Slashdot Mirror
Free Software As Nigerian Scam
djeaux writes "In the November 4 issue of Syllabus, Howard Strauss, manager of technology strategy and outreach at Princeton University, presents 'The FREE, 0% APR, Better Sex, No Effort Diet' in which he scattershoots at open source software. The Nigerian scam is part of his imagery, leading to a great quote: 'While you are installing your free open source software you may want to write Mrs. Ahmed a check. Her $8.5 million will help pay for the real cost of that free software.' Elsewhere, Strauss describes the open source community as 'a smattering of teenagers too young to work at Redmond, hackers, virus creators, and a menagerie of others with whom you will feel great pride in entrusting your IT infrastructure.'" Not everyone at Princeton agrees.
Though it's a parody and I generally try to take those lightly, he's made one critical error that really stands out in his assertion that free software is the domain of hackers/tinkerers/students, etc. I think Howard Strauss ought to be informed of the billions of dollars being invested in free software development by major corporations, many of whom have salaried and talented employees developing such applications. His condescending attitude towards the talented programmers who have created so much of the infrastructure the Internet depends on (Linux, BSD, Apache, MySQL anyone?) is a bit infuriating, to say the least.
On another note, what is responsible for the recent surge of anti-free software propaganda? I'm sure that some could present a viable argument that nefarious sources (SCO/Microsoft/whoever) are essentially astroturfing on a media-wide scale (not like they haven't done it before), but things like this, plus the Forbes article and other critiqued rants that have been posted on Slashdot before, have me a bit worried about how the worldwide computer-using community is perceiving free software, especially when peoples' critiques contain such glaring factual errors as this particular one does.
That sounds like a fair minded, well reasoned and educated comment entirely lacking in FUD...
fortune -o
It sounds like the kind of article an anti-Linux Microsoft employee would write - lol. Lets just hope nobody takes it seriously....
Video Game cheats, hints a
Or does that article site seem like a scam in itself? I counted 5 ads from doubleclick (all blocked by privoxy) and another set of sponsored links at the bottom. With all the rhetoric designed to inflame linux users, it is sure to make money for them if it gets enough hits (thus getting put on /. benefits them greatly...).
C:\>
Is there anyway I can moderate this entire story -1: Flamebait?
Let's get something straight here: I'm not exactly impressed by Linux on a regular basis. I think that the UIs you find on it typically suck. I think that the lack of It Just Works kind of sucks. But... This is ridiculous. I don't get the idea that Howard has the slightest idea what he's talking about. I can only assume that he was personally burned, or something, by some open source project. Maybe some MIS or IT underling pushed an OSS solution that burned his department... Weird. In any case, I think he needs to take a chill-pill. I'm amazed that something that vitriolic would be published in a mag. associated with such an august institution.
iRooster, the Mac OS X a
I see the plan, post four links to Princeton servers and watch them suffer. Make them pay for their insolence!
That guys animosity towards students reflects the level of customer service that most Universities provide today.
Nobody said most college students are masters of project management or the big picture, but they are a talented group of programmers. To dismiss them as worthless is to ignore a valuable and cheap source of labor. You may not want to make them PM just yet, but I gaurentee they'll work their asses off, with a little direction, more than that 30-year veteran who has become acustomed to the University's indiference towards laziness. Union YES!
Most computer science students I know haven't been corrupted yet and still have a high work ethic, they just need a little direction and be brought down a level to reality. Once they get past thinking they can change the place overnight, they make some excellent, hard working individuals.
But alas, the University I attended didn't hire any of its graduates either. While I was working there, not one of my supervisors had any sort of degree and they weren't eager to give anyone from the inside a chance upon graduation (again, I'm not talking about management positions, but I've seen plenty of entry level jobs that turned down countless grads from the Uni. I guess they don't have faith in what they teach.)
...ex-manager of technology strategy and outreach at Princeton University, one should hope. That kind of stupidity can't go unrewarded, can it?
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
"instead of having highly paid programmers at... Blackboard build your critical university systems, you can have scores of software gurus scattered around the globe working completely independently build them for you FOR FREE."
Oh, you didn't. You mean free vending machines for life Blackboard?
My blog
Wow. I guess 2/3 of the Web *IS* wrong. I'm sorry, Microsoft. I should have listened.
So can we have some competition against Redmond then? If it takes free software to produce some competition (think PBS versus the entire broadcasting spectrum), I think its indicative of other darker factors.
I work on OSS in my spare time, and I don't fit the stereotype... and I don't call every pro-MS a money-scrounging heartless profit-driven capitalist. Just Bill Gates.
Bill and Howard. Yeah... them two.
This space for rent.
Since Microsoft tries to hire them right out of school, "too young" must be young indeed! I'd rate that article as definitely either a Troll or Flamebait, certainly Overrated.
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
Help fight continental drift.
Naysay all you like, and for that matter Ayesay as well.
But in the end, won't results speak louder than allegorical assertations?
'While you are installing your free open source software you may want to write Mrs. Ahmed a check. Her $8.5 million will help pay for the real cost of that free software.'
Should read:
While you are installing your free open source software, you may want to write SCO a cheque, to help pay for the real cost of defending their "stolen" intellectual property which they cannot disclose and will not show to you without an NDA giving SCO exclusive rights to your first born offspring.
My rights don't need management.
That article really makes me think. It makes me wonder about the value of a FREE article.
Sounds like he's bitching about moving to Windows.
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
This article wouldn't bother me as much if it presented a single independently verifiable fact. Since it doesn't, it's a rant and nothing more. The real queston is "Why did Syllabus choose to publish it?" This guy isn't even a professor, is he? With the title of "manager of technology strategy and outreach", it sounds like he's just a department employee. Not that that invalidates his opinion, mind you! That is discredited by his vacant non-awareness of facts.
"Lawyers are for sucks."
- Doug McKenzie
I hate people who susbtitute analogies for evidence or proof. Analogies help illustrate the point but they don't make the point. This writer pretty much set the scene from the opening line by linking open source with spam mail. It's a pretty far-fetched analogy. The entity we are comparing with is spam mail, the link betweeen spam and open source is that they're both free. I bet someone could think up another evil entity and associate it via some property common to closed source development and then discredit closed source software that way.
First Szulik promotes Windows, now some unknown Princeton professor pans free software and gets enormous media attention. I wonder whether Microsoft has been doing more to discredit open source than just financing SCO's lawsuits; have they been spreading cash around trying to fake a grass roots campaign?
a smattering of teenagers too young to work at Redmond
... or just too ethical. Or sensible, take your pick.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Commander Taco must be on vacation in Silicon Valley.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
May you live in interesting times...
Sd-
The Open Source Community
Here's a shocker: Strauss's mode of argumentation is sarcasm. He's an astonishingly inept writer, so it's not even particularly well crafted sarcasm. I don't know if this is because his understanding of the subject matter is negligible or if it's because he thought this would be the best way to make his nebulous point, but it seems sort of wasteful to engage him in any sort of debate (with or without his participation). There may be smarter and more articulate people who share his views, and it would be much more worthwhile to find them and have an intelligent discussion than it would be to waste time debunking the content implied by his article.
was that the offer from Mrs. Ahmed was brought to you by thousands of co-opted machines doing spam mailing, all running that first-class commercial OS made in Redmond by highly paid, first-class professional programmers!
This thing appears to smack of parody, though it isn't specifically mentioned as satire anywhere. If this truelly represents his beliefs, this guy is off his rocker. He repeatedly equates OSS with the Nigerian scam, but gets his facts all wrong. He claims that they are both scams, attempts to get people to fall for the "something for nothing" desire in us all. This specifically forgets that the Nigerian scam is not "something for nothing", but rather "nothing for your money". This scam asks you to send in a good faith deposit to procure a much larger sum of money in the future. OSS gives you the software, and then only asks that you obey it's license, which typically does not require any fee at all.
Slackware, what else when it must be secure, stable, and easy?
Maybe a also-dropped-on-the-floor brother or something?
Belief is the currency of delusion.
Elsewhere, Strauss describes the open source community as 'a smattering of teenagers too young to work at Redmond, hackers, virus creators, and a menagerie of others with whom you will feel great pride in entrusting your IT infrastructure.'
And a hell of a lot more intelligent and insightful than he is. Who let this asshole work at Princeton?
Oh, and where does Linus fit in the above list? Alan Cox? The multitude of other major kernel hackers (to my knowledge, none of them that young or unsavory)? And that's just the kernel...
Someone, quick, break out the 2x4 of Enlightenment!
... is the death rattle of another of the priests in the cathedral.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
I mean, jeez -this guy could piss off Mary Worth. Maybe he thinks since the open source movement is just as he characterizes it, then it can't gice him a cosmic IT wedgie - guess someone hasn'ty bee following the SCO badminton game.
This should in now way be construed as an entre for Eric (/Bruce/Linus/Richard) to launch a salvo. Really,
Not to mention where else should you embrace open source but in academia.
And here's the punchline, from netcraft:
The site www.princeton.edu is running Apache/1.3.4 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.1.8 SSLeay/0.9.0b on Solaris.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Looks like you are wrong. Ann Coulter got first post.
Article feels like one large Flamebait, but in these days of SCO lawsuits I'm never quite sure which viewpoints are satire and which are just out and out stupidity.
In any case, it does make a point that the "establishment" has a very hard time coming to terms with - Free Software can and does work. For some fraction of people, this seems to somehow represent a personal insult. Probably the same people who get upset at anyone who questions whether our current economic system is absolute perfection suggest regulation might serve some purpose after all.
Commercial software provides only two things open source software can't provide - software that is extrememly difficult to create and has a small target audience (think very high end engineering CAD software or exteremely complex movie rendering) and someone to sue if the product doesn't work as specified. That doesn't sit well with people who think capitalism is the One True Way, and just for more fun people compare open source with Communism(?!). As if the spirit of goodwill is somehow corruptive to our way of life.
So, whether the author set out to write satire, troll all of slashdot, or actually denies the evidence right in front of him, this article is quite childish and silly. The evidence that free software does work is right in front of him, if he's interested in looking. Whether he WANTS it to work might be the real issue.
Ever notice that, that some people are personally interested in the failure of open source? It seems to be an affront to them, for no reason I can discover. No one has the RIGHT to make money, and open source taking away commerical markets for software is something they'll just have to grow up and deal with. If they can't make a more compelling product that people are willing to pay for and stay ahead of volunteers, tough.
Linux/Free Software is for real. I've used it exclusively on my own machines for four years, with great success. Community spirit is powerful and can accomplish great things, and if our social system has forgotten/doesn't want to accept that then we're in some deeper trouble than just questions of software.
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
This article is so trollish that I can only hope it was written as a parody/joke. Otherwise, this guy has no idea and hasn't bothered to research about the subject he is talking about.
No sig
I have to post this every now and then, but for those of you not in education, you have no idea the lengths microsoft will go to push their products. Let me give yo a few examples:
.doc, .xls or .ppt. Because the profs get lots of perks from Microsoft. (hint: they get whatever software they like for, well, um, free)
.NET, etc., all no reg key type.
1) I am finishing a Master's in Ed Technology. We are required to submit our work, etc. in either
2) Everyone in the Master's program, and I think in the credential program, canget Office for $20.
3) In my district, the district technidiots (the same ones who didn't understand how my linux box could get internet access on the school network, and had no idea what TCP/IP was) get thrown all sorts of freebies at the tech conferences. The tech at my school laughed about getting XP Pro, VS
Those are a few examples. I could go on. Microsoft has gotten the Ed. crowd the way Apple did years ago. Worse is the way technology is used in schools. PowerPoint has become the favorite tool of choice for projects. Plus Microsoft gives lots of money to schools, and has VERY long tentacles. They get involved in many ways. You can be sure, this guy is not on Microsoft's payroll directly, but he is certainly the recipient of much Microsoft "benevolence". Teachers are just like everyone else really, just a few freebies, and we're yours.
But here's the biggest rub. The truth is that it takes far more techs to maintain a windows network, then say, a *nix network. Which means the tech department get more jobs, money, etc. And if something breaks, and they fix it, it only reinforces their importance. F***ed up? You bet. And the sad truth is that most school personell are not the best qualified. So, you try to give them linux, which requires more "expertise", they're gonna reject it. Simple really. You'd think that schools would care about cost, security, etc. But they don't.
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
I can see how his style of reasoning by backing his claims with assumptions might be a useful skill for a leafblower salesman, but for the manager of technology strategy and outreach at Princeton University?
Check out some of these brilliant quotes:
We may have to give up project planning, quality control, coding standards, accountability, version control, and support, but it's FREE and we get the ability to modify the source code ourselves, something that is extremely dangerous to do, was discredited decades ago, and few people do anyway.
And as an argument dispelling the "myth" of free labor: You can also get free software developed by having your users develop it for you.
It really goes downhill from there trying to comparatively illustrate the "ridiculousness" of open source developers as a concept.
That sounds suspiciously like you want to "take your ball and go home" -- something that would be expected from a group of immature teenagers rather than respectable software developers.
Fortunately, most of us don't feel like we have to try to punish everyone in sight when somebody says something we don't like.
How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
Great. A humor piece (I hope) based on the common confusion of "free" meaning "no cost".
(Score: -2 AttemptedFlamebait)
134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
Biggest. Troll. Ever.
