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...
I can't say that I have had any problems with Linux and hardware, especially since the 2.6 kernel. Even for relatively new hardware, things just seem to work.
This is even true with various laptops I have used. All the devices work perfectly, even the wireless capabilities. In many cases the drivers are already included, whereas with Windows XP I was forced to either download the drivers or obtain them from a vendor disc.
For desktop use, it doesn't matter if the nVidia drivers are mostly closed-source. As long as they work, that's fine. When it comes to servers, there's often little need for proprietary drivers. At my place of work, either we use Solaris (which wasn't open sourced until recently) or OpenBSD. Either way, there's no need for proprietary drivers in the first place, even with rather obscure SCSI and networking devices.
Idiot.
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
but it seems to be making him money, so who am I to argue?
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.
Last week's Slashdot article on Theo de Raadt was about how he's not using binary drivers.
Ever try writing a 1 to the /proc/self/seccomp file? That blocks everything except read/write on already-open file descriptors, exit, and some stuff for returning from signal handlers. On x86, the cycle counter is disabled too.
The alternative is an extremely strict SE Linux policy, but seccomp is probably better for this job. One could use both at the same time I suppose.
I don't want some spyware crap telling Sony/Microsoft/Real/Sorensen about everything I do and probably acting as a backdoor.
Gundam Wing expresses it nicely:
From a historical point of view, warriors who have lost what they were protecting and were further betrayed by those they were protecting are losers. But they do not recognize themselves as such. Not only that, but they retain a strong will to continue fighting. The emotions of those who were thought to be beautiful are always full of sorrow, and honored tradition disappears in the cry of the weak. Winners of a battle will eventually decline in power and become losers, and then those 'losers' will cultivate a new leader.
Sir, I'm not sure, but I think you might be dumb.
/\SS!
Configuring OSS is not like hazing. Hazing is what "they" do to you so you can be accepted by "them".
You configure OSS so that it will do what you want it to do. And you learn something about how it works in the process.
We used to spend time compiling apps. Then package managers got better and adding apps is now easier and automated.
We used to spend time configuring X, now most distros can handle that for you.
The progression we are seeing is not one where folks are becoming less interested in OSS as it becomes easier to install/configure/use. In fact, it's the opposite.
The functionality bar keeps getting raised by the community, who continue to dream up new abilities and uses for OSS. They only have so much time, and when it's freed up from not having to spend a lot of it configuring a basic system, then they have more time to dedicate to developing that application they really are interested in.
And, as for the folks you refer to as 'losers', they will continue to configure linux to do what they want it do- only their expectations of what constitutes basic functionality will continue to grow.
Well, there are quite a few college students that have joined the cult. But they usually see the light when they hit the real world.
Two weeks ago, I posted a message after Kevin Carmody introduced Freespire at the Linux Desktop Summit. For those who didn't see it, the message seems relevant to this discussion, so I thought that I would ask forgiveness for repeating myself and post it again. Here's what I wrote: "Linspire is, of course, a purely commercial effort, with the goal of selling a shrink-wrapped OS that looks externally as much like Windows as possible. His target audience is not the Slashdot crowd, but rather the people who buy their computers at Wal-Mart. Really! For them, it's all about the out-of-the-box experience, starting up a computer with preinstalled OS and apps and just using it. As someone who has recently installed Mandriva, Fedora 5, and Ubuntu Breezy on various machines, I think that the experience is much better than it once was, but still falls short of the "Wal-Mart" or even the Windows experience. To listen to Kevin Carmody, Freespire is offered in the spirit of recognizing the contributions of the open source community, and giving people the opportunity to stay "pure", i.e., without licensed and proprietary pieces, or hybrid, where the user can choose to download and perhaps pay for the licensed and proprietary pieces. He gave an analogy with food, where the choices were Junk Food (Windows and proprietary software), Healthy Food, and Vegan. Open source vegans, of course, are those who would never want music in the proprietary MP3 format or images in the proprietary JPG format. His belief is that most consumers and business people would like Healthy Food, which is some mix of Linux and those proprietary formats, plus some drivers for graphics cards, etc.. He and his company are actually going out to Fortune 500 companies and talking to them about why they should consider a move to something like Freespire rather than suffering the pain and expense of migrating to Windows Vista (if and when it ever ships). This is a fairly brave, not to say crazy, thing to do, and I think that they deserve some credit and support for their evangelism, even from people who don't care for the whole Linspire business. Getting 3-4% penetration of Linux (any flavor) on corporate desktops would be quite an achievement, and it won't come from Linspire on its own. Carmody also said that they are going to open source Click N Run because they think that it is the best updating program, and are offering it to others for the taking. If I were responsible for Ubuntu or other Debian-based distros, I would be very tempted to take them up on their offer. I've done enough "apt-get"s."
most users would prefer to have something - anything - that works in the meanwhile.
