Linked by Amjith Ramanujam on Sun 3rd Aug 2008 15:56 UTC, submitted by netpython
Apple "Apple Inc. has pulled its security engineering team out of a planned public discussion on the company's security practices, which had been set for next week's Black Hat security conference in Las Vegas."
Thread beginning with comment 325437
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: As we say in venezuela:
by MobyTurbo on Sun 3rd Aug 2008 18:06 UTC in reply to "As we say in venezuela:"
MobyTurbo
Member since:
2005-07-08

It's just another stripe on the tiger's fur. And then my apple-loving friends come tell me how Macs are just great and GNU/Linux sucks big time. :-D

Venezeuela has a perfect analogy this time. :-) Macs *are* great, but Linux will eat Apple's lunch if they don't watch it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: As we say in venezuela:
by tyrione on Sun 3rd Aug 2008 20:58 in reply to "RE: As we say in venezuela:"
tyrione Member since:
2005-11-21

"It's just another stripe on the tiger's fur. And then my apple-loving friends come tell me how Macs are just great and GNU/Linux sucks big time. :-D

Venezeuela has a perfect analogy this time. :-) Macs *are* great, but Linux will eat Apple's lunch if they don't watch it.
"

Keep dreaming. If you think Linux has an easier time of converting people to Linux over OS X you truly are dreaming.

Focus on making Linux as consistent and user friendly as OS X and you'll accelerate more Windows people to Linux just as they are moving to OS X. They won't switch from OS X to Linux as they already have the GUI paradigm and they also have familiar applications under that paradigm.

Linux will never be the big player for Desktop as long as Desktops require a GUI and a consistent user experience.

Linux has made huge inroads in the server space against traditional big iron companies because these companies have dumped billions into helping it mature.

If Linux Community lost the funding/support from IBM, Novell, Google and Sun you'd see advancement of the OS go from a tidal wave to a stream.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Ford Prefect Member since:
2006-01-16

"Linux will never be the big player for Desktop as long as Desktops require a GUI and a consistent user experience."

Never say never ;-)

Seriously: What you describe presents the current state of the art. But this industry is a very rapidly evolving one. Sometimes it helps to look at the past to see the possible future. If you compare current Linux installs with them five years ago, you will see a huge amount of progress being made in regards of desktop usability. And there are no signs of this progress to be declining, quite the opposite is happening these years.


And btw, I find my Linux-based graphical environment to be far more consistent compared to the Windows machine I have to work with lately. I see lots of potential -- for the future.


You don't know what happens in another five years. If Desktops (including OS X) will still work the same as today, that would be a sad story. Wouldn't it?


Edit: I have to add something. Your perception of the past is not right, it's quite the opposite. It's the big iron companies who jumped on the train after they watched GNU/Linux eating their market. Exactly the same can happen with the Desktop or not. Microsoft is very good at missing out opportunities to keep their position strong lately. Time will tell.

Edited 2008-08-03 21:42 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

meh, converting mac users would be pointless. hell, converting any users will be pointless.

if they are interested, they come. if not, its their choice.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[3]: As we say in venezuela:
by gan17 on Sun 3rd Aug 2008 22:38 in reply to "RE[2]: As we say in venezuela:"
gan17 Member since:
2008-06-03

"Keep dreaming. If you think Linux has an easier time of converting people to Linux over OS X you truly are dreaming."


Well, you don't have to sell a kidney for a Linux experience....

Edited 2008-08-03 22:41 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

MobyTurbo Member since:
2005-07-08

Someone needs to fix the quoting mechanism here. I'll try to quote with italics.


Keep dreaming. If you think Linux has an easier time of converting people to Linux over OS X you truly are dreaming.

Focus on making Linux as consistent and user friendly as OS X and you'll accelerate more Windows people to Linux just as they are moving to OS X. They won't switch from OS X to Linux as they already have the GUI paradigm and they also have familiar applications under that paradigm.

Linux will never be the big player for Desktop as long as Desktops require a GUI and a consistent user experience.

