Bad Windows but conquering the desktop war

[catweazel]

The other 5% being those who don't use a computer.

old himself

At 85 years old, I resemble that remark.

[deepakdeshp]

The other 5% being those who don't use a computer.

old himself

At 85 years old, I resemble that remark.

At 85 year old, you are still contributing meaningfully to the forum. Thats quite remarkable.

[mediclaser]

WARNING: This post is for people with sense of humor only

Choose your OS by answering simple questions:

Code: Select all

   Are you an idiot? 
          |
    Yes   |    No
  ------------------
  |                |
  |         Do you have life?
macOS              |
             Yes   |    No
            ----------------
            |              |
         Windows         Linux

Disclaimer: This is not originally from me -- Just found it in the internet.

[Pierre]

How to choose your next Operating System.

[deepakdeshp]

How to choose your next Operating System.

The do you have a life , I couldn't decipher, and even don't know the figures in them.
Nice picture though,

[xenopeek]

The complete chart for choosing an operating system is actually:

[killer de bug]

As I said at the top of this message, I've seen this movie before. Now, I'm not trying to say this is all pointing towards the death of F/OSS, or GNU+Linux, or anything like that, but these are situations we do not need because you have bad architectural decisions casting an unwarranted and undeserved bad light on products and functionality.

Is it the fault of Libre Office if Microsoft locks the documents by using a proprietary file format?
Data HAVE to be saved in an open way or you are at risk not to be able to read them without huge costs after a few years.

Which tend to state that MS and other closed Source oses are somehow patched quicker than closed source MS

Whoaaa really.

[Portreve]

Is it the fault of Libre Office if Microsoft locks the documents by using a proprietary file format?
Data HAVE to be saved in an open way or you are at risk not to be able to read them without huge costs after a few years.

I'm not sure how to respond to this because I do not understand how you arrived at this conclusion from what I wrote.

[deepakdeshp]

As I said at the top of this message, I've seen this movie before. Now, I'm not trying to say this is all pointing towards the death of F/OSS, or GNU+Linux, or anything like that, but these are situations we do not need because you have bad architectural decisions casting an unwarranted and undeserved bad light on products and functionality.

Is it the fault of Libre Office if Microsoft locks the documents by using a proprietary file format?
Data HAVE to be saved in an open way or you are at risk not to be able to read them without huge costs after a few years.

Which tend to state that MS and other closed Source oses are somehow patched quicker than closed source MS

Whoaaa really.

The open source os in general and Linux in particular are tested by a huge number and hence the vulnerabilities are caught soon. Then the number of code fixers are numerous who work on the vulnerabilities and patch them sooner as compared to MS$

[BigEasy]

The open source os in general and Linux in particular are tested by a huge number and hence the vulnerabilities are caught soon.

All Linux vulnerable code fixers and vulnerable code writers concentrated in Red Hat, SUSE, Debian and The Linux Kernel Organization. Testers are always we, regardless of OS. 3% of Linux marked comparing 88% of Winsows doesn't looks as huge number.

Then the number of code fixers are numerous who work on the vulnerabilities and patch them sooner as compared to MS$

Example, please.

[Portreve]

The open source os in general and Linux in particular are tested by a huge number and hence the vulnerabilities are caught soon. Then the number of code fixers are numerous who work on the vulnerabilities and patch them sooner as compared to MS$

Exactly. Libre licensing and the architectural structure of the free software / open source community brings peer review to all such software, which is something proprietary code does not and will never have.

That's why I refuse (at least on my computer) to run (nearly) anything that's proprietary. Exceptions include Chrome's sandboxed Flash, and codecs for certain proprietary media formats.

As for my phone, well... At least Android is less closed-off than iOS.

[catweazel]

... free software / open source community brings peer review to all such software, which is something proprietary code does not and will never have.

I take it you've never worked as a software developer. Peer review is the key component in any software quality assurance process.

[jimallyn]

Peer review is the key component in any software quality assurance process.

The numbers I have seen suggest that at any given moment in time, there are approximately 300 people who have access to the Windows source code. Anybody with a computer and internet access has access to the Linux source code. I don't know exactly how many people are doing QA on Linux, but thousands of developers have made contributions to the Linux kernel.

[catweazel]

Peer review is the key component in any software quality assurance process.

The numbers I have seen suggest that at any given moment in time, there are approximately 300 people who have access to the Windows source code. Anybody with a computer and internet access has access to the Linux source code. I don't know exactly how many people are doing QA on Linux, but thousands of developers have made contributions to the Linux kernel.

Peer review only takes two people.

[Portreve]

... free software / open source community brings peer review to all such software, which is something proprietary code does not and will never have.

I take it you've never worked as a software developer. Peer review is the key component in any software quality assurance process.

It doesn't take much effort to recognize Microsoft's "peer review" process has always sucked.

[deepakdeshp]

... free software / open source community brings peer review to all such software, which is something proprietary code does not and will never have.

I take it you've never worked as a software developer. Peer review is the key component in any software quality assurance process.

Peer review is a review of code by another programmer with the writer of the code afaik.Consider this with the 10s of thousands of testers who test voluntarily the open source code.

[catweazel]

... free software / open source community brings peer review to all such software, which is something proprietary code does not and will never have.

I take it you've never worked as a software developer. Peer review is the key component in any software quality assurance process.

Peer review is a review of code by another programmer with the writer of the code afaik.Consider this with the 10s of thousands of testers who test voluntarily the open source code.

If you read the text that was replied to you'll see that the statement was made about peer review, with absolutely no mention of numbers. The idea that greater numbers somehow count is sheer nonsense.

[jimallyn]

The Linux kernel has greater than 15 million lines of code, while Windows 10 has 50 million lines of code. Shouldn't take two guys long to go through that.

[catweazel]

The Linux kernel has greater than 15 million lines of code, while Windows 10 has 50 million lines of code. Shouldn't take two guys long to go through that.

That misses the point entirely. It seems I'm replying to fanboys who don't care about facts and are more interested in safeguarding their tightly held misbeliefs about some strange Utopian sanctity of kernel code.

A browse of the kernel mailing list will show just how many people are involved in linux peer review. There have been major debacles because there are only two people doing the major reviews on two major branches, that's Torvalds on the mainline branch, and Kroah-Hartman on the LTS branch. The lack of sufficient peer review led directly to the recent 4.14.9 kernel debacle that borked nVidia drivers by inserting code meant for a mainline release into an LTS release, and the list goes on.

Code: Select all

Reviewed-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>

Two reviewers. https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/23/107

Code: Select all

Reported-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Yixun Lan <yixun.lan@amlogic.com>

No reviewers. https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/23/110

I won't mention the huge number of fix reversals to deal with regressions in damaging 'fixes' that got through peer review into production.

A Reviewed-by tag is a statement of opinion...

https://kernelnewbies.org/UpstreamMerge ... ingPatches

Opinion is never required to be founded on any fact whatsoever, requires no proof at all, and need not be based on any positive knowledge of any kind.

So, go on, support your opinion by quoting the number of millions of lines of code and number the devs in the hundreds of thousands, even take the mickey out of me for my stance on peer-review, as you have. It won't change the facts.

[deepakdeshp]

It won't change the facts.

Sometimes facts can be twisted or managed to portray your point of view.