We give Linus too much of attention. He thought he would kick Bill Gates out from #1 in the OS impersonation biz but became #3 with the raise of Mac OS X (represented by Steve Jobs).
Now on the technical level, Linux is interesting for labs but running linux on mission critical environment is a huge problem because the non integration between Hardware and software. IMHO it was already a big issue with Windows but when a server is failing your linux doesn't understand what's going on, which is not the case with a Mac Server. Not to mention the ability to power on/off a XSERVE/XRAID remotely. Not to mention Apple Hardware superior design, I am not talking about the looks here.
That's why after running Windows servers with crappy Windows (which requires a monthly reboot in the best case scenario), trying Linux I am now using Mac OS X as servers. We can benefit from all the Open Source solutions on top of top quality servers, top quality OS.
For me linux is good to recycle all old computers with a console machine, very useful to test solutions in dev environment. Of course the linux approach is to equip tons of "boxes" as fail over so when one fails, there is always another to take the relay. It's a conception not mine.
Now as some of you said previously, to give a linux box as desktop computer is the best way to train a generation of geeks or computer haters!
Sorry but Linux is not ready for prime time yet. Windows is dead until Microsoft go back to white board. Still they proved there inability in doing so in the past and in case they would be successful it would take them 10 years to reach prime time, so I am sorry Linus to disappoint you but as much as I find your contribution invaluable, you are not in you league here. We are dealing with bigger scale here. And Mac OS X, MAc OS X Server iphone, Apple TVs are showing the way to modern era of OS that has no equivalent today. If you consider GPS systems in cars, their interface sucks, those people who design this type of products have no clue on how making their system intuitive to everybody. Until Apple TV, TVs menu sucked big time, not to mention phone before the iphone. I can give plenty of other examples excerpt from our day to day life to illustrate this hardware-software integration. That's why it is clear from beginning that a Windows or a Linux OS are simply an old fashion way to talk to interact with computers.
I believe Linus understood he may take him 30 more years to reach #1 hence his critics !!
I doubt Mobistar will be able to get a deal done with Apple as in Belgium it is by law forbidden to sell a phone with a subscription. My guess Mobistar wants to ride the iPhone hype and hopes people will switch to Mobistar in advance. Belgium is one of the few countries where every phone is sold unlocked.
Or this means unlocked phones are coming to europe.
I suspect selling phones with an extremely good incentive to be with a certain carrier will be enough for Apple. If it would save you $50 a month to be with (Mobistar) then wouldn't that be enough for the majority of people to subscribe with them? Or perhaps a couple hundred dollars up front?
Then Apple can receive their kickbacks from (Mobistar) based upon iPhone subscribers, no negative implied, and avoid the experience dilution that can come about with a user base distributed over numerous networks. (Particularly those that may not support certain features).
Implementation of such a system would be hard, perhaps sell the (unocked) iPhone with say a $300 premium, with an oh so coincidental $300 rebate from Apple after signing with (Mobistar)?
Theres the incentive to be with Mobistar, at no extra cost to Apple or Mobistar to implement. Not saying it should be done, rather that it could be.
Can anyone name major, paradigm-shifting software developments that have come out of Linux? (Please spare me the teary-eyed stuff about the beauty of "collective development" etc a la the Wikipedia model).
And, considering that many people see it as an alternative to Windows, would you please include in that an argument why it has a market share of about 1%?
You, sir, don't have a clue. The main reason for the weak market share of Linux is to be seen in the optionitis that plagues the Linux world, i.e. the lack of consolidating forces to relieve users outside the geek realm of the unneccessary choices you have to make.
I suspect selling phones with an extremely good incentive to be with a certain carrier will be enough for Apple. If it would save you $50 a month to be with (Mobistar) then wouldn't that be enough for the majority of people to subscribe with them? Or perhaps a couple hundred dollars up front?
Then Apple can receive their kickbacks from (Mobistar) based upon iPhone subscribers, no negative implied, and avoid the experience dilution that can come about with a user base distributed over numerous networks. (Particularly those that may not support certain features).
Implementation of such a system would be hard, perhaps sell the (unocked) iPhone with say a $300 premium, with an oh so coincidental $300 rebate from Apple after signing with (Mobistar)?
Theres the incentive to be with Mobistar, at no extra cost to Apple or Mobistar to implement. Not saying it should be done, rather that it could be.
Your scenario would not work as belgian law forbids to ceate a financial incentive for 'coupled' sales. So the 300$ mail in rebate would just simply not work. Granted, mobistar has an excellent EDGE network -and is incidentally part of the Orange Group, which helps matters I guess.
However BASE (the 3rd operator) has national EDGE coverage as well, whereas Proximus (the leader) does not (very good 3G though).
My guess is that a Belgian deal will be as complicated as can be as the handset will have to be sold unlocked and at the same price for everyone. One could stipulate that you can only bu the handsets in the mobistar centers, so brace yourelf for some hard selling of services, but at the end of the day I would be in my right to ask for a naked handset, walk out of the shop and put my present SIM card in it.
Anyway the only difference between an official iPhone carrier and a non-official is the absence of visual voicemail, which to me is a nice-to-have feature but not a core criterion
We give Linus too much of attention. He thought he would kick Bill Gates out from #1 in the OS impersonation biz but became #3 with the raise of Mac OS X (represented by Steve Jobs).
