brinkley.joseph at gmail.com
Wed Nov 18 11:59:53 EST 2009
Yes there we go. Now i propose we use this model to NOT do that in
Linux. but as with life love and liberty you have to crack some eggs.
So lessons learned is yes it will break but in the end the lesson is
for M$ Wondows to be as successful as it is it has to be broken.
Let us enjoy success of being publicly known on the current set of
products Linux works. may not do exactly what you want it how you want
to.(average PC user) but there is a strength in knowing that If we
are stable and SLOWLY populate the mass. they will come!
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith at ieee.org> wrote:
> Most "community" distros are supported only 15-18 months.
> As a result, the newer technologies aren't allowed to mature.
> They also cause ABI breakage, have API compatibility issues, etc...
> That is expected. It's software engineering 101.
> In fact, it's why SuSE first (before Red Hat**) split the model.
> There is no "one size fits all" distro.
> [ **NOTE: Red Hat originally attempted the same model as Canonical
> with Ubuntu LTS back in the Red Hat Linux 6 timeframe, and then
> changed to the SuSE model. It wasn't about greed. It was about
> fiscal sustainability -- focusing on those who want 7+ years of ABI/API
> backports and sustaining engineering to pay for those who get the
> "free" versions that are only maintained 15-18 months. ]
> Most of the complains that long-time Windows professionals have
> (ignoring any Linux-Windows bigots) _are_ quite specific to Windows.
> I could go on and on about abandonment, lack of even "proprietary
> standards" and countless other non-sense.
> It's also why I like Red Hat's stance on many things. Yes, it's
> technically possible to upgrade in various ways, even EL X to X+1.
> But Red Hat does not support it for a reason, because there are often
> other considerations involved. E.g., Oracle might be built for a specific
> GCC, LibStdC++ and GLibC, and then some other libraries, that are
> not always addressed by the compat-libs in the next release. I have
> this discussion several times a week. ;)
> Confusing technical capable or even partially feasible options with "best
> practice" is too commonplace. Blaming people, vendors, community,
> etc... is yet another issue.
> Community developed software has always been about options, the
> options are based on professionals who work together and find solutions.
> If a solution is offered, it is because it was necessary. If a solution is not
> offered, it is because not enough people found it necessary.
> Non-community developed software has largely been about what the
> vendor values. That's not bad, but it can work against some interests of
> users at times.
> Also understand Microsoft is _not_ your typical, "proprietary" software
> vendor. Proprietary software vendors at least value their customers who
> value their proprietary stack and fund it. Microsoft is driven by distribution
> channel and control. Let me say that again, it's distribution channel and
> control. Microsoft is _not_ a proprietary software company, it is a
> distribution control company (interwoven with strategic investments).
> And it's very, very advantageous to be a Microsoft partner, with
> guaranteed sales, revenue flows and -- most importantly -- force,
> subsequent purchases -- be it new drivers/software for the new system/OS,
> or new products/hardware for the same.
> Microsoft breaks their ABI/API regularly. I run into it weekly. Microsoft
> has been notorious for not documenting their own calls, violating their
> own API and just flat out bypassing their own security mechanisms for
> compatibility and, in some cases, just a flat out "oops."
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Joseph Brinkley <brinkley.joseph at gmail.com>
> Well it snot just the support that is modified.Again if its a bad OS
> or a bad idea no matter how long support is its still not usable. That
> there is th lesson that needs to be learned.
> Instead of bashing the other side try learning form its mistakes. the
> ample millions of them that can be seen slowly being made by the
> Distros out there.
> If We don't then how can we ask people to trade the OS they used for
> years for an OS that is just as unusable.
More information about the Novalug