| krygny |
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
http://government.zdnet.com/?p=2930
sure will save them a lot of money from licensing. :cool:
Maybe not, since they were probably pirating most of the commercial software they were using anyway. I use a lot of open source software because I prefer it but even if I didn't, I wouldn't consider the government of Cuba a raving endorsement; not exactly a paragon of technological advancement. |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
Maybe not, since they were probably pirating most of the commercial software they were using anyway. I use a lot of open source software because I prefer it but even if I didn't, I wouldn't consider the government of Cuba a raving endorsement; not exactly a paragon of technological advancement.
The whole things is a really big "Who cares"! |
|
|
| krygny |
quote:
Originally posted by N_Jay
The whole things is a really big "Who cares"!
Ah yes, the universal rhetorical question that can be directed at absolutely any subject. Obviously YOU don't care and we get the point. |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
Ah yes, the universal rhetorical question that can be directed at absolutely any subject. Obviously YOU don't care and we get the point.
OK, well, if it is not a universal "Who Cares", then someone find something that shows it has ANY relevancy to anyone (With the possible exception of those in Cuba)? |
|
|
| 5Gs |
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
Maybe not, since they were probably pirating most of the commercial software they were using anyway. I use a lot of open source software because I prefer it but even if I didn't, I wouldn't consider the government of Cuba a raving endorsement; not exactly a paragon of technological advancement.
wow I never thought of it that way, that they were pirating whatever software they were using. good point. |
|
|
| 5Gs |
quote:
Originally posted by N_Jay
OK, well, if it is not a universal "Who Cares", then someone find something that shows it has ANY relevancy to anyone (With the possible exception of those in Cuba)?
I can easily say the same about some threads you've started. |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
I can easily say the same about some threads you've started.
Maybe so.
That is why I asked about a "third" point of reference.:rolleyes: |
|
|
| 5Gs |
quote:
Originally posted by N_Jay
Maybe so.
That is why I asked about a "third" point of reference.:rolleyes:
if I remember correctly, you're no fan of open source, so that probably explains your attitude of who cares. according to the article, there's a department of students dedicated to open source programs. it's a relatively tiny number of developers, but that's still more developers who can possibly improve on current code. my guess is they're not that advanced, but it would be interesting to see what they can do in a few years. well, maybe not to you... |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
if I remember correctly, you're no fan of open source, so that probably explains your attitude of who cares. according to the article, there's a department of students dedicated to open source programs. it's a relatively tiny number of developers, but that's still more developers who can possibly improve on current code. my guess is they're not that advanced, but it would be interesting to see what they can do in a few years. well, maybe not to you...
Nope, not a fan of Open-Source.
I personally think it is a flawed concept (much like socialism) that sounds good on the surface and has many underlying issues that the proponents care to ignore.
I have been watching the 'Open-Source is going to win" battle for over 10 years now, and I don't see any significant change in the outcome.
All that aside, I would better (without looking at any data, but feel free to correct me if you know better) that almost any US state with a major university has more people working on open source software than the total of Cuba.
Since the total work of the entire open source world has not been able to reach the "tipping point" (so to speak), I don't think bringing the software development "power" of Cuba to the task is going to make any impact.
So unless someone has some new information, I will keep this news in the "who cares" category.
Of curse those who follow Open-Source with a religious like fervor will see this just as some see the image of Mary in a shadow, as a divine sign.
(Maybe its not obvious, but I ave given this a lot of thought rather than just approaching it with the mindset of a pro or anti open-source drone.)
If you really think it is that big A deal, I will bring it up with a friend I am visiting this week. He is the founder/president of a small software company. He may have a different view than I or you have. |
|
|
| 5Gs |
quote:
Originally posted by N_Jay
Nope, not a fan of Open-Source.
I personally think it is a flawed concept (much like socialism) that sounds good on the surface and has many underlying issues that the proponents care to ignore.
I have been watching the 'Open-Source is going to win" battle for over 10 years now, and I don't see any significant change in the outcome.
I'm not sure what you mean by "win" but I know open source software is used by lots of companies.
quote:
All that aside, I would better (without looking at any data, but feel free to correct me if you know better) that almost any US state with a major university has more people working on open source software than the total of Cuba.