Linux has made huge inroads in the server space against traditional big iron companies because these companies have dumped billions into helping it mature.

If Linux Community lost the funding/support from IBM, Novell, Google and Sun you'd see advancement of the OS go from a tidal wave to a stream.


Oh, I know they won't convert many OS X users, but I suspect they'll get to the point where the GUI in Linux is Good Enough, on the level of say Windows with some of the eye-candy of OS X. It's never going to be as elegant as OS X probably, simply because open source development resists that level of consistency and the Linux desktop is too fractured with multiple desktop environments and toolkits, much less applications that adhere to interface guidelines. Many users, however, are used to some inconsistency already.

If Linux can get to the point where it doesn't need much command line intervention, and gets included in more OEM systems, then it will make progress. There is already a large market of people who would get a computer running Linux in a user-friendly fashion at a low price, netbooks are filling some of that market - ASUS's EEPC is a large percentage of new notebook sales now. Remember what the largest selling computer in history is? Not anything from Apple or the PC. The Commodore 64. When computers are available at blue-color prices again, there will be a shift.

As for corporate funding, it helps, but a lot of the progress has been made by Ubuntu and others on the desktop, though with some help from Novell, IBM, Google, and a "consortium" of other companies that have a grudge against Microsoft. ;-)

Incidentally, I don't say this as an Apple-hater. I use a Mac, but am very disappointed at what they're doing with security and secrecy. I still recommend Macintosh to people, but if this keeps up Apple is asking for trouble. What happens to their image of being less virus-ridden than Windows when the first malware outbreak comes? Security-through-obscurity isn't enough. I believe OS X is the best for my needs, else I wouldn't be running it, but they really need to work on this - especially if they intend to crack the enterprise market they need to be more professional about security.

Edited 2008-08-03 22:45 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Not likely. Linux lacks several things that OS X has:
* A consistent ABI
* consistent driver model
* a consistent user interface
What does linux have? On the ABI front, every distro has a different version of glibc, gcc, and the other base tools (half the time with additional "distro-supplied" patches applied that cause unforseen bugs). On the UI level, we have a lot of different DEs/WMs to choose from, none of which really look or feel like any others. Even if we choose a DE and not a WM, the apps in that DE are hardly consistent--worse, IMHO, than even some of the inconsistent windows apps. Finally, we have the Linux driver model which, for in-kernel drivers or other open source drivers, is fine. But it falls short when dealing with the possibilities of vendor-supplied drivers. One of the major issues is, of course, that the drivers have to be linked to a certain kernel version. Now, before you Linux zealots go after me, yes I know there are ways to work around that (usually making the kernel-specific stuff open source and putting the rest in a binary blob)--nVidia, OSS, and Smartlink are evidence of this fact, but it doesn't change the underlying issue that every time you receive a kernel update, any vendor-supplied drivers need to be reinstalled. To the end user, this is worse than annoying. Yes, I know that if someone's voluntarily updating their kernel they are aware of what will need to be done in regards to their drivers. But, for the average users, their distro gives them a kernel update that they don't pay attention to. They click on software update, the distro updates itself, then tells them they need to reboot. So they do... only to find that some of their hardware isn't working anymore.
All of these things mean that Linux is not a consistent target for vendors to supply drivers and applications for. Each distro is slightly different, has a different kernel, a different DE or version of said DE, etc. So, which one do they target?
This is contrasted to OS X and Windows, where you know exactly what is part of the base OS and what is not, and the ABIs and APIs are done in a way that updating the OS, and even the kernel, doesn't break drivers and apps. OS X has a better handle on this than Windows does at the moment, especially with Windows Vista.
I'm not an OS zealot, I happen to prefer OS X, as it gives me the power of BSD with a consistent and functional GUI. My point is simply to illustrate that Linux has some major hurdles to overcome before it can ever "eat Apple's lunch." Unfortunately, it seems that providing a consistent target is the last thing on the mind of the OSS devs which is understandable, given their development process.

Reply Parent Score: 2