No not the same guy. Ferdinand Porshe designed the VW Bug as well as the "Porsche" 911, and died in 1998. Probably the best overall engineer and designer of the 20th century.
There is also no point in continuing this threat if we have fundamentally different underlying ideologies
Whats ironic is that I probably don't have much different views, I'm just not so radical about them. Every piece of software I've written was released under the GPL. But I don't do it under RMS's bastardization of a perfectly good word "freedom".
You obviously refused to read the text of the GPL I provided,
Look, you really misunderstand me if you think that kind of stuff is going to win over my support. I won't be verbally coerced, intimidated or otherwise swayed by backhanded name calling. Its ideological guerilla tactics like that thats convinced me that RMS is off his rocker lately, and you pushing a simular tack is rather distasteful.
I believe *BSD comes to mind,
Yeah a project that actively supports four forks, has become the basis of Apple's operating system (with them releasing their changes mind you) is simply not competing.
And what did you say it was competing with, Windows? A product that took some of the TCP utilities and wrote hundreds of thousands of new lines of whole new operating system underneath is now unfairly competing? Puhlease...
Most of them specifically prevent multiple copies of the same program from being run on different computers.
Thats a crock of bull. I know of no EULA that limits the number of computers you can run it on. If that were so there would only be that many people using it in the world. Now, maybe you need to pay for more liscences before you can run it on more computers, but no one "limits" the number of computers you run it on.
Listen, you really need to lay off the Stallmanist doctrine for a while. Its sevierly clouded your head.
I fail to see how it relates much to socialism in general (which in practice had nothing to do with slf-government).
Its clearer now more then before you haven't a clue what your talking about. Socialism is all about self-government. You just don't get to determine what happens with stuff around you. Kind of like the GPL. Now mind you the USSR was really more fascism/state capitolism like Nazi Germany was more then socialism. Man, I thought everybody knew this stuff. And like I said, I'm not even a socialist.
Then you list a bunch of EULA restrictions you have seen. I've seen them too. But none of them restrict the end user's use of them. And most of them are restrictions for only cheaper versions of the software.
Yes, you do seem to worship Linus, at least in comparison to other FS / OSS leaders, such as Stallman, Raymond, Perens, etc.:s/worship/respect/ig
I've locked horns with BP personally on a few occasions. Honestly he has his strong points, and is remarkably pragmatic in dealing with companies. However his whole Debian->OSF->whatever dance was just a premaddona routine in my eyes.
RMS had my respect for being really ideolistic. He's personally sacrificed more for his ideals then any of the bunch. He really believes in what he says and puts his resources into it. However his GNU/crusade telling people how to name their products was embarassing as a Linux advocate. It set the community back in the eyes of more then one company I've worked for. He got some limelight and was corrupted into stealing more when he felt he didn't get enough.
ESR is a good philosopher, but his brushes with the lime light took him away from his fighting roots. When he made it he kind of drifted off to other things, with some BP like premaddona routine along the way.
Now Mad Dog, theres another hero. I like him. Linus I like becuase he really does seem immune to all the attention. Its not that I look for people to follow, and I don't follow Linus. I don't like some of his decisions in the kernel, and some I'm glad he has the gumption to make. But politically I find myself aligning with him more then any other.
Yes, the BSD-license allows proprietary developers to club their users over the head.
Okay, this could be entertaining. Specify exactly what is "clubbing their users over the head." Fairly vague yet threatening language so far. The use of proprietary software for the end-user is no different then that of use of GPL software, yet you describe it as clubbing them over the head.
This is why BSD-licensed software simply cannot compete with proprietary software.
Hmmm, this is why the BSDs, XFree86, WineX and others are "dead"? They simply couldn't compete with OS-X, Metro-X, and (ahem) WineX? Could you name maybe one project that "couldn't compete" becuase it was BSD?
But lets look at an underlying motive here. You're not talking about freedom anymore, your talking about control. You are assuming a bleak future for those that cannot control what others do with their product.
Lets not make up meaningless phrases here.
I'm dealing with a moron here. Even worse an arrogant moron who presumes that if he/she's never heard of it before someone is making it up.
