Slashdot Mirror
LinuxWorld: Business, Business and More Business
Clarkson University wins a server from IBM. Sun is bringing embedded Linux to its UltraSparc IIe processors. Wired has an overview of LinuxWorld, talking about how it's all business and the joy is gone; and so does Internet.com; and so does Newsforge, which also has a story about LinuxWorld in Paris. The Register has a lengthy interview with Miguel de Icaza, in which he notes "Gnome 4.0 should be based on .NET".
Hey,
I thought that's what everyone wanted? To be taken serious as opposed to hey look at the nice kids playing with Linux?
What's wrong with this?
Sent from your iPad.
And yet the naysayers still proclaim that Linux died with the rest of the dot coms a couple years ago. They say it can't win on the desktop. Yet thousands and thousands of people do just that -- use it, and quite frankly, enjoy it. Linux is in the realm of education, it's running government computers, and it's even running corporate servers in the private sector.
If you celebrate Xmas, befriend me (538
I'm already depressed, why did you have to post this now.
"I'd like to see Gnome applications written in .NET in version 4.0 - no, version 3.0. But Gnome 4.0 should be based on .NET," he told us. "A lot of people just see .NET as a fantastic upgrade for the development platform from Microsoft.
.NET. But it will be a cold day in hell before Billy and the boys would do anything (even for profit) for an open source project that uses the GNU licence for many of its parts.
If this was US politics, a candidate has just stated he supports a communistic form of governement and cant wait till he gets it installed.
Interesting concept though, using
-- Knowing too much can get you killed, but knowing who knows too much can make you rich.
Wired has an overview of LinuxWorld, talking about how it's all business and the joy is gone
Too bad it can't be both ways. Often times, as mass popularity increases (in this case business adoption), enjoyment level decreases. Probably because you now have people involved who don't see things even close to the same way you do.
By the way, E*Trade moves to Linux servers
I Heart Sorting Networks
hmm, zdnet.com.com doesnt seem to work.
Just what exactly is the soul going for these days, Mr. Icaza?
It's clearly a buyer's market.
I respect Miguel. Not only is he a great programmer, but he's got guts. At a time when most other observers are downplaying Microsoft's "security initiative" as market-speak and vaporware, he comes out and praises them. He's also got a keen sense of history, too. "Embrace and extend? Why should Microsoft do that?" And telling "the community" that they should "get over" Microsoft, when it has shown no signs of repenting of its monopolistic, predatory ways, well, he's convinced me!
I suspect that most people will probably disagree with him, however.
P.S. Any guesses on how many trolls will say, "Sure glad I use KDE! GNOME sucks!" Etc...
:Peter
"click" That's the sound of Gnome being deleted. After reading the Register article, I'm almost convinced that Miguel is on the evil empires payroll. Hello KDE!
On the other hand, he does say it's a cool environment and I'm sure he knows a hell of a lot more about programming than I do. So, I take back the "click". Hell, I don't know what to think. I do know I don't ever want to donate to M$ again!
--- Think of it as evolution in action ---
It had to pass. Linux is maturing as an operating system, IBM is introducing Linux-based servers, even Red Hat is posting a profit.
It's losing its hacker heart, but at least Linux is growing into a profitable machine, hopefully rewarding those who worked hard on it.
It's simply a maturation process.
...That's the only word I can think of to accurately describe Miguel de Icaza. He should do more thinking and less talking.
I'm sorry, but someone throw some cold water on me.
GNOME 3.0 could perhaps be using APIs by the traditionally evil folks at Microsoft? Now, see if you have as much trouble imagining this as I do -- a long-haired, super-smart, (sexy, even) traditional Linux user who has used GNOME for years now embracing a Microsoft-ish manipulation of his GUI. Ever more far-fetched would be SUN Microsystems, who hate Microsoft more than all of us do, ditching their CDE GUI for GNOME, which in turn gets hooked into Microsoft
I'm skeptical, but it'll sure be fun to see how this all plays out.
If you celebrate Xmas, befriend me (538
The more big business..even little business adopt the linux, dare i say, paradigm. The more money is going to trickle down to the little guys, read us, to develope more business solutions. Even free software needs money to grow.
I think that it is great news. How many business sheep are going to flock to the, not just for kids anymore, linux solution.
If I were only smart enough to accomplish the things I dream about.. Or maybe too dumb to care.
I'm gonna sound like a troll here, but why should huge a free software project like gnome depend on something owned by a single company. It is a lot less problematic if something is owned by GNU since they're a non-profit organisation. Ximian are reqired by law to do what is most profitable for their shareholders, even if that means making stuff proprietary.
Miguel sounds out of his mind. Despite .NET being an rather open standard, it was created by the biggest, baddest, and meanest software company in the world. You cannot get around the fact that Microsoft owns .NET. When you endorse .NET, you endorse Microsoft. I, for one, will not just forget the years of horrible software and put my trust in a shady development platform based on central Microsoft databases.
I really like Gnome, and I don't want it to be tied-in to a major Microsoft project.
Porting Gnome to
I love the idea of a common runtime environment that supports C++, Java, Perl, Python, etc., runs on all platforms, etc. etc. etc., but I DON'T want that platform in any way controlled by Microsoft (or by Sun, or RedHat, or me!) If any one entity controls the platform, that one entity has entirely too much power - we've simply traded one monopolist for another.
Now, if Miquel wishes to create such an environment under GPL, with no patents held by any organization, then I'm all for it - that way no one organization can embrace and extend the spec. But
www.eFax.com are spammers
Don't you want people to buy yer stuff?!
:Peter
I wonder what RMS has to say about it!
Yeah for clarkson... works out good for me because I'm a student here... that should slove all our network problems. :)
While clearly this story is overloaded, it's also clear the only real part of it that people want to talk about is Miguel endorsing Microsoft .NET for the future of GNOME. Hence, which icon should that get? A ximian monkey? A Microsoft icon? My thought would be just a very sad face indeed.
I think - I THINK - that Miquel's goal is to out-Microsoft Microsoft, by beating MS to the punch on .NET.
.NET as widespread as HTTP _before_ MS can get a signifigant foothold, then you have a certain element of control over the Beast From Redmond.
If you can make
But that's a really dangerous game to be playing, methinks.
Miquel scares me sometimes.
DG
http://streetmodified.org/books.html
Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
Seriously, back in the good old days (circa 1980) IBM's VM/370 OS was "available source", and we used to play with and modify it. Some of those modifications even got picked up by IBM. We also used it for business (the customer of those modifications).
There's (obviously) nothing to stop businesses from exploiting the benefits provided by those that play with the OS.
And, as long as there's source, there's nothing to stop people from continuing to play.
Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.
I've been wanting to get into this Linux thing for a while, but I'm kinda confused. And nervous. What is a kernal and changelog? And how come people seem to get angry at me when I ask questions? If you're not gonna be mean to me,would you mind telling me how you run it? I downloaded some folder called Red Hat from www.redhat.com and it had a bunch of stuff in it that didn't look like a setup.exe or anything. I tried opening it with winzip and that didn't work.
Adaware didn't call what I downloaded spyware or anything, but I know alot of freeware has spyware on it. Is linux like that? Also, is it REALLY free? Or is it one of those things where you will use it for 30 days and then it takes forever to come up when you click on its icon until you pay?
"They've yet to understand we're not marketing to them but to people who actually purchase software, instead of religiously create it. They may have made Linux, but we know how to make money with it, and we just can't understand why they don't care about that."
That pretty well sums it up.
Take that!
Well, this ain't a troll, cause I'm not going to rm -rf
BTW, I'm a programmer, so I shouldn't find it hard to figure out what
"Old man yells at systemd"
Wash, rinse, repeat.
Dragging people kicking and screaming into reality since 1996.
To all those who are crying on their keyboards about Linux being "all business": You can play the game your way and maximize your fun, or you can play by the world's rules and try to win. Very, very seldom are those two ways the same.
And people give Dan Berstein a hard time?
"They've yet to understand we're not marketing to them but to people who actually purchase software, instead of religiously create it. They may have made Linux, but we know how to make money with it, and we just can't understand why they don't care about that."
