I wonder what is more important: the 'Open Source' aspect of the database or the actual PORT of the database to linux? OpenSource means also 'it's for free!!', but for an organisation who wants to have a huge reliable database system, it's not important if costs $5000,- or $0.0. So, why are people ALL OF A SUDDEN interested in a good product when it comes Open Source AND/OR free? Sure, what's free is nice to have, but what's GOOD and SOLID is also nice to have, allthough it might cost a little money. Not very much people did that, according to the financial figures of Inprise. And that's a shame.
For Inprise I can understand they open up the source because they get the attention of the people who just want to use free software and/or software that is open sourced and other people who just watch every move of a company on the path of 'Open Source' or 'Linux'. It doesn't bring them any money, which is badly needed over there due to their bad financial situation. I truely hope it will give insight in how a complex system as Interbase works, but I doubt the actual advantage of the release of the sourcecode.
Call me a sceptic, IMHO it's not allways right to open up the sourcecode, especially if you are near the edge of death as inprise is
That's right. No matter how good you are in developing new technology with your own hands and brains, if you're not a businessman, you're doomed in the world of money and greed. Gates is a businessman, a damn good one too. Because he is good at it, he will survive in Businessland. I doubt if Torvalds will survive in BusinessLand. Perhaps in TechnologyLand, allthough if you check out who brought the most technology to Linux, it's not Thorvalds. Others did. The same goes for Transmeta. The patents they received last year (1999;)) weren't mentioning Thorvalds. He just works there.
Even it comes from Berst and the words smell like poop, it's worth a thought IF what he says is true and why/why not.
uuuuh.. that last scentense was really bad. Should have been:
Add that to the fact that developers sometimes have to choose for new technology and cut loose backwards compatibility, and you get a group of people who suffer under the developer's decision, but IMHO unavoidable.
Same stunt was pulled by the Dutch Rabobank on their site a few weeks ago: because some 'small' errors were reported in older browsers than v4, certifcates could expire in cases that they were not really expired. So the 'not so smart' programmers of the site put up a page that checked the browser and if it wasn't IE4 or higher you simply couldn't logon, even if Netscape4 was a correct browser to work with. They've now fixed the browserchecking after a lot of complaints. Perhaps the people who really suffer from this (thus not the professional whiners who whine on everything that seems to be Redmond related) should complain to Citibank about this subject.
I have to add that it might be a 'flaw' in design, and not a 'feature' that is put in on purpose. Add that that to the fact that we sometimes developers have to choose for new technology and cut loose backwards compatibility, and you get a group of people who suffer under the developer's decicion, but IMHO unavoidable.
Attacking a person on his abillity to produce texts in a language that isn't his first is below the low level of courage to post with your registered name.
Besides the poll lookalike behaviour of this contest, as pointed out by others, I wonder.. why is Windows 9x also in this list? it's a desktop OS... not a server OS. And yes, IMHO these 2 are different. On a server you'll do everything to prevent the server from being offline, on the desktop all you want is to not loose work you've done in a certain program.
hehe and it's also a good laugh to see these people think win2000 can have an uptime of a year or so... it's not even released!;)
I think java on the server is so successful in Unix land because it solves a serious flaw in OS design: the availability of Binairy Objects on OS level. When you build an e-commerce system you can choose between (besides the HTML:)): a) writing it all in C/C++ or other binairy compiling language (not many do that) b)a scripting language or c)Java. Choosing a) has the drawback that however you probably can use objects within C++ or object pascal, it's hard to share these objects between pages in your e-commerce system. Choosing the scripting language gives you the sharable objects (if you use PHP for example) but these objects are living in an interpreted language environment. When your system needs speed because of the high load, it's not that recommended. Choosing Java on the server brings you an optimized binairy world, with binairy objects using CORBA. Because of the usage of a JIT it's faster than scripting languages plus the binairy objects available with CORBA bring more advantages than the scripting languages do: the sharable objects are binairy and optimized for execution by the JIT. Advantages, it's hard to say, people at NT with IIS are having for years: binairy, speedy COM objects used in ASP scripts on the server. Java on the server bridges this gap, but only with CORBA.
I don't think he will patent it (;)) but I think he got the reward because of the (semi) unique way he formatted the developers to achieve the current status of enlightment. It's not about enlightment or the obvious stuff that is put into the codebase. It's about the way the project is organised. You can ofcourse discuss if the way he organised the project is unique or not.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder what is more important: the 'Open Source' aspect of the database or the actual PORT of the database to linux? OpenSource means also 'it's for free!!', but for an organisation who wants to have a huge reliable database system, it's not important if costs $5000,- or $0.0. So, why are people ALL OF A SUDDEN interested in a good product when it comes Open Source AND/OR free? Sure, what's free is nice to have, but what's GOOD and SOLID is also nice to have, allthough it might cost a little money. Not very much people did that, according to the financial figures of Inprise. And that's a shame.
