Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 1st Sep 2005 14:47 UTC
Microsoft Some prominent figures in the Linux community believe that as enterprises increase their use of Linux on the desktop, Microsoft will be forced to consider offering a version of Office for Linux. "When the [Linux desktop] market share gets to a certain point, Microsoft will, just as it did with Apple in the past, make Office available on Linux," CEO Stuart Cohen of OSDL said in an interview. My take: Mr. Cohen is forgetting two important things: Excel was first released for the Mac (1985) and Word wasn't popular until MS ported it from DOS to Mac (1985).
Thread beginning with comment 26467
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Breakage
by raver31 on Thu 1st Sep 2005 19:34 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Breakage"
raver31
Member since:
2005-07-06

bad example there....

you upgraded a stable version 2.6.8 to a testing version 2.6.9

in the linux world, a version number that ends in an even number is stable, and odd numbers are not.
they are for developers to do testing on, so therefore things could be broken.

I am not going to give you abuse about this, as you have probably came from a windows background, and believe everyhting microsoft says about "newest is better" and "the next version will have everything working"

2.6.10 would have been the better choice to upgrade to

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 1

RE[8]: Breakage
by Tom K on Thu 1st Sep 2005 21:32 in reply to "RE[7]: Breakage"
Tom K Member since:
2005-07-06

Incorrect. The odd/even refers to the second number (ie. 6). The 2.1 kernel was the dev branch that lead to the stable 2.2. The 2.3 kernel was the dev branch that lead to the stable 2.4. 2.5 lead to 2.6, and that's where they abandoned the idea. Technically, I expect all 2.6 kernels to be stable, but the kernel devs don't seem to think so. Ted T'so made a particularily disappointing statement once about the hit-and-miss nature of 2.6 releases and their stability. It really puts the non-professional development attitude of the Linux kernel in the spotlight.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: -1

RE[9]: Breakage
by raver31 on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 08:36 in reply to "RE[8]: Breakage"
raver31 Member since:
2005-07-06

sorry, my mistake.
you are completely right.
I remember from trying a 2.5 kernel ;)

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 1

RE[8]: Breakage
by rm6990 on Fri 2nd Sep 2005 01:56 in reply to "RE[7]: Breakage"
rm6990 Member since:
2005-07-04

You are completely wrong. 2.6.9 is a stable Linux kernel. It is if the second number is odd that it is unstable. In fact, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 ships with kernel 2.6.9.

2.5.9 would be unstable.

2.6.9 would be stable.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 1