Now on the technical level, Linux is interesting for labs but running linux on mission critical environment is a huge problem because the non integration between Hardware and software. IMHO it was already a big issue with Windows but when a server is failing your linux doesn't understand what's going on, which is not the case with a Mac Server. Not to mention the ability to power on/off a XSERVE/XRAID remotely. Not to mention Apple Hardware superior design, I am not talking about the looks here.
That's why after running Windows servers with crappy Windows (which requires a monthly reboot in the best case scenario), trying Linux I am now using Mac OS X as servers. We can benefit from all the Open Source solutions on top of top quality servers, top quality OS.
For me linux is good to recycle all old computers with a console machine, very useful to test solutions in dev environment. Of course the linux approach is to equip tons of "boxes" as fail over so when one fails, there is always another to take the relay. It's a conception not mine.
Now as some of you said previously, to give a linux box as desktop computer is the best way to train a generation of geeks or computer haters!
Sorry but Linux is not ready for prime time yet. Windows is dead until Microsoft go back to white board. Still they proved there inability in doing so in the past and in case they would be successful it would take them 10 years to reach prime time, so I am sorry Linus to disappoint you but as much as I find your contribution invaluable, you are not in you league here. We are dealing with bigger scale here. And Mac OS X, MAc OS X Server iphone, Apple TVs are showing the way to modern era of OS that has no equivalent today. If you consider GPS systems in cars, their interface sucks, those people who design this type of products have no clue on how making their system intuitive to everybody. Until Apple TV, TVs menu sucked big time, not to mention phone before the iphone. I can give plenty of other examples excerpt from our day to day life to illustrate this hardware-software integration. That's why it is clear from beginning that a Windows or a Linux OS are simply an old fashion way to talk to interact with computers.
I believe Linus understood he may take him 30 more years to reach #1 hence his critics !!
My 2 cts...
I TOTALLY agree with your and other's statements about
a) having tried Linux for the sake of geekyness,
b) left it frustrated because either audio stuff was incompatible, or servers were a pain to configure*
c) I could never support that kind of "not one installation is the same" - yes, true, there are thousands of friendly people out there willing to help you if you've got a problem with Linux (or Windows). But the reality is, all these installations vary so much by versions, add-ons, plugins, extra packages etc. that it becomes a NIGHTMARE to support others. On the Mac, I establish a iChat Video-Conference in 2 Minutes and I'm sharing their screen if it's not solved on the phone. You choose!
*the real Linux geeks are going to say I just lacked the skills - and that's probably true.
My case in point however is this: On a OS X Server machine (we run only XServe's now - with a reboot for some major installation perhaps every six months - not bi-weekly as on Windows Server 2005 because of security patches btw), a moderately educated guy can install, configure, and maintenance the OS X Server system by himself.
Heck, my parents could take care of setting up email accounts, users and home folders or create another web site. On the server admin and reliability side, Mac OS X wins clearly for us (=that's my work team btw, not my parents and I...).
On the "desktop" side - if you're into Audio, Mr. Linux - have you seen Logic Studio 8? Case closed. Apple wins. And if you don't like Apple Logic 8(it's a world better than 7, try it!), there's Ableton Live (haven't seen it on Linux...), which is used by probably half of the mega-successful producers and DJs today.
Final Cut Studio 2 with Color (formerly a $25,000 software before Apple integrated it into FCS2) and Shake (formerly $10,000+ for a seat - now $500 after Apple took over) - let's not go there - it blows the competition away at a fraction of the price. Granted, Shake is available on Linux, but it costs more than the FCS2 package PLUS Shake on OS X...
Hardware and file-system - "a crap file-system" WHAT is the Linux guru on about?!
I have not done defragmentation on my drives (OS X soft-RAID) in FOUR years! I have also not had any file-system corruption... how is this"crap"? "Crap" is a very extreme, unprofessional way of talking about your copetition anyway. I would never say Linux is "crap", nor is Windows Vista crap (that was a difficult thing to put in writing though, as the security-warnings drive you bonkers). But they're far from the user-friendliness and the overall "getting-things-done-factor" that Apple OS X 10.5.1 offers me (or Tiger, I liked it all along).
For the Windooze camp - we can still successfully run all current professional applications in their newest form (Adobe CS3, Apple Final Cut Studio 2, ...) on the most modern OS (10.5.1) on a 5-year old PowerBook G4.... try that with Vista Premium.
Oh, of course, all the new Macs run Windows XP and Vista, in many cases faster than the Dell's out there. And we haven't touched design yet, and we don't have to.
Enjoy your Macs folks and Welcome on over Linux and Windows people, give it a try for a week, two weeks, ....
Jonas
PS: I like most of the things Apple brings out, but I am not using their hard- and software because I am an Apple-fanboy or only care about superior design and usability.
I use it because it allows me to spend 99% of my time doing productive, fun things that deliver professional results - from fail-proof Servers to HD-Video-Editing with professional-level Color correction and special effects. The 1% is the time I spend on installing NEW software, not partitioning my hard-drive or defragmenting like the bad old days of M$.
