__/ [ The Ghost In The Machine ] on Tuesday 28 March 2006 20:59 \__
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Roy Schestowitz
> on Tue, 28 Mar 2006 18:14:40 +0100
>> __/ [ ray ] on Tuesday 28 March 2006 16:59 \__
>>> On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 05:42:16 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>> < snip />
>>> We're due to have one of their four head systems installed at the
>>> Portneuf District Library in Idaho. This follows on the successful
>>> deployment of Mandrake Linux on the public access internet computers last
>>> year - a VERY successful deployment, I might add. No complaints in over a
>>> year, and a recent customer satisfaction survey showed universal
>>> acceptance and revealed that several patrons were unaware they were not
>>> running MS.
>> Is this /truly/ the test for success? It leaves me with a bad taste in the
> I can't say I'm all that happy about it myself, and there
> are rather sinister implications if Microsoft wants to
> exhume a certain look-and-feel suit (which ultimately got
> rejected -- but that was then; this is now, although stare
> decisis might give us some protection).
That's just what I thought. Think of all these iPod copycats that vanished
due to lawsuits.
> Of course it depends on how perceptive the customers are.
> Presumably, if a customer stares at a desktop long enough
> he might forget *what* the background color is. :-)
> What is a webbrowser anyway? It's a standardized fat client
> with client-server communications capabilities.
In some cases, it has client-server-filesystem capabilities; And it has poor
comprehension of security and separation of the two (or perhaps the code is
not sufficiently modular, IE/i.e. messy).
>> Here at the Student Halls we deployed Windows terminals to handle the
>> simple task of running a browser with a Web form to serve as a
>> communication gateway.
> With IE? Oy.
That particular IT department is very Microsoft-oriented. Fortunately, it is
also VNC-friendly and has recently gone Web-based.
>> Needless to mention, the machines crash quite often (leading to
>> plenty of trouble as they only get manned the following day) and are a
>> pain to maintain (updates, cleanups and other types of drek on a platter).
> As opposed to Linux which can be administrated remotely by IT
> (as opposed to a malware writer :-) ).
Precisely. Well, I'm 24, so I haven't a hand on any policies.
> <snip />
>> Precisely. Such success stories must be echoed rather than have success be
>> taken for granted. Look how a state of quiet existence leads Windows
>> advocates in this group to suggesting a failure (notably Munich and
>> academic institutes). Google mention nothing about their stock of
>> Debian-type boxes. It's irrelevant. They just handle the workload.
>> Quiet is a positive sign.
> In some ways. The problem is quiet can equate to nonexistence (and
> certainly to non-perceptance); "the squeaky wheel gets the grease".
> <snip />
This argument can be extrapolated to account for Linux usage myths. You
rarely have a Linux box brought to an engineer or a shop.
Roy S. Schestowitz | HTML is for page layout, not for textual messages
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
6:40am up 20 days 20:25, 9 users, load average: 0.94, 0.97, 0.95
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms