full day Linux Installation Workshops offered by UncleYap ;)

[uncleyap]

Wahahah glad you could understand hokkien, its very funny when I first saw them. Wah si Apple, Wah si PC. wahhahaah

Yes, I said UI, there are other stuff in Macs that are done "right" as well from a developers point of view. After all, OSX is a certified UNIX now, its BSD based. Lets put it this way, with Parrallels, Bootcamp, only a Mac can run Windows, Linux, OSX at the same time. There are no other laptops in the world that would allow you to develop stuff on all 3 platform. Char_azn pointed out that Apple are worst then PAP, I've heard that argument before and tend to agree a little with that respect. However, what I disagree is that apple has proven time over time their design is still the best compared to M$. There are stuff that Apple engineers designed that is simple and elegant to use both for the users and its developers. Unless you are an Apple developer you won't know what I'm talking about.

Again, I've said Linux has its own uses. The right tool for the right job. Its just I see the use of Windows getting less and less relevant in my life thats all. All the good windows developers I know actually hated developing on windows. I'm glad I'm doing linux,osx as its primary development machine. Windows dominance will end. Other then M$ everyone else has move to *nix OSes. Something that has been around more then 30 years.

I am pushing Linux to replace M$ craps. Because it is there, it is good, it don't cost $, it solves loads of M$ Crap problems, it benefits users, it will benefit the economy.

As it is, M$ Craps wasted computing resources and time and capital like hell in the Cyber world & IT aspects. Very inefficiently human resources are wasted to do non-productive craps.

The Y2K exercise is a one-time example that famiLEE LEEgime is very proud of, to squander $$$$$ & time & man power to fuck themselves. However M$ Carp is not just a one time event it is daily forever until M$ is rid from Cyber space. It is already almost 10 years from silly Y2K.

I hope people still remember that today.

Apple is another business, if Apple is being pushed to replace M$ then it will become another M$. M$ already bought up 35% of Apple's share long time ago. M$ saw that Apple might replace it's own craps some day, and they still want to be the only monopoly exploiter.

If we push Linux to replace M$, there are too many distributions and sources to see any monopoly. It is economically justified.

Apple UI has it's value, but I hope they become available as open source. Sun Micro for example have lots of good staffs in open source e.g. mysql; open solaris; open office etc. That is the kind of spirit that I respect. I hope Apple will follow.

IBM is yet another business that had contributed many useful technologies to the world without exploiting lots of users money.

M$ made too much craps and had robbed the world of too much money not just through compulsive sales but also via huge bully law suits, this is the fucking aspect that they are fucking similar with CB famiLEE LEEgime.

That's why we must rid them.

My view for the term ECONOMY is not the same as most people.

For most people ECONOMY equates with FREE GAINS, that means for them to fulfill their own greeds easily, and gain like no body's business WITHOUT JUSTIFYING CONTRIBUTIONS of their own parts.

I can not agree to that.

My view of economy is a science to efficiently allow needs and contributions (supply & demands) be interchanged FAIRLY among the people. NOT something to manufacture millionaires or billionaires or monopolies in the bloody process, if it does then it is where it got wrong, and MUST be STOPPED and Corrected.

Socialists believe that the by-products of each millionaire is a million poor, there is a lot of truth to that. Madoff & Lehman Brothers are the good examples, LEEgime ministers are also excellent examples.

To talk apart from politics, and back to IT, software should NEVER become a tool for their makers to exploit their customers. Open Source is the most important way to prevent this. M$ is the worst example that proved this un-affordable risk. They MUST BE STOPPED.

In the view of economy and trade, it is totally imbalanced and out of the line when even Bill Clinton tried to chop up M$ Crap spending lots of Dept of Justice funds and still lost to Bill Gates. The interest between M$ & users will never come to any healthy balance, even with White House putting in it's weight and efforts still can not help. 作小贡献占大便宜＝非常经济？？？:oIo:

The correct antidote is Linux.

Mac OS is comfort for the users, yes for sure, but it can be another poison again following after M$.:(

 

[Char_Azn]

I'm with you on the part about telling facts. I am not anti-windows myself. I am just anti monopoly.

Having said that...

