Slashdot Mirror

Why not help?

I did, see http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/desktop_architects /2005-December/000349.html but they don't seems to be interested in my way to improve Linux.

See also http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/54009/index.h tml

O. Wyss

Why not help? http://www.osdl.org/lab_activities/desktop_linux/

BP:Well, some of the industry bodies try to help open source. OSDL is actually handicapped in one very important way, which is that the majority of OSDL's membership have a conflict of interest where the agenda of open source is concerned.

wait, so 2006 ISN'T the year of the desktop linux?

Does anybody know why? Read http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005. pdf

Or a possible solution? Read http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/54009/index.h tml

O. Wyss

The silly part is using todays more powerful system as an excuse that you can use it to map to an older more limited system, and that somehow it disqualifies the fact that the system of today did not exist then.

Proof that Software patents are not valid patents? Absolutely! But such absolute proof did not stop the catholic church from promoting Galileo as a heritic. It was the losing of followers that in 1992 the Pope exonerated Galileo, and further stated that there are long running ideas about the religion that may change the understanding of. The point: Proof is not all that is needed and then there cheating in a manner that leaves no proof.

The page I linked to is very clear and straight forward, simple. What is left open is perhaps a little more datail of the action constants that you cannot avoid. There are NINE things we do in any and all things we do.

Basic things of the VIC (Virtual Interaction Configuration)

AI (Alternate Interface) You start or begin things and stop or end things.

PK (Place Keeper) You need to know where you are in doing something, keep track of things, especially if you need to set something aside to do other things before you can go back to something and continue.

OI (Obtain Input) You get things to pass to other things (variables).

IP (InPut from) You select where your getting something from and what to get when you get things.

OP (OutPut to) You select where your sending something to and what to send when you send things.

SF (do StufF) You do things a step at a time, even when your doing more than one thing at a time, each you do a step at a time. And the things you do can be or include doing the nine things.

IQ (Index Queue) You look up what things mean, and use the meanings to (SF) "do StufF". Often the meaning is from a Selected Abstraction Set.

ID (IDentify things) Sometimes you gotta know what something is before you know what to do. So you test things to see what they are. Once you know what something is, you can (SF) "do StufF".

KE (Knowledge Enable) When looking up or testing something (IQ and ID), you may only want a certain part of it. This "KE" helps you narrow down what you want to look up (IQ) or test (ID). When you look up a word in a dictionary, you limit your search to the section starting with the first letter of the Word.

These NINE things can easily be made available in the form of computer functionality, easy for us to use.

And With This we can Automate The things We Do thru computers. We can organize and automate our use of abstraction sets through The Abstraction Tool (Computers).

And on to your next comment:

"Writting letters" and "hording it to myself"? Try doing a google search on "Timothy Rue" and "Patents"
I'm even a wikipedia entry...

If the above is not enough, try: http://threeseas.net/vic/html/ and there is plenty more

Yes computer science is a bunch of information transforms, but its the underlying "mechanics" that provide simpler and more powerful control over automation, including the automation of software creation.

You can break down the heap sort yourself into terms of of where you use what of the nine action constants. But know that these constants are as a carrier wave, not the specific signal they are passing.

If you and your professors really are against software patent, then the only way to to undo them is to help map the prior art of Free Software, Open Source Software, etc.. For just like the catholic church and Galileo, its about popularity in use.

Try joining in on http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/priorart-discuss/
and check out the associated http://developer.osdl.org/dev/priorart/wiki/index. php/Main_Page

But you are anon coward so you'll have to hunt this thread down to see any response, which you probably will not do, and that makes you a troll.

Why am I on slashdot? Considering the USPTO sometimes makes use if it......go figure...

The silly part is using todays more powerful system as an excuse that you can use it to map to an older more limited system, and that somehow it disqualifies the fact that the system of today did not exist then.

Proof that Software patents are not valid patents? Absolutely! But such absolute proof did not stop the catholic church from promoting Galileo as a heritic. It was the losing of followers that in 1992 the Pope exonerated Galileo, and further stated that there are long running ideas about the religion that may change the understanding of. The point: Proof is not all that is needed and then there cheating in a manner that leaves no proof.

The page I linked to is very clear and straight forward, simple. What is left open is perhaps a little more datail of the action constants that you cannot avoid. There are NINE things we do in any and all things we do.

Basic things of the VIC (Virtual Interaction Configuration)

AI (Alternate Interface) You start or begin things and stop or end things.

