http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7540282.stm

Well, Midori's a start, I guess. Of course, M$ should have just put Windows out of its misery when they introduced WinME and told everybody to go to Linux instead............

Now let's see if Midori is as ridden with bugs and security problems as recent implementations of Win have been, or if it actually ends up (Gods forbid) being an improvement!

(I sense a special "Non-Windows issue" of 2600 coming sometime in the near future........)

IMHO, this is a glorified web services platform, that happens to be able to run stuff and likely cache stuff locally.

The real question is are we at the end of the full featured OS era?

IMHO, this is a glorified web services platform, that happens to be able to run stuff and likely cache stuff locally.
This isn't the only website I've seen the link to this exact article posted, and this concerns me quite a bit.

Many people these days agree that they only own the physical portion of their computer. That's great, but don't I also own my own documents and such that I create? Or is this an excuse to create an even bigger database than before?

Myspace is such a smashing success because everyone that's there opted-in, they weren't forced to use it. Is there any bigger private database of people talking about their everyday product use and their interests? Some people (not just kids, either) post just about everything they do in their waking hours on that thing.

This also means anyone with access can get into it for whatever reason. Doesn't need to be legal or not; if it's been accessed, it's been accessed.

Some people say 'there is no privacy anymore, get used to it.' What next, conspicuous cameras in every room of your own home (including the bathroom) because the government wants to make sure you're not a terrorist (of course, it will be marketed to the masses as being "private, secure, and convenient," they'll probably throw in something about knowing where your kids are at all times, which instills the surveillance society into them at an even younger age).

I hate the programs out there that want to create a database of all my audio files, want me to save notes in a proprietary format, keep track of all my bookmarks, nag me to download and/or buy 'companion' software, etc. I don't want an 'integrated, multi-media online experience,' I want programs that do what they're supposed to.

"The real question is are we at the end of the full featured OS era?"

Personally, I think we are just barely even at the beginning of that era. M$ hosing Windows will probably open up a *lot* of opportunity for Linux to finally "come out of the closet", if you will, and with development Linuces might become accepted as standard, mainstream PC operating systems.

It'll probably mean eventually developing to the point it becomes a huge, slow, all-purpose memory hog like Vista. Not going to be pretty.....but then again, given the "modular" software architecture of *nix, it can also be stripped down if that ever happens. And it will. It's just a matter of when it will happen......some people seem to think it has happened already.

I think, as long as there are Internet-based platforms there will always be PCs. (Hell, they said DVD would completely eliminate VCRs, but I still see a lot of people using tapes.) And PCs will still nees an OS to run it.

No, most forms of Linux don't behave or perform like Windows, but it might be a form of improvement......at least in the way the GUIs themselves act. I mean, even my Kubuntu seems to somewhat resemble an older version of MacOS than it does Win.

I have heard the argument that Linux is a "geek OS" and isn't worthy of mainstream attention. But wasn't there a time when the same was being said about Windows? Or even DOS?? ;o)

Give it a few years and we'll see.

Newflyer--I own everything in/on my computer. Hardware, OS, files I create etc. Even in an MS environment. I paid money for the stuff, I call the shots with it. It's just simple logic (weren't computers developed around logic to begin with?) and the law of nature.

Hmmmm... Own everything?

So, let's say you make a movie using the tools you own a license to use.

That movie only plays in players compatible with those tools.

Who owns the movie?

"Personally, I think we are just barely even at the beginning of that era."

That's exactly correct.

Often overlooked and not true during the late 80's and 90's, Windows and Mac OS's are built on Unix variants.

Unix was developed in 1969 and was a key element in the development of the "internet." Linux in any flavor is a Unix variant as well.

Developed by ATT/Bell Labs whom in 1972 developed the C programming language to run on Unix. Much of what we do today has roots in Unix and C. Microsoft and Apple each spent a decade or more trying to build a better OS from scratch and it led them back to Unix.

All this talk makes me want to go punch some cards.

Heh...

Unix is as good as it gets right now. We've not progressed past that expression of computer science.

This effort, ain't gonna be it, and that's enough for me to safely ignore it.

A Unix will be capable of these things, just like it has been capable of all the other things.

My latest computer (used) is Linux-only (Ubuntu 8.04 LTS was pre-installed). There's quite a buzz over Linux, which makes me wonder...

Would it be better for Microsoft to change the Windows licensing scheme for individuals to more of a limited "site license?"

