Linux Addiction !!!
I work in NGO @ Panvel. Here I switched one department (20-25 Users) 0n Linux 3 years back. They use OpenOffice 2.2, Tally 7.2 (Linux Ver), Kmail, Firefox and Write & Font software with using Wine.
Today When I ask in one department in organization that "Can we switch over to Windows? As some body is donating Licensing cost for those PCs" All users said "No, We can't work on Windows now. We need only Linux"...
I got pleasant surprised by their reply. I thought that they will switch to Windows.
Three years back when I was pushing these users to work on Linux. I had to explain them advantages of Linux. They faced lots of issues in their daily work. Some of them I could resolved easily, some of them took a long time, In some cases they had to change their working style. But now when they are using it for last 2.5 years without any issue, they dont want to go back to Windows. They said that they forgot how to work on Windows. ....
They got addicted to Linux now..... :)
People say that Linux is not user friendly and cannot be used for Desktops for general users. Now I can surely say, if management plans to use Linux in offices, users & admins work hard on it without having windows in mind then they can switch to Linux.
Offcourse proffessional companies like Adobe, Corel, Font making companies should make applications for Linux.
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 1:54 PM, Neelesh Gurjar
People say that Linux is not user friendly and cannot be used for Desktops for general users. Now I can surely say, if management plans to use Linux in offices, users & admins work hard on it without having windows in mind then they can switch to Linux.
A few months back I supplied a pc installed with Kubuntu to a hospital and on the actual installation day, I was unavailable due to medical reasons. After getting back to work, I called them up a few times asking them if they need a demo and surprisingly each time they simply say no; that they are already comfortable using it. The installation was done by a windows guy who had simply wired up the system and entered the login password. The only time I had to visit was after a month or so when kde would disconnect the keyboard after login and the .kde folder had to be deleted. Just after logging in again, the doctor there made a few clicks and got back his favourite photo as the background. I would have taken a longer time to do it. This exprerience has really amazed me.
On Monday 22 Dec 2008 1:54:40 pm Neelesh Gurjar wrote:
Offcourse proffessional companies like Adobe, Corel, Font making companies should make applications for Linux.
why? cant we make our own opensource applications? Gimp, blender are all ready there. Things like inkscape and scribus will arrive sooner or later.
why? cant we make our own opensource applications? Gimp, blender are all ready there. Things like inkscape and scribus will arrive sooner or later.
now if only we had a good not a chalta hai replacement for MS Office! This is the biggest factor for people to shift in my place. Another one is support.
SG
On Tuesday 23 December 2008 10:27, Sachin Gopalakrishnan wrote:
why? cant we make our own opensource applications? Gimp, blender are all ready there. Things like inkscape and scribus will arrive sooner or later.
now if only we had a good not a chalta hai replacement for MS Office! This is the biggest factor for people to shift in my place.
There can never be a replacement for the crap that is M$office. Even a brainless moron cant write such crap. There are at least two SUPERIOR alternatives Openoffice and Koffice. Though less popular, Koffice is allegedly better than OO.
Another one is support.
For how many users?
On Tuesday 23 Dec 2008, Sachin Gopalakrishnan wrote:
why? cant we make our own opensource applications? Gimp, blender are all ready there. Things like inkscape and scribus will arrive sooner or later.
now if only we had a good not a chalta hai replacement for MS Office! This is the biggest factor for people to shift in my place.
I have been using OO since way back when it was called StarOffice and I have been able to get my work done. What is the feature set at your place that your users do not find in OO - please be specific, you can also put those features in the OO wish list.
Another one is support.
If you are willing to pay for support there are consultants and such who can be help.
On Wednesday 24 Dec 2008 12:22:46 am Arun Khan wrote:
now if only we had a good not a chalta hai replacement for MS Office! This is the biggest factor for people to shift in my place.
I have been using OO since way back when it was called StarOffice and I have been able to get my work done. What is the feature set at your place that your users do not find in OO - please be specific, you can also put those features in the OO wish list.
the point is that OO tries to be 'like' M$ office, or 'as good as' M$ office or 'better' than M$ office. And fails miserably. Take M$ word - this is designed to mimic the way that people wrote documents in the days of paper. They assume that: 1. You start at the beginning, go to the end and stop 2. You format the document as and when you write it.
This methodology is a result of the constraints of writing with pen and paper - any other way of doing it would result in inordinate amount of wasted effort. But what these jokers have not realised is that with the advent of the PC, those constraints no longer exist. And as even the most moronic of programmers know: good programming separates presentation from data.
A document essential consists of data - written words, images, etc and a presentation of the said data. Obviously the two have to be separated. The ideal document processor would have a module to enter data - in chunks of text without worrying about font/format etc. This implies a lightweight text entry application.
Then it would have a module to organise and present data - another lightweight application since the data would probably only be represented symbolically.
And a module to preview the result - again lightweight, since it would not be used to edit or reformat.
Since data is entered in text chunks in a database, the possibility of reuse of data is always there - DRY.
Sounds familiar no? There are hundreds of programs out there that do this. Only totally brain dead or brain washed people will ever use either M$ office or OO for anything other than maybe reading documents or converting format.
btw, this is the age of collaborative authoring - ever tried collaborative authoring with any of the above pieces of crap? I have - it's not pretty.
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:24 AM, Neelesh Gurjar neel.hjs@gmail.com wrote:
They got addicted to Linux now..... :)
yey...what joy...what encouragement...yey look at us...we're a cult...
iff someone didn't understand, the last line was full of dry sarcasm.
People say that Linux is not user friendly and cannot be used for Desktops for general users. Now I can surely say, if management plans to use Linux in offices, users & admins work hard on it without having windows in mind then they can switch to Linux.
Boooooooo... :P Its just a matter of getting used to, convenience, inertia. You'll find the same "effect" in offices that have been using Windows since a long time...
Offcourse proffessional companies like Adobe, Corel, Font making companies should make applications for Linux.
Yes...it didn't occur to anybody.. wow thanks for enlightening us :) Hehe, i'm being plain nasty now :P I'm kidding ;)
Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:24 AM, Neelesh Gurjar neel.hjs@gmail.com wrote:
People say that Linux is not user friendly and cannot be used for Desktops for general users. Now I can surely say, if management plans to use Linux in offices, users & admins work hard on it without having windows in mind then they can switch to Linux.