The sad truth of Linux "defeating Goliath" is a twist on the old Groucho quote, "I wouldn't want to belong any club that would have me."
Linux won't "dethrone Microsoft", because people like the DIY playground aspect of Linux much more than they want a product that works for people who doesn't give a rats arse about CPU cycles, and they ain't giving up easy. And let's face it folks - all of y'all who say "Windoze doesn't do this, it's hard to do that" - y'all don't like it cause it's sanitized sheepware
If some meteor hits the earth, and Linux really does become the desktop of ubiquity, something will be lost. You don't have to be a silly prepubescent h4x0r aiming for l33t3n3ss to be sad when the spirit of your club gets diluted by people who don't want what you want. It can be good in that once the trend comes and goes, people can go back to focusing on what really drives their interest, and you get deeper, more interesting interactions between people. One way or another Linux is acquiring a personal history.
I love the idea of a common runtime environment that supports C++, Java, Perl, Python, etc., runs on all platforms, etc. etc. etc., but I DON'T want that platform in any way controlled by Microsoft (or by Sun, or RedHat, or me!) If any one entity controls the platform, that one entity has entirely too much power - we've simply traded one monopolist for another.
Considering that C# and the CLI are ECMA standards exactly how does Microsoft control the Mono platform? However Java is very much still entirely controlled by Sun which hasn't stopped a vibrant Free Software community to grow around Java? So even if C# and the CLI were completely controlled by MSFT (which they aren't) there is no reason why Free Software cannot benefit from it. Now, if Miquel wishes to create such an environment under GPL, with no patents held by any organization, then I'm all for it - that way no one organization can embrace and extend the spec.
According to miguel the Mono runtime is released under the LGPL, the compiler is released under the GPL, and the class libraries are released under the X11 license..
From where I sit that is all FREE SOFTWARE unless you are one of those GPL zealots that believes that if it isn't GPL it isn't Free Software even though we all know that Apache, BSD, Kerberos, BIND, etc aren't GPL.
then they laugh at you,
they they fight you,
then Miquel sells out...
Miquel thinks he can ride the tiger.
He will find too late, that he cannot.
Miquel's obsession is a gift to Microsoft.
I read the interview, and frankly his comments
about MS disgusted me.
Oh and by the way this isn't your anticipated
KDE troll, it's the just the way I feel.
If anyone is trolling here it is Miquel .
I actually know about here you fucking retard. In fact, one could suspect you're the fucking retard for thinking that I didn't know that:
.NET
.NET resources, that I was looking for something a little more specific or (preferrably) written by someone else other than the party with the most vested interest in convincing me that I can't live without it?
a) Microsoft makes
b) www.microsoft.com is their homepage
And yes, I could start there, but don't you imagine that I've already been there, and, by virtue of me asking for
"Old man yells at systemd"
I am not a linux world attendee, so I have not experienced the letdown that these people are describing, but it reminds me of people lamenting the loss of the "cool" internet when it was just a bunch of random people putting up sites, before mass commercialization came in and "ruined everything".
I say the same thing to this as I do to that. There are still plenty of cool sites put up by random people. You still have to look for them just like you used to have to in the early days. YOU DON"T HAVE TO DO WHAT THE MASSES DO. YOU DON'T HAVE TO WATCH THEIR TV SHOWS OR LISTEN TO THEIR MUSIC.
Getting depressed about what the masses do with a new concept is silly and counterproductive. All that does is shows how much you are buying into what Madison Avenue is trying to sell. You get irked because some knockoff is getting all the attention. Well, why do you care who all the masses are being told to pay attention to? Why are you letting them tell YOU what to pay attention to?
Britney Spears does not annoy me--that may be because I never see her or hear her music. If I want to hear edgy, innovative, gutsy music I know where to look--off the beaten track. Lamenting the fact that it isn't on the radio is a waste of a lament.
Enterprise stuff may be getting all the industry/press/expo attention right now, but that doesn't stop a single GPL/open source product from getting done, nor should it have any bearing on our passion for the freedom, quality, and community of open source/free software.
Personally, I am thrilled to see people there to make money. And an important part of that is just the "to see people there" part. With this economy we should totally expect that a lot of the fun, innovative, exciting, and cutting edge stuff would be gone. A lot of that was funded by the pre-bubble-burst wild-eyed investment community. The fact that ANYBODY showed up this year is wonderful. And if IBM and HP are not only there, but completely bullish on linux's future, well, I'm ecstatic. It's a huge victory for us that they are there at all, and that they are as enthusiastic as they seem to be.
Linux in the enterprise might not be what excites you about Linux, but it is still an exciting possibility.
These may well be the people that create your next Linux using job--I say we welcome them with hearty handshakes and reciprocal enthusiasm.
Liberty uber alles.
ah damn!
"I saw weird stuff in that place last night! Weird, strange, sick, twisted, eerie, godless, evil stuff!! And I want in!"
The parent post must be a joke.
I've created a new Slashdot Icon for Gnome that I'd like to propose. It can be seen at the following location:
. jp g
http://www.geocities.com/heavenstrash/gnomeicon
>GNOME 3.0 could perhaps be using APIs by the traditionally evil folks at Microsoft?
You tell me, Mr. Open-Source
"Microsoft-ish manipulation of his GUI"
So "write your own" without Microsoft's influence. Come on spaceman, you use linux, you should be able to write your own.
I also got to experience the feel of the old days, having brought my TiBook for a demo system. There were quite a few Apples in evidence, and I proabbly spent more time talking PPC Linux than I did KDE. The PowerPC Linux crowd continues to have all the community feeling that Linux as a whole lost when the gold rush started. Curiously, the Apple guys who stopped by the booth seemed completely uninterested as all the Linux guys drooled over the TiBook.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
Come on spaceman, you use linux, you should be able to write your own.
Actually, I use a tweaked-out Commodore 64 for basic web browsing and email purposes. The rest of my time is spent improving Knuth's algorithms with pencil and paper methods in order to achieve a better run-time.
If you celebrate Xmas, befriend me (538
IIRC, he threw a hissyfit over GMONE referring to Staroffice instead of a free alternative. I'd imagine he'd be ready to have Miguel lynched over this - getting into bed with the worst of the colsed source companies.
Doesn't he have some serious pull with the GNOME people?
-- When a fool hears of the Tao, he will laugh out loud.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
That's great news about the Clarkson students. I'm glad to see that students at my old college are involved with Linux. I only wish I could be there participating.
Good job.
Bruce Garlock
Clarkson U. class of '95
Let's go tech!
I saw this in the Business Wire - apparently Oracle will be ditching Unix to run on Linux, and will then do versions for the different OS as well.
But their main servers will all be Linux.
As to those who gripe about "darned business Linux" stuff - what's stopping you from doing your own Open Source projects? We never paid attention to Windows - you don't have to pay attention to Business glomming on to Linux either.
-
--- Will in Seattle - What are you doing to fight the War?
Perhaps the smelly open source hippies finally realized that there is a reason MS has all the money and OSS does not. That reason is that MS makes higher quality products than an OSS team can haev a wet dream about.
here goes moderators, get your -1 trolls ready.
Which frigging way do you want it? I never once mentioned that part of the article. I was referring to this...
FROM THE DAMNED ARTICLE:
"Be careful what you wish for," programmer Mickey Haines said. "Five years ago, we all wished that Linux would be accepted by the business world. Our wish was granted. But the payback is a plague of pink-faced guys in shiny blue suits. The expo is all about brains and business now, not art and heart like it used to be."
Well, guess what. Business IS exactly that. It isn't about fun. It's about Business. If it was supposed to be fun, they would call it that.
I am sick to death of people screaming how little respect the "real world/business world" gives the various flavors. Well, here's your respect. Oh, you don't like it? Well, you ASKED FOR IT DIDN'T YOU????
And no, Jbeamon, this isn't directed at you. It's everyone with the elitest attitude...10 years from now I can see people saying yeah, Linux used to be cool, then "THE MAN" took it over and now it isn't.
Sent from your iPad.
