sure, it fooled people at first (when the conspiracy started > 1 week ago with the 'litigation'), but then it became MORE than obvious that it was a joke yesterday when all three of them went down.
GC is a *big* reason why Java is so popular in enterprise environments. Forget write once, run anywhere.
GC and simplified pointers help you to pay more attention to the problem *at hand*, then to have to worry about differentiating between (in C++):
- stack allocated objects that don't have to be deleted but can't be safely passed around because they go out of scope - heap allocated objects that have to be deleted - pointers vs references (i.e. dot-notation vs. '->' notation)
Granted, these are not big problems by themselves. Put together however, they wind up being an unnecessary headache, especially when dealing with application-level programming. And on the bright side of things, Java catches your null-pointers with a catchable-exception - not a segfault.
When dealing with systems-level stuff, putting up with C++'s self-memory management is a "grin & bear it scenario", until Java's performance increases.
Though, of course, C++ and C will always be used where bit-twiddling is needed.
I'm glad Redhat's getting all the investment dough, but SuSE really does deserve some too. I just installed 6.0... sweet distro.
And another thing...SAP is big *today*, but I really gotta wonder about the future... I mean, sure it's nice to integrate your line-of-business systems, but A) SAP is clunky and annoying (ask any engineer working on it), B) It doesn't give the business SQUAT for analytical power, C) many businesses are buying it because their current enterprise systems aren't Y2K enabled, and need something to hold the fort.
The *real* stuff is with those OLAP engines & data warehouses... I'd love to see OLAP engines or multidimensional DB's on linux.... even some of the query tools like Cognos'... (if we want Linux to be on the corporate desktop).
This is sort of like Zen. If a tree falls in a forest, yet no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?
Open source software is usually software that appeals to a "community". Custom and niche applications typically don't serve a community, and don't need to be opened up for those purposes.
- You're not really promoting sharing, and if the end users don't "really" care about the code, you're not exactly contributing personal freedom. If you do open it, you're essentially giving into a customer demand. So, open source in a niche scenario becomes less a moral imperative and more an economic one.
- Since custom applications usually come with a HEFTY price tag, it's typically not economically viable to open it up, unless you're charging purely on a consulting basis.
- Furthermore, if you have extremely innovative work within the product, it (gasp! horrors!) might be in your best economic interest to protect that intellectual property.
The *ideal* is to open everything, but the economic reality (in certain circumstances, such as niche software) is such that you can't realistically do this an expect to do this and make the big bucks:) Furthermore, I forsee a lot of open source activists working on custom, proprietary/closed software in order to feed themselves (and create free software in their spare time).
There is room in the world for both models.
Sorry if I couldn't be more precice, but really, there is no "answer" to these things. It's all a matter of trade-offs, judgement calls and personal choice.
- This guy is way too cynical and condescending. ESR deserves a little better than this flaming.
- His comments about Apple and Troll Tech are rather extreme. Apple's licence has problems - they can and probably will be fixed. Troll's licence does NOT have any "non-free" problems according to RMS. I don't see what the debate is over.
- I thought FUD was a Microsoft tactic. Now I'm hearing FUD about Apple, ESR, Troll Tech, OSI, etc. Isn't it lovely how human nature has turned a community based on sharing into a community based on cynicism and flaming?
- Let's try to be constructive! The world is not going to beat a path to our doorstep forever. We have to stand on our own merits, and cynicism like this is not going to help matters. We have to work *together* with companies if we want to see open source spread further. The name of the game is *increasing personal freedom*, not living in an insular community that fears outsiders.
Let's debate what's wrong with these new licenses, but let's not persecute these companies for dipping their toes in the ocean.
Furthermore, while it conflicts with the free software ideal, it's worthwhile to watch these companies experiment with direct-revenue model licenses that aren't "quite" open source. Sun's "pay if you play" licence is a good example of something that 'might' work. While it doesn't benefit *THIS* community, there might be a whole other community (I.e. commercial Java developers) who will benefit from increased access to Sun's source code. If THAT community wants to accept Sun's restrictions, so be it - it still increases their personal freedom, which is a step in the right direction.
"Thinking that everyone in the whole world could agree to one specific license would be naive. Unless we all suddenly start to think very much the same, that will not happen. RMS knows this. I know this. The BSD followers know this. Everyone should know this. Frankly, would you want to live in a world where everyone thought the same way? "
Quite true, however there's a discontinuity between what you just said, and the stated GNU philosophy, from my perspective.
That philosophy is that "software should not have owners", and that copyright law should be amended to reflect this belief (I'm referring to RMS' essay on copyright on gnu.org).