Jesus fucking Christ! Is this something that has slipped past the great minds behind the Linux revolution!?!? Yet you fucktards STILL don't understand why Linux isn't catching on. Man, this kind of stupidity really burns my ass.
The distro I use, Gentoo, lets you play mp3s easily. In fact most Linux distributions do. I don't think it's a controversial issue that people want interoperability with their closed format files.
But that's not the issue people have with Linspire.
I'll probably be modded down for this...
I'm guessing that this response was motivated (at least in part) by the effort of PJ at Groklaw. For those that have visited recently, PJ did a scathing article on Linspire/Freespire. Really harsh stuff which a lot of people found pretty unwarranted. Myself included.
... deleted. Then it descended into farce.
So I posted anonymously as I usually do. The odd thing that happened to me was that I found my post deleted. So I posted again
She seemed convinced that this was an orchestrated attack by Linspire "astroturfers". And when Kevin posted to the forum, she wouldn't talk to him and asked him for an apology from the (imaginary, IMHO) astroturfers. Having said that, Kevin did quote an email he sent PJ which I thought was poor form.
Anyway, I literally sat there for ages watching post after post being deleted which I thought was amazing. A large number of these posts were quite sensible. They just didn't tow the Groklaw line.
When it had calmed down a couple of days later, I posted that here is a place where they discuss free speech, but don't practice it. Quite frankly, the amount of groupthink and censorship I saw left me with a very different opinion of the place.
The best thing about Slashdot's comment system is that it keeps all the posts. Even the trolls.
Yeah, he's a flame warrior, but he's of the old school, and I for one believe we should support this dying style.
Lack of backwards compatibility would "doom all driver projects to eternal development", except that kernel drivers are updated by whoever breaks backwards compatibility. This is why drivers need to be in the official kernel source tree. Driver authors often sit back and relax while other people make the required changes to all drivers in the tree. Updating the drivers is often a robotic task, often taken on by the "kernel janitors" team.
This usually keeps the less-popular drivers alive for many years, though not forever of course. Linux just recently lost support for the PC-XT hard drives that came in 5 MB, 10 MB, and 20 MB sizes back in the early 1980's. (these never shipped with a 386, but people sometimes put the old drives in newer machines) It is unlikely that any of these drives still work.
Who can authorize the release of anything? Well, a CEO can, but he's kind of busy. An engineer certainly can't.
Get a market share above 10% and vendors with consider to release on Linux. Get a market share above 20% and vendors will release on Linux. Get a market share above 30% and vendors can't afford not to release on Linux!
5 .pdf). How to fix this inhibitor? One important action (IMHO the most important) is to declare the guidelines of wyoGuide (http://wyoguide.sf.net/) as the Linux application standard!
How to get a higher market share? Fix the first top inhibitor of the Linux adoption (http://www.osdl.org/dtl/DTL_Survey_Report_Nov200
There might be other actions to fix this inhibitor but I don't know any. Just voice them here and now. But be sure unless this inhibitor isn't fix fast, the market share of Linux will stay low, too low for any significance.
IMHO it's essential that anybody (maybe O'Reilly) starts a Linux conference about this subject to discuss any possibility.
O. Wyss
See http://wyoguide.sf.net/papers/Cross-platform.html
Dell's BIOS was doing some nasty hack to work around an Intel chipset bug. The bios would just grab the CPU in System Management Mode, totally messing up real-time.
Since we didn't have source, we had to solder tiny wires to the CPU just to find out what was going on. We then determined the problem using a digital logic analyser. (looks kind of like a scope)
I find your argument to apply equally well to the open source drivers, as well as the closed source ones.
While in theory I could fix a bug myself in the open source drivers, that likely isn't the case. I just don't have the technical know-how to diagnose such a problem, let alone figure out how to fix it. I could try to find somebody who could fix it, but that will take time and money.
What it comes down to, open or closed source, is that if the driver runs into a problem, I may not be able to fix it. For a non-technical end-user, it's basically the same situation for both types of drivers. The limiting factor is that I do not have the knowledge to fix a broken driver, which renders the fact that it's open or closed source irrelevant.