Well Miguel, it would be a lot easier to get over our beef if the Beast wasn't still pulling the same ol' crap. And if Gnome starts using .Net all I have to say is: We still have KDE!
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
"He also had praise for the new Microsoft security model.."
Based upon what?
"..dismissed the notion that Redmond was employing embrace and extend to its web services protocols.."
Oh, yeah, right. M$FT has certainly changed it's tune...
"..and put the message that the community should get over its beef with The Beast."
uh.. well... Maybe he's willing to "get over it"
It's plain he's intent on hopping into bed with Unca Bill: you can see that by the brown tones on Icaza's nose...
t_t_b
I'm on PJ's "enemies" list! Are you?
Gnome in .NET because MS is not _evil_ any more? .NET is about making money for _MS_. Your gnome will be assimilated. Get out of drugs and continue coding, so far you have done very good. You do not like the tools at your disposal: _create_ new ones, do not go with a proprietary solution just because it makes everything so much "easier". Nobody is going to give you want you need, if you want it, you code it, get it?
Sure, and you can get in bed with a prostitute because she really wants your _hot_ body (even if you have to pay for it, you know she really likes you because she told you so).
C'm, Miguel!! Wake the f#ck up!!!
"I can't see a f#@!! thing" - photon a to crossing photon b
Don't use it!
The children had their run; now that all the IPO money has been frittered away, it is time to pay the bills.
HP, Compaq, Sun, CA, Oracle, IBM, and friends are serioius about Linux and they are taking no prisoners.
Linux is gaining momentum where it counts: with the grown-ups.
It's amazing that no matter what the story, you guys still find a way to bash Microsoft. Get over it. It's a business. We live in a country with a capitalist economy. Microsoft is out to make a profit, not save the world. They make a good product. Some of you may claim otherwise, but when I have something I really need to get done, Windows is the only solution. If I want to waste an afternoon trying to get something to work, I'll fire up one of my Linux boxes. It may be fun, but it isn't practical. Hell, I'll bet Microsoft could give each and every one of you a free copy of Windows, Office XP and .NET, and you'd still find a way to bitch.
Just because you run Linux as your primary desktop OS doesn't make you superior to every other computer user.
Linux is all about profit now, it's not what it
used to be. This is the beginning of the end.
is that microsoft doesn't even have to
change the spec for anything: they can
just do "business as usual" and add
api's, compiler hooks, etc. so that
an unsuspecting developer on MS.NET
creates software unportable to other.NET
implementations. then when porting time
comes, "why does my app not compile? why
does Gnome.NET suck so badly?"
Following *any* initiative led by Microsoft
is setting yourself up for failure.
At least with Java, Sun is interested in interoperability, portability: things
Linux people should care about.
It's what's for dinner.
I understand from what I've read over at Wired that many an old attendee of Linuxworld are dissapointed with the new business-sponsored Linuxworld.
.NET into GNOME or the fact that IBM, HP, Compaq and other major hardware vendors are embracing Linux?
I've read comments on it 'not being fun' any more. I've also seen comments here stating that the Opensource-ness of Linux is being attacked by the close-sourced monsters. I was wondering if that comment was referring to just the spastic comment aout including
I think IBM doesn't sit up all day thinking of somehow 'stealing' linux for themselves. They see it as a viable, important alternative to the closed and controlled Microsoft, and probably even Intel regime. They see the gartner charts that show with current trends that Intel servers running MS OSes are going to account for 85% of the money spent on IT infrastructure in the server market.
The reason I think they're even against Intel is that all of their big-ticket-lots-o-press-with-linux in it adds are about the zSeries or the iSeries products. There is hardly a mention about Linux running on Intel based systems (xSeries).
I think IBM sees Linux as a way to sell more of their 'big iron' high margin systems and to not have to continue to fight the idiots at Dell who try to commodotize the server market when they see the server market as more than just a commodity...
Just My $0.02. I may be wrong.
As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.
I have a couple old Apple IIe machines. Wonder what some moron PHB would bid them up to if I put them on eBay as "Enterprise IIe system."
Yeah, it's a joke. I mean, he made it obvious. "He also has a keen sense of history. Embrace and extend? Why would they do that?" You can almost hear the sarcasm.
But hey, -Miguel- actually thinks this, so who's to say?
The enemies of Democracy are
OK: old argument, old news... UNIX blah blah blah security blah blah blah happens to everybody blah blah blah...
Yeah, right.
Sounds like a typical M$FT apologist, don't he?
"...They happen to be really bad at managing their bugs, and not providing fixes on time, but that's another issue..."
Wait!
Stop right there, Miguel, that's the whole f*cking point!
You can't just blow off the single biggest issue there is with M$FT "security" just because you're sucking up to them...
Security is a marketing issue to M$FT -- not a security issue, despite Unca Bill's recent homily.
Until M$FT demonstrates in a consistent manner, over an extended period of time that they're doing *anything* differently, anyone with an ounce of integrity wouldn't be sucking up to The Beast® this way...
Like someone already said, at least there's still KDE...
t_t_b
I'm on PJ's "enemies" list! Are you?
Does anyone remember how MS supposedly had "industry insiders" in Linux to ruin us with MS FUD. Could Miguel be on of those peeps?
Dad, pass the ketchup!
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
Miguel? Do you have any idea of what type of fire you are playing with? Seriously, what you plan on doing is taking a large chunk of gnome users and kindly giving them to Microsoft in their battle to control EVERYTHING there is to control. Listen, if this came of it's own because of need then I would have no problem with it. Especially if it came from the free software movement or other companies/monopolists who weren't convicted of abusing said monopoly. The problem I DO have is that simply this may make things easier in short term but in long term horrible for the industry. The infrastructure of what we call the internet today (application wise) is built with many different, compilers, archs and setups; it works and it might not be efficient but it allows for choice. What .NET plans to do is basically eliminate choice in the long run.
.NET taking over the world, using dumbasses and tiny amounts of cash in retrospect as pawns and they are too blind to see me coming.. man I'm good"
Can't you see that Microsoft isn't doing this to be nice, they aren't even doing this for web services. They are doing this to own the whole goddamn thing. The internet, what developers develop in, how things operate.. EVERYTHING!! And you are gonna sit there and honestly interview with someone on some bullshit about how this is good for you/us/me/developers because it makes things easier and that Gnome 4.0 will support this. This is Microsoft getting out of the OS business and into a much larger market. If they become the standard (standard meaning widely used) this will set off World War 3.. Everyone trying to break ties with Microsoft will again have no choice but to follow a standard they created and will no doubt make proprietary extensions too breaking said standard submitted to the ECMA when their standard+extensions becomes standard (widely used) you are fucking OWNED.
I hope this doesn't happen because if it does, you'll be known as the fucking typhoid mary in the free software movement.
"MS =
i'm sorry, you must be a jackass.
./configure --prefix=/gnome
... because you will be just like them.
In the other hand, knowing your enemy and knowing yourself is the only way of win.
AND, in the other hand, dont we code just for fun? Why to worry about business?
We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
Both your questions are irrelevant. The first set of questions about whether Microsoft can change the C# and CLI spec is irrelevant because already a lot of stuff in .NET is not in the C# or CLI specification. Miguel has stated that creating a compatible implementation of .NET is not his goal yet people keep assuming it is. The CLI and C# are good technologies that fix some of the mistakes that Sun made with Java (and made some new ones) but somehow assuming that implementing the development platform now means that Ximian will have to mirror the .NET development environment when MSFT probably has twice or thrice the number of programmers working on .NET fulltime versus Mono's five fulltime and about fifty volunteer employees.
.NET framework to Linux. Instead I assume it will be a successful port of C# and the Common Language Infrastructure which is good enough for me.
Quite frankly, I don't ever expect Mono to be a port of the
As for your second set of questions, I somehow doubt that MSFT can hand over their technology to a standards body yet still threaten to sue anyone who implements it. However, IANAL and stranger things have happened.
What was so great that three of them won the contest? It's not on the press release, the COSI site, nor on IBM's winners list.
I am posting from a public email computer running redhat 7.2 but boasting a Windows sticker licence for Win2Kpro. (sigh)
At least they are being good to the .org's that applied.
