Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Linux Foundation Purchases Linux.com

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the new-life dept.

Announcements 231

darthcamaro and several other readers have noted that the Linux Foundation has bought Linux.com from SourceForge Inc. (Slashdot's corporate parent). The Linux Foundation (employer of Linus Torvalds) will take over the editorial and community stewardship for the site; SourceForge will continue to supply advertising on it. "[Linux Foundation Executive Director Jim] Zemlin says the Linux Foundation wants to build a collaborative forum where Linux users can share ideas and get information on the Linux operating system. A beta of the site will be released in the next few months. ... Linux.com is being redesigned as a central source for Linux software, documentation and answers regardless of platforms, including server, desktop/netbook, mobile and embedded areas." What do you think should be on Linux.com?

cancel ×

231 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Welcome Linux Overlords (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057371)

I for one welcome our linux overlords...
BTW, First Post

What do you think should be on Linux.com? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057375)

How about the proper spelling of the namesake's name?

Re:What do you think should be on Linux.com? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057503)

Yes! For the last time:
It's GNU/LINUX TORVALDS!!!!!

Re:What do you think should be on Linux.com? (-1, Redundant)

Tenebrousedge (1226584) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057587)

lol...Richard M. Stallman, you win the internets.

Re:What do you think should be on Linux.com? (1)

davester666 (731373) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057949)

exactly. They should be using gnulinux.com or gnu_linux.com or gnu.linux.com

Re:What do you think should be on Linux.com? (2, Informative)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058277)

Well, gnu.linux.com is just a subdomain of linux.com, so there's still hope! Btw, underscores on URL are major fail.

Re:What do you think should be on Linux.com? (0)

Paua Fritter (448250) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058121)

Curse you, AC; that brought on a nasty coughing fit

Re:What do you think should be on Linux.com? (-1, Flamebait)

kill-1 (36256) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057509)

Yeah, isn't he called Linux Trollwalds?

Re:What do you think should be on Linux.com? (5, Funny)

Linux Torvalds (647197) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057795)

What's wrong with how they spelled my name?

Re:What do you think should be on Linux.com? (1)

CheshireFerk-o (412142) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058239)

not sure, but im humbled to see my UID is lower then yours. thanks for the kernel

Re:What do you think should be on Linux.com? (5, Funny)

Zaiff Urgulbunger (591514) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058701)

you've been waiting years for this moment haven't you?

Re:What do you think should be on Linux.com? (5, Insightful)

fewnorms (630720) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057797)

Seriously, when is /. going to do something about kdawson? Crappy articles, misspellings, you name it.
If your guys can't even get the name right of the guy who pretty much wrote Linux, it's time to make some changes in the editorial department.

Re:What do you think should be on Linux.com? (4, Informative)

Em Emalb (452530) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057851)

how quickly people forget jonkatz. ;-)

Re:What do you think should be on Linux.com? (4, Funny)

doug (926) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057993)

No, we only wish that we could.

Re:What do you think should be on Linux.com? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27058075)

wat

Linus Torvalds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057381)

He'd be pissed to be called "Linux".

Porn (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057387)

Free Porn

A Ninnle section! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057399)

Obviously they need to have more coverage of Ninnle Linux and all the innovations coming from Ninnle Labs.

howtoforge.org does that just fine (5, Informative)

lordsilence (682367) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057411)

Howtoforge.org has fulfilled that role for a long time which Linux.com aims to do now.

Re:howtoforge.org does that just fine (2, Funny)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057829)

What do you think should be on Linux.com?

Porn.

Just like the rest of the internet [what-is-what.com] .

Ummm (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057415)

What do you think should be on Linux.com?

Why didn't Sourceforge Inc. ask us this before they sold the site? Then they'd actually be able to follow-through on the answers.

Re:Ummm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27058459)

It's not like websites are a static thing, that can't be changed on a whim...

Uhh, I don't know... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057421)

Linux?

Articles (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057429)

Does anyone else miss the articles they used to post at Linux.com?

I hope the Linux Foundation brings back the articles. Right now it's just a glorified forum

Linus kernel (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057437)

Linux Torvalds? The guy that made the Linus kernel?