PK (Place Keeper) You need to know where you are in doing something, keep track of things, especially if you need to set something aside to do other things before you can go back to something and continue.

OI (Obtain Input) You get things to pass to other things (variables).

IP (InPut from) You select where your getting something from and what to get when you get things.

OP (OutPut to) You select where your sending something to and what to send when you send things.

SF (do StufF) You do things a step at a time, even when your doing more than one thing at a time, each you do a step at a time. And the things you do can be or include doing the nine things.

IQ (Index Queue) You look up what things mean, and use the meanings to (SF) "do StufF". Often the meaning is from a Selected Abstraction Set.

ID (IDentify things) Sometimes you gotta know what something is before you know what to do. So you test things to see what they are. Once you know what something is, you can (SF) "do StufF".

KE (Knowledge Enable) When looking up or testing something (IQ and ID), you may only want a certain part of it. This "KE" helps you narrow down what you want to look up (IQ) or test (ID). When you look up a word in a dictionary, you limit your search to the section starting with the first letter of the Word.

These NINE things can easily be made available in the form of computer functionality, easy for us to use.

And With This we can Automate The things We Do thru computers. We can organize and automate our use of abstraction sets through The Abstraction Tool (Computers).

And on to your next comment:

"Writting letters" and "hording it to myself"? Try doing a google search on "Timothy Rue" and "Patents"
I'm even a wikipedia entry...

If the above is not enough, try: http://threeseas.net/vic/html/ and there is plenty more

Yes computer science is a bunch of information transforms, but its the underlying "mechanics" that provide simpler and more powerful control over automation, including the automation of software creation.

You can break down the heap sort yourself into terms of of where you use what of the nine action constants. But know that these constants are as a carrier wave, not the specific signal they are passing.

If you and your professors really are against software patent, then the only way to to undo them is to help map the prior art of Free Software, Open Source Software, etc.. For just like the catholic church and Galileo, its about popularity in use.

Try joining in on http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/priorart-discuss/
and check out the associated http://developer.osdl.org/dev/priorart/wiki/index. php/Main_Page

But you are anon coward so you'll have to hunt this thread down to see any response, which you probably will not do, and that makes you a troll.

Why am I on slashdot? Considering the USPTO sometimes makes use if it......go figure...

There's a chilling effect that stems from the harassment of Quinn: other government CIOs are being scared away from the Open Format issue because now they know that Microsoft will do its best to end their careers if they even try. They can see from the Abramoff scandal that Microsoft's influence reaches the very highest level of American politics - and that while Abramoff and Delay were damaged, Gates hasn't been touched.

I always wonder why people complain about Microsoft but when it comes to do something against Microsoft, they fall silent. Also Bruce Perens doesn't give a hint, why? Well let's have a look about some key developments in OpenSource.

Mozilla: It is by far the most successful OpenSource project and it finally forced Microsoft to upgrade IE6 to IE7 and become more standard. Why is Mozilla this successful? Because it runs anywhere (cross-platform) and its look&feel suits enough users so they go for it. Besides Mozilla is developed with its own XUL framework.

OpenOffice: Not as successful as Mozilla but might become as well, albeit there are some reservation. This mostly because there are some complains about performance in their Java parts. Still it will become successful (on Windows and Linux but not MacOS) because it runs anywhere (cross-platform) and its look&feel (since version 2.0) suits enough users so they go for it. OpenOffice is developed with its own framework which allows for a native Windows port and a GTK/X-Server port anywhere else.

Gimp: Why does even the majority of the Linux users wish for Photoshop than Gimp (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf)? It seems Gimp fails to attract even Linux users let alone other's platform users. Because it's not usable as the others and its look&feel doesn't fit.

GTK apps: There are countless OpenSource applications written with GTK but none has become a significant contender in the market. None has threatened any commercial Windows-Only vendor. Because they all fail the usability as Gimp but maybe not as bad.

QT apps: There is no questions QT applications are usable and the look nice enough. But they face another problem, QT as OpenSource is only used within KDE but nowhere else. So even if they theoretically could be cross-platform they practically aren't.

Java apps: I don't know any top Java application, maybe there are but none for the ordinary user. This is amazing since there are lots of millions dropped into Java. Sun (Java), IBM (Eclips) and others spent altogether probably more than halve the money in OpenSource, still all this money seems to have no effect to threaten Microsoft.

Xara: Xara is a rather nice application and with Xara LX becoming OpenSource, there's much expectation it soon will become one of the top. Why can Xara but not Gimp? Maybe because it's written with wxWidgets?