Socialism means
Hmmm, you even seem to have a rather simplistic idea of what socialism is. Its far off enough to warrant suspicion of you creating straw-men, but in this case I think you never learned any more then you highschool teacher told you. I know better and I'm not even a socialist.
Please turn off your FUD-machine:
What FUD are you talking about? It even restricts output it considers a "a work based on the Program". But even as it is, an end user has no more access to the program then someone that has legally purchased a proprietary program. The GPL guarantees nothing more to the end user then a EULA. (Wait, that did sound like deja vu. I did mention that before.)
Well at least you admitted it when you said "The FSF specifically chose not to enumerate end-user rights".
The FSF and FS advocates are not concerned with getting something for free.
Nope, they are not really interested in the end-user or downstream developers freedom at all.
Why is it that any time an individual has firm beliefs, (s)he's accused of being a zealot?
No its not that you have firm beliefs that make you a zealot, its your blind worship and misinformed stance *and* militant defence of it that makes me suspect you are a zealot.
Simply because I agree with RMS on a few issues does not mean I worship him.
This coming from the person who opened up their responce to me with, "Oh please. When you're done worshiping worshipping Linux Torvalds, please call us so that we can actually engage in an intelligent discussion." What a hypocrite.
When you're done worshiping worshipping Linux Torvalds, please call us so that we can actually engage in an intelligent discussion.
Ahh, I see. So I can't engage in intelligent discussion with you if I actually think Linus is right. Lets mine this for other gems.
I hardly see how RMS, BP, or ESR have been corrupted. That is the most outrageous thing I've ever heard.
That sounds more like blind worship then what I said about Linus.
As for the free/freedom/liberty thing, simply being a long-time member of Slashdot does not make you any more capable of forming judgements on issues than anyone else.
As if I said it did.
In short, any freedom granted by anarchy is temporary.
Agreed.
I think that the potential for a similar situation exists with BSD-licensed software.
Ohhh, you compared BSD to anarchy. That is a gem.
Any proprietary developer can come along and make modifications and release the modified version under a proprietary license, which denies the users many rights.
So what are you saying here. If I release something BSD, someone can come along and change it so me or my friends don't have access to it any more?
This effectively means that the FS / OSS project will die off if any proprietary project decides to take such a tact.
Yep you did. For shame. You know, when you say "intelligent discussion" most people don't know you really meant a FUD festival.
The GPL prevents that.
Sure it does. Its guild socialism.
The entire purpose of the GPL is to ensure the end-user and developers certain freedoms (which RMS deemed important)
No, it doesn't ensure the end-user of anything. Does it mean I will never have to pay for RedHat? No. Does it mean I don't have to pay for Crossover Office? No. Does it really give me any freedom as an end-user not already granted by any other EULA? No.
But if I am a developer it does. Fallicy #1 of the OSS/FS zealots is the blurring of the line of developers and end users.
which RMS viewed as more of a harmful power, than a freedom.
Oh please. I can see where someone agreeing with Linus is a bad thing for an RMS worshiper. I appear to have upset your ideologies.
I can think of a few guys I'd pick as leader of the OSS movement,
Not Bruce Perens, not Eric Raymond, and for the love of anything that is good in the world not RMS. They've all made contributions and have varying political styles that may give them followers but I'd hardly elect them or anyone else as the "leader" of the OSS.
Now as "a" leader of the OSS, I have to admit I find myself aligned more with Linus then any of the others. He's squarely grounded, and showing himself rather resistent to the corrupting influences of the position as opposed to BP, ESR, and RMS.
After all of his noteriety and ascribed power, he still has the end user's freedom at heart. The others seem to want to make decisions for everyone else.
And before this turns into a "free != freedom" debate, I'll remind people that I've been around Slashdot since it was "Bits and Chips", and Rob Malda was more famous for WindowMaker themes then any weblog. I'm familiar with what people have tried to pass off as "free" for a long time, and honestly I don't buy it. I don't think I ever will. The GPL is not "freedom" its guild socialism. Sure its freedom for the guild, and its even pretty magnanimous and beneficial to all. But freedom, it ain't.
actually sold more copies of OS/2 then otherwise would have been. And if OS/2 had gained win95 compliance there is no telling where these OS wars would be right now.
