Unfortunately, innovation in Open Source software, that is to say non-market-driven software, seems to follow the following formula:
1) Get an idea
2) Write an 0.1 version
3) Archive at SourceForge
4) Repeat
Rigor is a function of one of two conditions: economics or obsession. Innovation based on economics/market is the Microsoft approach, which is why they're the 800-pound gorilla.
At this time, the Remote Shell Trojan source code is not known to be available.
This...thing violates the GPL and everything Open Source stands for! They could sell it commercially, and not even contribute back to the code base! That's just so, so, so non-Stallman that it makes my middle finger itch!
What is 'success' for Amiga? Some people seem to think it's a return to being the little box that outpaced all the competitors in graphics and sound performance. Others think it's the ability to write really cool software that will enable any box to be the little box that outpaces all the competitors, etc...
The one point here is that Amiga isn't defining success as being Open Source, or making really cool graphics and sound hardware. They're defining success as finding a way to stay in business, whether or not that matches with the expectations of the old Amiga user base or with the expectations of the current Mac users who say that the Mac is really the best Amiga ever made.
If you think this is easy, try creating and supporting a hardware/software platform sometime, not just a piece of somebody else's project, and see how far you get. Amiga deserves respect for surviving in its various forms this long, not derision for not being exactly what you want it to be.
If you take away the guitars, then there's no chance of infringement. I can think of many people who need their guitars taken away, and would be happy to provide a list (with home addresses) to facilitate this action.
Or I suppose you could just stop selling strings. That would work too.
It would rock if people would stop making lists of Open Source/Free Software and start finding ways to convince people with money that there are ways to make more money using Open Source/Free software, so that we can use money instead of lists to fund development.
Making lists is fun, though, and probably passes the time.
And I'm sure that his shifting position between two groundswell movements that have minor philosophical differences is going to greatly enhance his credibility while making a marginal economic proposition to some of the largest corporations in the world.
Finally we grind those money-grubbing capitalist lackeys beneath our boots, eh comrades? Eh?
If it's companies that make money by providing Open Source software, it should be a sparsely attended meeting, unless they include all the companies that tried. I think Bruce is probably trying to present a value proposition that there are lots and lots of indirect economic benefits of using Open Source software, and that it's worth it for companies to spend money on Open Source because they'll make it back somehow. Or maybe he's trying to keep his name in the public eye, or both.
Undoubtedly Linus had a lot of job offers. It's naive to think that he decided to turn down Jobs (or jobs) based on some inner fire and drive. Linus is accustomed to being the reluctant hero of a charismatic movement, a job which Steve Jobs already holds at Apple. Transmeta allowed Linus to a) be a l33t coder, b) continue as the figurehead for Linux kernel development, and c) not take sides on the desktop OS issue, which would have been politically unwise. I'm sure the choice was not as difficult as these sensationalist articles and writeups would have us believe.
It's somewhat interesting that most of the standards developed out of a requirement to keep commerce and business flowing and moving, with emphasis placed on commonality and uniformity. Now so-called 'standards' actually *compete* for business. This suggests to me that the critical industries, where actual material is moved as commodity, require real, common, physical standards, and that all the other 'industries' are really just using standards as another term for product. No wonder certification exams are so hard to standardize.
Bzzz! Wrong! Before you start mocking me, why don't you check YOUR facts out, buddy.
I"m sure there are plenty of keen sites on mach out there. Try reading information from a web site without "linux" in the domain name -- You might find some unbiased information.
Um.. Do you know who Greg Lehey is? Obviously not, but he has over 20 years of experience in the unix industry, and is among the founding fathers of BSD in general.
Come on, Linux users, learn some stuff about the REAL unix world...
Slashdot Mirror
What kind of medical facility is this, and how can I check in?
Although slashdot loves to post Damian Conway stories, those who still haven't had their fill can follow his online diary at yetanother.org.