...which is not the case with a Mac Server. Not to mention the ability to power on/off a XSERVE/XRAID remotely. Not to mention Apple Hardware superior design, I am not talking about the looks here.
That's why after running Windows servers with crappy Windows (which requires a monthly reboot in the best case scenario), trying Linux I am now using Mac OS X as servers. We can benefit from all the Open Source solutions on top of top quality servers, top quality OS....
Have you tried much NetBoot+NetInstall? I was blown away by it. There is the nasty DHCP "interface not found" or something like that bug for 10.5 Server fresh install. Other than that, OS X Leopard Server is rather impressive.
I know Linux has NetBoot etc. but I get the impression that it is nowhere near what OS X does with images (even on Leopard Client).
Windows server admins are really different. They think differently (as in from Mac users & admins), and are there to be happy to babysit beige boxes.
I notice that Mac Server admins, honestly, start to focus on solving the problems and improving things rather than be content that
"they as admins are so needed because nobody else knows WTF is always going wrong with the Windows server and desktop boxes".
... I use it because it allows me to spend 99% of my time doing productive, fun things that deliver professional results - from fail-proof Servers to HD-Video-Editing with professional-level Color correction and special effects. The 1% is the time I spend on installing NEW software, not partitioning my hard-drive or defragmenting like the bad old days of M$.
Perfect example of a level-headed Mac Admin... what I mentioned in my previous post. Call me a fanboy or n00b, but when your mobile phone is going off the hook every hour because of someone in your office downloading a Trojan or something else...
but when your mobile phone is going off the hook every hour because of someone in your office downloading a Trojan or something else...
I think you picked the wrong example there. There's nothing (within reason*) that an OS can do to protect against Trojans. Technically, all OSes are equally vulnerable, it's just that there are more Windows Trojans than anything else because of Windows' market share.
* A few possibilities are:
Only allowing signed programs to run on the OS.
Keeping all non-signed programs in a "sandbox".
Analysing the program with a cunning algorithm before running it to try and determine whether it wants to do nefarious things, and not running it if there's any doubt.
Linux is first class as a server OS but on the desktop it doesnt even come close.
You'd be suprised how much of the worlds infrastructure is running Linux quietly behind the scenes,(servers, embedded devices etc) but as a workstation OS it doesnt stand a chance in its current state.
I think you picked the wrong example there. There's nothing (within reason*) that an OS can do to protect against Trojans. Technically, all OSes are equally vulnerable, it's just that there are more Windows Trojans than anything else because of Windows' market share.
* A few possibilities are:
Only allowing signed programs to run on the OS.
Keeping all non-signed programs in a "sandbox".
Analysing the program with a cunning algorithm before running it to try and determine whether it wants to do nefarious things, and not running it if there's any doubt.
'it's just that there are more Windows Trojans than anything else because of Windows' market share'
That old chestnut!
When will you get it into your head, it is technically possible to infect OS X if you install the offending program and give it root access. However this has not happened 'in the wild'
Due to legacy compatibility, windows has more holes in it than a string vest. Leaving more opportunities for rogue software to be run by the user or run without the user knowing.
As to Mr. Torvalds
As a server base its ace (we run it as a base for vmware to run multiple MS 2003 server installs)
Linux Desktop is basically done for free and as the saying goes 'if you pay peanuts...'
I agree with most of what has been posted here, its not fanboyish ravings either, its well reasoned and sound "in the field" experience.
I spent a while on Linux, and it was a breath of fresh air, but ultimately it was that which sent me on to Apple.
-
Now! "Crap" I'd love to know what he defines "crap" as? in my neck of the woods it's "sh1t" and to be honest, no matter how much I respect LT, to me at least, it sounds like he is talking a LOT of "Crap"
things are not looking good, eh? just a few months ago linux was the major alternative [windows mobile]. now we have android and the 'almost' perfect os x...
things turned out to be not as easy as you expected, right linus?
But android is linux. I thought the point of linux was to have as he said an open source operating system, decentralized, that runs in the background so the applications become more important. If android succeeds then linus torvolds succeeds.
'it's just that there are more Windows Trojans than anything else because of Windows' market share'
That old chestnut!
When will you get it into your head, it is technically possible to infect OS X if you install the offending program and give it root access. However this has not happened 'in the wild'
Due to legacy compatibility, windows has more holes in it than a string vest. Leaving more opportunities for rogue software to be run by the user or run without the user knowing.
I think you need to go back and re-read my post over and over until you get it into your head that:
I understand (unlike most people) the difference between Trojans, Worms and Viruses.
I clearly stated that there is nothing an OS can do to protect against Trojans, and that therefore all OSes are equally susceptible to them.
There are more Trojans for Windows than other platforms - fact
This is because Windows has a higher market share - fact
It does not reflect upon the technical merits/detriments of Windows or other OSes - fact
A Trojan is a program that makes users think they want it, so the user installs it and runs it. Then it does nasty things instead-of/in-addition-to the things the user thought it would do. The Trojan tricks the user and there's nothing an OS can do about that.
I think that the investors and "on the surface" computer users here are missing the point about Linux. Yes, it's more anarchic and can be more archaic to use in a lot of ways. I wouldn't recommend it to any casual computer user who doesn't care about the internal details of their computer (unless it's been pre-configured for everything they need).