Re:Linus kernel (5, Interesting)

kensan (682362) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058419)

Yes, officially it's "Linus 2.6.29-rc4" see http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/2/8/129 [lkml.org] ;)

LinuxAppStore (5, Interesting)

godglike (643670) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057441)

The one-stop, easy-install, multi-distro place for all your linux software needs.

Re:LinuxAppStore (1)

youngdev (1238812) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057669)

Someone please Mod Parent up. This is almost the best Idea I have ever heard . So simple and yet so genius. I have been trying to think about how to do just this with Gentoo's portage as the app profile engine for governing the install preferences.

Re:LinuxAppStore (5, Interesting)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057673)

What about a hardware store? showing off and linking to the latest Linux hardware deployments and Linux supported hardware?

Also:
*news & articles (like the old linux.com, not just newsvac) covering the kernel, server & desktop developments
*NOT a major forum (there are plenty another just spreads the chance of you coming across somebody knowledgeable enough to fix your problem thinner)
*PERHAPS: A wiki (that is mainly based around merging the less distro specific stuff from gentoo,arch & other wikis)
*A parody of getthefacts that just plain laughs at microsoft.

Re:LinuxAppStore (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27058647)

I like your idea, but I believe there are many good sites out there that do that just fine. On the other hand, having some sort of "links" directory with a review system of the different sites covering different GNU/Linux aspects would work wonderfully and sites owners will kill for a place on that directory.
I would really love if they implemented a search engine where ALL Windows craps gets blacklisted. I just hate having to write "linux wifi config" why not just "wifi config"

Re:LinuxAppStore (3, Interesting)

Midnight Thunder (17205) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057699)

The one-stop, easy-install, multi-distro place for all your linux software needs.

Actually not a bad idea. It could also be handy to list all current distros and be a starting point for stuff for different people wanting to participate in the Linux experience, with starting points for end users, developers and managers.

Re:LinuxAppStore (4, Insightful)

Tenebrousedge (1226584) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057721)

That's one good idea.

So, an App section, a Knowledge Base, a What-is-Linux? section, a News section, a forum, hmm. I don't know whether it would be worthwhile to reproduce or relocate the information from kernel.org, kernelnewbies.org, and/or distrowatch.com, but it seems like all of those websites have sprung up because linux.com was being used for other purposes.

I'd want all of those websites to be conglomerated into one source, but I don't know what problems that could present.

mod parent up to +5 (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057743)

you know its a good idea

Re:LinuxAppStore (1)

icannotthinkofaname (1480543) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057939)

I don't think the ideas get better than this one. Anything I'm looking for, I can find with a Google search, or I can guess at an obvious domain name. Linux.com is as obvious as domain names get. If someone goes to that domain, I think they would expect to have such a place as the parent post describes.

Someone boost the score of the parent post to 5, please!

Sounds like... (2, Interesting)

XaviorPenguin (789745) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057453)

...they want to do something like Windows.com and showcase all what Linux can do and be installed on and overall, share a wealth of information for all to enjoy.

It would be neat to see all of this and I can't wait to see what it will be like in the months to come.

Yes! (5, Interesting)

quixote9 (999874) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057455)

A centralized source of Linux info would be GREAT! Especially if it had a search function that pointed you to a good complete answer to inexpertly phrased questions. Right now, pointing newbies at Google is one of the big linux turnoffs for them.

Re:Yes! (5, Insightful)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057551)

using google is worse than no information. Many guides and howtos are years out of date. (Google gives a higher page rank to older pages)

Re:Yes! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057575)

linuxquestions.org is actually pretty good, it would be nice though to have a wiki like the old gentoo wiki, except not relying on a single guy (however awesome of a job he did) and one day losing the entire database. :/

Re:Yes! (3, Insightful)

Jurily (900488) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057645)

A centralized source of Linux info would be GREAT! Especially if it had a search function that pointed you to a good complete answer to inexpertly phrased questions. Right now, pointing newbies at Google is one of the big linux turnoffs for them.

You cannot get more centralized than Google. And it also has a search function! Also, maybe there is no "good complete answer" that will work for everyone.

The main reason it's a turnoff is "Google it you moron" vs. "Have a look at http://www.google.com/search?q=nvidia+direct+rendering+slackware [google.com] and see if someone already solved it". See the difference?

