[lancer_rit]

Originally Posted by SirAlec

.mht are propreitary. But it can be opened by MS word. Now who on earth will not have MS Word.

I don't have it on my home laptop. Why should I pay $$$ for M$ Office when I get Openoffice for free, and all upgrades to it :-)

And I am quite fine with it for home use. I do use Office heavily on my work laptop.

[SirAlec]

I got news for you. OO.o can open 100% of files that MSO can open. Its made that way

[given2fly]

Originally Posted by deepclutch

infact microsoft help themself grow by leeching 3rd world countries with their license diplomacy.hence the Linux question arises and also Free Software along with.it is not M$haft bashing -but it is brainwashed indian human species which supports M$ products because they cant think anything better than that!how pity!
Linux is not a kid's game as some so called M$haft based IT professionals envisage.infact GNU/Linux is the *stablest* ,I repeat most stable OS when compared to solaris ,apple os x ,M$ window$ thingies(obviously!) .only competitor for GNU/Linux in reliability is openbsd and freebsd which ofcourse needs experts.

Think about it!dont feel shocked if I shattered the so called dream utopia that anything comes from M$ needs praise!infact M$ is bashing and trying its best to kill open source and Linux(search for so called patent sh1t).

Okay, You may be a pro at some distro of linux, but I can't see how using freebsd needs an expert. The update system is as good if not better than debian, with full compatibility for all the linux packages & installing them as simple as pkg_add, just like apt_get. with FreeBSD, You don't run into the dependency hell that Linux out of the box is. I once installed Suse & then slackware and then tried to install some popular package (I think it was KDE) and it wouldn't accept a certain build of library. That was about 3 yrs ago. I decided that it isn't ready for the end user yet. I was very much familiar with all the commands and libraries and could google a solution, but my particular distro would simply not accept that. Where do I go now, to the forums? Think of my pity posting 100s of lines of error messages in a forum to get support. Shouldn't there be something like MS Support where you call in and get support for your product. Shouldn't there be a vendor who should post packages on their website and certify the build to be compatible with their entire current x.x version of the operating system. In Linux, that culture isn't there yet, because people tend to rely on forums and google and think that is the power of the people. Hence, hail linux.


(Disclaimer - I am a full-time Microsoft Professional, supporting and designing for enterprises & from an admin's perpective, things should just work.)

From a user's perspective, it should never break and if it does, it needs to be fixed in quickest time. Linux yet does offer that ease of use apart from Jazzy desktop managers and some really good softwares like open office, GIMP, NMAP, etc, but most are still dependent of some particular version of binary which isn't all backward compatible. I mean, have you seen the latest MS policy. All their patches for all the new line of applications are cumulative. Get me that on Linux. I agree that world is following Solaris, AIX, HP-UX & Windows for a reason and Linux is still finding it hard to break into corporate datacenter, but the world isn't going to get rosier in a day. You need to build trust by building troublefree products & create a chain where everyone can live happily. Right now, MS is doing that. Oracle had to give up on Red-hat being their preferred platform because it just couldn't scale upto Solaris standards. And if Linux is the stablest, then what it HP-UX and AIX and Solaris doing there?

As for MS, apart from the their expensive licensing part & normal glitches which every softwares developer does at sometime, they also have to pay their developers to come up with enterprise class products. The bigger you get, the more monolithic you get. Same is applicable for IBM, Oracle & all those other companies which are operating in Billions. MS is no exception. Besides, that is where the entire IT industry comes into picture, including your and mine job, developing and supporting products and updating them with new features so that you could do something else which is more fun like racing, bungee jumping or just spending time with your dear ones. My question, is that a small price to pay?

PS - I do agree to your asian (not just indian) licencing part. MS seriously does need to do something there.

Enough of bashing and defending. You need to understand the enterprise software development cycles before we can discuss this in a sane state and with a no sh1t like language.

[given2fly]

Oh by the way, I remember a line from a very recent movie "Koi bhi desh perfect nahi hota, use perfect banana padta hai". Guess it was Rang De Basanti.

Shouldn't that be applicable to these software developers also.