However, the big excitement about Linux is for small companies who want to create new devices and prototype hardware easily without getting bogged down in royalties, licensing issues, and trying to get support from Microsoft or Apple.
I worked on some custom hardware in the past, and I can tell you that working with Linux was a breath of fresh air compared to trying to get Microsoft's attention with regard to upcoming hardware support in Windows CE. Firewire industrial camera support isn't there yet? Just write it in yourself in Linux or hold your breath waiting for Microsoft to care if you're not a big company. Using a custom LCD display? Not going to happen on Windows or Mac OS unless someone before you has pushed for it.
And for application development, I agree about the lock-in. I remember a few years back I was at the ADC talking to the Apple engineers about using Java for an application which needed to run cross-platform, and getting access to some of the native stuff specific to Mac OS X from Java, and it was like I was an alien. As soon as you mention the words "cross platform", people start to tune out.
Obviously, I understand that in the world of business, it doesn't make sense to help people support platforms other than your own. However, as someone who simply enjoys creating new technology, it's frustrating to hit the "business wall". That's where Linux is more enjoyable to use, and why it's the most popular platform for embedded systems and devices. Most of you probably already have one or more devices in your home which run Linux, but you just don't see it.
I don't get why Linus thinks that OS X follows the Windows approach to bloat.
It has required more RAM as time has gone by, but between OS 10.0-10.5 each upgrade has been faster and more responsive. Many of you here have said this through personal experience. But really, if you can't afford $40 a GB to upgrade your RAM to run OS X, then maybe you are just too cheap for a commercial OS.
As far as the file system being a mess, 99.9% of users can't tell the difference. And it's not like Apple isn't looking at ZFS.
Linux has its own problems that are much more severe than the direction Apple and Microsoft are going in.
What Linus says about OS's in general affect about 98% of the computer using population.
In fact my grandpa the other day, while emailing a picture of himself playing Bingo and waxing his 1988 Buick Electra, was pissed off at how long it took to attach said pictures.
He attributed the delay to "that gosh darn file system in OS X! If I were using Linux, it would have been faster by 0.16 seconds."
It's like the Toyota Camry: Yes, it's the ugliest car in the world and doesn't handle well in the turns at Laguna Seca. But that affects about, oh, 12 of us in the whole wide world.
Linus needs to "change the world" and quit bitching when he doesn't. Didn't he say he was going to do that, like, 12 years ago?
In fact my grandpa the other day, while emailing a picture of himself playing Bingo and waxing his 1988 Buick Electra, was pissed off at how long it took to attach said pictures.
He attributed the delay to "that gosh darn file system in OS X! If I were using Linux, it would have been faster by 0.16 seconds."
"...manufacturing costs accounted for only 50 percent of each unit before factoring marketing and sales into the equation."
Yeah, and frontloaded R&D costs apparently don't figure into this equation at all. Tool.
R&D never figures into the cost of a producing any product. Besides that, it is logically and theoretically inconsistent to do so. As a side note, in-house R&D must be expensed in the period incurred and is never capitalized unless it for certain types of software - that is the only exception. However, products can be made potentially for many years.
The reason for not tying R&D expense to any product is that the fruits of R&D can become evident in multiple products down the line or in none. The benefits of R&D remains open indefinitely. In theory, R&D is essentially a sunk cost. Seriously, if we were to look at things from your point of view, then the application of R&D to product cost could potentially be duplicated and this would result in major inconsistencies. Also, what kind of cost do you associate it with? Is it a fixed cost or variable cost? It is fixed. Is it a product cost or a period cost? It is a period cost. Plus, it is an indirect cost since it cannot be really be traceable to a single product (again, the number of products that ultimately will benefit from the research is indeterminable).
Other period costs like sales and marketing should really not factor into product costs either. Since these are administrative costs as well as period costs, they can only factor into units sold during the period in determining net income by product line (if such costs can be traced to the product).
Your scenario would not work as belgian law forbids to ceate a financial incentive for 'coupled' sales. So the 300$ mail in rebate would just simply not work. Granted, mobistar has an excellent EDGE network -and is incidentally part of the Orange Group, which helps matters I guess.
However BASE (the 3rd operator) has national EDGE coverage as well, whereas Proximus (the leader) does not (very good 3G though).
My guess is that a Belgian deal will be as complicated as can be as the handset will have to be sold unlocked and at the same price for everyone. One could stipulate that you can only bu the handsets in the mobistar centers, so brace yourelf for some hard selling of services, but at the end of the day I would be in my right to ask for a naked handset, walk out of the shop and put my present SIM card in it.
Anyway the only difference between an official iPhone carrier and a non-official is the absence of visual voicemail, which to me is a nice-to-have feature but not a core criterion
I am the first to admit I know nothing of Belgian laws, but from a consumer choice point of view it sounds excellent that phone sales are totally decoupled from subscription sales. From a monetary point of view it must suck for consumers, though? Financial incentives are only bad when you have no choice but to accept one - after all, an 'incentive' by definition can't be bad, but it can be different to what you want.
