Somebody needs to be fired immediately.
A comment you would expect from some kiddie gamer who's never been outside of his mommy's basement. Here's a tip for you, some governments have regulations about the time you are required to retain data if you are a business. If you do not follow such rules, you are not going to stay in business for very long. Some of the documents we deal with we have a 25 year retention requirement.
Yes you are.
Considering Linux is the deployment platform for my main product, that's a moronic statement, but hey, nobody expects a 12 year old kid to utter non-moronic statements when communicating about business, so that's OK.
Linux has billions of users in its handset
Try to google the concept of "context". This part of the thread is entirely about the desktop. I have elsewhere explained why Linux on handsets is not only an excellent platform, but hugely successful. I even explained what Google has done right that Linus did wrong assuming Linus wanted Linux to succeed on the Desktop (something Linus never cared about). I did so in my first posting. Linux is an excellent OS for a lot of things, but on the desktop it's a joke.
Where it is decent, but can't hold a candle to, for example, QNX. Sadly, the competition killed the vastly superior QNX.
Not on the desktop, and it never will grow - rapidly or otherwise.
Hang yourself up on a hook in the barn
When talking to adults, please seek the assistance of other adults to explain (obviously) very complicated things like "context" to you.
You need to lay off those magic mushrooms. Linus has nothing to do with user space applications on Linux.
I know. That was my point. The UI is, for 99.99999% of all users, an integral part of the operating system. In fact, for the vast majority of the population, the UI IS the operating system. Linus decided not to get engaged at all in neither the discussion nor the drive and direction of the UI, and consequently Linux was doomed to fail, from day one, on the desktop. It will never be relevant on the desktop as long as this quite essential part of the OS is dealt with in the dictatorial manner Linus does everything else. For Linux to succeed on the desktop it needs ONE UI, on all distributions. Any alternative must be banned, and the makers should not be allowed to call their product Linux. Simple as that. If Linux is to succeed on the desktop. If Linus doesn't care about Linux on the desktop, he should continue as now.
BTW, Krita is already a better tool for artists than Photoshop
Krita is great, but it doesn't have the professional support of Photoshop. Can it be used as a replacement for Photoshop, for the individual artist, probably, for the professional who spends a significant portion of his life sending work to others and working on the projects of others, probably not yet.
Your rant about Libreoffice is just pure braindamaged rambling
And there you demonstrated why Linux is always going to fail on the desktop. OO/LO has several major issues with formatting MS Word documents. What does this mean? It means that for anyone who has a professional relationship with documents, OO/LO is 100% useless. My department has some 2.5 million Word documents, of which a good percentage will not be formatted properly in OO/LO. So, how are we going to find out? Are we going to open all of them manually and check?
It's always funny when children who use their computers as toys try to inform people who use them professionally what is and is not. Linux is very good for software development. Since the late 1990s, most of my work has been developing Java software for deployment on Linux. The past five or so
I am not a Linux hater, but on the desktop, Linux is a pathetic joke compared to every single other operating system.
I suppose are least Sharepoint have fixed that incredibly fucking stupid (yes it deserves a great deal of profanity) design choice of embedding the documents in the database. They just did not think that people would be using multi-gigabyte sized files did they?
I don't use Sharepoint, so I could not possibly comment. I don't see a problem storing documents in a DB though, Oracle supports from (depending on how you set it up) 8TB to 128TB in a blob, so there should not be a significant issue with it. Not that I've tried of course, but still. In MS SQL one should (could) use FILETABLE, which again doesn't restrict beyond file size limitations.
Well the main reason is the desktop APIs are not good enough and the ABIs aren't stable
Also GNOME or KDE or plain X? For a while KDE is the most popular, then it's GNOME, not to forget every single other controversy that some developers need to relate to. As a third party software developer that is insane.
If Linus had required a single standard user interface for Linux way back when, Linux on the desktop would probably have been a reality. Choice and options are good for geeks. They are bad for everybody else, and the main reason Linux is never going to be a player in the general computing space. On Android there is one UI (with some possible customization) to program against. If the Android UI and programming situation was the same as on Linux, Android would have had a smaller market share than Windows Phone.
Why twist requirements to match a package?
The requirements were not twisted to fit a package, they are a combination of requirements imposed on the company by laws and regulations, and the consequences of these. Some of these are:
Not twisting requirements here. Regulations have been in place for more than 50 years (except for items on digital signatures).