Boooooooo... :P Its just a matter of getting used to, convenience, inertia. You'll find the same "effect" in offices that have been using Windows since a long time...
Windows is quite a PITA to maintain especially with viruses and its affinity for corrupting the file system, resulting in frequent reboots, hanging and blank screens. Employees who use the pcs have a don't-care attitude. After the coming of broadband about 2 years ago, these problems have increased. Pen drives are a nightmare. Every time I see someone putting in a pen drive, it feels as if he's injecting a syringe infected with a deadly virus.
Rony wrote:
Windows is quite a PITA to maintain especially with viruses and its affinity for corrupting the file system,
Windows has as many viruses because of its popularity, security, no matter the OS is actually up to the user, think of, what a nasty program can accomplish if it is given root access in linux.
The way I see it, Windows OS is not that bad, the bad part is the restrictions that a user/developer is forced go through because of the licensing issues.
Surya
On Friday 26 December 2008 10:13, Surya Pratap wrote:
Rony wrote:
Windows is quite a PITA to maintain especially with viruses and its affinity for corrupting the file system,
Windows has as many viruses because of its popularity, security, no matter the OS is actually up to the user, think of, what a nasty program can accomplish if it is given root access in linux.
HA ha you fell for that crappy defence parroted by the microzombies. This line was picked up from a study about environment diversity. What they convienently forget to mention is the opportunity costs to an attacker. Eg. put a litre of sugar water in the open, you get lots of flies lets say 5000. Put ten thousand litres of sugar water you get huge numbers but most certainly not 500000000. Why? there arent that many flies in the area and it's very costly for flies from far away to come. Now keep a bottle of honey in the middle of your sugar water. The honey bottle has a tiny spiral opening thru which only one fly can pass. You will get a few flies out of the thousands trying to get in. How come? Honey is a lot more nutritious than sugar water.
There is a lot more to that story about attacks and biological vectors and jump distances and infection strategies. But all those come into play only when you have a honey pot which advertises it self but has ample inherent defences. Honey pots with five hundred holes to make eating the honey easy dont require any of these complex analysis.
To put it in plain language M$ products are a piece shit wrapped in honey. Quoting lines from these complex studies to con idiots is fine. But if you are a pro check everthing about M$ with three veery fine tooth combs so that you dont look like the target.
The way I see it, Windows OS is not that bad, the bad part is the restrictions that a user/developer is forced go through because of the licensing issues.
That is the bad part, treating your customers like thieves. It tickles me no end to see people jump thru hoops and pay good money for shit wrapped in honey.
Surya Pratap wrote:
Rony wrote:
Windows is quite a PITA to maintain especially with viruses and its affinity for corrupting the file system,
Windows has as many viruses because of its popularity, security, no matter the OS is actually up to the user, think of, what a nasty program can accomplish if it is given root access in linux.
Linux, Unix and Mac OS-X confirm to POSIX standards and that is what makes them safer in multi-user environments. Windows does not. It only complies, which is much different from confirming. You could look up POSIX in google and you will find some interesting information.
The way I see it, Windows OS is not that bad, the bad part is the restrictions that a user/developer is forced go through because of the licensing issues.
Licensing is just one part of the problem.
On Friday 26 December 2008 10:13:27 Surya Pratap wrote:
Rony wrote:
Windows is quite a PITA to maintain especially with viruses and its affinity for corrupting the file system,
Windows has as many viruses because of its popularity, security, no matter the OS is actually up to the user, think of, what a nasty program can accomplish if it is given root access in linux.
It is a misconception that windows has virus because it is most popular. 85% of the servers run on Unix, and most of them GNU/Linux and also since they are servers they are exposed. They do not get infected, though they are popular. Desktops are usually behind the firewall so well protected. M$ machines get infected despite that. The possibility of virus in a Unix machine is possible in only one condition: all the applications are running as super user. But, this situation actually defeates the very idea of a multi-user design. Therefore, it is correct to say that Unix OSs are practically immune to virus problem, and M$ machines have virus problem not due to their popularity but due to bad design choices.
M$ is not using a known invention (25 year old, even before their company is born) for the benifit of human kind. Therefore they a are actually liable to be sued for the crime they are committing for not providing the benifits of computer science to their customers.
On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 2:47 AM, Nagarjuna G. nagarjun@gnowledge.org wrote:
The possibility of virus in a Unix machine is possible in only one condition: all the applications are running as super user. But, this situation actually defeates the very idea of a multi-user design.
Not really. You could have a remote buffer overflow exploit for the iptables code running your firewall. A properly crafted packet would wreak havoc. A simple program running as a normal unprivileged could have a exploit that could escalate the user's previledges. Infact all or most buffer overflow exploits exist due to this.
Therefore, it is correct to say that Unix OSs are practically immune
No that would be too arrogant to say. Many Linux boxes get compromised everyday all over the world but they're quickly identified since *nix admins are inherently more knowledgeable than their non *nix counter parts.
to virus problem, and M$ machines have virus problem not due to their popularity but due to bad design choices.
Yes and theres a lot of political agenda behind that. The whole malware, anti-virus, OS, application ecosystem exist. No vulnerabilities mean that the ecosystem collapses. McAffee, Norton and the hundreds of vendors depending on the existence of holes will be out of business and so will a lot of software engineers :)
M$ is not using a known invention (25 year old, even before their company is born) for the benifit of human kind. Therefore they a are actually liable to be sued for the crime they are committing for not providing the benifits of computer science to their customers.
Heck UNIX model isn't the best that there is. Infact there are far superior kernels out there. Check out L3 / L4 kernels. They'll beat the crap out of any microkernel. They're far more secure than the Linux kernel. Theres L4 Linux which runs Linux kernel in userspace on top of L4 kernel. UNIX is mature but definitely not the best :)
On Sunday 28 December 2008 05:09:45 Dinesh Joshi wrote:
On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 2:47 AM, Nagarjuna G.
nagarjun@gnowledge.org wrote:
The possibility of virus in a Unix machine is possible in only one condition: all the applications are running as super user. But, this situation actually defeates the very idea of a multi-user design.
Not really. You could have a remote buffer overflow exploit for the iptables code running your firewall. A properly crafted packet would wreak havoc. A simple program running as a normal unprivileged could have a exploit that could escalate the user's previledges. Infact all or most buffer overflow exploits exist due to this.
You are confusing the matter. buffer overflow error is not a virus. I did not say anything about that topic.
