Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Especially since there is no corporate leadership to squash innovation, no salary issues for those that want to participate on projects, no BS about your abilities.
Add to that the cheapness of bring up boards that allow developers to do this on their own dime/time as hobby does a lot to keep it alive.
Linux is a playground to programmers.
I've been running Linux since the mid-90s when it was very kludgy and had to be hand modified to get your various devices running. At one point there was only one good vendor video card support and it was the holy grail if you had it (Matrox variant).
No doubt Linux is important and ubiquitous. But Linux is killing Unix, not Windows. And it is doing so at the server level, not desktop/laptop.
But guess what, almost every large financial organization in the world runs z/OS. And the database of choice is DB2, not Oracle. And there is still a huge amount of data in IMS.
According to every market share study out there, Oracle is #1 and holding steady/growing slightly, DB2 is #2 and losing share, SQL Server is #3 and gaining and MySQL (now part of Oracle) is #4 and gaining.
DB2 is legacy, and people are moving off it where they can as newer ERPs like Oracle EBusiness, SAP, etc are dominating the transactional database market.
As far as growth goes, it's Oracle, then SQL Server followed by MySQL. Financial institutions run the old legacy systems because they are afraid of migration to this century.
To the part of Linux "killing" UNIX, that's not really true. Linux is "easier" UNIX that sacrifices performance gains in specific areas on specific hardware platforms for the ease of use and compatibility across multiple system architectures. All the flavors are UNIX are proprietary to the specific box architecture, where Linux tries to be a UNIX for all seasons. To recapture the performance gains, some folks like Oracle are now supplying their own version of Linux for use with their boxes and their tools. But there's no "killing" UNIX per se.
PDFs produced on Windows work everywhere. Quicktime is a terrible video format and losing market influence rapidly. Apple audio formats are less compatible than MP3, the worldwide standard.
What judge had to allow Firefox, OpenOffice, or Hulu to run on Windows? Please tell me what Microsoft has done to prevent someone from writing software to run on their platforms? Did they embed IE? Yes. Did that stop anyone from running Firefox or Chrome? No. Does Apple embed Safari? Yes.
Apple is THE most proprietary vendor today. They make software only for Mac or IOS, only on their hardware.
There was a lot of garbage in that suit. Hopefully you can see it. Did Microsoft abuse its market position by making it economically less attractive to resellers (e.g. Dell) to offer other browsers? I think they did.
But did that prevent you, me, or anyone else from installing another browser? No.
For some reason some thought Microsoft should not have included a browser at all. Why not?
Some time ago, Microsoft was disallowed from including a "save as PDF" option in Office 2007 because it was judged anticompetitive somehow with Adobe products. But they were allowed to offer a free download.
That was a dumb anti-consumer ruling. Thankfully it is obsolete and "save as PDF" works just great in Office.
Apple recently lost its fight over price-fixing of e-books. Yup they are a kind and gentle company.
There was a lot of garbage in that suit. Hopefully you can see it. Did Microsoft abuse its market position by making it economically less attractive to resellers (e.g. Dell) to offer other browsers? I think they did.
But did that prevent you, me, or anyone else from installing another browser? No.
For some reason some thought Microsoft should not have included a browser at all. Why not?
Some time ago, Microsoft was disallowed from including a "save as PDF" option in Office 2007 because it was judged anticompetitive somehow with Adobe products. But they were allowed to offer a free download.
That was a dumb anti-consumer ruling. Thankfully it is obsolete and "save as PDF" works just great in Office.
Apple recently lost its fight over price-fixing of e-books. Yup they are a kind and gentle company.
When users removed the browser the OS started "misbehaving".
I was working on Netscape code during that time period as part of a joint development team.
We did remove IE and stuff just stopped working.
You forget that back then it was all dialup for download or go buy the disc somewhere.
Yes, MS put themselves at an advantage by packaging their browser with the OS during "the browser wars".
MS was a monopoly on the desktop. Apple was all PPC based and not even in the picture then.
All you had was MS to run on your desktop.
When users removed the browser the OS started "misbehaving".
I was working on Netscape code during that time period as part of a joint development team.
We did remove IE and stuff just stopped working.
You forget that back then it was all dialup for download or go buy the disc somewhere.
Yes, MS put themselves at an advantage by packaging their browser with the OS during "the browser wars".
MS was a monopoly on the desktop. Apple was all PPC based and not even in the picture then.
All you had was MS to run on your desktop.
That is ancient history now. Microsoft changed. But you think that is a big deal today? Do you want to go through all the monopoly or similar lawsuits in computing?
Intel vs. AMD?
IBM vs. Amdahl?
Oracle vs. Sybase?
Apple vs. Google?
Apple vs. Microsoft?
Apple vs. EU?
Technically, there is nothing wrong with making the browser part of the OS.
That is ancient history now. Microsoft changed. But you think that is a big deal today? Do you want to go through all the monopoly or similar lawsuits in computing?
Intel vs. AMD?
IBM vs. Amdahl?
Oracle vs. Sybase?
Apple vs. Google?
Apple vs. Microsoft?
Apple vs. EU?
Technically, there is nothing wrong with making the browser part of the OS.
Technically no. But given the time and what other changes they made the judge did find fault with what they did.
Some of their programs did not work if IE was not on the system or selected as the default program.
MS was very monopolistic back then and they could afford to be because they were the only one on the block.
Whatever technology they developed outside of the OS they included in their OS which put any competitors at a disadvantage.
There was a lot of garbage in that suit. Hopefully you can see it. Did Microsoft abuse its market position by making it economically less attractive to resellers (e.g. Dell) to offer other browsers? I think they did.
But did that prevent you, me, or anyone else from installing another browser? No.
The problem was the browser being tied to the OS in such a way that removal of IE wrecked your Windows install. That created the imagery that Microsoft would crush even the user for NOT using their browser. It was one of the three primary reasons the court sided with plaintiff in that case.
Of course we could all use a different browser. I haven't used IE as my normal browser since 1994, and I've always used Windows PCs. But I am an IT pro who is not indicative of the whole market of PC users. Anymore, I just don't give my business or traffic to anyone who is dumb enough to write pages making heavy use of Active Server pages that only IE can render well. If Firefox or Chrome can't render your site properly on my screen, then your site sucks and so does your business. Pretty easy really.
But again, I do trust M$ for some things more than other people, like Security Essentials and various administrative stuff. They do some things really well, and I don't mind paying for the stuff that is done well or better than anyone else.
The job cuts from Nokia certainly do effect employment in America. There were 850 R&D employees in San Diego (the majority that will be sacked by the end of the year with less than 100 support/marketing remaining), not to mention the phone design and software centers found across California. And yes, there were over a 1000 cuts in Finland at the old Symbian OS, and Nokia X, R&D centers; However, there are additional jobs that will now be created in Finland to make up for the American and Chinese R&D facilities that are to be shuttered.
Either way, that's a large number. This is a horrible economy for the unemployed -- I feel for these people.
I thought they already laid off about 8 to 10 thousand employees from Nokia. Is this just a rehash of that news, or were 12K in this thread on top of that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringwise
I thought that just this morning. You never hear of a govt entity having a mass layoff because there is no money.
Well, they go through sequesters and furloughs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