The LXer article states "...to educate newcomers with respect to the importance of keeping software free" but people, especially customers, don't like to be educated of something they don't care. What would you think if the car seller wants to educate you that 60mph are more than sufficiant for any driving? Would you buy a car there or leave for another shop?
h tml
O. Wyss
PS. See http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/54009/index.
See http://wyoguide.sf.net/papers/Cross-platform.html
When did jpegs become proprietary? I thought this was the whole reason the FSF was using jpegs when everyone else was using GIFs on their website.
By two tracks I mean one track that has a Linspirish philosophy of just make it work for newbies even if that also means including some closed source proprietory software, AND a purist RMS FSF.
Really these two tracks compliment each other the closed source development track brings in newbewies while the purest camp can defend our freedoms and perhaps save our butts if DRM becomes very prevalent.
The point is though why does each side have to try to convert the other to it's philosophy as my way or the highway? Lets let them both run and see what happens, after all that's what's going to happen anyway, it's very unlikely either FSF or closed source software is going away any time soon.
I use OS X which has closed source software in the OS and I run closed source apps as well, but I also run fink/KDE as well on top of the open source Darwin base at times, as well as running Firefox as my browser. Does that mean one "side" or the other should work to convert me? What nonsense, what a waste of developer time, and above all how immature.
Can't you argue about something of real importance like poverty, or war, or whether peak oil is real, etc?
Tired of all the isms, don't exploit people as an employer, or a government, mmmmK?
About a year ago I heard an interview with Kevin Carmony, who at that time has just become CEO for Linspire. Up until that interview I had a pretty negative impression of Linspire (Lindows), but I had never actually tried it. I must admit, however, that I was really impressed with the LUG radio interview. The new CEO explained and addressed most of the misconceptions I had about Linspire up to that time. Linspire has done much for getting Linux pre-installed on desktop computers. They have been around for five years now, and have contributed a lot to open source (http://linspire.com/opensource). I think much of the misunderstanding stemmed from Linspire's target audience being non-technical consumers, which the slasher crowded couldn't appreciate. LUG Radio interviewed Kevin again this week, a year later, and he talked about Freespire. Once again I was impressed by his candor. I run Debian on my computers, but I'm grateful for the past year of education that I've had in coming to understand Linspire and their goals. I even plead guilty to recommending it to my non-technical friends when they say they'd like to try Linux (not sure they're ready for Debian without the ease-of-use coat of paint Linspire and others add).
I'm planning on taking a look at Freespire. I am intrigued.
R. Singfield
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.
I always play my MP3s with a legitimate, patent-licensed player. After I download them from eDonkey.
Kevin and Michael are both incredibly nice guys who have a particular angle of insight that no other distro has. That is, that users want something that just works in ways that leave ordinary people knowing what to do, or better, not needing to do anything except the task that interests them. Linspire gets it that most people don't want to do things more complicated than click and run. It takes an enormous effort to make software be just click and it works. That deserves our respect.
All of us are contributing, each in the ways we most understand. This sniping at each other, it is simply harmful.
I think I am going to go install Linspire. Let's face it, I don't have the time to hassle with making mp3s and dvd players and voip work on the big distros either, and I am a Linux developer, I can't imagine what ordinary users do when they want to use Linux on one of these distros that requires you to get libraries that don't just compile and work and somehow install them before your dvds can play. Or have they finally gotten it together recently, someone tell me....
If it is not written by me, it should just click and run.;-) Or at least, make and run.
Oh, and pissing on nvidia is not reasonable. At least they port to Linux, ATI just ignores us.
Charity is something to be thankful for, not to demand. Free software is charity. I like to do it myself, but that gives me no right to demand it of other more sensible persons.
A couple of years ago, the 'Linux Incompatibility List' was created to track stuff that doesn't work with Linux:
http://www.leenooks.com/
It may not be much, but it has the advantage that it points out what to avoid, and it's community maintained - with all the hardware out there these days, no one person can know about it all.
http://www.welton.it/davidw/
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.
In five years of holding out, the Lindows company has made relatively few gains, in terms of convincing customers to buy their repackaging. In other words, the strategy doesn't seem to be working.
The difference in thought here is that I view it as nothing more than any other tool. I want it to work, I don't care how it works. If I have to take notice of it or spend more time to make it work then its not working.