I'm sure that's the case. but didn't I already say that? cuba is/will be a relatively tiny developer population.
quote:
Since the total work of the entire open source world has not been able to reach the "tipping point" (so to speak), I don't think bringing the software development "power" of Cuba to the task is going to make any impact.
nobody said they were going to be a big impact. I'll even say that it'll take them time to catch up anyway.
quote:
So unless someone has some new information, I will keep this news in the "who cares" category.
ok, we'll leave it in the n_jay personal "who cares" category.
quote:
Of curse those who follow Open-Source with a religious like fervor will see this just as some see the image of Mary in a shadow, as a divine sign.
I doubt there are any who see it as that, but maybe you might know someone.
quote:
(Maybe its not obvious, but I ave given this a lot of thought rather than just approaching it with the mindset of a pro or anti open-source drone.)
I'm open to whatever works best/efficient, which includes open source software. for example, to share files between linux and windows, I use samba. did you just have a terrible experience with open source software, that you have such an anti-open source attitude?
quote:
If you really think it is that big A deal, I will bring it up with a friend I am visiting this week. He is the founder/president of a small software company. He may have a different view than I or you have.
nope, I never thought of it as a big deal. just something I came across, and I thought of sharing it here.
btw, in case you're not up to date on technology news, big companies are embracing open source software. I'm sure you've heard of companies like microsoft, ibm, sun, and google. |
|
|
| krygny |
quote:
Originally posted by N_Jay
Nope, not a fan of Open-Source.
I personally think it is a flawed concept (much like socialism) that sounds good on the surface and has many underlying issues that the proponents care to ignore.
I have been watching the 'Open-Source is going to win" battle for over 10 years now, and I don't see any significant change in the outcome.
All that aside, I would better (without looking at any data, but feel free to correct me if you know better) that almost any US state with a major university has more people working on open source software than the total of Cuba.
Since the total work of the entire open source world has not been able to reach the "tipping point" (so to speak), I don't think bringing the software development "power" of Cuba to the task is going to make any impact.
So unless someone has some new information, I will keep this news in the "who cares" category.
Of curse those who follow Open-Source with a religious like fervor will see this just as some see the image of Mary in a shadow, as a divine sign.
(Maybe its not obvious, but I ave given this a lot of thought rather than just approaching it with the mindset of a pro or anti open-source drone.)
If you really think it is that big A deal, I will bring it up with a friend I am visiting this week. He is the founder/president of a small software company. He may have a different view than I or you have.
You still posting to this thread? Oh, so you DO care. :19: |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
You still posting to this thread? Oh, so you DO care. :19:
Yep:4: :4: :4: |
|
|
| krygny |
quote:
Originally posted by N_Jay
...
To put that in perspective that is about 3 or 4 days of shipments from Dell.
It's not a competition against Dell; or any other computer maker. It's not a competition against Microsoft or any other software developer.
I'm completely perplexed by your apparent objection to open source software. You don't have to use it. Why DO you seem to care if developers create it and other people use it? If, as you imply, the impact is insignificant, then what deleterious effect does it have on your computing experience?
Please explain. Then, you can disconnect from the WWW forever, because the whole thing was built on FLOSS. |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
It's not a competition against Dell; or any other computer maker. It's not a competition against Microsoft or any other software developer.
I did not say it was competitive with Dell.
I used Dell's computer shipments to put what might appear as a large number in perspective with the size of the market.
If it is not in "competition" with other software, then why do OSS proponents put so much energy in touting these (supposed) "wins"?
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
I'm completely perplexed by your apparent objection to open source software.
I am completely perplexed to some people support for OSS.
(I was not the one who started the thread with admittedly unimportant information.)
Note: I have not objection to OSS, just an objection to the touted advantages of OSS.
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
Why DO you seem to care if developers create it and other people use it?
I don't and I have not said I do.
Heck, I even use some when it is the best solution to the problem at hand. (I just don't give it any extra credit for being OSS)
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
If, as you imply, the impact is insignificant, then what deleterious effect does it have on your computing experience?
Again, nothing against OSS, just a slight disdain for the "Cult of OSS" followers.
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
Please explain.
I think I have.
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
Then, you can disconnect from the WWW forever,
Why?