Therefore, it is correct to say that Unix OSs are practically
immune
No that would be too arrogant to say. Many Linux boxes get compromised everyday all over the world but they're quickly identified since *nix admins are inherently more knowledgeable than their non *nix counter parts.
Again, those compromises are not because of Virus.
M$ is not using a known invention (25 year old, even before their company is born) for the benifit of human kind. Therefore they a are actually liable to be sued for the crime they are committing for not providing the benifits of computer science to their customers.
Heck UNIX model isn't the best that there is. Infact there are far superior kernels out there. Check out L3 / L4 kernels. They'll beat the crap out of any microkernel. They're far more secure than the Linux kernel. Theres L4 Linux which runs Linux kernel in userspace on top of L4 kernel. UNIX is mature but definitely not the best :)
You miss the point agian. I did not even say that Unix is best. I only said that scientific advancements made, as old as 25yrs, are not used by that company for the benifit of humanity. Forget about the latest ones. This is to demonstrate that they do not have minimal social committment. The argument I made is to show that they are not complying to ethics.
On Sunday 28 Dec 2008 10:51:58 am Nagarjuna G. wrote:
used by that company for the benifit of humanity. Forget about the latest ones. This is to demonstrate that they do not have minimal social committment. The argument I made is to show that they are not complying to ethics.
companies exist to make money - not to comply with ethics.
On Monday 29 December 2008 09:50, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On Sunday 28 Dec 2008 10:51:58 am Nagarjuna G. wrote:
used by that company for the benifit of humanity. Forget about the latest ones. This is to demonstrate that they do not have minimal social committment. The argument I made is to show that they are not complying to ethics.
companies exist to make money - not to comply with ethics.
Companies exist to provide a service to society. In the process they make money. Both have to be within the ambit of the law. Given that they exist to provide a service to society, they engage in external auxilary activity that raises it's standing in society and internal auxilary activity that raises it's standing amongst it's internal elements (employees, vendors etc.,). One such activity is ethical behaviour.
Ofcourse there are any number of crooked companies and people whose sole ethic is to make money. M$ is one such. The disaster is all too clearly visible. It affects large swathes of society. including very many who actively shun products and services of such companies.
On Monday 29 Dec 2008 10:55:42 am jtd wrote:
companies exist to make money - not to comply with ethics.
Companies exist to provide a service to society. In the process they make money.
they exist to make money - they make it by providing a service to society. Some companies realise that it is good business to be ethical - others dont. But people invest in companies to make money - not to promote ethics.
On Monday 29 December 2008 11:15, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On Monday 29 Dec 2008 10:55:42 am jtd wrote:
companies exist to make money - not to comply with ethics.
Companies exist to provide a service to society. In the process they make money.
they exist to make money - they make it by providing a service to society. Some companies realise that it is good business to be ethical - others dont.
That looks like a glass half empty.
But people invest in companies to make money
- not to promote ethics.
It's a foolish investor who invests in an unethical company. His money is going to diminish quickly - Satyam anyone?.
And here we are talking of ethics, not illegality. In the case of M$ it's plain old breaking the law, over and over ad nauseum. Ethical behaviour in the case of M$ would be like many of their products.
companies exist to make money - not to comply with ethics.
Companies exist to provide a service to society. In the process they make money.
they exist to make money - they make it by providing a service to society. Some companies realise that it is good business to be ethical - others dont. But people invest in companies to make money - not to promote ethics.
The characteristic of capital is that it moves in the direction where it can make profits and most of the times in pursuit of predatory profits thus leading to monopolies. Companies need to make profits in order for them to be able to survive. The question is 'how much profit is reasonable'? The free software movement has the capacity to create a level playing field where anybody can compete to provide services and make profits and create a strong economy. The characteristic of a strong economy is when jobs are created. More jobs means more people have money to spend. Meaning they can buy things. Meaning companies can survive. Free Software also has the capacity to ensure that companies follow ethics, relative as it may be. And yes, companies need to have social commitment else they will be rejected. Look at all the big and medium cos for examples.
On Monday 29 Dec 2008 12:06:23 pm Vikram Vincent wrote:
they exist to make money - they make it by providing a service to society. Some companies realise that it is good business to be ethical - others dont. But people invest in companies to make money - not to promote ethics.
The characteristic of capital is that it moves in the direction where it can make profits and most of the times in pursuit of predatory profits thus leading to monopolies.
nice to see that youngsters still believe in dialectical materialism
Companies need to make profits in order for them to be able to survive. The question is 'how much profit is reasonable'?
huh?
The free software movement has the capacity to create a level playing field where anybody can compete to provide services and make profits and create a strong economy. The characteristic of a strong economy is when jobs are created. More jobs means more people have money to spend. Meaning they can buy things. Meaning companies can survive. Free Software also has the capacity to ensure that companies follow ethics, relative as it may be.
huh? I thought free software was something to do with the most efficient way of writing software - never knew it's job was to reform capitalism.
The free software movement has the capacity to create a level playing field where anybody can compete to provide services and make profits and create a strong economy. The characteristic of a strong economy is when jobs are created. More jobs means more people have money to spend. Meaning they can buy things. Meaning companies can survive. Free Software also has the capacity to ensure that companies follow ethics, relative as it may be.
huh? I thought free software was something to do with the most efficient way of writing software - never knew it's job was to reform capitalism.
Free software has a lot of potential. Application of that potential to unique problem statements depends on how good a "hacker" one is.
Companies exist to provide a service to society. In the process they make money.
No they dont. Name one company which exist only to serve society and i shall show you a failed company!
Given that they exist to provide a service to society,
no they don't sir.
Ofcourse there are any number of crooked companies and people whose sole ethic is to make money.
I dont understand why is making money so bad?? As i see it we all work hard so that we can gain money to provide for more comforts. What is wrong in doing so?
Am no MS supporter but they have gone a long way to make money, they made the desktop ubiquitous.
They marketed their product so well that more and more people wanted to buy it, this helped in bringing down prices. Enough for us to sit and argue over in on our own personal computers. Now they did this for money not to fulfill any philanthropic urge.
Successful companies have great ethics. They provide and satisfy a particular need. I don't see why we should bash MS just for making money. If they had monopolistic practices its because the competition wasnt good enough and allowed it to be a monopoly.
