Short bio: Computer Scientist, FOSS supporter (read more)
Tux Machines (TM)-specific
OK, so the commercial version of Solaris strictly speaking isn’t free software/open source (although quite a lot of the code is now open, thanks to the OpenSolaris project). But still, since we do quite a lot of Linux and other Unix stuff here on FOSSwire, I thought I might take a quick excursion into Sun’s Unix.
Last week I had the opportunity to try two new operating systems: Microsoft Vista (Home Premium) and the Ubuntu Linux distribution (6.10, Edgy Eft).
I’m more secure on Linux than I am on Windows. My primary desktop is on a Macbook Pro – the best computer I’ve ever owned, without any doubt. I consider myself very open-minded and will always give credit where it’s due. Heck, some of my best friends use Windows.
With the internetnews.com article published today, I found myself a bit curious as to what ReactOS exactly was and what it looked like.
For more than a decade, open source developers have been trying to clone Windows. The latest release of ReactOS 0.3.1 gets them closer than ever before, but don't expect open source Vista just yet. Now, the devs are aiming to be as compatible with Windows 2003 as possible.
To be truthfull that is an extremely difficult question to answer because there are so many variables that need to be addressed. There is the familiar and the unknown. The perceived benefits and disadvantages. The security or lack thereof. Then there is also a learning curve, hidden costs and nasty surprises waiting like some halloween ghoul.
An industry that has long resisted IT automation got a double dose of medicine last week. Both Microsoft and backers of key open source initiatives laid out plans to push IT further into health care--plans that also put the Windows and Linux camps on another collision course.
If you ask any IT manager if they would want an operating system that was ‘guaranteed’ to be available and supporting applications running continuously twenty four hours a day, 365 days a year, then the answer would probably be very simple. However, if you want to measure how much this level of availability is worth to the organisation, then you’ll probably get a very different response.
The real battle for the Windows desktop alternative may be the preliminary round between the MacOS and Linux. These two platforms have distinct advantages and disadvantages against each other and the winner will likely be the solution that walks away with the greatest number of advantages and the least number of disadvantages.
In last month’s column, I said “I’m more secure on a Mac than I was on Windows XP.” Some of you asked how Linux fares in that comparison. To that, I’ll say I’m marginally more secure on Linux than on a Mac.
It seems that barely a month can go bye without me finding some Linux based content that I object to and it's happened again. An article on CoolTechZone.com was trying to explain Why Microsoft Should Acquire Linux and I couldn't help but think "why not turn water to wine along the way".
Everybody has their "favourite" operating system. That's fine, in fact that's good. Everybody should have an operating system to champion. What is not good is when we allow our beliefs to blind us to the real facts of our chosen package of ones and zeros.
Let me share a tale of woe on how worlds collide. I gave up trying to use 2 different Vista Release Candidates during 2006; I couldn't get openVPN to work. Instead, I went and installed a Linux desktop.
In this fourth episode of a series that pits Microsoft's new Vista OS against SimplyMEPIS Linux, DesktopLinux.com columnist Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols compares the operating systems' bundled games, browsers, and instant communications applications.