I'm not sure I agree that "the only difference between an official iPhone carrier and a non-official is the absence of visual voicemail". EDGE coverage surely must play a part, and in the not too distant future (within a phone contracts length from now I would assume) a network having the correct type of 3G with good coverage could well play a part also. In other countries (might not apply for Belgium though) tech support and warranties could also come into play also and these should not be sneezed at.
Comments
Now on the technical level, Linux is interesting for labs but running linux on mission critical environment is a huge problem because the non integration between Hardware and software. IMHO it was already a big issue with Windows but when a server is failing your linux doesn't understand what's going on, which is not the case with a Mac Server. Not to mention the ability to power on/off a XSERVE/XRAID remotely. Not to mention Apple Hardware superior design, I am not talking about the looks here.
That's why after running Windows servers with crappy Windows (which requires a monthly reboot in the best case scenario), trying Linux I am now using Mac OS X as servers. We can benefit from all the Open Source solutions on top of top quality servers, top quality OS.
For me linux is good to recycle all old computers with a console machine, very useful to test solutions in dev environment. Of course the linux approach is to equip tons of "boxes" as fail over so when one fails, there is always another to take the relay. It's a conception not mine.
Now as some of you said previously, to give a linux box as desktop computer is the best way to train a generation of geeks or computer haters!
Sorry but Linux is not ready for prime time yet. Windows is dead until Microsoft go back to white board. Still they proved there inability in doing so in the past and in case they would be successful it would take them 10 years to reach prime time, so I am sorry Linus to disappoint you but as much as I find your contribution invaluable, you are not in you league here. We are dealing with bigger scale here. And Mac OS X, MAc OS X Server iphone, Apple TVs are showing the way to modern era of OS that has no equivalent today. If you consider GPS systems in cars, their interface sucks, those people who design this type of products have no clue on how making their system intuitive to everybody. Until Apple TV, TVs menu sucked big time, not to mention phone before the iphone. I can give plenty of other examples excerpt from our day to day life to illustrate this hardware-software integration. That's why it is clear from beginning that a Windows or a Linux OS are simply an old fashion way to talk to interact with computers.
I believe Linus understood he may take him 30 more years to reach #1 hence his critics !!
My 2 cts...
I doubt Mobistar will be able to get a deal done with Apple as in Belgium it is by law forbidden to sell a phone with a subscription. My guess Mobistar wants to ride the iPhone hype and hopes people will switch to Mobistar in advance. Belgium is one of the few countries where every phone is sold unlocked.
Or this means unlocked phones are coming to europe.
I suspect selling phones with an extremely good incentive to be with a certain carrier will be enough for Apple. If it would save you $50 a month to be with (Mobistar) then wouldn't that be enough for the majority of people to subscribe with them? Or perhaps a couple hundred dollars up front?
Then Apple can receive their kickbacks from (Mobistar) based upon iPhone subscribers, no negative implied, and avoid the experience dilution that can come about with a user base distributed over numerous networks. (Particularly those that may not support certain features).
Implementation of such a system would be hard, perhaps sell the (unocked) iPhone with say a $300 premium, with an oh so coincidental $300 rebate from Apple after signing with (Mobistar)?
Theres the incentive to be with Mobistar, at no extra cost to Apple or Mobistar to implement. Not saying it should be done, rather that it could be.
What's Linux? Why should I care?
Can anyone name major, paradigm-shifting software developments that have come out of Linux? (Please spare me the teary-eyed stuff about the beauty of "collective development" etc a la the Wikipedia model).
And, considering that many people see it as an alternative to Windows, would you please include in that an argument why it has a market share of about 1%?
You, sir, don't have a clue. The main reason for the weak market share of Linux is to be seen in the optionitis that plagues the Linux world, i.e. the lack of consolidating forces to relieve users outside the geek realm of the unneccessary choices you have to make.
I understand what he says about Microsoft.
But he is talking crap about Mac OSX.
My 400mhz G3 Pismo went through 4 OSX upgrades before it died on me (stroke).
Every incarnation of OSX, from 10.1 to 10.4, the machine responded faster, until a point, after I upgraded it to Tiger, it felt almost as fast as OS9.
Both my current 2.33ghz 15" MBP and 2.8ghz iMac feel faster under 10.5 than 10.4.
I know 10.5 needs more resources and slowing some processes down, but if the resources are available, Leopard feels snappier.
So as far as I can see improving performance is still high on Apples agenda.
TOTALLY AGREE with you :-)
I suspect selling phones with an extremely good incentive to be with a certain carrier will be enough for Apple. If it would save you $50 a month to be with (Mobistar) then wouldn't that be enough for the majority of people to subscribe with them? Or perhaps a couple hundred dollars up front?
Then Apple can receive their kickbacks from (Mobistar) based upon iPhone subscribers, no negative implied, and avoid the experience dilution that can come about with a user base distributed over numerous networks. (Particularly those that may not support certain features).
Implementation of such a system would be hard, perhaps sell the (unocked) iPhone with say a $300 premium, with an oh so coincidental $300 rebate from Apple after signing with (Mobistar)?
Theres the incentive to be with Mobistar, at no extra cost to Apple or Mobistar to implement. Not saying it should be done, rather that it could be.
