on the same hardware.

    3d work. You can take a hit under Linux for GPU access and performance.

    –It also would need to be proven that the business could make more money by using Linux.–
    The software on Linux is a factor.

    ILM is using JBOSS it does bring improvements to cost.

    Alfresco has http://www.activiti.org/.

    George Wilson yes Linux alone does not. But the quality of some of the tools to run businesses you can get on Linux and their performance on Linux can make Linux the right choice.

    There is a lot of head in sand. We will just choose Microsoft.

    –That’s only true under the pretense that the business using Microsoft is not making any money.–
    Just because you might be making money does not mean your staff really are being give the tools todo their job effectively.

    Some case the tools are bias to Linux. The bias makes a big performance difference.

    George Wilson problem here is without doing a proper assessment you will not know if for your business migrating to Linux is bullshit or not. Result might be mixed part Linux part Windows. Even the IBM migrate to Linux manual accept a 90/10 split. 90 percent Linux 10 percent Windows.

    bw –Microsoft has published a number of case studies where their claim of a lower “total cost of ownership” seems valid based on the numbers presented within the case. —
    Yes this include a stock exchange example that has been proven completely bogus by the Linux operating costs on stock exchanges now.

    Also you want to see how bad those surveys are out get HP guess me numbers compared to real Munich.

    In that bw you did miss something. Microsoft numbers are advertising and have cherry picked the Best(of windows) vs the Worst Example(of Linux).

    There is no point looking at advertising grade compares they give a false appearance.

  57. George Wilson says:

    If Google is not making any money by using FLOSS “tools”, then a business using Microsoft is wasting money spent on their tools.

    That’s only true under the pretense that the business using Microsoft is not making any money. It also would need to be proven that the business could make more money by using Linux. That will depend on the business. But for the most part the suggestion that Linux will boost your productivity (exceptions like, for example, ILM in the other post not withstanding) is just mythical bullshit.

  58. kozmcrae says:

    The trolls say business “tools” are detached from money earned or lost by that business.

    If, according to the troll’s logic, Google is not making any money by using FLOSS “tools”, then a business using Microsoft is wasting money spent on their tools.

    Once again the trolls use the logic of convenience in a feeble attempt to support a dying cause. Thank you bw and George Wilson, you give this blog a measure of comic relief.

  59. oiaohm says:

    George Wilson
    –Want to point us to an example where someone actually sells FLOSS for a living and is therefore making money with FLOSS?–

    That is the thing about FOSS. You don’t sell it. Redhat sells support for FOSS same with many others.

    When you have issues need the master coder behind it paying they company they work for to fix it can be quite profitable.

    Different model.

    Google makes money using FOSS software. Google allows lots of there developers to spend 20 percent of their time working on FOSS projects outside Google. Since Google depends on FOSS for operations improvements to FOSS can being improvements to Google.

    George Wilson company making money with FOSS wants to stay head of competition at times will have to work on FOSS to achieve that.

    George Wilson FOSS is not without it costs.

  60. George Wilson says:

    FUD: You can’t make money with FLOSS.

    That statement is as broad as they come. No basis for discussion there, because nearly everything where some person deliberately or not uses FLOSS would prove it wrong (at least in the sense construed by Pogson). You use an iPhone and/or an iPad to do your job? Hey, those contain FLOSS! You’re making money with FLOSS!

    Absolute nonsense.

    That Google example? Equally nonsensical. They use FLOSS as a tool, they make money with ads and a few business ideas.

    Would you claim that a mechanic is making money with/because of his tools? No, they’re merely tools. He’s making money with his abilities. Pretty much every fool can work a screwdriver. But earning money with it does not depend on the screwdriver.

    Want to point us to an example where someone actually sells FLOSS for a living and is therefore making money with FLOSS?

  61. bw says:

    “FUD: You can’t make money with FLOSS.”

    I am not aware of anyone saying that around here in the context that you present. I think that you are mistaken in a couple of ways as well in regard to the argument that you make here.

    The first is that you are not “making money” as you put it. At best, you are avoiding costs, which is subject to argument now as in the past. Microsoft has published a number of case studies where their claim of a lower “total cost of ownership” seems valid based on the numbers presented within the case. Naturally these cases are hand-picked from others that may not offer the same conclusion, but that is just advertising license. Everyone has to run their own numbers.

    Your position suffers from an obvious need to have an IT expert involved in the process both to initiate the selection of a FOSS program and then to nurture its introduction. You point to success in a number of schools systems where you acted as the expert and persuaded the systems to adopt and/or change to Linux. I would contend that such expertise is not readily at hand for most individuals or small businesses at an affordable level.

    It may be that such individuals or business owners who can apply themselves can muddle through, but they are more likely to attempt that using Windows, based on the universal familiarity of the Microsoft product.

    The second error that you are making is attributing Google’s success to their use of Linux in their server installations. That belittles the importance of their underlying search software and their basic ideas about how to monetize search as well as the fact that their critical mass is more important to their success than any other factor today.

    They “made their money” from their innovation in search and related advertising. They may or may not keep more of it by using free of charge software. They have been dumping buckets of money into Android and that has resulted in some reduced profitability as they mention to analysts and investors, so it is not totally clear that they are actually avoiding costs using FOSS.

Leave a Reply