On 2 ene, 04:24, "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <zn... / cesmail.net> wrote:
> Luis Lavena wrote:
> > - Build with MinGW also requires proper testing, which I've tried to
> > get some assistance on this list and also on ruby-core about serious
> > issues (blockers) without success too (hey, maybe I need to learn
> > english, since I think noone understand what I write).
>
> I can't help you with ruby-core, but I *can* test MinGW (and Cygwin,
> which I prefer) versions of Ruby. :) I think the real issue isn't
> performance or open versus closed source, though. The real issue is that
> a large number of Windows "workstations" are inside very tightly
> controlled IT environments, and *anything* other than approved software
> is frowned upon. That includes One-Click, MinGW, Cygwin, and lots of
> other things.
>

Yeah, those tight controlled environments play they role in the
equation. I've seen also tightly controlled linux servers too.

> Now if you're talking about *servers*, I'd be inclined to join in the
> chorus of "get a real OS". ;) Seriously, though, Windows servers *using
> all of the native Microsoft tools* have an unjustified bad reputation.
> They're fine tools, the performance is competitive with the LAMP stack
> (now), and the .NET development environment is world-class. But why pay
> the Windows license fees for the base server OS if you're going to run
> Apache, MySQL or PostgreSQL, and Ruby/Rails or PHP? Why not just get
> Debian, Fedora, CentOS (free), or even RHEL, which is cheaper than
> Windows Server?
>

Ok, maybe I should add some light on this, since it seems I been keep
associated with *servers* all the time.

I don't use Windows Servers, neither all the Microsoft tools for the
job. I develop and create solutions for TV Stations and cable/
satellite networks.

The problem with that is some of the hardware (the real hardware in
charge of stream the content to your tv, either in analog or digital
way) works on Windows. There are some comapnies just starting using
Linux as platform to develop their drivers, but the viral nature of
GPL and some zealots make them keep that secret.

You see, these companies invest a huge amount of money creating
hardware, but there are also other companies that do the same -- there
is some competition. Some ppl demand (yeah, demand) comapnies should
release the source code of they propietary hardware, just to be
allowed enter the linux community. That will impact on their
investment.

Come on, I don't see Ford or Audi open the internals of their motors
(black box), but they still sell so many cars.

Ok, I work on that area. That hardware, even it's expensive, need
coding, need a software run on top of these NDA-powered SDK to be
useful. That's my job, that's is what I do.

NOTE: before users start pointing me "hey, there is VLC" or "hey,
MythTV can do that"... stop right there. That is amateurish, that is
for your computer, for your home, that is not broadcast.

Search for Broadcast television and eat all the papers about broadcast
analog tv standards, all the MPEG specifications, DVB and ATSC, code
your first 24x7 software to handle 16 channels ad insertion solution
and _then_ we can talk about it.

So, even that I use Windows, doesn't meant I will use all the tools
Microsoft want me to sell. Is not a issue of speed, but maintainance.
I need to control my environment, not someone else.
deployment and maintainance nightmares happens on every OS, not just
Windows. Take a look at the so-many-different packaging systems that
exist for linux. There are too many that keep track of them and their
features is almost impossible.

I choose Ruby even that Python is more mature on Windows platforms.
Why? Because after 3 years of using it (python) just get tired of 4
spaces identations (and no tabs!). (Well, there is more but I'll not
trash that language here).

With respect to anyone suggestion this *all over again*: You keep
using your OS of choice, I'll keep using mine, we (everybody) have
their own reasons. If we respect eacho the world will be a better
place to live.

--
Luis Lavena