Your scenario would not work as belgian law forbids to ceate a financial incentive for 'coupled' sales. So the 300$ mail in rebate would just simply not work. Granted, mobistar has an excellent EDGE network -and is incidentally part of the Orange Group, which helps matters I guess.
However BASE (the 3rd operator) has national EDGE coverage as well, whereas Proximus (the leader) does not (very good 3G though).
My guess is that a Belgian deal will be as complicated as can be as the handset will have to be sold unlocked and at the same price for everyone. One could stipulate that you can only bu the handsets in the mobistar centers, so brace yourelf for some hard selling of services, but at the end of the day I would be in my right to ask for a naked handset, walk out of the shop and put my present SIM card in it.
Anyway the only difference between an official iPhone carrier and a non-official is the absence of visual voicemail, which to me is a nice-to-have feature but not a core criterion
We give Linus too much of attention. He thought he would kick Bill Gates out from #1 in the OS impersonation biz but became #3 with the raise of Mac OS X (represented by Steve Jobs).
Now on the technical level, Linux is interesting for labs but running linux on mission critical environment is a huge problem because the non integration between Hardware and software. IMHO it was already a big issue with Windows but when a server is failing your linux doesn't understand what's going on, which is not the case with a Mac Server. Not to mention the ability to power on/off a XSERVE/XRAID remotely. Not to mention Apple Hardware superior design, I am not talking about the looks here.
That's why after running Windows servers with crappy Windows (which requires a monthly reboot in the best case scenario), trying Linux I am now using Mac OS X as servers. We can benefit from all the Open Source solutions on top of top quality servers, top quality OS.
For me linux is good to recycle all old computers with a console machine, very useful to test solutions in dev environment. Of course the linux approach is to equip tons of "boxes" as fail over so when one fails, there is always another to take the relay. It's a conception not mine.
Now as some of you said previously, to give a linux box as desktop computer is the best way to train a generation of geeks or computer haters!
Sorry but Linux is not ready for prime time yet. Windows is dead until Microsoft go back to white board. Still they proved there inability in doing so in the past and in case they would be successful it would take them 10 years to reach prime time, so I am sorry Linus to disappoint you but as much as I find your contribution invaluable, you are not in you league here. We are dealing with bigger scale here. And Mac OS X, MAc OS X Server iphone, Apple TVs are showing the way to modern era of OS that has no equivalent today. If you consider GPS systems in cars, their interface sucks, those people who design this type of products have no clue on how making their system intuitive to everybody. Until Apple TV, TVs menu sucked big time, not to mention phone before the iphone. I can give plenty of other examples excerpt from our day to day life to illustrate this hardware-software integration. That's why it is clear from beginning that a Windows or a Linux OS are simply an old fashion way to talk to interact with computers.
I believe Linus understood he may take him 30 more years to reach #1 hence his critics !!
My 2 cts...
I TOTALLY agree with your and other's statements about
a) having tried Linux for the sake of geekyness,
b) left it frustrated because either audio stuff was incompatible, or servers were a pain to configure*
c) I could never support that kind of "not one installation is the same" - yes, true, there are thousands of friendly people out there willing to help you if you've got a problem with Linux (or Windows). But the reality is, all these installations vary so much by versions, add-ons, plugins, extra packages etc. that it becomes a NIGHTMARE to support others. On the Mac, I establish a iChat Video-Conference in 2 Minutes and I'm sharing their screen if it's not solved on the phone. You choose!
*the real Linux geeks are going to say I just lacked the skills - and that's probably true.
My case in point however is this: On a OS X Server machine (we run only XServe's now - with a reboot for some major installation perhaps every six months - not bi-weekly as on Windows Server 2005 because of security patches btw), a moderately educated guy can install, configure, and maintenance the OS X Server system by himself.
Heck, my parents could take care of setting up email accounts, users and home folders or create another web site. On the server admin and reliability side, Mac OS X wins clearly for us (=that's my work team btw, not my parents and I...).
On the "desktop" side - if you're into Audio, Mr. Linux - have you seen Logic Studio 8? Case closed. Apple wins. And if you don't like Apple Logic 8(it's a world better than 7, try it!), there's Ableton Live (haven't seen it on Linux...), which is used by probably half of the mega-successful producers and DJs today.
Final Cut Studio 2 with Color (formerly a $25,000 software before Apple integrated it into FCS2) and Shake (formerly $10,000+ for a seat - now $500 after Apple took over) - let's not go there - it blows the competition away at a fraction of the price. Granted, Shake is available on Linux, but it costs more than the FCS2 package PLUS Shake on OS X...
Hardware and file-system - "a crap file-system" WHAT is the Linux guru on about?!
I have not done defragmentation on my drives (OS X soft-RAID) in FOUR years! I have also not had any file-system corruption... how is this"crap"? "Crap" is a very extreme, unprofessional way of talking about your copetition anyway. I would never say Linux is "crap", nor is Windows Vista crap (that was a difficult thing to put in writing though, as the security-warnings drive you bonkers). But they're far from the user-friendliness and the overall "getting-things-done-factor" that Apple OS X 10.5.1 offers me (or Tiger, I liked it all along).
