Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Interview With Andreas Pour of KDE

Posted by michael on from the small-chip-on-shoulder dept.

friedmud writes "I just read a great interview over at OPEN for Business. It is with KDE contributor Andreas Pour. He goes over many topics - not only including KDE. My favorite part: 'they are basically saying, if you stop obeying us, we will stop you from viewing the documents you and your friends created. Who are they to say where and when I read my documents? Now I need a monopolist's permission to view my own creations? The audacity is mind-boggling, and that the Justice Department is permitting it is simply astounding.' - Wow"

71 of 203 comments (clear)

  1. I think he raises the interesting point... by Ieshan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And the point is, humans have been allowed to patent standardized tools.

    "Now I need a monopolist's permission to view my own creations? The audacity is mind-boggling, and that the Justice Department is permitting it is simply astounding."

    This is something like patenting keys and locks. Obviously, if Microsoft ever tried to say something like: "No, you can't view your documents", I think the justice department would immediately step in and cry foul, much as if the person who invented the key demanded that all people who owned and used keys for operating locks pay him a surcharge or discontinue their use.

    "But I can't get into my house!", people would cry. They'd use the key anyway, and popular demand would win; much the same in the Microsoft case. The point is: someone allowed Microsoft to patent a key and license it, and now they're trying to figure out ways around this.

    Hm.

    1. Re:I think he raises the interesting point... by idiotnot · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is something like patenting keys and locks. Obviously, if Microsoft ever tried to say something like: "No, you can't view your documents", I think the justice department would immediately step in and cry foul, much as if the person who invented the key demanded that all people who owned and used keys for operating locks pay him a surcharge or discontinue their use.

      I'm not sure that Justice would be so quick to do that. The real concern is that a situation such as this would arise.....

      1. You create document/opus/graphic with propriety tool X, document great_work.msx .
      2. Propreitary software maker patents the file format, and includes methods (Palladium, anyone) which make it impossible to open in anything other than proprietary tool X.
      3. You, as artist, no longer agree with the licensing terms (which changed during a bugfix that was automatically installed).
      4. You're screwed.

      Now, the old way of remedying this would be,
      5. Write new program that can read file format so that you can continue to use your work, but then;
      6. You've violated the DMCA if you do that.

      It's not a pretty picture.

    2. Re:I think he raises the interesting point... by SlugLord · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Just because somebody gets a patent doesn't mean the patent will stand in court. It is not uncommon for the patent office to grant a patent that is overturned it court: the patent office has too little funding to check every patent thoroughly. They do a quick scan for prior art and a general estimation as to whether the "invention" is "useful," and then grant the patent. This is probably not the best way to work it, but it's the way it works. Eventually we'll see a court case about this and the judge will declare the licence requirement invalid for whatever reason, then the case will be appealed. Hopefully the case will get to the supreme court so we can have some intelligent people make policy about this. Fortunately, we still have the Supreme Court, which fortunately still values the Constitution.

    3. Re:I think he raises the interesting point... by Master+Bait · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It takes at least 5 years to fight a patent. By the time you win, the bad guys have secured another similar patent and the game begins again.

      --
      "Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
      --Tom Schulman
    4. Re:I think he raises the interesting point... by extrasolar · · Score: 2

      No, it's not a pretty picture. That's because you painted it.

      Can anyone paint a different picture? Like, lets say, a best case scenario?

    5. Re:I think he raises the interesting point... by Zathrus · · Score: 2

      Well, sticking with some of the more idiotic premises of the original poster...

      1) You create document.
      2) Software maker patents format.
      3) Patent ruled invalid because the software maker didn't follow basic patent law and apply for the patent prior to testing or release (depends on the country, but most of Europe and Japan requires patent applications to be filed prior to testing. The US gives a 1 year grace period, but the patent still has to be applied for prior to commercial usage -- the product can only be used for testing purposes in that grace period)

      Ok, so assume that the company isn't absolutely stupid and knows basic intellectual property law.

      1) Company files for patent, releases software.
      2) For some idiotic reason you still use software to create your own document.
      3) Company changes rules for using said software, which you don't agree with.
      4) You retain copyright on the documents, start a class action suit to sue Company for unlawfully restricting your access to your own intellectual property. Patent is ruled unenforcable, or it's ruled that you have an implicit license to the patent since that capability was given to you through the software.

      People are being overly stupid with this. They're thinking of worst case scenarios that won't happen because they can't. I don't care how dimly you may view MS, the Justice department, the RIAA, etc. -- this kind of thing won't be allowed. Companies won't allow someone to seize their property in such a manner, nor will consumers. Nor will the government, which uses the same software as the majority of the world. Maybe in some dark, twisted universe of your own self-hatred, but not in this one.

    6. Re:I think he raises the interesting point... by pmz · · Score: 2

      It's not a pretty picture.

      This is why open non-patent-incumbered file formats are so essential to the future of general computing.

      Companies that insist their proprietary formats are necessary to protect their business should be boycotted, because this excuse is simply unfounded. A file format is pure data. If it is architected well, it can store what it needs to store without giving up any secrets about the algorithms and other tricks implemented in the software. Any software product can and should compete on the quality of the implementation, where robustness, completeness, and user-friendliness would all be rewarded by the consumers. File formats are simply an excuse put forth by companies like Microsoft to protect their unfairly gained stake in the software industry.

      --
      Healthcare article at Kuro5hin
    7. Re:I think he raises the interesting point... by glwtta · · Score: 2
      I think the justice department would immediately step in and cry foul, much as if the person who invented the key demanded that all people who owned and used keys for operating locks pay him a surcharge or discontinue their use.

