Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

It's Official: Valve Releasing Steam, Source Engine For Linux!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • freedom to use as you see it fit?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by energyman View Post
      freedom to use as you see it fit?
      Good, that's freedom 0: "the freedom to run the program, for any purpose". Now, please explain how GPL version 3 prohibits you to run a program, for whatever purpose.

      Comment


      • I do find that article laughable. It transpires fanboism from each and everyone of its lines. Pretty cocky of her calling it a "debunking" piece too. So initially we are are basically thrown some figures supposedly coming from a market research company. Following the links, though, we end up in another article from yet another technology website, where the words of an "analyst" working in said company are quoted. The original report and methodology is not present. Same story with the Dell figures. Yet another article in yet another tech site (can't these people offer something original?) where a Dell spokesperson is quoted as saying something. Again, we are asked to trust what we are told and left without the possibility to check the original sources, for there are none. The next piece of "evidence" already goes beyond fuzzy arguments to engage in outright missinterpretations: sorry? are you telling me that because what a bunch of people shouted about Dell proved to be wrong, this says anything about the demand for Linux systems? For maximum hilarity, I'll quote next the last paragraph from the article the original author provided to make this point, a paragraph which apparently she failed to read:

        No, I think what we have here is yet another example of a mountain being made out of a molehill. If you want to be upset about something, get ticked off that other big-time computer vendors like HP and Lenovo make it almost impossible to buy any of their systems with Linux pre-installed on them. Dell doesn't do a great job of supporting Linux for consumers, but they do a lot better than any of the other major PC manufacturers.
        So not only the author of the source linked to does interpret what can only be read as an anecdote under a completely different light than what we were told, but it also makes assertions highlighting the reality of the situation meant to be debunked. I note that the guy writing this also cited the very same article from a blog where the Dell representative is said to claim that 1/3 of
        one of their netbook models (Inspiron Mini 9) is Ubuntu. Leaving aside for a moment that these are no primary sources, that we lack a context and that the reliability and trustworthiness of these sites is, at best, shaky: doesn't this pretty much sound like the snow ball effect we are familiar with from the very topic of this thread? Somebody says somebody said something, people jump to conclusions, other sites pick it up, and before you know it there's a guy in Singapore claiming he bought Crysis for Linux in the corner shop.

        At this point I want to note that indiscriminate use of links is a well-known trolling practice. I'm not saying the author is a troll, god forbid, only that in an article where she apparently set out to debunk something, it's in her best interests to appear as a respectable and authoritative figure as possible. And links help to accomplish this. To the cynical, though, it has the opposite effect. So I can't help but think she surely must be desperate and in total lack of arguments when she links to the Ubuntu website. Really, why do I need to be taken there? Or two paragraphs later, where she offers two links which present exactly the same information. Because she apparently uses the second link to quote something Ballmer said. But that same piece of information was already in the first link, right below the SAME CHART both web sites display.


        Anyway, back to what is argued in the article, another link to another secondary source with no hints as to how to get to the original information and methodology says that netbook sales in 2009 represented 18% of the total US consumer PC sales. Okay. Now, since we apparently have established that ONE THIRD, no less, of the total netbooks sold [where?] are shipped with a Linux operative system, based on reliable second hand information about the approximate sales figures of a particular Dell model, you just have to do the math idiots. 18/3=6%. Irrefutable. I'll ignore all the arguments that can be made about this critical step but one: the supposed words of the Dell guy the 1/3 figure was taken from:

        Originally posted by Dell dude
        A third of our Mini 9 mix is Linux, which is well above the standard attach rate for other systems that offer Linux.
        So...is the Mini 9 basically an outlier? How much is "well above"? What are we talking about here? It would be interesting to know what other systems that offer Linux he was referring to, but we can't possibly know because we are not given enough information, and by now one would be crazy to trust in the interpretations advanced by these "journalists".

        Then we get the Ballmer pie chart (in duplicate), about which we know nothing, and we learn that Microsoft regards both Apple and Linux as competitors. "Does anyone believe that Microsoft would see Linux as a serious competitor is Linux had captured just 1% of the market?" Well, I don't know, maybe the question is a bit more complex than what she is trying to present? Maybe it's not the current market share what worries Microsoft but the future adoption? Maybe for a company that not only sells desktop oriented products but also operates on the server market it makes a lot of sense to consider Linux as a competitor? Maybe you just tried to distract me from the fact that you have no actual, reliable data by hand waving? Maybe?

