Linux and open source have won, get over it

[securitybreach]

In 2015, Microsoft embraced Linux, Apple open-sourced its newest, hottest programming language, and the cloud couldn't run without Linux and open-source software. So, why can't people accept that Linux and open source have won the software wars? ....

 

Today's Microsoft isn't Gates or Ballmer's Microsoft. Today'sMicrosoft has brought .NET Core to Linux; it supports Debian GNU/Linux on its Azure cloud; and has its own Linux certification. Look at Microsoft in 2016 and you'll see a company which offers the open-source Hadoop big data software on Ubuntu and whose CEO proclaims that Microsoft loves Linux. Heck, Microsoft even has its own, specialized Linux distribution: Azure Cloud Switch.....

 

As for the cloud, which is where all IT work is headed, much of it already runs Linux and uses open-source server programs. As Mark Russinovich, CTO of Microsoft Azure, said last fall , "one in four instances [on Azure] are Linux."Looking ahead, this trend will only continue. OpenStack, a pure open-source cloud play with vast support, continues to grow in popularity....

 

And, everyone on the cloud, and I mean everyone, is racing as fast as they can to use Docker and other open-source containers to maximize the server instances from their hardware...

 

I'll make this simple for you. Open-source programmers, you've won. Relax already. Proprietary software developers, get your GitHub account now, your world is coming to a close.

 

http://www.zdnet.com...on-get-over-it/

[V.T. Eric Layton]

Now if we could just get free education and free health care and free food for everyone.

[securitybreach]

Now if we could just get free education and free health care and free food for everyone.

 

Agreed!!!!!!!!! Looks at Finland...

[lewmur]

Now if we could just get free education and free health care and free food for everyone.

I thought LBJ did that back in the 1960s with his "War of Poverty".

[lewmur]

Now if we could just get free education and free health care and free food for everyone.

Maybe because all three of those things cost money to produce. OpenSource if free ONLY because people DONATE their time and talent to produce it. The "free" stuff you want to give away is taken by force in the form of taxation without representation.

[raymac46]

/Rant on. Sadly the state of Linux desktop usage is not improving and I have lost heart when it comes to fixing up old PCs with Linux for other people. The average naive user will never get over the belief that Windows is the only way to go - or failing that get a Mac.

If you do install and configure old hardware to run Linux for someone you'll be dealing with screwups constantly - they try to run iTunes, download Windows software from the Internet and wonder why it won't work. If they can't get on Facebook for some reason they blame the operating system - never Firefox or Google Chrome. I can never duplicate their errors in Linux myself so I don't know what they are doing - must be network/DNS issues that would plague Windows as well.

I think it'll take a generation before Linux is accepted as a desktop O/S - although millions run Android and don't give it a second thought. /Rant off.

[lewmur]

/Rant on. Sadly the state of Linux desktop usage is not improving and I have lost heart when it comes to fixing up old PCs with Linux for other people. The average naive user will never get over the belief that Windows is the only way to go - or failing that get a Mac.

If you do install and configure old hardware to run Linux for someone you'll be dealing with screwups constantly - they try to run iTunes, download Windows software from the Internet and wonder why it won't work. If they can't get on Facebook for some reason they blame the operating system - never Firefox or Google Chrome. I can never duplicate their errors in Linux myself so I don't know what they are doing - must be network/DNS issues that would plague Windows as well.

I think it'll take a generation before Linux is accepted as a desktop O/S - although millions run Android and don't give it a second thought. /Rant off.

There is a simple solution to this. Instead of trying to make desktop Linux look and act like Windows, make it look and act like Android. And make it easier to port Android apps to desktop Linux.

 

Actually, I've found that introducing my elderly neighbors to Linux is easiest when they've had little experience with Windows. Using distros like Ubuntu and Mint are easier for "newbies" than Windows. It is when people "have to have" a particular Window app, that it becomes difficult to get them to switch.

 

What I'm seeing for the future is that that same principle is going to apply to Android users wanting "have to have" Android apps on their desktops and MS's CEO has killed that project for Windows.

