Linux - NewsThis forum is for original Linux News. If you'd like to write content for LQ, feel free to contact us.
All threads in the forum need to be approved before they will appear.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Funny to read, but... not what I call a critical article:
"Take software development, for example. Open source produces better code. Period. End of statement."
-> there's still a lot of discussion about that...
"Coverity, maker of software auditing tools, recently found that the Linux kernel has far fewer security vulnerabilities than a typical commercial software package. I'm not surprised."
-> security vulnerabilities are hard to (impossible to?) compare. Also: linux is a kernel, can you compare it to 'a typical commercial software package' ? And is this result because linux is open source, of because linux is maintained for over 10 years now, and I don't think the average software package is...
But I DO hope a revolution has arrived as the author says!
my guess is that he is really only trying to compare it with windows (and the NT platform, about 10 years old), but doesn't want to stick his neck out too far ;-).
Clearly, Linux has scored big in the enterprise powering all kinds of servers for all sorts of tasks. And it is making waves in the embedded world on everything from cellphones to set-top boxes.
And then there's the desktop.
For me, Linux has arrived and it is unlikely I will ever go back to Windows. There are enough quality apps and drivers to keep me satisfied and the scene is growing faster than any commercial entity could sustain.
Yet, for the masses, there are some formidable barriers to overcome before the orders for Linux boxes start rolling in. One that stands out is familiarity. Humans are creatures of habit and are uncomfortable with the unknown. They resist change and will put up with an unbelievable amount of pain before considering change. That is my experience.
I hear it everyday the woes of viruses, spam and spyware, the flaky behavior and the endless patches. I have cleaned up so many hard drives and rescued more borked Windows PCs then I care to remember. Yet when I propose to them a choice, they too freeze up. So I collect my money and walk.
However, folks will only put up with so much hassle, and MS has arrogantly dished out platefulls to their customers. Governments and corporations around the world are more brave or frugal then ever before and have or will try open-source. And once people start using Linux boxes at work, and are therefore able to buy them off the shelves at Best Buy or order them right from Dell with all the familiar software and such, it will become a viable choice in that arena as well.
Therefore, penetration of the corporate desktop is most likely the key to success and one that has not gone unnoticed by Red Hat, Novell, and, now, Mandrake.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.