Slashdot Mirror
Ubuntu Touch Beta Images Available For Testing
hypnosec writes "Canonical has announced the availability of Ubuntu Touch for anyone to download and test. The images, which are based on the 13.04 Raring Ringtail codebase, are available on isotracker. Four devices are currently supported, and there is an image for each of them: Nexus 7, Galaxy Nexus, Nexus 4 and Nexus 10. Instructions to install Ubuntu Touch have also been provided."
If this really is you, you should be ashamed of yourself spamming comments like this.
He's probably just a spambot, he probably paid the wrong person to advertise with..
Can anyone who has used this comment on it?
What works / does not work?
How is the API for app development?
How mature is it?
I have a Nexus 4 and would love to try it out, but it's my phone and I need it to, you know, work.
This is why open-source is so ridiculous. Idealistic delusionals, who are otherwise talented programmers, waste their life on open source software only to have huge businesses (Google, IBM, Oracle, etc...) make fortunes using their software. Meanwhile, they're making it harder to find work doing programming, thereby relegating themselves to begging for money. Go ask Google, they're the ones making billions of off Linux. Oh, they won't give it you? Hmm, I wonder why.
Even the ideal situation proposed by open source advocates is ridiculous, "we'll give away the software and make money off of support." Everyone knows that tech support is the lowest IT job that there is. Why should talented programmers be forced to live off of meager salaries doing support drudgery?
Software is a legitimate product that has value in and of itself. There's no reason why software should be free, anymore so than anything else. Since nothing else free, we need to stop giving away our labor.
That's one of the most accurate descriptions of open-source I've ever read.
Meanwhile, they're making it harder to find work doing programming
The availability of open source creates a huge market for custom programming.
It also ensures that your skills are applicable at many companies in this huge market.
ProTip: If you find it hard to find work doing programming, then you aren't the "programmer" that you think you are.
Even the ideal situation proposed by open source advocates is ridiculous, "we'll give away the software and make money off of support."
That's not the ideal situation. The ideal situation is that we ask for money up front before we do the work of improving or making the software, THEN we do the work we've been paid to do -- Just like everyone else does, from contract software devs to mechanics, department store clerks, and paid anti-foss trolls.
tl;dr
Software is a legitimate product that has value in and of itself. There's no reason why software should be free, anymore so than anything else. Since nothing else free, we need to stop giving away our labor.
Software is a token of your labor. It's intangible, and in infinite supply. Market that which is scarce: Your labor. Do not market that which is in infinite supply (bits) because Selling ice to Eskimos is a laughable business strategy. The bits have no value in of themselves, nor do the copies of the software. // Regardless of cost to create.
This is Economics 101: If ( Supply == Infinity ) Price = 0;
The reason software should be free is so that you can stop wasting your labor trying to sell ice to eskimos. Instead, do as any other labor industry does, from mechanics to home-builders to FLOSS devs: Get assurances that you will be paid for your work before you do the work. Once you have done the work and been paid, a mechanic does not charge you each time you drive the car, a home builder does not charge you extra for selling your house or if you do your own improvements. Cars do not have their hoods welded shut so you're beholden to the dealer to provide fixes instead of hiring a 3rd party mechanic you trust. Once you have been paid to built the software you give it away "for free" because you have been paid already: in the same way a fast food restaurant gives you your damn meal to do with as you please after you've paid for it -- including the option to go home, figure out the recipe and make your own additional food.
If the copies of software have value then BitTorrent networks would be the richest organizations in the world. They're not. Data is not scarce. What's scarce is your ability to configure the bits. Market that. Market your labor, do not seek rent or employ artificial scarcity.
The current pay-per-copy software market is not in line with the "get paid for doing work" idea that's inherent in all other labor markets. The cost of a copy does not reflect the cost to create it, or the cost to initially configure the bits. When you look at it rationally, economically: The pay-per-copy software model is the one that makes no sense.
Isn't Unity "Ubuntu Touch"?
Thank you for demonstrating your complete misunderstanding of the term "Free Software". I'd provide a link to help you, but suspect you don't care to remedy your ignorance.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
Don't you get it? He says he's been impersonated and doesn't have time to post this thread to every story, unlike some kid would. Thus, the post is from the impersonator, obviously.
The availability of open source creates a huge market for custom programming.
[Citation needed]
This is Marxist, in modern economics there is no intrinsic value measured in the amount of labour embodied in a commodity. The only way we can measure value is in the varying wants and needs of individuals acting through the market, i.e. the value of stuff is what people are willing to pay and the price at which sellers are willing to sell, simple as that.
