No EFI is a "negative" good sign
I have to take this announcement from Microsoft - that they will not be supporting EFI bootup with Vista, and will instead rely on the creaky old BIOS - as something of a good sign.
Why? Well, stop and think about it for a moment - it means that Microsoft actually considers Apple to be a viable competitor. The only reason for them to make dual boot a pain is to keep Apple software off of systems that have Windows. They realize that dual booting into Linux is irrelevant - Linux on the desktop is a non-starter. Apple though? Clearly, they think that might be a problem.
Comments
[] March 10, 2006 9:48:16.366
"Linux on the desktop is a non-starter."
Wow. Somebody's really not paying attention.
say what?
[ Troy Brumley] March 10, 2006 11:04:52.205
Comment by Troy Brumley
The only fulltime Linux on the desktop people I know are uber geek wannabees. I'm sure there are many more rational types who use it for non-"I'm cooler than you" reasons, but I sure don't see them outside of some of my Smalltalk friends. Even among the Linux fans there, I see a trend toward OS X.
Linux on the desktop is a non-starter
[Charlie Bogues] March 10, 2006 11:49:53.508
I've been using Linux at work (because I have to) for over 8 years now. It's fine for developer geeks and engineering tasks, but for the mainstream masses Linux on the desktop is going nowhere fast. And the whole "community" behind it is in a state of mass delusion if they think that cloning Windows or Mac is going to get them anywhere. Being free as in source and beer is not enough for obvious reasons. They need to do something different and better.
My advice. Fork Ruby into an image-based system. Clone something like Squeak, VW, or (my favorite) Dolphin, and extend it into a full desktop environment.
P.S. Macs are going nowhere fast too until Jobs (or someone else) has the courage to decouple OS X from the hardware (unlikely).
[Silent F] March 10, 2006 14:24:13.501
"but for the mainstream masses Linux on the desktop is going nowhere fast"
Got any hard numbers, or should we just trust you? Which version do you run at work? Have you tried the various versions that are out there?
"And the whole "community" behind it is in a state of mass delusion if they think that cloning Windows or Mac is going to get them anywhere."
You mean like the way Windows and Mac copy off one another endlessly? I'll forward your comments to them to let them know that they are wasting their time.
"Being free as in source and beer is not enough for obvious reasons."
Enough for what purposes and what "obvious" reasons?
"My advice. Fork Ruby into an image-based system. Clone something like Squeak, VW, or (my favorite) Dolphin, and extend it into a full desktop environment."
Now you really lost me. Just because you like the syntax of the Ruby language? What's wrong with Squeak?
Linux not a factor in this decision
[Giovanni Corriga] March 10, 2006 17:22:20.575
While I'm not disputing here the importance (or lack of) of Linux on the desktop, I don't think that Linux was ever a factor in this decision. Linux can boot from both BIOS and EFI, so choosing one against another wouldn't have meant any difference. Also, EFI has a BIOS compatibility layer which can be added by the hardware vendor, and Intel is serious in pushing BIOS into legacy. So I don't know if many hardware vendor will follow Microsoft down this route.
[] March 10, 2006 19:46:50.732
SilentF
"
"but for the mainstream masses Linux on the desktop is going nowhere fast"
Got any hard numbers, or should we just trust you? Which version do you run at work? Have you tried the various versions that are out there?"
What's the market share of Linux on the desktop? 2% or below. You don't need to be Kreskin to see the trend.
For a desktop I run debian Sid. Most of my server machines in my office are slackware. We ship debian stable. I've tried and used about every distro out there. "Distros" are part of desktop Linux's problems.
"
"And the whole "community" behind it is in a state of mass delusion if they think that cloning Windows or Mac is going to get them anywhere."
You mean like the way Windows and Mac copy off one another endlessly? I'll forward your comments to them to let them know that they are wasting their time."
If you think Linux KDE or Gnome producing 2nd rate ripoffs of Windows or OSX is going to accomplish anything then you're part of the delusional thinking I"m talking about.
"
"Being free as in source and beer is not enough for obvious reasons."
Enough for what purposes and what "obvious" reasons?"
For the obvious reason that most people don't even consider the cost of Windows...it's just part of the computer. And for those that do buy it separately, the cost is about equal to a couple going out to a nice dinner and a movie. Apple's hardware tax is much more noticeable. And obviously nobody except geeks (and even then it's marginable) cares about source code
"
"My advice. Fork Ruby into an image-based system. Clone something like Squeak, VW, or (my favorite) Dolphin, and extend it into a full desktop environment."
Now you really lost me. Just because you like the syntax of the Ruby language? What's wrong with Squeak?"
Nothing's wrong with Squeak (for me), but people freak on the Smalltalk syntax (or lack of )just like they freak on Lisp's syntax (or lack of).
It's not that the Linux kernel couldn't power a desktop operating that could make a dent. It's just that Gnome and KDE aren't going to be it. It's 2006 and all the illusions are gone, except for ideological fanboys.