Novel theory: Modern Man evolved from psychopath
That "server" that Clarkson won was a zSeries mainframe. They *start* at a cool quarter million bucks US. In the award presentation, the Clarkson president pointed out that it would go the Clarkson Open Source Institute --- a mostly student-run and organized endeavor within the Computer Science department there. Not a bad achievement for five students working on improvements to Linux, and a professor that encouraged them to enter, eh?
To those giving MS praise for coming up with .NET (including Miguel): Face it, there isn't a significant difference between CLR-type functionality and the JVM. Getting the JVM was a much bigger step than going from JVM -> CLR. In MS's defense, though, since it's an incremental and obivous step, WHOEVER had made that step would be embracing and extending the innovation of the JVM work at Sun (and the efforts to bring other languages to the JVM).
.NET software that people will think can run on any .NET platform that actually only runs on MS's .NET. Sure, it's an ECMA standard, but that doesn't keep MS from introducting their own "extensions" to it which lock users into MS.NET while still giving the illusion of not being MS-specific.
I'll leave the discussion of Java (the language) vs C# out of this.
The real difference is that with Java/JVM, when MS deviated from the spec (de facto, governed by Sun) Sun was able to get them to stop. Sun put the smack down on MS for trying to make MS-specific changes to MS's implementation of Java. This would have resulted in people developing for MS-Java thinking they were developing for Java, and then having issues when trying to get their code to "run anywhere" besides MS OSs.
With CLR/.NET there's no one to sue Microsoft when they go and take what is touted as being an open spec and change their implementation of it. That will lead to
Or am I wrong? Is there any legal way to punish MS for the type of mischief they tried with Java/JVM and that I predict they will try with CLR/.NET?
Perhaps "Student" isn't the proper description... As far as I knew he was running Clarkson's tech crew for a while when I arrived my freshman year (6 years ago)
It's a slippery slope from emulating
Win32 I/O and security models, to playing
catchup full-time because you have all
these Microsoft drones coming to your platform
and saying "Why does gnome.NET suck so badly?"
I think there must be a shadowy cabal of Freemasons, Knight Templars, Rosicrucians,
Okrana, CIA and The World Health Organization behind KDE, bent on emplying it in
a neffarious plot for wold dommination; and Miguel is their paid opperative...
I think it's the only POSSIBLE explanation.
Bitsofnews.com Giving you the latest bits
Well, at least that'll finally put an end to the GNOME v KDE debate.
Malike Bamiyi wanted my assistance.
Microsoft is playing the favourites game again. First MS gives the rights to MFC to Bristol (where is Bristol today? Notice also that Bristol did not get the rights for COM?), then COM and MFC to Mainsoft (where is Mainsoft today? Notice that Mainsoft does not have the rights for .NET?), and now finally Ximian is the "annointed one".
This is a Microsoft play through and through. And it surprises me that Michel is that STUPID to fall for it. I think the reason is because MS seriously sweet talks into into Michel's ear. And most likely the Ximian team went through various scenarios and thought, "Hey this is a win win situation." But the reality is that it is not a win win situation. Microsoft will string along Michel until they do not need him and Ximian anymore. And then there will be a new annointed one.
What disappoints me is that Michel thinks he can outfox Microsoft. Bigger people have tried and have their problems. Michel is a small fry and when Bristol or Mainsoft or Software AG tried to get more action MS stopped them dead in their tracks. Standards mean squat to Microsoft. How many people does Microsoft have on the standard bodies and how many does Ximian? Get my point folks!!! Sorry for being so harsh, but after having talked and written about Microsoft for a decade (switched to Open Source) I am amazed that people still fall for this tatic.
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
I had mono in highschool. Made me really, really sleepy. Damn slutty chick...
I think Miguel was dismissive of Microsoft's security problems because he won't be affected by them. Buffer overflows are implementation problems, and the Mono project is doing a completely independent implementation of .NET. Microsoft's design is sound, they just tend to write shitty code.
I'll put it another way. Who cares if Windows is built like a screen door? One of the big selling points of .NET (and therefore Mono) is that I can run the same web services on my secure *nix box that my neigbor runs on his virus-laden Windows box. So long as the security model is sound (and it looks like it is), then I can run Miguel's stable and secure Mono instead of the crap coming out of Redmond.
Remember, Microsoft has used some really good ideas in the past (OLE, the registry, microkernel architecture, Active Directory). It's just that their actual implementation of those ideas has been truly awful. Miguel is getting around that by writing his own code.
This
I dunno what drugs he's on either, but Miguel is under the impression that Windows is the best operating system out there, period. Since no other OS is as "user friendly" as Windows, in order for open source to Succeed we must clone Windows in every way.
N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
From the wired article:
"They've yet to understand we're not marketing to them but to people who actually purchase software, instead of religiously create it. They may have made Linux, but we know how to make money with it, and we just can't understand why they don't care about that."
Wow. This guy must be one of those souless people who are completely shallow save their wealth. You always hear how 'suits' are ruining it for linux, but this is the first time I've read something first hand
Having just taken a DevelopMentor class on C# and .NET, and having spent most of the last 16 years developing for one Microsoft OS or another (it's a living), I wanted to relate to /. readers that, for once, I believe Microsoft is on to something. (By the way, 16 years of programming on Microsoft platforms does NOT make one a Microsoft fan. Quite the contrary; it's pushed me into a moonlight affair with Linux and even some Palm OS development.)
.NET for a moment. .NET is largely a marketing concept, and has become an overloaded term often used to refer to selected components. To Microsoft, .NET is their latest plan to take over the world. To us, it should be viewed as something that incorporates technologies with a creepy pedigree, but technologies which were nonetheless developed by some very bright people.
.NET, what should we focus on? Primarily, language and libraries, specifically C# and the CLR (Common Language Runtime).
.NET), a string has a common representation, and C# provides a rich syntax for working with them. That's but one tiny example of something done right. All the COM nightmares with its reference counting and remoting are now neatly packaged, or at least neater than anything Microsoft previously hatched. The model works.
Forget
So if not
It's true that Microsoft has come up with some major fusterclucks in the past, and words cannot express my loathing of MFC and OLE hairballs... but in C#, they've developed an extremely simple language that retains much of the power of C++ and pulls in some of Java's better ideas, such as garbage collection. From my casual introduction to the language, the only thing that really rubs me the wrong way is the lack of a real destructor when an object goes out of scope... you can't count on the C# finalizer being called, because there's no guarantee about if/when a garbage collection will occur. You can force a cleanup, but you have to do that in the caller's source rather than keeping it hidden in the object. For resources other than memory, that stinks. Before tossing out C# because it's from Redmond, though, one should make an effort to understand what it does right.
The CLR and the CTS (Common Type System) finally bring some common sense to Windows APIs. Anyone who's done much programming for Windows has cluttered their code converting between TCHAR strings, CStrings, BSTRs and probably a few others. It's necessary, because various APIs all have different ideas about what a string is. With CLR (which is really the platform, not
One approach the Linux community could take is to ignore C# and the CLR. But understand that a good many programmers will be embracing this stuff, and the Linux community will need to answer with something better and easier. Yes, easy: in the real world, companies pay for results, not for the pain and knowledge it takes to develop a solution. If Microsoft offers developers the path of least resistance for implementing complex solutions, then that path will be taken by most.
Another approach the Linux community could take is, I believe, the one supported by Miguel: embrace the technology. Realize that a program compiled to CIL (Common Intermediate Language, the output of a language like C#) is producing code for the CLR platform, not a specific OS. Such programs could run as well on Linux as on Windows; how is that not a good thing?
For years Microsoft has been criticized for clubbing the competition with "embrace and extend" tactics. I say why not give them a taste of their own medicine? Why not take what they've done right and extend it to new heights on Linux? The Linux community has some brilliant people; I believe we can do this.
It's easier said than done; there's a ton of work just to catch up to where Microsoft is now, and it's far easier to post glib comments than write code. But I challenge those of you who have the talent to spend some time contributing to Mono's class libraries.
What, in practical terms, do we have to lose?