      All things computery and digital seem to be viewed differently from meat-space things. Take the same lock ananlogy, if digital laws were applied to locks, it would be illegal to not only break into other people's houses, but to break into your own house, or to own a set of lock-picks or to distribute information on how to pick locks - all of which is perfectly legal in the real world.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    8. Re:I think he raises the interesting point... by Alsee · · Score: 2

      Can anyone paint a different picture?

      Ok, I'll paint 3, derived from the original senario. Let me know which one you'd like to go with.

      Senario One
      1. You never use a propriety tool to create document/opus/graphic.
      Note that for this to be a general solution replace "You never use" with "No one ever uses"

      Scenario Two
      1. You create document/opus/graphic with propriety tool X, document great_work.msx .
      2. No propreitary software maker ever patents the file format or they never include methods (Palladium, anyone) which make it impossible to open in anything other than proprietary tool X.

      Scenario Three
      1. You create document/opus/graphic with propriety tool X, document great_work.msx .
      2. Propreitary software maker patents the file format, and includes methods (Palladium, anyone) which make it impossible to open in anything other than proprietary tool X.
      3. No software vendor ever add new objectionable licensing terms.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    9. Re:I think he raises the interesting point... by Alsee · · Score: 2

      unlawfully restricting your access

      I agree the situation would be so bad that the courts would "stretch" to try to change it, but I don't see how even a big stretch could consider the company to have done anything unlawful. IANAL though.

      If it happens, a large number of people are still going to be screwed for a long time until either congress or the courts manage to change the rules.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    10. Re:I think he raises the interesting point... by (void*) · · Score: 2

      Of course it won't happen. The point is that there is great possibility of conflict, and it is in our interest to anticipate that conflict, and hopefully resolve it before it grows out of proportion.

    11. Re:I think he raises the interesting point... by Alsee · · Score: 2

      could probably still make your own decoder

      The entire open source community is still having touble writing a complete decoder for microsoft documents, and mere formatted text at that.

      Not to mention that creating the decoder could be a patent violation, EULA violation, DMCA violation, or even impossible if it uses Palladium (short of cracking Palladium itself).

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  2. Re:avoiding the subject? by Col.+Klink+(retired) · · Score: 2, Insightful
    They have only themselves to blame for there lack of success.

    No, read the interview. They have people like YOU to blame as well:

    If there is something they don't like, instead of asking "What can I do to improve it?", a common attitude in KDE's earlier days, the attitude now rather frequently is, "Damn it, why is this [ so or not like so ]? If you do not do as I say immediately, [ place a horrible here ]."
    Yours is the most common [place horrible here] that I see on all developer lists. "If you don't solve my problem, I'll use the competing product." Like that's a meaningful threat coming from someone who doesn't pay or contribute...
    --

    -- Don't Tase me, bro!

  3. Re:avoiding the subject? by bogie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sorry but I have a few problems here.

    "Well instead of discussing the usability problems of KDE and the huge installation issues"

    What huge installation issues? I've always just followed the direction for my distro and not have any problems. I seem to recall looking at how many packages I had to download to upgrade Gnome not long ago and thinking how happy I was that KDE required like 1/5 as many packages. Every reviewer out their that I have seen has said that one of the few things that makes the transition from Windows to Linux a bit easier is the user friendliness of KDE.

    "They have only themselves to blame for there lack of success."

    Again what is the basis for this statement? The fact that KDE is the most widely used Linux gui that pretty much every distro has standardized on it? Sounds like sour grapes to me.

    --
    If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
  4. Re:avoiding the subject? by NanoGator · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Well instead of discussing the usability problems of KDE and the huge installation issues, he prefer to just go ahead and blame Microsoft. "

    It's a pity, really. Few people here realize that MS's products demonstrate evolved wonderfully evolved usability. Yeah yeah, I know about the stability complaints and all. I'm not talking about productivity, I'm talking about usability. There's lots of things that both Windows and Office do right.

    I'll give you an example of what I mean: If you take Internet Explorer, highlight a section of a web page, then paste it into Front Page, all of the HTML remains in tact. So if you're copying and pasting formatted text, you're not losing the formatting in the process. That's a good example of usability because it goes a little farther to give the user what they probably want.

    Now, let me be clear about something: I did not say that MS made the right choice there. I'm not saying anything other than Windows/Office demonstrate that usability has been considered. (Note: Do not confuse the word term "considered" with "better than KDE", "best", "perfect", "good", etc...") After using KDE for a bit, it felt clunky... like I had to fight with it. As a matter of fact, I had trouble copying and pasting from a web page. I've heard a few people complain about that. I don't know if it's a problem anymore, nor do I care. It is only an example, please don't take it as KDE bashing. It could use a little more design work.

    However, it is possible to be really obnoxious with usability, and MS has demonstrated that a number of times. That copy/paste example I used with IE/FP has serious drawbacks to it. They didn't think it all the way through. I copied/pasted some HTML I found on a website once into the HTML of the page I was working on. (as opposed to pasting it into the WYSIWYG interface...) Unfortunately, it wasn't smart enough to realize that I just wanted the plain-text translation of it, so it pasted the HTML that made the code look all pretty in the page, not the HTML itself I wanted to bring over. I had to paste it into Notepad, then re-copy it. It's 'usability' seriously got in my way. Unfortunately, that happens all too often because I wasnt using FrontPage the way MS assumed I would.

    Here lies the problem with MS's forms of usability: They work great, only if you're doing exactly what MS thought you might want to do. This forces you to understand exactly how MS products are working internally, and that is not acceptable. I would love to see KDE take a few cues from MS on usability, but I do NOT want it to take too many of them. You can reach a point where you take a hit on productivity, MS has reached that point a number of times.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  5. Re:avoiding the subject? by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Isn't the main point of having these Windows-workalike desktops so that random Joe User will choose to use one of them rather than the competing project (Windows)? It seems to me that a lot of people are working awful hard to win people who don't pay or contribute over from a competing product.