If MS used its monopoly status to make more money then its because they ensured nobody else could provide better. Successful companies are successful because they provide something which others cannot.
they exist to make money - they make it by providing a service to society. Some companies realise that it is good business to be ethical - others
dont.
But people invest in companies to make money - not to promote ethics.
Well Said!
SG
On Monday 29 December 2008 11:21, Sachin Gopalakrishnan wrote:
Companies exist to provide a service to society. In the process they make money.
No they dont. Name one company which exist only to serve society and i shall show you a failed company!
You completely misunderstand. Every company exists to provide a service. They MAY fail because of many reasons. But they WILL fail if they cannot provide the service that they propose in a satisfactory way.
Given that they exist to provide a service to society,
no they don't sir.
Ofcourse there are any number of crooked companies and people whose sole ethic is to make money.
I dont understand why is making money so bad?? As i see it we all work hard so that we can gain money to provide for more comforts. What is wrong in doing so?
You again miss the point. There is absolutely nothing wrong ( though amassing pieces of paper is kind of strange) in making money ETHICALLY. Thus making money by providing a service to small section of society, while knowingly damaging other sections is definetly wrong. The law tries to recognise the existence of such behaviour and legislates to prevent it. However as tech and society changes the law falls behind (sometimes deliberately). At such time the ethical company recognises and corrects itself, thus protecting itself from future problems.
Am no MS supporter but they have gone a long way to make money, they made the desktop ubiquitous.
Boss, you need a major reeducation in the history of computing. Thank god you never said billy baba invented computers.
They marketed their product so well that more and more people wanted to buy it, this helped in bringing down prices. Enough for us to sit and argue over in on our own personal computers.
You make me laugh. Just do everybody a favour by reading up about the various law suits filed against the company about stolen ip, illegal practices etec. etc.
Now they did this for money not to fulfill any philanthropic urge.
Ethics != philanthrophy.
I don't see why we should bash MS just for making money. If they had monopolistic practices its because the competition wasnt good enough and allowed it to be a monopoly.
Snip. As i said you really need to get the facts from some place other than wherever you are getting them from. Periodically we get thoroughly misinformed members on the list. However it has been sometime since the last one. Cant blame the poor members though, the disinformation from M$ and their puppets is huge and the poor reader thinks it's great marketing. If anything they are as terrible at marketing as they are at tech.
Read the list for an abridged version. Or go to groklaw.net in the M$ section.
Terrence,
Generally I don't enter into such fruitless discussions as see it akin to masturbation. :)
Lot of heat and no production. ;-)
However,
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 11:51 AM, jtd jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:
On Monday 29 December 2008 11:21, Sachin Gopalakrishnan wrote:
Companies exist to provide a service to society. In the process they make money.
No they dont. Name one company which exist only to serve society and i shall show you a failed company!
You completely misunderstand. Every company exists to provide a service. They MAY fail because of many reasons. But they WILL fail if they cannot provide the service that they propose in a satisfactory way.
Your argument can be used to validate the M$ success! Since M$ has not failed so far can lead to point where they can say that they are providing the products/services in satisfactorily.
I don't see why we should bash MS just for making money. If they had monopolistic practices its because the competition wasnt good enough and allowed it to be a monopoly.
Snip. As i said you really need to get the facts from some place other than wherever you are getting them from. Periodically we get thoroughly misinformed members on the list. However it has been sometime since the last one. Cant blame the poor members though, the disinformation from M$ and their puppets is huge and the poor reader thinks it's great marketing. If anything they are as terrible at marketing as they are at tech.
Isn't it strange that if someone don't agree with you are have views and opinions opposite ti you becomes M$ puppet? Why we never attempt to learn from our opponents? If our opponents are vastly successful does not always mean that they always employ unfair/illegal practices. They must be doing something right - like not berating and attack newbies with insults and creating an ecosystem which feed on each other, however flawed.
Read the list for an abridged version. Or go to groklaw.net in the M$ section.
When will stop being cry baby?
With regards,
On Monday 29 Dec 2008 4:58:58 pm Dinesh Shah (દિનેશ શાહ/दिनेश शाह) wrote:
You completely misunderstand. Every company exists to provide a service. They MAY fail because of many reasons. But they WILL fail if they cannot provide the service that they propose in a satisfactory way.
Your argument can be used to validate the M$ success! Since M$ has not failed so far can lead to point where they can say that they are providing the products/services in satisfactorily.
that is what they said about enron and merill lynch - take it from me, M$ is on the long slippery slide downhill
Snip. As i said you really need to get the facts from some place other than wherever you are getting them from. Periodically we get thoroughly misinformed members on the list. However it has been sometime since the last one. Cant blame the poor members though, the disinformation from M$ and their puppets is huge and the poor reader thinks it's great marketing. If anything they are as terrible at marketing as they are at tech.
Isn't it strange that if someone don't agree with you are have views and opinions opposite ti you becomes M$ puppet?
he did not call them M$ puppets - he said they are misled by M$ and it's puppets
Why we never attempt to learn from our opponents?
what exactly do you suggest we learn from M$?
If our opponents are vastly successful does not always mean that they always employ unfair/illegal practices.
in the case of M$ it means precisely that.
They must be doing something right - like not berating and attack newbies with insults and creating an ecosystem which feed on each other, however flawed.
Actually *you* are the person who specialises in insults.
Kenneth,
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@au-kbc.org wrote:
They must be doing something right - like not berating and attack newbies with insults and creating an ecosystem which feed on each other, however flawed.
Actually *you* are the person who specialises in insults.
You seem to mixing up me with my namesake on the list!
-- regards Kenneth Gonsalves
With regards,
On Monday 29 Dec 2008 5:34:30 pm Dinesh Shah (દિનેશ શાહ/दिनेश शाह) wrote:
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@au-kbc.org
wrote:
They must be doing something right - like not berating and attack newbies with insults and creating an ecosystem which feed on each other, however flawed.
Actually *you* are the person who specialises in insults.
You seem to mixing up me with my namesake on the list!
aha shah != joshi, my mistake
On 12/29/08, Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@au-kbc.org wrote:
what exactly do you suggest we learn from M$?
Innovative and integrated User experience. As a developer, I still have not come across development environment + documentation comparable to MSDN + Visual Studio.
I work on a C++ product that works on few platforms (Solaris, Win32/64, Linux). I keep evaluating Linux dev + debug tools every few years and keep coming back to Windows for development. And most of GNU command line tools work on Windows with Cygwin (to integrate build process with VS).