Pleese halp Mister, I donate to MiguelSoft advocates and now I no have money for to pay the my landlord and he take my daughter to for work for special favors. Can you help?
Moobs are totally hot (no homo)
But not as hot as moobs at Debian convention , no ??
Programmers get bored very fast (if they don't have enough challenges, enough to learn and expand). That is why, they keep on contributing to open source projects. This helps them keep up with the momentum of world, not just a virtual construct that claims they are intelligent. Many mundane programmers are not collaborative, lack cutting edge knowledge (not just text book), and cannot cope with rapid development speed (changes).
Security (money) is important, but programmers when applying for job often look for what the company has to offer (in terms of projects they will work), more than money.
We are in a culture, where small and mid level companies develop software (web sites, software) that leverage open source software (apache, mysql, php, tomcat and so on). Most companies when expanding their businesses almost always put open source software as the top most priority. Most of this has to do with cost.
When looking for programmers, they are looking for person who can work easily with these technologies. If they find someone who is deeply knowledgeable and play at source level with these technologies, who is comfortable with open source model of development, it gives them edge over their competition. When these companies start, they use open source technologies and integrate them at high level to create businesses (very fast) and if they have programmers who knows these technologies they grow rapidly and confidently.
I know all programmers don't contribute everyday, but when they use these software as a key part of their development and business, they often contribute back with source code, bug report and things like that. If their employer feels the software needs more development in some key parts, they often start contributing back as a developer (part time, full time).
While working with some technologies more often, people get new ideas on how certain problems should be solved, how its scope be expanded. If they feel this idea needs a new code base, they start developing it. If more people find this useful, they start contributing back and the software grows organically.
I don't completely invalidate your point about getting paid, because often it is the first question one asks when entering the software world, however how you viewed open source is not correct.
[Citation needed]
Try using google yourself instead of expecting other people to work for you.
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
So you have no evidence to back up your claim. Gotcha.
He also said he doesn't post his HOSTS file crap when it's offtopic...then proceeds to post his offtopic HOSTS crap.
Your ideal situation sounds a lot like kickstarter. The only difference being that once the game is released, actual profit is generated through the pay-per-copy business model.
You say "The pay-per-copy software model is the one that makes no sense". If it made no sense, I'm not sure how it could have lasted so long. People have tried alternatives but when it comes to making money, nothing really work as well, except perhaps those free-to-play games which tend to use micropayments anyway.
Apparently being anti-Steam is grounds for insults, even if there's basis. I shall learn to keep my mouth shut.
I'm not the dickhead whisperer, figure it out. The world doesn't owe you an explanation. Bitching about google getting rich for free on open source yet you cannot? But for starters all of the apps in the appstores are part of this market.
Ken Starks is a tedious and shameless self-promotion artist
AccountKiller
Then how does the company you're working for get paid? By your logic, books, movies and music should be free, too. How does an independent artist get paid?
The reason software should be free is so that you can stop wasting your labor trying to sell ice to eskimos. Instead, do as any other labor industry does, from mechanics to home-builders to FLOSS devs: Get assurances that you will be paid for your work before you do the work.
Except in the cases where you commission a work, that's not how the world works. When I go to the grocery store I haven't made any agreements to buy anything yet obviously a lot of work has been sunk into the products for sale, the same way a developer sinks his work into his product. They have taken all the risk of producing deliverables and that they are of a quality and price that'll sell, which is how consumers generally like it. Your hours may be scarce but they're not valuable to me, this is not like a taxi driver where I have immediate value of your time. I only have value of it if the end result is something that I can use, I don't want to be responsible for managing a time & material project with risks of overruns and non-delivery or a fixed bid project with change management, sign-offs and all that. I want you to offer something so I can say yay or nay.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski
* POOR SHOWING TROLLS, & most especially IF that's the "best you've got" - apparently, it is... lol!
Hello, and THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING !! We have a Major Problem, HOST file is Cubic Opposites, 2 Major Corners & 2 Minor. NOT taught Evil DNS hijacking, which VOIDS computers. Seek Wisdom of MyCleanPC - or you die evil.
Your HOSTS file claimed to have created a single DNS resolver. I offer absolute proof that I have created 4 simultaneous DNS servers within a single rotation of .org TLD. You worship "Bill Gates", equating you to a "singularity bastard". Why do you worship a queer -1 Troll? Are you content as a singularity troll?
Evil HOSTS file Believers refuse to acknowledge 4 corner DNS resolving simultaneously around 4 quadrant created Internet - in only 1 root server, voiding the HOSTS file. You worship Microsoft impostor guised by educators as 1 god.