On the other hand, if Microsoft, Sun, and say, Red Hat got togther to build an NFSng that all would put in their products, we'd have a *real* revolution.
I'm not saying at all that innovation isn't happening. Its not happening and any of those companies mind you, but I didn't say it wasn't happening.
Sure you'll see some polishing here, and some integration there. These things I feel are where you will paint as "major improvements", and others here will laugh at you and say "we could have done that 20 years ago.
It turns out that at the time their research showed that Women were the largest growing segment of Mustang purchases. And the Probe was supposed to be the replacement of the Mustang.
we might finally get a decent network filesystem for the 21st century
Mark my words, for the computing paradigms we have today, we've pretty much hit our limits. Don't hold your breath, any real improvements are 20 years out.
What would you like to find out from the future?
When I will die?
Should I invest in RedHat and OSDN?
Will JLo's marraige last?
Do you know Cowboy Neal?
Will they ever make Survivor Redmond?
Who are you replying to? I never "faulted" Novell for anything Groupwise or Zenworks. In fact, its rather clear in the text that I'm saying the compeditors in the Linux arena are completely absent.
Reading around the thread I see that everyone else here acknowledges that eDirectory is an LDAP server, and uses LDAP for its own means. Did you think otherwise?
NDS/eDirectory is based on LDAP. It's not OpenLDAP.
OpenLDAP is fully LDAP v3 compliant. If there is something missing, I don't deny there may be, its not something we've needed in setting up network directory services at our company.
which is a much improved, time-tested implementation of LDAP protocol.
Embrace and extend...
Work with both, for at least a year, with scores of hundreds of users... and then, you tell me.
Whats been funny is the Novell appologists who've crept up in this thread have been so defensive. I never said it wasn't better, yet thats been the point of offence for them. Read the statement again, Novell is given its due credit no need to worry.
It's like saying that Joe's Online store is the same as Amazon because they are both "HTML".
Not so correct. They are not just HTML. It would be okay to say that Amazon and Joe's Online store both have the features of SSL, credit card payments, and books online. Then you say they are both "online stores". As such, its okay to say it is LDAP.
True ones user experience is more refined and capable with Amazon (which I say only because that is I think the point of your analogy.
NDS has a big pile of features and tools that are entirely seperate from the "core" implementation of LDAP.
Sure it does. You and I know them, but think if the casual lurker in this thread. So far the Novell appologists have just alluded to these things. Perhaps you could help and spell some of these out.
But as you do I'm afraid it will be evident that thes VA features are just VA features.
I regret to inform you then that NDS/eDirectory is LDAP.
If Novell puts its knowledge into GNU/Linux so we all profit.
Unlikely. They may build on linux, many of thier utilities run on it already. How they will "improve" linux remains to be seen, and honestly I can't see how. Perhaps they can get the NetWare kernel module up to task for a start.
Sorry, but Linux isn't even in the same league when it comes to network services.
Not to counter-rant, but I never said it was. There are some services that can go head to head with Novell services, and some that are entirely vacant. As a whole integrated package, the synergy just isn't there for Linux.
Nothing else is - not NFS, not SMB, not whatever, just NCP.
You will want to look into AFS then before making such a judgement. It may not change your opinion, but for file serving there is very little lacking.
Further, NDS is far and away the best directory service available today
Not so true. LDAP provides much of the directory services for ADS, NDS and it can for Linux through nsswitch-ldap, and pam-ldap. All of those either come with the major distros. Its much improved over NIS.
Slashdot Mirror
Another interesting fact that I learned from it, he was jailed without trial a by France.
Oops, I linked to Ferdinand's Father, also Ferdinand Porche, who died in 1950.
No not the same guy. Ferdinand Porshe designed the VW Bug as well as the "Porsche" 911, and died in 1998. Probably the best overall engineer and designer of the 20th century.
and it can be easily tailored.
So while you have the source code, this suggest to me that you've never looked at it.