    --

    How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
  6. Re:avoiding the subject? by aussersterne · · Score: 2
    usability problems of KDE
    only themselves to blame for there[sic] lack of success

    Hello, what are you smoking? KDE is widely regarded has having better usability than GNOME and it is by leaps and bounds the most widely used Linux GUI according to nearly every survey that has been done, magazines, developers, distributors, etc.


    GNOME is great, but there's no point in trying to paint KDE like a broken, unpopular product because it just makes you look clueless.

    --
    STOP . AMERICA . NOW
  7. User interaction overrated. by reaper20 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    To manage the overload, developers to some extent are forced to retreat from direct user interaction, such as on the user mailing lists. You can characterize this pessimistically as paying less attention to users, or more realistically as an appropriate adjustment to changed circumstances.

    I'm glad they retreat. I think there's more to this than simple overload - I think alot of OSS devs are probably sick of backseat drivers trying to dictate features and direction of something they're doing for free anyway. The more OSS project mailing lists and forums I read, the more I am glad that developers choose to ignore more and more user requests. Everyone is quick to point out how "developers don't know what users need" and how "difficult" certain OSS developers are when dealing with users.

    I for one am glad when developers choose to ignore some users and just go away and code. If you're ever bored, go check out the INVALID or WONTFIX bugs in Mozilla, for example. I swear, the next moron that wants mozilla to render ALT tags as popups, or ask for colored scrollbars should get drawn and quartered. We're screaming for standards and these guys think its their right to dictate what Mozilla should be doing.

    We, as users, should take a step back and trust the developers for a bit. There are certain things in KDE that I feel are totally wrong, and there are certain things in there that I'm glad someone figured out for me. There's nothing wrong with giving constructive criticism ... but dear God people ... if you're a KDE developer, and you have half the people yelling "Make it more like Windows" and the other half yelling "Make it less like Windows", you'd get pissed off to. It's like this in all OSS projects. Who else cheers for Branden when he flames some jerk off that wants XFree4.2 in Debian "just because"?

    Mayor Quimby said it best when the citizens wanted a Bear patrol but wouldn't accept higher taxes ... "Is it me, or are these people getting stupider?"

    1. Re:User interaction overrated. by renehollan · · Score: 2
      Yes, those that don't contribute, either with code, or $$$, don't really have as say.

      The whole point of free software is that we do it for US, not them, US!. The moral freedom to do this is that them can share in the fruits of our labour freely.

      Be glad that there is an (absurd) movement afoot to make free softeare illegal -- that's far better than taxing it.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    2. Re:User interaction overrated. by fferreres · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Great, so because it's OSS and because some people work in their free time, they should not listen to anyone that requests feature X or state that they need to accomplish Y.

      The day a developer stops listening to user requests directly or indirectly and starts to do whatever he likes most (in their free or payed time) is the day I'll want to switch to something else (personal choice here).

      People usually don't ask for a response, they just ask for someone to listen to what they need. For a large project this may mean some people specialize in just that (communication between the org and the users) and for a small project these may be the same people developing.

      I think developers will benefit from users feeback *if they know how to handle it*, and that does not necesarily mean they should be the users bitches or anything like that. There is no magic solution. They key is to be able to listen to good requests and ideas, ditch the bad ideas and have a way to balance the time it takes to read these and do actual work.

      --
      unfinished: (adj.)
    3. Re:User interaction overrated. by renehollan · · Score: 2
      The problem with explicit and formal requirements, is that, all too often, one does not know what they are.

      While this can, and does, lead to unstable code, sometimes the coding process is part of trying to discover what reasonable requirements are, by experimenting and seeing what kind of programs best fit a desired work flow.

      We've all seen applications that are clumsy and awkward to use, as well as bits and pieces of code that have to be tied together in order to do anything useful: the former may have rigid well-refined requirements, but the wrong ones and result in code that is stable but not useful. The latter can be made useful, and if not constantly tweaked, stable too, and can be of use in suggesting what reasonable requirements for an application that meets a desired subset of the possible problem solution space is.

      The point is that much of the free software development mindset revolves around sharing code in order to find out what the best way to tackle the problem is in the first place: you might have an idea for reasonable requirements, but they might fail to address a very significant way in which the app might reasonably want to be used.

      Architecturally, the conflicting desires to close requirements up and keep things open is addressed by punting: trying to identify areas for dynamic, and user, extensibility (viz. plugins), and providing APIs for them. Of course, even this isn't perfect.

      From (a lot) of experience, I can say too that rigid requirements never are (rigid, that is). Mistakes happen, requirements change, and code changes to meet them. Yes, this introduces instability, and must be managed as any other risk. But a design process that is based on the mantra "Produce formal requirements that will never change" is a self-deceiving lie: my bullshit radar goes off whenever I hear the word "never". People make mistakes, and while an error-free requirements and design phase might lead to a pleasant, and perhaps even automated, implementation phase that results in a stable product, that just ain't gonna happen: mistakes will be made in the requirements phase, and like any other change, the risks involved in correcting those mistakes must be assessed.

      So, like a skyscraper built in an earthquake zone, requirements must have a designed-in degree of flexibility, so that within certain reasonable parameters, change can be accomodated without unduly increasing the risk of resulting instability.

      --
      You could've hired me.
  8. Re:avoiding the subject? by WildBeast · · Score: 2

    you said it yourself "licensing issues". He's a developer not a politician for God's sake. He better start doing his job well before telling the government what license to impose on people.

