The point is that while he is working, he is physically close to his father. So if any problems arise, he can act immediately.

Now they are appealing to “scientific articles” trying to claim that “AIs” (in quotes because they have nothing to do with actual intelligence) think, reason, and are now similar to what the human brain does. Not only that, but they are also paying a lot of people right here on Slashdot to downvote anyone who goes against the hysteria.

Look at the situation from a South American perspective. China has been proposing trade partnerships in exchange for access to the region's resources. What does the US offer? The US sticks a gun to your head and demands that you only do “business” with them, where the terms of the "agreement" only benefit the US.

Imagine which partner we here in the South will prefer?

Even the orange guy himself admitted that his motivation is venezuelan oil. He will invent the most absurd excuses to attack Venezuela, and he won't stop there. Soon it will be Mexico, Colombia (Argentina has already surrendered for a piece of bone). I wonder what excuse he will invent to invade Brazil, the "terrible" Brazilian jabuticabas?

My “friend,” I'm not the one saying that Windows gets some things right and others wrong. What's saying that are more than 30 years of improvements (and mistakes along the way), to the point that the vast majority of the market uses it (and it's not just “Microsoft's imposition” as you fanatically believe).

Same thing about the Linux desktop. Today we have more than 300 different distros (and counting), but even so, all of them combined don't account for 6% of the market. If Linux were as good as a desktop as you religiously believe it to be, it would be the dominant desktop on the market and Microsoft wouldn't have much to do about it.

So, stop shouting from the rooftops that Linux isn't taking off just “because Microsoft won't let it”; the facts tell a different story. And as long as Linux developers don't get their act together, the year of the Linux desktop will continue to be "current_year + 1" and that worries me too, despite what you may think, because as you so rightly pointed out, the Windows after Windows 7 is going down the drain, and with the Linux desktop in its current state, we may end up without any desktop that's good enough.

Nah, you're just being like a religious fanatic right now. You can only see the flaws in the Windows desktop (and there are many) but you're blind to its strengths, while you only see the strengths of the Linux desktop (which, honestly, I've seen very few so far) and can't see the flaws that prevent it from being genuinely good enough to replace Windows.

Tip: We will have a Linux desktop truly capable of replacing Windows when Linux developers finally recognize what is good about Windows and copy those good parts, fix the bad parts (or avoid doing the same mistakes), and most of those developers agree to focus their efforts on one or two good desktops instead of each making their own because their egos are too big to collaborate with others.

You're probably just trying to find a reason to offend me, but I'll make an exception this time.

What the other commenter completely ignored is that I am NOT saying that Windows (currently version 11) would be the best option, far from it. What I am saying is that Linux is failing to be a viable alternative for the average Joe, because if you have three Linux developers arguing about how they should make a desktop, you end up with three distinct desktops where none of them are good enough, thus forcing the average Joe to continue using Windows even though it is getting worse, as you have noticed.

You came here to comment with such fanatical hatred that you couldn't even make a single meaningful comment? Tsk. All you managed to do was reinforce my point.

It's partly because of childish attitudes like yours that people continue to use Windows or Mac. And I'm not going to bother explaining why this time, because you obviously won't understand.

I currently know of a pretty good one called “Windows 7”... You know, the one with over 30 years of refinement behind it? (And the one that Microsoft is foolishly trying to abandon in favor of a phone interface?)

You can hate Windows as much as you want, but there's no escaping the fact that it's a good desktop (well, until the newbies took over and started the disaster that is Windows 10/11). And being unable to recognize its strengths is one of the reasons why the Linux desktop continues to be the disaster it is today.

You are looking for “malicious motives” where the reason is simply something more practical. Assuming I spend “x” to produce a Windows application, I have to spend “x” to produce the same application for Ubuntu. And then probably more ‘x’ for Slackware, meaning I have spent “2x” to support Linux. And while my “x” spent on Windows will probably last for years, what I spent on Ubuntu will almost certainly be lost in the next major version of Ubuntu, and I will probably have to spend another ‘x’ on Ubuntu, bringing my cost to support Linux to “3x”. And note that the market size for my Linux application is only a tiny fraction of the market for the Windows application.

As a commercial developer, I can explain why commercial applications are not made for Linux. When you make an application for Windows, you usually only need to create a single version of the executable and associated libraries, and even if you originally made the software for Windows 7, say, it's quite likely that it will continue to work on Windows 10 and 11. Heck, I've seen applications for Windows XP running happily on Windows 11.

If I were to make the same application for Linux, would I make it for Ubuntu? Debian? Arch? Slackware? Each of them seems to offer the same support, but that's not the case. Each one has small differences that can cause the application to malfunction or not work at all. Worse still, even within the same distro, It would still have problems between versions. What was made for Ubuntu 9.4 stops working in Ubuntu 9.8 or 10, and the same thing happens in other distros. Of course you can try to make a version of your system for each distro, but how can you justify the extra time and money spent to management for what is basically a moving target?

Fragmentation is actually a big problem. Because instead of having a hundred developers contributing to make one good desktop, you have a hundred different desktops because none of these developers can agree with the others on what would be a good enough desktop. Worse still, considering that Windows has already shown what a good desktop needs, it would be enough to just copy the good ideas from Windows and avoid the bad ones (usually the parts involving the Windows kernel).

It has been established for some time that Linux is a good kernel, a good operating system. But the same level of effort is now required to make a good desktop, and a good desktop is something completely different from a server that you usually set up once and then forget about it.

Have you ever heard or read the expression “greed is blind”? You and I know that there is no way this can end well, but those who rule the world have been completely blinded by the fantasy of having an “absolutely servile and powerful servant” that would allow them to free themselves from dependence on other humans (guards, employees, consumers, etc.). And they will spend as many trillions as necessary to achieve this, even though it is actually impossible with what is being sold to them as “AI.”

It won't work. If you target a specific version of the framework (or JVM in the case of Java), you'll end up with several different versions of it having to run on the same client machine, with the risk that one won't be able to coexist with the other. Of course, if you have a dedicated machine for your system, you can focus on a specific version, but even then you'll end up missing out on security fixes from newer versions of the framework, not to mention the extra work for developers in having to maintain multiple versions of the framework at the same time when they could be maintaining just one.