However, if one modifies the copyright laws to reflect the spirit of the GPL, by enabling free copying/redistribution, aren't we living in a society that "thinks one way - the RMS way" ?
the impression I got was less harsh than you've painted, and in fact, I think you're being quite biased in your judgement of his essay.
ESR is saying "I am a God" ? You're viewing this with very tinted goggles, my friend. He doesn't *WANT* to be a leader - he stepped up to the plate and said "Okay, I can do this, but I don't want to do it forever." That's not the voice of a leader, that's the voice of an extrovert who wants to make a difference.
Criticizing the APSL was not what got him. The "conspiracy theories" about him being a coporate lap-dog ARE what got him. Human beings ARE irrational people. Seeing personal attacks like that WILL hurt a man.
I will agree that ESR is not perfect and Linus Torvalds (there is an S on the end of that, you know) is a wonderful example of the effectiveness of being humble. It's a rare and wonderful trait, and something the other leaders (RMS) of this movement are lacking.
To increase the amount of freely available source code, to increase personal freedom throughout the industry and to increase the rate of innovation.
*promoting* open source is a periphery activity...If it becomes our main activity, then we've become a parody of the sad "marketechture" that corporations spew out in order to sell their products.
In the world at large, RESULTS matter. In the business world it's "SHOW ME THE MONEY". In the hacker world it's "SHOW ME THE CODE". This priniciple is the decicive factor in most subjective disputes. It explains why Linus is good at running the kernel - got an idea? Show him the code.
The truly sad thing are the people who insist on moving AWAY from "technical superiority" as the end deciding factor. KDE vs. GNOME is a sad example of this (because BOTH ARE FREE - yet people continue to wage war over it). So many people are wrapped up in their own personal crusade to be noticed that they don't realize they are NOT contributing to things, they're just spinning their wheels and making lots of noise.
We have to be honest with ourselves. If you want your voice heard (beyond Slashdot's forums), you should prove your contribution to this community, either through opened code OR documentation (for those that can't code).
ESR wants to see Open Source succeed. Sure, he makes boo-boo's now and then, but it doesn't warrent the out right vitriol that this community has often spewed in his direction.
Rational debate & criticism is warrented. Conspiracy theories and personal attacks aren't.
If ESR burns out, this is going to be a huge loss for our community. Few people will have the time, patience or overall balance of perspectives that ESR has displayed over the past year.
The only people I know of that would be suitable replacement "evangelists" [besides RMS, who I view as more as an inspirational leader than an "evangelist"] would be Linus or Bruce Perens... of course, neither has the time with their work commitments.
CNN had little or nothing to do with this story.. they just post up whatever schlock IDG gives them, whether its from ComputerWorld or LinuxWorld, etc. (Nick Petreley of LinuxWorld fame had a CNN article recently..)
The problem is that while CNN usually has good reporting quality, they don't seem to display a great sense of judgement with regards to republishing technical articles...
I was under the impression that one phone in the 61xx series could alternate between GSM and TDMA.. (At least that's what one of the sales people told me in passing... I thought "yeah right", but he insisted on it...)
Thank you, Bruce, for all the effort you've been putting into this.
I've noticed your public comments & essays have been a lot more "diplomatic" than what I think I have seen in past from you. I feel I've misjudged you in the past.
Sorry, I had read an article (I believe on PCWeek or Infoworld) that was referring to the new licences for many of Sun's products that would allow *anyone* to download them for non-commerical use. This includes the Java Developer Kit, Java Workshop, Jini, one of Sun's UNIX applications.
I had assumed Solaris 7 was included under this "newer" licence. I guess I was wrong.
Dude, I don't use *BSD, but your message WAS very much a temper tandrum. Their licence and development process are VERY open.
Furthermore, Solaris is *INFERIOR* to Linux? Are you basing that on a technical assumption? Please, explain. Solaris has options for high (B1) security, 64-processor SMP, failover clusters, and best of all, its source code is freely available to look at (and modify for personal use).
From a technical perspective, when dealing with a high-end server (over 4 processors), it is difficult to argue in favour of Linux.
While the image is still vague, my impression (based my own observation, and the observation of some "clueful" industry consultants I know) of the "new and improved" software developer that companies want embodies the following, in no particular order:
- Confidence, communication and humility.
These are important in teamwork - don't let your views get lost because you're shy - but have the humility to concede when you're proven wrong.
- Being able to see the forest AND the trees.
To elaborate what I mean by that point:
- A specialization in an area of technology such that they can perform "high leverage" activities. I.e. instead of "plowing through" a problem that would take a generalist 3 days, it takes them 6 hours, because of their specialized knowledge. An example would be someone who is intimately familiar with distributed systems development vs. GUI interface design.