  9. Re:avoiding the subject? by WildBeast · · Score: 2

    Pay? They're offering it for free, there's no way I'm just gonna pay for the heck of it. Improve it? I'm too lazy and why would I care? It's not like there's a lack of software and stuff. If a piece of software doesn't satisfy my needs I just install another one.

  10. food for thought... by Whammy666 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    "Now I need a monopolist's permission to view my own creations? The audacity is mind-boggling, and that the Justice Department is permitting it is simply astounding."
    Consider this: M$ releases another revised EULA buried in some 'upgrade' which states that they now have legal rights to anything created using their OS and/or product line. Could this be far off?
    --
    When all else fails, run.
    1. Re:food for thought... by _ganja_ · · Score: 2

      Which is akin to the makers of a hammer claiming they own the house you built with it. Don't you think that sounds a bit too ridiculous? So, its about 2 years off I guess.

      --

      A journey of a thousand miles starts with a brutal anal raping at airport security

    2. Re:food for thought... by Rogerborg · · Score: 2
      • M$ releases another revised EULA buried in some 'upgrade' which states that they now have legal rights to anything created using their OS and/or product line.

      Unthinkable... until we recall that they tried to sneak a clause into Frontpage that prevented us producing anti-Microsoft content with it.

      So no, I don't believe that's unthinkable in the long term. But they'll work on cutting us off from our own content first.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  11. Re:avoiding the subject? by WildBeast · · Score: 2

    But the question is. Have you ever upgraded KDE without at the same time upgrading your linux distribution?

    If KDE beats Windows I would have switched a long time ago. I try it every now and then and it has been pretty useless and too ugly in my opinion.

  12. Re:avoiding the subject? by fireboy1919 · · Score: 2

    Upgrading kde without upgrading distro:
    emerge --update kde

    Same with gnome:
    emerge --update gnome

    I can do glibc, too.

    Perhaps your package management system needs work?
    I just upgraded to KDE 3.0.3 a few days ago with that one command. Sure, it took a while, but so does gnome (installing 2.0.1 as I write this).

    I use KDE for one reason, and one reason alone. The "show desktop" button and shortcut. I know it seems wierd, but its the Feature that is important to me. KDE has it, and afaik Gnome doesn't.

    Of course, I keep going back to Gnome sometimes, because its faster and smaller. Though if I'm really pressed, its Icewm all the way.

    --
    Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
  13. Re:avoiding the subject? by WildBeast · · Score: 2

    I know KDE has RPM's and stuff, but everytime I download them there's plenty of libraries missing which is weird because I already have KDE and I'm just upgrading. After a few hours, I managed once to do a half-successfull update but once I started KDE all my icons, program files and shortcuts where missing

  14. Re:avoiding the subject? by npietraniec · · Score: 2

    With Ximian GNOME on the other hand...

    Ximian is a company. Gnome and KDE are not. You've decided to suck Ximian's proverbial teet. Hopefully they're never change anything and make you pay for it.

  15. Re:avoiding the subject? by npietraniec · · Score: 2

    I haven't had any problems on Mandrake 8.2 going from 2.x from 3.x

    download RPMS
    rpm -Uvh *.rpm

  16. Re:avoiding the subject? by eno2001 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yes, I have both installed AND upgraded KDE without upgrading my distro or re-installing. Several times on different machine. All successful and very easy to do. You can always use RPMs if doing things manually isn't your bag.

    As far as KDE beating Windows, I think it has a lot more useful features/apps "out of the box" than plain vanilla Windows and it looks much better. If you haven't tried KDE 3.0 with the Liquid engine, then I can see your point, but the latest KDE with Liquid goes a good step beyond Windows. Even Windows XP (and that's saying something since Windows XP is a HUGE improvment over their past products. Too bad MS decided to go with a dain bramaged licensing scheme or I might have bought it.

    The other complaint that some people seem to have about apps is unfounded as well. (I'm assuming that's what you meant by "useless".) There are plenty of KDE applications. The apps that come with KDE are much nicer than anything Windows throws in and go beyond anything Windows has ever had. If you don't like the built in apps with KDE, you can still run tons of other gui based apps from Gnome to very basic, but useful X apps. I can't think of more than a handful of apps that I miss from the Windows platform that don't have an equivalent or better under Gnome or KDE. The only place that is weak on both sides (although KDE 3 made some nice steps forward) is pro-audio software. Even there KDE has Windows beat hands down though. Does MS bundle a software based synth (with the ability to create custom sounds) and MIDI sequencer with Windows XP? I think not... KDE 3 does. Hopefully Gnome will take a hint there too. Computers are meant to do a lot more than just "work". They are primarily a creative tool in every aspect.

    KDE also has a much nicer version of the Windows Task Manager. It's much more extensive and customizable. You can define whether stats are reported in graph, LED readout, pie chart, histogram or numeric format. You can also add counters for different system resources that you wish to track. It's an improvment on both the Windows Task Manager and Performance Monitor. And it's MUCH more "user friendly" than any Windows administration app if you like that sort of thing.

    But... I still like to travel light and have a decent looking environment, so Gnome all the way for me.

    --
    -"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
  17. Re:Where do you want to go toady? by NanoGator · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "The amount of @sskissing required to get +5 for a seemingly pro-Microsoft comment is mind-boggling."

    Heh the last time I made a 'KDE is broken, look to MS for help' comment I got modded into oblivion, followed by lotsa heated flames. (Although none of them were actual responses to the criticisms I made...)

    I thought I'd soften it this time around by showing the flaw of too much usability. I'm glad I did that because I hadn't thought about that copy/paste deal in quite a while. Now I understand why I got modded down originally. I was seeing the plusses of MS's usability choices, everybody else was seeing the minuses. In other words, I didn't present it too well originally. I had just assumed that Linux Zealousy had reigned. It didn't occur to me that I sounded like I was trolling.