Seriously though, I'm sure that a lot of people think the way this guy thinks. It's an easy mistake to make, especially if you look at software as being analogous to physical property. The analogy breaks down pretty quickly if you look at it. I like to use the example of the "magic hammer".
If I attach a rock to the end of a stick to make a real-life hammer, and I give it to you, now I don't have a hammer anymore. With software, I can sell the hammer to you, and I still somehow have an identical hammer (that's how Microsoft makes the big bucks). With open source software, I give you the hammer with instructions on how to make it. I haven't really lost anything by giving you the hammer - I still have my copy, and copying it took about 3 seconds. You are encouraged to share the hammer with your friends (and you don't loose anything by doing so either). You can also make improvements to the hammer. Only an enterprising few will do this, but the effect is cumulative. When someone forges a brass head for the hammer, poof! Everyone's hammers are now better. Steel head? Poof! Claw on the back for pulling nails? Poof! It doesn't take long before everybody has a really good hammer.
Well, I'm preaching to the choir here, so I'll stop. The only outrageous thing about this article is that this guy somehow became the "manager of technology strategy and outreach at Princeton University" without learning how open source software works. He should catch a clue. Personally, I don't think that the Open Source model is right for all types of programs, but there is a wide swath of IT purposes where it can't be touched by closed source.
link
figured i'd do it myself and save you all the trouble... ;-)
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Howard Strauss is the manager of technology strategy and outreach at Princeton University. (Emph. mine)
It would appear that "outreach" is the only thing this guy does worse than "technology strategy".
I suspect the article is one of those stroke-your-ego-by-increasing-your-budget trips that bureaucrats are so fond of.
Fear, Stupidity and Doubt, I say.
Like I said, quite inciteful of Mr. Howard
Patent: from Latin patere, to be open
Is there a special prize for 1st post and karma whore in one?
but it's FREE and we get the ability to modify the source code ourselves, something that is extremely dangerous to do, was discredited decades ago, and few people do anyway.
Idiot doesn't realize that the danger of modifying source doesn't depend on whether it's an open source model or closed source model. When people working in closed source organization modify their products code the level of danger depends entirely on the competence of the programmer working on that source code base.
There's a ton of bad closed source software too. For the most part it ends up in the $4.99 bin, if it ever gets into stores at all.
Yes, PeopleSoft is very expensive and those greedy folks at WebCT expect to make a profit, but they have to pay for quality software to be developed and so do we! My School has just switched to the dreaded PeopleSoft academic software...It is horrible; for example some Seniors had their enrollment appointment (to apply for classes next semester) moved on them randomly...so much for quality...
You can get complex systems at absolutely NO COST!
Remember, it's free as in freedom.
[Insert standard Debian zealot message here]
Long live Schrodinger's cat...
or get you on those gravy-train corporate boards. There should be a disclosure statement of who he and the publication's beholding to. To be fair, he is right, free software may not cost anything is not free, but his own example, webct, costs a hell of a lot in internal support, that's on top of a 3 fold cost increase in licensing fees in recent years. I wonder if he is trying to justify why he and his group are not participating in open source CMS (course management systems) efforts and ponying up a 6 or 7 figure license fee, and then finding internal funds for running and supporting it. That money would pay a lot of professional programmers' salaries. There are dangers of relying on free software, especially it is a fragile project, but who says the WebCT will be around in a few years. And, do you think if that happens you will have a choice between changing products or trying to maintain the product yourself? I doubt it. It's an interesting piece, but will do more harm them good, but maybe that is what he wanted. I can see those board offers rolling in.
and as for programming experience
- 4 had 1 year
- 10 had 2-4 years
- 31 had 5-9 years
- 40 had 10-20 years
- 16 had 20+ years
Then there is the Boston Consulting Group's Hacker Survey, which found Occupation ChartHardly what Howard Strauss's article portrays.
Congratulations, that was one of the most brilliant pieces of flamebait I've ever seen or read. It had everything:
1) blatant factual inaccuracies:
> We may have to give up project planning, quality control, coding
> standards, accountability, version control, and support, but it's FREE > and we get the ability to modify the source code ourselves, something
> that is extremely dangerous to do, was discredited decades ago, and
> few people do anyway.
I don't know of a single open-source / free software project that doesn't use version control. In fact, what might easily be the
most popular version control system in the world, CVS, is itself
an open source project.
Coding Standards? True, not every open-source project has written guidelines for that. However, many do ( The Jakarta sub-project
group at the ASF comes to mind, as does the Mozilla project) and
all are subject to the most rigorous coding standard of all... review and inspection by an unlimited number of peers, at any time of day or night, 24 x 7, 365 days a year. Let a snippet of bad code get checked into the repository (see above) for a large open source project with
numerous active committers, and see how long it takes for it to get rolled-back, and the author mercilessly flamed.
Quality Control? Maybe you've heard the expression "all bugs are shallow, given enough eyeballs?" Open Source by it's very nature has
the ultimate form of quality control... and unlike closed source
proprietary software, the end user generally has relatively easy
access to the engineers working on the code, to report defects,
whether it be via Bugzilla, Sourceforge, e-mail, newsgroups or
what have you.
Support? JBoss Corp. provides support for the JBoss application server,
Red Hat, SuSE, Mandrake and many others provide supported distributions of Linux, and Mozilla.org provides support for Mozilla. And that's just
paid support I'm referring to. Never mind the aforementioned channels of e-mail, newsgroups, forums, etc., for interacting directly with the authors (and fellow users) of the code.
As for modifying code being dangerous... that's just ignorant. Cutting towards yourself with a sharp knife is dangerous... crossing a busy highway without looking is dangerous... modifying source code is about as NON dangerous an activity as you could dream up.
2) unwarranted and inaccurate personal attacks
> These folks are some of the same great people
> who are supposed to be working for you anyway,
> plus a smattering of teenagers too young to work
> at Redmond, hackers, virus creators, and a
> menagerie of others with whom you will feel
> great pride in entrusting your IT
> infrastructure.
Wow, you just managed to insult the entire open source community in one
drop of the hat... a community which happens to include many professional software engineers, working for respected firms such as IBM, Red Hat, SGI, Novell, Mandrakesoft, Sun Microsystems, etc.
I suppose you believe Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox to be "others with whom you will feel great pride in entrusting your IT infrastructure," eh?
Oh, and you make look around the Princeton campus sometime... I'm pretty sure you'll find quite a number of members of the open source community there, both students and faculty / staff members.
3) red herrings and unrelated rambling galore...
no quote necessary... this bullet basically summarizes your entire article.
In short, you sir, are either a flaming idiot, or the first Slashdot troll to get hired by Princeton and allowed to publish obvious flamebait in Syllabus. If this was an intentional troll, I must say, it was a masterful one. If you actually meant any of that drivel however, I would suggest you leave the IT industry and take up something you are competent at.
// TODO: Insert Cool Sig
I am Surangus Aboogi, Finance minister for King tutako of Nigeria. I have recently been ordered to flee the country with our nation's riches to protect them from the rebels. I need your help to hold these funds. if you could please provide me with our account information, I will be depositing 1 million dollars in it as soon as I receive your reply. please hurry.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
This is so ridiculous I find it hard to believe that "the manager of technology strategy and outreach at Princeton University" is serious. I almost think it could be a parody of a parody, showing just how ridiculous arguments against open source etc can be.
(can I get an AMEN!)
I betcha this guy moonlights at Forbes.
And this is the reply I received:
"I am out of the office from Monday, November 3 thru Friday, November 7 returning
on Monday 11/10/03....."
I think Howard will have a full mailbox come November 10th.
"Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
Danger, danger! Run Will Robinson, RUN!
KFG
he said we are
"...distracted by alcohol, sports, or the acquisition of potential mates." Distracted by sports?!?
They want their brain cell back!
Cheers
Stor
"Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
Maybe he just got scammed by one Nigerian too many and it pissed him off.
> a smattering of teenagers too young to work at Redmond,
Nope. I hit the big 50 in a couple of years. Still have a punch card hanging in my office as a reminder of "the old days".
> hackers,
No again. The company I work for makes network security software.
> virus creators,
Nope. See above.
> and a menagerie of others with whom you will feel great pride in entrusting your IT infrastructure.
Gee, the Air Force let me write software to target ICBMs and build radar systems, the Navy let me build radar system, for the Army it was logistics and air defense command and control software, I've also written software for maintaining civilian airliners and I now work for a company that makes really good money selling the network monitoring software I help create. Menagerie is a funny word to use to describe a group of people with this kind of credentials, but, maybe he was at a loss for words.
Are we sure Laura DiDio didn't just take on another pseudonym?
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
Ben
In fact a lot of software came via open source development particularly at universities.
Where did Emacs originate? Vi? Sendmail? Big chunks of Unix? Programmers many at universities "scratching an itch"
This includes Princeton, btw. I used to use one of their editors.
-- I may be paranoid, but I'm still alive
manage
It isn't every day that somebody admits he's too clueless to deal with real software that doesn't come with corporate contractors to do all his work for him.
We at Princeton have been getting grief from OIT for quite a while now, and I've always suspected there were persons of dubious intelligence hiding in the hierarchy. It's nice to have confirmation.
The CREN "Tech Talks" that Strauss has hosted have been sponsored by Microsoft. A Softie probably took him out for lunch, he felt good and sleepy and wrote this.
There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
Strauss is such a snot.
I work in the Engineering Quadrangle at Princeton. Linux is around, sometimes covertly,
the happy replacement for all those fubared Win2000 installs the CIT techs punch out. But then again, check out systems like hats.princeton.edu (running RedHat) that run pricey MatLab and Mathematica on an Nigerian scam money funded OS. In your a^Hear Mr. Strauss.
Oh, and as a LUG/IP member, I can say that we aren't affliated with Princeton University, just with the Central NJ area and that the meetings used to be in a bar just off campus.
Me physicist. Me make rockets.
is a lesson in the difference between free as in beer and free as in speech.
Yes, some people do get the product for free. That does not mean that some programmers were not paid for their services. Ask any Red Hat or SuSE employee.
The freedom Mr. Strauss does not understand is the freedom to improve given with the software. Not only the right to improve the software, but to improve the community by the giving of ones services and improvement in ones self by learning from previous programmers.
I hope that this is satire, as some of you have posted. Otherwise this serves as a sure sign of failure in our education system. The fact that someone this closed minded, short sighted and greedy is teaching our future generations is a tragedy.
If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. - James Madison
He shows an utter lack of grasp on all the ideas behind Free/OSS, and for that I'll have his head
All the cluelessness rolls over and becomes true.
They can develop and run your systems on their own dorm computers where their cyber sapien friends can do quality assurance with your confidential data.
Actually, that's a pretty good idea.
If they use encryption, and the dorm network is stable, letting students develop might be better than Microsoft "security".
In fact, I'm writing code for an application running on a university server with the CVS repository accessed through a team member's dorm computer.
I back up the documentation to my dorm computer.
It works.
But we have the good sense to not test the system with real confidential data. Usernames are in the style of "Eli. T. Haksor, Apartment 3, West Deepfrier 4, 1337 Elit Ness"
Irene KHAAAAAAN!
his computer crashes next time, imagine what the geeks will do to it.
Did Glenn Beck rape and kill a girl in 1990? gb1990.com
It's also at the bottom of the article, but I suppose a lot of people reading these comments probably didn't RTFA. If you're into psychotic rants it would be a great read.
Have you tried Linux yet?
Now, I don't know his personal views on Open Source, but I do know that his voice would carry considerable weight on this matter, for the following reasons:
Ok, so what do I conclude from the above points? Well, Open Source is essentially one possible implementation of cooperative economics, and therefore should produce superior results per effective dollar spent than the competitive model.
Secondly, the idea of not getting in each other's way (very nicely summarized in the movie, btw, even though I doubt it's quite how events were in real life!
Third, IBM and SGI are in business to make money. They don't exist because of some idealistic notion. Ergo, their embracing Open Source is because they believe there's gold in dem dere hills. And, again, you see cooperation. This time over NUMA. Technically competing companies working together so that everyone gains, and so that their energies can be directed to useful ends.
A summary for those who detest my long-winded style: The manager's view contradicts those with money, those with experience at the top of industry, and those with knowledge of how things work. I'll side with the ones in the know, until I'm given a damn good argument as to why not. And FUD ain't cutting it.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
source:
http://www.marietta.edu/~mcevents/IMC_2_12_03.pdf
manager of Technology Strategy and Outreach at Princeton University.
A graduate of Drexel University and Carnegie Mellon University
previously employed by the Johnson Space Center of NASA and by Bell Telephone Laboratories
And the scariest one of all:
Strauss has authored several IT courses and is an information technology consultant for many companies and universities.
Yikes!
One point Howard failed to mention was the superior coding ability of the student programmers who obtain higher levels of focus and creativity through their daily intake of illicit drugs ;-)
Who is this Strauss guy? Is he yet another student-turned-teacher that has no real world experience? Nothing chaps my hide more than perpetual academics, who have never built or run a successful company preaching their superior wisdom and insight on business development.
Take a look at this guy - He can't even select a decent hairpiece. I certainly wouldn't trust his technical advice.
hmm well i just send a carefully worded flame to his other address (listed at end of article).
i hope whoever howard@princeton.edu is he has his asbestos underware on!
