Linux developers MUST consolidate and release a "master" distro for the general computer/device mark

Discussion in 'Windows Vista General Discussion' started by ultimauw, Oct 7, 2007.

  1. ultimauw

    Oxford Guest

    yes, and while agree for the most part... linux users forget they are
    mainly isolated to the poorer sections of northwest europe. and never
    have been able to spread beyond that region. nobody in the states uses
    linux, nobody in japan, canada, etc.

    photoshop is technically free, you just need to learn where to look. so
    the idea of gimp replacing it is just mythical thinking.

    i've learned to have no bias regarding platforms, i just search for the
    best and be done with it. i think if linux users will do the same
    they'll switch on over to OSX since there really isn't a better OS at
    this time.

    it's not about "faith" it's about being practical and currently OSX owns
    the unix market.
    Oxford, Oct 8, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  2. In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Oxford
    Does Windows? Windows has Photoshop, InDesign, etc.
    I'd like to know what "modern" means in this context,
    specifically what is in the foundation of a "modern OS".
    For example, one of the selling points of the old Mac
    OS was its Resource Fork; the general idea was to use a
    hierarchical typed container system, which could contain
    code, pictures, audio, and stylized text. Windows also
    has a Resource Fork, though it's not nearly as widely used
    in its software; Windows tends to like to put things in
    its Registry, instead.

    And of course most operating systems have a Graphical User
    Interface; Windows in particular has Win32 and Mac OSX has
    something which I can't properly identify, apart from the
    fact that the X Window System (X11) is part of its makeup.
    (Mac OS had Quickdraw, but I'm not sure what layer that
    was -- API or drivers?)

    For its part Linux has none of a Resource Fork, a Registry,
    nor a GUI [+]. Clearly, this makes Linux ancient in
    design and philosophy -- except that Unix, which is more
    or less Linux's precursor, was object-oriented before the
    concept even *existed*, though later revs took out some of
    the objectuivity (if that's a word) by disallowing open()
    on a directory, for example. However, one can still open()
    a symbolic link (which results, as it turns out, in opening
    the file to which the link points). AFAIK, Mac OS did not
    have this concept (not sure it really needed it, but it
    does come in handy), and fortunately Mac OSX inherited it
    from its Mach/Unix kernel. The Amiga, before it died, had
    a concept very akin to a Unix "hard link", a concept rarely
    used (though still available) in Unix or Linux today. [*]
    Windows has a very befuddled implementation of shortcuts.

    And of course X11 carefully implemented client versus
    server communications, which effectively made abstract
    tokens out of pretty much everything except an XImage,
    which was a client-local datastructure. Windows tried;
    it has things such as a "device-independent bitmap",
    or DIB, but that was somewhat later on, if memory serves.
    Or test it. It is a problem; until we mimic the entire
    functionality list of both Windows and Mac OS/Mac OSX, we
    probably won't be able to get good high-quality software
    on Linux.

    (Spot the flaw.)
    And what, precisely, should Linux (or a Linux distro, more
    properly) focus on?

    [+] the GUI in most distros is implemented using a mixture
    of Linux for the very base support such as framebuffers
    and KGI, the X server, and user-level libraries such
    as Qt and Gtk. Utility programs are also available,
    which gives one KDE and Gnome -- the entire enchilada,
    as it were.

    [*] in a soft link, an entry points to another entry by
    name; that entry can easily be changed. In a hard
    link, an entry points to an *object* (identified by
    inode), and once made, a hardlink is indistinguishable
    from any other reference to that object. In effect,
    one has two or more entries for the same object
    -- a fact reflected in the link count of the
    stat()/lstat()/fstat() call. (Since directories all
    contain '.' and '..', the link count for a directory
    can be any number greater than or equal to 2, and
    depends on the number of directories immediately below.)

    In other words:

    (create file a)
    ln a b
    rm a

    is indistinguishable from

    (create file b)

    as far as other tools are concerned, after this
    sequence of instructions is done. In a symlink
    (ln -s a b above) deleting a would result in a
    broken symlink; it is still possible to do a create
    through that symlink under certain conditions, but
    it points to no object prior to that creation.