- On top of the specialization, a general *understanding* of the issues of management, economics, sociology, psychology, organizational behavior, and entrepreneurship.
I.e. they don't have to KNOW how to run a business, they don't have to LIKE running a business, but they should UNDERSTAND why a business does what it does, and whether it makes sense in the larger picture of the world economy.
Note that the above trait is probably the hardest one to find, mainly because there are so few people - even managers - in employment today that even understand basic principles of economics and innovation/entrepreneurship.
- A genuine belief that software development is first & foremost about *PEOPLE*, not technology.
That's what I see as the desired software developer of the future. Companies don't want "geeks", who spout hubris of their greatness while ignorantly criticizing business. They want "ubergeeks" who have workable SOLUTIONS to business problems, instead of just incessant complaining, and who can communicate their solutions in terms of RESULTS, not the technical details - but when pressed, can express themselves at ANY level of technical detail.
What companies want is not the fakery of IT-analysts of the past, who had little technical expertise. They want someone who systematically tries to match technology with reality, instead of someone who lives in a bubble - be it "business" or "programming". They want *flexibility*.
This is what the IT shortage is all about. A lack of a flexibility in the workforce.
Yes, the GPL is possible now because of copyright law.
However, if copyright laws were amended to ensure freedom of copying and freedom of source (as RMS wishes to be done - see his essays), then the GPL *WOULD NOT BE NEEDED*.
Slashdot Mirror
sure, it fooled people at first (when the conspiracy started > 1 week ago with the 'litigation'), but then it became MORE than obvious that it was a joke yesterday when all three of them went down.
elaborate prank yes, funny no.
dude, if you havent figured out that this whole forum is an april fool's joke, then the egg is on *your* face :)
While I wonder what it provides over LinuxPPC, it looks to be a Linux distro designed for MacOS users who want more things "pre-configured".
:)
I guess it's a good alternative to Mac OS X Server in some ways (price!
It's a Linux distribution.
GC is a *big* reason why Java is so popular in enterprise environments. Forget write once, run anywhere.
GC and simplified pointers help you to pay more attention to the problem *at hand*, then to have to worry about differentiating between (in C++):
- stack allocated objects that don't have to be deleted but can't be safely passed around because they go out of scope
- heap allocated objects that have to be deleted
- pointers vs references (i.e. dot-notation vs. '->' notation)
Granted, these are not big problems by themselves. Put together however, they wind up being an unnecessary headache, especially when dealing with application-level programming. And on the bright side of things, Java catches your null-pointers with a catchable-exception - not a segfault.
When dealing with systems-level stuff, putting up with C++'s self-memory management is a "grin & bear it scenario", until Java's performance increases.
Though, of course, C++ and C will always be used where bit-twiddling is needed.
they bundle proprietary shit because it's good proprietary shit....
it's a good distro overall, and superior to redhat in some aspects, imho. BUT if you dont like the mix of free/proprietary, dont use it
the interesting thing is that the virus doesn't *DO* anything harmful, except spam mailservers.
I'm glad Redhat's getting all the investment dough, but SuSE really does deserve some too. I just installed 6.0... sweet distro.
... (if we want Linux to be on the corporate desktop).
And another thing...SAP is big *today*, but I really gotta wonder about the future... I mean, sure it's nice to integrate your line-of-business systems, but A) SAP is clunky and annoying (ask any engineer working on it), B) It doesn't give the business SQUAT for analytical power, C) many businesses are buying it because their current enterprise systems aren't Y2K enabled, and need something to hold the fort.
The *real* stuff is with those OLAP engines & data warehouses... I'd love to see OLAP engines or multidimensional DB's on linux.... even some of the query tools like Cognos'
This is sort of like Zen. If a tree falls in a forest, yet no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?
:) Furthermore, I forsee a lot of open source activists working on custom, proprietary/closed software in order to feed themselves (and create free software in their spare time).
Open source software is usually software that appeals to a "community". Custom and niche applications typically don't serve a community, and don't need to be opened up for those purposes.
- You're not really promoting sharing, and if the end users don't "really" care about the code, you're not exactly contributing personal freedom. If you do open it, you're essentially giving into a customer demand. So, open source in a niche scenario becomes less a moral imperative and more an economic one.
- Since custom applications usually come with a HEFTY price tag, it's typically not economically viable to open it up, unless you're charging purely on a consulting basis.
- Furthermore, if you have extremely innovative work within the product, it (gasp! horrors!) might be in your best economic interest to protect that intellectual property.
The *ideal* is to open everything, but the economic reality (in certain circumstances, such as niche software) is such that you can't realistically do this an expect to do this and make the big bucks
There is room in the world for both models.
