Oracle Switching Solaris To A Continuous Delivery Model

[aht0]

Passive-aggressive, much?

Not passive-agressive, just aggressive.

Btw, your link earlier. At least Windows TELLS you program you are trying to run is not fully compatible for some reason or the other, although it would optionally let you start the program if you wished so. It might be that only some functions are not working properly and you could do whatever else you wanted with it.

Instead of quietly segfaulting or erroring out with notices about missing libraries and faulty kernel symbols. Which you'd be getting in the console, incompatible Linux GUI program would in most cases simply die off silently after you tried starting it.

[TheBlackCat]

Me?

Yes you:

"redirfs" for example. It was file system filtering driver. AFAIK it's development ceased around 2014 and it's sudden lack in kernels caused problems for Linux's antivirus software. Suddenly your AV stopped working after you upgraded and it was that. Take an program using that module and it won't work. Such examples are probably plentiful. Since Linux kernel has stuff added to it and removed from it all the time.

That was your one and only example of the lack of backwards compatibility in the Linux kernel. You only brought up additional libraries later.

FreeBSD, Solaris, NetBSD, OpenBSD and even Windows do bother with providing compatibility modules for earlier library versions. Linux never needs any. It always works OTB. Sarcasm.

Have you ever actually packaged windows software? If you want to use the MSVC runtime, you include it with your installer. If you want to use Qt, you include it with your installer. If you want the .net framework you include it in the installer. If you want to read PDF documents you include adobe in the installer. Either that or you download whatever you need from the internet. That sort of approach works just as well on Linux as it does on Windows.

Let it be as you claim then. Linux is perfect in all ways..

I didn't say that and you know it. Stop lying. I am done here. I have no interest in fighting against blatant strawman arguments.

[ldo17]

At least Windows TELLS you program you are trying to run is not fully compatible ...

Otherwise you wouldn’t know?

[aht0]

Otherwise you wouldn’t know?

No, because the program itself would start up like usual? Just some functionality would either not be working or be working as not intended. It's still vast improvement over "crash and quit". What's so hard to understand? If there is a newer version around, you'd know to look for it.

Instead of wasting bunch of time and effort getting Linux binary working eventually, and find out it's still semi-functional. Or not getting it to work and finding out at all.

[ldo17]

Just some functionality would either not be working or be working as not intended.

How is that different from how Windows apps normally behave?

[aht0]

How is that different from how Windows apps normally behave?

I'd say Windows market share should give you the answer.

[ldo17]

I'd say Windows market share should give you the answer.

Ah, if you lose the argument on your original point, try changing the subject.

You want to talk about market share? How about the fact that more Android devices ship in one year than the entire installed base of Windows put together?

So maybe you want to think twice about going there...

Or consider the fact that Windows is a niche OS. True, that was a pretty big niche at one time, but now it is shrinking, with no likely reversal in sight. And while Microsoft was complacent about its dominance in what it thought was the only sector of the computing market that mattered, Linux was gradually taking over everywhere else.

And now Windows finds itself trapped, with nowhere to move without being hit by Linux.

[aht0]

Hard to give any other answer for demagogic and bigoted bullshit like

How is that different from how Windows apps normally behave?

You can sense the blind fanaticism from mile off. It does not deserve any other answer than identical off-hand remark. Which, if you bothered to think with your head, instead of your ass, has a grain of truth in it.

People are not using something they dislike. Either by perspective of getting the work done, entertainment value, working stability or compatibility. Linux desktop share is 1%. Make your own conclusions.

Android.. is just communication/light entertainment platform filling it's niche. It's not really usable for much more. It fits with it's role nicely, and that's all. As an argument it's as stupid as "look at all the BSD-base console devices, it's sure sign of the popularity of BSD".

[ldo17]

You can sense the blind fanaticism from mile off.

Hey, it was you who tried to fall back to the market-share argument, not me.

[aht0]

It was not an argument, it was plain simple truth, in the form of an off-hand remark.

'how is that different how Windows apps normally behave'..

Do you even think for a fucking second, before writing down such bs?