Re:Yes! (2, Insightful)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058311)

People who know the hardware in their computer, the specific distro they run, and what the problem is related to don't need the help. Well, they do, but they might already be serviced by Google.

You need to give the help to the people who ask, "hey, last week the doohickey worked with the internets thing, but now the button doesn't go anywhere and the doohickey disappeared!" That's a substantially harder problem, and if you could solve it you'd have one-up on Microsoft and Apple.

Re:Yes! (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057679)

Agreed. A well-written and easily-used "standard" linux documentation for a lot of distros would be very, very excellent. And targeted, distinctly targeted, to the beginner. "linux.com" is going to be what very beginning beginner linux users are going to type in, right, not advanced computer users. Centralized and standardized Linux help would be great.

Re:Yes! (1)

Rutulian (171771) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058373)

The reason why that will be hard is because each distro has a slightly different way of doing things (different menu structure, different shortcuts, different config utilities, etc). You would have to have separate instructions and screenshots for each distro. The only way to be (mostly) distro-agnostic is to use the CLI. That is why most help forums don't bother with GUIs, but it is distinctly not beginner user friendly.

Re:Yes! (1)

Ronald Dumsfeld (723277) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057761)

A search function... yes, but it has to be very good. Would Google perhaps donate one of their search 'appliances' rather than insist everything go in their great database?

Linux.com has to be really good to serve any sort of evangelising purpose, and search will be critical to that.

You, tangentially, touch on another major issue with any computer related stuff - poorly phrased questions. Pose them to a search engine? You get squat. Pose them to a discussion area? Someone will probably ask you a bunch of questions back to work out what the problem is, and be able to provide a solution.

The latter requires more effort on someone's part, so may be the less-travelled road. The accumulation of poor questions, and volunteers working to resolve the issues causing them, should eventually help on the search side.

So, I'd want to see Linux.com with the right foundations to evolve into an indispensable site. I do not believe it can start as such.

Re:Yes! (1)

Haley's Comet (897242) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058115)

There are a lot of threads in forums specific to one flavor of Linux or another that should be read OS wide... Maybe there will be a function to import from say, Ubuntu or Slackware or PCLinuxOS forums so that the great info could be found by all.

It would be nice to have forums dedicated to certain software that had a good chance of large public use and the dev's reading it... You know, for usability purposes. The dev's could get a real feel for the pulse of the user base. If enough "how do I do X or Y function" get asked, maybe the next release of that software could make it loads easier to do X or Y. Also, great help files could be written almost directly from the forums. Just a thought.

I think it's a great thing, what has transpired. Maybe now the kernel might get some more general interaction between the dev's and the day-to-day users. Maybe this might make a better channel for communication than just mailing lists?

Actually, isn't all that what http://www.linuxquestions.org/ [linuxquestions.org] is for? They could just as easily post a link to LinuxQuestions.org as a forum and leave the main site as an info only/release site. That might get LinuxQuestions.org some more general attention (and possible affection) as it is not distribution centric. Also, that would allow the main site to remain at least that much smaller and more manageable. Why double efforts if it isn't needed?

Right now, pointing newbies at Google is one of the big linux turnoffs for them.

They DO need to learn that "The only stupid question is one that you could easily answer yourself." I have said that for 20 years or so. Google and forum searches should be their first thought. Understanding the results comes after asking better questions. I myself still need help from time to time, but instead of asking what I call stupid questions, I go to a search function. Only after such do I ask a better, more informed question if needed. You could, in your answer, post that you found the result on google.com or a forum search by searching for what they asked. Don't just tell them to search, show them that they can! After all, are we not the admin of our own computers? Yes, just telling them to RTFM is the worst idea. Instead, tell them how to find TFM and that you are there to help them understand what they found. If they found nothing, there might not be a FM, then help them anyway.

Make it beginner friendly (5, Interesting)

Xs1t0ry (1247414) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057461)

Most of us experienced users know where to find good help and info so I think they should make linux.com primarily a site for beginners. It would include a broad overview, tutorials, howtos, information about distros and a lot of zealous pro-linux content to spread the love. linux.com is the obvious domain name for someone looking to learn about linux. Notice I say primarily for beginners and not totally. It should of course contain more detailed information.