I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
Do I detect a bitter msft owner
Being tenured doesn't grant any cred. outside the circle of mastrubatory influence and purile dread. In fact, his riff on the supposed character of people who invest heavily in the lucre of repuation and respect (currency of the Free/Open software community) seeks to cut both ways. Not only does he seek to belittle the contributions of wise people who wanted to free themselves and all humanity from the yoke of software copyrights and restrictions, but businesses and individuals who he seems to think are fools for using such contributions.
As I read the piece the one thing that set my teeth on edge was the tone of incredulity. The characterization that somehow someone who hasn't possibly toiled away within the system that this professor holds near and dear and worked hard to obfuscate and proprietize under the auspices of corporate/academic credibility couldn't possibly create something meritable. Is there a professional wrestler with a penguin fetish we could convince to elbow drop a professor?
What I think we're seeing is an affirmation in the circles of higher education; that they still hold themselves as being the one true way to enlightenment. That they are the anointed high-priests, keepers of sacred seal and maintainers of the divine covenant (Touch the PDP-11 and repeat after me! By the sacred printwheel do we solemnly swear...in the amber glow of the vacuum tubes and by the robes I wear, to sell what I know to the corporate line, to booby trap it all and make it mine, to pass it on when I'm finally paid, with backdoors aplenty, with keys I can trade, I'll deal with evil if it gets me laid, pays for the toys to ply my trade, by this I swear in this hallowed place, with a fez on my head and a smile on my face)
--forgive me my ad-hoc poetry gentle reader--
I would say they are highly-overvalued now, in an age where there's an API that fully embaraces the toiled for grails of sparse-matricies, linked-lists, and a sort for every season. Free/Open-sourcery may be creating wraiths of the instituions, draining them of their art, making it public-domain so that the much feared/maligned hacker-student-rogue programmer-anyman will touch once-sacred code with un-anointed hands.
More squeaking from the ivory towers.
To which I say...
Every new form of media has it's own Requirimento
I am out of the office from Monday, November 3 thru Friday, November 7 returning on Monday 11/10/03. Contact Lee Varian (lvarian@princeton.edu) or Sally Van Fleet (sallyv@princeton.edu (609)258-2908)if you need to contact me.
Please leave your message and I will handle it when I return. I may not be able to check my e-mail reliably while I'm away.
-Howard
How about we give him a call, after all, I'm not a virus writer... Maybe I should install Windows ME?
Commercial software provides only two things open source software can't provide - software that is extrememly difficult to create and has a small target audience (think very high end engineering CAD software or exteremely complex movie rendering) and someone to sue if the product doesn't work as specified.
The silly thing is that usually regular users get no warranty at all (if not national laws require them). Warranties may be available for a higher price. And indemnifications against lawsuits are almost non-existent.
Irene KHAAAAAAN!
I just did a little Google Search and it turns out that Mr. Strauss has given quite a few talks on Internet technology in the past. He also co-Hosted a talk titled Research Computing and Linux Clusters. So which side of the fence are you on Howie?
Nothing hampers a programmer's creativity as much as a compiler.
With the fall of the Soviet Union, the meaning of the word Capitalism seems to be going through a shift. Increasingly, it seems to mean compulsory competition across a deliberately unleveled playing field. Everyone has to play a game they know is rigged, or they are Un-American. They HAVE to be going for profit. They HAVE to limit their methods to ones that don't actually have a snowball's chance in hell of out competing the established firms. Both charity and real innovation are equated with communism or worse yet some sort of generic un-being-like-real-mericuns-ism. Your last comment is especially meaningful. This isn't just about Microsoft vrs Linux, it's moving towards an idea that any not-for-profit act endangers the 'right' of slected entities to have a guarenteed profit.
Who is John Cabal?
For a closed-source project one cannot trust what the software's coding standards were. Open source projects' coding standards are there for everyone to see. A closed-source vendor often has no incentive to improve coding standards or quality, since they get to charge you for support for bugs that bad coding standards lead to. Why is modifying source code dangerous? If you can see the source, you can justify the cost of changes needed for some feature or bugfix. If you can't see it, the vendor can make up a high price estimate. Version control can be provided by a mature open-source tool called cvs.
I think the author is hopelessly confused. "Open source" software does not magically kill off third-party experts who can be paid to plan, do quality assurance and work on the code. In fact, because it's open, it is easier to become an expert!
Open source projects can always be documented because someone could always figure out the missing pieces from the source code, which is much easier than trying to figure out from binaries. Linux Documentation Project, for example, is a great resource. Microsoft's MSDN documentation is so poor that its online version often fails to find function names that I can directly browse to! Don't believe me? Go to MSDN Library and search for GetDiskFreeSpaceEx. No matches. Now browse to it by going up to the top level, Windows Development, Windows Base Services, Files and I/O, SDK Documentation, Storage, Storage Reference, Disk Management Reference, Disk Management Functions. See? It's right there! There are also countless errors in "quality" documentation like MSDN that don't get fixed.
Anyway, this just shows again that, especially in the world of tech, brand name inteligence, i.e., Ivy Leage TM and MIT etc. are not always reality bound.
Since the "at" link in the story is to a former version of my homepage (~ferguson is my dad), I think I can comment on this.
I don't know WHERE this guy is coming from, unless its satire, in which case, it is poorly executed. Linux is quite prevalent on campus. In fact, OIT (central campus network folks) had to drop support for the public Irix cluster because of support costs, while the public Linux and Solaris clusters are chugging along just fine.
Yes, students have been using it on campus forever, but the scientists and engineers like it quite a bit too. A 1999 report by a Faculty Sub-Committee writes, "Linux is emerging as a widely-used version of Unix. At this time there are over 600 Linux systems registered at Princeton, and the number is growing rapidly. One of the advantages of Linux is that it makes it possible to take advantage of the economies of Intel-based computing and a full-featured operating system with a complete set of high quality software tools available gratis. We recommend that consideration be given to expanding the university DeSC program to include the Linux operating system as an option." [DeSC is the Desktop Systems Council, which oversees official university desktop computers.] So Slashdot crowd, remember who makes the real decisions at a private university: the tenured faculty, end of story. (NB, how many slashdot stores have been posted about Prof. Felton and his group? They do plenty of work with OSS.)
OIT has included Linux-specific information for a couple years now in its knowledgebase, complete with setup information, network configuration & printing, mounting the campus samba servers, backing up to the central Tivoli servers, etc. etc. They've also held seminars touting the benefits of OSS for departments; I know, because I've been to them.
So Linux isn't in trouble at Princeton. Guess this oddball found a pulpit from which to buck the herd.
object tag.
"We may have to give up project planning, quality control, coding standards, accountability, version control, and support, but it's FREE and we get the ability to modify the source code ourselves, something that is extremely dangerous to do, was discredited decades ago, and few people do anyway." As we all know, long ago, modifying source was shown to be the leading cause of bugs. It's about time someone put two and two together!
For example, apparently math isn't that important: $8 per (extra hour) meal * 365 days (who works an entire year) = $2,920 (about $3,000 a year) Perhaps that was 3 meals a day? $8 * 3 * 365 = $8,760 (about $9,000 a year)
Also, a fair amount of this article seems to be aimed at IT professionals. However, unlike desktop users, a considerable amount of work is done with UNIX based systems; even some of those crazy Free Operating Systems are used. It sure is a good thing that those choosing to work with some certain quality software outside of the free domain are getting what they paid for. After all, it's not like there was a security frenzy for both desktop users and ITs last summer or anything.
You see? Obviously this is just a joke or a simple story taken out of context. I'm sure you can find several other examples that would support this claim. (documentation, usability, standardization, etc)
Yeah, or... something.
"Is not a sentence" is not a sentence. Well damn.
Yes it can be a bit of a bother to drop in an open source solution but the same also holds true of licensed software. You don't just sqat and shit an oracle installation. You don't just install Windows and have the computers magically doing everything you want them to.
There is no magic bullet that instantly makes the computers do everything you want them to. Not in the Open Source world and not in the commercially licensed software world. Unless you want to make a slashcode site. That really is as easy as "apt-get install slash apache-perl".
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Does a whiff of Nigerian snake oil tickle the nostrils?
Timothy: I wonder if THIS will piss them off! What, they are just making jokes? damn it!
It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
still if you had a link it would be doubble plus good.
good thing im here to find this link
"Join this free, live audiocast during which Paul Hill of MIT and
David Bodnar of the University of Colorado, Boulder, will be
interviewed about the state of their institution's planning and
deployment of Windows 2000. Richard Jones will be guest
co-hosting along with regular Technology Anchor, Howard Strauss
Thursday, November 30 at 4 pm Eastern Time
Sponsored by Microsoft..."
I knew it had to boil down to microsoft.
oh and another
"Our Sponsor for this Event
Microsoft is committed to helping colleges and universities build 21st Century Campuses in the Connected Learning Community by continuing to provide them with rich technology tools. Some Microsoft Web links of potential interest include:"
can you say vested interest?
I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
This article is insulting to every IT professional, whether they are using open source software or not. No responsible professional would rely on untested, uncontrolled software. It doesn't matter whether it was developed in house (for free or at great cost) or acquired externally (for free or at great cost). People using open source software generally follow the same process as people using Microsoft, Oracle and other more expensive options. I would be surprised if things were any different at Princeton.
...when one has to wonder if the cliche about certain academics living in hermetically sealed reality-deprived bubbles of their own deluded design is true. this would be one of those times. the mans screed reads like a litany of myopic thinking and a stunning lack of anything resembling a grasp of the topic at hand. Who the hell let this guy past the editing desk?
when Microsoft visited its library!!!
The biggest problem this guy has with Open Source is that he seems to have been presented with a lot of pitch and little substance, in his job. When I worked at my college doing IT work, I attended the pitches by WebCT and Blackboard and saw some pretty solid seeming systems there. Open Source simply can't compete with those applications in a manner that school systems need. We may like to think of college as a place where faculty and staff are constantly innovating and striving to save a buck, but we also need to keep in mind that things often come down to one simple question: What is the easiest thing for us to maintain in the long term?
My college, for example, couldn't afford any option other than Microsoft based PC's. There was no budget for it, the faculty didn't have time to learn it, and even the computer course staff thought of Linux as a toy. (I went to a seriously shitty school) Open source advocates don't even need to target someone like the author of this article, because he isn't really the person or application open source is best suited to.
The strengths of open source are only there for those that have the power to enable themselves to take advantage of it. If he has a dedicated staff willing and able to take the next step and design what they need using open source tools, that's a wonderful thing and he should at least consider it. Being that he's at Princeton, he may indeed have that option. But most likely, that option isn't out there, and so open source solutions intended for that purpose need to be bulletproof, -simple- to use and complete. I don't see something like WebCT being implemented and supported under an open source license without a corporate entity set up to manage the project and provide documentation and support for a fee.
He spreads FUD, but only because he seems to have had people blowing smoke up his ass about how awesome open source is and how he absolutely has to use it to save money. Yes, there are costs to open source if you can't simply use the out-of-the-tarball product you download from Sourceforge. Yes, it is incorrectly targeted as "free" due to the unfortunate difference between beer and speech. But no, it is not inferior in any technical manner other than the fact that enterprise-adequate support for any given open source project only lasts as long as interest from the community that produces it. No more, no less.
My own pointless vanity vintage computing page
That article uses some of the most strained and unrelated analogies I have ever encountered.
The simple fact that escapes the Professor and others who don't understand free software, is that there are virtually no manufacturing (duplication) costs for reproducing software. It is therefore possible to design or author software once and reproduce it infinitely especially where the costs of reproduction and distribution are bourne by the copier. Moreover, the previous design and authoring efforts are not wasted but build upon successive itterations.
Instead of explaining this further, let's use an analogy (since the professor likes analogies so much). Instead of horribly flawed analogies comparing open source to Nigerian email fraud let us use a genuinely equivalent analogy.
Imagine if Ford motor company or anyone else could make vehicles for free at the press of a button. That's right, just infinitely replicate any vehicle you come across just by pressing a button and coming back a few minutes later jumping in and driving away.
How would this change the business of vehicle manufacture?
Given this situation let us further imagine that Ford still sold vehicles and moreover that the vast majority of people on the highways drove around in Fords and agreed not to copy any of the vehicles despite their innate ability to be copied. You couldn't even tinker with the engines or change the oil never mind make a whole new copy of a car.
Now given this unresaonable restriction on the way the universe works naturally (in our scenario), wouldn't an enterprising bunch of mechanics team together to design a vehicle that anyone could duplicate freely, and wouldn't others quickly join to improve that vehicle from a primitive wagon into fine vehicles of all descriptions from sportscars to towncars to SUVs that anyone could copy in order to use the highway freely.
Now realize that this IS the nature of software and wonder why Professors still foolishly try to impose the business models and thinking processes suited to traditional manufacturing industries onto a software industry that so naturally matches the above scenario of infinite free replication and incremental creative design.
Yes, my university uses Chalk, a product by Blackboard. It was deployed last year, and horrified us all. I will grant that, to the best of my knowlege, no open-source alternative exists, but to say that this is supposedly quality software is mind-boggling.
Clearly, the author does not think very highly of the students who attend a supposedly exclusive university. A shame indeed. Despite the fact that I have little love for Princeton in my heart, I'm pretty sure that a few of their CS majors could whip up something better than Chalk in a couple of months.
It does, however, raise the issue that a free software alternative does not exist in most of these cases. This situation would be easily remedied if the university opted to have an opensource project developed.