Audacity: It's yet another good sample for a successful application even if it has to compete against lots of free commercial applications. Again Audacity is written with wxWidgets.

wxWidgets apps: There aren't that many other applications written with wxWidgets so I don't know other OpenSource candidates. There are some commercial (e.g. AOL is or was a wxWidgets app) but they don't make it public. But remind they might as easily be released on Linux as Xara is, either commercial or free.

GoogleEarth: No question GoogleEarth is in its area a top Windows application but there is still no Linux release. What do you think when you know that GoogleEarth is a QT application but not wxWidgets?

I think there are enough hints that any GTK application has failed to attract users and QT applications to attract users cross-platform. But to get a bigger market share and to force Microsoft to fight for it, I've design wyoGuide (http://wyoguide.sf.net/) so it's easy to create attractive cross-platform applications.

O. Wyss

What you suggest is End User Experience and different from the intentions of the Portland Project.

The Portland project (PP) was created as a reaction of the results from the OSDL survey (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf) to tackle the problems why the Linux desktop isn't a success. But the PP simply neglects the first top inhibitor for the Linux desktop adoption. Why? I don't want to assume they don't want to solve this issue, does this means they don't know how?

In May there is a DAM meeting where the PP will discuss the outstanding issues. Let's see if they also discuss the first top inhibitor or if they avoid it.

... It seems to me the HIGs of KDE, Gnome and OS X are converging for quite some time. So perhaps there is already done for lot of your ideas?

Do you really believe that?

Portland Project tries to unify the Developerside. ...

Sure, but does this remove any inhibitor? Do you really think DAPI will have any effect on the adoption of the Linux desktop?

To make Linux fit for a better adoption it's necessary to look at the problems from a broader view than just Gnome/KDE. Just think to solve the first top inhibitor commercial application vendors have to be encouraged, even better "forced" to release also for Linux. That's yet another goal I try to achieve with wyoGuide. Only then will companies consider Linux a viable platform. Only then will the Linux desktop get a significant market share and force hardware vendors to create drivers and/or release documentation.

O. Wyss

Intel, as one of the founders and main supporter of the Open Source Development Lab where Linus works and I think most of the lab activity for OSDL still takes place at an ex-Intel building in Beaverton, OR.

Intel has been helping to make Linux better for years and doesn't get the credit for the millions of dollars and other resources it has put into Open Source.

It's actually a bit broader than that.

One thing that looks as if it will happen is that Gtk+, Qt, and any widget set wishing to be a part of the family will have a common event loop:
http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/desktop_architects /2005-December/000229.html

One of the cool things that results from this is that it'll be possible to embed Gtk+ applications into Qt and vise versa. That will eventually allow you to write a KPart (in KDE) or GPart (in GNOME) that can be embedded transparently in the other:
http://www.scheinwelt.at/~norbertf/common_main_loo p/

There also appears to be some work in unifying the GNOMEVFS and KIOSLAVES:
http://www.scheinwelt.at/~norbertf/common-vfs/

Because the real problem is not so much the used framework but to use a single set of guidelines. The main obstacle of the Linux desktop is the usability, the look&feel of the applications. If one just uses 2 different applications on Linux, one most likely has to learn 2 different ways how to work with. If one uses 10 different application one doesn't have to learn 10 different ways but quite possible 5 to 7.

So I created wyoGuide (http://wyoguide.sf.net/) exactly for this, to finally have a single set of guidelines. And I designed wyoGuide to be cross-platform guidelines since no serious developer codes for a single platform these days. wyoGuide can and should be used on any platform with any framework and any language. Sure I do provide sample code written in C++ with wxWidgets but I'd love to put up others sample code as well. So far nobody familiar with other's framework volunteered.

To stress this point again, the Linux desktop won't become a success unless it can't be agreed on this single set of guidelines. It's possible that everybody sits together and designs yet another set but the outcome won't be much different than wyoGuide. On the other side wyoGuide is still work in progress and I'm open to any suggestion to make it more suitable for anybody.

If somebody doesn't believe me just read the LXer article here (http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/54009/index. html) and follow the links to the sources. Or go and read the guidelines themselves at http://wyoguide.sourceforge.net/guidelines/content .html.

What I'm curious about is how the Portland project handles this info, the knew it since December 2005 (http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/desktop_architect s/2005-December/000349.html), they seems to already have forgotten. I've also informed Novell and posted it to LinuxQuestions, almost no reaction. So what else can I do?