[BaCkSeAtDrIVeR]

Originally Posted by given2fly

Shouldn't there be a vendor who should post packages on their website and certify the build to be compatible with their entire current x.x version of the operating system. In Linux, that culture isn't there yet, because people tend to rely on forums and google and think that is the power of the people. Hence, hail linux.

Well, you got it very, very wrong.

Red Hat, Ubuntu, Mandrivia, SuSe, all have paid support where you can ask for, and get support, without having to know how to use google. Too bad people think "free-as-freedom" also mean "free-as-free-masala-dosa".

(Disclaimer - I am a full-time Microsoft Professional, supporting and designing for enterprises & from an admin's perpective, things should just work.)

I love this honesty.

From a user's perspective, it should never break and if it does, it needs to be fixed in quickest time.

"Dependency" hell is not same as "broken packages". If you use your distro's repository for the given release, there is no question of "broken" packages.

but most are still dependent of some particular version of binary which isn't all backward compatible.

You can always download source code of the application you want, and compile it yourselves against the libraries you have on your system. Now beat that!!!

[given2fly]

Originally Posted by BaCkSeAtDrIVeR

Well, you got it very, very wrong.

Red Hat, Ubuntu, Mandrivia, SuSe, all have paid support where you can ask for, and get support, without having to know how to use google. Too bad people think "free-as-freedom" also mean "free-as-free-masala-dosa".

Hey BaCkSeAtDrIVeR, Thanks for writing back a civilized reply. Most people will rip me off for showing the other side of the whole Microsoft business. I never meant it that Linux side doesn't have a paid support model. But most of them are not based in India (okay, I do remember flashsupport in Chennai but their main clientale are foreign companies). Besides, you have a Microsoft support knowledge database which is well documented like Cisco's documentation. Now I find it really hard to even search Symantec's knowledge back, and so far have not come across any support site like support.SUSE/Redhat/ubuntu.org/com/etcetc. It may be just that I am not aware of them, but whenever I search for MS support articles, I do get them somehow. But Google never throws up anything like I mentioned before.

I love this honesty.

Here is another side of mine. I started off as a Microsoft hater and almost vowed never to work for Microsoft. But those were NT days and MS just wasn't there like it is today & Linux was the buzz word. However, as fate will take turn, I ended up working for Microsoft Enterprise support for almost 3+ years & saw why so many businesses are still preferring MS. The availability of the consultants, easy availability of compatible parts & drivers (then), ease of use (both from Admin & users' perspective) led to where it is today. And since Windows 2003, they have become more stable than ever. I still won't compare it to the legendary FreeBSD uptimes but they are improving primarily because customers are demanding so & they are listening. Sometimes, I find it very annoying to see the culture prevalent in most Indian IT companies and MNC's india operations. But MS has got such a professional attitude towards their customer that you have to work with them to believe it. For them, it is really customer first, but at the same time, employee doesn't suffer due to companies dedication to delivery. It is not all that evil as people may brand it.

"Dependency" hell is not same as "broken packages". If you use your distro's repository for the given release, there is no question of "broken" packages.

Here, I downloaded the certified KDE packages for SUSE & Slack, probably from their website. Then, I think I had Slackware 10.1/2 and had a major headache configuring X. One of my friend, who is good with Linux, tried to help me out but we both ended up failing. Then the same experience happened with some other applications. One or the other thing will just not work no matter what dependent package or library I will download to get it working. That was the turning point of my belief that Linux may be an enthusiastic choice, but enterprises are not fully ready to embrace it yet.

You can always download source code of the application you want, and compile it yourselves against the libraries you have on your system. Now beat that!!!

You can't beat that, but how many developers will you need to modify the code of MS Office or something like SharePoint or SMS or Exchange. how about the headache of managing those people who do modify the code and then leave when another company offers them a bigger package. What about duplication of efforts by giants like IBM, HP, Accenture, TCS, Wipro, CG, EDS etc, to achieve the same. They are paying a premium to not have this headache, and for a justified reason. Then, there are third party developers writing compatible plugins for those very software and earning their livelyhood. Isn't that a good way to ensure everyone earns his living in a justifiable way? Linux is equally good in its own way, but branding MS as evil for their products marketing is not a good thing.

Anyone presenting a counter view is more than welcome, but please write in a civilized language. I don't feel that an aggressive language is a way to prove one's point.