As such, I won't bother with Linux on my desktop because I don't care to have to think to use the damn PC. Its a tool, as such the OS should be as transparent as possible. If I have to do more than slap a CD in to get my latest addition to my PC to work then its not transparent enough. Just as my friend uses OS/X over Linux? Why, because it just works, no thought needed. The OS is not germane to his work and as such it wasn't worth his time to install Linux on a machine. Whats the point?
Convert hell, convert the attitude that only "real computer" users are those who use linux. The whole attitude you espouse smacks of elitism.
Screw that. Its just an OS.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
"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
We had a few developers build a mission critical system based on Kylix to run
on our desktop clients. Now here we are a few years later and borland decides to
end of life the development environment. The runtimes are dependant on the kernel versions. Now guess what I have, a program that I have to compile and or change on a old version of the operating system and I cannot upgrade production to anything newer I am forever stuck in this situation until a large amount of money is spent to replace the application....That gents is exactly why Kevin is just plain wrong I don't need and I sure don't want your proprietary software.
Got Code?
Your PC is a multipurpose tool.
Mine are not. Every one is specialized.
Each does a list of jobs and does them well and every one either saves me money or makes me money.
So on so fourth. Every PC I have is a tool in its own right and every one does its job perfectly well. I possibly can replace them with a single Winhoze box. It may do everything they do, but it will do every single thing worse than they do it now. In addition to that it will cost me more over its lifetime in essential expenses, maintenance and power consumption.
Such is life. Winhoze and MacOS X are multipurpose. Linux is multirole. While Linux cannot be made to do all of the tasks Winhoze does simultaneously, it can be optimised for a specific role to do it much better than Winhoze. Personally, I would rather stick with several tools each of which does its job well instead of a single that does all job at a mediocre level. Other people may make a different choice
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
... except you picked the perfect example of linux drivers that always WORK FLAWLESSLY. You run the file, and if it can't pull a binary from nVidia it compiles a driver right there and then for you. I've installed it on many, many machines with more than 10 differnt nVidia cards and have never had an issue. nVidia has a vested interest in keeping those drivers working well because, quite frankly, ATI's been sucking (Only supports radeon 8500 and later, DIFFERENT CODEBASE THAN THE WINDOWS DRIVERS, mising features, etc.)
nVidia is the PERFECT example of closed source drivers done right.
One basic problem is that this is part of a long-term strategy to proprietarize GNU/Linux. You start by including a few free-as-in-beer drivers and codecs. You make sure that some of those codes only Linspire can distribute. Now, no one else can compete on those codecs. You add a few desktop applications that are again, a free download from Linspire, but no one else can contribute. A few years down the line, you hope people standardize on Linspire. Then, you offer "Linspire/Pro", which costs money, but includes slightly nicer versions of the apps. A few years down the line "Freespire" is a crippleware relic, whereas "Linspire/Pro" is nice, and we're back to Windows. Only initially developed by free labor.
A second basic problem is that it makes binary-only drivers work in the short-term, so there's less incentive to release specs or free drivers. Binary-only drivers are fragile. The Linux APIs and ABIs constantly change, so your hardware works only so long as the manufacturer keeps supporting it (and there, only on supported kernels). If 5 years down the line, your 802.11 card has a driver for 2.8.19, but your 3d card for 2.8.16, you can't use both at the same time. It's insanely fragile. Free drivers work forever.
It's a slippery slope. Let's not start down it.
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.
The point of an operating system is to enable the user to get their stuff done.
You mean... Like solataire?
Look at porn?
Play some games?
Write grandma an email?
Many developers have high hopes for the end user's goal into create Nobel Prize winning works on their PCs.
Really, the end user just wants the operating system to work without fiddling with it.
But the same applies to the what you said about getting stuff done. But let us not kid ourselves about what the end user is actually doing.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
The real question is, (using a car analogy) if you needed to get it fixed, do you always want to go to the dealer, or do you want to be able to go to another mechanic?
Today most customers have never seen, nor heard of, a local software repair shop, so to them there is not a difference -- the distributor of the software is the only place to go to get it fixed if there is something wrong with it.
Most people will never actually see the value of free software until there is a local software fix-it shop, because they aren't qualified to fix it themselves.
- "History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men" -- Blue Oyster Cult, 'Godzilla'
For some other insights from Kevin check out this weeks LUGRadio interview from the episode "Pigeon! Like your English!" availible at http://lugradio.org/episodes/50.