    For its part the Amiga implementation was asymmetrical,
    unlike the Unix one, which presumably led to some
    interesting quirks. Part of that asymmetry was because
    the Amiga did not have inodes as such, and therefore
    could not implement the symmetric variant.
    The Ghost In The Machine, Oct 8, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  3. ultimauw

    Oxford Guest

    they'd first have to start bricking anything. so far they haven't
    bricked any of their products in 31 years.

    sounds like you are reading false reports designed by Nokia to trick the
    Oxford, Oct 8, 2007
  4. ultimauw

    Kier Guest

    Where do you get *that* incredibly dumb idea? You must have pulled it out
    of your arse.
    'Technically free' - in other words, you recommend that people steal it.
    We Linux users have no need to be thieves.
    Bullshit. You're incredibly biased against Linux.
    Kier, Oct 8, 2007
  5. ultimauw

    spike1 Guest


    I wonder when oxford will begin to talk about something he has knowledge
    of... Obviously, in this newsgroup, the answer is "Never"
    | | Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
    | | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
    |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
    | in |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
    | Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
    spike1, Oct 8, 2007
  6. ultimauw

    Oxford Guest

    so you are you talking to yourself, or admitting I'm correct with that

    kier, you know I want the best for the linux movement, but I've clearly
    seen that it has stalled, so just trying to help you and other linux
    users see the clear light.
    Ah, OSX is now 7 times larger than Linux's installed base, so that means
    I've learned quite a bit, while you have been sent back to school to
    learn more.

    The biggest event in the history of UNIX is about to happen, where will
    you be when it does?
    Oxford, Oct 8, 2007
  7. ultimauw

    Jesus Guest

    In other words, you don't understand.
    There already are pro-level apps on Linux. If you actually read this
    thread and comprehended it, you'd understand that.

    **** you, Oxtard.
    Jesus, Oct 8, 2007
  8. In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Oxford
    Sure it does. That's why so many Apple OSX servers are
    running amuck serving webpages.

    The Unix *desktop* market, maybe...and that's only if one
    discounts the Linux variants.
    The Ghost In The Machine, Oct 9, 2007
  9. Years ago Corel made a lot of noise when they introduced a shrink
    wrapped version of Linux. I was one of the suckers that bought it. It
    quickly went belly-up.
    Adam Albright, Oct 9, 2007
  10. Per Oxford:
    Few years back when I was doing contract work for a major mutual
    fund at least one of the officer-level people I worked with used
    Linux as their desktop of choice at work.
    (PeteCresswell), Oct 9, 2007
  11. ultimauw

    Oxford Guest

    the fact you spelled "ass" incorrectly according to the wealthier
    nations, proves you are living in a poor area. Linux is certainly 2nd or
    3rd place there, but here in wealthier portions of the world, nobody has
    even heard of Linux! trust me... Linux? what? Is that a star trek
    character? wasn't that a video game in 1998? A new restaurant? let's go
    sometime... etc.

    I'm trying to help you understand the larger world kier, to help you
    understand Linux is unheard of here in the States, Canada, Japan, etc.
    No, I suggest people use PhotoShop no matter how they obtain it. GIMP is
    an embarrassment to the human race and you know it.
    NO. I want Linux to succeed against Microsoft. But why all the false
    starts and promises that remain unfulfilled? What is holding up the
    Linux community from creating something great?

    The FACT:

    No FOCUS..... and I'm simply here to tell it straight, not gloss over
    the false reasons you and other people like Peter keep trying to avoid.

    I'm telling you the TRUTH, so you must learn to deal with my explanation
    or disappear.
    Ah, OSX does own 7 times more than the Linux market as of "today",
    that's a proven fact.

    Kier, have you ever traveled? If not, thus you know why Linux is not
    accepted... it's a baby Unix, it needs software, it needs certification,
    it needs to be consolidated down to 1 or 2 distros, etc.

    Unless you do that, Linux has zero future. We all know that. But do you?

    Oxford, Oct 9, 2007
  12. ultimauw

    Rick Guest

    Who is they Oxford?

    Rick, Oct 9, 2007
  13. ultimauw

    Rick Guest

    IMO you don't know what you are talking about. What makes you think the
    software would HAVE to be recompiled for each distro?
    Rick, Oct 9, 2007
  14. ultimauw

    Rick Guest

    You're a bigot and a liar.
    The City Of Largo, Fl uses Linux in a BIG way. Why do you think they
    chose Linux and not OS X?
    Photoshop is in no way free. Your saying so just shows how much of a
    thief you are.

    Most Linux users HAVE searched for what works for them, and that's why
    they use Linux and OSS.

    No, it doesn't.
    Rick, Oct 9, 2007
  15. ultimauw

    Rick Guest

    yuppp .. according to Oxford, if an app works on Linux, it doesn't mean

    You are SUCH a dishonest bigot.
    Rick, Oct 9, 2007
  16. ultimauw

    Rick Guest

    Sounds like you are a little fanboi in denial.
    Rick, Oct 9, 2007
  17. ultimauw

    Rick Guest

    Dumbass... OS X is much more similar to Linux distros than to Classic
    MacOS. What the hell do you think OS X is based on?

    So... what professional offices use iLife?
    Rick, Oct 9, 2007
  18. More like a networking company.
    George Graves, Oct 9, 2007
  19. Didn't they also release a Linux version of CorelDraw?
    George Graves, Oct 9, 2007
  20. ultimauw

    Nick Simpson Guest

    I'll second that.

    Nick Simpson, Oct 9, 2007
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.