Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

State Of Open Source In 2003 Reviewed

Posted by simoniker on from the was-it-good-for-you? dept.

uninet writes "Open for Business' latest Year-in-Review article regarding GNU/Linux and Free/Open Source Software is up here. Things that made our list of notable occurrences include (not surprisingly) SCO's legal issues, MandrakeSoft's financial problems, our product pick of the year (Shuttle XPC SB62G2) and many more small and large items of note. For an interesting look back, you can find previous Slashdot coverage of OfB Year in Review articles here (2002) and here (2001)."

5 of 82 comments (clear)

  1. Real Player by Alcohol+Fueled · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "Real, whose aging Real Player for UNIX has fallen far behind its Windows and Mac OS X counterparts, announced the Helix Player project that would produce a new, Free Software client for a wide array of media files. While the actual Real codec will remain proprietary, the client will also support many Free Software formats, such as Ogg Vorbis."

    *sigh* Who thinks the Helix Player will be just as bloated as Real Player?

    --
    Ah am not a crook! (\(-__-)/)
  2. Re:I think it was a very important year. by irokitt · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Personally favorite milestone: Mozilla Firebird. A beta that works so well-and a Mozilla variant that doesn't make me reach for a book while pages are loading.

    --
    If my answers frighten you, stop asking scary questions.
  3. And looking forward to 2004? by Peter+Cooper · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think 2004 is going to be a bumper year for open source (and Linux, in particular) thanks to the advances made in 2003. Linux is finally a term that is recognized by many businesses, and the concept of 'open source' is invading even the most stoic of companies. More developers than ever are joining the ranks (although many only because they're out of work, unfortunately), and there are lots of cool projects.

    Mike Home, who works on Wine, posted a great summary of planned open source developments in 2004, mentioning Wine's continuing development (0.9 should be out in 2004), and planned leaps in KDE and GNOME. GNOME will finally get a full and stable version of Epiphany, too.

    Development continues on Perl 6 and the Parrot virtual machine, and I am particularly interested in the development of Dashboard, a GNOME 'just in time' information manager project created by Nat Friedman, of Ximian fame.

    Alan Cox should have his MBE this year, er, MBA, rather ;-) And perhaps he'll stop using Welsh only on his diary. And as discussed over at KernelTrap, Reiser4 may also be merged into 2.6, although this is not certain, and may be merged into 2.7 first for further testing.

    So, what do YOU see happening in open source in 2004? Fill us in on what you plan to do, and why 2004 is going to be a bumper year for open source, Linux, and all. What technologies are going to spring up this time around?

  4. They Missed Gentoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    2003 marked the year that I switched to Linux for my main desktop.

    Un-important in the grand scheme of things, but still: go take a gander at the gentoo forums. Hundreds on thousands of new Linux users asking questions and getting answers (answers beyond RTFM, no less).

    Well-engineered distros, along with killer apps like Karamba, along with government after government adopting to Free/Open Source, along with the phenominal 2.6 kernel all combine to spell the best year for Linux yet.

    Off for more beer...

    BillG

  5. Why free software is more free market. by argoff · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think alot of people don't understand that free software is more accountable to market forces than closed software. If the government microregulated the supply and demand of stocks, commodities, services, or most other items - most people could easially see how this government intervention is less efficient and effective than open markets. But when they microregulate the supply and demand of certain types of information by imposing copyright laws - then all of a sudden people don't even question it.

    If the government gave a farmer a monopoly on growing oranges, and then called it free market because other farmers could buy and sell shares of that monopoly - i think most people would see it as a lie and a farce. But this is exactly what they do with companies like Microsoft, who are the only ones legally allowed to copy Microsoft software. Asserting the right to restrict what others copy that is freely at their disposal is bullshit morality and bullshit markets.