Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Can Ubuntu 9.10 Outperform Mac OS X 10.6?

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

  • #41
    Originally posted by Apopas View Post
    If your government contracts agreements with MS to use Vista and 7 in the schools and forces it via a new maiden law despite the counteractions of the local FOSS supporters, then it's haardly a coincidence.
    i suppose it depends on the government. Long time ago my computer engineering teacher was talking about how the provincial government was making a transition to open source software for high school students. He particularly mentioned OOo as the first test. The reasoning behind it was not price or performance but licensing and real-word application. I am unsure of what is going to happen however before I left I noticed we had ~20 ubuntu systems running and the local server was running suse (used to run windows). Open office could be found on ~70 PC's but had old installs of office 2000 beside it.


    Maybe my government is different? then it becomes a political issue.

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
      i suppose it depends on the government. Long time ago my computer engineering teacher was talking about how the provincial government was making a transition to open source software for high school students. He particularly mentioned OOo as the first test. The reasoning behind it was not price or performance but licensing and real-word application. I am unsure of what is going to happen however before I left I noticed we had ~20 ubuntu systems running and the local server was running suse (used to run windows). Open office could be found on ~70 PC's but had old installs of office 2000 beside it.


      Maybe my government is different? then it becomes a political issue.
      Maybe your government's guys are smarter than ours. Here last year they contracted an agreement with MS for using MS products (not just OS) everywere they can and they passed the law during summer when the capital was empty
      Fortunately, (just for that case) the laws in Greece are rarely active

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by deanjo View Post
        Well I would say that saying "Is zealot someone who considers closed systems as a bad idea and promotes open software?" when there are literally millions of people that depend on that model for their income to pay the bills and feed the family would classify as promoting without regards to others and their wellness.
        But like this we should have not promote shoes because million of cobblers lost their jobs totally.
        If a new model is better in many ways (not just financially) than a previous one, then we should just look how to make the transition less painful and give time for adoption from the old fanciers rather than stay stucked to the old one.
        But even with the best thing in the world, is impossible to satisfy everyone. That's just natural and we can't go against it.

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by Apopas View Post
          Maybe your government's guys are smarter than ours. Here last year they contracted an agreement with MS for using MS products (not just OS) everywere they can and they passed the law during summer when the capital was empty
          Fortunately, (just for that case) the laws in Greece are rarely active
          lets pick an island in the pacific, Call it the great kingdom of L33F3R. A libertarian state that encourages the use of everything free. What an interesting project .

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
            lets pick an island in the pacific, Call it the great kingdom of L33F3R. A libertarian state that encourages the use of everything free. What an interesting project .
            As long as nuclear experiments don't take place near..

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by Apopas View Post
              But like this we should have not promote shoes because million of cobblers lost their jobs totally.
              If a new model is better in many ways (not just financially) than a previous one, then we should just look how to make the transition less painful and give time for adoption from the old fanciers rather than stay stucked to the old one.
              But even with the best thing in the world, is impossible to satisfy everyone. That's just natural and we can't go against it.
              Thing is Apopas, we are a economic driven society. It takes money to make money. Could you imagine what kind of state the linux kernel would be in if it wasn't for those companies that generate revenue off their proprietary solutions (this means killing off every kernel contribution that has touched the kernel, removing the code as if it never existed from companies that sponsor or hire the developers nor benefit from any of their r&d). So now everybody shifts to where hardware is where it's at for making profit in IT. What happens then is prices sky rocket on the hardware and costs on that hardware goes up as well. Raising costs resulting killing off the small guy's that might have had a chance had costs been lower and then we tread into monopoly country again. It's all a game of give and take both ways. The only keeping prices in check is competitive alternative solutions. If everything was proprietary that would be bad but the same can be said if everything was open source. They both feed off of one another. Love it or hate it, it is the world we live in.

              Comment


              • #47
                Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
                thats a better call I would be willing to say that the promotion of FOSS is important outside this site
                I not completely agree. I think that this site it's *REALLY* important for the FOSS promotion.

                Phoronix created a great prestige, particularly technical, in the ICT world, this is *very* important. And it has always been a voice in favor and to push freesoftware and real open systems, not pure Locked-in and proprietary system like Apple stuff.

                For this I am so sad to see some kind of reviews (not this benchmark, but previous on Osx).

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by qwerty View Post
                  I not completely agree. I think that this site it's *REALLY* important for the FOSS promotion.
                  I think we are saying the same thing here. . Im just saying the principals used by FOSS can be applied elsewhere.

