Linked by Eugenia Loli on Fri 13th Jan 2006 17:30 UTC
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y Linux News raises questions about Microsoft's alleged $6 billion per year investment in R&D. Is it money well spent, or are they just throwing it away?
Thread beginning with comment 85400
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
rakamaka
Member since:
2005-08-12

Microsoft has earned their money(legal, illegal, monopoly, whatever you say) and they can do whatever they want with their R&D. Their products maynot be the best but at least are working.
Same breath, I will say Is time hours(man hrs/ staff hrs) spent by thousands of Linux developers around the world, are those worth for anything?? Nothing! because after 10 years and countless developers working on linux R&D.....we cannot
install OS correctly...
install simplest or everday software on linux without pulling hair...
linux is still trying to copy win2K GUI in 2006 through KDE/GNOME
..many other things.....
So MS is wasting billions of dollars and Linux developers are wasting billions of precious manhours...
Both are in same boat.....

Reply Score: -3

leech Member since:
2006-01-10

Something tells me you haven't used a Linux distribution in quite some time. It's much easier to install the system, they come with more than Microsoft's offerings, and they look much better.

That transparent window border in Vista is a crime against nature.

My GNOME looks much better than Win2k. Besides the fact that XP is nasty looking, it also can look like Win2k, which looks better than the default WinXP. Just because you were raised on Fisher Price toys, doesn't mean that is what your computer is.

Leech

Reply Parent Score: 5

archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

Something tells me you haven't used a Linux distribution in quite some time.

Look at his comment rating...I think it's just deliberate trolling. I mean, how can we take someone who says that "we cannot install OS correctly" or "we cannot install simplest or everday software on linux without pulling hair", when everyone knows that this is simply not true.

My advice: ignore him and his posts.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Aussie_Bear Member since:
2006-01-12

...Same breath, I will say Is time hours(man hrs/ staff hrs) spent by thousands of Linux developers around the world, are those worth for anything?? Nothing! because after 10 years and countless developers working on linux R&D.....we cannot
install OS correctly...
install simplest or everday software on linux without pulling hair...
linux is still trying to copy win2K GUI in 2006 through KDE/GNOME
..many other things.....
So MS is wasting billions of dollars and Linux developers are wasting billions of precious manhours...
Both are in same boat.....


I have to say, of all the comments I've read this week, yours really ranks in the same area as Winnie the Pooh's (Linux is Poo).

(1) Like Winnie, you've demonstrated that you haven't seen recent work aimed for the desktop.


(2) Ever tried the following?

PCLinuxOS
Fox Desktop Linux
Symphony OS
STX Linux

Of the four I've stated, Symphony OS is the least like Windows. In fact, there's nothing Win2k GUI about it.

Its based on your beloved Debian (Knoppix, really. But Knoppix is still based on Debian)...And uses a completely different interface that uses the 4 corners of your screen. A single click on one corner shows all the menu options for the user. Its nice, clean and different. If you wish, deb packages are available if you want to try this new GUI out.

Fox Desktop Linux uses KDE, but is a modified solution to look more like OS X's GUI. Its based on Fedora Core 4. The "Control Center" is modified just that its easy to adjust/configure, update, and add/remove apps to your system. Nice big icons for the not so technically inclined.

STX Linux is the one that really wants to look like Windows. It looks more like Win9x, but that's the Equinox Desktop Environment (EDE) is. What's unusual about this distro is the how light it is on system resources. Its less than 45MB once booted into the desktop. On a modern day system, it flies. This is based on Slackware 10.2

Its suitable for people who still own really old Pentium 1 era systems. The odd-est thing I find about it, is that Firefox flies with this distro, but runs slow on other distros using KDE or GNOME or on Windows. Its slightly faster than Xfce...The only issue is that EDE isn't mature enough yet. But it shows promise as a lightweight solution for "windows defectors" looking for speed and responsiveness again.

PCLinuxOS is based on Mandriva, and it seems to be the most polished of the four I'm talking about. It has a custom "Control Center" for the not so technically inclined folks out there, and retains the traditional KDE interface. Essentially, this is Mandriva that underwent some serious lypo suction and some tweaking.


(3) Have you even tried recent versions of Xandros "Open Community Edition"? What about OpenSUSE?

Both these are aimed for the "coming from Windows" user. And you do not need to "pull your hair out" to install them. Depending on the stuff you install, they can allow you to setup a system in less than 45min.

I've tried OpenSUSE on desktops and notebooks. I have yet to lose any hair. The best thing about OpenSUSE, is the nice documentation you can download. It guides you through the basics as well as teaching you how to use AppArmor (basically, an easier alternative to SELinux).

Xandros OCE is even easier. It's a Debian based solution that has a nice installer with a easy to use add/remove app solution. You can easily add third-party repositories, if you don't wish to be restricted by Xandros Networks's limited app choices. Its well suited if you want to replace Windows client PCs, but still want to hold on to Windows-based infrastructure.

There are a number of other distros that are similar, but I've only mentioned the ones I've tried for a week. I use them as if I was a typical desktop user.


(4) What you don't get, above all, is that part of the Linux community began to take notice of the desktop folks in the last few years.

The desktop area of the computing industry is very new to them. And as a result, they're still working the kinks out, looking into ways to make things easier, and trying not to completely kill the "Linux ugly bits" to the ordinary user.

At this time, we're in what I call the "Win9x phase". Its rough, but the basic idea is there. They just need time to refine and mature their distros.

When it reaches "Win2k/XP phase", then we'll see a different story. (It'll be obvious when we hit this mark, because MS will start bringing in more PR smearing against Linux via website like eWeek.)...I'd say let them do what they want and spend heaps of money on PR.



If you make a legit point that is backed up by today's status of how Linux is doing on the desktop, then I may take you seriously. But what you've demonstrated, is that you haven't got a clue where Linux is at on the desktop. Nor does that blog you've posted.


And yes, I do teach the average folks Linux, if they chose to take this path. (We first assess if their requirements don't need Windows. Surprisingly, most don't). I teach them the basics and how to do "those complex things".

I have a good idea of what the "newbie" is looking for, and I've taken the time to try various "easy to use" distros that I've mentioned, and noted down what can be improved. I usually email the developers about it. (And nearly all the responses are serious about making things better for the newbie).

I just don't teach them how to fish, I give them the pole, I tell them how to fix it themselves, and how customise things to meet their needs. From then on, its up to them if they wish to adopt distros like Debian/Slackware/Gentoo/etc.

Overall, I am doing my part for open-source. I just hope one day, I get the time to learn a programming language that allows me to make a more direct impact on progress.


I think its still too early to judge Linux on the desktop, and its important to give those devs time to progress. It may not happen tomorrow. But sometime in the future, a point will be reached. You'll know when the MS sponsored articles/studies/etc start coming by the truckload!




As for MS spending $6 Billion on R&D. Its their money, they can do as they wish to it...But they better get something out of it.

Otherwise, its no different from dropping smart bombs on a target, only to find that they've missed the mark because the guidance package has failed.

ie : You just blew a whole wad of taxpayer's money for no reason, other than to create big holes in the ground!

Reply Parent Score: 4