O. Wyss

Linux is already widely adopted, except on the desktop.

If you want proper surveys, instead of one guy's opinion, have a look at OSDL Desktop Linux Client Survey (pdf) which will tell you:

Top inhibitors of Linux desktop adoption:
*Application support
*Peripheral support
*End user training

See also:
Linux adoption

Peter Galaxy.

The clients would have to demand that. It does happen and it will happen more often in the future. First there was the .com bubble, then a few high profile conversions, soon there will be an avalanche of conversion as the ordinary person learns more about it. One of the top reasons for businesses to convert to Linux is that users ask.

Quoting from the report from OSDL,

The top reasons for deploying Linux on the desktop (listed in order):

• Employees requesting Linux (user demand)
• My competitors have successfully deployed Linux
• TCO (Total Cost of Ownership)
• Reduce license costs
• Security
• Source code availability (ability to customize)
• Corporate direction
• Unhappy with existing desktop operating system

should be more than enough to break Mircosoft's monopoly on the desktop which certainly will have a mighty impact on their ability to throw around with money. How?

Assume you have a 1000 developers who would one year fully concentrate on writing OpenSource applications according to the guidelines of wyoGuide (http://wyoguide.sf.net/). This would easily achieve up to a few hundreds cross-platform applications which are better or at least equally good as any Windows-only application. This base stock will force any software vendor who wants to stay in business to change their applications as well to comply to wyoGuide. Any application soon will be converted to cross-platform that's no question. Together with the already cross-platform Mozilla and OpenOffice this will definitely break MS monopoly on the desktop.

Then nobody would ask again for none-Linux applications anymore as here (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf, http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/showthread .php?t=105955 or http://www.novell.com/coolsolutions/feature/16798. html). The Ubuntu Bug #1 (https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+bug/1) would finally be solve and the future as outlined here (http://wyoguide.sf.net/papers/Cross-platform.html ) would become true. All would win, well maybe not MS. So why doesn't IBM size up with Novell, Sun, Oracle, Google and others and throw in 10 million each? I think each of them are able to scrap together this 10 millions without much problems.

O. Wyss

See the OSDL desktop Linux survey (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf) and then you know why end users are reluctant to switch. It's not that easy when there still are inhibitors for adoption. Unfortunately nobody knows how, isn't able to or does't want to tackle the problems.

O. Wyss

tackle the most important Linux problems. The OSDL Linux desktop survey (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf) clearly lists Application support as the first top inhibitor to Linux adoption and Novell's own Cool-Solutions web site (http://www.novell.com/coolsolutions/feature/16798 .html) shows that Quickbooks is the most wanted Linux application. So why doesn't Novell sponsor a real OpenSource alternative?

No I don't mean to sponsor GnuCash, I mean to build up a cross-platform solution which is able to compete against Quickbooks on all platform (including Windows). I guess it doesn't need more that just a few developers to create an alternative within halve a year and within a year Quickbooks will notice its business diminish. Well lets see then how all the others Windows-Only vendors will react when they see what happened to Quickbooks.

I'm quite sure these few developers have a much more important impact on the success of Linux that dropping another fifty developers into Suse. It will even be better for Suse if these few developers are taken temporarily away from it.

The way to success is quite easy when you follow a few rules:

- don't have unsolvable obstacles
- don't have killer arguments against you
- don't have inhibitors
- do have something valuable the others don't have
- look at our products with the eyes of your customers or users
- ...

O. Wyss

It strikes me curious why the authors choose Gimp and GnuCash as sample project to layout their theory. The ODSL survey (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf) proves that even Linux users still wish for Photoshop instead of Gimp and it proves together with the Novell's Cool-Solutions web site (http://www.novell.com/coolsolutions/feature/16798 .html) that users prefer other cash applications than GnuCash.

Does this prove that OpenSource development is wrong? Or is not done properly? I think not, the way how OpenSource development is done is fine but it shows some other problems. It shows that OpenSource development has a leader problem, a problem in which direction (towards which goal) the development should head.

So if OpenSource doesn't head into a common direction as e.g. outlined here (http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/54009/index. html) I don't see a possibility how it can eventually overtake ClosedSource development.

O. Wyss

... an analogy as to how programming is done today and how much easier it can be and why it needs to be.

http://wiki.ffii.org/IstTamaiEn

AS a matter of dealing with software patents and the scope of non-novel...

some additional relative reading on teh patent issue:

http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/priorart-discuss/

Which is a mailing list trying to address how to make existing open source software available to teh USPTO in their searching for prior art.