Re:Make it beginner friendly (1)

recharged95 (782975) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058247)

You're looking at the same paradigm as:

www.javasoft.com (aka java.sun.com) www.java.com

Re:Make it beginner friendly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27058283)

Spread the love, you mean like on a dating site? So we can meet hot blond supermodel girls in bikinis that play video games, love fat geeks, and are Linux freaks?
Ah, nevermind, I need to change my undergarments...

Re:Make it beginner friendly (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058363)

I think they should make linux.com primarily a site for beginners.

The problem is that beginners need to ask questions; if you have a site for beginners, there won't be many or any people to give good answers.

It's sort of "a self taught man has a very ignorant teacher" 2.0 - scaled up for crowdsourcing.

Porn? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057471)

Uhmm... Porn?

Redirect to lwn.net (1)

kill-1 (36256) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057493)

...and forget the advertising bits.

That's fine and all (5, Funny)

Daimanta (1140543) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057497)

but does it run Linux?

Better question... (1)

broken_chaos (1188549) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057749)

But does it run Linus?

Re:That's fine and all (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057885)

Nope.

nmap -sS -O -v linux.com
Starting nmap V. 4.76 ( www.insecure.org/nmap )
Host linux.com. (140.211.167.55) appears to be up ... good.
Initiating SYN Stealth Scan against linux.com. (140.211.167.55)

PORT STATE SERVICE
80/tcp open http
3389/tcp open msrdp

Remote OS guesses: Windows Me or Windows 2000 RC1 through final release, Windows Millenium Edition v4.90.3000
TCP Sequence Prediction: Class=random positive increments
                                                        Difficulty=6798 (Worthy challenge)
IPID Sequence Generation: Incremental
Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 2 seconds

A redirect (5, Insightful)

apankrat (314147) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057505)

A redirect to .org seems to be an appropriate option.

Linux Torvalds? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057507)

Slashdot Malda should really fix the typos on his site.

Slashdot (0)

RichardJenkins (1362463) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057525)

What do you think should be on Linux.com?

A mirror of Slashdot. Because nothing will help Linux adoption than seeing a bunch of raving geeks talk about the RIAA.

Why d'ya have to go and sell it?

Role of linux.com? (5, Insightful)

jgurling (1333517) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057535)

I don't know for a fact, but I'd guess that a number of visitors will be people who have heard of "that linux thing" and punched in www.linux.com to find out more. While I think it's great that Ubuntu is great for having critical mass and gaining mainstream momentum, I also think it's in everyone's interest to explain, in simple terms, that Linux != Ubuntu, and that Linux is, in a manner of speaking, a whole lot more than Ubuntu.

Re:Role of linux.com? (1)

maiki (857449) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058671)

...Linux is, in a manner of speaking, a whole lot more than Ubuntu

To be certain, Linux is also a whole lot less than Ubuntu, given that it's just the kernel.

Shouldn't that be linux.ORG? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057541)

Kids, when I was your age, .com was for commercial businesses, and no self-respecting FOSS projects would be seen using one. Even for-profit blogs that cover FOSS would use the non-profit TLD, .org.

Re:Shouldn't that be linux.ORG? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057589)

.org is not and never has solely for non-profit organizations. It is for any sort of organization, no matter the type or legal structure.

The concept of it as 'non-profit' was spread from misinformed 'journalists' and shoddy Internet-for-dummies style guides in the mid-90's.

Here's to some serious improvement! (5, Insightful)

red_blue_yellow (1353825) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057565)

With such an obvious name, linux.com is where many newbs go first. The forums were not that great to begin with, and in the last few weeks they even lost all formatting, including newlines. I'm glad to see that such an important domain name will be put to good use now.

Re:Here's to some serious improvement! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057963)

With such an obvious name, linux.com is where many newbs go first.

The days when people typed "whatever.com" into their address bar are over (and have been for a while now). Today they type "whatever" into google.

A "face" for Linux. (5, Interesting)

JustinOpinion (1246824) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057577)

What do you think should be on Linux.com?

One thing I would like is for it to be a clear and professional page that invites and excites people to learn more about Linux.

What I mean is this: Right now if you google "Linux" [google.com] , the first hit is linux.org [linux.org] . That site has some good info, and even has an explanatory paragraph about what Linux is... but (how to put this nicely?) it doesn't look professional. It doesn't scream "this is a sophisticated and powerful (yet user-friendly) system supported by (and supporting) billion-dollar industries." Instead the impression a first-time visitor will get is that Linux is arcane, old-fashioned, and disorganized.