Miguel is either making a huge mistake, or he's a genius.
.NET buzzword bingo started, I spent some time digging around for some information on it, and what I came up with was very impressive. I compared what Microsoft are proposing, with the developments going on in the open source community, and the thing that struck me was the synergy and scale of .NET. If it was coming from any other company apart from Microsoft, then I think we'd all be throwing a party.
.NET is appealing, and maybe Mono is what the community needs to get a development environment (by which I mean API, runtime etc) to rival MS. If we get compatibility with .NET as a byproduct of this, then I'd consider it a bonus. If GNOME is ported to Mono, along with GTK, what else could be? Maybe Mozilla, Jabber, Apache and who knows what? If MS intentionally break compatability with Mono, then we'd have two similar architectures with a whole bundle of applications. It may actually help push Linux on the desktop - especially if the modifications MS make are subtle enough to break Mono, but not most applications. Perhaps third party developers would find fixing the problem worthwhile if it means they get a few million more users.
When the whole
But we all know that MS plays dirty. Other posters have given examples already. Which makes me question whether Miguel is being utterly naive in thinking that Microsoft won't screw the Mono project.
The technical side of
Which leads me to think that maybe there is a hint of genius in Miguel's actions. A paraphrase of a quote describing genius stated that 'A clever person is someone who comes up with an idea that makes you think "I could have thought of that". A genius is someone who comes up with an idea that makes you think "I would never have thought of that!"'
Time will tell I guess.
MS has been giving out free 2-day seminars on .NET to Universities, so I attended.
.NET works (from programming to system administration).
.NET.
.NET was so complex that getting it all working properly was going to be almost impossible for anything but MS's IDE. Realistically, this means VS code generation, being served to (IE?) web-clients running the MS CLR. Both ends of the wire would seem to be under MS's control.
.NET infrastructure would have no less than 7 servers. It seems that MS knows their applications can't scale to handle tens to hundreds of thousands, so they solved the problem by splitting functions across machines. Maybe a good idea, and possibly functions can be collapsed to a single machine (like Active Directory), but the number of different parts was daunting.
I'm a modest VBScript ASP programmer, with reasonable experience in Java (and PERL, C, BASIC). I'm a "do-all" type network admin (jack of all trades, expert at none) that writes programs (web to database mostly) when I need the functionality of a universal client.
Back to the seminar. Lots of marketing hype, but we did get good insight into how
The model is one of Java, where the programmer creates an Intermediate Language (IL) file that is complied "just in time."
Server-side applications (web to database for example) get complied and cached the first time they are run. Code changes trigger an automatic recompile. The overhead for the one-time compile was minimal, but we didn't get an answer on how the system senses that the code needed to be recompiled (multiple file touches for each request?).
Client-side applications use a required browser object called the Common Language Runtime (CLR). The CLR, likely feed to the client via Windows Update (or an Office service pack, etc.) is the program that converts the IL byte-code into native code. Caching applies here too.
Sounds like Java, works much like Java.
C# is just like Java --we felt sorry for old-hand VB programmers because MS seems to be tossing them over because of the need to only have object oriented classes talking to
We couldn't understand why Java wasn't supported. If MS is changing to a services model, and hopes to make their money this way, then why don't they have Java as a valid language to ensure wide acceptance?"
A lot of the functionality available (XML) seemed geared toward business and to ensuring that MS would have a way to leverage Passport. The "business to business" XML seemed interesting, but likely long in coming because use requires that businesses adopt standards (nobody would willingly choose XSL transforms unless they had to). The "business to MS" XML seemed ready to go, suggesting that MS will spend most of it's XML efforts on making it easy for MS to act as a broker for a business wanting to leverage Passport as a way to bill customers.
The big concern I and several others had was the seeming reliance on Visual Studio for the creation of code. Yeah, MS had a list of 20 odd languages that could interface with it (except Java), but it became apparent that
System administration also looked complex. A fully fleshed out
I know this sounds a bit cynical and bashes MS a bit, but this is pretty much the feeling a lot of us had. The tools seemed geared to large companies needing to interact with hundreds of thousands of customers. They were not geared toward the small-market usage that a College webserver might need for a Conference Registration Webpage.
Having to use VS to write, edit, and publish programs is going to make it much harder to train people on writing web to database code. Maybe this is good, but I doubt it. The virtually unreadable HTML code, coupled with the complexity of the paradigm just piles on what is already difficult enough to teach.
"With .NET once an API is published it's available to all programming languages at the same time."
.NET MYTH: that you can just willy-nilly plug in existing languages in the CLR nirvana. He has become one of those .NET fan boys who show up touting that .NET supports over twenty programming languages.
.NET are a pile of large stinking COW dookey!
.NET. What are the hard realities:
.NET support for the .NET versions of languages do not. Programmers don't want to work with 80 percent of the features of their chosen language simply because the .NET version of the language doesn't support it. They also don't want to deal with compatibility problems arising with FunctionA() acts differently when run under the C++.NET as opposed to the native C++ environment.
.NET universe impose straight jackets on languages that no programmers will want to deal with. Programmers don't want to be confined to using a limited set of types and classes just so their program can function in the CLR. Should I even mention the compatibility problems that existing code will have within the .NET sandbox?
With comments like these, Miguel has really lost it. Perhaps he never had it to begin with.
He appears to have this entirely fantastical idea that when Mono reaches 1.0, we will be able to just plug in the existing C, C++, Perl, etc code bases into it and, WAMMO!, instant cross language, cross platform code. I can understand his frustration with updating Gnome language bindings. However, I think his mind has snapped from doing that kind of work.
He has bought into the central
Note to Miguel: the cross languages promises of
Programmers don't like half assed solutions to problems. And that is just what Perl, Python and name-your-favorite-language are inside the world of
(1) Languages evolve. The
(2) The Common Type System and Common Class Libraries of the
based on .NET I'll switch to KDE
Hello KDE . . . Wow, I'm a bit stunned. What a shame.
This year's LinuxWorld was much more business oriented. Many of the organizations that appeared last year didn't show. Much less/lower quality freebies. The highlight of the show for me was trying out Sharp's new PDA.
It seems some people yearn for the days when they where the only ones using linux. They are as bad as M$ trying to put themselves on a pedestal by sabotaging other peoples attempt to step out of ignorance.
Business is good. A "mixing of open source and close source ideologies" ends up making a very competitive and successfull candidate. It's not that one or the other is necessarily bad, but that extremes of either become self defeating. Sure RedHat has certain proprietary secrets which they use to make a profit. So what. They also make linux very accessable and allow more people to discover the 'joy' of linux. These heady idealist who scream down with all things proprietary are nothing more than neo-hippy-nihilist-posers who need to think before they parrot. Part of what makes linux and open source such an inspiring concept is that it makes information accessable to the people, and thusly empowers them to some extent. Successfull business' that push open source solutions manage to put the empowering project in more hands, and helps to fuel the ongoing development and exploration in the community. I think it's very symbiotic. The real bitch I think these people have is that money no longer falls out of the trees. Such is the state of the economy. Many of us are finding we have to work for a living. For some of us, this is no revelation. Some of us even find joy in our work.
Okay, let's forget about .NET's tainted past and pretend like it's just another ECMA standard. There are still a boatload of questions that need answered here.
.NET direction been discussed and agreed upon by the GNOME hacker community and the GNOME foundation? Obviously Miguel is the founder, maintainer and chief architect of GNOME. But at this stage too many players have a stake in GNOME to allow Miguel to take the project flying off in a new direction at his whim, particularly when the whim just happens to have potential commerical benefits for the company he founded and runs.
.NET puts Ximian in a position to do the same thing with GNOME. Okay, the free version works with all those ECMA standard API's but if you want it to work with those Microsoft proprietary API's (and you know they'll appear) you've got to pay up for the Ximian version.
.NET technology to use? Why not DotGNU?
.NET's tainted past. But that still doesn't make it a white wedding.
Is this a unilateral declaration from Miguel, or has this
Ximian's business plan is to get companies to pay for their distribution of open source products because they're nicely packaged, maintained and supported. That's all well and good, but we've already seen one instance with Evolution where Ximian has developed open source software and then decided to charge for an extension to support Microsoft's proprietary protocols (Evolution's Exchange connector).