But if Programming is made easier, even automated, then it becomes common place like using the hindu-arabic decimal system today, instead of the Roman Numeral system for math,.

Software will never be genuinely free until it is easy enough to create that the typical end user can do so by directing the computer to do most of the work (like the fictional Star-Trek holo-deck is programmable by a child).

I can't believe that anybody can tell anything about the Linux desktop without reading the "ODSL Linux Desktop survey" (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf) before! Else Jono Bacon would have known the first top inhibitor for the Linux desktop adoption is "Application support".

Read the article at LXer (http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/54009/index. html) how to possibly solve it.

O. Wyss

The applications covers the natural process of taking any complexity and automating it for easier use and reuse, so the users of the complexity can apply the complexity thru the simplification of the resulting automation interface.

Think I'm kidding?

to finish the subject line: ....buster!

The following mailing list archives is from a new mailing list intended to address making prior art of FOSS better accessible by the patent office and others.

http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/priorart-discuss/

There is some interesting read in there and there is also mention of slashdot being used for observable comment, if you follow a link in the list to the recent USPTO meeting regarding prior art and FOSS (its a link to Groklaw summaries of that meeting).

There really is a way for the FOSS community to overcome the software patent deception, but it means enlightening others.

It seems that video and wireless network interface drivers are two of the stickiest wickets for the desktop, irrespective of OS.
Under my WindowsXP boot, my Netgear card died, after configuring WPA-PSK against the Linksys router, with a wpa_supplicant error.
Can't run CivIV at an interesting resolution with any amount of eye-candy, or the nVidia driver craps out.
Clearly, these are multi-vendor problems.
What I hope to see from OSDL, and I think the Linux kernel community is driving towards, is more advocacy for open drivers. I don't know whether it's all intellectual property crap or what, but the peripheral vendors, as a whole (and without stooping to finger-pointing) come really close to cartel-like behavior that achieves little besides disadvantaging the end-user.
Is there a way to promote a hardware compatibility database on http://www.osdl.org/ that focuses strictly on chipsets, standards, specs, and test suites so vendors are positively encouraged to sell gear that doesn't suck?

Given the genuine nature of softrware, software is copyrightable... it is not patentable.

Copyright term length is way way out of wack and sucks more than patent term length.

I fully believe in the ability of any human to advance and improve upon the works of those before them. This is the unique quality of man over all other known creatures.

I belive in giving credit where it is genuinely earned but I do not support the false constraints of such IP upon the unique quality of our being.

Its all a matter of honesty. And honestly, software by its very nature is not patentable. That is provable too.

https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/priorart-d iscuss

Now think about it. To be honest and remove the fraud of software patents, then he won't have to build up such a data base of prior art to defend against software patents.

I've noticed effort lately to alter the meaning or scope attached to "copyrights" and "Patents" as it applies to software. Mostly in defence of software patents.

Now maybe there is something to software not being copyrightable, but the primary current battle is that of "Software Patents"

Does a copyright suppress the creation of functionally similiar but different code? NO!

If he wants to solidify his arguement, then he has no choice but to prove software is not patentable.

Because untill you remove the fraudlent cover of patentability, you won't be able to see what is not even copyrightable.

Commercial OSes live only as long as their companies are financially viable. After Be disappeared, support for BeOS disappeared.

I am aware of these issues because my company was contemplating using Linux.

See the OSDL Survey: http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005. pdf for the issues.

O. Wyss

... why don't they use it?

Almost every PDF document on the OSDL website has been created on a Windows PC or on a Mac. Even the Desktop Linux Survey Report shows:

$ pdfinfo DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005.pdf
Title: Microsoft Word DTL_Survey_Report_v4.doc
Creator: Word
Producer: Mac OS X 10.4.3 Quartz PDFContext

I wonder if the GnuCash developers know that even Linux users wish for none-free cash application, see

and would like to know what they consider to do against.

O. Wyss

Modern computing platforms have:

1. A relatively predictable set of ABIs (for both drivers and apps)

2. Standard installation procedures

3. A defacto IDE that lands new developers smack in the middle of said platform's functionality and documentation

4. The above implemented such that ISVs can easily distribute to the platform with one file or CD-ROM distributed independantly.

5. Technical decisions that do NOT force authors to distribute through a Centralized Repository just to keep their application from breaking with each OS update.