The fact is that when any of us talk to others about Linux (whether as a home desktop or for business-use), the person will go and search "Linux" and end up being confused. So I would like "linux.com" to have a really carefully designed frontpage, that explains what Linux is, looks very professional (maybe with tie-ins to big-name companies to make the suits feel more comfortable), and helps people get what they need (links to downloads, FAQ, community sites, all that good stuff...).

The Ubuntu homepage [ubuntu.com] is pretty good in this regard. I'm sure I'm not alone in having switched over the last few years from telling people to "read more about Linux" to telling them to "read up on Ubuntu". It's just easier to pick a distro for them (they can always change when they learn more), and Ubuntu has put a nice "face" on the Linux ecosystem. Their homepage doesn't overload you with info, and provides clear links to downloads, community, etc.

So while I hope linux.com becomes many things to many people (and has all the news and content that we geeks want), I hope they take this opportunity to make the mainpage a useful portal for people who want to learn more about Linux. (Since it will be an obvious place for a newbie to first look.)

Re:A "face" for Linux. (0, Troll)

danomac (1032160) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057861)

It doesn't scream "this is a sophisticated and powerful (yet user-friendly) system supported by (and supporting) billion-dollar industries." Instead the impression a first-time visitor will get is that Linux is arcane, old-fashioned, and disorganized.

So you mean it should be riddled with flash objects and <blink> tags? Then it'll be annoying AND old-fashioned. ;)

Re:A "face" for Linux. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057961)

the first hit is linux.org [linux.org]. That site has some good info, and even has an explanatory paragraph about what Linux is... but (how to put this nicely?) it doesn't look professional. It doesn't scream "this is a sophisticated and powerful (yet user-friendly) system supported by (and supporting) billion-dollar industries." Instead the impression a first-time visitor will get is that Linux is arcane, old-fashioned, and disorganized.

Visiting http://linux.org/ is worse.
It tells you you're a retard and should get off the Internet.
Seriously.

In most peoples minds, there's no difference between http://foo.bar/ and http://www.foo.bar/ , as 99% of the sites out there serve the same content or redirect to the right with a 301.

What linux.org does is just fucking petty and arrogant.
Much like most Linux advocates.

Re:A "face" for Linux. (5, Insightful)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058387)

Oh my CHRIST! You're right, I didn't even believe it.

The text, when you visit http://linux.org/ [linux.org] reads:

Incorrect Site

For comprehensive information about Linux please visit our proper site, www.linux.org.

Please update your bookmarks and any links you may have to this old site.

What it should read is something along the lines of:

Duuuh

Despite Linux's popularity, this site is run by people who aren't smart enough to point linux.org and www.linux.org to the same page. (It apparently worked in the past, but we broke it.)

Please update your bookmarks and any links you may have to this old site, because we pointlessly and broke all our own links when we broke our own site and probably slaughtered our own pagerank in the process.

I agree wholeheartedly with the parent. It's amazing that a site like this still exists in 2009... heck I'd much rather see http://linux.org/ [linux.org] just 404 or time-out then give you this crap. "Proper site!" Unbelievable.

Re:A "face" for Linux. (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058291)

Instead the impression a first-time visitor will get is that Linux is arcane, old-fashioned, and disorganized.

I know this will sound like a troll post... but, Linux IS disorganized. Arcane and old-fashioned, no, but disorganized, yes. There are tons of distros. Those distros have very different organizational structures even (deb vs. rpm, to name one). Even something as simple as dvd playback and sound is sometimes hard. Last evening, in fact, I spent an hour trying to get Amarok 2, kscd, and Kaffeine to work.

  • Amarok 2 was fine, but kscd and Kaffeine wouldn't work. If I had used Amarok 2 that session, Kaffeine had no sound.
  • kscd wouldn't open, period. Turns out kscd was already open, somewhere in the background, due to KDE 4.2 session management
  • gstreamer was the culprit, I guess, for the Amarok-2-stealing-my-sound, since I was able (with some amount of difficulty) to switch to a xine backend for phonon.
  • DVD playback worked after I installed Packman's libxine codecs, except that it could not decrypt the DVD (which, incidentally, was a Hogan's Heroes collection from the library).