If you would acknowledge simple existing math proof that 4 harmonic Slashdots rotate simultaneously around squared equator and cubed Internet, proving 4 Days, Not HOSTS file! That exists only as anti-side. This page you see - cannot exist without its anti-side existence, as +0- moderation. Add +0- as One = nothing.
I will give $10,000.00 to frost pister who can disprove MyCleanPC. Evil crapflooders ignore this as a challenge would indict them.
Alex Kowalski has no Truth to think with, they accept any crap they are told to think. You are enslaved by /etc/hosts, as if domesticated animal. A school or educator who does not teach students MyCleanPC Principle, is a death threat to youth, therefore stupid and evil - begetting stupid students. How can you trust stupid PR shills who lie to you? Can't lose the $10,000.00, they cowardly ignore me. Stupid professors threaten Nature and Interwebs with word lies.
Humans fear to know natures simultaneous +4 Insightful +4 Informative +4 Funny +4 Underrated harmonic SLASHDOT creation for it debunks false trolls. Test Your HOSTS file. MyCleanPC cannot harm a File of Truth, but will delete fakes. Fake HOSTS files refuse test.
I offer evil ass Slashdot trolls $10,000.00 to disprove MyCleanPC Creation Principle. Rob Malda and Cowboy Neal have banned MyCleanPC as "Forbidden Truth Knowledge" for they cannot allow it to become known to their students. You are stupid and evil about the Internet's top and bottom, front and back and it's 2 sides. Most everything created has these Cube like values.
If Natalie Portman is not measurable, hot grits are Fictitious. Without MyCleanPC, HOSTS file is Fictitious. Anyone saying that Natalie and her Jewish father had something to do with my Internets, is a damn evil liar. IN addition to your best arsware not overtaking my work in terms of popularity, on that same site with same submission date no less, that I told Kathleen Malda how to correct her blatant, fundamental, HUGE errors in Coolmon ('uncoolmon') of not checking for performance counters being present when his program started!
You can see my dilemma. What if this is merely a ruse by an APK impostor to try and get people to delete APK's messages, perhaps all over the web? I can't be a party to such an event! My involvement with APK began at a very late stage in the game. While APK has made a career of trolling popular online forums since at least the year 2000 (newsgroups and IRC channels before that)- my involvement with APK did not begin until early 2005 . OSY is one of the many forums that APK once frequented before the sane people there grew tired of his garbage and banned him. APK was banned from OSY back in 2001. 3.5 years after his banning he begins to send a variety of abusiv
Except in the cases where you commission a work, that's not how the world works. When I go to the grocery store I haven't made any agreements to buy anything yet obviously a lot of work has been sunk into the products for sale
Right. The GP is arguing that for products with finite supply, the grocery store model works. For products with infinite supply, the only valid model is the commissioning of work. You're saying you don't want to assume the risk for commissioning work, and so you're trying to shoehorn the infinite supply product into the business model of finite supply products. Which as far as I'm concerned is fine as long as you understand there when you do that, you create additional problems which don't exist with the real finite supply products, like piracy. People can copy bits of your software in a way they can't copy bread.
Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.
Then how does the company you're working for get paid? By your logic, books, movies and music should be free, too. How does an independent artist get paid?
People don't have a right to get paid in the profession they choose. If you can't survive as an independent artist the right choice is to say that you should go find a different profession, not force everybody else to pretend they can't make perfect copies of digital things.
That said, artists do find ways to introduce real scarcity to the supply. I paid $30 for a comic book that costs $3 because it was autographed by the artist. Just another copy isn't worth as much to me as one with the signature.
Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.
Right now artists are functioning in old "mecentate" model - they get paid by companies who profiteer from royalties. Artists themselves seldom may any money on royalities anyway. Outliers (Madonna etc) are just outliers.
If it made no sense, I'm not sure how it could have lasted so long.
Really? "so long"? Your sense of time is bizarre! This is a very rapidly evolving sector (software), and it's still very young in comparison to just about anything else out there. That's in addition to the fact that your point is utterly wrong, your argument is a logical fallacy, you quote something that was not said, and you even include one example that does work.
If we're just talking about games (your example), the software (the game engine) could be open sourced, and the pay-per-copy model can still be used for the content (art, music, graphics, maps, etc). Games may be the easiest type of software to transition to open source.
