>> set up a "go fund me account" and just put...one dollar a month in it...
Throwing money at a complex problem won't help. Problem with linux isn't lack of resources which are unlimited, I heard, with the world as its oyster and millions of people contributing and developing. Right, or was that a lie ?
Besides. what about commercial cos raking it in the name of OSS/linux ? Examples- redhat, IBM, intel and so on. Are they just getting a free ride on the gravy train ?
>> NO..."PCLINUX OS" walked off and LEFT IT!!! WALKED OFF AND LEFT IT!!!"
I tried often to install PC linuxOS and then had to remove it. Under the covers, it has serious issues. I don't blame it entirely on the small group of people putting together that distro- they simply cannot support a linux desktop on their own. They could have been smarter and focused on ONE desktop to at least make the most of their resources.
Speaking of making most of the resources, this is what should'a happened, like 20 years ago. Is there ANY reason, besides insanity that there isn't a single way to package s/w for any distro even today ?! Or a convention for packaging s/w that is universal, so that a package can work across distributions ? When this simple, non controversial, "non political" thing happens, pose this Q again and maybe ask for money.
Canonical puts its own money into improving linux. And it does a LOT MORE than redhat. I don't just mean money but in terms of results. I don't work for Canonical nor even on any of its distributions. I simply base my staement on the fact that most desktop users of linux (outside of chromebooks) run a flavor of ubuntu. I keep coming back to ubuntu after trying other distros because it works better than any other in terms of h/w support, plug and play, repository depth and mind share. I remember the times when that used to be Suse and Mandrake and even earlier when it was Caldera !
Before talking about money, talk about pooling resources. Talk about efficiency. Don't talk like the govt- let us tax you more so your money can sink into the corruption pit that is DC.
Throwing money at a complex problem won't help. Problem with linux isn't lack of resources which are unlimited, I heard, with the world as its oyster and millions of people contributing and developing. Right, or was that a lie ?
Besides. what about commercial cos raking it in the name of OSS/linux ? Examples- redhat, IBM, intel and so on. Are they just getting a free ride on the gravy train ?
>> NO..."PCLINUX OS" walked off and LEFT IT!!! WALKED OFF AND LEFT IT!!!"
I tried often to install PC linuxOS and then had to remove it. Under the covers, it has serious issues. I don't blame it entirely on the small group of people putting together that distro- they simply cannot support a linux desktop on their own. They could have been smarter and focused on ONE desktop to at least make the most of their resources.
Speaking of making most of the resources, this is what should'a happened, like 20 years ago. Is there ANY reason, besides insanity that there isn't a single way to package s/w for any distro even today ?! Or a convention for packaging s/w that is universal, so that a package can work across distributions ? When this simple, non controversial, "non political" thing happens, pose this Q again and maybe ask for money.
Canonical puts its own money into improving linux. And it does a LOT MORE than redhat. I don't just mean money but in terms of results. I don't work for Canonical nor even on any of its distributions. I simply base my staement on the fact that most desktop users of linux (outside of chromebooks) run a flavor of ubuntu. I keep coming back to ubuntu after trying other distros because it works better than any other in terms of h/w support, plug and play, repository depth and mind share. I remember the times when that used to be Suse and Mandrake and even earlier when it was Caldera !
Before talking about money, talk about pooling resources. Talk about efficiency. Don't talk like the govt- let us tax you more so your money can sink into the corruption pit that is DC.
Comment