Oh, and the best part of the article was that the entire point was likening free software to the Nigerian scam... now what is it precisely that the open-source community is trying to scam, I wonder?
I'm posting AC because I'm at Princeton. I did some checking around. According to our campus directory, he works in the Enterprise Infrastructure Services department of our IT division (OIT--Office of IT). And while the article credits him as "manager of technology strategy", I cannot find him on the OIT org. chart that you can find in our OIT's annual report. He must be some underling who's bitter.
I intend to write his boss. I mean, I appreciate satire and parody, but as everyone has pointed out, his article is just malicious and factually false. It's filled with ad hominem attacks at students, hackers, the whole open source community. All based on a ridiculous metaphor that doesn't hold. Hell, it doesn't even make sense. If he hates young people so much, why in the world would he work in an "outreach" capacity at a university?!
Interestingly, his department is responsible for serving the notorious PeopleSoft management and purchasing software here....roundly hated by every administrative person I know at Princeton. I only mention this because he specifically mentions PeopleSoft. OIT at Princeton is definitely a mixed bag--some outstanding services, people, and liberties (including, yes, plenty of linux support)--and some horrible policies and red tape (like, charging for every ethernet box they activate--both for students and in the depts!--AND charging for every device attached to the network! They nickle and dime like crazy).
A couple of things jump out right away.
First is that he is obviously in the middle of justifying some huge course management purchase. Good luck, bud. Almost all proprietary software can be viewed as over-priced for one reason or another.
Secondly, he doesn't explain at all what is wrong with any Open Source software. Not a single example.
This line says a lot about his backwards head-in-the-sand view: We cannot avoid the high cost of high-quality IT no matter how temptingly Mrs. Ahmed beckons us with her siren song.
Fantastic stuff!
... Mr. Strauss's most recent achievement on campus was the negotiating a discount for Microsoft products. And he's ticked off because the work he's done convincing the faculty (that's the ``outreach'' part of his job, eh?) to do all the lectures using Powerpoint and require students to turn in assignments only in Word format will have gone to waste.
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
The man's brain must be a FUDsponge.
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools The way to dusty death. --Will
Yeah right. It's got to be a scam. C'mon, a guy sweats for years to create a work of art, using tools and equipment he had to pay, and it's free? Anybody can come and see it? Riiiight. It has to be a scam. Maybe they'll sell you the souvenir picture or the history book on Amazon. Bastards.
So instead I went to a matinee of the movie "Waterworld". All that water, it was really feeling expensive.
--
Mad science! Robots! Underwear! Cute girls! Full comic online! http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/
Yeah, you make a good point - but in some ways, a little bit of segmentation happens because it actually makes the most sense.
EG. The stereotype of the Mac getting used for "media" is really no accident. I just got the latest issue of Macworld, and even in their comparisons of the new G5's vs. the top-end WinTel offerings, they decided that the Mac had a big lead in such things as video editing and graphics manipulation, while in apps like MS Office, the PC trounced it in performance. The Mac is superior at these media-related tasks, so it's the best tool for those jobs.
Still, the whole racket of heavily discounting software and/or hardware for students seems to be more effective than one might at first think. Maybe it cashes in on the optimism of most students. ("I may as well take advantage of this great deal on these MS products now - and after 4 or 5 years, I'll get a job making enough money that paying full price for upgrades won't be a big deal by then....")
I couldn't help but notice, this guy put "WebCT" and "quality software" in the same sentence. Just because the software (online teaching suppliment) sells a lot doesn't make it good. I've seen a hell of a lot of bad free software, but never as bad as WebCT.
This guy wants so much to work at Microsoft. It's not even funny.
I really can't believe the arrogance of this dude. Does he think that because he's at Princeton, that means that everything he says is verbatim truth? Princeton isn't even on the map of top CS/Engineering schools, rather it's a stuffy law/liberal arts school. It's no wonder why you don't see people from Carnegie-Mellon, MIT, Caltech, University of Illinois, RHIT, etc. blasting open source software.
The guy isn't credible, even if he is the head of the "Technology business stick it up your ass" department. If I want to hear bad things of open source, I'll wait until the real doctors wiegh in. They won't, probably because a lot of them participate in the production of said software.
You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
But he's 30 years too late. He's predicting the past, and getting that wrong is just stupid.
... is actually a customer of mine. I can't believe she'd go behind my back and try to smuggle the money through some idiot at Princeton. She's trying to cut me out of my share of the money!!!
Disclaimer: Packetvision, being a parody site, doesn't always work as expected. As such, your results may vary.
Note: It's funny... laugh.
-- Stu
/. ID under 2,000. I feel old now.
See link mentioned above for a small taste of the idiocy you'll encounter, if you've not already had a taste.
The real scam artist here is Howard, who has managed to hold down this job at Princeton, of all places. To have a managerial position, apparently all one needs is the ability to write jargon-laden papers and know how to turn one's nose up at undergrads. Thinking is optional. Insight is unnecessary. Knowledge of the subject matter is most likely beyond a manager's grasp, even if the manager is supposedly a learned man. Rather than research the subject matter, go with one's gut, write about whatever one thinks is true.
Move along; nothing to see here.
Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
how can one man memorize so much fud? truly outstanding effort, mr. princeton.
It is unfortunate that the first introduction to your publication for the ten's of thousands of slashdot.org readers is Howard Strauss' ignorant rant about open source software. Mr. Strauss has attempted to portray the open source community as disorganized, dishonest and disreputable. This could not be farther from the truth. A quick visit to netcraft.com would show that the open source web browser, apache, hosts the vast majority of the web sites in the world and it's share is increasing. If Mr. Strauss had any hands on experience with Linux or BSD Unix, he would know that they have proven much more reliable than their commercial counterparts. It might interest Mr. Strauss to learn that the IBM corporation has invested millions in Linux and runs Linux on it's flagship mainframe systems. Linux is also used in mission critical systems by companies like Google and Akamai. (not to mention Princeton Univ.)
The biggest problem with Mr. Strauss' rant is that not one example or shred of evidence is offered to support his argument. It is unfortunate that such unsubstantiated conjecture passes for journalism on your web site.
...a smattering of teenagers too young to work at Redmond, hackers, virus creators, and a menagerie of others with whom you will feel great pride in entrusting your IT infrastructure...
Sounds to me like someone from Redmond has been sucking this guy's weiner, stroking his balls, and telling him he's hung like a bear.
Spread the RC luvin'
I'm a little confused by the notion that Free (freedom) software is considered free (no cost). Sure, generally it doesn't cost money, but there are other costs. As an open source user, I have free (no money) access to the software, with the hopeful expectation that I'll report bugs and so on to improve it more. However, because I have some programming skills and a desire to contribute back, this is where the cost that I pay comes in. I spend time helping improve programs that do almost what I want/need, in return for which, other people improve it also, and I get the benefit of that.
This cost may be optional, but it is there nonetheless. The programs I like the most I have paid for by offering my bugfinding time, and developer skills.
Bob: You wanted to be Krusty's sidekick since you were five! What
about the buffoon lessons, the four years at clown college.
Cecil: I'll thank you not to refer to Princeton that way.
Freevo - Linux Multimedia Jukebox
He fails to mention that these teenage hackers are more qualified, despite their lack of degrees, than most of the Redmond coders.
The Code Ninja is swift with his tool, precise in his delivery, and deadly accurate in his execution.
The Office of Information Technology at Princeton is divided between thoughtful and clueful people who are an absolute pleasure to work with --- and, regrettably, a few people like those who wrote the above article for Syllabus.
If you look beyond the cheap shots at OS/FS, he's defending PeopleSoft, which makes the CRM-like software that runs the University's bureaucratic systems. The company certainly needs some defending. Case in point: up until last year, Princeton course registration was paper-based. Fill out a scan-tron sheet, have your adviser sign it, and take it to the Registrar. Simple, but students complained about the long walks to remote parts of campus.
Last year, the Registrar finally implemented a new computerized system based on PeopleSoft. The steps for a student to register as follows:
Maybe I'm not subtle enough, but I fail to see how this represents a step forward. It would seem trivial to save the course information on the registration system so the adviser could approve it with a mouse-click at their meeting with the student. But let me guess --- does PeopleSoft not support that? In fairness, PeopleSoft might support it. But if it did, one wonders why the registrar chose a more inefficient solution. Why a three-way paper-shuffle? Is that what PeopleSoft's "aging, over-21 staff" thought was a good idea?
I will not begrudge Mr. Strauss his vitriol --- he reminds me of the apologists for any broken platform. If you're stuck with it, you might as well at least pretend that you like it, and that the competition is junk.
Also -- I can't help but note the omission of a link to the student-run Linux/Unix Users' Group at Princeton. (Consider this a shameless plug.)
I am mr. howard strauss former manager of technology at prineton univercity and victom of wrongfull termnatian. my university has been taken over by linux zeliots and i need your help... i seek in confidence that you plese assist in my lawsuit angist printon and aid me in investing this us$34,000,000 settlement money. i have resolved to depart 25% of the total sum to you for your assistance in helping pay my legal fees, this transaction secured by your good faith deposit of us$5,000.
</p>
'a smattering of teenagers too young to work at Redmond,'
Wow! When they are that young, they don't yet count as teenagers.
The ______ Agenda
It IS about your article in Syllabus, however. :D
At my time in school (at a less than reputable state U) I found that the true scam artists were in the employ of the University.
Okay! I promised no flames. Sorry.
There were a few other tidbits that I loved:
"Another way to get free software is to have students develop our critical systems."
Or rather, students are paying you to develop the software for you. Yep!
"Schools often provide free food for you and your staff for working meetings during lunch."
Meanwhile, the students (who're helping to pay to keep the lightson...well, yes, more than likely their parents, grants, loans, scholarships, what have you) also have to pay for their meals. Thes eare the same students who're slackjawed cyber-sapiens, unworthy to betrusted with your important tasks. If they're not mature enough to handle important tasks, what's that sayabout Princeton?
Cheers.
Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
ECMAScript is the non-trademark name for standardized JavaScript. SMIL doesn't appear to be supported by Mozilla yet, and I think most of what it can do can be done in ECMAScript + those other technologies (except changeing the volume on sound clips)
There are some out there who say, let's judge what works by looking at the real world. They say, let's look at the successes and the failures and see how it all comes out in the wash. These people have the nerve to say, maybe the best opinions come from those successful in business, those whose asses are on the line, those who will buy a second house or mortgage the first one -- all depending on whether or not their business strategy is sound.
Would you believe these full time business men and women? Would you be so foolhardy? Would you guide your ship by the example of those businessmen, by those who do not get paid if it turns out they are full of shit?
Of course not!
You, smart fella that you are, take your business advice from someone who will keep his job regardless if someday he develops a crackpot theory that spaghetti is better than OOP, regardless if someday he publishes an entire book detailing how COBOL is the best language ever! You, oh wise one, will give deference to the opinion of a man who could only lose his job for sleeping with students -- and only then if they get pissed off and tattle. You, observant and calculating, will not take advice from the businessman who does not give advice, but who only betrays his strategy by doing business openly and by quietly pocketing customer dollars. No, Sir! You will only take advice from those learned gentlemen who do nothing but give advice, for you, Sir, know that they are great, learned Professors. And who on earth, you ask yourself, would profess something and dare to be talking out his ass?
_______________
On a serious note, having been deep in the bowels of academia, I can tell you this. The only metrics of note in academia are publishing, peer recognition, and, occasionally, student feedback. No one ever gets published by saying, "Yep. The stuff we taught last year is still good." No one ever gets peer recognition by saying, "Yep. Still good." Student feedback isn't affected by what you teach, only how you grade and how much work you give. So what gets a professor recognition and approval is denying something else, someone's work, someone's theory, everyone's work, everyone's theories but your own, etc. A theory that no one has thought of is good. A theory that no one has thought of and which, if true, invalidates the theories of all your peers at other institutions is best. Only in some disciplines and in some cases does the chance of being proven false raise much of a spectre. Outside of the hard sciences, you can spew whatever crap you want and who's to say your wrong? So what if you think Chaucer is a misogynist and Open Source is a fool's paradise? Both opinions are pretty subjective and leave lots of wiggle room. If someone replies that Chaucer donated religiously to a widow's fund, you say, so what? He did it out of spite. If Novel's earnings rise for five years in a row after they buy SuSe, you say, just you wait until year six! And even if you are proven blatantly wrong, so what? Who follows up that? The story about the asteroid that might hit earth is always bigger than the story that it didn't. And anyway, next year's flood of contrived controversy issuing forth from the desks of your peers will drown out your personal load of horseshit.
As an example, look at New Math. What was wrong with Old Math, you know, the same math they taught to a generation of engineers who put us on the moon? Nothing. There was nothing wrong with it. Except that if you are taking a Ph.D. in Math Education, it doesn't look good to have a dissertation two sentences long: "Good job. Keep it up."
Everybody has an agenda. And it's good to be skeptical about agenda which appear to be altruistic. IBM, Novel, etc. -- there's nothing altruistic about their agenda. Their agenda is $$$, same as Microsoft, only they have a different strategy to that money. What is Howard Strauss's agenda? Is it enlightening the masses? Is it enlightening the CEO, the CIO? Is he doing this to enlighten anyone
Yes linux is a plot by COMMUNISTS to take over the world. No, this is not a parody.