There is also no point in continuing this threat if we have fundamentally different underlying ideologies
:s/worship/respect/ig
Whats ironic is that I probably don't have much different views, I'm just not so radical about them. Every piece of software I've written was released under the GPL. But I don't do it under RMS's bastardization of a perfectly good word "freedom".
You obviously refused to read the text of the GPL I provided,
Look, you really misunderstand me if you think that kind of stuff is going to win over my support. I won't be verbally coerced, intimidated or otherwise swayed by backhanded name calling. Its ideological guerilla tactics like that thats convinced me that RMS is off his rocker lately, and you pushing a simular tack is rather distasteful.
I believe *BSD comes to mind,
Yeah a project that actively supports four forks, has become the basis of Apple's operating system (with them releasing their changes mind you) is simply not competing.
And what did you say it was competing with, Windows? A product that took some of the TCP utilities and wrote hundreds of thousands of new lines of whole new operating system underneath is now unfairly competing? Puhlease...
Most of them specifically prevent multiple copies of the same program from being run on different computers.
Thats a crock of bull. I know of no EULA that limits the number of computers you can run it on. If that were so there would only be that many people using it in the world. Now, maybe you need to pay for more liscences before you can run it on more computers, but no one "limits" the number of computers you run it on.
Listen, you really need to lay off the Stallmanist doctrine for a while. Its sevierly clouded your head.
I fail to see how it relates much to socialism in general (which in practice had nothing to do with slf-government).
Its clearer now more then before you haven't a clue what your talking about. Socialism is all about self-government. You just don't get to determine what happens with stuff around you. Kind of like the GPL. Now mind you the USSR was really more fascism/state capitolism like Nazi Germany was more then socialism. Man, I thought everybody knew this stuff. And like I said, I'm not even a socialist.
Then you list a bunch of EULA restrictions you have seen. I've seen them too. But none of them restrict the end user's use of them. And most of them are restrictions for only cheaper versions of the software.
Yes, you do seem to worship Linus, at least in comparison to other FS / OSS leaders, such as Stallman, Raymond, Perens, etc.
I've locked horns with BP personally on a few occasions. Honestly he has his strong points, and is remarkably pragmatic in dealing with companies. However his whole Debian->OSF->whatever dance was just a premaddona routine in my eyes.
RMS had my respect for being really ideolistic. He's personally sacrificed more for his ideals then any of the bunch. He really believes in what he says and puts his resources into it. However his GNU/crusade telling people how to name their products was embarassing as a Linux advocate. It set the community back in the eyes of more then one company I've worked for. He got some limelight and was corrupted into stealing more when he felt he didn't get enough.
ESR is a good philosopher, but his brushes with the lime light took him away from his fighting roots. When he made it he kind of drifted off to other things, with some BP like premaddona routine along the way.
Now Mad Dog, theres another hero. I like him. Linus I like becuase he really does seem immune to all the attention. Its not that I look for people to follow, and I don't follow Linus. I don't like some of his decisions in the kernel, and some I'm glad he has the gumption to make. But politically I find myself aligning with him more then any other.
If you continue ignoring those rele
Yes, the BSD-license allows proprietary developers to club their users over the head.
Okay, this could be entertaining. Specify exactly what is "clubbing their users over the head." Fairly vague yet threatening language so far. The use of proprietary software for the end-user is no different then that of use of GPL software, yet you describe it as clubbing them over the head.
This is why BSD-licensed software simply cannot compete with proprietary software.
Hmmm, this is why the BSDs, XFree86, WineX and others are "dead"? They simply couldn't compete with OS-X, Metro-X, and (ahem) WineX? Could you name maybe one project that "couldn't compete" becuase it was BSD?
But lets look at an underlying motive here. You're not talking about freedom anymore, your talking about control. You are assuming a bleak future for those that cannot control what others do with their product.
Lets not make up meaningless phrases here.
I'm dealing with a moron here. Even worse an arrogant moron who presumes that if he/she's never heard of it before someone is making it up.
Socialism means
Hmmm, you even seem to have a rather simplistic idea of what socialism is. Its far off enough to warrant suspicion of you creating straw-men, but in this case I think you never learned any more then you highschool teacher told you. I know better and I'm not even a socialist.
