Attn: Windows guys

Without any consideration for political stuff, MS Word is the most annoying program ever. There are a huge list of things that it does automatically without asking you that are enabled by default. If you go into the auto correct options, there are like 30 different things that you have to unselect.

"it's much easier to go crossplatform with Unix-based stuff than Windows. "

Cross-platform is one of those things always true in theory, but isn't true in practice. Apps are almost never exactly the same across platforms.

"I agree OpenOffice isn't perfect and has problems.
however, after a bit of getting used to it, I can still get work done just fine."

I use OO as a read only program. But you'd be insane to send your supervisor or business partner an OO document and risk the fonts and format being all screwy.

"FreeBSD is big on the webserver market, and there's no better firewall right now than a OpenBSD machine with PF."

Not that big. BSD is even smaller than Linux.

THere is a difference between the business world and the hobby world. The hobby world can run Debian and Gentoo, whereas the business world wants one throat to choke, and developers on hand to fix their problem. The hobby world can live with OO "features", the business world can't. THe hobby world loves open source, open features, but the business world has to make money. The business world is why M$ is strong.

Also, there is the M$ side. As Bob said, RH's licensing sucks now too. Also as Bob hinted, the Open source business model sucks - as of a few years ago, RH is the only Linux company to ever make money. Computers are getting faster, making the M$ bloat less relevant. Companies are starting to realize other Linux costs - such as more expensive and harder-to-find sysadmins. M$ is finally paying attention to security. And they have the biggest army of programmers known to man.

I can't believe I'm taking the M$ position here.

"Not that big. BSD is even smaller than Linux."

FreeBSD isn't close to being small in the webserver market. Check again.

"THere is a difference between the business world and the hobby world. The hobby world can run Debian and Gentoo,"

while I wouldn't suggest Gentoo for most businesses, more than one business runs Debian.

"Also, there is the M$ side. As Bob said, RH's licensing sucks now too."

then buy SuSE.

"Also as Bob hinted, the Open source business model sucks - as of a few years ago, RH is the only Linux company to ever make money."

Only? Nope, not even close.

"Computers are getting faster, making the M$ bloat less relevant."

this just isn't true.

As computers get faster, MS software keeps bloating in proportion to the speed.

Longhorn will be as bloated on future computers as Win XP is now when it comes out.

this has always been true historically.

people make the same fallacy with Java programs...

sure, for current Java programs, future speed will take away the bloat...

but future programs will be just as bloated because less optimization will be done to them.

"Companies are starting to realize other Linux costs - such as more expensive and harder-to-find sysadmins."

this is a definite cost, but the larger the enterprise the less the cost.

you can pay many millions on MS licensing fees when you're dealing with a huge business.

Linux admins do cost more, but they also can adminster more machines on average due to better Unix remote system adminstration, and Linux machines usually perform better than MS ones anyway meaning you need fewer.

"M$ is finally paying attention to security."

and they still have years to go.

Start reading NTBugtraq and look at all the patch complaints.

look at how they messed up GDI+ detection.

"And they have the biggest army of programmers known to man."

wrong.

there are estimated to be around 100,000+ open source programmers contributing to the typical Linux distro and the number is continually growing.

MS has around 30,000 programmers and has serious limits on how many more they can get.

I think you guys are looking at the "programmers" thing both wrong.

asdf is look at it from the market of creating programs for linux

as rob is thinking for the OS side of things

"Like I said in my post, we ported a pretty complex Java app from Windows to Linux in a day. The big issue, which was the soundcard drivers, wasn't even related to Java. I was shocked to see it port so quickly, but it did."

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. I know a guy who tried for two weeks to recompile a code for OSX - this is a code that works on every other Unix out there. He's at MIT and he's no dummy. At that point, he gave up, and a lot of business would rather not have that hassle.

"while I wouldn't suggest Gentoo for most businesses, more than one business runs Debian. "

Yes, and sometimes they have problems. Our Compaq hardware was only semi-supported because we ran Debian. Intel math libraries are RPM's embedded within an executable - you can't alien them. I've had Compaq math libraries and Intel compilers that didn't install correctly on Debian because the libraries were named differently. At that point we switched.

Fermi National labs has reported problems getting Oracle to run correctly. Many companies say "if you run other than RH or Suse, no support". This is fine for a hobby, but most businesses do not want this hassle.

"then buy SuSE."