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Originally posted by Apopas View Post
                    Maybe your government's guys are smarter than ours. Here last year they contracted an agreement with MS for using MS products (not just OS) everywere they can and they passed the law during summer when the capital was empty
                    Fortunately, (just for that case) the laws in Greece are rarely active
                    At least the use of Linux is quite widespread in technical universities, with Linux-only labs and courses that even touch kernel development. That said, the Microsoft deal was really, really moronic. Guess that's to be expected of the current government...

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                      Thing is Apopas, we are a economic driven society. It takes money to make money. Could you imagine what kind of state the linux kernel would be in if it wasn't for those companies that generate revenue off their proprietary solutions (this means killing off every kernel contribution that has touched the kernel, removing the code as if it never existed from companies that sponsor or hire the developers nor benefit from any of their r&d). So now everybody shifts to where hardware is where it's at for making profit in IT. What happens then is prices sky rocket on the hardware and costs on that hardware goes up as well. Raising costs resulting killing off the small guy's that might have had a chance had costs been lower and then we tread into monopoly country again. It's all a game of give and take both ways. The only keeping prices in check is competitive alternative solutions. If everything was proprietary that would be bad but the same can be said if everything was open source. They both feed off of one another.
                      Actually, every society that has ever existed was economic driven. Since Homo Sapiens who traded meat for tools and thus the best hunter had the best equipment and vice versa till 3000 AD when we will trade with the ETs from the X76 planet of the neighbour galaxy. No wonder why ancient Greeks had made a god for merchantry.
                      During history the ways of making wealth and the economical models have changed dramatically along technology's evolution. What was/is the best way, nobody is able to say for sure but one thing that has been proved as a terrible mistake despite the era that happened is the accumulation of riches in the hands of few. Despite the technology and education our period offers, we weren't able to stop that and the thing I find as the funniest of all is that the wealthiest man overall belongs to the room of software. Well, everybody knows who this dude is...
                      So, what do we have with our current model? Very few companies that were smarter or even luckier at the begining of all these are able today to control almost the whole market. They sue and close smaller companies, hire or fire indivinduals in the way they want, have a tremendous power of advertising that transforms tomatoes to potatoes, fight to establish software patent laws in every country and in general control a big part of the global economy.
                      On the other hand we have the free software movement and the model they promote. I remember few years ago an interview with one of RedHat's key guys. Along with other words he had said
                      "who says GPL is bad for enterprises? Look us, in a matter of time we doubled our stock and now we are in a position we could not imagine. Without GPL we would have been struggled at the very begining from some colossal company and disappeared from the earth".
                      Indeed RedHat today has almost 3000 employees. Well, they are not Microsoft, but why should be? I look from myself as well. I have a small company with 2 other guys that build websites, graphics, advertisements etc. We do well but we didn't have to pay for software since the very begining and thus, we gave extra money for better hardware. Believe me it helped.
                      The power of free software is that it helps smaller companies to be established and can be very profitable, though I doubt they will ever make a tremendous income. But that's the positive of the case. For example look again at MS and RedHat. MS produces operating systems, office applications, search engine, video games, game consoles etc etc. RedHat will never be able to produce so many and that means more smaller companies around, each one with speciality in one or two things and this also means more bosses with less money each one, more employees in the jobs and greater need for cooperation. Some will argue that the companies won't have enough money for research and thus the evolution will be slower, but if everything is both opensource and there are more employees around, the manpower which will have access to the products will achieve tremendous numbers. This can only lead to even faster evolution than now (the absence of software patents will help to this as well) and the most important, in a clearer way than now.
                      The benefit will touch and other facts as well. I will say a small example I know well. In my country there was an agreement with MS to install MS products in the school. That means the goverment will give more money for education than they used to do. While this sounds terrific, the cash that will go for needs like books, better schools etc will be even less than before if we remove the part the software needs. Someone will say "and the software does not count?" Ofcourse it does, but we could have it for free and pay for the support that is really needed in cases like that, while the idea of opensource is better for educational use. So while we really offer more money for education the benefit is less than the previous years.
                      Anyway, to finish I'll say that the amount of money is about standard, the matter is to move it around and nothing more. The current model doesn't help at all to that.

                      Love it or hate it, it is the world we live in.
                      Well, I believe is realistic every national school in the universe to use OSS
                      Last edited by Apopas; 01 September 2009, 10:20 PM.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X