Linked by David Adams on Fri 4th Jul 2008 15:47 UTC, submitted by Caffeine Deprived
This article by Shane Schick looks at changes Steve Ballmer should consider making at Microsoft now that Bill Gates is out the door. A couple of the most interesting: making user education a priority and establishing an open source project.
Thread beginning with comment 321468
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: What he should make
by siride on Sat 5th Jul 2008 16:10
in reply to "RE[4]: What he should make"
Member since:2006-01-02
How many people would get confused if someone were to say "Linux" and think that the speaker meant the kernel and not a whole distribution? RMS fanbois maybe, but even then they know that the speaker meant Linux distribution (i.e., its usable state), but they'd rather just be pedantic asstwits.
The fact is, whatever the original intentions of RMS, people say "Linux" to mean "Linux distribution". There's no confusion. That's what "Linux" means to everybody and you and your crybaby pedant friends will have to get over that.
Oh, and there really is no confusion, because if people intend to speak about the kernel, they say "the Linux kernel".
RE[6]: What he should make
by Clinton on Sun 6th Jul 2008 06:30
in reply to "RE[5]: What he should make"
Member since:2005-07-05
How many people would get confused if someone were to say "Linux" and think that the speaker meant the kernel and not a whole distribution? RMS fanbois maybe, but even then they know that the speaker meant Linux distribution (i.e., its usable state), but they'd rather just be pedantic asstwits.
I don't think anybody ever gets confused. Every time I have a conversation about Linux, whether it be used in the distribution sense or the kernel sense, context has been my friend.
I never said people were stupid for saying "Linux" when they meant the distribution. I simply said that technically, Linux is the kernel and not the combination of the kernel, userland, etc., which is true. I'm not the one getting upset about it either. You are.
The fact is, whatever the original intentions of RMS, people say "Linux" to mean "Linux distribution". There's no confusion. That's what "Linux" means to everybody and you and your crybaby pedant friends will have to get over that.
First of all, I'm pretty sure that Linus named Linux, not Richard Stallman. Secondly, I don't see GNU/Linux being mentioned anywhere in this thread, so why are you bringing up Stallman anyway? Thirdly, you are the one throwing a tantrum and calling people names; not anybody else.
Member since:
2005-07-05
By metonymy Linux is the name of the whole OS as well as the kernel.
Of course, you knew that. You also knew that pointing out what you did adds nothing to the discussion and shows you to be one of those RMS morons or Slashdot idiots. I am *so* glad we have people like you around.
Metonymy is a figure of speech and while people may choose to refer to Linux as the whole OS, that doesn't make it so. Linux is the Kernel. Ubuntu, RedHat, Slackware, and so on, are the distributions.
You can believe accuracy is the mark of a pillock if you choose. You'll be wrong, but the choice is yours nonetheless.