Linux and the GPL, A Hard Look at Leftist Software Development
This is obviously pro-Microsoft propaganda. I cannot see how anyone who has done their research can make such mindless exaggerations.
Pesudo-authoritative spin like this is part of the new marketing model where products are sold like politicians get votes: disparage your opponent rather than address the issues. Because if we actually raise the issues, one might find that Open Source products are often better-supported, more-reliable, more secure, and more cost-effective.
Clearly Mr Strauss isn't doing his job as manager of technology strategy and outreach.
Who exactly is he reaching out to with his blatant insult of many free software developers. I produce quality products during my spare time as a hobby and during the day time I have a professional job. I for one call for Mr. Strauss' immediate resignation. He is clearly short sighted doesn't see the big picture. He is certainly not an individual I would trust to manage my technology outreach program.
-----
One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
So are we going to get up in arms everytime someone dares bash Linux? That is far too many unnecessary tears to shed. There are people that don't like Linux out there.
Deal with it. I really hope some of you don't have such a fragile ego, but the comments are making me wonder.
Are the things he's listing bad, or is he getting it half right, or... what?
--- 11 meters/second, or 24 miles per hour - the airspeed velocity of an unladen European swallow. Really.
Ok, so an e-mail offering free software might sound too good to be true. But how would an e-mail offering exorbitantly priced software under draconian EULA terms and conditions sound?
--
James G
The world is full of loons who love to shoot off their mouths, and if you paid attention to every one of them you'd never have time to do anything worthwhile.
reading this who thought it might be intended as satire?
His portals presentationis a couple of years old and seriously dates itself with the following:
Loading the page with Safari gives me this: Slide #5: 1) Nasser got the boot by Bill Ford for taking his eye off the auto business
2) Wine.com merged with wineshopper.com which then folded, and the domain & other assets were purchased by eVineyard which continues to use the wine.com address
3) Digiscents isn't around, either, having folded the following year
If nothing else, he's consistent at quoting duds.
Verity Stobb got to the Nigerian e-mail scam as parody first in a recent DDJ column -- the parody had SCO trying to scam Microsoft to raise funds to pursue you-know-what -- check it out and tell me you didn't LOL.
...that this article is hosted on a server running Apache?
Give shelter to the free loading homeless taking profit away from hard working landlords, and soup kitchens that take profit away from restaurants giving free food to people who should be out working for a living. And who pays for all this free food and shelter, all those saps who buy the 'helping others' scams that the charities use to get money out of people.
People in the UK (where I live) even expect that there should be free medical care taking away profit from the private healthcare companies.
And what about Live Aid, all those musicians that put on a worldwide concert and raised hundreds of millions for those freeloaders in Africa who were too lazy to to get a college education and go work for Microsoft.
This sort of article really makes me angry because it gives credibility to the stupid anti GPL retoric of Microsoft and SCO. Unfortunately as soon as the first article arives that claims "Bin Laden uses Linux", then Bush and co will try to ban GPL software as part of the war on terror.
I make a living through installing and supporting "free software". The freedom is independance from Microsoft, freedom to modify the code, and maybe even freedom from viruses, but thats another posting
Dang... And all this time, I thought the great open-source software used by many academic institutions (TeX) was written by an esteemed computer science scholar...
Mr. Strauss,
You *are* kidding, right?
Many of those spams to which you compare open source software are now being sent using mass-mailing viruses. Funny thing about viruses is that they usually exploit security flaws - stupid things like buffer overruns - which are by and large eliminated by the peer review process in open source software. (Never mind the poor Windows security model which allows these viruses to do actual damage.)
The writers of open-source software, which you dismiss as being a bunch of children, include organizations like IBM and NASA's JPL. The rogue programmers at NASA must alone be accountable for half the world's virus problems.
I know that when I reboot my FreeBSD webservers (which happens only when the power goes out or I have to vacuum the inside of the computer), the list of credits in the dmesg as it starts up makes me seriously consider how intelligent the choice of open source was, in the face of the legendary reliability, security and standards-compliance of Microsoft IIS.
Not for one second would any reasonable person suggest that student labor is a suitable choice for managing proprietary university systems. But that wouldn't be open source anyway. Nor would there be enough open source interest in developing systems like WebCT (which I haven't personally found to work that well anyway, being all too familiar with administration of WebCT 3.2).
Open source solutions like Linux remain generally unsuitable for the desktop - the very things which make it excel in a server environment are the very things which hobble its mass acceptance and usefulness as a desktop operating system. But that will be fixed before too long.
Where open source currently excels - and has almost since the first newsgroup message where someone said, "You know, I think you could improve your program by..." - is in the implementation of the open standards-based systems which are the very infrastructure of the network.
Open source isn't free. Download a source tarball. Compile it. Use it. Enjoy it. And if you find a feature is broken or missing, your contribution will be to edit the source code and send it back so that other people can share the changes.
And so what if a 14-year-old kid with a cable modem reviews the source, finds a bug or missing feature, and contributes a patch? That patch is still subject to the same peer review process. And it's still public, so that it can be documented by others if not by him.
The most important thing I learned as a student in university is that higher education is not a barometer of intelligence, creativity or aptitude, but a barometer of diligence and funding. Over the years since, I've hired several gifted programmers with ability far eclipsing many of the university graduates I've employed. Mostly they were gifted programmers because that's what they loved to do... kind of like a 14-year-old kid who may have started into C++ when he was 10, has a natural mind for developing algorithms, and is capable of developing efficient software while freshly-minted science degrees are still writing bubble sorts.
Frankly, the ignorance displayed in your article is an embarrassment to you, your professional reputation, and your university.
[signed in real name]
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
And you end up with bespoke software that doesn't depend on some corporates willingness to conntinue to support or upgrade it.
Nowhere does anyone suggest that good development procedures should be ignored.
Of course if YOU end up with unreadable code that noone but the developer can change then its YOU that fucked up.
I suspect thats the major reason why IT managers don't like free or open source , because they have no-one to blame if its screwed up.
First he was told Linux was free and now he's receiving letters from SCO.
You know he's wishing he didn't put up his email address right about now...
Amazing, something that actually made me de-lurk on Slashdot...
Here is my letter to this guy:
Sir:
I am a graduate student in the Princeton University Physics Department. I came across your article regarding open source software on Syllabus Magazine's web site, in which you do a grave disservice to Princeton University's reputation of technical excellence. Allow me to elaborate.
You say, with a tad of sarcasm:
"These folks [open source software developers] are some of the same great people who are supposed to be working for you anyway, plus a smattering of teenagers too young to work at Redmond, hackers, virus creators, and a menagerie of others with whom you will feel great pride in entrusting your IT infrastructure."
I am interested, then, in how you feel about the Princeton University web servers at www.princeton.edu running Apache, the most well-known open source web server. Apparently [1], Apache has more than 2/3 of the web server market share on the Internet, so someone must trust these people. Of course, the fact that source code is available for open source projects may have something to do with this trust. By the way, how many open source viruses have you seen? (Microsoft Word macros don't count.)
[1] http://www.netcraft.com/
You say:
"We may have to give up project planning, quality control, coding standards, accountability, version control, and support, but it's FREE and we get the ability to modify the source code ourselves, something that is extremely dangerous to do, was discredited decades ago, and few people do anyway."
Really? Who discredited the ability to modify source code? Did I miss a Congressional report or something? I apologize for calling you dead wrong, but in fact the Linux kernel [2], one of the most successful open source projects in existence, has been continually updated and improved since its first release in 1991, all by people with an interest in changing source code. These "dangerous" modifications have strangely made Linux and its BSD Unix cousins more stable than any release of Windows. The open source software development process is self-regulating: stable, good software survives, while low-quality efforts are ignored and drop from the face of the Internet. It is too bad that mediocre commercial software does not do the same, since it is too well-supported by people who will not consider using anything they are not required to pay for.
[2] http://www.kernel.org/
You say:
"We either pay commercial software developers, pay to build it ourselves, or pay the even higher price to manage and maintain FREE open source software."
I don't suppose you are aware of the existence of companies who provide support for open source software. Believe it or not, it is possible to buy a support contract from most major Linux distributors, e.g., [3]. It is even possible to ask (politely) for FREE support on open source message boards, such as [4], where you will usually get far more helpful responses than the standard Microsoft "Have you tried rebooting? Reinstalling?".
[3] http://www.redhat.com/apps/commerce/
[4] http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/
You say:
"Another way to get free software is to have students develop our critical systems," and "You can also get free software developed by having your users develop it for you."
These are ridiculous straw man arguments. No sane system administrator would tell his/her students or users to develop their own softwa
- Kevin B. McCarty
I sent a letter to howard@princeton.edu expressing my thoughts. I suggest all of you do the same. Here's the contents of my letter:
Dear Howard,
I think I speak for all the hard-working members of the open-source community when I say,
"Fuck you."
Sincerely,
Ignorant Aardvark
Cyde Weys Musings - Scrutinizing the inscrutable
Mister Strauss is probably responding, poorly, to some pressure from upper management.
Somebody there heard that free software is great and cheap and thus wanted to cut his budget massively, fire experienced programmers and believe that a few undergraduates can do the same work for cheap.
It is true that you can't get something for nothing, even with free software.
It is also true that it is *possible* (not guaranteed) that you can get more for less money with free software.
Some free software is probably quite high quality---not produced spastically by inexperienced students as Strauss asserts---but other free software is also lower quality too.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
-
Find a clear defect in a Microsoft product. Document it.
-
Call Microsoft (425-882-8080). Try to get it fixed.
-
Record how long it took to get it fixed.
Any questions?"Yes, instead of having highly paid programmers at . . . IBM [or] Sun . . . build your critical university systems,"
You can have highly paid programmers at IBM or Sun build your critical university systems.
I think the man has mental gas, and this is the equivalent of a fart.
After reading it I was let down, a lot of the comments below have talked the article UP. Even with the reports that this article was badly thought out it looks like it was written by somebody on the outside looking in through a media cloud created by SCO, Microsoft and that stupid article on Forbes.
The comments on the "...modify the source code..." statement however are plain idiotic. Give your 2 year old the reiser code and let him type random characters in it, and if it actually compiles run it on your system, if you dare. Sure I could modify the code, and I might not actually destroy all the data on my disk.
The argument "...was discredited decades ago..." is actually based in fact, this is one of the reasons that a consumer video recorder bought now has less buttons on it than it did when you bought your first on 20 years ago. It seems people forget that they can do it, and I can do it, and get it to compile and even run - we can even program the video to record at a specified time - but the accountants, laywers and eldery mothers - not you mum - of this world might not be able to. How many of you know people who don't even use computers for fear of breaking something.
I like my software free, as in speech, and free, as in beer, and contribute on the odd project that warrents the extra work I put in to get it to do what I need. However generally I still browse the code of projects from non reputable sources, just to make sure that it is not free, as in pay in blood. "NYT *cough*"
Most people, and I guess Mr Strauss too, are scared of open-source because it has the reputation of being a load of hackers, and if Mr Strauss wants to, he's free, as in speech, to.
That it is factually wrong can be attributed to the fact that there is just enough FUD about, and possibly a brown envelope here and there, to confuse the "...manager of technology strategy and outreach at Princeton University."
Oh, yeah and stupidity.
'I am become Shiva, destroyer of worlds'
I agree totally that the article is definitely insulting for many contributors.
However, your posting made me think about how people might feel about some opinions/postings about them personally or their community (regardless if they are in the open source camp or not).
Let's ne honest, I have seen many similar insulting postings about people working at Microsoft in general and of course specific Microsoft individuals. I always like to treat ppl with ate least the same respect I would like to receive myself, even if I not agree with them.
I hope we can learn that it is no fun and probably counterproductive to insult people or IT/business practises, especially with so-called facts, and that the open source community would refrain from such postings and instead focus onall those informative, interesting and insughtful postings that makes slashdot and open source such a grand community.
Probably wishfull thinking, but wanted it said anyway.
I thought it was pretty funny - I couldn't help but think that he'd got fed up with students constantly nagging him to move everything over to Linux - "But it's open source", "We shouldn't be giving money to Micro$haft", "It's much better than Windoze", "Anyone with half a brain will find it really easy to use"...
I think eventually he just flipped and had to vent somewhere...
I quote: "We may have to give up project planning, quality control, coding standards, accountability, version control, and support, but it's FREE and we get the ability to modify the source code ourselves, something that is extremely dangerous to do, was discredited decades ago, and few people do anyway."
Doesn't really require a comment. Discredits the author, just shows that he hasn't got a clue. This would not matter, would this person not be in the position he is. That level of incompetence is shocking.
I am a medical doctor with a past history as software engineer. I run a paperless clinic (Dorrigo Medical Centre). There may be situations where patient's lifes depend on what our software does or doesn't do, not just the flawless running of a university department. To us and our patients, robustness and reliability of software is crucial.
Yet we use free software to this purpose, almost to exclusion. Why? Trust. Peer review. Accountability. All issues not covered by shrink wrap software with general disclaimers, where the end user is disempowered to the degree of a mere slave.
We never would pur our patients at risk by using software of a company with such abysmal reputation regarding stability, reliability and security such as Microsoft. We don't trust free software either right our of the box for that matter - but here at least we can investigate and verify, or pay competent people to do it for us.