        Finally, we are explained where the 1% figure comes from: very old data and web statistics. Ignoring entirely the first of the two (I suspect it's just made up), she goes on with a ridiculous explanation about why web statistics are unreliable. And again, her linked source proves exactly the opposite she is trying to argue. Basically this is an article about browsers market share, where the original ars technica source is Netmarketshare, one of those companies that offer this kind of service. Towards the end of the ars technica article, they present how things look like out of their own browser statistics, with this words precisely: "As always, things at Ars are very different." The very fact that ars technica uses a recognised source which gathers data from a multitude of web sites to write their main article, and present their own data as mere anecdotical information, defeats the idiotic conclusions about web usage statistics raised by Ms Martyn.

        As a gift, we get a magnificient Ass Pull from the author when she claims that "So what is Linux real market share on the desktop? The best estimate for present sales is around 8%, which puts Linux just a little behind or perhaps just about even with MacOS.[...]If we talk about actual usage there really is no way to get an accurate measure. Educated guesswork probably puts Linux at close to 10%, just about even with MacOS."

        Undoped, distilled crap this is.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by yotambien View Post
          Undoped, distilled crap this is.
          At least you're right about something.

          Comment


          • Mmm? I'm afraid you'll have to make a greater effort if you want me, or anybody else, to parse your (terribly interesting I'm sure) thoughts in any meaningful way.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by energyman View Post
              and she did not mention apache, mysql or php.

              You should sit down and read. Even a person with the attention span of fly and the reading capabilities of a third grader should be able to read and understand it. So you have a fair chance.
              Ahh, the last resort, hurl insults.

              Read the article again genius, she starts off with servers, which if your mind wasn't so keen on supporting your own opinion by belittling others, you'd draw the connection between apache, mysql and php and the Linux "server."

              Comment


              • Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
                Ahh, the last resort, hurl insults.
                You realy asked for it, because;
                Read the article again genius
                She was beginning with the overal Linux penetration before heading over to the desktop part, so read the entire article, genius.

                , she starts off with servers, which if your mind wasn't so keen on supporting your own opinion by belittling others, you'd draw the connection between apache, mysql and php and the Linux "server."
                She goes on to say that the with the Dell netbook sale in 2009, the Linux percentage was one third. Given that the netbook sale was 18% of all the Dell sales, Caitlyn calculated that the entire Linux sales percentage of all Dell sales in 2009 (last year) was 6%.

                So, in total for 2009, for each 17 computers that Dell sold with Windows, they sold one with Linux.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
                  She goes on to say that the with the Dell netbook sale in 2009, the Linux percentage was one third. Given that the netbook sale was 18% of all the Dell sales, Caitlyn calculated that the entire Linux sales percentage of all Dell sales in 2009 (last year) was 6%.

                  So, in total for 2009, for each 17 computers that Dell sold with Windows, they sold one with Linux.
                  It takes one sentence to produce a lie, but it takes a whole paragraph to debunk it. Fortunately, I have already done it in a previous post, so you only have to use your mouse to get there.

                  But briefly, what you say she did is not what she said she did. And what she said she did is not what she actually did. I attribute your interpretation to a question of missunderstanding. I attribute hers to a combination of dishonesty, ignorance and lack of professional standards.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
                    You realy asked for it, because;

                    She was beginning with the overal Linux penetration before heading over to the desktop part, so read the entire article, genius.


                    She goes on to say that the with the Dell netbook sale in 2009, the Linux percentage was one third. Given that the netbook sale was 18% of all the Dell sales, Caitlyn calculated that the entire Linux sales percentage of all Dell sales in 2009 (last year) was 6%.

                    So, in total for 2009, for each 17 computers that Dell sold with Windows, they sold one with Linux.
                    Actually that is not true. The 32% figure she quotes was an estimate from ABI Research of what they thought would be the percentage of Linux netbook sales from 2009. It was not an actual sales figure.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Gokumon View Post
                      Actually that is not true. The 32% figure she quotes was an estimate from ABI Research of what they thought would be the percentage of Linux netbook sales from 2009. It was not an actual sales figure.
                      That may be an accurate statement. However, the roughly 1/3 of all netbooks figure for Dell didn't just come from that- it also came from the Senior Product Manager at Dell FOR that product line. It also jives with my insider info at that OEM.

                      It's not some WAG.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X