For the Windooze camp - we can still successfully run all current professional applications in their newest form (Adobe CS3, Apple Final Cut Studio 2, ...) on the most modern OS (10.5.1) on a 5-year old PowerBook G4.... try that with Vista Premium.
Oh, of course, all the new Macs run Windows XP and Vista, in many cases faster than the Dell's out there. And we haven't touched design yet, and we don't have to.
Enjoy your Macs folks and Welcome on over Linux and Windows people, give it a try for a week, two weeks, ....
Jonas
PS: I like most of the things Apple brings out, but I am not using their hard- and software because I am an Apple-fanboy or only care about superior design and usability.
I use it because it allows me to spend 99% of my time doing productive, fun things that deliver professional results - from fail-proof Servers to HD-Video-Editing with professional-level Color correction and special effects. The 1% is the time I spend on installing NEW software, not partitioning my hard-drive or defragmenting like the bad old days of M$.
...which is not the case with a Mac Server. Not to mention the ability to power on/off a XSERVE/XRAID remotely. Not to mention Apple Hardware superior design, I am not talking about the looks here.
That's why after running Windows servers with crappy Windows (which requires a monthly reboot in the best case scenario), trying Linux I am now using Mac OS X as servers. We can benefit from all the Open Source solutions on top of top quality servers, top quality OS....
Have you tried much NetBoot+NetInstall? I was blown away by it. There is the nasty DHCP "interface not found" or something like that bug for 10.5 Server fresh install. Other than that, OS X Leopard Server is rather impressive.
I know Linux has NetBoot etc. but I get the impression that it is nowhere near what OS X does with images (even on Leopard Client).
Windows server admins are really different. They think differently (as in from Mac users & admins), and are there to be happy to babysit beige boxes.
I notice that Mac Server admins, honestly, start to focus on solving the problems and improving things rather than be content that
"they as admins are so needed because nobody else knows WTF is always going wrong with the Windows server and desktop boxes".
... I use it because it allows me to spend 99% of my time doing productive, fun things that deliver professional results - from fail-proof Servers to HD-Video-Editing with professional-level Color correction and special effects. The 1% is the time I spend on installing NEW software, not partitioning my hard-drive or defragmenting like the bad old days of M$.
Perfect example of a level-headed Mac Admin... what I mentioned in my previous post. Call me a fanboy or n00b, but when your mobile phone is going off the hook every hour because of someone in your office downloading a Trojan or something else...
but when your mobile phone is going off the hook every hour because of someone in your office downloading a Trojan or something else...
I think you picked the wrong example there. There's nothing (within reason*) that an OS can do to protect against Trojans. Technically, all OSes are equally vulnerable, it's just that there are more Windows Trojans than anything else because of Windows' market share.
* A few possibilities are:
You'd be suprised how much of the worlds infrastructure is running Linux quietly behind the scenes,(servers, embedded devices etc) but as a workstation OS it doesnt stand a chance in its current state.
I think you picked the wrong example there. There's nothing (within reason*) that an OS can do to protect against Trojans. Technically, all OSes are equally vulnerable, it's just that there are more Windows Trojans than anything else because of Windows' market share.
* A few possibilities are:
'it's just that there are more Windows Trojans than anything else because of Windows' market share'
That old chestnut!
When will you get it into your head, it is technically possible to infect OS X if you install the offending program and give it root access. However this has not happened 'in the wild'
Due to legacy compatibility, windows has more holes in it than a string vest. Leaving more opportunities for rogue software to be run by the user or run without the user knowing.
As to Mr. Torvalds
As a server base its ace (we run it as a base for vmware to run multiple MS 2003 server installs)
Linux Desktop is basically done for free and as the saying goes 'if you pay peanuts...'
I spent a while on Linux, and it was a breath of fresh air, but ultimately it was that which sent me on to Apple.
-
Now! "Crap" I'd love to know what he defines "crap" as? in my neck of the woods it's "sh1t" and to be honest, no matter how much I respect LT, to me at least, it sounds like he is talking a LOT of "Crap"
things are not looking good, eh? just a few months ago linux was the major alternative [windows mobile]. now we have android and the 'almost' perfect os x...
things turned out to be not as easy as you expected, right linus?
But android is linux. I thought the point of linux was to have as he said an open source operating system, decentralized, that runs in the background so the applications become more important. If android succeeds then linus torvolds succeeds.
'it's just that there are more Windows Trojans than anything else because of Windows' market share'
That old chestnut!
When will you get it into your head, it is technically possible to infect OS X if you install the offending program and give it root access. However this has not happened 'in the wild'
Due to legacy compatibility, windows has more holes in it than a string vest. Leaving more opportunities for rogue software to be run by the user or run without the user knowing.
I think you need to go back and re-read my post over and over until you get it into your head that:
There are more Trojans for Windows than other platforms - fact
This is because Windows has a higher market share - fact
It does not reflect upon the technical merits/detriments of Windows or other OSes - fact
A Trojan is a program that makes users think they want it, so the user installs it and runs it. Then it does nasty things instead-of/in-addition-to the things the user thought it would do. The Trojan tricks the user and there's nothing an OS can do about that.
However, the big excitement about Linux is for small companies who want to create new devices and prototype hardware easily without getting bogged down in royalties, licensing issues, and trying to get support from Microsoft or Apple.