Please turn off your FUD-machine:
What FUD are you talking about? It even restricts output it considers a "a work based on the Program". But even as it is, an end user has no more access to the program then someone that has legally purchased a proprietary program. The GPL guarantees nothing more to the end user then a EULA. (Wait, that did sound like deja vu. I did mention that before.)
Well at least you admitted it when you said "The FSF specifically chose not to enumerate end-user rights".
The FSF and FS advocates are not concerned with getting something for free.
Nope, they are not really interested in the end-user or downstream developers freedom at all.
Why is it that any time an individual has firm beliefs, (s)he's accused of being a zealot?
No its not that you have firm beliefs that make you a zealot, its your blind worship and misinformed stance *and* militant defence of it that makes me suspect you are a zealot.
Simply because I agree with RMS on a few issues does not mean I worship him.
This coming from the person who opened up their responce to me with, "Oh please. When you're done worshiping worshipping Linux Torvalds, please call us so that we can actually engage in an intelligent discussion." What a hypocrite.
When you're done worshiping worshipping Linux Torvalds, please call us so that we can actually engage in an intelligent discussion.
Ahh, I see. So I can't engage in intelligent discussion with you if I actually think Linus is right. Lets mine this for other gems.
I hardly see how RMS, BP, or ESR have been corrupted. That is the most outrageous thing I've ever heard.
That sounds more like blind worship then what I said about Linus.
As for the free/freedom/liberty thing, simply being a long-time member of Slashdot does not make you any more capable of forming judgements on issues than anyone else.
As if I said it did.
In short, any freedom granted by anarchy is temporary.
Agreed.
I think that the potential for a similar situation exists with BSD-licensed software.
Ohhh, you compared BSD to anarchy. That is a gem.
Any proprietary developer can come along and make modifications and release the modified version under a proprietary license, which denies the users many rights.
So what are you saying here. If I release something BSD, someone can come along and change it so me or my friends don't have access to it any more?
This effectively means that the FS / OSS project will die off if any proprietary project decides to take such a tact.
Yep you did. For shame. You know, when you say "intelligent discussion" most people don't know you really meant a FUD festival.
The GPL prevents that.
Sure it does. Its guild socialism.
The entire purpose of the GPL is to ensure the end-user and developers certain freedoms (which RMS deemed important)
No, it doesn't ensure the end-user of anything. Does it mean I will never have to pay for RedHat? No. Does it mean I don't have to pay for Crossover Office? No. Does it really give me any freedom as an end-user not already granted by any other EULA? No.
But if I am a developer it does. Fallicy #1 of the OSS/FS zealots is the blurring of the line of developers and end users.
which RMS viewed as more of a harmful power, than a freedom.
Oh please. I can see where someone agreeing with Linus is a bad thing for an RMS worshiper. I appear to have upset your ideologies.
I can think of a few guys I'd pick as leader of the OSS movement,
Not Bruce Perens, not Eric Raymond, and for the love of anything that is good in the world not RMS. They've all made contributions and have varying political styles that may give them followers but I'd hardly elect them or anyone else as the "leader" of the OSS.
Now as "a" leader of the OSS, I have to admit I find myself aligned more with Linus then any of the others. He's squarely grounded, and showing himself rather resistent to the corrupting influences of the position as opposed to BP, ESR, and RMS.
After all of his noteriety and ascribed power, he still has the end user's freedom at heart. The others seem to want to make decisions for everyone else.
And before this turns into a "free != freedom" debate, I'll remind people that I've been around Slashdot since it was "Bits and Chips", and Rob Malda was more famous for WindowMaker themes then any weblog. I'm familiar with what people have tried to pass off as "free" for a long time, and honestly I don't buy it. I don't think I ever will. The GPL is not "freedom" its guild socialism. Sure its freedom for the guild, and its even pretty magnanimous and beneficial to all. But freedom, it ain't.
actually sold more copies of OS/2 then otherwise would have been. And if OS/2 had gained win95 compliance there is no telling where these OS wars would be right now.
On the other hand, if Microsoft, Sun, and say, Red Hat got togther to build an NFSng that all would put in their products, we'd have a *real* revolution.