[lewmur]

/Rant on. Sadly the state of Linux desktop usage is not improving and I have lost heart when it comes to fixing up old PCs with Linux for other people. The average naive user will never get over the belief that Windows is the only way to go - or failing that get a Mac.

If you do install and configure old hardware to run Linux for someone you'll be dealing with screwups constantly - they try to run iTunes, download Windows software from the Internet and wonder why it won't work. If they can't get on Facebook for some reason they blame the operating system - never Firefox or Google Chrome. I can never duplicate their errors in Linux myself so I don't know what they are doing - must be network/DNS issues that would plague Windows as well.

I think it'll take a generation before Linux is accepted as a desktop O/S - although millions run Android and don't give it a second thought. /Rant off.

If you could do the same thing with Windows, you'd have the exact same problem only you'd also have to deal with tons of malware. And I'm not talking about true malware. PUP's are a much bigger problem, IMO, than real infections. I had an elderly lady stopped me in the lobby just the other day to ask me to help with her friends brand new laptop on which that the friend tried to install a "free" anti-virus program. Now the PUP's keep multiplying like rabbits and she can't use the laptop.

 

So, your real problem isn't Linux. It's "doing a good deed". That never goes unpunished!!!

[raymac46]

Nowadays I find very few people that have little or no exposure to Windows or any sort of operating system. Even if you were to find such a pristine lady or gentleman, they'd have an interfering relative who tries to help them with Linux problems by downloading more Windows software. This has happened to me. Or the lady sees the brother running some Windows solitaire app and wants to use it.

I agree that if you do anything at all to support either Windows or Linux, you'll be on the hook in future. I've recently had to help people upgrade from Windows 7 to 10, or install and configure Windows 10 on a new machine. That is as much trouble as dealing with Linux since you need all the security apps they don't want to pay for. If I had a nickel for every Bing bar, Yahoo search bar, or Conduit Search Protect install I've zapped, I'd be able to have a nice meal at Olive Garden.

Edited January 7, 2016 by raymac46

[Robert]

Desktop monitors are now huge widescreens but software developers make fonts tiny, DPI settings that don't work on everything, and tiny disappearing scrollbars (PDF files are horrible to scroll through these days). Even some browsers eliminated permanent tabs and menus. I get lost everyday, sometimes multiple times within the same programs.

 

It does not matter if it is WIndows, Mac, or Linux, computers programs are harder to use than they were 10 years ago. The war on desktops users is killing the market.

[lewmur]

Desktop monitors are now huge widescreens but software developers make fonts tiny, DPI settings that don't work on everything, and tiny disappearing scrollbars (PDF files are horrible to scroll through these days). Even some browsers eliminated permanent tabs and menus. I get lost everyday, sometimes multiple times within the same programs.

 

It does not matter if it is WIndows, Mac, or Linux, computers programs are harder to use than they were 10 years ago. The war on desktops users is killing the market.

Just because a TV/monitor is capable of 1080i doesn't mean you have to use it at that res as a desktop monitor. I've got three 40" monitor/TV's sitting right in front of my recliner and I just set the res back to 1360 X 768 on two of them. Of course, with most Linux distros, you can do what I do on the third monitor. On that one, I run if at full res, but go into /Setting/Fonts and increase all of the font sizes.

 

On Windows 10, I do have a problem with changing the font size in that it will only let me choose 100% or 125%. Often, 100% is too small and 125% makes some apps not fit on the screen.

[sunrat]

I have a 3840 x 2160 27" monitor running Debian/KDE (siduction actually) and have managed to make almost all programs cooperate with display and font sizes. Setting DPI in System Settings>Fonts to 192 fixed most of it with minor tweaks needed for a couple of programs. Okular has no problem with PDF files. Pysolfc and a couple of others just won't scale though.

The problem is mainly with developers setting fixed font or window sizes, something which KDE has actively discouraged for some time so it is ahead of the game now.

As for Windows, I only have Win 7 which does have more problems than KDE but is still usable. And games look beautiful in 4k!