For Inprise I can understand they open up the source because they get the attention of the people who just want to use free software and/or software that is open sourced and other people who just watch every move of a company on the path of 'Open Source' or 'Linux'. It doesn't bring them any money, which is badly needed over there due to their bad financial situation. I truely hope it will give insight in how a complex system as Interbase works, but I doubt the actual advantage of the release of the sourcecode.
Call me a sceptic, IMHO it's not allways right to open up the sourcecode, especially if you are near the edge of death as inprise is
That's right. No matter how good you are in developing new technology with your own hands and brains, if you're not a businessman, you're doomed in the world of money and greed. Gates is a businessman, a damn good one too. Because he is good at it, he will survive in Businessland. I doubt if Torvalds will survive in BusinessLand. Perhaps in TechnologyLand, allthough if you check out who brought the most technology to Linux, it's not Thorvalds. Others did. The same goes for Transmeta. The patents they received last year (1999 ;)) weren't mentioning Thorvalds. He just works there.
Even it comes from Berst and the words smell like poop, it's worth a thought IF what he says is true and why/why not.
I heard that Yeltsin's FUD Producer XL (tm) wasn't Y2K compliant, so before it would start irreversable disasters it was put on Hold (tm).
;)
uuuuh.. that last scentense was really bad. Should have been:
Add that to the fact that developers sometimes have to choose for new technology and cut loose backwards compatibility, and you get a group of people who suffer under the developer's decision, but IMHO unavoidable.
Same stunt was pulled by the Dutch Rabobank on their site a few weeks ago: because some 'small' errors were reported in older browsers than v4, certifcates could expire in cases that they were not really expired. So the 'not so smart' programmers of the site put up a page that checked the browser and if it wasn't IE4 or higher you simply couldn't logon, even if Netscape4 was a correct browser to work with. They've now fixed the browserchecking after a lot of complaints. Perhaps the people who really suffer from this (thus not the professional whiners who whine on everything that seems to be Redmond related) should complain to Citibank about this subject.
I have to add that it might be a 'flaw' in design, and not a 'feature' that is put in on purpose. Add that that to the fact that we sometimes developers have to choose for new technology and cut loose backwards compatibility, and you get a group of people who suffer under the developer's decicion, but IMHO unavoidable.
Unfortunatelly, I know you are correct. :(. Let's hope in the future people don't have the possibility to use a desktop as a server.
Attacking a person on his abillity to produce texts in a language that isn't his first is below the low level of courage to post with your registered name.
Besides the poll lookalike behaviour of this contest, as pointed out by others, I wonder.. why is Windows 9x also in this list? it's a desktop OS... not a server OS. And yes, IMHO these 2 are different. On a server you'll do everything to prevent the server from being offline, on the desktop all you want is to not loose work you've done in a certain program.
;)
hehe and it's also a good laugh to see these people think win2000 can have an uptime of a year or so... it's not even released!
I think java on the server is so successful in Unix land because it solves a serious flaw in OS design: the availability of Binairy Objects on OS level. When you build an e-commerce system you can choose between (besides the HTML :)): a) writing it all in C/C++ or other binairy compiling language (not many do that) b)a scripting language or c)Java. Choosing a) has the drawback that however you probably can use objects within C++ or object pascal, it's hard to share these objects between pages in your e-commerce system. Choosing the scripting language gives you the sharable objects (if you use PHP for example) but these objects are living in an interpreted language environment. When your system needs speed because of the high load, it's not that recommended. Choosing Java on the server brings you an optimized binairy world, with binairy objects using CORBA. Because of the usage of a JIT it's faster than scripting languages plus the binairy objects available with CORBA bring more advantages than the scripting languages do: the sharable objects are binairy and optimized for execution by the JIT. Advantages, it's hard to say, people at NT with IIS are having for years: binairy, speedy COM objects used in ASP scripts on the server. Java on the server bridges this gap, but only with CORBA.
I don't think he will patent it (;)) but I think he got the reward because of the (semi) unique way he formatted the developers to achieve the current status of enlightment. It's not about enlightment or the obvious stuff that is put into the codebase. It's about the way the project is organised. You can ofcourse discuss if the way he organised the project is unique or not.