All Things Microsoft > Microsoft as a Company
I told you Linux was going to dominate the future...
lazygamer:
So what I wanna know is, how long do we have to wait before Linux becomes very mainstream?
Faust:
quote:So what I wanna know is, how long do we have to wait before Linux becomes very mainstream?
--- End quote ---
One of the main obstacles to this would have to be that for most ppl changing the OS over is too much effort so they stick with the OS they got bundled. Since this is windows this is a bad thing - but apparently now Sun is selling purple colored linux budget pcs -
quote: Suns purple box will go head to head with the dominant windows white box.
--- End quote ---
Becoming very mainstream may not be very far away... especially if other companies emulate Sun and/or if their release is wildly successful.
preacher:
Interesting article voidmain, but if linux and amd truly win, that would void the previous comments about Microsoft vs.AOL, because as all linux users know, there is no way that we will run microsoft applications. Also if Dell wins, how can AMD win? Dell doesnt use AMD processors in their boxes.
voidmain:
quote:Originally posted by ThePreacher:
Interesting article voidmain, but if linux and amd truly win, that would void the previous comments about Microsoft vs.AOL, because as all linux users know, there is no way that we will run microsoft applications. Also if Dell wins, how can AMD win? Dell doesnt use AMD processors in their boxes.
--- End quote ---
It's why I said ignore the first part of the article. But seriously, some predict when that time comes Microsoft will have no choice but to port their software to Linux:
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-976755.html
And Dell can change processors like you change your underwear (I hope you change your underwear). It wouldn't take any more than about ten dollars worth of R&D budget to yank the Intel out and throw in an AMD. Hell, even I could do that. Dell is nothing more than a reseller, they pick up and drop companies all the time (3com, HP Printers vs Lexmark, etc).
[ December 11, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]
voidmain:
quote:Originally posted by Crunchy(Cracked)Butter:
I use Visio for creating DFD's, but like i said there is Kivio, i could use it but like i said time is an issue.
--- End quote ---
Does Kivio take more time to use than Visio? I also use a utility called "Dia" which isn't as mature looking as Kivio but it does work for quick and simple diagrams. And Kivio comes with a limited set of stencils where Dia has quite a few more sets to choose from. What I found out is, the Dia stencils also work with Kivio (most, not all but if you know how to tweak them you can get them going, they are nothing more than XML and pixmap files).
If you find Visio necessary because you just can't make the others work for you then I don't know of any other free apps that are better than Kivio/Dia.
quote:
Access on the other hand is something more tricky.
I am creating a database for a hotel which can involve designing an interface as well for it. The database isn't what you interact with but the UI instead, Access is used by the hotel this project is for as well thus the compatability issues i have. His copy has to be workable with my copy and so forth crap and there is the user issue as well. Training isn't part of his costs because it is only the manager that is using it, but i cannot have a situation where he is off for work and somebody else needs to use it but hit a wall because its not Access.
I suppose i could finish off the DFD to show you what will be going on, do you want that? I'll finish it now and then email it you for your perusal?
--- End quote ---
Access is a real peeve of mine, some of the reasons you exactly mention. With Access you must have the exact version of Access that the person you are sharing with has or you will screw it up for the both of you. And like I said, it's ok for a single person database but get more than one person working on it or let it grow too large and you are in for a lot of trouble.
I particularly do not like the proprietary nature of it (as you might have guessed would be my view). If possible I prefer to do the database in PostgreSQL, make it web based using Apache/PHP so if the entire department needs to use it they can. This may sound like a lot of work but I find the learning curve to where you can create a database and an interface is about the same for both.
Once you have overcome the learning curve of both, creating and writing an interface takes about the same amount of time. The web based version oviously only requires a browser to use it. In fact you can connect your Access GUI to your PostgreSQL database using the ODBC drivers. So you can use the pretty Access GUI, or use it from your browser from anywhere over your network or even the internet on any operating system and it's fast.
Now you might say with Access you can easily take a copy of the database with you and work on it at home without having to be connected to the server, and that is true to an extent. You could add write a simple import/export routine to your existing Access database to import the data from the Postgre database into your Access using the ODBC drivers.
But for quick simple little things Access is fairly easy. If nothing else if it got to the point where you were considering moving it to MS SQL Server I would highly recommend that you look at and consider PostgreSQL or other open source SQL databases.
And believe it or not there is an Access knockoff GUI for PostgreSQL and it seems to work well, but I still prefer doing all my database work under a web server. The flexibility can't be beat. See pgaccess:
http://www.pgaccess.org/index.php?page=NewPgAccessEnglish
[ December 11, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version