I know you are trolling but I'm going to try anyway :-).
In some ways you are correct about Linux not looking as pretty but pretty has very little to do when it comes to getting work done (hopefully you are not surprised by this). A simple example (which I'm sure you will discount) is the use of Linux desktop by my parents. Until my mom's workplace stated that she couldn't use Linux she loved it and used it for all her computing needs. Note that she did only a few things: Created/modified/edited documents, used web applications, IM, email, spreadsheets and maybe a few other things. True, she is a 'user' which obviously isn't a group you or I wouldn't fit as easily into but a lot of people using phones and desktops are 'users'. The fact that users must have a swirly pointer or IE to do business is a fun thought but it has no real basis other than fear of changing or a want for the super model effect. It's not an example of 'why would anybody want that'. We have shiny things on the desktop. I'm sure you will discount Gnome Shell but it's an amazing example of easy of use and pretty stuff.
Yup, sens ui is closed. Turn if off or remove it. Done. Easy.
<cite>
I use Linux where it is appropriate -- my web and email server is running Linux, and I'm developing on Linux for embedded servers that run Linux. But to say there's no reason to use anything other than Linux is just koolaid-drinking ... and, uhm, for the guy who says his HTC Evo 4G proves FOSS rocks, I might point out that the EVO 4G is running a proprietary closed-source "skin" (HTC's "Sense" UI). Yeah, that's "proof" alright... but maybe not of what the original commenter claimed :).
I think you are missing the point ... I didn't say there is no reason to run anything but Linux. Let me quote me:
<cite>
The case for using Apple software of Microsoft Windows for something is so slim it tends to sound like the techno lust (sooo shiny ...) or the machinations of a mad man (I HAVE TO HAVE IE!!!!!).
</cite>
Many of the use cases for moving from a Linux machine to an OS X machine are nonsensical. The same goes for from a Linux machine to Windows. With only a very few, slim things there is a good chance that what they have been using will continue to work.
Now, in the case of a large organization management is an issue and it's pretty obvious why one would like to have Linux (or BSD which can include OS X) machines as desktops. There was a time when this was not the case and Linux/BSD was an interesting alternative with less features. This is not the case anymore (nor has it been for a while on desktops). Unfortunately, the only way to turn off the closed bits on OS X is to use Darwin.
Authored Comments
The only time I buy actual CD's is at shows so the money actually supports the artists. Other than that it's bought through online services.
I know you are trolling but I'm going to try anyway :-).
In some ways you are correct about Linux not looking as pretty but pretty has very little to do when it comes to getting work done (hopefully you are not surprised by this). A simple example (which I'm sure you will discount) is the use of Linux desktop by my parents. Until my mom's workplace stated that she couldn't use Linux she loved it and used it for all her computing needs. Note that she did only a few things: Created/modified/edited documents, used web applications, IM, email, spreadsheets and maybe a few other things. True, she is a 'user' which obviously isn't a group you or I wouldn't fit as easily into but a lot of people using phones and desktops are 'users'. The fact that users must have a swirly pointer or IE to do business is a fun thought but it has no real basis other than fear of changing or a want for the super model effect. It's not an example of 'why would anybody want that'. We have shiny things on the desktop. I'm sure you will discount Gnome Shell but it's an amazing example of easy of use and pretty stuff.
Yup, sens ui is closed. Turn if off or remove it. Done. Easy.
<cite>
I use Linux where it is appropriate -- my web and email server is running Linux, and I'm developing on Linux for embedded servers that run Linux. But to say there's no reason to use anything other than Linux is just koolaid-drinking ... and, uhm, for the guy who says his HTC Evo 4G proves FOSS rocks, I might point out that the EVO 4G is running a proprietary closed-source "skin" (HTC's "Sense" UI). Yeah, that's "proof" alright... but maybe not of what the original commenter claimed :).
--ELG
</cite>
(<a href="http://confessionsofalinuxpenguin.blogspot.com/2010/06/that-xkcd-619-feeling.html">source</a>)
I think you are missing the point ... I didn't say there is no reason to run anything but Linux. Let me quote me:
<cite>
The case for using Apple software of Microsoft Windows for something is so slim it tends to sound like the techno lust (sooo shiny ...) or the machinations of a mad man (I HAVE TO HAVE IE!!!!!).
</cite>
Many of the use cases for moving from a Linux machine to an OS X machine are nonsensical. The same goes for from a Linux machine to Windows. With only a very few, slim things there is a good chance that what they have been using will continue to work.
Now, in the case of a large organization management is an issue and it's pretty obvious why one would like to have Linux (or BSD which can include OS X) machines as desktops. There was a time when this was not the case and Linux/BSD was an interesting alternative with less features. This is not the case anymore (nor has it been for a while on desktops). Unfortunately, the only way to turn off the closed bits on OS X is to use Darwin.