Building GNOME on
In short - Miguel has far too much of a conflict of interest to make a unilateral decision on this. There are too many questions that need answered with something other than Miguel's "It's really cool." The first and most important is do we really need it? Does this really need to be an integral part of the desktop or can it just be added with some kind of interface? KISS would seem to apply to the desktop and GNOME is complex enough as it is.
Assuming we do need something like this at the very core of the desktop, is this the right technology for the application? Is it the right version of
Ultimately this needs to be discussed in much more detail and decided by concensous and not just decreed by Miguel. If he can sell the idea on the basis of merit to the GNOME hacker community and the GNOME Foundation I can live with
Miguel and company create interoperability with M$ backend platforms (e.g. Evolution/Exchange) and now with mono, comes that much closer. KDE is look and feel, Gnome is going deeper... much deeper
With Ballmer's dire warnings about open source being 'potentially viral code', he must be going ape shit that an organization is shadowing their moves, keeping open source an alternative to their monopoly
I'm reminded of the scene in 'Fight Club' when the fat bastard bar owner (Steve Ballmer) comes down to the basement and gets into it with Tyler Durden (Miguel) only to have a beat up and bloodied Tyler crawl on top of him... bleeding all over his face laughing manically... 'you don't know where I've been' - the bar owner scurries away yelling 'crazy fucker'.
Gotta love it
The newsforge comment on RMS' attendance habits is just plain false. RMS was at LWCE in San Jose in the fall of '99, and there was no "GNU" prefix attached. He was really tearing up the dance floor at the /. /Andover party :)
Mike
Intel transfer the difficult from Hadware to software, for get more power, programmer need more technology. -- chinaitn
It's like the woman that keeps returning to the man that beats her up. She always thinks he'll change, and he keeps promising that this time something is different.
Miguel, et al, is about to get married to a serial abuser. They are smitten with the power, but they don't have enough self-respect and or sense of history to realize they're like a deer caught gazing at the headlights. As one who has been abused, I'm just telling you that the odds of this "person" changing look about as good as the polarities of the earth reversing. Maybe you'll bring out their best side, or maybe they have sought counselling and have truly turned another leaf. Unfortunately, I have yet to see evidence of remorse or one iota of humility. All I see, is that they got a brand new E class that they will let me borrow from time to time if I keep putting up with their abuse. Until I personally receive an apology (something to the effect of, "We played way too hard, injured way too many people in the process, and made the game no fun at all"), and then show that they can play the game respectably, I cannot reasonably think that anything has changed. Remeber, a good definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, but expecting a different result each time.
Microsoft, like its mentor, the U.S., plays the game such that "either you are with us, or you are against us". Sorry, but I'm against anyone precisely to the degree that they espouse that philosophy.
Can someone tell me what this part of the interview means, in particular the second sentence?
My main focus is the client. In the web services area there is not a big-buy-in to the Windows platform, because this is the first time they have brought it to Windows.
Well in the Windows world they use SOAP... they do not talk about proprietary protocols.
I don't follow the SOAP statement at all, since developers would normally use the proprietary Dotnet Remoting protocol rather than SOAP within the Windows environment as it is far more complete.
This Slashdot press article reads like the
last dying gasp of a desparate journalist
reaching out for anything to write about.
I'd like to see Gnome 2.0 myself.
Does Miguel mean he plans to implement vaporware?
If Sun wants to have people use the Sparc chip in embedded systems like network routers, then they should make some hardware available to do just that. I suggest starting with a small box not larger than the old lunchbox machines (e.g. IPC, IPX, LX, etc) and preferrably smaller, with the following features:
If they sell that beast w/o HD, w/o RAM, but with a 1 GHz CPU, for say $500, I'd bet it will sell fast. Oh, and if IBM does the same but with a PPC-64 CPU at 1 GHz, I'd bet that would sell fast, too.
Now if they added a 2nd CPU, ultra fast 3D graphical video, and joystick controls, and sold it for $300 ... uh, no ... I am not going to share this excellent weed with you :-)
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
So, Miguel, how much did Bill have to offer you to get you to SELL OUT COMPLETELY?!!. Jesus Christ, but this guy became a corporate MS whore literally overnight - and he's the primary on Gnome?
.NET. Anyone with half a brain can see that either Miguel is getting a good rimming for some tasty US dollars, or he stopped taking his medication quite awhile ago.
Please, somebody else take over before Miguel really fucks things up for whatever it took to buy the use of his asshole. Gnome is founded upon the core principal of 'free software whenever possible', entirely antithetical to MS and
Perhaps Miguel should run for office.
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
As a Ximian user, I've got to say ...in the beginning Ximian was great, but since they've started their 'subscription model', they've gone downhill rapidly.
...around 800bps to 1kbps speed wise ...which is a disgrace.
.NET, Miguel appears to not have been warned as a child against making deals with the devil. Someone needs to take Gnome away from Ximian, before it's too late.
...there should be different price structures for business and home use. $9.95 a month is OK for businesses, but something like $1 - $3 per month for home use is a more reasonable amount.
If you don't subscribe, the Red Carpet downloads are at a pittance
As for
As for the 'pay for update' subscription service
Keep it up Ximian, and I'll be finding myself a new GUI, along with a lot of others, I imagine.
more like a festering turd.
In '93 when I first started on Linux, I recognized it as vastly superior to the Windows 3 scruff that I was dealing with, so I find Miguel's fascination difficult to relate to. I have been using his Gnome until this fall.
In November I tried Apple's OS X and found it very much like Linux in the ways that I cared about, but positively gorgeous next to Gnome -- Gnome, in fact, looks quite crude next to Aqua.
So if the rest of the Gnome consortium follows Miguel, I will definitely putting my efforts into Apple's vision for the future and not Linux.
Microsoft follows Apple, then Miguel follows Microsoft -- how serious a player will Linux ever become, if kept on that track?
The Edge Report has a new batch of pictures from LinuxWorld Expo in New York City. Set 4 - NuSphere, IBM, Caldera, Dice.com, Sony; Set 5 - Veritas, Sharp, Sun, O'Reilly, and Compaq's Game Show.
.orgs, Compaq, fsf, Sun.
The last series were: Set 1 - Walking in, CA, AMD, Red Hat; Set 2 - Ximian, IBM, Games, "The Tattoo Guy", MandrakeSoft; Set 3 -
--
Why is it so easy to hate members of the "Linux community"? Is it because they are the whiniest bunch of computer users ever? Is it because they kick and scream like the children they are when they don't get their way? Is it because they are just fucking stupid? I don't really know which one to pick. Two years ago Linux geeks were complaining about not getting corporate support. Now they are complaining about actually having corporate support. Now when somebody suggests they have a method to interact with the rest of the world they kick and scream because the great satan was the one who came up with the buzz words. What the fuck?
.NET system is based around stateless XML based RPC methods. This is a GOOD THING for interoperability. As long as you conform to the SOAP your program can talk with another program not matter what sort of machine it is running on or where it is running. A common runtime for languages isn't so bad either. You can write a program on any architecture and run it on any other architecture that has a compliant runtime environment and bytecode translator. Don't use the CLR if you wahnt to preserve certain functionality for a given language. It would be cool though to be able to write apps for GNOME that would run on any OS and architecture that has the CLR compliant GNOME libraries. No recompiling required. A house that does all C/C++ development doesn't need to learn Java in order to write a program they can sell to just about anybody running just about any computer. Just because the idea proposed by microsoft doesn't make it evil. In fact I'd say Miguel is doing the GNU thing by writing a free implimentation of non-free software. This is what the whole GNU crap is about. Slashdotters seem too fucking stupid to understand this point.
