narrow
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| incinerator Jan 22, 2007 1:28 AM EDT |
Oh dear, what a thing to read on a Monday. I don't want to diss the work OSDL and FSG have done over the last couple of years, but this new thing is laughable:
- There's only one Open Source and Linux is its prophet? D'uh.
- ecosystem, markets, competition with closed platforms, why should I care about that?
- "it’s really a two-horse race now": Yeah, sure. And everything else will vanish. What do you dream about when you're asleep? I respect Andy Updegrove, he's got a truckload of know-how about many things. I particularly enjoy reading his works about the OpenDocument - msxml debate. But this is just narrow-minded, lacking perspective. This is so 20th century all you can hope that his new Linux Foundation will evolve into more than this announcement is promising. Otherwise it won't make much of a difference, really. I've saved the best thing for last: "The Linux Foundation will have three offices: in San Francisco, California; Beaverton, Oregon; and Tokyo Japan, with additional staff located in Indiana and Moscow." This is a joke, right? You actually do care about some other places, don't you. Like Western Europe, South America, Asia, Africa, Australia etc? To leave out a big Free Software powerhouse like Western Europe will be a big mistake. |
| dcparris Jan 22, 2007 2:27 AM EDT |
Say, isn't Tokyo, Japan in Asia? :-p |
| incinerator Jan 22, 2007 4:39 AM EDT |
Population of Tokyo (plus suburbs): ca. 20 million people
Population of Japan: ca. 130 million people
Population of Asia: ca. 4 BILLION people!!! If you want to get involved in Asia, an office in Tokyo won't be enough. |
| Abe Jan 22, 2007 8:23 AM EDT |
I have no problem with two Linux organization joining forces, it is a good thing and I am all for it. Let us not knock it out and help them find a good direction. I have couple comments right of the bat.Quoting:"to compete more effectively against Microsoft, the world’s largest software company"FOSS doesn't need to compete against Microsoft or anyone else. FOSS exists because it is needed and wanted by many people. FOSS stands on its own merits, it doesn't need to compete. All it needs is to keep its pace in innovation and development and keep getting better to furnish its users the best IT solutions and ecosystem with or without MS existence. If we are going to use MS as a baseline, I think it would be a mistake because it sounds like copying MS and that is a very bad idea. Quoting:the things that Microsoft does well are things we need to do well —Again, I have a problem with this first sentence. How do you know that the things that MS does well are not done well in FOSS already or even better? I think many of the features and capabilities in OSS are superior to MS Quoting:to promote, protect and standardize Linux.Now this I agree with and support. This is probably the thing that Linux needs the most at this time. I think the idea is pretty good one and necessary to help FOSS proliferate faster. |
| bigg Jan 22, 2007 9:00 AM EDT |
Abe: This is one of the things that really bothers me when I read people presenting their strategies for Linux. Linux will not be appealing to most Windows users if it is sold as a cheap Windows clone. I don't buy store brand peas or cereal most of the time, because "store-brand cereal" means "bad tasting but cheap cereal". Anyone wanting the exact functionality of Windows will never consider Linux. Linux will appeal only to those wanting a feature not present in Windows but present and usable in Linux. I don't deny that it is good to offer the same functionality as Windows. I'm just saying that's useless as a strategy, because very few users will move from Windows to Linux as a result. Rather than asking "What does Windows do that we don't?" they should be asking "What should we be doing in the future that Windows doesn't?" As just a single example, consider AMD. Their processors took off when they were able to promote energy savings compared to Intel. The only way to gain market share is to be different in a way that people like. I also see HP listed among the founding members. I have seen many HP/Compaq computers on store shelves through the years, and have yet to see one without Windows preinstalled. Maybe that's part of the problem. And I don't see Dell listed as a founding member, yet Dell is the only major company for which I've seen a Linux ad. (Maybe I just don't watch enough TV.) Compare Microsoft's marketing budget against the grand total of $37.29 that was spent on Linux marketing in the period 2001-2006, and the mission of the Linux foundation seems trivial. |
| Abe Jan 22, 2007 12:18 PM EDT |
Quoting:I also see HP listed among the founding members. I have seen many HP/Compaq computers on store shelves through the years, and have yet to see one without Windows preinstalled. Maybe that's part of the problem. Quoting:yet Dell is the only major company for which I've seen a Linux ad. (Maybe I just don't watch enough TV.) Don't forget IBM ads. Although it is true that HP/CPQ don't advertise Linux on TV, but they do sell Linux/NOOS PCs. (See the links below). Dell advertises only their servers but never desktops, and they make sure they mention it as a better replacement to UNIX. Kind devious isn't? Dell has couple Linux desktops but they are more expensive than the same hardware that come with windows. HP/CPQ without OS is usually $130 less than the ones with Windows. For a while, HP had Suse/Mandrake Linux as the OS in addition to FreeDOS, but I am not sure why the removed it recently. Couple years ago, I purchased two HP EVO 250 with Mandrake Linux and I saved $130 on each. Dell just kept playing a tricky game. One day they offer Linux to go right back and discontinue the offer citing lack of demand. They actually were harming Linux not helping by giving the impression that Linux is not in demand. http://h71016.www7.hp.com/dstore/MiddleFrame.asp?page=config... http://h71016.www7.hp.com/dstore/MiddleFrame.asp?page=config... Any ways, OEMs are getting kick backs for not supporting pre-installed Linux but sooner or later, they will have to give in. They have no choice since there are many more small outfits that are offering pre-installed Linux these days. |