Shame on this man and his unsubstantiated statements. Reality check strongly recommended (like what software is keeping the Internet alive and working, and what software is running some of the worlds most powerful and expensive computers liek Blue Gene)
Dr Horst Herb, MD
Principal, Dorrigo Medical Centre, Australia
Management Committee Member, General Practice Computing Group
He is fed up with Linux users at University knowing much more about technology than he does, and he needs to maintain some air of being superior to the unpaid mass of students.
Like others, I'm a bit ashamed that such an extended caricature of the free software movement affects me like it does. But it really is remarkable how good Howard is at knocking down straw men. Where does he see anyone advocating free software as a means of avoiding all software costs?
Of course, his point (such as it is) is stronger than that. He seems to say that, if quality matters, one ought to go with proprietary, closed source software. Which prompts the question: Are Apache, Linux, FreeBSD, Emacs[1], LaTeX, etc., merely successful aberrations in an unsuccessful paradigm? (If so, what can one say about security holes in IE, IIS, etc? Are those unfortunate aberrations of a process that is destined to bring out quality software?)
Rather than creating argument after argument explaining why free software will never work, he ought to spend some time explaining why so many users (including technical managers) believe that free software is already working well for them.
[1] Replace with VI depending on your religion.
Phiwum's law: anyone that names an obvious law after himself and then puts it in his own sig is just pathetic.
- Kid's Book
- Crazy Cartoon
- Japanese Cartoon
- English Paper
Anyways, it's worth a look around. Just don't go there when you have alot of homework to do.I AM MRS. HAJIAH HASSAN AHMED, THE WIFE OF LATE CHIEF ALHAJI HASSAN AHMED...I SEEK IN CONFIDENCE THAT YOU ASSIST ME TO INVEST THIS US$34,000,000 ...
Nigerians don't have Arabic names. If you're going to make fun of a people, you should at least try not to look like a jackass!
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
It's not an animation tool, trying to do Homestar Runner in SVG would kill you and be so inefficient that you'd be better off doing the whole thing with animated GIFs.
Flash actually uses Javascript (Their own implementation) as the internal scripting language, although they are planning on moving to a more type safe language (similar to java). That language probably includes all the animation primitives you'd need done in machine code, but there's no reason SVG couldn't include those primitives in their spec as well, eventually.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
... smack of fear of being rendered redundant by "a smattering of teenagers too young to work at Redmond, hackers, virus creators, and a menagerie of others..." ??
Or am I the only one feeling that way?!
I read Howard Strauss' abovementioned article.
Quite apart from the intended insult of the comparison to the Nigerian scamsters, I found his thread quite hard to follow. I guess if he had been Theseus, he would've wound up in the Minotaur's stomach after all.
"Too sophisticated to believe" - precisely what has this got to do with anything, let alone the question at hand? Then we get on to the ridiculous, skipping the sublime with consumate ease ...
"You can get complex systems at absolutely NO COST!" Yes, for a start they enable you to publish Syllabus, using the HTTP transport protocol and the HTML markup language, running on the TCP/IP internetwork connection suite.
"Why buy expensive software or spend millions to develop it yourself?" In relation to the Internet - let's see, I have within my grubby little hands, a book called "The Open Book", which you may or may not have read, written by Marshall T Rose, in which he mentions the Open Systems Interconnect internetworking suite - so far behind it's now been officially abandoned except for highly specialized applications such as the Aeronautical Telecommunication Network. There's nothing so cheap as a product that never gets developed.
"We may have to give up project planning, quality control, coding standards, accountability, version control, and support, but it's FREE and we get the ability to modify the source code ourselves, something that is extremely dangerous to do, was discredited decades ago, and few people do it anyway." Where to start? Has the estimable Howard Strauss ever read "The Mythical Man-Month" by Frederick Brooks? Of IBM's Operating System/360 fame? That does tend to cast doubts on the value of a lot of so-called "project planning". Strangely enough, much of the problems Microsoft has had with Windows over the last few years has been with "quality control" - I don't call soBig's world-wide success a proof that Microsoft has any idea what quality is, let alone how to develop for it. Ditto "coding standards" - and "accountability" - have you managed to get from Microsoft a statement of accountability for its criminal negligence in releasing software that allows such grotesque default breaches of privacy and personal security as Windows? "Version control"? The estimable Howard Strauss is pulling my leg. Perhaps he can tell me what the letters cvs and rcs mean - besides being TLAs? "Support"? Amazing - I bought MS DOS 5.0 when it came out - but Microsoft was never particularly interested in supporting me.
"something that is extremely dangerous to do," for ignorami. I expect every prof and his dog to back me up on this - mind you, I also expect every prof and his dog to back me up when I also say that doing such dangerous things is one way to learn, and extremely fast.
"was discredited decades ago," - by whom, where at, and in relation to what? I suppose that also refers to the TCP/IP suite, the which discredited software you yourself are happily running a magazine site on? And in relation to which, might I add, Microsoft has been happily selling software that is based heavily on said TCP/IP source code - you are at liberty to inform them that half their product lineup has been discredited.
"Another way to get free software is to have students develop our critical systems." Ask the DoD about TCP/IP and the University of California at Berkeley. Even better still, ask Bill Joy, late of Sun Microsystems, about the UoC at Berkeley.
"You can also get free software developed by having your users develop it for you. Really, users are no dummies ..." - only if you don't treat them as
dummies. The estimable Howard Strauss gets funnier and funnier all the time.
Do you think Apple would've got so far along with its Macintosh - if it
hadn't had Hypercard? Here was a nice little utility - users with no
background in programming of cou
heh. I learned how to use a computer on a PCjr. Basically sat down one day when the cable was out and read the DOS 2 manual front to back playing with it.
:)
Didn't have the basic add on stuff (it was like a carterage or something, wasn't it?) so I couldn't make programs and save them -- which is a good thing, since not being able to code that early (I was around 8 or so) ment that I still got to see the sun every so often.
If I interpreted him correctly, his idea seems to be that the lure of open source software is the lack of licensing cost but this lure is too good to be true. As a result IT managers should not shrink from spending large amounts of money on propritary solutions.
He points out that the actual cost of managing and supporting an open source solution is not free. Thank you Capitan Obvious. Any IT manager worthy of the title would understand this. In fact a proper IT manager would factor in support costs, licensing cost, expected lifespan, risk to operation, expected user base, security and many ofther factors before making a decision on a particular solution. In some instances open source would be chosen, in others not.
To make a case against open source software, Strauss could have chosen some of those factors and provided examples where open source failed. He could have provided hypothetical situations in which the ability to modify source would be dangerous. Instead he chose the "Attack by Bad Analogy". While an analogy can be useful to illuminate a line of reasoning in an argument, it is no replacement for an argument. Indeed, an over-reliance on analogy is generaly a signal that the person lacks a clear understanding of the issue being debated. I would certainly expect better from a publication whose intended audience is involved in higher education.
Strauss goes on to discourage the use of student written software and the idea of user customization. Again, lacking any clear argument, anaolgy is used.
The ability to evaluate software solutions and choose the best fit for the problem is a critical skill for IT managers. A useful article could have explored the particular issues associated with evaluating open-source soultions. Instead a poorly argued rant occupies the space. Hopefully Strauss's article is the exception rather than the rule for the pulication.
He never made it though.
... the audacity!!!).
... but those damned students are just there and you will have to make do, if you dont like it you shouldnt work at a university (and you obviously shouldnt!).
All it is is some whining about how it is getting harder for him to push through proprietary software purchases, and how student run/create infrastructure is too complex for poor old geriatric him to understand (at least he is honest) and how they are willing to do his and other's work for the price of some free lunch (and for that they cost him his lunch time every so often for meetings too
Im typing this on a student administrated campus LAN as we speak, and I tremble of the thought of letting his geriatric kind near it.
Yeah students are willing to take the bread out of the mouth of people like him for free, that is true and that is sad for those people. Ill agree with him on that much. They dont do a bad job of it though, time and time again people like him have only succeeded in proving they cant do it better but can only ask more money to do it worse.
To mr. Strauss : cry me a river you fucking dinosaur. Students are a resource for univeristy IT departments, I know you would love to do nothing more than just spend other people's money
I get just as good support from OSS (perhaps better) as I do for 'commercial' software.
I also tend to get bug fixes faster and mroe timely than I do from commercial software vendors.
Of course YMMV, but personnally I tend to find OSS offers a better quality of support all round. Sure I can't sue anyone, but then in the 10 years or so I've been using OSS I can't think of any reason why I would want to. Now if think of the times I'd like to through a shed load of lawyers at a commercial vendor (no, not necessarily M$)....
Perhaps its because it is a 'hobby' for alot of the OSS people, they take a greater pride in their work and become more emotionally attached to the work and therefore 'care' more about the product.
Persoannly I'd like the man justify his claims
Its ok, I think I've found a better link for his University..
"You lied to me! There is a Swansea!"
There really is no point in letting this kind of nonsense get to you, for two reasons.
The first reason is that it's false anyway and the world is full of people saying false things on purpose or simply because they are dumb. Wasting your time on either type is, well, simply a waste of time.
And the second reason is that the situation is self-correcting: those without the ability to see the value in our treasure chest will not benefit from it and hence will lag further and further behind until they themselves become extinct or irrelevant.
So, don't let their ramblings get to you, not even when phrased as mildly amusing parodies, in fact don't even bother acknowledging their existence, especially when they are just clueless PHBs as in this case. Those that cannot do, manage, and it sounds like Howard Strauss cannot even manage so he writes dumb opinion pieces. Ignore it.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
This isn't the first time that a manager has felt himself becoming powerless by being cut out of the loop, and is now reacting badly. Shock horror, "his" teccies can now modify the code freely themselves, he is losing control, it's the ultimate catastrophe. :-)
Those that cannot do, manage. Those than cannot manage in the face of change, complain. Ignore him.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
that for each action, there is an equal, and opposite, reactionary.
Jolyon
Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
The author is commiting a grave error in his assessment, stemming from not understanding what he is talking about.
"Free software" as we understand the term nowadays is all about basic freedoms, not about getting a free ride. The freedom to inspect and modify for example, and the freedom to reuse.
The annual IT budget of our clinic is about $30,000. Most of that money goes into "free software" development. We pay software engineers per project or per hour, and we pay decent. But once a project is completed, it belongs to us. And we release it under the GPL.
It makes economical sense: if everybody does the same, developers still get paid well for their work, and everybody can build and extend upon an increasing heap of quality software components.
Everybody wins, only the big coporates depending on cutomer lock in would lose out. I wouldn't shed a tear for them.
from all the computers in the world. Holy shit, where's the net gone$&BG$&"(!NO CARRIER
No wonder, check this out:
OS, Web Server and Hosting History for www.syllabus.com
OS Server Last changed IP address Netblock Owner
Windows Server 2003 Microsoft-IIS/6.0 1-Nov-2003 64.239.183.128 992359768
Windows 2000 Microsoft-IIS/5.0 5-Oct-2002 64.239.183.128 The Pajo Group
NT4/Windows 98 Microsoft-IIS/4.0 12-Oct-2001 209.134.33.92 Worldsite Networks
how long until
I always find it ironic that for a lot of people competition at the product level is a Good Thing, but at a more abstract level (between economical systems themselves), it is suddenly Evil.
Subject: Your article in Syllabus
...) It is very shocking that you are able to make such statements, so much that I nearly think that you have not taken a look at the computing industry for the past fifteen years. And what is even more schocking is that you are able to present such an article when you clearly have a big lack of knowledge about the subject. But I do not want to comment on these issues because other people have already done it before me, showing you the facts that you should be aware of before writing such an article.
To: howard@princeton.edu
Dear Mr. Howard,
I will not comment on the statements that you are making on your article about the open source movement (version control, accountability, quality control, support
What worries me is how can it be that a supposedly competent senior technology strategist is making such plain false statements. I can only think of a plausible answer: you are on the payroll of the powerfull interests which feel threaten by the rise of the open source movement. To you and to those powerfull economic interests I say the following: prove that your model is better and that you can serve better the customers than the open source projects by *delivering* software. Stop the PR campaigns and convince the industry that you can deliver faster, better and cheaper. Stop talking and start coding.
And one more thing: we are creating a mature infraestructure which will power the information technology of the (near) future. People like you, who are only looking for their own short term economic interest (as all good citizens of a capitilist system should be doing, right?) do little service to the common good. You have a daunting task in front of you, though: just try to wipe out all distributed knowledge that our society has accumulated, in which we base our open source movement. I wish you luck!
Best regards,
Daniel Gonzalez
Independent Real Time Software Consultant
Great letter, but gotta ding you on your sig (seeing as how pride yourself on your "analness").
That quote is actually ascribed to first century stoic philosopher Seneca, not Aristotle. The original Latin is "Nullum magnum ingenium sine mixtura dementiae fuit."
Geeky regards.
...Hypocrit....I think he's bucking for a job at MS as a backup for when Princeton "lets him go."
[laughs hysterically]
At some point, I blinked and the open soruce social revolution happened.
Remember the phrase "nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft"?