[lewmur]

I have a 3840 x 2160 27" monitor running Debian/KDE (siduction actually) and have managed to make almost all programs cooperate with display and font sizes. Setting DPI in System Settings>Fonts to 192 fixed most of it with minor tweaks needed for a couple of programs. Okular has no problem with PDF files. Pysolfc and a couple of others just won't scale though.

The problem is mainly with developers setting fixed font or window sizes, something which KDE has actively discouraged for some time so it is ahead of the game now.

As for Windows, I only have Win 7 which does have more problems than KDE but is still usable. And games look beautiful in 4k!

I'm not a gamer and at 76 my eyesight isn't good enough to tell the difference in "pretty pictures". (Though its still good enough to pass the driver license test without glasses.) Personally, the only difference HD TV has made for me is that the text stuff in watching football games is better. Other than that, my mind is too focused on the content I'm watching to pay attention to how many pixels I can see. As far as I'm concerned, high res is just a way to sell more bandwidth and more expensive hardware.

[securitybreach]

As far as I'm concerned, high res is just a way to sell more bandwidth and more expensive hardware.

 

I understand your point but the whole reason for it so you can fit more on the screen and everything is much clearer and sharper than lower resolutions.

[raymac46]

My biggest monitor is 23 inch and 1920X1080p. I use it to do some train simulation full screen. That's about the highest res I can get with my video card. Anything higher res would require a larger power supply, more robust video card and likely improved cooling and a larger case. Maybe something for a new build someday.

[sunrat]

Text rendering is vastly better in 4k compared to my old HD monitor.

[lewmur]

As far as I'm concerned, high res is just a way to sell more bandwidth and more expensive hardware.

 

I understand your point but the whole reason for it so you can fit more on the screen and everything is much clearer and sharper than lower resolutions.

But if you make things smaller to fit more on the screen, then it is too small to read. Vicious circle. If you have 30/20 vision, maybe you aren't wasting your money on hi-res, but for those of us with 20/30, it is useless.

 

With my 40" monitor set at 1360x768, fonts set at 6pts still are perfectly clear. I just have to put on reading glasses and move real close to the screen to read it.

Edited January 8, 2016 by lewmur

[securitybreach]

As far as I'm concerned, high res is just a way to sell more bandwidth and more expensive hardware.

 

I understand your point but the whole reason for it so you can fit more on the screen and everything is much clearer and sharper than lower resolutions.

But if you make things smaller to fit more on the screen, then it is too small to read. Vicious circle. If you have 30/20 vision, maybe you aren't wasting your money on hi-res, but for those of us with 20/30, it is useless.

 

With my 40" monitor set at 1360x768, fonts set at 6pts still are perfectly clear. I just have to put on reading glasses and move real close to the screen to read it.

 

I am nearsighted and wear glasses so my vision is far from 20/20 but I can see high resolution screens (including 4k at work), just fine.

[lewmur]

As far as I'm concerned, high res is just a way to sell more bandwidth and more expensive hardware.

 

I understand your point but the whole reason for it so you can fit more on the screen and everything is much clearer and sharper than lower resolutions.

But if you make things smaller to fit more on the screen, then it is too small to read. Vicious circle. If you have 30/20 vision, maybe you aren't wasting your money on hi-res, but for those of us with 20/30, it is useless.

 

With my 40" monitor set at 1360x768, fonts set at 6pts still are perfectly clear. I just have to put on reading glasses and move real close to the screen to read it.

 

I am nearsighted and wear glasses so my vision is far from 20/20 but I can see high resolution screens (including 4k at work), just fine.

Sure. So can I if I set the fonts large enough. But by definition, 20/20 vision says that the smallest type one can read from 20ft is 20pt. Move in to 6ft and there will be a type size limit that someone with "normal" vision can read. If a monitor with a max res of 1360 X 768 can display that type size very clearly, it will do the person no good to increase the res. (As regards how much text will fit on a page.) With higher res you can fit more text but you won't be able to read it.)

 

As I stated, my 40" monitor, set at 13608x768, can clearly display 6pt type but there is no way I can read type that small from 6ft away. And while my vision isn't 20/20, it is better than 20/30.

Edited January 8, 2016 by lewmur