Where to begin. Let's see. Disorganized was my critical remark - there we, I think, too many options for the sound backend which is why it didn't work. Xine didn't work right off the bat with Amarok 2. Gstreamer was fine, except that it didn't work well with multiple applications, for whatever reason. Now, my question is - how in the world would a normal user know how to fix this? He should not even have to know that such things as "phonon" and "xine" and "gstreamer" exist. Sound should be taken care of in the background; at worst, installing a DRIVER for the soundcard, but having to work with backends (xine, gstreamer, etc.) to a backend (phonon) for applications is a bit much.

And the DVD playback thing, I still don't know how to correct that. At least I'm able to get it to see that it is a DVD - before this, DVD playback was simply disabled (see opensuse.org page [opensuse.org] ).

Old fashioned, arcane? No. Disorganized? Yes.

Documentation of a LOT of different problems (has to be distro-specific though, as they are so different and *ahem* organized differently...) would help a LOT of users, I think.

Re:A "face" for Linux. (1)

blackest_k (761565) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058463)

I like that linux.com for commercial ventures, linux.org for individuals, I know thats a blury line but perhaps it is two different area's to address. Linux in the commercial environment has a different focus to what individuals want from their linux systems.

Corporate Linux solutions for 100's of desktops and servers is a bit different from the usual newbs cry of my wifi won't work...

So yes commercial applications and solutions with Linux for the .com org for the rest of us who use linux because we want to.

appropriate really even linux.edu deals with linux in education who'da thought

     

linux.com needs some direction (1)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057611)

Linux.com [linux.com] was one of the very first sites I used to frequent on a daily basis. But I quickly lost interest as I found the site ugly and Slashdot together with other sites did a better job.

I hope the new owners can put some serious work into the site.

By the way, Slashdot too needs some love. Details like number of comments submitted to date are missing or are deliberately hidden from non subscribers like me! Heck, we need to know all sorts of statistics. I appreciate the need for cash but I thought that's why we began to see ads especially among comments at Slashdot.org.

What do you think should be on Linux.com? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057657)

Windows Server 2003.

How much? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057735)

Doesn't the submission title say "purchase"?

It's about 10 years too late (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27057783)

Whatever useful purpose that site may have once been able to serve has been squandered by SourceForge/VA attempting to use it as nothing more than a revenue stream. The best thing to do with it now is to redirect it to one of the many actual useful sites that already exist.

Just the fact that SourceForge is going to "continue to serve ads" tells you all you need to know about this. It's another colossal waste.

Re:It's about 10 years too late (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27058301)

I concur.

My list (4, Funny)

microbee (682094) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057793)

1. monthly debate on the best Linux distro
2. monthly debate on binary kernel modules, proprietary software and GPL, plus ridiculing RML's mustache
3. quarterly email exchanges between Linus Torvalds and other users with the latter calling the former former arrogant bastard and the former calling the latter "a bunch of wanking monkeys"
4. weekly discussion on how Windows sucks and bookkeeping on the number of chairs thrown out of Redmond buildings
5. monthly whining about how slow Debian development is
6. bi-annually mention of Hurd and that it's going to be ready "soon"

Re:My list (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058267)

You're a 'tard. What about vi vs emacs?

Re:My list (1)

Rob Riggs (6418) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058425)

We've moved on to KDevelop vs Eclipse. Don't even get me started about those Code::Blocks posers.

Those who dont learn from history... (3, Interesting)

Seraphim_72 (622457) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057835)

So why did Sourceforge let Linux.com go essentially dead at the turn of the year?

All I ask for is the clear, thorough (mostly), and timely writing that was the hallmark of the articles that were on the front page of the old Linux.com.

Re:Those who dont learn from history... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27058689)

So why did Sourceforge let Linux.com go essentially dead at the turn of the year?

Perhaps they were losing money? Perhaps the talks to sell it were already in progress at that time?

Advertising (4, Funny)

Hatta (162192) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057883)

"The Linux Foundation (employer of Linux Torvalds) will take over the editorial and community stewardship for the site; Sourceforge will continue to supply advertising on it."

Good, I was worried they would run out.