I have nothing against you. I was just replying your post since it was a reply to mine

And this will be my last reply to your post, as stated earlier, I have nothing against the Open Source Movement and in fact support it. My only problem is with a certain hypocrite so unless that Hypocrite replies to my post directly, I will not be posting anymore in this thread to avoid being seen as anti Open Source

That's not why I mentioned it. Did you know that most common encryption algorithm are actually 'open-source' in nature, meaning everyone knows what they are? Therefore to say that open-source code is more susceptible to hackers vs closed source is simply not true.

No I didn't know that. Learn something new everyday. Then again, there is good reason why NONE of the major banks uses Opensource encryption and some companies may have based their product encryption on Open source sources the end product are usually very different and the end product is almost always closed to the public

I have to disagree on this because it is a personal choice and your personal opinion is not a common opinion

However the thousands of Linux based netbooks that were returned and the subsequent dropping of many Linux netbook models also goes to show that the Linux GUI isn't exactly a big hit either. True, many pple probably did not like to have to familiarize themselves with something new, then again, I can also argue that if it was so user friendly in the first place, users should have no problem making the leap.

OpenSource is not about you against me kind of thing. OpenSource is to encourage interoperability so that you are have to luxury of choice. If you need MS Office, so be it. But is it fair to force anyone who wants to use it to only Windows as well?

MS Office is available for the Mac BTW. Reason why M$ didn't make Office for Linux distribution is pretty much to do with economics. The Linux desktop market share is so freaking small that financing a team of programmers to create MS Office to be able to run on Linux is probably not profitable.

If not for opensource, MS products would have been more expensive. This is basic common knowledge. Without competition, monopoly takes over.

I agree. In some ways it is true and I totally agree with the monopoly part. However, note that M$ greatest competitor isn't something that's free, it's a Product that exploit it's user far worse then M$

I can never understand how Uncle Yap is thinking. Why would someone who hate PAP ways of doing things praising the Apple Mac OS is just weird

Pple who hate PAP usually does not like how they like to tell U wat to do
Apple tells U, what hardware U can or cannot use for the Mac

PAP like to sue the competition
Apple has the best record of suing any company who tries to sell Mac on their hardware

With PAP you are forced to vote for them else no upgrades
For Mac users, you can only buy your next machine from Apple again or else no more upgrades of Mac OS to the next version

you forgot to mentioned that MS Office Standard cost at least $500 for that 'advanced' feature while OpenOffice cost nothing. How many home users actually found that $500 worth it that they buy the original MS Office?

No I didn't forget to mention it, in this particular context, I was not talking about the software in general. Just to refresh, the topic for this in particular was that Open Source software is usually a watered down version of commercial software. Since Open source have been associated with being FREE(which is mentioned many many times in this thread already so I don't find the need to mention it again), its implied that you need to pay for the competition

I used both on a daily basis. Apart from macro, there is nothing OpenOffice cannot do, at zero cost.

Apart from the fact that vast majority of Finance pple and many Engineers need to use Micros at work, my point is that Open source software, in this example OpenOffice do not have as much features as MS Office and U just proved it for me, thanks.

Even govt agencies uses openoffice.

Yes I know and your point?

Do you know how much SAP and Oracle cost? If you know, then you will know how many companies can actually afford SAP or Oracle. Would a startup company invest that huge amount of money?

See answer on cost of OpenOffice vs MS Office, the point of the entire argument is about features of Open source software vs commercial software. This is out of context. I totally agree and readily admit that not all companies can afford commercial software and that Open Source is a good alternatives. I have never spoken out against that fact and this fact have been brought up several times before so I do not find the need to reply this

Would web hosting be as cheap as a few dollars a month if not for Apache? Even this forum is using php which is open source!

Think again.

See reply above

One word - education. Same for anyone who never used MS Office before. They can't do jack shit unless they learn

Same goes for all open source programs and unfortunately the number of courses teaching anything M$ or something from Commercial entities like Cisco Networking, SAP, etc, outnumbers Open Source courses by 100 to 1

Just like the encryption thingy, you didn't get my use of analogy. I was comparing Dell installation service to those commercial version against you fixing your ordered Dell yourself to the 'watered-down' version of the same product.

Yeah I didn't get it and quite frankly, I still don't

Are there are any free courses on how to use Windows or MS Office? Why should it be any different for opensource products?

Actually, yes there are. Though not common, its some of the tools M$ use to capture market share. However I am fine with someone charging for a Linux course but I am not fine with some asshole charging for something that is free while hiding behind a righteous cause when in fact he is doing nothing other then trying to make money.