I worked on some custom hardware in the past, and I can tell you that working with Linux was a breath of fresh air compared to trying to get Microsoft's attention with regard to upcoming hardware support in Windows CE. Firewire industrial camera support isn't there yet? Just write it in yourself in Linux or hold your breath waiting for Microsoft to care if you're not a big company. Using a custom LCD display? Not going to happen on Windows or Mac OS unless someone before you has pushed for it.
And for application development, I agree about the lock-in. I remember a few years back I was at the ADC talking to the Apple engineers about using Java for an application which needed to run cross-platform, and getting access to some of the native stuff specific to Mac OS X from Java, and it was like I was an alien. As soon as you mention the words "cross platform", people start to tune out.
Obviously, I understand that in the world of business, it doesn't make sense to help people support platforms other than your own. However, as someone who simply enjoys creating new technology, it's frustrating to hit the "business wall". That's where Linux is more enjoyable to use, and why it's the most popular platform for embedded systems and devices. Most of you probably already have one or more devices in your home which run Linux, but you just don't see it.
It has required more RAM as time has gone by, but between OS 10.0-10.5 each upgrade has been faster and more responsive. Many of you here have said this through personal experience. But really, if you can't afford $40 a GB to upgrade your RAM to run OS X, then maybe you are just too cheap for a commercial OS.
As far as the file system being a mess, 99.9% of users can't tell the difference. And it's not like Apple isn't looking at ZFS.
Linux has its own problems that are much more severe than the direction Apple and Microsoft are going in.
In fact my grandpa the other day, while emailing a picture of himself playing Bingo and waxing his 1988 Buick Electra, was pissed off at how long it took to attach said pictures.
He attributed the delay to "that gosh darn file system in OS X! If I were using Linux, it would have been faster by 0.16 seconds."
It's like the Toyota Camry: Yes, it's the ugliest car in the world and doesn't handle well in the turns at Laguna Seca. But that affects about, oh, 12 of us in the whole wide world.
Linus needs to "change the world" and quit bitching when he doesn't. Didn't he say he was going to do that, like, 12 years ago?
...
In fact my grandpa the other day, while emailing a picture of himself playing Bingo and waxing his 1988 Buick Electra, was pissed off at how long it took to attach said pictures.
He attributed the delay to "that gosh darn file system in OS X! If I were using Linux, it would have been faster by 0.16 seconds."
...?
ROFL!!
"...manufacturing costs accounted for only 50 percent of each unit before factoring marketing and sales into the equation."
Yeah, and frontloaded R&D costs apparently don't figure into this equation at all. Tool.
R&D never figures into the cost of a producing any product. Besides that, it is logically and theoretically inconsistent to do so. As a side note, in-house R&D must be expensed in the period incurred and is never capitalized unless it for certain types of software - that is the only exception. However, products can be made potentially for many years.
The reason for not tying R&D expense to any product is that the fruits of R&D can become evident in multiple products down the line or in none. The benefits of R&D remains open indefinitely. In theory, R&D is essentially a sunk cost. Seriously, if we were to look at things from your point of view, then the application of R&D to product cost could potentially be duplicated and this would result in major inconsistencies. Also, what kind of cost do you associate it with? Is it a fixed cost or variable cost? It is fixed. Is it a product cost or a period cost? It is a period cost. Plus, it is an indirect cost since it cannot be really be traceable to a single product (again, the number of products that ultimately will benefit from the research is indeterminable).
Other period costs like sales and marketing should really not factor into product costs either. Since these are administrative costs as well as period costs, they can only factor into units sold during the period in determining net income by product line (if such costs can be traced to the product).
Your scenario would not work as belgian law forbids to ceate a financial incentive for 'coupled' sales. So the 300$ mail in rebate would just simply not work. Granted, mobistar has an excellent EDGE network -and is incidentally part of the Orange Group, which helps matters I guess.
However BASE (the 3rd operator) has national EDGE coverage as well, whereas Proximus (the leader) does not (very good 3G though).
My guess is that a Belgian deal will be as complicated as can be as the handset will have to be sold unlocked and at the same price for everyone. One could stipulate that you can only bu the handsets in the mobistar centers, so brace yourelf for some hard selling of services, but at the end of the day I would be in my right to ask for a naked handset, walk out of the shop and put my present SIM card in it.
Anyway the only difference between an official iPhone carrier and a non-official is the absence of visual voicemail, which to me is a nice-to-have feature but not a core criterion
I am the first to admit I know nothing of Belgian laws, but from a consumer choice point of view it sounds excellent that phone sales are totally decoupled from subscription sales. From a monetary point of view it must suck for consumers, though? Financial incentives are only bad when you have no choice but to accept one - after all, an 'incentive' by definition can't be bad, but it can be different to what you want.
I'm not sure I agree that "the only difference between an official iPhone carrier and a non-official is the absence of visual voicemail". EDGE coverage surely must play a part, and in the not too distant future (within a phone contracts length from now I would assume) a network having the correct type of 3G with good coverage could well play a part also. In other countries (might not apply for Belgium though) tech support and warranties could also come into play also and these should not be sneezed at.