Funny Goat

[epic]

Old news. But thought I would share it.

http://management.silicon.com/itpro/0,3902...39127619,00.htm

Billy may be able to fool some, but when it comes to intelligence, people choose Linux(interoperability) over Windows(doesnt even work with its own products).

What Billy states reminds me of...

[un4given1]

I don't want to turn this into a battle between Windows and Linux... but I completely agree with what he says.... That's all I am going to say.

[matrix0978]

Yeah i understand where hes coming from. And i agree with it in some parts.

[epic]

I don't want to turn this into a battle between Windows and Linux...  but I completely agree with what he says....  That's all I am going to say.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I want to get other's intellectual views on his ignorance of the termonology he is using, when in fact his own software does not interoperate with his own creation. But you have your opinion and I respect that, but I would not respect it if you nothing about what linux or *nix even has to offer.

---

Moving forward: Gate's doesnt stand behind 'Interoperability', he should be looking at his own software before accusing the Open Source nix community. Linux has proven itself for interoperability for 'YEARS'.

Gates just digs a hole deeper and deeper whenever he opens his mouth. In fact, as I mentioned before, Gates has no knowledge what interoperability means, he can not even stand behind it himself, its a proven track record. It is one reason Open Source exists... 'interoperability'! With *nix you have every right to compile the kernal and customize the software to integrate. Windows you have neither of these options. Widows does not follow standards, and expect other companies to follow them.

Windows (Gates) needs to learn how to work with the Open Source community and not fight against the community, he has every right to dig in and share. However, Gates is intimidated by linux, he knows it's a better platform.

Gate's should look this up as well as his cohorts

Open Source (defined) directly from a well known resource:

<philosophy, legal> A method and philosophy for software

licensing and distribution designed to encourage use and

improvement of software written by volunteers by ensuring that

anyone can copy the source code and modify it freely.

The term "open source" is now more widely used than the

earlier term "free software" (promoted by the Free Software

Foundation) but has broadly the same meaning - free of

distribution restrictions, not necessarily free of charge.

There are various open source licenses available.

Programmers can choose an appropriate license to use when

distributing their programs.

Interoperability

n : (computer science) the ability to exchange and use information (usually in a large heterogeneous network made up of several local area networks)

Gates is wrong. Do your homework boys he has fooled (lemmings). Don't get me wrong there are 'some' things Windows can do better then Linux and vise versa, and between the lines Apple. However Linux is better at security and serving (it's not my opinion) its a Fact. However, Windows was not made for interoperability, the Linux community had to design software just so that it 'could' interoperate with Windows software. Gates is all about Monopolizing.

I will quote a gentleman that could not state interoperability any better;

How so Billy Boy? Why do you say that? Is it because Free Open Source apps. don't run on Windows? But they do. Open Office, Mozilla/FireFox, Gimp, MySQL, PHP, Perl, Python, Samba, etc., they all run on Windows as good as on Linux. Or is it because Windows apps don't run on Linux? But they do using Wine, VMWare, DreamWeaver, etc. Or may be Linux can't talk to Windows servers? But they do using TCP/IP, Samba SMB, etc. Or may be because Linux can't access Windows drives? But it does using native drivers. You can connect, mount, read, and write on Windows drives without any problems. Or is it because Linux apps can't read MS file formats? But it can. OO can read Word, Excel, PowerPoint files without any problems. Or is it because Linux users can't read/write MSSQL Server database? But Perl, Python, and your own ODBC enable Linux to do that. Or is because Linux can't connect to your Exchange server? But it can using Evolution. Or is it because you Windows servers can't to Linux server? But they can using your own Unix tools. If there is anything I missed, or if for some reason you can't make your Windows inter-operate with Linux, you know that you can change Linux to do what ever you want it. It is Free Open Source and available to everyone including you if you want to play by the rules but with the rules. You see Billy Boy, it takes two to Tango and all you have to do is to follow the leader, Linux. Unless you are intentionally crippling your Windows, you should have no problem and it is not that hard at all. But if you insist, you better be careful because customers will believe that Windows is truly crippled, which many already found out, and will abandon and stay away from your beloved Windows

http://management.silicon.com/itpro/talkba...4675t-40000032c

oh yea.. how does this even fit into funny farm? besides Gates' factor of interoperability.

[indianarchie]

wat is this about..i am feeling simply too lazy to click links and wait for thepage to load...

[mark]

Bill Gates --- warning that those in search of technological interoperability shouldn't look towards open source software.

"Businesses face an ongoing challenge of making a wide variety of software from many different vendors work together..............." he said in the email.

Gates adds ... the key to getting everything to work together, and the easiest approach for developers, is interoperability.

So we shouldn't challenge ourselves and just buy from MS? "the key to getting everything to work together is interoperability"? Sorry, I missed something there.

"Interoperability is more pragmatic than many other approaches, such as attempting to make all systems compatible at the code level, focusing solely on adding new layers of middleware that try to makes all systems look and act the same, or seeking to make different systems interchangeable," the email says.

What's he saying? MS has no 'layers'? no middleware? something to make something else work? MS doesn't do that?

While acknowledging through the interoperability drive that there are many more vendors than Microsoft in the market........

"Open source is a methodology for licensing and/or developing software - that may or may not be interoperable. Additionally, the open source development approach encourages the creation of many permutations of the same type of software application, which could add implementation and testing overhead to interoperability efforts," Gates wrote.

many permutations=more choices?

"implementation and testing overhead" In open source, isn't most of that done by volunteers?

Don't get me wrong. I don't know which OS is best. I use Windows because I am used to it. I've tried Linux and maybe one of these days I'll switch to see how well it goes. The only thing that puts me off is when I read something that talks about having to do several things with a 'package'. I never had to use DOS and for the little bit I had to venture into DOS, I didn't find it too friendly and some of the things in Linux look like crypticDOS to me. bin, jar, $, root and so on. With the bit I have tried in Linux, there were things there that for Windows I would have to go and find, download or purchase.

DL