    Live and learn, eh? :)

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  18. Re:avoiding the subject? by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

    I upgrade my SuSE installation all the time just by downloading the RPM packages from SuSE's website and I've never had trouble with KDE. It even automatically imports all my old settings each time I go to a new version.

    What do you do? Compile from source and install everything in /usr/bin? Then forget to remove old stuff when you compile the new version? Try a package manager.

  19. The Old Agenda by istartedi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Viewed in this light, FS / OS desktops present a perfect match for Government investment. Free desktops provide a boundless, publically-available resource which results not only in large financial savings to its citizens, but also protects and enhances citizen privacy, freedom and choice. Moreover, because Government investment in free software development can be made locally, such support stimulates the nation's or locality's technology sector. In the longer-term view, such investment eventually operates to sizably reduce the outflow of hard currency to other countries, something especially critical for developing nations but also a factor no Government cannot seriously consider. What responsible Government would prefer its citizens pay a large international tax to a foreign corporation over creating high-tech jobs in its local economy?

    Folks, this meme has been in the Free Software community from the earliest days of the FSF. Just read some of RMS's early essays and you'll see the same ideas. It's bunk. They just want us to exchange a private monopoly for a government monopoly. Private monopolies can be defeated when customers become so disatisfied that they choose alternatives. Private monopolies can be defunded because when customers stop buying they lose money. Public monopolies are much harder to defeat because they just confiscate money in the form of taxes. Almost all products produced by governments are inferior. This long-winded interview is just loaded with Leftist scare tactics. MSFT is not capable of preventing you from viewing your own creations unless you are stupid enough to let them. Don't let the government take care of you--do it yourself. You'll be much better off in the long run.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:The Old Agenda by podperson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Almost all products produced by governments are inferior"

      Who's counting? I'm not saying the government doesn't suck at doing many things, but if some FSF rhetoric is recycled left-wing crap, this is mindless right-wing crap.

      Do you prefer your army to be public or private? Macchiavelli suggested that mercenary (non-government) armies are less reliable than citizen militias, and most citizens of democratic countries seem to agree.

      When asked to choose between Democrat-flavored private health care and Republican-flavored private health care in a New York Times survey, most respondents picked *neither* and opted for Canadian-style public health care.

      So national security and healthcare *products* seem to be better when provided by government. Are you so sure that software is different?

    2. Re:The Old Agenda by ctid · · Score: 2

      I don't understand. You're saying that governments should not buy desktops based on Free Software? It is better for governments to buy Microsoft because it's better to have a Microsoft monopoly than a "government monopoly"? What on earth are you talking about?

      --
      Reality is defined by the maddest person in the room
    3. Re:The Old Agenda by dylan_- · · Score: 2


      Well, I wish all hospitals were private ones, that I could pay for a private insurance that would require me to pay and not fill forms.

      But you can. You can pay for private heathcare in France, and you can get insured. If you didn't organise it before now, that's hardly anyone else's fault...

      --
      Igor Presnyakov stole my hat
    4. Re:The Old Agenda by glwtta · · Score: 2
      MSFT is not capable of preventing you from viewing your own creations unless you are stupid enough to let them.

      Most people, and probably you and I as well are, in fact, that stupid. Or at least that's how it appears at the moment.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    5. Re:The Old Agenda by Alsee · · Score: 2

      I don't understand. You're saying that governments should not buy desktops based on Free Software?

      No, he's talking about government funded/developed software. Or even mere governemt use of open source software would help drive its spread and developement.

      Not that I can see any way the government could have a monopoly if it's GPL or similar.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    6. Re:The Old Agenda by gosand · · Score: 2
      MSFT is not capable of preventing you from viewing your own creations unless you are stupid enough to let them.

      My standard answer to the "MSFT can't do XXX" argument is "Who is going to stop them?"

      Don't let the government take care of you--do it yourself. You'll be much better off in the long run.

      I have to agree with you here, because the government can F up just about anything. But as long as the government doesn't control open source, I think everything will be OK. (and I don't think they can control it)

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    7. Re:The Old Agenda by istartedi · · Score: 2

      My standard answer to the "MSFT can't do XXX" argument is "Who is going to stop them?"

      Apple, Sun, Palm (if they can survive), Any other corporation that can please people for whom control really matters, and last but not least--the Free Software and Open Source movements.

      I actually like the fact that they exist as independant players in the market. What I object to is them being enshrined as part of the government, because when government gives something away for free there is potential for serious inequity. The public schools are the best example of this. Poor kids can only use public schools. Rich people may choose private. Vouchers are a good solution, but the Left fights it tooth and nail. Now, imagine if everybody can run free government Linux systems but if you want the features missing from that you have to pay $1500 for Windows or MacOS. Would that really be good?

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    8. Re:The Old Agenda by istartedi · · Score: 2

      how on earth can a government releasing a "free gpl'ed software" be a monopoly in that area?

      Because the existance of such software tends to drive out low-cost proprietary alternatives leaving us with high-end proprietary and GPL'd "distributions". The compiler market is a good example of a place where "the middle" is stagnating because of this.

      Read the GPL --- you have the right to do what you want to do with the source, as long as you don't take away others' rights to do what they want to do with the new source.

      In other words, you can only propogate the GPL, and if the government throws its hefty weight into a particular market, it would create a monopoly by driving out proprietary competitors. The damage would be proportional to the quality of the product. If the product were really poor, it would produce little damage. If it breaks into the realm of "good but lacking some features" It will destroy the low end of the market. If it becomes the best-in-class it will destroy the entire market. Then, the government is free to sit on its collective ass and let what was once best-in-class slowly erode. The proprietary versions won't come back because the threat of increased government funding and restoration is ever-present.