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
because the whole thing was built on FLOSS.
Sorry, but that is a myth supported by the blind followers of the "Cult of OSS".
Sorry to hear you were brainwashed. |
|
|
| ramirami |
quote:
Originally posted by N_Jay
I am completely perplexed to some people support for OSS.
(.
'casue on the whole proprietary solutions are weaker than things derived from Standards or open source...
lot of big name S/W companies have proprietary solutions |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by ramirami
'casue on the whole proprietary solutions are weaker than things derived from Standards or open source...
lot of big name S/W companies have proprietary solutions
That is a good story, but I don't see any evidence that it is true for OSS.
Also, don't mix "standards" with OSS. |
|
|
| krygny |
quote:
Originally posted by N_Jay
...
Sorry, but that is a myth supported by the blind followers of the "Cult of OSS".
Sorry to hear you were brainwashed.
Now that statement is really perplexing. OK, I'll bite - What part(s) of the WWW are not free, open and in the public domain? |
|
|
| 5Gs |
n_jay, I honestly believe you don't have a good understanding of open source software, or what we're talking about here, and because of your ignorance, you resort to claiming people who don't think your way as being brainwashed.
you continue to relate oss news to some competition. who here other than you has said anything about a competition? it's just oss news.
perhaps you should ask questions to further educate yourself, rather than getting into a worthless debate. |
|
|
| rocky |
| What kinds of computers do they have? |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
Now that statement is really perplexing. OK, I'll bite - What part(s) of the WWW are not free, open and in the public domain?
That was not want was said.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by krygny
because the whole thing was built on FLOSS.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, the WHOLE WWW was NOT BUILT on FLOSS.
Don't change what I say that then try to argue with it. |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
n_jay, I honestly believe you don't have a good understanding of open source software, or what we're talking about here, and because of your ignorance, you resort to claiming people who don't think your way as being brainwashed.
you continue to relate oss news to some competition. who here other than you has said anything about a competition? it's just oss news.
perhaps you should ask questions to further educate yourself, rather than getting into a worthless debate.
Feel free to enlighten me.
Carefully read what I said, and then correct my errors. |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by rocky
What kinds of computers do they have?
Personally 5 Windows PCs, and two Linux Boxes I play with.
One Windows PC (laptop) for work, and 4 Hosted web server accounts (3 Linux based, one MS based). |
|
|
| rocky |
quote:
Originally posted by N_Jay
Personally 5 Windows PCs, and two Linux Boxes I play with.
One Windows PC (laptop) for work, and 4 Hosted web server accounts (3 Linux based, one MS based).
Not you, CUBA! |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by rocky
Not you, CUBA!
Who knows. |
|
|
| rocky |
quote:
Originally posted by N_Jay
Who knows.
quote:
Originally posted by N_Jay
The whole things is a really big "Who cares"!
Just wondering if a whole lot of people in Southern Florida know and care.
Thank you anyway. |
|
|
| krygny |
quote:
Originally posted by N_Jay
That was not want was said.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by krygny
because the whole thing was built on FLOSS.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, the WHOLE WWW was NOT BUILT on FLOSS.
Don't change what I say that then try to argue with it.
I didn't change anything you said and I'm not following your sematics (and this discussion is really getting tedious). |
|
|
| ramirami |
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
(and this discussion is really getting tedious).
,cause N_Jay cared about it... |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by rocky
Just wondering if a whole lot of people in Southern Florida know and care.
Thank you anyway.
Hu???
A whole lot of people in Southern FL know and care what kind of computers they use and if they use OSS???:confused: :confused:
Wow, I did not know?:rolleyes: |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
I didn't change anything you said and I'm not following your sematics (and this discussion is really getting tedious).
The point I disagreed with is the statement that;
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by krygny
because the whole thing (WWW, Internet) was built on FLOSS.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That has nothing to do with;
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What part(s) of the WWW are not free, open and in the public domain?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is that clear enough?
Maybe you don't grasp the different between OSS (what we are discussing) and the use of the Internet as a method of publication and distribution. |
|
|
| 5Gs |
quote:
Originally posted by N_Jay
Feel free to enlighten me.