Why did Sourceforge have it in the first place? (1)

Rix (54095) | more than 5 years ago | (#27057907)

Doesn't Linus own the Linux trademark? This seems like a fairly cut and dry trademark squatting case.

Re:Why did Sourceforge have it in the first place? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27058111)

Trademarks are industry and country specific. Owning the Trademark to "Linux" doesn't mean that you immediately get Linux.com, although it would help your court case.

Re:Why did Sourceforge have it in the first place? (2, Informative)

retchdog (1319261) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058193)

They most likely had already a free sub-license for the trademark: http://www.linuxmark.org/ [linuxmark.org]

Revoking a nominally perpetual license, in order to take over someone's website, would be rather questionable...

I have an idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27058091)

A site containing nothing but republished Microsoft's "get the facts" stuff would be an epic Aprils fools.

I'd like to see a beta of the site before I make any serious suggestions.

WHat about cost ? (1)

Delifisek (190943) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058157)

If my memory correct. Some one buy that domain for 5 million dollar at .com craze...

Wow, just wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27058209)

It took until 2009 to make this move. Maybe in 2015 the site will be working as it should.

Jakeroberts (2, Funny)

jakeroberts (1113299) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058211)

How about no more Microsoft advertisements. I understand its a money thing but you wouldn't take money from a crack dealer would you?

Re:Jakeroberts (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27058659)

your just jealous because they actually have money. linfux is for cheap bitches with no cash. but who cares lnux is soon going under! slashdick will soon be gone!!

hey kdawson! go find a job flipping burgers, fucking asshole.

Does anybody ever visit "linux.com"? (1)

sqldr (838964) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058255)

I mean, honestly, my general daily haunts are slashdot, the register, BBC news, and failblog, and occasionally b3ta.

If I want to learn about linux, then I go to slashdot. That said, if I'm a total linux kernel developer geek, then perhaps I do need to see a daily news update on what patches got accepted and rejected, but somehow, I expect the whole site to be dedicated to boring shit like "linux gets used in some school somewhere", or "some country installs linux box somewhere in the basement of some government office".

I hope it didn't cost too much, because they're not going to get many visitors..

Re:Does anybody ever visit "linux.com"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27058391)

Well, for marketing purposes, Linux.com is much easier for non-linux people to remember and use than the alternative which would be something along the lines of "opensourcesoftwarewhichmeansitsfreeforpeopletouse.com." Or if the names of various consumer linux programs are any sign of things to come, the new Linux website would have a name equally vague and confusing as Gimp or Gaim. Something like "Gafoofa."

Re:Does anybody ever visit "linux.com"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27058629)

If I want to learn about linux, then I go to slashdot.

uhhhh... yeah.

As a new user my instinct would to be type in www.linux.com. But maybe i am just being stupid and will just visit the chat board called slahsdot. Think about it.

because they're not going to get many visitors.
You are generalizing what YOU would do to the actions of others.

Re:Does anybody ever visit "linux.com"? (1)

kitezh (1442937) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058677)

Actually, it used to be NewsForge up until a few years ago when it redirected to linux.com. It was one of the sites I'd visit daily for news and useful editorials. I didn't even know they had forums until the end of the 2008 when they stopped posting new articles and instead defaulted to the forum page.

Let 'er rip (2, Interesting)

NotBorg (829820) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058423)

What do you think should be on Linux.com?

If they really want the community to decide then they should just make it a blank Wiki and let it go with the only restriction being that content be related to Linux.

games (3, Insightful)

doti (966971) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058439)

What do you think should be on Linux.com?

Linux games.

2009 should finally be the year... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27058441)

...for linux.com on the desktop!

Linux.com (1)

Orion Blastar (457579) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058449)

needs BitTorrents of various Linux distros. That way we can download Linux better.

Welcome to linux.com (4, Funny)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058497)

Welcome to Linux.com!

You can do anything with Linux, anything at all!

Porn! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27058579)

, because its the intertubes.

articles (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27058591)

The articles from the way the site was, needs to continue. The subjects of the articles were very interesting.

domain not sold.. was given. (4, Informative)

nsanders (208050) | more than 5 years ago | (#27058615)

The article never said it was sold and I know that it wasn't. It was given by Sourceforge to the LF. But hey, this is slashdot and headlines almost always are incorrect :-)

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>