It does not happen every day that news related to computer technology - news we report on every day - makes its way to the headline news programs and newspapers here in my home country, The Netherlands. So when it does, I am usually on the edge of my seat, simply because it offers an interesting glimpse into how 'normal' people perceive our little world. The last few days, however, that casual interest has made way for something else - tooth gnashing irritation.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-11-18
Gee, the anti-Linux crowd has walked in already 
.
When Linux breaks compatibility then it is a good thing. When Vista does it it is a bad thing. That is the world in the eys of OSS fanatics:)
The difference being that virtually all GNU/Linux applications are opensource or free software (what you prefer), and can and will be recompiled. Larger distro's like Debian have a comprehensive package set, and important packages are never dropped between releases. While Sarge's GIMP may not run on Lenny, the point is kinda moot, because Lenny includes The GIMP as well.
Yeah, sure, this doesn't apply to closed-source applications, but for the rest.
Member since:2005-07-06
So? Applications that don't work in Vista right now may and more than probably will be updated too. Don't tell me that not having closed applications available on the Linux platform is a good thing. Since closed and propietary software are not going to cease to exist anytime soon, if Linux-based operating systems become a serious alternative to the Windows desktop, they'll have to face the same or worse problems that MS is suffering now with Vista.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2007-09-06
Linux users including the minority Zealot extremists tend to be of a higher technical understanding so they look at *why* compatability was broken. There is usually a good reason for a Linux distro to break compatibility. Granted, there are also some stupid reasons for broken compatibility or hardware support present in an earlier kernel to be missing from a later kernel; they tend to be the minority of breakages though.
On the other hand, the same geeks also look for technical reasons when Windows breaks compatiblity and the majority of the time, there tends to be little technical reason for it; there may be grand business reasons for the breakage but we're looking at it from the end user's best interest not the company profit margin's best interest. Where Vista breaks compatability because it's finaly implemented security as more than an after thought; bravo, about freaking time security was a remote consideration.
My personal issue is that I distain Microsoft's business culture, decisions and inability to compete base on product quality. I'd like to explore Vista as I have with every other OS I own a license for but I'm not willing to contribute more money to there marketing and FUD (ney, outright BS) departments. For that reason, I'm glad and thankfull to the developer community for alternatives that blow away Windows in many aspects.
Member since:
2005-07-10
When Linux breaks compatibility then it is a good thing. When Vista does it it is a bad thing. That is the world in the eys of OSS fanatics:)
IMO Microsoft should just plainly drop all backward compatibility bullcrap from Windows and make it a lightweight OS not ridden with all old crap. Then provide a solution like coherence using their virtual PC to run XP in the guest OS.
Slowly promote application vendors to write applications for the new OS and say RIP to XP.