Enterprise search for WHO?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| helios Oct 31, 2005 10:11 AM EDT |
or whom...I always get that mixed up. Read it twice just to make sure I didn't miss anything and sure as fire...I did not see the word Linux used anywhere in the story. Now, with IBM's ties to Linux, I am going to assume (remember the ass-ume rule) that the enterprise Linux Desktop is the target here, but as is often the case, I assume too much. Numerous blogs and then counter articles from google have appeared in recent weeks, concerning google's lack of desktop support for Linux. So is this "enterprise" solution going to be developed for "enterprise" Linux and then trickle down to the masses? Or am I just waiting on a bus that just isn't gonna stop here. helios |
| Abe Oct 31, 2005 11:06 AM EDT |
I think it will be for Windows desktop first then Linux. Windows is still dominant for now. It wont be for long. |
| helios Oct 31, 2005 1:13 PM EDT |
Desktop search 2 has been out for almost 2 years on Windows. That is what all the stink was about in the first place. They seem just to be tweaking it for corporate use. Seems to me anyway...Linux has been put on the back burner again by google. Maybe they havent made enough millions off the back of Linux yet to justify the effort. helios |
| Abe Oct 31, 2005 2:30 PM EDT |
You got helios, money talks. we just have to be patient. MS had the market for themselves for a long time, it is not going to happen over night, but it will happen. IBM & Google are doing very good job but they can't just switch right away without switching users along with them. They are companies and they have to keep making money, otherwise they will vanish. Google donating $350,000 to Oregon university is not a whole lot, but still, it is better than nothing. |
| helios Oct 31, 2005 3:31 PM EDT |
In my absolute pout against Google, it was brought to my attention that since firefox is still evolving internally (see changes from 1 to 1.5a) google is not going to expend alot of effort incorporating it into Ffox until it stablizes a bit. Might have nothing to do with it, but it makes sense. Then again, when the hell was IE EVER considered stable? helios |
| TxtEdMacs Oct 31, 2005 4:36 PM EDT |
helios - stable: consistent, unchanged, reproducible or stable: not prone to capriciousness behaviour, dependable, immobile, mature, monotonous, standardized, ... Well I think a good argument can made for IE to match these definitions, e.g. unchanged - just a few patches here and there that has not really altered its operation properties consistent - any change yields similar results dependable - sure is, you know what to expect immobile - yes on lockup monotonous - sure boring standardized - well look at all the sites that are MS only bug work arounds mature - sure damn well is, hasn't changed in years reproducable - with variations, sure but even Firefox crashes not prone to capriciousness behaviour - stick with us if you know what's good for you! Case Closed |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!