Slashdot Mirror
Kevin Carmony Responds to Criticism
sharkscott writes to tell us that LXer's Don Parris took a few minutes to get Kevin Carmony's response to the large amount of criticism he has been taking over offering non-free software in Linspire. From the article: "Essentially, Carmony's position is that, in ten years of holding out, the FOSS community has made relatively few gains, in terms of convincing vendors to release libre codecs and drivers. In other words, the strategy doesn't seem to be working. Additionally, while some will be patient, most users would prefer to have something - anything - that works in the meanwhile."
Note that Mr. Paris pointed out to me that Robertson stepped down as CEO. Carmony is running the show now. (Just in case you pay as little attention to Linspire as I do.)
My point still holds, though. There's nothing "wrong" with what Linspire is doing with the Freespire project. They're giving away free binaries (which they don't have to give you) along with all the source code they owe you. In exchange, you may or may not become a Click and Run customer. I don't see an issue here. And no, I don't think that Linspire is really expecting a huge outpouring of volunteer programmers, either.
On another topic (since I can't make fun of poor Mr. Robertson's Linspire work anymore), has anyone noticed the latest from AJAX Launch? It seems that they have added an Excel "Demo" (a pretty bit of XUL that looks like a real spreadsheet), a media player that seems no more sophisticated than the one in sharkscott's link in the summary (if I wanted your website to make noise... grrr...), and a RealPlayer video of the "AJAX Desktop" of the Future.
Are you amazed yet? Ecstatic? Hopping up and down in excitement? Holding your breath in bated anticipation?
No, neither am I.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
If Linux proponents expect to see any sort of growth in desktop Linux usage, they are going to have to back down on this issue. Users want their MP3s to play. They want their videos to play. They don't want to deal with some complicated installation procedure just to get basic functionality that they can get easily, out-of-the-box in an install of another operating system.
Linspire realizes this, so they're doing all they can to make it easy as they can for new Linux users to use Linux and do what they want. People shouldn't be giving them flack for this.
Arrrrrrr
...that the _real world_ does not share their view that politics is the most important thing in software... Functionality is...
This is the first I've heard of this situation involving Linspire. All I can say is, "Sounds good!"
I can't believe how many times I have been stymied when configuring Linux because it didn't support my major-vendor video card. The "Open Source" version of certain drivers don't work. I tried an OSS implementation of some Nvidia drivers and it could barely spit out any video at all, much less allow me to use the advanced options on the card. I know the OSS developers tried hard, and I appreciate that. However, it just didn't work.
At times like these, I don't really care about politics or philosophy. I'm just trying to get the computer working, and if I get stuck because of OSS, I'll just abandon the project.
I suppose this is the reason why I haven't been a serious user of any Linux Desktop software for years. I use Linux as a server all the time, on dozens of different machines. It works great as a Server.
94% of Repubs and 21% of Dems voted to renew the Patriot Act
IMHO, there has been little to no success getting vendors to release documentation to write drivers for three major reasons:
1) To date, the market share represented by open-source operating systems is very small.
2) The users and distributors of opensource operating systems have not presented a united front when it comes to the inclusion of propriety drivers and code. In fact, it seems the vast majority of distributors and users are more than willing to settle for closed, propriety drivers (even when they are crap!)
3) American corporate culture reflexively resists voluntarily releasing information of any kind. It is always easier to say no. Some Taiwanese vendors, for example, have been found by some opensource projects to be rather cooperative when it comes to releasing information. Major American corporations by constrast are a guaranteed stonewall.
We believe that the only way the world can successfully advance in the field of computer software is by eventually replacing all closed source systems with open source ones.
Take an example of Apple's recent success with Mac OS X. This software, although it contains tons of closed source code, is based on open source code and contains literally hundreds and hundreds of free software packages. Apple would never have succeeded in creating such a feature-rich operating system in the time it took to make it without the availability and use of such open source code.
This is why this Linspire debacle is happening. People know that although the expedient thing to do is to continue using closed source proprietary stuff, the correct thing to do is to get ourselves off that addiction and on to some better software.
Keep in mind that you can't rely on the nVidia drivers to work, because they are closed source. Opting for a closed source driver is accepting that Bad Things may happen to your system, and you may not get any help if they do.
Their windows drivers are closed source, but I expect them to work. I also /do/ expect the nvidia linux drivers to work, because... they do!
Sure, nvidia "might not" keep the drivers up to date with all the linux kernel side changes that are going on, but they "might not" with windows as well... but they do, so their customers can use their product.
Okay, this weeks drivers might not work with next weeks kernel, but this is a problem with the linux kernel not having the same backwards compatibility as windows. Can hardly blaim nvidia for that.
It's so not as big a deal as everyone keeps making out.
The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
Who else but the designers of the hardware to produce drivers (open or otherwise)? They have access to hardware schematics, development plans, and the engineers who designed everything from the fabrication plants to the chips you're writing the drivers for. Do you honestly think you're a good enough programmer to fix a driver for hardware you have no knowledge of? I'm not a programmer hardly at all. It doesn't matter to me if it's open or closed. Either way, I can't fix anything.
Assuming that something won't work because it's closed source is as stupid as the closed source camp claiming FOSS is more susceptible to security vulnerabilities. It's absolute BS. And won't get any help from the vendor? I'd say I'm as likely to not get help from a vendor as it is likely that the FOSS community will label my bug Won't-Fix. God forbid I happen to get some rare bit of critical hardware for which the FOSS "community" consists of one guy who's a complete idiot.
Yes, I understand the FOSS model. Yes, I beleive it is superior. Yes, I believe it is the future. But avoiding closed software because of some nebulous bugaboo makes you seem like Chicken Little in a snowstorm.
The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
Source code would be nice, but it's not what we want most.