Few things that Linux has innovated :
1. IPTABLES 2. RaiserFS 3. Live CD
Can anyone think of other things that Linux introduced and were not already present in other Unix environments.
On Monday 29 Dec 2008 11:03:55 pm Shamit Verma wrote:
what exactly do you suggest we learn from M$?
Innovative and integrated User experience. As a developer, I still have not come across development environment + documentation comparable to MSDN + Visual Studio.
unfortunately the nix philosophy of using many small tools, each specific to one task rather than one monolithic tool stands in the way of developing such a thingie. Lakhs of progammers worldwide do fantastic stuff without these. The problem with integrated development enviornments is that the more sophisticated they get, the more the programmer is restricted to specific languages/frameworks/tools. In our world, we get much more freedom and flexibility - which leads to innovation and thinking out of the box.
On Monday 29 December 2008 23:03, Shamit Verma wrote:
On 12/29/08, Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@au-kbc.org wrote:
what exactly do you suggest we learn from M$?
Innovative and integrated User experience. As a developer, I still have not come across development environment + documentation comparable to MSDN + Visual Studio.
I work on a C++ product that works on few platforms (Solaris, Win32/64, Linux). I keep evaluating Linux dev + debug tools every few years and keep coming back to Windows for development. And most of GNU command line tools work on Windows with Cygwin (to integrate build process with VS).
Strange we have discarded all our closed coding tools for micon development and are a lot happier. fte and a few scripts does everything that 600 Mb of trash did. Not to menton other stuff like cvs and a quantum jump in productivity.
Few things that Linux has innovated :
- IPTABLES
filtering network packets is old hat
- RaiserFS
Journaling fs were present much before reiser fs
- Live CD
this one is innovative afaik. as are os on usb, os on flash os on microsd. However dos on eprom (card) existed proly before linus wrote code on a pc. Dos on a isa card with a few dozen eproms and some sram existed in 1985. The card was by Cromemco and a small firm in texas burned dos on it and sold the stuff.
Can anyone think of other things that Linux introduced and were not already present in other Unix environments.
Most stuff in foss are small increments in a very large number of places. That is what contributes to progress. The giant leap for mankind usually lands you in a ditch. Infact most so called "Innovations" in the closed software world are nothing but pack and paint self glorification jobs. The technical retards that make up the press gaga on the PR while getting sozzled at one of the 5 star joints. Next day morn general joe wakes up to innovation and pays a packet for something available for free in the foss world.
On Tuesday 30 Dec 2008 11:36:53 am jtd wrote:
everything that 600 Mb of trash did. Not to menton other stuff like cvs
c'mon, cvs? people are moving from svn to git and you are stuck in cvs?? After all what do you have to lose by shifting? No vendor lockin here. No costly new software needed. No new hardware.
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 11:03 PM, Shamit Verma subs.linux.mum@vshamit.com wrote:
On 12/29/08, Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@au-kbc.org wrote:
what exactly do you suggest we learn from M$?
Innovative and integrated User experience. As a developer, I still have not come across development environment + documentation comparable to MSDN + Visual Studio.
There is extensive documentation for most of the FOSS tools. I have had no problems using gcc for compiling C programs, and the time tested editors have been enough for me to write them.But using VS put me into lot of trouble and what with the frequent crashes(Of course, I have not tried anything after VS6. I feel I have dumped it for good).
I work on a C++ product that works on few platforms (Solaris, Win32/64, Linux). I keep evaluating Linux dev + debug tools every few years and keep coming back to Windows for development. And most of GNU command line tools work on Windows with Cygwin (to integrate build process with VS).
Few things that Linux has innovated :
- IPTABLES
- RaiserFS
- Live CD
Can anyone think of other things that Linux introduced and were not already present in other Unix environments.
Going by that, we should say, at the lowermost levels, there is nothing that M$ innovated.
Reply in-line.
-- --Dinesh Shah :-) +91-98213-11906 Shah Micro System http://dineshah.wordpress.com Sent from iPhone!
On Dec 29, 2008, at 17:06, Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@au-kbc.org wrote:
On Monday 29 Dec 2008 4:58:58 pm Dinesh Shah (દિનેશ શાહ/दिनेश शाह) wrote
Your argument can be used to validate the M$ success! Since M$ has not failed so far can lead to point where they can say that they are providing the products/services in satisfactorily.
that is what they said about enron and merill lynch - take it from me, M$ is on the long slippery slide downhill
Let us stop day dreaming. As closed source software companies have accepted and acknowleged the FOSS. Let us also accept that they are not going away in hurry.
If we stay in the denial only we will pay the price.
With regards,
-- regards Kenneth Gonsalves
On Tuesday 30 December 2008 23:55, Dinesh Shah wrote:
Reply in-line.
-- --Dinesh Shah :-) +91-98213-11906 Shah Micro System http://dineshah.wordpress.com Sent from iPhone!
On Dec 29, 2008, at 17:06, Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@au-kbc.org
wrote:
On Monday 29 Dec 2008 4:58:58 pm Dinesh Shah (દિનેશ શાહ/दिनेश शाह) wrote
Your argument can be used to validate the M$ success! Since M$ has not failed so far can lead to point where they can say that they are providing the products/services in satisfactorily.
that is what they said about enron and merill lynch - take it from me, M$ is on the long slippery slide downhill
Let us stop day dreaming.
Hehe. You are preaching to the wrong section.
As closed source software companies have accepted and acknowleged the FOSS. Let us also accept that they are not going away in hurry.
We were specifically talking about M$. But most prop software product companies will die. Their demise is a mere side entertainment. But watching M$ trash about without a clue - VISTA ? no it is very sucksessful - while they sink will be fun.
According to the press (TOI) Satyam's maintanence of UNs network was pathetic with several cases of network compromises. Satyam is a M$ most valued (whatever) partner. Hmmm... nothing to do with the os i think.
On Wednesday 31 Dec 2008 11:05:27 am jtd wrote:
According to the press (TOI) Satyam's maintanence of UNs network was pathetic with several cases of network compromises. Satyam is a M$ most valued (whatever) partner. Hmmm... nothing to do with the os i think.
speaking of Satyam and ethics, where does this fit in:
On Wednesday 31 December 2008 11:53, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On Wednesday 31 Dec 2008 11:05:27 am jtd wrote:
According to the press (TOI) Satyam's maintanence of UNs network was pathetic with several cases of network compromises. Satyam is a M$ most valued (whatever) partner. Hmmm... nothing to do with the os i think.
speaking of Satyam and ethics, where does this fit in:
Only the training part is sort of ok. St. Johns provides a far more comprehensive training on first aid and emergency medical help - far more relevant in a disaster emergency than cardiac failure revival. The cost is extremely low and the certification is recognised world wide.
