Sujet : Re: cpu-x
De : ronb02NOSPAM (at) *nospam* gmail.com (RonB)
Groupes : comp.os.linux.advocacyDate : 15. May 2024, 16:10:54
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v22fpe$tjac$4@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
User-Agent : slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
On 2024-05-15, Andrzej Matuch <
andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
On Wed, 15 May 2024 05:45:03 +0000, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
On 14 May 2024 01:02:56 GMT, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
On Tue, 14 May 2024 00:42:29 +0000, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On 14 May 2024 00:11:11 GMT, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
So, it would be beneficial to open-source developers to make sure
that their software breaks easily and crashes, so as to sell the
support.
Clearly you have never used the stuff.
No, actually, you are depending crucially on it right now, without
realizing it. Without Open Source, there would be no Internet.
We both know that's not true. Without open-source, there would have
been an alternative based on UNIX or Windows.
Those alternatives existed, way back when. Before the Internet, there
were “online services” such as Compuserve, AOL, Prodigy and others.
Before the World-Wide Web came to dominate, and in competition with it,
there was Microsoft’s “Project Blackbird”, Quark’s “Immedia” and no
doubt something from Adobe as well.
(Are these names unfamiliar to you? Go look them up in the usual places.
There will be a test--if you want to continue this thread.)
>
I am aware of them (I'm 45 years-old). In fact, Delphi Internet was my
first venture onto the Internet.
>
Linux is chosen because it's good enough and free, not because it is
necessarily better.
Open Source was better than all of those put together. That’s why it
wiped them out. Those proprietary products had the backing (financial,
marketing, technical) of some of the world’s biggest megacorporations of
the time, but they could not compete with Open Source and open
standards.
>
Not on price, that's for sure. If I recall correctly, those proprietary
services also wanted to make sure that you remained exclusive to that
service. There was no benefit for them to allow you to venture outside of
their walled garden, since that would cause you to eventually look for a
cheaper service which still gave you access to things like Usenet, IRC and
the World Wide Web without needing to pass through their graphical
interface. That might be why their systems were primitive compared to the
Linux ones, based on UNIX, which resisted a user having any sort of
middleman.
Microsoft could use their own server software for free on their Cloud. They
don't. They use Linux for their servers. That's all you really need to know
about the superiority of Linux for servers. I think Apple mostly gave up on
the server market a few years back.
If you're using the Internet, you're using Linux.
-- [Self-centered, Woke] "pride is a life of self-destructive fakery, an entrapment to a false and self-created matrix of twisted unreality." "It was pride that changed angels into devils..." — St. Augustine