Miguel de Icaza wanting to add real functionality to Linux is not a damning offence. Half the fucking posts on this thread seem to think Miguel is off his rocker or Bill Gates' bitch or something. That is just fucking retarded. He's a damn good programmer who knows Linux is way behind the times when it comes to interacting with the real business world. Stateful RPC methods need to hit the road. They don't fit into topologies where you have multiple servers behind a single address that are all processing requests for the sake up upping your throughput. Stuff like the LVSP isn't going to work with FTP or rsh connections though works well with HTTP. XML based RPC (or any stateless RPC method) are much more efficient in modern networks because I don't need to fuck with my external network configuration to add capacity. SOAP and the whole
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
He has seen the light: Linux is dying. You
should all switch over to Windows or a real Unix
like FreeBSD and escape from the egomania of
Linus "I'm the World's Greatest Authority on
Operating Systems, no wonder I flunked OS class"
Torvilds.
It is not Linux, it is the nature of GPL (+basic psychology :) ) which will shine! For some reason everyone is afraid of "Big Business" here, but what is wrong with their involvement? Even RMS (as "commie" as some people on /. prefer to see him :) ) showed no hostility at all towards the business' use of GPLed products, provided that business comply with GP (which the players here, HP, IBM et al. will most likely do). They can not CONTROL Linux, but what that are likely to do it to release more code to be included in Linux _under_GPL_ to make their (and everyone's else) life easier.
:) Just a little bit of inter-operability with The Beast, nothing serious. Or do you take the behaviour of your desktop seriously? ;-)
Of course the great idea of (once again!) UNIX re-unification should be in the backgroiund of our minds. The companies involved are producing _hardware_, their proprietary UNIces are more of a burden to them...
As of GNOME/.NET marriage, how much does it differ from the intentions of SAMBA guys?
If this is true, and Ximian wants to be at microsoft's side and not in its path, then this is a clear conflict of interest for Miguel.
He is head of a corporation that wants to play microsofts game, and he is head of a project that microsoft would want see die.
Onto the serious side of how it's becoming business orientated, that's a good thing. I work as a consultant and I try to have as many skills as I can muster up. Linux has always been one of those things I could do, like whittlling or embroidery, but wasn't really useful. Now that the industry is offering corporate solutions and enterprise servers, maybe I can use my Linux skills and get more money. I'm in it for the money and you'd have to be stupid or extremely rich to not do so yourself. So what if some code I wrote a few years ago winds up in the hands of some corporate schmo, if I meet someone using something I helped create I think that would impress them more so than saying I got a certification and know how it works.
As for LinuxWorld again, I am upset that the "fun" booths were gone but I can understand that some companies just didn't have the cash to keep going and through natural capitalist selection the big fish are still in the pond. I only wish they'd bring some joy into it.
Does anyone want me to whittle them a carved Indian statue?
One way to look at the mono project is that it is similar to the wine project, except that it was started earlier in the process. Sort of puts a different light to it.
Are you kidding me? That quote was one of the best things I've heard all year. Finally businesses will be able to use Linux and open source tech in general without the "free software" zealotry that usually accompanies it!
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
This would be a great time for the people at odds with microsoft to think about the future.
Linux needs something other than Microsoft/Gnome.
Java won't cut it, being held tightly by Sun (who is going to use Gnome anyway).
So, what the heck is the alternative? KDE (with the licensing issues?)
The last guy I worked with from Ximian had a severe fetish for python, so maybe they can do something?
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
Microsoft is a Corporation. They're in the business of making money, and doing whatever they possibly can to make more. Anyone looking at the past 10-20 years will see that - Bill knows what he's doing, and he's playing out the same recipe once again.
.NET encorporates extensions and improvements only available on Microsoft operating systems, 90% of the world's desktops will instantly be running a Mono-incompatible .NET implementation. Miguel is providing validation for the platform, and giving Microsoft a leg up by telling the world, implicitly, that Open Source supports .NET. This is suicide.
But I have one simple question that might shed light on the entire issue: What could Microsoft possibly hope to gain by providing, no strings attached, a development platform that anyone, anywhere can use, without putting a single penny in Microsoft's pocket?
If Microsoft is as righteous and friendly to standards bodies and open-source movements as Miguel seems to think they are, they're signing their own death warrant. Microsoft is undoubtedly the most hated software company in the world; if the hype was true, people would move from Microsoft-based solutions to Mono in freaking droves. You'd have people lining up outside Best Buy for the next version of Mono and Gnome. Why in hell would Microsoft make a scenario like that possible?
Anyone who doesn't have Microsoft filling their heads with nonsense can see that Microsoft is leveraging off the powerful movement that Open Source has become to help their platform gain wide acceptance. Truth be told, the world still runs Windows on the vast majority of desktop machines, and still has large investments of time and money in Microsoft solutions. When Microsoft's implementation of
It reminds me of a fellow I know that has bilked people out of money, merchandise (myself included) and services many, many, many times. He's good at what he does, which is getting something for nothing, or very little, and there's a sucker born every minute.
Don't be Microsoft's next sucker, Miguel.
Miguel's comments completely shocked me like when Luke Skywalker got his hand chopped off in "The Empire Strikes Back".
.NET, what the future of it holds or whether it is a true "sell-out" to MS, but I can say by embracing the ".NET" name alone Miguel just did a boatload for MS PR.
.NET, which again indirectly says that they all support MS.
.NET is "the future" and that Microsoft will be "the leader". Is it sound business to use products that lag behind by 1 year? Of course not. They'll all choose MS because now they think .NET is the future to everything, there is no alternative and that MS is the leader of it.
I have no idea about the "technical" pros and cons of
Average Joe now thinks that MS=.NET and Miguel just said that Gnome=.NET. Sun said they'll use Gnome2 and obviosly Linux uses Gnome, thus indirectly Sun and Linux now support
Next he said that Ximian will lag 1 year behind MS, thus MS is superior and the "leader" in the technology. Now most high-level managers have the technical knowlege of "the average Joe" and to them Miguel just validated that
This is so sad. The game's over. MS wins if they pull this off -- it doesn't matter what is technically superior -- if MS wins the PR battle they can make monkey dung and people will flock to buy it. Case and point: OS/2 versus Windows 3.0.
MS just got one of the "leaders" of Open-Source to fully endorse their technology (and thus indirectly thier products). I'm glad I got my class B CDL so that I can drive busses when MS owns the technological world.
I still remember when KDE were the big corporate bad boys, and Gnome was the good project. Then Qt was GPLed. Wonder how far the reversal will go.
Remember that the GNU Object Model Environment was formed, and it's ultimate final goal still is, to provide a whole heap of things for the FSF's GNU project. Obviously, a GUI infrastructure; a component architecture, GUI applications and other such niceties also fall within it's domain.
When Stallman decided that he wanted a free operating system, and started up the whole GNU thing, he decided to clone one of the most popular hacking environments at the time: Unix. Remember that every working Unix was proprietary at the time. Now, it's up to GNOME to provide GNU with a whole bunch of "modern" features, so why not work off of .NET?
.NET is a lot more centrally controlled than Unix was, so I agree that there's a serious danger of GNOME being burnt horribly. But if they're willing to take that risk, and think they can surmount it, I don't think "We can't use .NET! We're all turning into Microsofties! Linux rules!" on it's own is a valid argument.
And if it doesn't work, there's always KDE. (Just think, as KDE and GNOME branch out further from each other in their goals and approach to things, they might start to get different enough that comparisons can be entirely free of religious arguments! :)
When will that be released, the year 2075?
Here's The Edge Report's last batch of pictures from LinuxWorld Conference & Expo in New York City. Set 6 - Veritas, Intel, hancom (they really like Commander Taco); Set 7 - AMD, Inferno, Linuxfund, Entertainment; Set 8 - Miscellaneous; Set 9 - Miscellaneous, Booth Babes, and New York City.
.orgs, Compaq, fsf, Sun; Set 4 - NuSphere, IBM, Caldera, Dice.com, Sony; Set 5 - Veritas, Sharp, Sun, O'Reilly, and Compaq's Game Show.