      Where exactly in there do you see the government who may have written the sourc-code, exerting a monopolistic control over you?

      I think I've made it pretty clear. Although there wouldn't be an explicit government monopoly, there would be a defacto monopoly. The proprietary software industry would be effectively destroyed, which RMS freely admits is the purpose of the GPL. However, most customers want the choice. If people were properly educated and the issue were put to a vote, most would not want this to happen. Unfortunately, most people are not properly educated due to the Left's prior victories in education.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  20. Re:spot the difference by friedmud · · Score: 2

    Actually....

    Enlightenment does come with a "task manager" - try loading up it's "icon box". This is a small bar that does just what a task manager does - if you minimize a program it goes into your "icon box" and you can retrieve it by clicking on it (or dragging its icon to the desired location - including into the pager so it can show up on another desktop ;-)

    Enlightenment is an incredible WM - but I have switched full time to KDE now. I am a C++/QT programmer so it only makes sense.....

    Derek

  21. Re:avoiding the subject? by WildBeast · · Score: 2

    yep I'm running Redhat

  22. Re:avoiding the subject? by DEBEDb · · Score: 2
    but to a developer, the fact that someone if building a report in Excel is disgusting.


    Even if in this particular case it makes
    the most sense (takes the least time,
    will be used easily by all those that need
    to use it, etc)?

    Bletch.

    --

    Considered harmful.
  23. Re:avoiding the subject? by JabberWokky · · Score: 2
    KDE does not release RPMs, nor any other binary package. They never have, and likely never will.

    They do, however, host packages that distros compile and package. Check the documenation and build information in your package - it didn't come from KDE, even if it was hosted on ftp.kde.org - it was from the distro itself.

    --
    Evan

    --
    "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
  24. Re:avoiding the subject? by JabberWokky · · Score: 2
    Or for me, it's simply opening up the Control Center (KDE's equivelent of the Control Panel) and simply choosing Update Software, make sure it's set to automatic, and clicking Next.

    Okay, I usually use manual. But the point is, that every modern distro afaik has a quick and easy online update of the sntire system. Gentoo, debian, SuSE, etc. Simple, easy and it lets you focus on your work, rather than worrying about software issues.

    --
    Evan

    --
    "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
  25. Yes, but the WHY is missing .... by fferreres · · Score: 2

    We still do get it, do we? The point is america NEEDS a monopolist because ONLY a MONOPOLIST can be an effective cyber-cop of media content.

    If you have diversity and competition, you can't control data. And that's what media/content resellers are asking the goverment to do.

    On the one hand you have the citizens not knowing MS is getting ready to be the cyber-cop for a huge profit. On the other hand you have entire industries crying for a solution that involves allowing a Monopoly to solve all their problems.

    (sorry for the caps)

    --
    unfinished: (adj.)
  26. Re:avoiding the subject? by fferreres · · Score: 2

    What?

    Edit -> Paste Special -> Unformated Text

    Or do you want the application to GUESS what you have in mind when you paste something? They provide a sane default and you have the freedom to override it. You just need to know you can Paste Special.

    Even more, it's a blessing Notepad and Word behave differently, according to each capabilities and needs. If you are using notepad you probably don't care about the formating and if you are using Word or excel, you do care.

    I think your point is right in that MS very much limits the users in many way, but the example was just a terrible one. A better example would be the "Find..." command, that really lacks power, the way extensions work (ie: they don't really guess what a file is for, as in file [binary]), etc.

    --
    unfinished: (adj.)
  27. There is no community if only certain members are by Kunta+Kinte · · Score: 2, Troll

    ... allowed to be heard.

    Just after I read your post mozilla crashed on me again, so I am going to respond.

    I submitted one of those WONTFIX bugs, and I stand by my suggestion still today. I recommended that an unstripped nightly or a linux talkback nightly build be distributed ( either one ), just as talkback nightlies for windows are distributed. The sad thing is the suggestion is simple. They would have to *not* strip a binary before inclusion on the mozilla ftp server. This would require no code changes and only a minor build change.

    I'm not just bitching about not being able to run nightlies under a debugger without building from scratch. I'm complaining about not being able to provide any reasonable information to the developers for those random crashes. And thus having to live with those crashes.

    I'm complaining about being shut out of this "mozilla community" I keep hearing about.

    Mozilla and other large OSS projects are turning their backs on one of the most important advantages of OSS, user feedback. As more and more of the decisions go corporate and behind closed doors, these projects will appeal less and less to many users.

    --
    Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
  28. Re:avoiding the subject? by NanoGator · · Score: 2

    Umm do any of you guys remember the 'right-click' context menu? Heh.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  29. US Government Nationalizes Microsoft by crosbie · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The second the US gives up trying to use the courts to keep MS in check, it'll simply nationalize MS. It'll certainly do this the moment it perceives a conflict of interest. It may neuter it (like IBM), but it will probably nationalize it given widespread reliance on it.

    There is of course the small chance that MS will become the ascendant (espicially with a tad of infiltration in congress, etc.), and the US will become the United States of Microsoft.

    When more taxes get spent on IT infrastructure than anything else, they'll be the de facto government anyway.

    So, there's a choice: Software Dictatorship or Software Democracy. Run by an individual from taxation, or run by the people by community sponsorship.

    I'm not saying there's anything wrong with making money out of software, but it's not a good idea to have a government start enshrining the interests of commercial organisations in law at the expense of peoples constitutional rights.

  30. Re:The desktop is dead by 10Ghz · · Score: 2

    "Do you get the feeling that people missed the point of why Rasterman and others (such as myself) say the Linux desktop has no future?"