First, don't post anonymously if you want a thoughtful critique to be taken seriously. Anonymous posting of anything in favor of a commercial product just screams "astroturfer", here and on Groklaw.
Second, if your non-anonymous comments get deleted, do what I do: repost them on your own web site, with explanatory commentary on the censorship. And then don't waste any more time using the site in question.
Freedom of speech is basically reserved for those who own their own publications; the sooner people realize that, the better.
As you seem to realize, you're never going to force a site like FARK or (you allege) Groklaw to stop engaging in invisible arbitrary censorship, so it's not worth trying. To continue to use the site is to bolster their credibility. So quit, and write your comments elsewhere.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Had you continued to read the article you would have read that the chipsets were STILL SUPPORTED, just not under the unified driver. The Riva TNT is what, 7 years old? I would hope that code would have worked its way out of the unified driver.
You probably missed the "real-time" part of the grandparent post.
You likewise missed the "software we use for development". This would include the operating system that the code-editing and compilation machines run, especially as opposed to the "libraries that we license for use in our products" that runs in a real-time environment. This software used on development machines includes BIOS and video card drivers; is their source code available?
Impressive that you have built a solution that works so well for you, and I like seeing happy Linux users. That out of the way, your very argument is what makes me so happy I am so far away from Open Source elitist bullshit these days.
A few years ago, I switched to OSS full time - I would not go near proprietary solutions for work or for play based on the premise that I believed OSS was the end all be all of everything. I loved the philosophy, I like most of the software, and I didn't mind when the software was incapable of doing what I needed to do - I enjoyed the challenge of 'making it work'.
These days I use a Mac for my work. Why? Because at some point, I need to be able to do my work. My computer is not a toy, it is not for games, it is for work.
By trade, I am a graphic designer/web coder. Linux/FOSS does not have the capabilities to do my work. Period. I am reliant on closed source software (Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, etc) to get things done.
When you argue that anyone who is serious about their work will convert, I think you are correct - you just did not mention what we will convert to.
Do I like Linux and OSS as a whole? Yes. I use a lot of OSS software on a daily basis (vim, openoffice, firefox, etc). But a computer is there to do what you want it to do, when you want to do it. I hope in the future I can rely on Open Source to build the tools I need, but just because I can't at this time, that does not make my work or my needs a triviality as the elitists would suggest.
Your needs are not my needs, and apparently my needs aren't what open source developers on the whole care about. If the community would stop being so rabid and learn to bend a little bit, I think we would all be far better off.
But i still feel like what we unionized people with plenty o' hair on the chest and lower regions call a "dirty little scab". I dont like the feeling, hope i one day will get rid of it...but darn sometimes you just have to listen to Edit piaf - je ne regrette rie.mp3
I took a couple of broadsides over this concerning the availability of apps on given operating systems. The gist of it all was if the Wintel world is so convoluted, why don't you just go use FOSS to do what you want. My original point was a comparison of the state of Apple and Wintel experiences, but the bottom line is it's the end result that counts. Can you be who you need to be and get the work you need done or not. It's about balancing htree dimensions of time, money and headaches.
Case in point. Astronomy software. I want to be able to head outside and decode the sky and use a scope. For a while I paid StarryNight because it was impressive and did everything. Once they jacked the price had to consider if I needed everything or if I could live with something less frilly. For a few dollars I can use shareware Equinox. It will always do what it does, it's way leaner than StarryNight and can control my scope. And for free, I can use Stellarium, which is OSS, beautiful, responsive, no scope, but everyone I know can use the same app across platforms.
However, if I had to involve everyone in builds, or an install so huge it should only be shipped on CDs, or requiring X11 or other layer(s) of techie stuff, it'd be back to Equinox and pay for the upgrade.
Blasphemy, I know, but when I want to go look at the stars I don't want to be the IT guy in order to get it done.
You can multiply that by a bunch if you subsitute millions of WalMart customers for me and everything plain old people need to do for "astronomy".
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
We are "in violent agreement". I understand your motives for going with MacOS. For me it is useless. My trade is network stuff and more specifically design, VOIP and QoS. I am not going to get anywhere close to getting any work done on neither Winhoze nor MacOS. Both suck to that effect. So I do not use them.
Every tool for its job. Some are better than the others, some are worse, but as a general rule a specialized tool will beat a general purpose one.
