Interview With Andreas Pour of KDE

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"

Comments

I think he raises the interesting point...

[Ieshan]

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.

Re:I think he raises the interesting point...

[idiotnot]

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.

Re:I think he raises the interesting point...

[SlugLord]

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.

Re:I think he raises the interesting point...

[Master Bait]

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.

Re:avoiding the subject?

[bogie]

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.

Re:avoiding the subject?

[NanoGator]

"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.

Re:avoiding the subject?

[aardvarkjoe]

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.

User interaction overrated.

[reaper20]

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?"

Re:User interaction overrated.

[fferreres]

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.

food for thought...

[Whammy666]

"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?

Re:Where do you want to go toady?

[NanoGator]

"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? :)

US Government Nationalizes Microsoft

[crosbie]

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.

Re:Dude! Sad attitude.

[Slashamatic]

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.

Probably an MS shareholder...

[Slashamatic]

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.