Hardware Vendors Will Follow Money To Open Source 194
Stony Stevenson writes "Dirk Hohndel, Intel's chief technologist for open source, believes the installed base of Linux-based desktops could potentially double this year, based just on Eee PC sales. Speaking at open source conference Linux.conf.au in Melbourne, Hohndel said commercial pressure will be the incentive for traditionally Windows-centric hardware vendors to begin offering open source drivers and Linux-based systems to their customers. 'Open source has made the most inroads in the server market, where Linux-based servers represent roughly a quarter of the total market. But in other segments, such as mobile phones and desktops where open source hasn't had as much of an impact, vendors were less interested, Hohndel said. Linux penetration of the desktop environment is currently at around 0.8 percent, but Hohndel said consumer behavior is changing this.'"
It's here! (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Potentially? Come on. (Score:2, Funny)
2000^h1^h2^h3^h4^h5^h6^h7^h8 (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Cool! A new year! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:As it is frequently pointed out in this site... (Score:3, Funny)
Let X be a small number greater than 0.
A: Under the assumption that double of a small number is a small number we have: Y is small => 2Y is small
B: Thus for all n > 0 we have (2^(n-1)) * X is small => (2^n)X is small
C: Thus by the principle of mathematical induction we have that (2^n) * X is small for all n > 0 and X > 0.
D: However, if X > 0 , then the sequence a(n) = (2^n) * X has no upper bound and is strictly increasing. Hence it diverges towards infinity.
E: So either double of a small number is not necessarily a small number, or all positive numbers are small numbers.
Re:Ubuntu is a trojan horse (Score:3, Funny)
I did wonder why I saw this chunk of code creep into ubuntu CVS as well;
if [ parttype.sda1 = "NTFS" && parttype.sda2 = "EvilLinuxFilesystem" ]
sda1.wipedrive
print "pwned by teh Ballmer!"
exit
Fortunatele for me, it wasn't written in any exploitable programming language as gcc doesn't understand bad pseudocode. Although I'm sure are writing a patch for it as we speak.