Unfortunately, innovation in Open Source software, that is to say non-market-driven software, seems to follow the following formula:
1) Get an idea
2) Write an 0.1 version
3) Archive at SourceForge
4) Repeat
Rigor is a function of one of two conditions: economics or obsession. Innovation based on economics/market is the Microsoft approach, which is why they're the 800-pound gorilla.
At this time, the Remote Shell Trojan source code is not known to be available.
This...thing violates the GPL and everything Open Source stands for! They could sell it commercially, and not even contribute back to the code base! That's just so, so, so non-Stallman that it makes my middle finger itch!
What is 'success' for Amiga? Some people seem to think it's a return to being the little box that outpaced all the competitors in graphics and sound performance. Others think it's the ability to write really cool software that will enable any box to be the little box that outpaces all the competitors, etc...
The one point here is that Amiga isn't defining success as being Open Source, or making really cool graphics and sound hardware. They're defining success as finding a way to stay in business, whether or not that matches with the expectations of the old Amiga user base or with the expectations of the current Mac users who say that the Mac is really the best Amiga ever made.
If you think this is easy, try creating and supporting a hardware/software platform sometime, not just a piece of somebody else's project, and see how far you get. Amiga deserves respect for surviving in its various forms this long, not derision for not being exactly what you want it to be.
If you take away the guitars, then there's no chance of infringement. I can think of many people who need their guitars taken away, and would be happy to provide a list (with home addresses) to facilitate this action.
Or I suppose you could just stop selling strings. That would work too.
It would rock if people would stop making lists of Open Source/Free Software and start finding ways to convince people with money that there are ways to make more money using Open Source/Free software, so that we can use money instead of lists to fund development.
Making lists is fun, though, and probably passes the time.
And I'm sure that his shifting position between two groundswell movements that have minor philosophical differences is going to greatly enhance his credibility while making a marginal economic proposition to some of the largest corporations in the world.
Finally we grind those money-grubbing capitalist lackeys beneath our boots, eh comrades? Eh?
If it's companies that make money by providing Open Source software, it should be a sparsely attended meeting, unless they include all the companies that tried. I think Bruce is probably trying to present a value proposition that there are lots and lots of indirect economic benefits of using Open Source software, and that it's worth it for companies to spend money on Open Source because they'll make it back somehow. Or maybe he's trying to keep his name in the public eye, or both.
Undoubtedly Linus had a lot of job offers. It's naive to think that he decided to turn down Jobs (or jobs) based on some inner fire and drive. Linus is accustomed to being the reluctant hero of a charismatic movement, a job which Steve Jobs already holds at Apple. Transmeta allowed Linus to a) be a l33t coder, b) continue as the figurehead for Linux kernel development, and c) not take sides on the desktop OS issue, which would have been politically unwise. I'm sure the choice was not as difficult as these sensationalist articles and writeups would have us believe.
It's somewhat interesting that most of the standards developed out of a requirement to keep commerce and business flowing and moving, with emphasis placed on commonality and uniformity. Now so-called 'standards' actually *compete* for business. This suggests to me that the critical industries, where actual material is moved as commodity, require real, common, physical standards, and that all the other 'industries' are really just using standards as another term for product. No wonder certification exams are so hard to standardize.
/me sticks a daemon sticker on all the anonymous cowards.
/me passes out freebsd stickers to all the silly linux people.
if this party is anything like last years, we're in for a blast.
I'll be one of the many scantilly clad chix0rz dancing madly
Bzzz! Wrong! Before you start mocking me, why don't you check YOUR facts out, buddy.
I"m sure there are plenty of keen sites on mach out there. Try reading information from a web site without "linux" in the domain name -- You might find some unbiased information.
MacOS X is based on a BSD kernel. Not Linux.
Gee, ya think there is a reason for this?
You linux users seem to think your "OS" can take over the world.
If I could get the media to tell you that the ocean was orange, you'd believe it.
well said!
Um.. Do you know who Greg Lehey is? Obviously not, but he has over 20 years of experience in the unix industry, and is among the founding fathers of BSD in general.
Come on, Linux users, learn some stuff about the REAL unix world...