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
Given the billions they're putting into Linux development, they might as well spend a few bucks on letters to manufacturers that'll make it a lot easier for them to package Linux solutions for people.
They are in a position to blow some doors open for us.
Tech Public Policy stuff
NO, Not by the way you are defining 'users'.
Unlike commercial software or commercial anything, Linux and other volunteer type products don't need the same type of customers.
True customers for OSS are people who will tinker with it, and develop for it. Its success is dependent only on these type of people existing (assuming the IT sector was a level playing field).
All other types of users like the desktop and server users are really irrelavent. If they come along for the ride, GREAT (IMO, some disagree), but if they don't that isn't as great, but it is OK... not really a loss for OSS.
Obviously commercial software is different, they need paying customers, who provide the funding to pay to develop software; whose focus is on what the customers want which could be something you tricked them into thinking they want and not necessarly 'better' software defined from a pure CS point of view because few if any customers actually CARE about 'better' other than defined by theyselves.
I run my Linux box with full multimedia, it's the machine I use to do business with. . . as somebody who currently writes Linux tutorials for a living.
I would simply not be in business if I couldn't run Linux with proprietary commercial apps like Win4Lin (which lets me run the nonFOSS Windows OS in emulation) and several other proprietary Linux apps... including the Turboprint package of print drivers that supports the Canon printer print-to-CD capability. Or at any rate, I would be in business as a Windows or Mac user, because the base Linux distro installs are NOT READY for SOHO business use.
The fact that the people who have Linux multimedia are either using Linspire style training wheels distro or are part of a l33t minority is all that one really needs to know about Linux usability out of the box. It isn't supposed to be a technical achievement to be able to watch a movie on your computer.
If the fanatics whining about Linspire were to get usable replacements for Linux proprietary apps and the Winblows legacy proprietary apps like PaintShopPro (yes, I've tried GIMP2... it is teh suxx0rs), I'd be happy to ditch my proprietary apps. I can't even use OpenOffice2.0 to do my final edits of Linux tutorials because it doesn't handle highlighting in Word document files correctly... in the way my editors expect. They can write a shitload of new drivers while they're at it, or find a way to induce the vendors to do so. [not impossible, persuading IBM/HP/other megacorps supporting Linux to lean on peripheral vendors might not be difficult]
The zealots don't get that we people who use our boxes to make a living can't wait for the OpenSource movement to get around to writing everything we need in order to make our computers function as we need them to. We don't live in mommy's basement, we work for a living. They can fix the problems, find ways to get them fixed, or STFU.
Tech Public Policy stuff
Even Linus Torvalds runs a Mac as his personal workstation.
It isn't just drivers, it's the apps that exist on Windows and OSX that don't have usable equivalents in Open Source.
As these usable apps (graphics is the biggest problem... when will a usable replacement for GIMP2 appear?) appear, I'll be nuking my Windows legacy apps I run in Win4Lin (Linux proprietary Win virtual environment) one by one. Though what I actually expect is that CPU hardware virtualation support will make it possible to simply run Windows as just another OS and I'll get rid of Win4Lin first... and keep running legacy apps.
Just because Linux zealots think an app is adequate means that anyone in his right mind will actually use it. The biggest obstacle to Linux on the desktop is the apps zealots think are "good enough" so they've stopped working on the UI or functionality... that suck.
Tech Public Policy stuff
Read this slashdot story and the responses CAREFULLY and then come back and post your response. Many people are PISSED about the usability of GNU software who WOULD like to use it, how hard is that to understand?
/ 1315235
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/12
Tired of all the isms, don't exploit people as an employer, or a government, mmmmK?
I'm not going to use something that sucks (e.g. GIMP2) if I actually have to work using it and there's a proprietary app that does the job right.
Tech Public Policy stuff
- I don't believe in God.
- I don't use Linux.
Religion and Linux zealots have one thing in common. Both believe "You're either with us or against us." If it has to be like that, then I'm against you both. Having R all TFAs, it all reads like a big dick size contest. Pitiful.It's a very dark ride.
The whole point of a codec is to do "calculations on hunks of data".
Read compressed data. Write uncompressed data. Repeat.
Also, prior to setting seccomp, a mmap can be prepared.
this guy's post brought up some intersting points. I belive that their should be a free alternative to everything. But we are not in a perfect world, so I think we could work towards that though education. I agree with what he says, the FOSS zelots are making things worse trying to turn this into an all or nothing game. Some people just dont have the choice right now...