I'm not saying at all that innovation isn't happening. Its not happening and any of those companies mind you, but I didn't say it wasn't happening.
Sure you'll see some polishing here, and some integration there. These things I feel are where you will paint as "major improvements", and others here will laugh at you and say "we could have done that 20 years ago.
And they would be right.
And we might as well just shut down the Patent Office, too, because everything that can be invented has already been done?
Ad-absurdum does not amuse me.
It turns out that at the time their research showed that Women were the largest growing segment of Mustang purchases. And the Probe was supposed to be the replacement of the Mustang.
we might finally get a decent network filesystem for the 21st century
Mark my words, for the computing paradigms we have today, we've pretty much hit our limits. Don't hold your breath, any real improvements are 20 years out.
Hey good idea for a slashdot poll,
What would you like to find out from the future?
When I will die?
Should I invest in RedHat and OSDN?
Will JLo's marraige last?
Do you know Cowboy Neal?
Will they ever make Survivor Redmond?
Who are you replying to? I never "faulted" Novell for anything Groupwise or Zenworks. In fact, its rather clear in the text that I'm saying the compeditors in the Linux arena are completely absent.
Reading around the thread I see that everyone else here acknowledges that eDirectory is an LDAP server, and uses LDAP for its own means. Did you think otherwise?
NDS/eDirectory is based on LDAP. It's not OpenLDAP.
OpenLDAP is fully LDAP v3 compliant. If there is something missing, I don't deny there may be, its not something we've needed in setting up network directory services at our company.
which is a much improved, time-tested implementation of LDAP protocol.
Embrace and extend...
Work with both, for at least a year, with scores of hundreds of users... and then, you tell me.
Whats been funny is the Novell appologists who've crept up in this thread have been so defensive. I never said it wasn't better, yet thats been the point of offence for them. Read the statement again, Novell is given its due credit no need to worry.
It's like saying that Joe's Online store is the same as Amazon because they are both "HTML".
Not so correct. They are not just HTML. It would be okay to say that Amazon and Joe's Online store both have the features of SSL, credit card payments, and books online. Then you say they are both "online stores". As such, its okay to say it is LDAP.
True ones user experience is more refined and capable with Amazon (which I say only because that is I think the point of your analogy.
NDS has a big pile of features and tools that are entirely seperate from the "core" implementation of LDAP.
Sure it does. You and I know them, but think if the casual lurker in this thread. So far the Novell appologists have just alluded to these things. Perhaps you could help and spell some of these out.
But as you do I'm afraid it will be evident that thes VA features are just VA features.
Silly grayantimatter...
Comparing OpenLDAP to NDS/eDirectory is wrong.
I regret to inform you then that NDS/eDirectory is LDAP.
If Novell puts its knowledge into GNU/Linux so we all profit.
Unlikely. They may build on linux, many of thier utilities run on it already. How they will "improve" linux remains to be seen, and honestly I can't see how. Perhaps they can get the NetWare kernel module up to task for a start.
Sorry, but Linux isn't even in the same league when it comes to network services.
Not to counter-rant, but I never said it was. There are some services that can go head to head with Novell services, and some that are entirely vacant. As a whole integrated package, the synergy just isn't there for Linux.
Nothing else is - not NFS, not SMB, not whatever, just NCP.
You will want to look into AFS then before making such a judgement. It may not change your opinion, but for file serving there is very little lacking.
Further, NDS is far and away the best directory service available today
I'd believe its the best. No need for hyperbole.
MPlayer supports RealAudio
My attempts as of a month ago were unsuccessful. Do you have any generaly guidance to getting this to work?
Not so true. LDAP provides much of the directory services for ADS, NDS and it can for Linux through nsswitch-ldap, and pam-ldap. All of those either come with the major distros. Its much improved over NIS.
Oh how many times has been heard
the slashdot war cry "email them".
When in violent passion the nerd
mixed flammible breath and igniting pen.
And opon corporations came the herd
of emails in flooding streams unbroken.
In crafty demise the corps did gird
slashdot with the purchased by OSDN.
Now email storms are thought obsurd
and fuel for the flame to the nerd is returned.
Thats unpossible.