6. A developer base that can concentrate on their ideas and customers, not on the shifting sand underneath them. Whereas 'Linux' distros have 'maintainers' that insert themselves between the end-user and the developer (and make users wrestle with faltering package databases to boot). Is the distro the right focal point for customer relationships?

'Linux' is just a kernel with several OSs built upon it. And those OSs don't constitute modern computing platforms either. They are good ways to run Apache + a databse, and one could say that LAMP is a solid platform concept. But that is all for the sever room and for web development.

Our community needs a 'LAMP' for the native, desktop environment. Is LSB Desktop up to the task?

Well... are developers creating RPMs for LSB? I've never seen such an RPM. I don't think that's even possible. How will LSB Desktop fix this?

Someone from OSDL's Project Portland invited me to join after I expressed these concerns. But even with 5 years of using Linux on my desktops, I spend most of my time on a Mac now. Maybe I will anyway; It should be interesting to find out if the community is still trying to pour sugar over warmed-up server-room procedures, or if they are going to focus on meeting user expectations.

The OSDL has started a site to help people and vendors write drivers and to list existing driver: http://developer.osdl.org/dev/opendrivers/. Not much on wifi yet but it's a wiki so add what you know now! Maybe someone could write a little app that people could run on their boxes to see what's working and send the report to OSDL...

Probably all working for the Chinese

Alcatel: The parent company is based out of France, with close ties to the government. Probably pro-open source.

Ericsson: Sony owns them. This won't last. Sure, they've got a good track record, but...

Motorola: they're in it to make money, acquiring open source companies and selling linux-based phones.

NEC: They jumped on Itanium for their cluster platform, so they joined OSDL two years ago, probably to make sure their investment paid off.

Siemens: Just barely joined the OSDL. Siemens Communications is primarily a hardware company; from my POV they're just trying to push their profit margin.

Nokia: they seem pretty secure as a cell phone company; I think they're into OSS genuinely to benefit the community. Take a look at what they're Open Sourcing.

Their contributions to open source notwithstanding, it looks like they want to:

1. Form alliance, apply magic words "Open Source"
2. Post article on slashdot, improve public image
3. Wait for OSS community to write their software
4. Sell COTS hardware to upgrade cell networks
5. Profit!

Of course, maybe they're working on Carrier Grade Linux just so they don't have to buy Micro$oft products any more.

Probably all working for the Chinese

Alcatel: The parent company is based out of France, with close ties to the government. Probably pro-open source.

Ericsson: Sony owns them. This won't last. Sure, they've got a good track record, but...

Motorola: they're in it to make money, acquiring open source companies and selling linux-based phones.

NEC: They jumped on Itanium for their cluster platform, so they joined OSDL two years ago, probably to make sure their investment paid off.

Siemens: Just barely joined the OSDL. Siemens Communications is primarily a hardware company; from my POV they're just trying to push their profit margin.

Nokia: they seem pretty secure as a cell phone company; I think they're into OSS genuinely to benefit the community. Take a look at what they're Open Sourcing.

Their contributions to open source notwithstanding, it looks like they want to:

1. Form alliance, apply magic words "Open Source"
2. Post article on slashdot, improve public image
3. Wait for OSS community to write their software
4. Sell COTS hardware to upgrade cell networks
5. Profit!

Of course, maybe they're working on Carrier Grade Linux just so they don't have to buy Micro$oft products any more.

Probably all working for the Chinese

Alcatel: The parent company is based out of France, with close ties to the government. Probably pro-open source.

Ericsson: Sony owns them. This won't last. Sure, they've got a good track record, but...

Motorola: they're in it to make money, acquiring open source companies and selling linux-based phones.

NEC: They jumped on Itanium for their cluster platform, so they joined OSDL two years ago, probably to make sure their investment paid off.

Siemens: Just barely joined the OSDL. Siemens Communications is primarily a hardware company; from my POV they're just trying to push their profit margin.

Nokia: they seem pretty secure as a cell phone company; I think they're into OSS genuinely to benefit the community. Take a look at what they're Open Sourcing.

Their contributions to open source notwithstanding, it looks like they want to:

1. Form alliance, apply magic words "Open Source"
2. Post article on slashdot, improve public image
3. Wait for OSS community to write their software
4. Sell COTS hardware to upgrade cell networks
5. Profit!

Of course, maybe they're working on Carrier Grade Linux just so they don't have to buy Micro$oft products any more.

The network developers have recognised that this is a major problem at present. One of the big problems was that nobody was in charge in effect of wireless! (although Jeff Garzik has done a wonderful job of overall networking devices). John Linville has now taken on the job of sorting this mess out. (http://lwn.net/Articles/167272/ http://lwn.net/Articles/167270/).

