Debian

We’ve looked at a couple of religious based distributions such as Ubuntu: Christian Edition and Ubuntu: Muslim Edition. But there’s another version of Ubuntu…a dark and evil one. A version so hideous and so terrible that it’s name is only spoken in whispers among Linux users…

From:   Linus Benedict Torvalds
Date:   Sun, Aug 25 1991 3:57 pm
Groups: comp.os.minix

Hello everybody out there using minix -

I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and
professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones.  This has been brewing
since april, and is starting to get ready.  I'd like any feedback on
things people like/dislike in minix, as my OS resembles it somewhat
(same physical layout of the file-system (due to practical reasons)
among other things).

I've currently ported bash(1.08) and gcc(1.40), and things seem to work.
This implies that I'll get something practical within a few months, and
I'd like to know what features most people would want.  Any suggestions
are welcome, but I won't promise I'll implement them  

                Linus (torva...@kruuna.helsinki.fi)

PS.  Yes - it's free of any minix code, and it has a multi-threaded fs.
It is NOT protable (uses 386 task switching etc), and it probably never
will support anything other than AT-harddisks, as that's all I have  . 

And the rest, as they say, is history…

Microsoft will release a version of Office to run on Linux within the "next couple of years", according to the chief executive of the Open Source Development Lab (OSDL).

"They did it once with Apple; they will do it again with Linux," Stuart Cohen said during an interview with vnunet.com at the LinuxWorld conference in San Francicso.

So? OpenOffice.org works for me and I use it on both Linux and Windows.

Inspirational Linux Posters:

Reason number one: Linux is too complicated

Even with the KDE and GNOME graphical windowing interfaces, it’s possible — not likely, but possible — that you’ll need to use a command line now and again, or edit a configuration file.

Compare that with Windows where, it’s possible — not likely, but possible — that you’ll need to use a command line now and again, or edit the Windows registry, where, as they like to tell you, one wrong move could destroy your system forever.

Reason number two: Linux is a pain to set up

It’s true. After all, with modern Linuxes like Xandros Desktop or SimplyMEPIS, you need to put in a CD or DVD, press the enter button, give your computer a name, and enter a password for the administrator account.

Gosh, that’s hard.

On the other hand, with Windows, all you have to do is put in a CD or DVD, do all the above, and then immediately download all the available patches. After all, Symantec has found that an unpatched Windows PC connected to the Internet will last only a few hours before being compromised.

Unpatched Linux systems? Oh, they last months, but what’s the fun of that?

Reason number three: Linux doesn’t have enough applications

Really now. I mean, most Linux systems only come with secure Web browsers, like Firefox; e-mail clients, like Evolution; IM clients, like GAIM; office suites, like OpenOffice.org 2.0; Web page editors, like Nvu; and on, and on, and…

Microsoft, on the other hand, gives you Internet Explorer and Outlook Express, the most popular Web browser and e-mail client around — even though they do have a few little, teeny-weeny problems. Of course, Windows also has an IM-client, Windows Messenger, which, come to think of it, has also had some problems.

And, Microsoft also has Microsoft Office, which — oh wait, you don’t get that with the operating system, do you? You also don’t get a Web page editor either, do you?

Well, still, with Windows you get so many more choices of software, don’t you? Like Lotus 1-2… oh really? I didn’t know that. Or, WordPerfect… oh, pretty much dead too.

Still, so long as you want to run Microsoft programs at Microsoft prices, Windows is the operating system for you!

Reason number 4: Linux isn’t secure

If Microsoft says so, it has to be true! So what, if you can scarcely go a week without reading about yet another major Windows security problem in our sister publication, eWEEK.com’s security section! Who would you rather believe — Microsoft, or your own eyes?

Reason number 5: Linux is more expensive

Are you calling Microsoft a liar? Those nasty Linux companies, like Red Hat or Novell/SUSE charge you a fee for support. Others, like Linspire sell you the product. How dare they, when you can download free, fully-functional versions of almost all the Linux distributions.

Your computer, on the other hand, almost certainly came with Windows pre-installed! For free!

Oh wait, it’s not free? Windows’ actually makes up a large percentage of your PC’s price?

Hmmm. Well, still, it’s already on there, and it has everything you need.

Right? Of course, right!

Except, of course, you might still want to buy an anti-viral program (Norton Anti-Virus: $40), anti-spyware software (McAfee Anti-Spyware: $25); and a full-featured firewall (Zone Alarm Pro: $35). But, hey, who needs those when you have a secure operating system like Windows!

And so…

When you really think about it, you can see why there are lots of reasons not to use Linux.

There just aren’t any good ones.

–Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols

The first is KLatin – a program to help revise Latin. Yes, probably not terribly useful, but a fun time waster.

The other is Kiten – a Japanese reference/learning tool. This one is actually pretty useful, at least for me, since I’m wrapping up the development of a multilanguage version (including Japanese) of a client’s software.