    Yeah, he said it because he doesn't work on Linux-desktops as much as before.

    --
    Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
  31. Re:avoiding the subject? by Col.+Klink+(retired) · · Score: 2

    My point about the "do it or I'll leave syndrome" is that it's universal. I see it on the Debian list. "Fix this or I'll go back to [Windows, Red Hat, etc]." I see it on the Plucker list. "Fix this or I'll use Avantgo." Emacs newbies threaten to use vi, and vi newbies threaten to use emacs.

    None of these projects were started to get people to stop using the others, no matter how hard it seems the developers are working. Developers are trying to make a better product because the developers want to use them. It's nice that other people can use them and it feels good to get complimented. Some developers may even feel a bit of a debt since they've used so much of other peoples work free work. When it comes to choosing between the carrot and the stick to see your wish fulfilled, choose the carrot because the stick is meaningless. Or do it yourself.

    So no, the primary motivation of Open Source developers is generally NOT to stop others from using the competition. Commercial vendors work that way, but not volunteers.

    --

    -- Don't Tase me, bro!

  32. Re:Dude! Sad attitude. by Slashamatic · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I agree. I want Linux Kernel and expect people to look at Win 2K/XP as well as BSD. They don't need to study it but they should be aware of alternate ways of doing things.

    GUI manager developers seem to get even more religious.I am not particularly interested in a merger between GNOME and KDE but I do want their developers trying to use the best of the opposition to improve their products. Remember, one of the intentions of the open source movement is promote knowledge sharing not monopolies of the way of doing something.

  33. Probably an MS shareholder... by Slashamatic · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The way a person refers to the Micro$oft corporation tends to reflect their relationship with it. For example the $ substitution implies that I may believe that they are a group of money grabbing SOBs.

    This gentleman refers to them by their stock ticker symbol, MSFT. The "use Open Source" solution is a threat to the great Ponzi scheme. Personally, I have worked in developing countries and can say sure, we give them a World Bank loan for a hundred copies of XP, but where are they going to money for their licence renewals/update fees?

    Government led OS initiatives do not mean a Government monopoly. The Govt is a useful first-mover and because of open-source, anyone can compete for the provision of support services, even local companies in developing countries.

  34. Re:avoiding the subject? by uchian · · Score: 2

    Actually, you point out one major problem with RPM's. Hence why I'm looking at non-RPM distros

    This is a common misconception - The problem does not lie inherantly with RPM, rather you just need a wrapper around it. You'd have the same problems if you tried to use debs directly (rather than using apt instead).

    If you use, urpmi, apt-rpm, up2date or any of the other systems out there, rpms aren't any different from any other distros out there.

  35. Use the bug tracking system by marm · · Score: 2

    The day a developer stops listening to user requests directly or indirectly and starts to do whatever he likes most (in their free or payed time) is the day I'll want to switch to something else (personal choice here).

    Which is why just about every OSS project (KDE included) that is large enough to use a bug-tracking system has a 'wishlist' category in the bug-tracker.

    Just about every OSS project I know would LOVE to hear about new ideas and ways to improve the software - but PLEASE report these ideas in the appropriate place, which is in the bug-tracking system. If you post your ideas to a mailing list, then not only are your proposals far more likely to get lost in the noise of other posts, you are also creating extra work for the developers who have to wade through tons of feature requests, often for identical things, before they can use the mailing list for what it was designed for - which is communicating with each other. If the idea is in the bug tracking system, it is recorded for eternity, indexed and can be searched and reviewed by developers easily when they run out of pressing bugs to fix.

    To repeat: if you have a killer idea, post it to the bug-tracking system, with a 'wishlist' category! Although you may not get an immediate response, my experience is that you have a far far better chance of seeing your idea implemented in the future than if you pollute project mailing lists.

    Now, if you're prepared to implement your idea yourself, then by all means post to the mailing lists when you need help - that is what they're there for - but if you aren't, leave it to the bug tracking system.

  36. Re:avoiding the subject? by npietraniec · · Score: 2

    I hear you talking, but guess how many people start crying once Red Carpet is pay per use.

  37. what a surprise... by ZoneGray · · Score: 2

    What a surprise, he's afraid that software vendors are going to own his thoughts. "In other words, the products of our creative minds, the very essence of our humanity, are being relentlessly stripped from us."

    Hey, KDE is very good and all, and yes, there are some real serious issues about proprietary document formats. But anytime somebody starts into this sort of extremist scare-mongering, even if I basically agree with them, I just tune it out. Most people who use such exaggeration aren't capable of thinking through the issue clearly. It's become far too common these days to make some trivial cause into something of earth-shattering importance. Spare me.

    1. Re:what a surprise... by gosand · · Score: 2
      What a surprise, he's afraid that software vendors are going to own his thoughts. "In other words, the products of our creative minds, the very essence of our humanity, are being relentlessly stripped from us." Hey, KDE is very good and all, and yes, there are some real serious issues about proprietary document formats. But anytime somebody starts into this sort of extremist scare-mongering, even if I basically agree with them, I just tune it out. Most people who use such exaggeration aren't capable of thinking through the issue clearly. It's become far too common these days to make some trivial cause into something of earth-shattering importance. Spare me.

      Hmm. Guess you missed this story. Sure, the guy signed an invention disclosure agreement, but what if MS put a similar clause in the EULA? "I agree, that by using this software, that I forfeit any rights to any invention created all or in part by any of the software contained herein, and the intellectual property rights to those inventions shall be the sole property of Microsoft."

      Think it won't happen? Who is going to stop them?

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    2. Re:what a surprise... by gosand · · Score: 2
      No offense, but your arguments are not that convincing.


      Duh - THERE IS NO COMPETITION! That is the point. Do people read the EULA? No, not the majority of them.