Carefully read what I said, and then correct my errors.
as most of your comments are of personal opinion, there's no correction to be made. but you seem to be closed minded to what open source is, its benefits, and its advantages. you keep mentioning a competition, as if they're mutually exclusive. why don't you tell us why you feel that it's a competition? you also stated open source is a flawed concept. why? is microsoft now supporting a flawed concept? perhaps you should read what you've wrote, and further explain your attitude/position. |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
as most of your comments are of personal opinion, there's no correction to be made. but you seem to be closed minded to what open source is, its benefits, and its advantages. you keep mentioning a competition, as if they're mutually exclusive. why don't you tell us why you feel that it's a competition? you also stated open source is a flawed concept. why? is microsoft now supporting a flawed concept? perhaps you should read what you've wrote, and further explain your attitude/position.
I think this post covers it very well.
I have done some minor edited to make it a little more clear.
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
It's not a competition against Dell; or any other computer maker. It's not a competition against Microsoft or any other software developer.
I did not say it was competitive with Dell.
I used Dell's computer shipments to put what might appear as a large number in perspective with the size of the market.
If it is not in "competition" with other software, then why do OSS proponents put so much energy in touting these (supposed) "wins"?
EDIT:You seem to think competitive is not an appropriate term.
Please suggest another that expresses the end result of a market choosing between alternatives.
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
I'm completely perplexed by your apparent objection to open source software.
I am completely perplexed to some people support for OSS.
(I was not the one who started the thread with admittedly unimportant information.)
Note: I have not objection to OSS, just an objection to the touted advantages of OSS.
EDIT: You continue to present me as anti-OSS. Way back here I thought I made my objections very clear. If you still don't understand I am not sure how to better explain.
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
Why DO you seem to care if developers create it and other people use it?
I don't and I have not said I do.
Heck, I even use some when it is the best solution to the problem at hand. (I just don't give it any extra credit for being OSS)
EDIT: The point is OSS proponents support OSS as being inherently better than non-OSS. (or non-OSS is somehow inherently "bad) I have not had anyone show me where OSS has any benefits over other development methods.
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
If, as you imply, the impact is insignificant, then what deleterious effect does it have on your computing experience?
Again, nothing against OSS, just a slight disdain for the "Cult of OSS" followers.
EDIT: Sorry if you feel insulted.
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
Please explain.
I think I have.
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
Then, you can disconnect from the WWW forever,
Why?
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
because the whole thing was built on FLOSS.
Sorry, but that is a myth supported by the blind followers of the "Cult of OSS".
EDIT: Again, please provide some reference if you truly believe this, but so far no one has. |
|
|
| rocky |
Man it must take a bunch of work to get all those quotes in one post.
Wonder if its really worth it. |
|
|
| 5Gs |
so why do you think open source is a flawed concept?
one advantage of open source is my ability to view the source code, and make modifications I feel will benefit my usage of the software. another advantage is I can download open source software and use it right now. I don't have to pay for a license. you object to these advantages. why?
let's say a developer wants to create a game. he can use open source as a starting point, and not worry about something such as copyrights or developer costs. is that not a benefit? |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by rocky
Man it must take a bunch of work to get all those quotes in one post.
Wonder if its really worth it.
No, it is really easy.
But it just a little more work, but I think it is worth it so people can read EXACTLY which issue I am addressing. |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
so why do you think open source is a flawed concept?
The often expressed goal is either "better" software, or better security".
I have not found any indication that OSS produces better software or more secure software.
Do you know of a study that shows otherwise?
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
one advantage of open source is my ability to view the source code, and make modifications I feel will benefit my usage of the software.
True, viewing the source is an advantage for the very small minority of software users who can understand and modify the source code.
Even in the outside the OSS world a lot of software is available with SDK's to allow development of custom applications.
OSS< does not uniquely enable this benefit.
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
another advantage is I can download open source software and use it right now.
Many software packages are distributed on-line. Again, this is NOT a unique benefit of OSS.
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
I don't have to pay for a license.
Many applications are available WITH SUPPORT for a modest cost.
Since studies have shown that support costs often outweigh the license cost, this benefit is again very slim.
When you do need support, you may find there is none beyond the user community, since without profits to protect, a help desk is not a high priority.
