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".

Comments

The only way to win is not to play

[wowbagger]

If you play
Society's Rules
Then you become
Society's Fools....
Devo, Society's Fools

Porting Gnome to .Net is playing Microsoft's game. The problem is that the first rule of Microsoft's game is "Microsoft wins".

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 .Net is neither under GPL nor is it patent unencumbered - the owners can change the rules as they see fit. The fact that the owners are Microsoft is only minimally relevant - Sun, Apple, SGI, RedHat, or IBM could also force the issue.

Vote: Miguel de Icaza for Troll of the Week

[PeterClark]

Thought: maybe Miguel was just getting bored at LinuxWorld and decided to throw out this little hand granade into the crowd to liven things up a bit? He definitely has my vote for Troll of the Week!

:Peter

Re:Linux turning into Business..no fun anymore...

[jbeamon]

What's wrong with this is that we're intermingling Open Source and vehemently Closed Source ideologies. This isn't making us a serious contender; this is making us a white flag waving wannabe. Yes, we want intercompatibility, but not because we've adopted our foundation from a company known for changing public standards and republishing them into a monopoly environment with every year's mandatory upgrades.

Microsoft's .Net initiative, not to be confused with the ".net" top level domain, is still bound to a company with a long and thriving history of imposing itself on everything it touches. I don't trust their HTML, let alone their XML, let alone their fill-in-the-blank that's supposed to be "open" and "cross-platform". I'd rather work in an environment where my desktop won't just be 'poof' expensive, closed source, and reporting home to a monopoly every time I open a web page or a file manager. Microsoft's "beautiful security model" has landed them more exploits and holes than a block of swiss cheese with telnet, plus an FBI warning. No thanks. Not for me. Not in a million years. No offense intended, but I don't see what's "right" about this.

Re:Reaganomics

[zulux]

The more money is going to trickle down to the little guys, read us, to develope more business solutions.

I found this to be true in my consulting business: When I don't have to charge them $250 a seat for Widnows, $400 for MS Office and $250 for various CAL and NT Servers - they tend to spend more money on my cool database applications. Less money going to Billionaire Bill means more for me.

IANALWA, but this can't be all bad

[msouth]

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.

A few random points:

[Otter]

I spent a couple of days working in the KDE booth, way in the back with the rest of the non-profits. Personally, I had a great time -- it's the first computer event I've attended (except for 'Geek Pride Day' back when Andover.net was flush with cash) so I'm probably a lot less jaded than most.

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.

• The Linux on PS2 demo was gorgeous. The Linux on Dreamcast demo (way in the back, with the .orgs) was given by one of the hackers and had hardcore authenticity. And they gave me a boot CD, elimiating the problem of burning the crazy Sega format.
• I think the iPlanet demo was supposed to be a tongue-in-cheek satire of cultists, the humor of which was lost on the attendees.
• I spoke with a number of indivduals known for their inflammatory viewpoints. I won't mention names, since I insisted on speaking off the record with them, but they walked up to the booth and launched right into their monomaniacal rants. I'd have thought they'd be better rounded in real life.
• I got to thank David Korn for answering my question in his Slashdot interview. He was really nice, down to earth and an excellent teacher.
• On the whole, the level of social grace was higher than I had expected, but there was still a large population of weirdos. Mind you, it's not like I normally associate with supermodels - compared to scientists it's a weird bunch.
• Oh, and this Mono thing? You know how everyone's always complaining about duplication of effort from KDE and GNOME? It sounds like Miguel wants to take GNOME into a direction that KDE won't be touching, so I suppose that's good. As long as X-chat and grip keep working.

Re:More Mono Trolling, Don't You Folks Get Tired?

[wowbagger]

Answer the following questions, truthfully:

1) If Microsoft changes the spec for C# or CLI, can ECMA deny the changes?
1a) If they can deny the changes, can Microsoft still call C# "C#"?

2) Are C# and the CLI completely free of patents?

If the answer to 1) is false, then at any time MS can change the spec on what C# is, and leave Miquel to play catch-up.
If 1) is true and 1a) is true, again MS controls the table.
If 2) is false (it is, by the way...) then at any time MS can jerk Miquel up short and deny everybody the right to use the code without paying them a royalty (think Unisys and LZW).

I assure you, I am neither a troll nor an idiot - rather I am a person who can see beyond "that's cool" and ask myself what the downsides are.

Ximian is already on life support

[SerpentMage]

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.