| jdixon Jan 22, 2007 1:20 PM EDT |
> Dell has couple Linux desktops but they are more expensive than the same hardware that come with windows. Out of curiosity, I priced two Dell low end desktops today. The first was their E521. From memory, the only change I made to the base system was to upgrade to a 250 GB hard drive. It came in at $469. I priced the same computer with their no-OS option, selecting the same equipment. This required adding a modem in addition to upgrading the hard drive to 250 GB. It also came in at $469. The Windows machine included Windows XP home and recycling of your old machine. The no-OS machine included FreeDOS and no recycling. :( Needless to say, I don't expect to be buying a Linux box from Dell. |
| bigg Jan 22, 2007 2:00 PM EDT |
I'm not going to promote any of these companies. I think none of them are our friends, regardless of how many groups HP joins. It's tough enough getting an HP printer working on Linux. I can understand the idea of not putting Linux on a PC. But why not sell a PC without an OS? Would it kill Best Buy to do that? You will never see any of these non-MS options in stores. Sorry, the Preinstalled Linux Vendor Database doesn't help much, because I don't know anything about these companies. My money is on a company like WalMart offering such a PC. I am very skeptical of claims that there is no demand for a cheap no-OS computer. |
| jimf Jan 22, 2007 2:10 PM EDT |
> It's tough enough getting an HP printer working on Linux. While, in general, I agree that none of these people are exactly 'friends', I'm wondering where you're getting the attitude against HP printers and drivers in Linux? HP has supported their printers under Linux longer than anyone else I can remember. I've never had a serious problem getting one to work. |
| jdixon Jan 22, 2007 2:44 PM EDT |
> HP has supported their printers under Linux longer than anyone else I can remember. HP's laserjets have been supported since forever. From what I understand, their support for their inkjets is more recent and Epson initially did a better job. Their current support is excellent, however. That was the main reason for our recent purchase of an HP inkjet over a Lexmark which was slightly cheaper. |
| tuxchick Jan 22, 2007 2:46 PM EDT |
HP printers and multifunction devices are well-supported in Linux. HP even has a table on their website showing exactly which ones are supported, and which features. My whine is their overpriced inks and toner, but that's the state of the industry. HP also sells Linux workstations and servers, and certifies some of their PCs as being Linux-capable. Of all the tier 1 vendors, I think HP is the friendliest to Linux. This page links to some of their SourceForge projects they sponsor: http://hp.sourceforge.net/ A conspicuous omission is the Wireless LAN resources for Linux site, http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Jean_Tourrilhes/Linux/ which HP has sponsored for years. Dell is completely two-faced about Linux. They lie and they bait-n-switch. Fie on Dell. |
| Abe Jan 22, 2007 4:00 PM EDT |
Quoting:I'm not going to promote any of these companies. I think none of them are our friends, Bigg, I don't promote them either, but relatively speaking, HP has been more supportive of Linux than Dell. Dell has been very deceptive and their products are not better than any other except in hype (remember the cool kid). At least HP has good engineering groups doing research and development while Dell copies from everyone else and does nothing more than integrating components from every where they can buy the cheapest. This strategy made Dell rich but now it is coming back to haunt them after many consumers realized their hype. About their printers, from my experience, HP has the best quality and support of printers in general and Linux drivers in particular. Under Cups, you will find drivers for almost every HP printer. You can even download them. http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/genericDocument?docname=b... I have an HP LaserJet 4ML that I bought about 10 years ago for $1000. It still runs very nicely and never had any problems with it. I always had it on my home network accessible from Linux, Mac, and Windows computers until yesterday. I (had) to install XP for my daughter and tried configuring it the same way I had it on Win 2000, It wouldn't work. I know, It is an XP Pro issue. That doesn't mean HP is a good supporter of Linux. But they are trying, like other companies including Dell, to evade the restrictions imposed on them in their contracts with MS. The time will come when Linux volume demand is large enough, and we will see a major shift. That is already happening over seas where companies can order Desktops with Linux. Heck, HP & Dell will even sell desktops with Linux/NO OS in large volumes here in the US if companies demand it. Are they Linux friendly? No they are not, I still see "HP recommends Windows Vista™ Business." on their web site. But in my book, a little is better than nothing. |