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  38. Re:Audacity? Only in being that stupid. by bluGill · · Score: 2

    Yeah right, welcome to the real world. I don't own any Microsoft products (not even illegal copies). I'm looking for a job, and I've been unable to apply for several because they demand my resume in Word format only, which I cannot save in. The worst offenders seem to be companies looking for unix help, companies looking for help with Windows don't have a problem with plain text.

  39. Re:avoiding the subject? by glwtta · · Score: 2
    "Well instead of discussing the usability problems of KDE and the huge installation issues"

    hmm... 'emerge kde'

    the only issue there was the issue of New Yorker I was reading while it was compiling :)

    --
    sic transit gloria mundi
  40. Re:avoiding the subject? by pmz · · Score: 2

    Unfortunately, that happens all too often because I wasnt using FrontPage the way MS assumed I would.

    This is exactly why I hate Microsoft software and many other GUI-based systems. But let's not debate GUI vs. CLI, right now.

    This complaint about the limitations of Frontpage is related to why systems inspired by UNIX have gained so much popularity lately. Look at the spectrum of available systems from OpenBSD and Slackware through Solaris and AIX and all the way to Mac OS X. This really seems very odd at first (Mac and Solaris in the same boat?!?), but it isn't odd at all after thinking about what UNIX really is.

    All these systems share a high-level architecture of a kernel, CLI system utilities, and a GUI layer. Any of these components is modular and can be swapped out if different characteristics are desired (hence the BSD, Linux, and commercial kernels and toolsets and the many many graphical environments available). It turns out that this architecture is so flexible that OpenBSD and Mac OS X can correctly be called UNIX but still appeal to an immensely broad audience.

    I know that many people have arguments against particular aspects of UNIX, but I don't know of a computing system in all of history that has achieved this breadth of implementation while maintaining significant interoperability. This is really quite an accomplishment.

    --
    Healthcare article at Kuro5hin
  41. No agenda by drew_kime · · Score: 2
    I know you're trolling, but in case someone doesn't ...
    They just want us to exchange a private monopoly for a government monopoly ... Almost all products produced by governments are inferior.
    No one said anything about the government producing the software. They are talking about the government using the software.
    Don't let the government take care of you--do it yourself.
    I thought we were talking abou a private monopoly vs. a government? Now you're comparing the government to do-it-yourself. If Palladium plays out as many people have speculated, doing it yourself won't be an option.
    --
    Nope, no sig
  42. Re:There is no community if only certain members a by Kunta+Kinte · · Score: 2

    And should every user that wants to give crash data ( from a core file or talkback ) from linux have to build their own?

    it takes 3 hours and 1Gig of drive space on a P450. I did build my own for a while and I contributed a few bug fixes in that time as well. But I can't have such a huge build running everyday on my desktop.

    Also, the unstripped binary would be in *addition* to the stripped and can clearly be labelled as such. eg. mozilla-linux-i686-unstripped.tar.gz, along with the others in ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/nightly/lastest/

    But this is only an example, my point is that it is getting increasing difficult to give feedback in the larger OSS projects nowadays.

    PS. This is meant as serious argument I've observed, not a troll ( as my previous post has seemed to be labelled )

    --
    Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
  43. I have a question... by TFloore · · Score: 2
    When did "Microsoft" become a dirty word?

    Looking through the interview, I noticed that Andreas actually said "Microsoft" once.

    Whenever he discussed them, it was always
    • "software vendor(s)"
    • or "one particular vendor"
    • or "a noted software and Internet services vendor"
    • or "the monopolist"
    • or "the world's largest creator and enforcer of proprietary prisons"
    • or "a monopolist"
    • or "those with the current monopoly".

    When did "Microsoft" become one of the Seven Dirty Words???
    --
    This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is... Oops. Frank, I've got your sig again! Where's mine?
  44. Re:Government produced software by istartedi · · Score: 2

    If government-produced software is GPL'd, then I, as a citizen, am being denied the right to use the government work in a way I see fit. The GPL is *not* public domain. Allowing MSFT to repackage PD material does no harm to anybody, because the PD material is still there. At this point, I have to hit you with one of my classic zingers:

    A Free Software wacko is somebody who believes that intellectual property can't be stolen--except when a proprietary software company uses something from the Public Domain.

    The Free Software wackos (like Rush Limbaugh's environmentalist wackos) don't care about Freedom, Liberty, Technical merit, or any other system of values. They simply choose to identify with value systems when it suits their purpose. Sooner or later, they can be caught in a glaring inconsistancy. With the environmentalist wackos it's preferring to let forests burn rather than allow logging companies to thin them. With Free Software wackos it's extolling technical merit in one breath, and then arguing that freedom is more important in the next breath, and then arguing that some people have to give up their freedom in the next breath. It's also saying "IP" can't be stolen and then turning around and objecting when *their* IP is stolen.

    So, what values do these sibling wacko movements really hold dear? Political power and self importance. That's it. That's all. Not everybody mind you, there are many people in both these movements who are not aware of it. True believers. Every once in a while they wake up and have a "conversion". I'm not aware of anybody doing this from the Free Software movement, but give it time. It's a bit younger than the environmentalist movement, and hasn't become as political... yet.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  45. Re:TCP/IP? WWW? GIF? Sound familiar? by fferreres · · Score: 2

    Well, protocols that survived where the Open ones. Now some copamnies want to promote the non-open ones. I mean Disney, RIIA and some other friends. The non-tech companies do not care much (they don't sense "danger").

    Only developer that are not married with MS actually outcry the need for open standard, and some services sectors like Banks and the such (ie: products where MS could easily turn into some kind of unavoidable ManInTheMiddle)

    --
    unfinished: (adj.)