Subsequent to this discussion there has been a lot of positive discussion on the netdev mailing list and here are some updates:
* Public git tree has opened now
* WPA patches are getting merged
* Other drivers are getting merged into kernel
* OSDL is having a summit to get together the key players (http://developer.osdl.org/shemminger/blog/?p=29)

I would say the picture in six months to a year will be dramatically better.

If you want to contribute then google the netdev mailing list and jump on in. We would certainly appreciate help!!!

Read for yourself: http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/desktop_architects /2005-December/000629.html According to Nat himself there was obviously no need to close the devlopment: "For the first 10 or 12 months of development, there was no material outside contribution to Xgl." But: "We'd like to make a splash with something that is largely functional." That's maybe OK for a company and it's marketing needs, but not how open source development works. Although Novell sposored a lot of work on XGL it's not "thier" project. Everyone would have also appreciated Daves work if he'ld submitted to the open repository. I think esp. the Ximian crew behave in my opinion quite reckless und unfair. Remember all that Qt license bashing in the beginning, then all these "standards" for all desktops defined by gnome developers like tango, the fluffed gnome coup some weeks ago, Linus rant against gnome (a few days befor was that desktop meeting at OSDL in Portland, take a look at Nats blog, where just he says something like need to says something about that later in a short blog...) and the general "WE are the corporate desktop" attitude of the Gnome Marketing. And all this with a gnome that has serious problems with unmaintainable libraries which are full of double implemented technoligies and remains of wrong descions mage earlier like Corba, bonobo, ... Sun already dropped thier gnome based Java desktop, Slackware did so because of the unmaintanable librarie dependencies. So with all that background I would say developing XGL behind closed doors is not a "conspiracy" and the link to the discussion above is not a flamewar, but another Nat Friedman stupidity. And surprise, surprise, a few days after that discussion it looks like Dave accepted that this was silly thing to do and released his work on the mailing list: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg/2006-Ja nuary/011922.html but it looks like it's to late and some people also started to work beside Dave on XGL and it seems like we most likely now will have a fork. So, Thank you, Novell, well done :(

neither of the three mail applications seems to be attractive enough for the users participating in the Linux Desktop Survey (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf ). In the survey e-mail was rated the most important application while the top inhibitor for a Linux desktop adoption are the missing applications. Why aren't any of these mailers sufficient enough for the everyday use of ordinary users?

O. Wyss

As if there were only Opera and Microsoft. Ever heard of these people? Or these people, who seem to be coming up in the news a lot lately? Plus there's always these people, these people and these people.

The smartphone market is a very competitive place.

Usability of a desktop system is mostly defined by the available applications and by the quality of these applications. Even the most important part of each desktop, the file manager is just an ordinary application. So any Gnome versus KDE study is just another useless effort which has no relevance to the users. Just have a look at the Linux desktop survey (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov2005 .pdf) which clearly lists the missing applications as the top inhibitor for an adoption.

Ah, nevermind, I found the post you were quoting. Took a while, though. :)

Linus on slashdot: "Screw slashdot." Details here. This is getting better and better - and there is some very sound reasoning (not for the screw ./ part) in the linked post above. If anyone is still interested.

Please stop the strawman arguments that that someone requesting a feature does not need it (duh!) and just tell him/her to use KDE and the feature will be there.

Well I saw that phrase here:
http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/desktop_architects /2005-December/000395.html

If the Gnome people are actually removing functionality from their stuff then they're doing things wrong.

They should:
1) Pick good defaults.
2) Make easy things easy.
3) Make hard/advanced things possible[1].

So far they allegedly are removing 3).

I used to recall colleagues having to go to the CLI to configure even basic GUI stuff in gnome. When I said the defaults sucked they agreed but they also told me "but you can configure everything". That misses the point of "1) Pick good defaults". If you pick a good enough default most people won't bother to change it (or ask others to change it for them), it won't annoy them that much.

And that makes support calls easier since most people will be having their UI in the same state - only the advanced users will change things and they may not need support.

[1] Sure you can probably configure stuff by editing a text file somewhere, but if such cases are _increasing_ then gnome might as well shutdown as a project. People who like that should be using one of those "minimalist GUIs".

And what, pray tell, has OSDL done to deserve my trust or respect?

Better yet, can you tell me that their "Desktop Linux Working Group" doesn't invision a better, brighter future... A future where a single linux desktop named KDE reigns?