When this poor dumb schmuck comes back from his vacation, completely oblivious that his flames got leaked to a more prominent forum (and knowing Slashdot, probably rapidly spread across weblogs, IRC channels, USENET forums, tech newsletters and websites, and tech chats), he's going to be in for a surprise. Slashdot, an internationally-read technology forum, has alone around a thousand messages, most of which are harshly condemning him. These range from a medical doctor in Australia to graduate students at Princeton to CS PhDs and high-ranking software developers. There will be emails to both him and his superiors. There will be complaints in the school newspaper. There will be irritation from Princeton faculty, many of whom are very active and visible members of the open source community, at the personal insults aimed at them. There will be disapproving comments on the fact that he used his title and the university image to promote his views. I doubt he'll be fired over one incident, but he will almost certainly be talking with his superior (especially if enough of these complaints reach university administration).
The world certainly has changed.
May we never see th
Anyone care to investigate?
this is as almost as bad as .....
Harvard claiming that Dave Winer is Opensource..
Considering that Princeton doesn't produce programmers that get their name in the nes..is He Jealous?
Don't Tread on OpenSource
It'll be seen by more people that way. Administrators often care more if you tell someone else that something's wrong than if you just tell them.
microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
Cant RTFA because the site seems to be down (wouldnt surprise me given the software its running).
a smattering of teenagers too young to work at Redmond, hackers, virus creators, and a menagerie of others with whom you will feel great pride in entrusting your IT infrastructure.
Bill Gates was once a teenage hacker too young to work at.. oh wait he created Microsoft and made his fortune off a system that leaves gaping holes open for years, yeah your right i wouldnt want to trust them.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Where's the loss in quality controll, when on the one hand you have OS developpers who want their software to be as good as possible, and when you report a problem, will try to help you asap.
...
On the other hand you've got companies selling propreity software, who, wen you report a problem make you wait about a year for their next hotfix or service pack
In my opinion, the end-user is the final quality-control, and if you don't put enough effort in trying to solve this user's problems, then the end-user WILL be throwing away your software. So you better get your act together.
Makes you wonder how long it will take Redmond to catch on
Even better are the "Teen Girl Squad" episodes in the "Shorts". It was started from a StrongBad email.
Sounds like he is auditioning to be the Rush Limbaugh of IT.
The author completely missed one important aspect of open source. People write for it because they love it, not because they need a paycheck.
Look at it this way. If you needed a door installed, would you call Harrison Ford? He's an actor, right? But he's also a master carpenter, and can probably do a better job than anyone you know. If he installs your door, he won't do it because he needs your money. On the other hand, you can hire laborers outside your local 7-11 to install the door also. They may do an adequate job, but they are working for money.
Howard Strauss, /. but they need said again.
Did it ever occur to you that there MIGHT be people in this world that are not Self Centered, Paranoid, Money Grubbing, and Power Hungry ? Open source software is supported by companies that feel that open standards are better than propriatary ones, ever heard of ASCII? Which is is more widely used ASCII (open standard) or EBCDIC (IBM propriatary)? Open Source software is also supported by software developers that: A) Enjoy writing software, B) Wish to contribute something back to the computing community. (By the way item B is the core ideal of most societies.)
I am sure that these points have already been raised here at
Roy Owen
Software Developer/Engineer
Meddle thou not in the affairs of Dragons, for thou art crunchy and with most anything.
to join the angry mob outside his office?
I always find it incredible, when this kind of trolling reaches Slashdot.
PLEASE DON'T FEED THE TROLL.
Enough said.
t_t_b
I'm on PJ's "enemies" list! Are you?
He won the award for Outstanding Achievements in the Field of Excellence.
But many people believe the marketing hype from the manufacturers that their software will bring huge benefits to your organisation for relatively little investment in their software.
Sorry, but Nigerian Scam emails are much more like the marketing materials of large corporates, promising the world but failing to deliver. Open / Free Software at least tends to do what it says on the tin.
Pity he didn't use logic or persuasiveness in his tirade. Mr. Strauss needs a new job title (if not a new job entirely); someone lacking reasoning skills should not be planning strategy.
=========
Together, we will drive the rats from the tundra.
they screwed up the email so badly recently that they had to resend ALL email received since 2000. yeah, thats a hell of a lot of email to get (again) in a week.
i sell illegal drugs
I don't get your sig.
Surely asking Saddam Hussein for military advice would be better than asking almost anyone else? He has IIRC an extensive military training, with years in the Iraqi intelligence and even more years as military leader of a medium sized country. He has so far managed to hide from an enormous invading army with the stated primary goal of killing him.
While there probably are hundreds of people who would know military strategy even better than he, the same would be true when asking a lawyer for legal advice.
Have I misunderstood? Are you implying that asking slashdot is a good way of obtaining legal information?
Opinions stated are mine and do not reflect those of the Illuminati
I sent Mr. Strauss the following E-Mail...
Mr. Strauss:
Wow. I'm in shock. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Like a lot of people who barely understand technology, you clearly know enough to convince non-technical people that you have a clue, but my fellow slash-dotters see right through you. I suppose the folly of open source software explains why Linux is rapidly becoming the world's most dominant server operating system and why every server in google's arsenal runs Linux. I suppose that's why IBM has repeatedly built commercial software on top of open source components. The IBM HTTP Server is based on the Apache web server (which happens to be the dominant web server in it's own right). Their WebSphere Java Application server is based on the open source Tomcat project. IBM's WebSphere Studio line of products is based on the open source Eclipse project. Even Oracle incorporates (and horribly mangles) open source components like XML parsers in their Java application server. I could go on and on.
There are good and bad open source projects just like there are good and bad commercial software packages. The difference is that open source projects rise and fall based on their technical and usability merits alone. There's very little marketing to cloud the issue. The most successful open source projects tend to be those that are actually better rather than those that just have the best pitch men.
But let's call this what it really is. Your article was just good old fashioned intellectual snobbery. You're from Princeton and people like you can't possibly imagine how some kid without a college degree can do in a week what it takes you a dozen developers, several years, and a research grant to do. What you're really saying is that you don't trust software written by people without what you consider the proper pedigree. People who don't move in your Ivy League circles are the unwashed masses to you. The world is changing, Buckwheat. You better change with it.
Coldest Regards,
[name deleted]
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
...and be brought down a level to reality.
I've been programing since my early 10's and I am now 24. The day I have been brought back to reality, when I encountered "the corporate world!", I started to hate this job.
Let them dream as much as they whant, as dreamers are the ones who drives innovation.
I'd rather be sailing...
poor as in he will be poor after his medical bills after just about everyone in the world beats the living crap out of him. And when I say everyone, I don't mean "teens." Or at least get a pitchfork in the rear and a flaming torch in the front.
Just because you go to some prestigious school does not give you the right to be above it all and inflammatory; hell, in this case, have a death wish.
Looks like college these days are REALLY overrated.
I remember, BACK in the days.......
That should read more like "I package a large set of open source programs and libraries, developed by CERN, for the Debian GNU/Linux project...". Obviously I didn't want to imply that CERN wrote this software specifically for Debian. It was 2 am when I wrote the above...
- Kevin B. McCarty
(A quick All-The-Web search turned it up several times over on various campus pages. It's real.)
As much as a twit like Strauss deserves it, please refrain from crap-flooding his address. People like him tend to not be able to deal well with criticism in the first place, which means it is more than likely that he'll just ignore all his incoming email once he realizes that the internet is a two-way street. To blast a fool like him, you need to be subtle. Like emailing him the address to the slashdot article for instance. .
Those denial balloons are sure hard to penetrate, but curiosity always kills the cat!
Cheers!
-FL
That should never happen. Last thing we need are people's freedom of speech being suppressed. Academia, believe it or not, is the bastion of free speech. I would prefer if it remains that way.
Oh, I agree with you 100% about academia being the last true refuge of free speech -- but there is an invisible line where an uninformed, biased, ill-equipped argument (as presented in his article) will find someone ostracized by their university community.
And here's why:
Without providing any information to back up his argument, this guy comes across as a total loon, or at the very least totally unprofessional. He isn't writing fiction, so he must provide factual evidence to reinforce his claims -- I can't "suspend my disbelief," like we all do on some level when we immerse ourselves in fictitious work. When he is ostracized by his peers for a commentary that smacks in the face of the laws of written communication, it makes Princeton look bad. And you don't make one of the major higher education learning institutions in America look bad. You have to remember that free speech is acceptable as long as it is in the name of the higher cause of learning -- the moment he makes the university look bad, his ass is grass. If he's not tenured, all I have to say is "Good luck!"
In closing, free speech doesn't protect anyone from making a complete arse out of themselves in a professional community.
Even superheroes once were losers
UIUC engineering grad here...
I don't know if you intentionally left this out or not, but there is yet another higher quality computing system on campus. The Engineering Workstations (EWS for short), have far more reliable services than the campus wide service as well. At the time I was there (96-00) they were a mix of Solaris, HPUX and AIX, although I have heard this is changing. I did have the pleasure of using the CS department computer systems as well (did a minor in CS) and I can't say that I saw that much difference between the CS and engineering computers, other than the CS labs having a lot more horsepower...
"I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...
and the number of their sites are rising, while Microsoft powers only 21% and their site count is falling. http://news.netcraft.com/
Apache is FREE, but you have to pay Microsoft for the priviledge of getting your IIS & SQL Server sites infected with script kiddie viruses. How do you explain this, Mr. Howard, if MS employs such vaunted and highly skilled software engineers and Apache is written by volunteers and pimple-faced kids?
You are obviously not interested in facts, only smear. This raises the question of motive. What would you profit by writing such hog wash? It certainly hasn't added to your integrity or professional standing. Who are you trying to score points with? By spitting into the wind of experience (FEDEX, Amazon, PostOffice, NYSE, US ARMY, Google, and Microsoft itself when it resorted to hosting its patches on Linux servers because it couldn't keep its own dog food up, and many cities and government around the world) you can't seriously suggest that these folks are deluded or ignorant. That only leaves your personal motivation to consider. Since this tantrum will only enhance your personal standing among Microsoft fanatics the only other upside would be a cash donation to your personal bank account. Has it arrived yet?
Princeton University should re-evaluate your credentials for employment. Anyone with analytical and research skills so obviously poor as yours must have padded their resume.
Running with Linux for over 20 years!
I recently read your editorial at http://www.syllabus.com/article.asp?id=8460 After receiving my official scores for the GRE, several ivy-league schools sent me informational packets at their own volition. Deciding which highly esteemed educational institution would be the best match for my higher education in computer science was no simple task. After reading your editorial, I thank my lucky stars that I avoided a school represented by someone who believes that modifying source code is "extremely dangerous" and something that "few people do anyway." It really is a shame that the students of technology at Princeton must suffer the embarrassment of being associated with the unprofessional attitude and outright misinformation presented in your editorial. I am quite certain that Syllabus.com is not a site devoted to satire, therefore the final impression I have of your editorial is that you are fishing for a job with a proprietary software developer. If that is true, there are definitely more professional means of achieving this. If I'm in error, then let me kindly suggest having someone from the English department preview your future publications. In light of the situation, I might also suggest avoiding the Princeton English department. Please take note that I am not mindlessly defending open source software, let alone defending open source software in any fashion. I am merely expressing my great relief at electing to not attend Princeton's graduate program and subsequently being humiliated by association with an editorial that suggests that modifying source code is "extremely dangerous". To the students of Princeton, I express my sympathy. [my name]
After receiving my official scores for the GRE, several ivy-league schools sent me informational packets at their own volition. Deciding which highly esteemed educational institution would be the best match for my higher education in computer science was no simple task. After reading your editorial, I thank my lucky stars that I avoided a school represented by someone who believes that modifying source code is "extremely dangerous" and something that "few people do anyway."
It really is a shame that the students of technology at Princeton must suffer the embarrassment of being associated with the unprofessional attitude and outright misinformation presented in your editorial. I am quite certain that Syllabus.com is not a site devoted to satire, therefore the final impression I have of your editorial is that you are fishing for a job with a proprietary software developer. If that is true, there are definitely more professional means of achieving this. If I'm in error, then let me kindly suggest having someone from the English department preview your future publications. In light of the situation, I might also suggest avoiding the Princeton English department.
Please take note that I am not mindlessly defending open source software, let alone defending open source software in any fashion. I am merely expressing my great relief at electing to not attend Princeton's graduate program and subsequently being humiliated by association with an editorial that suggests that modifying source code is "extremely dangerous".
To the students of Princeton, I express my sympathy.
[my name]
"I think Howard Strauss ought to be informed of the billions of dollars being invested in free software development by major corporations"
You might know everything, but you certainly don't know everybody...
My sentiments exactly. Once a manager, you need to deal with (and answer to) execs who know so little it's truly frightening! To be a GOOD manager, you must lose sight of tech reality (or you can't "connect" with your new "peers", which is necessary). But then you lose sight of the tech work.... and round and round we go!
But once you are alienated by those execs (as this guy clearly is feeling... his comments highlight bad decisions more than bad software), you best regain your tech skills and return to your roots. If you don't you will be "lost in the middle", as he appears to be.
Some places need a techie-connected IT manager. Some places need an exec-connected IT manager. Everybody could use a techie-connected IT manager who can gain the trust of the execs (rare). Nobody needs a disconnected IT manager.
"Public software". Not as glamorous as "free" but it fits. The idea is that it resides in the public domain, much like other intellectual property owned by all, like old songs and such, correct?
You might know everything, but you certainly don't know everybody...
Either of the following: 1) He's a complete sold-out to M$ et al. 2) He does not really have a clue at all. Coming from a place like Princeton (one of the greatest research universities in the world) he should know better: the model of open-source software is very close to what has worked very well in a tremendously successful human enterprise: Science! Remember Newton's famous words (can't remember them verbatim): "I have only succeeded because I stood on the shoulders of giants".
