OSNews

Ahh....we get to go through this again.....

It's really just another re-hash.....let's all up the osnews
hit counter so pump up their advertising revenue with another
linux desktop flamewar.

I just want to point out that "Oh, I use Linux as my desktop, so
it must be ready." is not a valid response to the statement that
"Linux is not ready for the desktop". I used linux as a desktop
back in 1992, it wasn't ready, but it was possible. I still don't
see it as viable for 'my desktop', and that is what this discussion
always degenerates into, everyone trying to generalize their
own desktop needs into that of everyone elses.

The term "the desktop" means that it is a completely viable
replacement for a significant majority of the population in
general, not for a significant population of osnews readers.

Also, in response to the comment about how X cannot be slow
because it is a 'protocol', and that only an implementation can
be slow. This is patently false. Protocols are made up of
data formats and algorithms that have their own computational
complexity. In CompSci, we measure that in such notation as
Big-O or Big-Theta. If a protocol is inefficient in the way that
it formats data, or the algorithms used, it is inherently slow,
regardless of the implementation. An implementation of a slow
protocol may be as highly optimized as possible, but it is still
limited by the protocol definition.

Since I do networking, I'll use that as an example....BGP is
inherently slow with respect to acting on network changes,
while protocols such as OSPF or IS-IS are very fast. Insert
RIP for BGP if you so desire.

And on the topic of open source. That is much less important
than open standards, formats, and protocols. I don't have time
to sort through the source for every application, but I do expect
them to follow standards to enable interoperability. That is what
the companies such as IBM mean when they talk about the future
being "Open", not the source code. The only people who really
care about 'open source' are coders who want to tinker. It is not
inherently better, just different, and to many of us, irrelevant.

- Kelson