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
you object to these advantages. why?
Once again, you have misunderstood what I have said fairly clearly.
I don't "object to the "advantages", I just don't see them as significant.
What I object to is the cult like attitude of OSS proponents who take every little difference (and even some non-differences, as you just did) and spin them into (bind) support for OSS.
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
let's say a developer wants to create a game. he can use open source as a starting point, and not worry about something such as copyrights or developer costs. is that not a benefit?
Maybe, maybe not. In the end he may be better off buying a game development package that comes with the level support he needs.
my point is (one more time) that it is not a given that it is an advantage. |
|
|
| 5Gs |
quote:
Originally posted by N_Jay
The often expressed goal is either "better" software, or better security".
I have not found any indication that OSS produces better software or more secure software.
Do you know of a study that shows otherwise?
True, viewing the source is an advantage for the very small minority of software users who can understand and modify the source code.
Even in the outside the OSS world a lot of software is available with SDK's to allow development of custom applications.
OSS< does not uniquely enable this benefit.
Many software packages are distributed on-line. Again, this is NOT a unique benefit of OSS.
I should clarify that...I can download open source software, not pay some license fee, not worry about some expiration, and use it right now. you wouldn't be able to do that with too many commercial softwares. for example, if I want to touch up a photo, I can download gimp for free, and use it right away. I wouldn't be able to download photoshop legally for free. (this is not a knock on photoshop. I love that sofware and use it all the time, and prefer it to any other similar software.)
quote:
Many applications are available WITH SUPPORT for a modest cost.
Since studies have shown that support costs often outweigh the license cost, this benefit is again very slim.
When you do need support, you may find there is none beyond the user community, since without profits to protect, a help desk is not a high priority.
Once again, you have misunderstood what I have said fairly clearly.
I don't "object to the "advantages", I just don't see them as significant.
What I object to is the cult like attitude of OSS proponents who take every little difference (and even some non-differences, as you just did) and spin them into (bind) support for OSS.
your exact words:
I have not objection to OSS, just an objection to the touted advantages of OSS.
what did I not understand from your statement? now that I've given some examples of advantages and benefits, you belittle them. I probably use commercial software as much as you do. I understand the differences and benefits of each. I acknowledge the advantages of each. in some cases, because of the existence of the other, it has made similar software better. for example, firefox has tabbed browsing. its popularity has led to internet explorer implementing that feature. you seem to think open source advantages are igsignificant. I'm glad big companies don't think like you, and they have openly embraced and supported open source. |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
I should clarify that...I can download open source software, not pay some license fee, not worry about some expiration, and use it right now. you wouldn't be able to do that with too many commercial softwares. for example, if I want to touch up a photo, I can download gimp for free, and use it right away. I wouldn't be able to download photoshop legally for free. (this is not a knock on photoshop. I love that sofware and use it all the time, and prefer it to any other similar software.)
You are linking "freeware" type licensing with OSS.
There is a good amount of freeware applications that are not OSS.
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
your exact words:
I have not objection to OSS, just an objection to the touted advantages of OSS.
what did I not understand from your statement? now that I've given some examples of advantages and benefits, you belittle them.
I think I said it better here:
quote:
Originally posted by N_Jay
Once again, you have misunderstood what I have said fairly clearly.
I don't "object to the "advantages", I just don't see them as significant.
What I object to is the cult like attitude of OSS proponents who take every little difference (and even some non-differences, as you just did) and spin them into (bind) support for OSS.
I probably should have used the word "touting of the" rather than "touted".
You call it "belittling", I call it pointing out that I believe they are insignificant advantages.
What happens in this discussion (EVERY TIME) is that the OSS proponents tend to pile everything they can say about OSS and call it a significant advantage over CSS. Most have no direct connection to the OSS or CSS decision.
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
I probably use commercial software as much as you do. I understand the differences and benefits of each. I acknowledge the advantages of each. in some cases, because of the existence of the other, it has made similar software better. for example, firefox has tabbed browsing. its popularity has led to Internet explorer implementing that feature.
Here you are again attributing MS's advancing the features to match a competitive product to OSS. So if another proprietary browser implemented a feature the MS copied, is that an advantage of CSS?
