Oh but what if you didn't mean to double click? Would you then make it require a triple click? Where does it end? How about you click on something only if you want to open it? Requiring a second click for "verification" is just silly and pointless. I think you're used to double-clicking, so that when you tried moving to a single click desktop, you made mistakes because you weren't used to opening things with a single click.

You know, downloading and installing 9.10 would have been 4-10 times faster, but I guess you already knew that.

If the government created its own software, it would be far, far, far far far cheaper, especially of course any software used on millions of computers like for education, police, fire, etc, but also for the bloated central government as well. For example, school districts across the country paying $$$$$$ for hundreds of thousands of licenses for Reader Rabbit could easily pay 1/100000 the cost and developer their own. All it takes is communication/coordination/working together, which is of course what OSS is. Once you have the software, updating/improving it costs even less usually and so future costs would be very low unlike with closed software usually demanding the same high costs over and over again. That adds up.

Each OS has its share of problems, but claiming that one vastly overshadows the other as a whole is silly.

IMO, Windows has mainly two things going for it over Linux, games and GUI tools. Since Windows has always been GUI-focused, Microsoft has created ways of doing most anything you'd need to have done in a GUI. Of course, this means that automation and the command line tools have been sorely lacking, though this is changing with Microsoft's importation/duplication/copying of various Linux/Unix tools in their newer versions, probably mostly the result of their "Linux Lab" work. Because if the power of automation on Linux, it has been a very strong server market contender, but needs to be careful since "lazy" server administrators are liking GUIs and the overhead of GUIs is less important now days I think. So, after disabling all the visual effects of Vista 7 and basically making the desktop be Windows 2000 again, there is an appeal of the Windows *desktop* over the Linux *desktop* for server administrators in some ways. Linux server administration tools are definitely out there and becoming more common, but I think this is an area Linux needs to step up its game still.

In the games realm, from what I've seen it seems there has been more of an effort in making games cross-platform thanks to competition from Linux and Mac. Linux continues to spread virally and along with desktop improvements are making cross-platform OpenGL games more appealing to developers. With the push to the browser as a platform, this really helps Linux as well, and is also good for combating the above-mentioned competition in the server area, too.

All in all, Linux has a very bright future, but should never give up on pushing against Windows in the ways where it still holds advantages, and it won't give up.

I know that there is hardware out there that doesn't work, and that quickly increases when you get into certain types of peripherals, but so far my "gambling" has yielded 100% success. I go out, buy whatever hardware I want, and it just works every time, as for my base computer that is. Like I said, for things like, say, webcams, I've had to be more careful and make sure that the cam is UVC-compliant for instance, or uses firewire. You know, actual standards. Then Linux support is cake.

"Perhaps you could call attention to particular aspects of PulseAudio's design you disagree with?"

Its failurenesstitude? Or how about non-workingness version 1.2? Those were two pretty bad features IMO.

Sorry, it's just that as others have pointed out, it's pretty broken and not ready for prime time, and its inclusion in many popular distros by default was a poor decision and has contributed to Linux looking pretty second-rate. I hope the problems get resolved but perhaps that will take improving the old systems, starting something else, or replacing everything. Linux needs quality rock-solid low-latency playback first and features second, not to mention good standards which require as little as possible for application developers to interface with it.

What are these "standards" and warm fuzzies you speak of, why would anyone want to play nicely with others, and why are you still on my lawn?!!!!!

(in other words, I agree) :P

I've watched my roommate struggle with exploring new Windows sound editing and composing programs. On most any system you have to try things out, find out what works, and works easily, and what you like. Yes, there are a greater number of professional sound editing and composing programs for the other major OSes, obviously, so your selection of good ones for Linux will be fewer. After you learn which ones you like and are the easiest, if you do (which you may not when comparing to audio programs for other OSes), of course you'll then be spending time playing with editing and composing audio instead of looking for and tinkering with new programs. ^^

"So where is Sound on Linux? In my opinion it's in a pretty good state"

If you call crackling system sounds on every computer I've ever tried Pulse Audio on as a "good state". It definitely wasn't ready to be the default.

Which is why many are glad to see Intel, Google, HP, Dell, and others make various pushes for Linux. Not sure which ones might pay out big bucks for commercials though, or perhaps it'd be a combined effort between some of them.

Sure, not good vs. bad in some super religious moral way, but if you don't recognize that an increase of freedom and competition for consumers is a good thing, you're a moron. I'm not saying it has nothing to do with "morality" though, because it certainly does. You can't completely remove anything from the moral spectrum, really, as the moral spectrum overlaps everything. Businesses like Microsoft always try to give the image that wanting money is an inherently good and just goal though no matter what getting more money involves in order to try to justify their actions, but it's simply not true. Regardless, this change helps make everything cheaper for everyone in the long run and helps push Linux development further no matter where you live, so be grateful. ^^

Exactly. Whether or not they were trying to say fuck off to M$ software, their actions said it and that's what matters. Were they right in doing so? Lets see: cheaper, faster, better, more freedom...yep.

It's a sad truth, but to go further, new things are brought to life by companies pushing correlation to known/old things. A company name, for example, that is known, pushes a new product. The new product must be cool, because you already know the company. In reverse, some unknown companies will try to push a product which looks like something that is similar to what they know. "Oh, this looks like an ipod, I guess Rikkitikkytinyhoe Co. is awesome!" Smart consumers won't see this, but most consumers aren't smart and open-minded enough to consider things they don't already know about. The young do, because they like exploring, but the ones with money, the old, often don't. Higher price = better quality is also burned into consumer's brains.

Thus, given the above, Linux will probably grow the fastest through known companies that push it. Google Linux, IBM Linux, HP Linux, etc, if they even choose to mention the name Linux (which they don't have to, they can just talk about themselves and their software and how awesome they are), and maybe even eventually Microsoft Linux, that will probably be how the majority of stupid consumers come to adopt Linux.

Linux "advocacy" is far from retarded, if that advocacy means simply informing others of more choice. Of course you can't FORCE others to use something, that's a given. The fact is, most average computer users only know what the stores sell to them, and the stores sell to them things that cost money so the store can take a cut of the profit (not that they can't charge money for Linux, but Microsoft puts lots of pressure in the form of money savings to only sell Windows which is unfair). Any way, a lot of consumers are clamoring for computer "secrets", help from someone who knows computers to tell them where they can get the good deals and avoid the scams and crappy software and hardware to save money. I've had several users chase me down wanting to know about alternatives to Microsoft, and alternatives to X Y and Z crappy hardware or software.

You should spread your knowledge the best you can to try to help others. Just do it in a way that comes across as trying to be helpful and not "I know better than you what you want".

Er, not doing so I meant. Slashdot should give you a few seconds to re-edit :P