However the PGPEC is interesting.
The 108 service backend and the service delivery itself is paid for by the government and Satyam is a direct beneficiary. Nothing philanthropic there. Plain business and a good one at that.
On Wednesday 31 Dec 2008 12:43:41 pm jtd wrote:
However the PGPEC is interesting.
The 108 service backend and the service delivery itself is paid for by the government and Satyam is a direct beneficiary. Nothing philanthropic there. Plain business and a good one at that.
and ethical?
On Wednesday 31 December 2008 12:47, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On Wednesday 31 Dec 2008 12:43:41 pm jtd wrote:
However the PGPEC is interesting.
The 108 service backend and the service delivery itself is paid for by the government and Satyam is a direct beneficiary. Nothing philanthropic there. Plain business and a good one at that.
and ethical?
I cant comment. I am not aware if satyam is leveraging voluntary work at the endpoint to gain commercial advantage. Or even leveraging the government paid for infrastructure for other purposes.
On Mon, December 29, 2008 4:58 pm, Dinesh Shah (દિનà«àª¶ શાહ/दिनà¥à¤¶ शाह) wrote:
<snip />
Isn't it strange that if someone don't agree with you are have views and opinions opposite ti you becomes M$ puppet? Why we never attempt to learn from our opponents? If our opponents are vastly successful does not always mean that they always employ unfair/illegal practices. They must be doing something right - like not berating and attack newbies with insults and creating an ecosystem which feed on each other, however flawed.
Have you ever tried calling a Microsoft call center? I'd much rather be "berated" on a list like this than try and communicate with those morons, whether I'm a newbie or not.
Read the list for an abridged version. Or go to groklaw.net in the M$ section.
When will stop being cry baby?
Since when has providing links / info become "being a cry baby?"
Can everyone stop with these meaningless personal insults - its a bit ridiculous, imo.
Peace, Sanjay
With regards,
--Dinesh Shah :-) Shah Micro System +91-98213-11906 Blog-1: http://dineshah.wordpress.com/ Blog-2: http://dineshah.blogspot.com/ Rodney Dangerfield - "The way my luck is running, if I was a politician I would be honest." -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
Sanjay B wrote:
On Mon, December 29, 2008 4:58 pm, Dinesh Shah (દિનેશ શાહ/दिनेश शाह) wrote:
<snip />
Isn't it strange that if someone don't agree with you are have views and opinions opposite ti you becomes M$ puppet? Why we never attempt to learn from our opponents? If our opponents are vastly successful does not always mean that they always employ unfair/illegal practices. They must be doing something right - like not berating and attack newbies with insults and creating an ecosystem which feed on each other, however flawed.
Have you ever tried calling a Microsoft call center? I'd much rather be "berated" on a list like this than try and communicate with those morons, whether I'm a newbie or not.
Actually, I did call the microsoft call center. Its called microsoft connect. And yes, they had the correct information that i needed. They gave me the data I wanted. On one occasion when I asked details of a product, they offered to have a dealer call me next day with an offer or email to me a list of 5 dealers in mumbai whom i can call for a quote. They gave me correct information and clarified about pricing of a certain license which i knew should be available but the dealers were saying it is not there. Further, they asked me to tell the dealer that I have spoken to microsoft connect and that he should get the correct product for me and to let them know if he refused or asked for a higher price.
And for your information, they have a very active community, both for users and for developers, that has members who are very much willing to help out newbies. And in most cases the community comes up with solutions. They have large bank of reusable codes that are available for developers to use, including a 12GB knowledgebase from which you can find who else had the same problem and what is the solution. If the community is unable to help and the matter is complex, microsoft inhouse developer and trainers step in and help out.
All this is from personal experiance. Believe me, newbies in Microsoft environment get a lot of help.
Regards Saswata
Read the list for an abridged version. Or go to groklaw.net in the M$ section.
When will stop being cry baby?
Since when has providing links / info become "being a cry baby?"
Can everyone stop with these meaningless personal insults - its a bit ridiculous, imo.
Peace, Sanjay
With regards,
--Dinesh Shah :-) Shah Micro System +91-98213-11906 Blog-1: http://dineshah.wordpress.com/ Blog-2: http://dineshah.blogspot.com/ Rodney Dangerfield - "The way my luck is running, if I was a politician I would be honest." -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
On Monday 29 Dec 2008 9:27:53 pm Saswata Banerjee wrote:
And for your information, they have a very active community, both for users and for developers, that has members who are very much willing to help out newbies. And in most cases the community comes up with solutions. They have large bank of reusable codes that are available for developers to use, including a 12GB knowledgebase from which you can find who else had the same problem and what is the solution. If the community is unable to help and the matter is complex, microsoft inhouse developer and trainers step in and help out.
All this is from personal experiance. Believe me, newbies in Microsoft environment get a lot of help.
ahem - all the above is for support for existing working products - have you any experience with bug reports and wishlists? Since I have *never* contacted microsoft for anything, I am ignorant of this. I *do* remember trying to get support for Coreldraw and pagemaker from wipro - a total excercise in futility. (Again this was over 10 years ago, so things may have changed now)
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 9:27 PM, Saswata Banerjee scrapo@saswatabanerjee.com wrote:
And for your information, they have a very active community, both for users and for developers, that has members who are very much willing to help out newbies. And in most cases the community comes up with solutions. They have large bank of reusable codes that are available for developers to use, including a 12GB knowledgebase from which you can find who else had the same problem and what is the solution. If the community is unable to help and the matter is complex, microsoft inhouse developer and trainers step in and help out.
We are actually comparing two stuff that are of entirely different philosophies. In the world of FOSS, we have IRCs and mailing lists which will help you with any technical stuff. It is not controlled by one company that owns everything. With respect to the large bank of reusable code, is that larger the the code that is contributed to the whole world by the FOSS community ? I don't think so.
All this is from personal experiance. Believe me, newbies in Microsoft environment get a lot of help.