Companies that cant afford to tinker with the source code of software that solves their problem are going to look for support plans that take care of that. If some obscure package with a minimal team solves their problem but cant provide certain levels of support (paid or otherwise) the company will find another solution that can. When dealing with their livelyhood companies just wont take a risk, perceived or imagined. Let's be honest, not every package out there comes from a large, well-known team like apache or samba, or is even a blip on the support radar of Red Hat or IBM. If it solves someones problem, a company will look at it.
Dont turn this into a pronoun war with "your type" and "paragons ... like yourself". Dont make this a "you versus slashdot".
Finally, I meant that I am physically incapable of caring any less than I currently do about whether one of my posts gets moderated into the toilet :)
1. make foundless claims about some of the most secure sw in existence.
2. ???
3. profit!!!
i sell illegal drugs
Damn, if people at Princeton are that stupid, there's no way I'm sending my kid there...
Obvioulsy a far-left leaning liberal unionite that doesn't believe that, in a free market economy, "free" should be allowed.
He's the manager of tech outreach or somesuch. We get all bent out of shape because we see this and assume some well-known prof at Princeton is shitting on open source. But this guy isn't a prof. He's a dipshit who (according to other posts) teaches classes on web portals. Wow. That's impressive.
It also means that corporations like MS probably have their pockets open to him knowing he can use his position to give them free press under the Princeton banner.
So what I'm saying is, this is nobody. Assume this is just some asshat troll who wouldn't get the press he's getting without trading on Princeton's name, a school he does NOT represent as an academic. He hasn't published shit in a peer-reviewed journal as far as I can tell. If anyone else wants to check, his middle initial is J - there are a couple of other "H Strauss"'s at Princeton that are actual Prof's. In short, ignore the turd.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
Sad, sorry little fellow. Glad I didn't go to Princeton...
Folks, trolls have existed in the ink and paper realm long before newsgroups/slashdot/blogs.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, it doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
But sometimes its just about having that channel at all. It's the accountability that managers crave.
Fortunately or unfortunately, the number one reason I have seen why companies want to go with a commercial solution versus an open-source project: its easier to sue a company when something fucks up.
Call it capitalism, call it stupid, call it whatever you want, but just dont dilude yourself into thinking thats not how it works. I'm not saying its what I believe in, but its just reality.
Seriously, if we look at some of the high-end professionals in many IT industries, how many were not hackers in their early roots. I think that what we really have is a confusion between hacker and script-kiddies. Linux is friendly to the former, but not really the latter.
And students? Why not pick up linux if you're a student. Yes, no shiat it saves money over picking up a legit copy of XP Pro, and yes, you can learn/do a lot more with it in many scenarios.
Really, you could pretty much draw a correlation between higher functionality and hackers in general, except that many people think hacker=virus=blackhat nowadays.
Wouldn't even Bill G have been considered something of a hacker back in the day? Granted with MS he's more like Darth Vader nowadays, but he could have had promise at one point.
One of the big flaws with classical Communism was the whole arguement that the state would eventually wither away amd return control to the people. The State seemed to always manufacture new enemies, either external or internal, instead. Maybe a similar flaw is developing here. The state always seems to erect barriers to everyone operating capitalistically, most often at the behest of those claiming to already be inside the system. There are a lot more people advocating a free market, except when it has adverse consequences for them, than advocating a free market, period.
Who is John Cabal?
This guy is onto something here. A lot of our current economic problems are caused by these "free-ware" people taking jobs from professionals. I've done some research on this issue, and the problem is much more pervasive than just Open Source Software. http://pete.kruckenberg.com/blog/archives/000310.p hp
When I was in school, I worked PC support for a mostly-windoze (3.1) campus. I was paid to run around campus fixing peoples' problems, fix their problems over the phone, and fix any problems in the labs. Most of the time I was very, very busy.
Yes, using a free software product, especially for users, incurs non-free support costs. BUT SO DOES USING RETAIL SOFTWARE!
What company doesn't have an IT lurking about waiting for an exec to drop his laptop in the pool? Even in the theoretical case of end users directly accessing "free tech support", if someone spends 2 hours on the phone with Microsoft, that's 2 hours they're not doing their job (look, hidden costs).
Applying the "free like beer" logic, it's like saying free beer isn't free because it makes you pee. Beer, be it free, cheap, or expensive, makes you pee. Software, be it free, cheap, or expensive, has to be supported.
:wq
so he makes the SAME generalization about the open source community, that most of the Linux users (of which I am not one of them) make about the Windows community, and suddenly HE is the bad guy? Call this flamebait if you wish, but honestly, a major reason more people aren't embracing Linux is because of the entire "Holier than thou" attitude. Sadly enough, there ARE alot of people in the world (hell, alot of people that I know), that fit his description to a T.
Defender of Microsoft and Communism!!!
"To be a GOOD manager, you must lose sight of tech reality (or you can't "connect" with your new "peers", which is necessary)."
What?
Who wrote this rule, and why?
No one said you had to be a moron to be a manager, it just ends up happening because the morons can't do the upper-level tech jobs.
If you happen to be a competent technologist who decides he wants to get into management, why do you need to "get dumb?"
+++ATH0
Think he is REALLY out of the office?
From: howard@Princeton.EDU
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 12:43:54 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: free software
I am out of the office from Monday, November 3 thru Friday, November 7 returning on Monday 11/10/03. Contact Lee Varian
(lvarian@princeton.edu) or Sally Van Fleet (sallyv@princeton.edu (609)258-2908)if you need to contact me.
Please leave your message and I will handle it when I return. I may not be able to check my e-mail reliably while I'm away.
-Howard
about the guy, but im sure his favorite position is 69.
Sending loud angry rebuttles to articles like this just dignifies them. Crap like this is not worthy of a response, and ought to be ignored. Just my $0.02
There are a thousand forms of subversion, but few can equal the convenience and immediacy of a cream pie -Noel Godin
Found on Princeton University's online directory, here's the info:
Howard J Strauss
Phone: 609-258-6045
Fax: 609-258-1004
Address: 205 87 Prospect Avenue
Department: OIT Enterprise Infrastructure Services
Email: howard@Princeton.EDU
Emailbox: howard@mail.Princeton.EDU
Netid: howard
Voicemailbox: 86045
Alias: 010003024
Now, call/e-mail him and ask him to clarify his article.
Would somebody please give this drooling idiot a hand kerchief?
The sign says "keep off the grass" not smoke it! Geez.....what is this guy on!?!?!
Resign or termination the only 2 ways to go with this guy. Can't say I would want his advice regarding my college education nor would I want his advisement for career choices. I hope he doesn't actually "advise" students.
Oh and from what I can tell from my own experience us young androids (or whatever he termed us), do not fault the older models. We learn from them.....just so you know.
:-( --- argh. Despair, I owe again.
...that he refers to me as a 'teenager'. It's been a few decades since anyone's done that.
"manager of technology strategy and outreach" sounds like "promotion" to the point where he can't screw up anything anybody depends on. He doesn't exactly sound like the kind of guy I'd ask "Are we better off converting to VoIP or should we wait for a while longer?" or "should we move our Oracle database onto Linux servers?"
My guess is that he's got an office and a secretary, he reports in when he feels like it and occasionally writes reports that get thrown into the garbage unread. And he wrote the article on "company time" for lack of anything better to do. Judging from what I read in his article, I suspect his secretary even handles his e-mail for him because he's "above" (read can't handle) such mundane tasks.
Can anyone who actually knows what goes on at Princeton tell us if this guy actually responsible for any actual systems or networks?
Tech Public Policy stuff
MS Customer Support with the Psychic Friends Network - a link to an article comparing the two was referred to in a post on Slashdot probably about two weeks ago. Surprise! MS didn't do so well...
I know your letter is done, but the above comparison doesn't exactly support his preference for professional closed-source support over "amateur" open-source alternatives.
I think we need to ask who is this person Strauss and what are his credentials? I'm not familiar with the name. How much software has he written, and how much of it has survived to the present day? What languages does he know, what institutions has he worked for, where did he get his degree, and what was it in? What books has he written and what are his greatest achievements? It might also be interesting to know what systems he has running on his desktop and his laptop.
In short, is he in any way qualified to speak on the subject?
Perhaps he is unaware that on the Internet you are judged by what you have contributed, not what you have consumed.
Recall the two questions that all properly educated schoolchildren should constantly ask, as they listen to their teachers: "How does s/he know?" and "How can I be sure?" (paraphrasing Nicholas Freeling).
I've posted the responses of two Princeton alums to this article (including my own). These responses were sent to Mr. Strauss as well as his supervisors.
In case anyone is still reading this thread.
Here goes my entry:
Tridge (defined here and here), the smartest man in Australian IT, obviously qualifies and Bill Gates does not (except in his own humble eyes). The only problem remaining is, where does Tridge fit in Howard's categories? Is he your employee? No. Is he a teenager, albeit a smattered one? Not for a long time, to Susan's immense relief. I must mention in defense of teenagers, though, that at least one well-known project has been managed by a 13-year-old, and managed well. A hacker? Since Howard evidently means "cracker", that's a resounding "no". Virus creators? No, although I'm sure SaMBa has transported and safely stored quite a few viruses in its day. I guess he fits in "menagerie of others", which is to say, no category at all. I could run up a list of another hundred or so such people in one day.
Not to put too fine a point on it, Howard Strauss is talking out of his rear, so has evidently forgotten that magic rule: "'tis better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Thanks for the reply.... you've said it better than I probably did.
In my own words, it's not that you actually get "dumb", but you can't work both sides simultaneously. You can't stay tech-savvy enough to keep up with the techies *and* still be "in" with the execs.
I have been there. The knowledge gap can be huge (especially where I was). The better I got at "management" the more $$ I made and the more I got promoted, but the less I could stay honest to the technology. The biggest reason by far?
Non-tech management simply cannot move fast enough to maintain proper decision making as tech advances. When you support a decision and it takes 10 months to be put into action, how do you tell them tech winds have shifted and the decision is no longer appropriate? As a non-tech exec to fall behind is to be WRONG, and their collective sense is they can't all be WRONG, can they? Truth is YES they can, but if you are the one who has to tell them that, you will be alienated/disenfranchised.
Perhaps my perspective is specific to a tech manager in a non-tech industry, but nonetheless it is very, very real. I won't be management again unless it's my company or a tech company, or there are many tech managers to share the burden.
MS had a run of print ads featuring folks that at first glance did not seem to be alpha geeks in any way. They were presented as no-nonsense, get-it-done techy types, and maybe that was their self-image, but to me they looked like poseurs. There is a class of tech whose esteem is boosted by booth weasels handing out tchotchkes, who think wearing a Visual Studio cap will enhance their sex appeal. These ads were composed of and for those guys, and in me they inspire the deepest pity.
If any of you are such a psuedo tech, you are not forceful and decisive for surrendering your judgement to the "inevitability" of the market leader.
well, first off, it is trying to be funny in that people are always giving/getting legal advice here and almost all of it comes with the IANAL disclaimer. so, it is an attempt at humor. as for the saddam thing: his first war, against iran, wa a dismal failure. while they were all out protesting the US and burning our flag, iraq couldn't defeat them. 8 years of war left his country and army in shambles. then 3 years later he invades kuwait. in desert storm, he gets crushed in a few days. so that strategy is shot. then with the latest war, he totally misread our intentions, and in probably the most dynamic armored assault in history, he is defeated in a few weeks. so 3 wars, 1 horrible stalemate, 2 ass whoppins. now, as for his latest hide and seek gamble. i would consider that a plan for survival. considering that a recent nbc news story has abotu 80% of iraq doing well, and almost, well, peaceful, the remaining 20% remains tough. but, i would hardly call it success that he is running for his life, hiding like a coward, and only able to conduct a guerilla war of desperation. so yes, there is humor intended. you just have to see the logic.
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
You'll enjoy this, I think...
11/06/03 07:55:19 Browsing http://www.princeton.edu/ ...
Fetching http://www.princeton.edu/
GET / HTTP/1.1
Host: www.princeton.edu
Connection: close
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 13:55:26 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.4 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.1.8 SSLeay/0.9.0b
Cache-Control: max-age=2
Expires: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 13:55:28 GMT
Connection: close
I *really* hope this wasn't meant as a serious article. I work as a systems engineer for a small cable/dialup ISP, and I decided to take a count of the number of open source based servers I run. I counted 34 different servers that run a variation of either RedHat or OpenBSD. 34 servers that have served me quite well. 34 servers that I don't have to worry a quarter as much about Worms/Virii/Trojans. 34 servers that do what I need them to do and do it just as good if not better than their MS counterparts. 34 servers that saved me roughly $34,000 in licensing alone to buy Windows Server 2003, not to mention the software that would have to run on it. I believe Mr. Strauss should sit in on a history class at his university and take to heart the words of one of our great presidents, Abraham Lincoln:
"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."
"You can't stay tech-savvy enough to keep up with the techies *and* still be "in" with the execs."
I actually perform best at work when my job involves doing this - that is, be a translator between technical and managerial concerns.
I cannot believe I am that unique. Maybe it's just a matter of perspective?
+++ATH0
I assure you that students are fully capable of project management. My friend just finished 2nd year in Electrical Engineering, and is currently a project manager at RIM.