The title of the article seems completely wrong to you? Naturally it would, when you daily read something like this. But I do state all this stuff is being a big mistake, if not worse. I am sure, that Linux is now close to extinction, and still is getting closer and closer to the point of no return.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-06-29
If you can't, then why is osnews publishing such obvious FUD?
There are three things you can do when you enounter an article you find rubbish or disagree with.
1) Write a comment why the article sucks, using arguments.
2) Write a rebuttal article which OSNews will be pleased to publish.
3) Ignore the article.
Take your pick. Empty claims like "this is fud" or "it is all nonsense" without any form or arguments is not really what we want to see.
Member since:2006-06-22
At the bottom of the article, the signature:
"Dmitrij D. Czarkoff is a Russian intellectual property and insurance lawyer, spending his free time on free software advocacy and UNIXes promotion. OpenBSD user, if you would like to know."
explains it all! There is a reason why I don't write analytical articles on law!
Member since:2005-07-08
I really wish I could mod you up Thom.
Like I said yesterday, Linux is about being open. We're about discourse. We're about talking. We're not about hiding our faults and problems.
If we're going to succeed we have to be able to freely speak our minds.
If we can't do that, if we can't talk about what's wrong or what we feel is wrong, then we become like Microsoft who cover's up their problems and hides them from customers. When we become like our "enemy" we've lost the war, and the war is useless.
Don't stifle or shut up critics. Let them talk. If what they say is true, take it to heart. If what they say is false, rebut them and show them what is true.
But don't push away those who might be in the middle--potential customers or users--by crying wolf all the time.
Member since:2005-07-10
Thom, there simply is no substance to refute.
The article is based on a false premise, acts as if this false premise was a fact and then acts as if the conclusion it draws follows logically from this false premise, though it fails to show how it does.
To add to this the article doesn't present one single fact to back up its assertions.
So no, this article is clear rubbish and there isn't anything more to say about it. That it is clear rubbish is obvious to anyone with half a brain and should be obvious to anyone who calls himself an editor, even if he's working for free.
Member since:2005-12-31
>>Empty claims like "this is fud" or "it is all nonsense" without any form or arguments is not really what we want to see.<<
Maybe you should take your own advise? This article is making assertions based on nothing. Why does osnews considering this pointless ranting newsworthy?
I don't mind any worthy opinion, pro-linux, anti-linux, makes no difference. But why publish unsupported cr@p?
Member since:2006-02-04
The article appears to be satire. As such, facts ect. aren't really a requirement. With some "what if" ideas thrown in.
As far as the term WYSIWYG, I don't think that is quite the corect term when talking about a GUI centric desktop enviroment as as opposed to using the command line.
What you see is not what you get. It's what the devloper wanted to you to see or felt you needed to see in order to use the software.
The author did say that he just didn't have another word to use. I understand what he's talking about when using the term WYSIWYG in this context.
Personally I'd like to see more integration between the GUI and the command line. Not a split. Not that I think a split would happen. Why would it? Want to use the GUI, use it. Want the command line use it. A split is in no way needed. You know, the whole choice thing.
Member since:2006-01-19
"I'd like to see more integration between the GUI and the command line"
And you can have it. For example use Konqueror. It looks and feels "Windows Explorer"-ish when you start it up the first time. But it is approximately 10 times more powerful, especially because it does not look like it:
-It is the perfect tool for a beginner who just wants to drag and drop files and folders through his filesystem.
- Then it provides a nice ftp client, without changing it's behaviour (no relearn).
- Then it is a CD-ripping tool, without changing it's behaviour (no relearn again).
- Then it is a manual page viewer, or a pdf viewer or a web browser, all that without changing it's behaviour and without having to have 100 buttons around.
- and last, it is a command line interface (CLI). And this CLI works TOGETHER with the GUI part of Konqueror. Just in existing, Konqueror disprooves the article perfectly. There is no real difference between a CLI and a GUI, the GUI simplyfies the access to often-done things, the CLI gives the user the power and flexibility for more complicated tasks. Konqueror does both, so it is a tool for beginners which grows it's powers as the user learns to use them. But it does not force the user to learn them!
Applications like Konqueror are the future, on which platform they run is irrelevant.
Member since:
2005-12-31
>>I am sure, that Linux is now close to extinction<<
Based on what? Care to back up that extreme assertions?
Can you provide evidence of declining market share? Or anything of that nature?
If you can't, then why is osnews publishing such obvious FUD?