We want hardware documentation. We can write our own software. Our software will be more stable, portable, and maintainable. Performance could be a win or a lose.
With hardware documentation, we can turn a WinModem into a telephony interface for a PBX. We can support Linux, OpenBSD, GNU HURD, and eCos. We can port the X server to run on the GPU. Lots of neat ideas become possible.
People already must install numerous pieces of proprietary software on their linux systems. Who uses *desktop* linux without any proprietary drivers or software? Even ignoring drivers, what about Java? None of the Java clones are nearly as good as Sun Java... yet linux distros fail to include Sun Java, forcing nearly everyone using java for any serious purpose to replace it immediately at some unnecessary inconvenience.
By taking the hardline "only OSS" stance at the distro level, we're just pushing installing the non OSS software onto the users. It's just an annoyance that accomplishes nothing.
As far as Linux being locked into unchangeable kernel schemes... maintaining binary compatibility for drivers is something they should be doing anyway. It is something that every other kernel I know of does, and it is just plain annoying that I can't swap out the drivers from one linux install to another because of driver breaks between kernel versions. At the very least, driver compatibility should be guaranteed between minor version numbers.
Yup, everyone with a different opinion is a paid shill.
It's comments like these that got me started on my intense dislike for some portions of the F/OSS community. I dared to post that Windows has gotten fairly stable, and is actually a reasonable operating system. Not a safe thing to say.
I don't personally know much about Linspire, but I do know that this community has to get rid of whatever's attracting so many people with this offensive elitist attitude. The very existance of the word "luser" makes me feel bad for the perversion of the principles behind free software.
"Quoting yourself is stupid." -Me
I would never buy a car with the hood welded shut. I'm no mechanic, but I can hire one.
People should be made aware of the choice they're making -- maybe when the next proprietary format comes along, people will actually question it's viability before it becomes an essential part of the computing platform. A lot of the problems this industry is seeing are based on people getting locked-in to a format/software/platform, only because they didn't understand that this was even a possibility (or that there may have been better choices and that they can demand freeness and interoperability from their suppliers).
Getting along doesn't mean keeping your mouth shut.
You need to sit down and think about the definition of a troll, because it does not mean anyone who disagrees with you.
Why don't you address the point of the post? Is Groklaw deleting postings by those who disagree with the prevailing sentiment, or is it not? Is it deleting posts that have critical content or not? If it is, what is the justification?
The typical response to a post that goes against the prevailing sentiment, here or on Groklaw, is a reply that accuses the poster of being a shill, a troll, or an astroturfer. Are you comfortable with a policy that allows criticism to be suppressed merely by ad hominem attacks on the source?
It sounds as if you are, in which case, why should anyone on the other side listen to you? (FOSS commie?)
"So I posted anonymously as I usually do"
Why not stop moaning about it and create an account (free) and post from that? PJ's had SCO astroturfers hitting her sight and has had 'friends' of SCO posting her personal details to the internet at the same time she was getting death threats.
So she might be a little oversensitive. Get over it.
---
We spoke for about a half an hour. I don't recall a thing we said. - Colorblind James Experience
What? Since when does the "Open Source camp" prefer non-copyleft licenses? What kind of drivel is this?
And why is no one screaming and pulling their hair over the fact that Dell ships their RH Enterprise-equipped machines with closed-source nVidia drivers?
I teach my Open Source Technology students that OS is a continuum, and that everyone falls somewhere along that continuum. ESR embraces the business side of OSS, while RMS (firmly!) embraces the libre side...everyone involved in OSS has some philosophical bent. If PJ has a problem with Linspire, she has every right to rant about it. But since she doesn't speak for the OSS movement, we have every right to ignore her (or pick up the pieces we agree with and discard the rest).
The beauty of OSS is that there's room for everyone. Don't like what Linspire is doing? No worries, come up with your own distro that ships with OSS versions of whatever it is about Linspire that rubs you the wrong way.
Not all software is open source. Its a fact of life. I love open source software. I love free software. but I do not think there is anything wrong with putting non-free software in your linux package. This kind of attitude is holding back linux. So what is 1 distro out of hundreds becomes "tainted" with copyrighted software.
Guess what? I play Neverwinter Nights and myth2, on my linux/bsd boxes! So shoot me because the source is not open. Its open source fundamentalism, at its worst. If you want to put out a good product, you have to come to the realization that not all drivers or software is free, and unless you want to write your own driver for every single bit of 19.99$ hardware out there, or 29.99$ game or productivity tool, its a lot easier to package binaries.
People should be made aware of the choice they're making
That's as unrealistic as people telling you that not only should you be aware where each item of your clothes are made, but all of the components that went into it. The t-shirt you're wearing now... where was it sewn? Where was the cotton grown that went into it? Who was the cotton wholesaler? Where was it dyed? Where did the dye come from? Who made the thread that holds it together? Who made the tag? Who made the ink for the logo on it? Who made the cardboard box that it was shipped in? Who made the oil that powered the ship that shipped it over here from China? Who made the ship that it came in? Who was the trucking company that got it from the ship to the wholesaler? Who was the wholesaler?
C'mon... it's a nice thought, but there are so many hours int he day, and in this day and age, most people are worried about how they're going to be able to buy their next meal, not the licensing of their computer's software.
If they're going to discriminate against anonymous posters, why do they have them in the first place?
In any case, this wasn't about being anonymous. Many registered users were having their posts deleted and from what other people have said here, you have the bonus of having your entire post history deleted. Hardly an incentive there.
It was discrimination based on whether or not you agreed with her. Plain and simple.
But I still choose to frequent the website. Not as often as I used to and I certainly take the information presented with a huge pinch of salt. Oh, and I don't even bother looking at the comments now that I've seen her "community" in action.