I'm sorry, but I've probably done more for GNOME and free software in my free time than half of the members on OSDL company roster.

I trust that neither OSDL or Linus have an objective opinion on the desktop... They just want their working group to succeed, leading to more money and less desktop competition in the future.

Then a person that claims that it's usable for something else is a FUCKING
IDIOT.

And in that FUCKING IDIOT vein:
(...)
And the technical term for somebody who claims to do user interface design
and not understand this fact is a "FUCKING IDIOT".

Using "FUCKING IDIOT" in caps on a mailing list is fairly childish behaviour, I think. There is a reasoned debate to be had there with the devs (not to be confused with the GNOME fanboy users) - how to add the complex options given limited developer time and a desire to make things usable without significant mental energy. Just shouting and insulting the developers is not the right approach and somebody needs to tell Linus that.

Have you read the entire discussion? Linus gave specific examples of what he considers usability "failures" in GNOME. Is that zealotry? Why don't you reflect on the points he raised instead of calling him a zealot. Who comes across as a zealot here? - read the post he answers to... Or read very carefully this post (focus on the content, not the author) - is it reasonable enought? Actually, what bothers Linus is the "usability zealotry" - whenever GNOME devs have to defend one decision or another (missing input field from file dialog, print dialog issues, spatial by default) we always here usability this and usability that, without any substantial evidence or empirical research to back it up ... just some outlandish theory. Now that is what is so annoying, that I'm not surprised in the least that Linus seems a bit vexed :) He is not known for his diplomatic skills, he never was, but as soon as his straightforward opinion does not coincide with some GNOME users, he is labeled as zealot?

Have you read the entire discussion? Linus gave specific examples of what he considers usability "failures" in GNOME. Is that zealotry? Why don't you reflect on the points he raised instead of calling him a zealot. Who comes across as a zealot here? - read the post he answers to... Or read very carefully this post (focus on the content, not the author) - is it reasonable enought? Actually, what bothers Linus is the "usability zealotry" - whenever GNOME devs have to defend one decision or another (missing input field from file dialog, print dialog issues, spatial by default) we always here usability this and usability that, without any substantial evidence or empirical research to back it up ... just some outlandish theory. Now that is what is so annoying, that I'm not surprised in the least that Linus seems a bit vexed :) He is not known for his diplomatic skills, he never was, but as soon as his straightforward opinion does not coincide with some GNOME users, he is labeled as zealot?

"Linus Torvalds has released his final 2.6.0-test kernel, calling it the 'Beaver In Detox'. Following this release, Linus says that 2.6 development will be led by Andrew Morton."

"Linux 2.6 is maintained by Andrew Morton, who works closely with Linus Torvalds to deliver a fast, powerful, and feature-packed Linux kernel. Development is happening at incredible pace and this kernel tree is now very mature."

I don't have a HT-capable proc (AMD Athlon XP 1700), so I don't know anything from personal experience.

I decided to check out how PostgreSQL did with HT.

The first link (1) was suggesting to someone--who was having performance problems under FreeBSD--to turn off HT. Of course, that may not be related to PostgreSQL itself, but rather FreeBSD. I really don't know.

The next thing I found showed some mixed results with ext2 under Linux (2). Somethings showed gain with HT, but not others.

Another link (3) commented that HT with Java requires special consideration when coding.

I didn't come up with anything useful under PostgreSQL, so I checked out Linux.

According to Linux Electrons, Linux performance can drop without proper setup.

Linux Kernel Management Style

• Must be able to access ALL web content without major gyrations
• Must be able to FULLY run Windows apps
• The average user must be able to install and manage their applications

• Adobe Photoshop
• Macromedia flash
• Macromedia director
• Page Maker
• Free Hand
• Corel
• dbase
• AutoCAD
• Quicken
• (there are others, but these were the main ones)

Q: Why PSU?
A: Keith Packard, principal X developer

http://groups.osdl.org/forums/higher_ed_projects/

I suspect that most server applications/os's will have servere scaleability problems once you go this far SMP though.

Well, if you're running Microsoft OS's yes. If you're running Unix or Linux - that's a different story. I remember seeing results for up to 32-way & 64-way testing by ODSL of the 2.6.0 kernel before it was released. The OSDL site of 2.6 Results doesn't seem to list them any longer - only up to 8 way. The results seemed to show Linux handled 32-way quite well, but were issues going to 64-way at the time. Don't know if they fixed that though - but I would gander so if they were testing for it.