Older sets include: Set 1 - Walking in, CA, AMD, Red Hat; Set 2 - Ximian, IBM, Games, "The Tattoo Guy", MandrakeSoft; Set 3 -
--
"Student" is the proper description now. I did indeed work for Clarkson a number of years ago ... supporting MS Windows (though not with a tech crew). It was that experience, particularly the abysmal support for managing several labs worth of computers, and Window's tendency to change things behind your back without telling you, that brought me to my senses about Open Source. I left that job and went back to being a student. It took a while, with some detours, but I got my Masters a year or two back and am now working toward my PhD. (If you want more proof, just look at my paycheck: Grad student stipend.) Just before the beginning of this school year, I had the chance to point out to the Provost that Open Source software can play an important role in CS education. Those discussions led to establishing the Clarkson Open Source Institute (COSI). I got to be the director (it's nice being in a small school where these things can happen), and that's what my stipend is for.
I did look at the eligibility rules. They didn't exclude returning or non-traditional students, they didn't exclude graduate students, and they didn't exclude people who'd worked supporting Windows.
one cannot describe in words what a FUCKING FAG you are
do yourself a favour and FUCKING DIE
enjoy the COCK UP YOUR ASS fag
The first compiler I used was UCSD Pascal, and it produced P-code, to be run on any platform under a VM. That was back in the early 80'ties. Some years later, I got an account on a Unix mainframe, started using Emacs, and write small Emacs Lisp programs. Usually they were interpreted, but I found that byte compiling them produced platform independent byt ecode that ran much faster than the interpreter. That was the mid 80'ties.
I haven't yet programmed in Java and produced code for the JVM, but what would make that so innovative compared to the technologies that were old when I discovered them a decade before Java was marketed.
damn, RMS sounds more like Joseph Stalin. but no open source is not like communism, but RMS is
Suppose we put our suspicions and personal views of Miguel aside for a moment, and look at the footprints Miguel's projects have left over the past year or two. After all, thats the best indication you're going to get as to where he (and the projects he's associated with) are headed.
In the beginning, GNOME meant "GNU Network Object Model Environment". Remember that? GNOME was being offered up as essentially Miguel's attempt build an API infrastructure, having complained in his original "Lets Maker Unix Not Suck" decree about the lack of code reuse and interapplication communication, among other complaints. CORBA was going to be thefoundation of the beast, and ORBit would be the broker making it all click. This approach failed because CORBA had to be badly kludged to get it to the point where it could even discover other components, let alone communicate with them. All dressed up and nowhere to go..which leads us to Bonobo.
Bonobo was Miguel's attempt to standardize the way in which components discovered eachother and talked with eachother, regardless of origin, and regardless of what language they're written in. It failed, because no coder in their right mind wants to deal with that level of overhead and abstraction, especially when the definition of HOW to go about doing it was never fully nailed down. Bonobo failed to pull the GNOME car out of the ditch. "All dressed up and nowhere to go" became "Die and leave a good looking corpse".
Meanwhile, the desktop wars were heating up. The GUI was getting all the attention, not the underlying mechanisms that were making it happen in the basement. For a guy who works hard and wants a little respect and attention, the basement is no place to be. You want the spotlight. You want a cameo in a movie, you want the speaking tour circuit, and you want progressively less and less to do with working and more to do with playing the figurehead game. Enter Ximian. Ximian GNOME was Miguel's attempt to distance himself from GNOME's basement. In short, Miguel decided to put himself on a level higher than his GNOME work, hoping his project management decisions would trickle down from the throne instead of trickle up from the basement. Miguel probably noticed at some point that issuing edicts from the basement would only get part of the project built. The other portion would have to be created by issuing edicts from the top. This brings us to today.
Ximian is pretty, but stability continues to be an issue. Its a 50 story building built from the ground up that halted construction around the 35th floor. Construction was resumed on the the top of the building, but it only extended down to the 45th floor leaving a messy framework of I-beams and scaffolding exposed for all the world to see.
Disappointed with how the Linux community has "failed" to deliver a completed structure to him, Miguel wants to call in Microsoft to fix that hole. They'll cover the holes on the outside of the building with plywood and paint them to look like the rest of the building. They'll worry about the insides later.
The whole issue comes down to this---If you insist on living in GNOME city, which would you rather look at? An ugly, unstable skyscraper with 10 unfinished floors at the top, or a pile of rubble and plywood? (No WTC jokes, please..)
Then again, I hear KDE City is building a nice skyscraper with gleaming spires and a solid foundation, and Microsoft is nowhere to be found.
Cheers,
Bowie J. Poag
I doubt it, some popular text
editors are quite different but
often the subject of holy wars.
Were that I say, pancakes?
OS X is quite a tasty piece of work. I'm in the middle of a Cocoa project (which I am simultaneously developing with a plain text UI) and was wondering if it might not be worthwhile to try to resurrect and improve Open Step. It seems to me that opening a compatibility wire that way might be a good idea. At minimum, it might unsimplify the target.
hmm, most of this exists already in the new Sun Blade 100 desktop box, but some of what you're asking for is just dumb.
ISDN, DSL, and Cable all in the same box? It'd be quite hard to sell that. I can't see how a manufacturer would be able to push all the products at the same time in the same hardware; much of it would go to waste depending on the environemnt.
Doesn't MS simply have to systematically "update" .NET to prevent Miguel from ever reaching the punch? How would this be different from Wine, for example?
Well, guess what. Business IS exactly that. It isn't about fun. It's about Business. If it was supposed to be fun, they would call it that.
Masturbation is fun but they don't call it that.
The thing that has always struck me about KDE and Gnome (among other WMs), are the fact that they are alternate implementations and approaches to common problems. Who is to say that Microsoft gets it right with the .NET interfaces ... or Gnome for that matter??! The beauty is in the diversity.
.NET, I'd be dissapointed. Not because I hate Microsoft (though they do irk me from time to time), but because the diversity in the approach to problem solving will push computing further ahead. Gnome has taught us many things, implemented a number of standards well, and brought us a number of innovations. KDE and Microsoft have done the same - to some degree.
... they caused Mozilla to sneak the tabbed-browsing feature in pre 1.0. I wouldn't be suprised if IE has tabbed browsing somewhere in the future. Why? The competition brewed a form of freedom for the user. Someone wanted tabbed browsing (not that there is anything *wrong* with that), and so someone got it. Others liked it, and have gotten the feature as well. What happens without this diversity?
I prefer Gnome myself, and have great respect for the bonobo and oaf implementations. I contrast the Gnome approach and the Microsoft approach when training developers - as their is much to learn in the differences. The KDE approach, as well, has many things worth learning from (QT for example). Remember that these systems all have good and bad points, and better - so much to learn from!
If Gnome were to embrace
Look at what Galeon has done for browsers
mx
Gay like goat sex. Stupid fag.
Could it be because my Windows GUI could run circles around my CDE desktop (under Exceed, of course)? CDE looks like it was written by a drunken 10 year old smoking $3 crack rock. The only thing CDE has behind it is that it is platform independent. That's it.
Holy crap dude. You are a God among Trolls.
If Miguel thinks that he and his band of merry men will overtake and dominate Microsoft's marketing and control mechanisms of developer APIs then he needs to increase the dosage.
It just goes to show that there is still an
abundant source of naivete in the opensource
community.
Every company that has tried to fight MS on their own playing field has lost. That is because business and business developers like a big predictable API backed by a monster corporation.
Forget it, Miguel. You are howling at the moon
and you are a fool. I've got more than 25 years experience in software development. You don't need that much experience to understand MS's game plan, but perhaps you need more than Miguel has.
We'll all be lucky if
Good luck to the Gnome people. You will need it. Meanwhile I'll go back to KDE/QT where things are a little more sane. At least all were ever concerned with is whether the Trolltech people will try to take over the world. 8-)
Jim Burnes
Let me be the first to benchmark this point is history. From now on KDE will be the standard linux GUI environment. It may take another year, but Gnome has finally, completely gone off into the weeds. I'm sure that there will be a group of anti-MS gnome afficionados out there, but the momentum has just radically turned in Trolltech/KDE's favor. KDE has its problems too, but selling out to MS isn't one of them.
Ah, congratulations. I had figured as much, though I was not aware you were not a student during my time there.
Even then Clarkson was Linux friendly (Oleg showed it to me my first year, and 2-3 others I knew ran it).