I have personally learn lots of stuff from these mailing lists and IRCs. It is a misconception that all newbie questions are neglected. There are lots of people here in these mailing lists who take time to answer newbie questions as well.
On Monday 29 December 2008 21:27, Saswata Banerjee wrote:
Sanjay B wrote:
On Mon, December 29, 2008 4:58 pm, Dinesh Shah (દિનેશ શાહ/दिनेश शाह) wrote:
<snip />
Isn't it strange that if someone don't agree with you are have views and opinions opposite ti you becomes M$ puppet? Why we never attempt to learn from our opponents? If our opponents are vastly successful does not always mean that they always employ unfair/illegal practices. They must be doing something right - like not berating and attack newbies with insults and creating an ecosystem which feed on each other, however flawed.
Have you ever tried calling a Microsoft call center? I'd much rather be "berated" on a list like this than try and communicate with those morons, whether I'm a newbie or not.
Actually, I did call the microsoft call center. Its called microsoft connect.
They have large bank of reusable codes that are available for developers to use, including a 12GB knowledgebase from which you can find who else had the same problem and what is the solution. If the community is unable to help and the matter is complex, microsoft inhouse developer and trainers step in and help out.
That must be a "recent" development. In 99 we had a virus problem that wiped out the fat from a very imp disk with years and years of data. (Ya ya backup stuff and all that - one always learns). We set about recovering. There was one closed recovery tool called tiramisu, which cost a packet and did a half rotten job. We decided to recover manually. And discovered that the fat 32 disk format 1995 was not documented in 1999. Calling local M$ office (no they did not have a help line, but did have an office) for help was useless. After a lot of digging on the net on dialup, we discovered that official docs were not available, but found some documentation from a polish uni where one of it's students did a Phd on file formats!! (bless his soul). using that, debugging bios calls (which we were already familiar with and inhouse assembly code we managed to recover quite a bit. It took two months of back breaking labour. One of the most fundamental parts of an OS not documented? i have yet to came across something worse.
It also opened my eyes and made me take a look at M$ with a magnifying glass, Particularly after lots of nasty experiences with doze 3.0, 3.1 and 95. And it wasnt just me. There were many Indian developers with very similiar experiences. I was already aware of M$ - CPM shenanigans. But it took a while to understand the politics of computer tech and the illegal and unethical practices of M$ in this politics.
I suppose one should just let the misinformed burn nicely, rather than point them out to correct sources of info.
Sanjay B wrote:
Have you ever tried calling a Microsoft call center? I'd much rather be "berated" on a list like this than try and communicate with those morons, whether I'm a newbie or not.
I have called a Microsoft call center once and I found the people very polite and provided me with the information I was looking for.
On Monday 29 Dec 2008 10:33:58 pm Rony wrote:
Have you ever tried calling a Microsoft call center? I'd much rather be "berated" on a list like this than try and communicate with those morons, whether I'm a newbie or not.
I have called a Microsoft call center once and I found the people very polite and provided me with the information I was looking for.
what was the information you were looking for?
Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On Monday 29 Dec 2008 10:33:58 pm Rony wrote:
Have you ever tried calling a Microsoft call center? I'd much rather be "berated" on a list like this than try and communicate with those morons, whether I'm a newbie or not.
I have called a Microsoft call center once and I found the people very polite and provided me with the information I was looking for.
what was the information you were looking for?
Free Vista upgrade coupon validiation and license issues.
On Tuesday 30 Dec 2008 11:58:16 pm Rony wrote:
what was the information you were looking for?
Free Vista upgrade coupon validiation and license issues.
shows they are good at marketing. Have you ever filed a bug report? What was the response?
Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On Tuesday 30 Dec 2008 11:58:16 pm Rony wrote:
what was the information you were looking for?
Free Vista upgrade coupon validiation and license issues.
shows they are good at marketing. Have you ever filed a bug report? What was the response?
Amazing thing is that, yes I filed a bug report. If a software crashes, they have an automatic bug report that comes up. you have the option of allowing it to go through (it shows what data is being sent) or not. I have noticed that in most cases, immediately after the bug report is sent, it links to the solution page (the link comes up in the window where the bug report send button was). In other cases (new bugs), it says it is now reported and you can check back later - a bud report code comes with it. In most cases, after a month if you have the same bug / crash report, the solution will be there.
Oh yes, they also have solutions / links for crashes in software other than microsoft ones (ofcourse, if the vendor cooperates - and if the software is certified for windows)
In addition, if you are member of the MSDN forum, there are opportunities to report bugs and feature requests during the monthly offline meetings and to the group leaders (they are called msdn regional directors) who are in touch with microsoft product groups all the time. Yes, I have reported some issued at times when I was active on MSDN regarding excel, and it was taken into account in the next version.
Also, anyone having Office 2003 or Office 2007 will know they have a customer survey module that runs form time to time asking people to tell if there is any problem or any missing features, etc (I always disabled it).
Regards Saswata
Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On Tuesday 30 Dec 2008 11:58:16 pm Rony wrote:
what was the information you were looking for?
Free Vista upgrade coupon validiation and license issues.
shows they are good at marketing. Have you ever filed a bug report? What was the response?
Never had to. All solutions were available on the net.
On Wednesday 31 Dec 2008 8:41:57 pm Rony wrote:
shows they are good at marketing. Have you ever filed a bug report? What was the response?
Never had to. All solutions were available on the net.
wow - doze, here I come
On Monday 29 December 2008 16:58, Dinesh Shah (દિનેશ શાહ/दिनेश शाह) wrote:
Terrence,
Generally I don't enter into such fruitless discussions as see it akin to masturbation. :)
Lot of heat and no production. ;-)
However,
You completely misunderstand. Every company exists to provide a service. They MAY fail because of many reasons. But they WILL fail if they cannot provide the service that they propose in a satisfactory way.
Your argument can be used to validate the M$ success! Since M$ has not failed so far can lead to point where they can say that they are providing the products/services in satisfactorily.
Make a measurement in a few years time.
I don't see why we should bash MS just for making money. If they had monopolistic practices its because the competition wasnt good enough and allowed it to be a monopoly.
Snip. As i said you really need to get the facts from some place other than wherever you are getting them from. Periodically we get thoroughly misinformed members on the list. However it has been sometime since the last one. Cant blame the poor members though, the disinformation from M$ and their puppets is huge and the poor reader thinks it's great marketing. If anything they are as terrible at marketing as they are at tech.