SuSE licensing sucks too. It (with RH) is better than M$, but still sucks.

"Also as Bob hinted, the Open source business model sucks - as of a few years ago, RH is the only Linux company to ever make money."

Only? Nope, not even close.

I could be wrong, but It is according to Josh Jensen, the main Linux instructor at all Linuxworld expo conferences.

"Computers are getting faster, making the M$ bloat less relevant."

"this just isn't true."

It is in scientific computing, where as much as any other field, CPU/memory speed is at a premium. Not so much at supercomputing centers yet, but for industry scientific computing, Windows is growing.

"sure, for current Java programs, future speed will take away the bloat...
but future programs will be just as bloated because less optimization will be done to them. "

Depends how critical speed is. If bloat doesn't matter, who cares? In this case, ease of use matters. In the fields where speeds are always too slow, optimization will continue.

"Linux admins do cost more, but they also can adminster more machines on average due to better Unix remote system adminstration, and Linux machines usually perform better than MS ones anyway meaning you need fewer. "

Sometimes true, but even with all that, Linux sysadmins still usually cost more. IMO, Linux sysadmins are usually more talented too so I'd rather have Linux sysadmins. But upper management does not always see it that way, and that is who is important.

"there are estimated to be around 100,000+ open source programmers contributing to the typical Linux distro and the number is continually growing.

MS has around 30,000 programmers and has serious limits on how many more they can get. "

M$ has a focused, smart,full-time group of programmers working on a few things. Open source has 100,000+ part-time programmers working on a ton of things. Plus there are other paid programmers working on M$ apps that you haven't counted. In that battle, I'll take team M$.

I like Open source, 90% Linux at work. Every chance I get, I try to replace a windows box with a Linux box. But Windows is strong, and as Bob said, there are good business reasons why.

Rob, check this out. It's pretty accurate IMHO. :-)

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html

The original intent of this thread was

"how do you guys feel, and what are your positions, regarding general portability, cross-platformness, and not being locked-in?

"

Now it's just degraded into blind arguing Linux-OS against MS.

Here's reality, Linux and OpenSource software is given away for free, and business would still rather pay for closed software in alot of cases.

It's to the point that MS sympathizers actually concede that there is alot of MS software that is crap, and they F'ed up many times in the past, and it's still not good enough for the zealots.

Logical arguements in favor of MS get answered with blind Nope's, Isn't true's, will be better just next version, all you have to do is run this heinously long command line, which doesn't work on Distros X, Y, or Z, blah blah blah... Try this program with this stupid name, and get these librarys...

Suse is going to become a Novell vechicle very soon, and if anyone can ruin something (WoprdPerfect) it's Novell.

And reading NTBUGTRAQ is certainly going to look bad for MS. Subscribe to all of the lists, and you get the big picture.

Each side has it's plusses and minuses, and it's not always the most technically cool stuff that wins. OS/2 was pretty cool in it's time..

Linux has no real business desktop prescence, and no real established central manageability or deployment tools. That's not a slam, it's based on a majority of reported businesses use and concerns from various trade magazines I read every day during lunch.A few odd foreign government's experiments are not going to change the world.

They have an office platform that even the most diehard zealot will concede has issues, and from my impressions based on Linux users postings everday on Slashdot, which is cetrtainly Pro-OpenSource, the distros are getting way too bloated by including everything but the kitchen sink. OpenSource/Linux is taking off like crazy on the server platform, but in alot of cases taking away market share from other unixes.

I don't know what else to say. Like anything, there is plusses and minuses to everything, and OpenSource has alot of hurdles ahead of it. And MS isn't going anywhere any time soon...

Developers, Developers, Developers... ;)

"Linux has no real established central manageability or deployment tools."

I wouldn't quite go that far. For deployment, Kickstart is as good or better than ghost. For manageability, HP Openview and IBM Tivoli run on Linux now, ssh is better than remote desktop, and as nice as Windows update is, running SUS forces you to run IIS, so it can't be that good. It is true that Linux still has no standard patching tool (apt is Debian-type only, yum isn't widespread yet), unless you subscribe to RH network.

But I think your overall point is correct: Windows software is just better right now, Windows has less "character", and business will pay to avoid headaches. It's the same with gaming systems: Gaming engine matters, hardware matters, but software matters as much or more.

HP Openview runs WONDERFULLY on linux. Now if people would stop running SNMP v1 shit..