Meaning if you're an individual you could legally use and install Windows on more than one computer without having to have a license for each one.

People would still have to buy Windows, and it's not like M$ would lose much (if any) money as there's plenty of people out there running pirated/hacked/etc. versions on their second/third computers. I'm not one of them. M$ could still say they'll only provide support beyond "the user should know what they're doing" and a knowledgebase for a main computer, but being able to use the same license would be a value-add for those thinking "I'll keep my old computer."

One of the appealing things of Linux is it's free, which is what got me to try it for the first time probably 4 or 5 years ago. It's obvious there's much more for regular users even within this time frame. The so-called no support issue isn't a problem if you know where to look online for the information. Even though there's still the old-timers that say "you don't need..." or "be happy with...," there's plenty that will tell you where/how to find firewall and anti-virus software for Linux, as examples.

"Meaning if you're an individual you could legally use and install Windows on more than one computer without having to have a license for each one. People would still have to buy Windows, and it's not like M$ would lose much (if any) money as there's plenty of people out there running pirated/hacked/etc. versions on their second/third computers......"

Hey, that's what I do with 98.......got it set up in a seperate partition on the UbStudio box, and the exact same install set up on the Optiplex. (THat's why I like XCOPY32!) Been that way (not exactly the same equipment, but the same idea) for several years........haven't had the "Windows Police" come a-knockin' yet........... ;o)

(Oh Gods....ah'm goin' to hell fer shure.....)

"One of the appealing things of Linux is it's free, which is what got me to try it for the first time probably 4 or 5 years ago."

That's initially what got me started with Linux, as well.

Now, if I could just get the @#$%^&*ing Audacity software to record in Ubuntu without crashing, I'd be a perfectly happy casmper!!

I've still got Ubuntu 8.04 and XP Media Center dual-booting on my Dell laptop. Although Ubuntu installed extremely easily on my laptop (easiest installation of ANY operating system I've ever done, far easier than Windows), I've had some nagging issues with 8.04 that I haven't had with earlier versions: an occasional freeze, a touchpad issue, etc. that I've probably detailed before. For now I don't have the energy to try to debug it, so I stick to XP most of the time.

Still, I'm a big champion of Ubuntu. I've installed it on various computers at least 20 times over the last few years - sometimes as servers, sometimes as basic-use desktops for non-profits I help out. If you stick to web browsing and word processing, Ubuntu really rocks.

But as it is now, it really can't replace XP or Vista - yet. Linux distros like Ubuntu have come light years in terms of user friendliness in recent years. They've got about 99% of it knocked out...but that last 1% or so is nagging and difficult for them to knock out. Perhaps the development model makes it too hard for them fix 100% of all issues on things like my laptop, whereas with Microsoft you have a company focused on it, not just a loosely-knit community.

I'm still waiting for the point when I can move to Linux more than 50% of the time. I'm just not there yet. But I have successfully avoided Vista thusfar, too.

Andrew

I was reading that in the early 1990s, there were some now-famous USENET arguments between Linus Torvalds and some other computer scientist who was trying to tell Linus that developing Linux was a waste of time because the UNIX operating system would soon be obsolete!

Oh yeah.

That was Tannenbaum. He remains an advocate of the micro-kernel style of OS design. There are a number of advantages, but also some serious disadvantages, one being the overhead of communicating between the various kernel elements.

At the time that Linux was posted, Linus had evolved it from writing what was essentially a multi-threaded terminal application.

The discussion between the two is archived and can be found on line. Search on Minix and Linux and you'll probably hit gold.

Linux was going to be named Freakix, or something goofy like that. The interested users of the time saved Linuses ass, and suggested Linux!

Favorite quote from that time: "It's not going to be big, like GNU, or anything."

Little did Linus know then what was going to happen.

In parallel with this, and also earlier, Stallman was busy writing the GNU utilities, but lacked a kernel.

The two were doomed to marry, ideological issues aside, it's been a fun ride ever since.

If this all interests you, read "Rebel Code". It's a great read that details a very fun time in computing.

Minix can still be downloaded, and I believe still sees some adademic development.

Interestingly, we found that maybe the micro-kernel approach is better. I don't think anybody has really nailed that down. The key though is in the open development of Linux, and Linus having an absolutely stellar ability to manage his kernel, despite tons of contributors and forks and god knows what else going on.

Lots of people, able to collaborate in a sane way is where the power is, and that's really the Linux story in a nutshell.