Isn't it strange that if someone don't agree with you are have views and opinions opposite ti you becomes M$ puppet?
My views are backed up by openly available data that everybody can refer to, which itself is backed up by even more data of M$ shenanigans over the years. The op started by quoting those parts of a study that were picked out by M$ puppets and bandied about in the press. They then never bothered to correct this subterfuge when the paper writer refuted M$ abridged theory.
Why we never attempt to learn from our opponents?
Are you implying we indulge in same subterfuge?. If any thing The opponent needs to learn from us. clarification: by opponent i mean M$ in this context. i do not consider anybody on this list to be an opponent. Everybody is welcome to their wise or otherwise views.
If our opponents are vastly successful does not always mean that they always employ unfair/illegal practices.
Definetly not. But in M$ case their "success" does not stem from any of the virtues people attribute to M$. As a tiny case in point, the samba team wrote a better package then the original WITHOUT documentation.
They must be doing something right - like not berating and attack newbies with insults and creating an ecosystem which feed on each other, however flawed.
No they wait for the trap to spring. Then screw the newbie customers with an audit and licence fees for the new improved equally fully of holes version. The poor sods realise only when they are neck deep in the cess pool.
YEAH i am waiting patiently for examples of something right. Maybe the op will actually do some research and point to some useful sources that will show that M$ "invented and popularised the desktop" (or anything else).
Strange how people get all twisted the moment you ask for (or point to) factual data. M$ is one of the few companies that pays for research, then quotes only the tasty bits to hook the gullible and FOSS developers have repeatedly ripped of the facade.
They marketed their product so well that more and more people wanted to buy it, this helped in bringing down prices. Enough for us to sit and argue over in on our own personal computers.
You make me laugh. Just do everybody a favour by reading up about the various law suits filed against the company about stolen ip, illegal
practices etec. etc.
huh?? As i see it they are still present on more than 90% of the desktops, which means they did something right inspite of what anyone says ....
On Tuesday 30 Dec 2008 6:00:10 pm Sachin Gopalakrishnan wrote:
You make me laugh. Just do everybody a favour by reading up about the various law suits filed against the company about stolen ip, illegal
practices etec. etc.
huh?? As i see it they are still present on more than 90% of the desktops, which means they did something right inspite of what anyone says ....
where did you get the 90% figure from?
where did you get the 90% figure from?
operative idea being "majority"
On Tuesday 30 Dec 2008 7:02:02 pm Sachin Gopalakrishnan wrote:
where did you get the 90% figure from?
dear friend, I asked for source - not wikipedia. Wikipedia does not claim to be source.
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 7:32 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@au-kbc.orgwrote:
On Tuesday 30 Dec 2008 7:02:02 pm Sachin Gopalakrishnan wrote:
where did you get the 90% figure from?
dear friend, I asked for source - not wikipedia. Wikipedia does not claim to be source.
Dear Kenneth,
I'd request you to RTFMail again. The 'fragment' cite_note-5 is the *source* that the original email pointed to - although, not the best way to point indirectly to the source.
Disputing the numbers is another matter...
Thanks, jaju
On Tuesday 30 Dec 2008 8:32:22 pm Ravindra Jaju wrote:
dear friend, I asked for source - not wikipedia. Wikipedia does not claim to be source.
Dear Kenneth,
I'd request you to RTFMail again. The 'fragment' cite_note-5 is the *source* that the original email pointed to - although, not the best way to point indirectly to the source.
just noticed that - apologies. Although one extra click would have shown the source
Disputing the numbers is another matter...
under countries one finds no mention of South Korea and Japan which are supposed to have the highest internet penetration.
On Sunday 28 December 2008 05:09, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
Heck UNIX model isn't the best that there is. Infact there are far superior kernels out there. Check out L3 / L4 kernels. They'll beat the crap out of any microkernel. They're far more secure than the Linux kernel. Theres L4 Linux which runs Linux kernel in userspace on top of L4 kernel. UNIX is mature but definitely not the best :)
Have you used L4?. It was part of an rtos (PLAN9 afaik) for ss7 systems. It has no native drivers and depends on the GNU universe to even boot ;-00. What would you use it for without drivers, tools etc. Oh umm...security. Ya its totally secure u cant even login. So you use L4 to bootstrap linux to use GNU tools. What do you get. More bloat. Can you use L4 natively. You cant.
Wonder if you thought of tasting your recommended poison.
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:24 AM, Neelesh Gurjar neel.hjs@gmail.com wrote:
Linux Addiction !!!
I work in NGO @ Panvel. Here I switched one department (20-25 Users) 0n Linux 3 years back. They use OpenOffice 2.2, Tally 7.2 (Linux Ver), Kmail, Firefox and Write & Font software with using Wine.
Today When I ask in one department in organization that "Can we switch over to Windows? As some body is donating Licensing cost for those PCs" All users said "No, We can't work on Windows now. We need only Linux"...
This is really great. Kudos to the work you've put in to achieve that.
They got addicted to Linux now..... :)
Addictions are always bad :P Jokes aside, how is the daily management of these computers done in your absence now? Do they have a full time sys admin to look after the place? Also, has this effort been documented so people wanting to replicate will find it easier, IIRC you had to deal with quite a few old PC's with varying configuration. Also how were the steps taken to move these people to linux in the first place. And at what points did you have to face resistance.
People say that Linux is not user friendly and cannot be used for Desktops for general users. Now I can surely say, if management plans to use Linux in offices, users & admins work hard on it without having windows in mind then they can switch to Linux.
IMHO, it's just about familiarity with the OS that matters these days. Definitely end users can adjust if the system administrators are competent with their work, can get the end users to work with linux with the users having to get into minimum of fuss and the end user is willing/forced to adopt Linux. Replace system admin with some technically competent person, in case of individuals.
-
Arun Khan -
Balachandran Sivakumar -
Dinesh Joshi -
Dinesh Shah -
Dinesh Shah (દિન ેશ શાહ/द िनेश शाह)
-
jtd -
Kenneth Gonsalves -
Mehul Ved -
Nagarjuna G. -
Neelesh Gurjar -
Ravindra Jaju -
Rony -
Rony Bill
-
Sachin Gopalakrishnan -
Sanjay B -
Saswata Banerjee -
Shamit Verma -
Surya Pratap -
Vikram Vincent