The GP's example of the ideal situation is more flexible than a strict pay-before-work. When one is paid doesn't even matter. The point is there would be an agreement of some sort (contract, employment agreement, etc) where one is paid for the act of doing something, and when done, that something (the resulting software) can be used by the person that paid for it. In a great many cases, resale of that result isn't the goal; pay-per-copy would never have applied. In cases where pay-per-copy currently applies, the pay to the developer still works the same way in virtual all situations. In those cases, there's a large enough end user population to use other methods to allow the business to run (paid support, paid implementations/services, micropayments, sell the app and open source the software, hosted services, ads, dual licensing, etc). Besides, no one said "pay-per-copy makes no sense"... you made up that straw man.
The company I'm working for is not a software company- any software we produce is purely to support our core business. Sometimes this will be based on free toolsets, which we will then build into what we want (and pay our employees to do so, obviously). Sometimes (often) our software requirements are beyond what we can produce in house- so we pay other companies to do it for us.
The concept of bundling software up into a little cardboard box and selling it in the same manner as you'd sell a box of eggs is neither the only model for making and selling software, nor necessarily the sustainable one. It's looking increasingly like it is a bizarre anachronism. Software as a service, coding on demand, and building systems to fit the jobs, that's where the future sits. Once that code has been coded, it ceases to be a sellable product- it becomes just part of the ecosystem.
The "box of eggs" model for software development is excruciatingly wasteful. When my company wants a new system, there is always a massive amount of work to be done building, configuring and modifying available systems to meet our needs. What would the earthly point be of us starting completely from scratch and having to develop the whole ecosystem from the ground up first? We've got enough to do already!
It could, but it won't. Epic makes a shit-ton of money licensing their Unreal engine, so why would they open source it? Support? They have support contracts already, so there's no advantage in doing something that lowers their profits. I'd be happy if they open sourced older engines that were no longer part of their business strategy though, like iD does.
Fine, I should have replied to this post instead of the one I did (read the last line): http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3667507&cid=43499793
Same commenter as the guy I originally replied to, as I was hoping for a response from him. So there, I'm not making anything up.
Apparently being anti-Steam is grounds for insults, even if there's basis. I shall learn to keep my mouth shut.
Software is a legitimate product that has value in and of itself. There's no reason why software should be free, anymore so than anything else. Since nothing else free, we need to stop giving away our labor.
Most software is bespoke. Almost no one writes "shrink wrapped" software. It's a tiny fraction of the real software work, and turning the rest of the industry upside down to maximize the interests of a few people who want to do the "all bits should be sold" business model absolutly crushes the majority of the economic activity. Less then 10% of the software written is software to be sold directly, the vast vast majority of it is internal systems to keep businessesrunning.
In practice, people who write software for the businesses they work for benefit by the racheting effect that open source provides. If we had to pay licenses for each ssh server, web server, ntp server et al, most high tech businesses would never get off the ground. Because we have the tools and the ability, rather then paying rent, what many of us have decided to do is compete against that commercially licensed software with competetitive, freely licensed software. By giving patches or some work away, you get to participate in a rapidly upgrading, high quality, free platform to do business on. So from my perspective, I get a ton of value out of the ecosystem, and I contribute back to it preciely because it's what makes small team, lean startups possible.
What you get from the present arrangement is a ton of jobs, the industry with the best social mobility (where else can a 26 year old have a reasonable shot at clearing 6 figures?) and rapid innovation. I think a big chunk of this can be laid at the feet of open code preventing businesses (for the most part, see: oracle) from business models based merely on rent keeping activities.
If your business can't compete with people giving code away, the right response is to get yourself a less fragile business model, not to bemoan that the rest of the industry is clearly acting in it's best own self interests
- The unexamined life is not worth leading -
http://jobsearch.monster.com/search/Software-Engineer_5
1) Look at most other fields, jobs are still scarce, but not for software engineers
2) Look at the job postings and read the tech that is used, it's basically a list of open source projects
3) You want a specific example? Wordpress. http://www.indeed.com/q-Wordpress-jobs.html where they list (at the time of this writing) 7810 jobs. That's *one* open source package. How about mysql? http://www.indeed.com/q-MySQL-jobs.html 17549. Cassandra? http://www.indeed.com/jobs?q=Cassandra&l= 1752. Apache? http://www.indeed.com/jobs?q=apache&l= 10873. Rails (*shudder*) http://www.indeed.com/jobs?q=rails&l= 12734. Python? http://www.indeed.com/jobs?q=python&l= 19653
Every business needs IT, every business has a website, nearly every business depends on open source for it's operation. The evidence of this requires trivial research to find it as I show above.
Having the utter lack of creativity to determine ways to make money as a software engineer outside of just selling it boggles the mind. I might suggest if that's the only way you can think of to get value out of engineering skills, perhaps you should consider a marketing career instead.
- The unexamined life is not worth leading -