| Abe Jan 22, 2007 4:20 PM EDT |
Quoting:It also came in at $469.Jdixon, That could be true and my information could be old and stale. I applaud Dell for making this progress, but why are they the same? Oh, wait a minute, I forgot, XP is worthless, that is why. |
| bigg Jan 22, 2007 6:18 PM EDT |
Well, I don't want to jump all over HP, but my experiences have not been good. I have a LaserJet 1000. It always takes serious work to get it going. Here is what it says on the home page linked from linuxprinting.org: "And if you work for Konica Minolta or HP, you should be embarrased for your company. Neither company has ever offered any kind of support for this driver." I also have an HP PSC 1600 and have not been able to scan anything with any Linux distribution. Maybe your experiences are different, but mine haven't been good. I should also say that when you don't have the original CD's, it's not easy getting them going in Windows either. The downloadable drivers don't work. I have to reboot one of my computers from Windows into Linux in order to print. I have not found any way to print from Windows on any machine other than the one where the driver was installed with the original CD. |
| jdixon Jan 22, 2007 6:36 PM EDT |
> I have a LaserJet 1000. Well, from memory, the HP Laserjet 1xxx series was HP's first attempt at a low end laserjet which would also appeal to the home user market. It was overpriced for the home market and never caught on, but was used extensively at our offices as a desktop printer. If I recall correctly, it had no build in printer language, unlike most of HP's printers, and everything had to be done in the driver. This meant it took forever to prepare the print job, but would print reasonably quickly once it had done so. Given the driver requirements, it's not surprising support is lacking for anything other than Windows. |
| bigg Jan 22, 2007 6:41 PM EDT |
> overpriced for the home market Actually, the reason I bought it was because it was only $200. I believe they were just cheap printers. Cheap in terms of both price and quality. |
| jdixon Jan 22, 2007 6:42 PM EDT |
> That could be true and my information could be old... I got the prices Friday and today directly from Dell's website. You can get the E521 price directly from their home and home office section. To get the no-OS (actually FreeDOS) computers, you have to go to their small business page and select the Open Source Desktops icon at the bottom right of the page. The options aren't exactly the same, so you won't get a direct price comparison without making some changes, but once you equalize the options, you'll find the prices are identical. With Dell, you pay for Windows whether you order it or not. |
| dcparris Jan 22, 2007 6:45 PM EDT |
Shucks, Both of my HP printers have been auto-detected _and_ configured by practically every GNU/Linux distro I've tried since SUSE 9.2. Even in SUSE 8.0 and Mandrake 8.0, I was able to get the DJ970Cse detected, and easily found the drivers for it. Even the new 4215, despite not having the correct driver, works quite well. Lexmarks, otoh, have left me with a sour taste. Aside from the screwy bottom margin (don't they know how to get down to 0.5" down there?), configuring the donated Lexmark our ministry received proved an impossible task, even with SUSE 9.2. My experience - and numerous others' as well - with printers of any kind in Windows is enough to turn just about anyone off of Windows. I'm honestly surprised Apple didn't win out on that point alone. |
| jdixon Jan 22, 2007 6:46 PM EDT |
> Actually, the reason I bought it was because it was only $200. $200 is a lot when you can get an inkjet for $50 or less, and the list price was usually more like $300. By comparison, we got a Brother HL-1440 a few years ago for $140 (plus a $20 rebate, so it came out to $120), and it includes PCL4 emulation built in, so it works great with both Linux and Windows. We'd had too many inkjets die after 6 months, so we decided a laser printer would be a better option. We haven't been sorry yet. |
| bigg Jan 22, 2007 6:56 PM EDT |
> Lexmarks, otoh, have left me with a sour taste. Maybe my experiences have been really strange. We used to have a Lexmark inkjet, and that thing printed without any setup problems at all in Ubuntu. |
| jimf Jan 22, 2007 7:51 PM EDT |
> Maybe my experiences have been really strange. We used to have a Lexmark inkjet, and that thing printed without any setup problems at all in Ubuntu. Back when IBM owned Lexmark, their support for laser printers in Linux and the build quality was very good. Since they were divested, the laser driver support has remained, but the support for usb connected printers was non existent until about a year and a half ago, and is pretty minimal right now. It's my understanding that the laser printers are still pretty good, but inkjet and multi printers build quality has gone to hell. Add to that outsourced support, and that nice Indian woman on the other end of the line will waste hours and hours of your time and effort. To be fair, when they do print, Lexmarks have excellent print quality, but, you'll spend twice as much on ink as any other inkjet printer. Lexmark would be my very last choice for a printer. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!