| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Linux Kernel Vapourware?Linux Kernel Vapourware?Posted Dec 6, 2004 15:11 UTC (Mon) by cpm (guest, #3554)Parent article: The Linux Kernel's Fuzzy Future (InformationWeek)
Umm, Lesse here.
The good folks who are doing this marvelous job developing the linux kernel are not participating in the age-old practice of "Don't buy my competitors product today, because the product I am going to introduce in the future will blow it away" hype and garbage that essentially constitutes public vapour ware sales campaign that goes by the name of the Microsoft roadmap.
And this is a bad thing?
(Log in to post comments)
Linux Kernel Vapourware? Posted Dec 6, 2004 15:28 UTC (Mon) by sbergman27 (subscriber, #10767) [Link] Throughout the article, the author makes a tacet assumption that the road map that MS publishes is somehow accurate. When is the last time that a major product came out of the company on time and containing the features that they said it would three years previously?
Linux Kernel Vapourware? Posted Dec 6, 2004 23:59 UTC (Mon) by Duncan (guest, #6647) [Link] No kidding. How much of the former Longhorn has been removed (so much soit's shorthorn now <g>, but that's not an original observation), and how far has the time slid? What about other major changes? Was Chicago on time? Wouldn't it have been MSWormOS 93 if it had been? What about the roadmap saying they were going to unite the 32-bit kernels with what became MSWormOS 98? That slid past that, past 98SE, past ME and 2K, and finally happened with the privacy challenged eXPrivacy. (I'd been long awaiting that change, but was bitterly disappointed when it ended up coming with invasive technology I simply could not and would not accept. All the better for me tho, in the end, as it finally pushed me into defecting to the free software world, something I may have never done on my own. And no, I never intend to go back, either, except possibly if its government changes so it becomes a part of the free software world too.) If we wished, I suppose Linux could have a map of a bunch of stuff that WON'T be available in three year's time, too. Only we'd have to make it really ridiculous (OK, I don't think Linux will be handling devices on Alpha Centauri in three years, since even at light speed, we couldn't get there by then <g>), because as fast as it develops, we might end up having the features in spite of ourselves! <g> Anyway, what sort of good would such a map of stuff that /won't/ be available do? Duncan
|
|
||||||||||||