This is yet another example of taking the advantage of a competitive market served by multiple products, and attributing an action of that market condition to OSS.
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
you seem to think open source advantages are insignificant.
You have yet to show me one that is truly significant, and in the process, you have tried using many that are not even related to OSS.
I will give you the lower (no) license cost. (Mama always said you get what you pay for.)
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
I'm glad big companies don't think like you, and they have openly embraced and supported open source.
Some have and some have not. (Many has "said" they do so for marketing reasons, but have shown no change in actions.) |
|
|
| 5Gs |
alright, as I don't have as much time as you on this forum, nor do I have the time to give you references to open source benefits and advantages (that you may not deem insignificant), I'll end it.
perhaps you will have the time to look into why big companies support open source (and why you think some companies are doing so for marketing purposes only). if you think they're doing it for insignificant purposes, fine with me. I'm not here to change your opinion. I'm merely trying to give you more info. have a good day n_jay. |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
alright, as I don't have as much time as you on this forum, nor do I have the time to give you references to open source benefits and advantages (that you may not deem insignificant), I'll end it.
perhaps you will have the time to look into why big companies support open source (and why you think some companies are doing so for marketing purposes only). if you think they're doing it for insignificant purposes, fine with me. I'm not here to change your opinion. I'm merely trying to give you more info. have a good day n_jay.
No problem.
Good discussion, you forced me to look up some stuff, and I learned a few things. Nothing that changed my general opinion of OSS, and nothing that changed my opinion of OSS Fanatics, but still worthwhile.
It really comes down to a "Ford vs. Chevy" type of decision. Of course even in cars, people attribute "religious like vigor" to their arguments. |
|
|
| 5Gs |
quote:
Originally posted by N_Jay
Did you look at the reason given?
Compatibility with Notes, Aspen 2.8.1, ISS 2.11, ProVu 3.1.1, and Capri 6.5????
What version of Linus supports all these?
Let me guess that Vista will (or they will support Vista) long before you find a version of Linux that does.
I'm thinking why would they want to upgrade anyway? sounds like xp is working fine. seems like a big waste of money to go to vista. |
|
|
| N_Jay |
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
I'm thinking why would they want to upgrade anyway? sounds like xp is working fine. seems like a big waste of money to go to vista.
Yep.
The upgrade mania is ridiculous.
There is no reason to upgrade, as least until Vista is the primary OS in the market. XP will be supported for years.
I don't know any major operation that upgrades when a new version is first released.
I would think that the article is really a big snooze. |
|
|
| 5Gs |
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
http://www.crn.com/hardware/197800591
I remember a little while ago we made a big purchase of systems that had windows preinstalled (no other way to buy them). of course we had to pay for the licenses, but as soon as we got them, we blew away the os and installed fedora. I bet there were a lot of orders like ours that inflated microsoft's sales, and probably didn't give any credit to the growing popularity of linux. |
|
|
| krygny |
quote:
Originally posted by 5Gs
...
of course we had to pay for the licenses, but as soon as we got them, we blew away the os and installed fedora.
...
OUCH!! You discarded the single most expensive component in the system. That's a hefty tax. 1 or 2 desktops I can see, but if you're getting 10, 20 systems (or more), you'd have been better off configuring and testing a custom system and image. Once you have a configuration and image tested successfully, order 10, 20, 50 or whatever of everything and slap them together. It takes little time to deploy each system. I mean it's not like the OTS systems come in the door and get placed on the user's desk. They each (usually) have to be re-ghosted and tested too. |
|
|
| 5Gs |
quote:
Originally posted by krygny
OUCH!! You discarded the single most expensive component in the system. That's a hefty tax. 1 or 2 desktops I can see, but if you're getting 10, 20 systems (or more), you'd have been better off configuring and testing a custom system and image. Once you have a configuration and image tested successfully, order 10, 20, 50 or whatever of everything and slap them together. It takes little time to deploy each system. I mean it's not like the OTS systems come in the door and get placed on the user's desk. They each (usually) have to be re-ghosted and tested too.
we had a great deal on the systems, even taking into account the extra license fees. for us, new systems do get placed at the user's station and we pxe boot them. all we need is the mac address of each system and it's pretty much done. :) |
|
|
|