[lancer_rit]

Originally Posted by SirAlec

I got news for you. OO.o can open 100% of files that MSO can open. Its made that way

Thanks.Well, since I use OO, I think I know that a good bit, or ? I also know what all things get messed up if there is VB script, or complex formatting. My point is that I wouldn't save a web page in a proprietary format - there are alternatives that work in every browser out there.
And an office app is not my app of choice to view webpages!

[BaCkSeAtDrIVeR]

@given2fly - I understand your frustration about SuSe and Slack[ware]. Most distros using the .rpm / .gz format for applications have second best package managers. Best package managers use the .deb format. (apt/aptitude / dpkg = Debian, Ubuntu, etc,) That said, afaict, you should not have to manually download anything if your package manager is properly setup. The package manager will do it for you. (yast, it called, in SuSe, IIRC).

@lancer_rit you can use office applications to create web pages. And I am able to open all files containing VB script in either OO.o or gnumeric. Gnumeric is another spread sheet.

I really do not miss the Microsoft environment. But then, I am a user, not a developer.

[Samurai]

I have used Linux since 1994, that's when I got my first home PC. Then we had the choice of installing Linux over DOS or as native OS. My first Linux was Slackware which came free with a Linux book.

The installation was very painful, epecially for the X-windows to work. I used to pour through usenet looking for the frequencies for my monitor to configure the GUI. Then I was using on SunOS at work, DOS/Win31 and Linux at home. Next year Win95 came out and that was quite revolutionary, and at work I had switched to HP-UX. I slowly gave up on Linux as it was not worth the trouble, this is after many foreys in the 90s.

Fast forward to current times, I use 85% Windows (XP/Vista/Win2003/Win2008), 10% HP-UX and 5% Fedora Linux (for Asterisk).

If you ask me which is the most rock solid OS among all the ones I have used, I have to say HP-UX. I have never seen it crash in 13 years I have used it. Can't say that to any other OS.

BTW, I am an enterprise product developer with many 24x7 critical apps running in the field.

[aaggoswami]

Not as big an expert as others here, I am in this computer world and love to give more voltage to processor and ram rather than to tweak OS.

My life started with Window 98 on Cyrix ( before than we had DOS on which I used to play a bit of games ). I hated MS till I was in school. Then I came to this world of Linux. Loved the " free " nature. But not satisfied. Then came to developer environment. Nothing beats MS here. Try the best, but you cant reach them. I tried my machine as Server using many configurations of software, ended up on Server 03.

A few observations from an Average user.

Linux ( Fedora: using since Version 6, Ubuntu: using since 5.10 ):

1) If you are using this or are planning to use this dont ever go for nVidia chipset. You will end up weeping.

2) More than basic knowledge required even to install flash. Even for more basic things like updating web browser, command is required.

3) Its not a rosy picture always, and eventually you have to shell out some money for further support.

4) Most of the recent developments are heavy. Needs higher hardware, takes some edge off the advantages.

5) Recent distributions are not stable and they seem to have issue regarding internet. Much slower than even XP. Fedora 9 hangs in middle of download. Something unheard of.

6) Use this if you are a professional for Linux.

7) Not 100% safe. And if threat is detected, its hard to find out and solve error. But chances of getting infected are 10K times less than Windows.

8) NO development centric environment. Biggest disadvantage and the reason I am with Windows.

Windows( using since 98 ):

1) No issues, though I have many.

2) If you are not a high level professional about IT, you can still use this.

3) More transperency as far as money matters go.

4) Same thing. Vista is heavy.

5) Stability is increasing over time.

6) Point 2.

7) Safety is issue but its easy to come out of it.

8) Much better here. Reason it sells.

The .Net framework is one of the best available in the market, and hence used by many. They pay but are out of headaches. Very efficient framework.

Till I was not in development world, I believed in Linux distributions and " free ' world. My feeling changes when I had to myself get involved in software development. I think its correct to charge money for the software you are selling, and MS is offering a lot of support after charging money. And it is improving.
I am treated as an inturder when I support MS, but that is truth.

The above points are from an average user who later on went on software developing. Not an expert.
Shift from Windows to Linux not possible for a developer.

I am looking foward to a middle way between Linux and windows, but that is just an impossible dream.