There are many others like it
I am no fan of Sharepoint, but for usability (when the poor admins and developers have finished their job) has features that are fantastically useful for Windows users, tight integration with Office, for example, enables many features that are incredibly useful. DAV for directly editing Office documents work very well, for example, which can not be said for a lot of other platforms. The solution is also extremely well integrated with the Dynamics platform, particularly the CRM product. Again, this is fantastically useful for the end user, and nobody has anything similar.
Azure is a server OS that has nothing to do with consumer Windows
Azure is Windows Server. Windows Server and regular Windows are built on the same core with some parameters changed on Windows Server to prioritize differently than what is required on a client OS. You should cure your ignorance before continuing.
Please note, there is also an amount of Linux servers in Azure, but these were added to the platform subsequent to Apple moving to Azure and are not used by Apple.
Again, this is in the absolutely simplest sense. Prior to this the admin has, of course, used System Center or similar, to make sure that each user can only run the applications he is allowed to run, and that those apps are in fact installed on the PC when the user logs in etc...
Now, to your repeated jab at Windows, why does Apple run its entire iCloud infrastructure on Windows (Azure and AWS)? If Windows is as bad as your Fan-boy religion tells you,wouldn't that be counter-productive? Which do you think needs the better stability and up-time, iCloud or the toy you use to play games on?
internal network disks
Shared disks are Evil (TM). You should get away from that terrible, terrible idea immediately!
I need to have access to all the documents you create, no matter where you put them. When you change them I need to have access to all the previous versions of said document. If you sign it digitally I need to be able to lock the document in such a way that you can never change it ever again under any circumstance. If you store documents that you ship to customers or clients on your local hard drive, I will have you fired.
These are the rules in many of the enterprises I currently work with. These types of requirements will be more and more common. People are not using document management tools to make it easy to share documents with others, they use them to comply with the law.
Change over from the old Windows Live email
Are you serious? We're not talking about upgrading some kid in his basement from Windows 7 to Windows 10.
wait while user thrashes through every file cabinet and closet box
If you are an administrator in an Enterprise, this sentence alone should get you fired on the spot for gross incompetency
ld Mac to a new Mac
Sigh, another MacTard that is clueless about Enterprise requirements.
Sigh. This has nothing to do with Gates. This is entirely the fault of Linus Torvalds, and only him. Linux could have had at least the desktop presence that Apple has, but due to Linus' decisions way back when, it doesn't. Here is the reality: There are no apps for Linux, the ones that are created to mimic the Windows/Apple equivalents are not equivalent. They are lacking. From Office to Photoshop, Linux have no viable alternatives. OOffice/LOffice can't format the documents we already have, nor the ones that are shipped to us. GiMP is not on par with PS by any stretch. Illustrator has no functional alternative. Linux can't compete on the desktop for an enterprise or a Municipality, that's the simple fact. It's all the fault of Linus.
If you wonder what he did wrong way back when, ponder the difference of two instances of Linux, Android and "regular" Linux. Android has a huge market share. It has an enormous amount of apps. What is the main difference for a developer between Android and Linux. Again, for a developer.
The problem is as follows. You are a kid. You play with your home computer and use it as a toy. Most enterprises, though probably nowhere near as sophisticated as you are, are not. They have to use software that works. Most of the time, preferably all of the time, on the platform they chose. I work for a small/medium enterprise and we use, among a lot of others, the following apps that have no proper alternative on Linux:
Enterprises and municipalities have completely different requirements from their software, and Linux simply doesn't deliver.
Interestingly, Apple has a tiny, tiny market share on the desktop, and still a lot of applications are developed for OSX (MacOS now I guess). Didn't even happen for Linux. The fault lies 100% in the lap of Linus, and his choice way back when, is the main reason that Linux didn't, and never will, be a player on the desktop. Can you guess what it is? If not, consider what the main difference between Android and Linux are for an independent software developer. There is one huge one, and that's the main reason Linux thrives on mobile and never will on the desktop.
However, expecting Microsoft Office docs to work 100% in OpenOffice or LibreOffice was your first mistake
Here's the thing. An enterprise has to be able to work with old documents (from well before you were born) and documents created in other enterprises and elsewhere. If OpenOffice or LibreOffice can not do this, then OO and LO are 100% useless. Period. Enterprises are not playing, they are trying to make money and not being able to properly use and exchange documents is vital.
This is only one problem here, and it's not really the fault of OO, LO or Linux. If Linux had ever made a dent in the desktop market place then the other players would have taken Linux into consideration. It never did. Never will.
"Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats." -- Howard Aiken