Sorry if I couldn't be more precice, but really, there is no "answer" to these things. It's all a matter of trade-offs, judgement calls and personal choice.
- This guy is way too cynical and condescending. ESR deserves a little better than this flaming.
- His comments about Apple and Troll Tech are rather extreme. Apple's licence has problems - they can and probably will be fixed. Troll's licence does NOT have any "non-free" problems according to RMS. I don't see what the debate is over.
- I thought FUD was a Microsoft tactic. Now I'm hearing FUD about Apple, ESR, Troll Tech, OSI, etc. Isn't it lovely how human nature has turned a community based on sharing into a community based on cynicism and flaming?
- Let's try to be constructive! The world is not going to beat a path to our doorstep forever. We have to stand on our own merits, and cynicism like this is not going to help matters. We have to work *together* with companies if we want to see open source spread further. The name of the game is *increasing personal freedom*, not living in an insular community that fears outsiders.
Let's debate what's wrong with these new licenses, but let's not persecute these companies for dipping their toes in the ocean.
Furthermore, while it conflicts with the free software ideal, it's worthwhile to watch these companies experiment with direct-revenue model licenses that aren't "quite" open source. Sun's "pay if you play" licence is a good example of something that 'might' work. While it doesn't benefit *THIS* community, there might be a whole other community (I.e. commercial Java developers) who will benefit from increased access to Sun's source code. If THAT community wants to accept Sun's restrictions, so be it - it still increases their personal freedom, which is a step in the right direction.
"Thinking that everyone in the whole world could agree to one specific license would be naive. Unless we all suddenly start to
think very much the same, that will not happen. RMS knows this. I know this. The BSD followers know this. Everyone should
know this. Frankly, would you want to live in a world where everyone thought the same way? "
Quite true, however there's a discontinuity between what you just said, and the stated GNU philosophy, from my perspective.
That philosophy is that "software should not have owners", and that copyright law should be amended to reflect this belief (I'm referring to RMS' essay on copyright on gnu.org).
However, if one modifies the copyright laws to reflect the spirit of the GPL, by enabling free copying/redistribution, aren't we living in a society that "thinks one way - the RMS way" ?
the impression I got was less harsh than you've painted, and in fact, I think you're being quite biased in your judgement of his essay.
ESR is saying "I am a God" ? You're viewing this with very tinted goggles, my friend. He doesn't *WANT* to be a leader - he stepped up to the plate and said "Okay, I can do this, but I don't want to do it forever." That's not the voice of a leader, that's the voice of an extrovert who wants to make a difference.
Criticizing the APSL was not what got him. The "conspiracy theories" about him being a coporate lap-dog ARE what got him. Human beings ARE irrational people. Seeing personal attacks like that WILL hurt a man.
I will agree that ESR is not perfect and Linus Torvalds (there is an S on the end of that, you know) is a wonderful example of the effectiveness of being humble. It's a rare and wonderful trait, and something the other leaders (RMS) of this movement are lacking.
What's the whole point of open source?
To increase the amount of freely available source code, to increase personal freedom throughout the industry and to increase the rate of innovation.
*promoting* open source is a periphery activity...If it becomes our main activity, then we've become a parody of the sad "marketechture" that corporations spew out in order to sell their products.
In the world at large, RESULTS matter. In the business world it's "SHOW ME THE MONEY". In the hacker world it's "SHOW ME THE CODE". This priniciple is the decicive factor in most subjective disputes. It explains why Linus is good at running the kernel - got an idea? Show him the code.
The truly sad thing are the people who insist on moving AWAY from "technical superiority" as the end deciding factor. KDE vs. GNOME is a sad example of this (because BOTH ARE FREE - yet people continue to wage war over it). So many people are wrapped up in their own personal crusade to be noticed that they don't realize they are NOT contributing to things, they're just spinning their wheels and making lots of noise.
We have to be honest with ourselves. If you want your voice heard (beyond Slashdot's forums), you should prove your contribution to this community, either through opened code OR documentation (for those that can't code).
Show me results, not talk.
ESR wants to see Open Source succeed. Sure, he makes boo-boo's now and then, but it doesn't warrent the out right vitriol that this community has often spewed in his direction.
Rational debate & criticism is warrented. Conspiracy theories and personal attacks aren't.
If ESR burns out, this is going to be a huge loss for our community. Few people will have the time, patience or overall balance of perspectives that ESR has displayed over the past year.
The only people I know of that would be suitable replacement "evangelists" [besides RMS, who I view as more as an inspirational leader than an "evangelist"] would be Linus or Bruce Perens... of course, neither has the time with their work commitments.
I don't think he's leaving quite yet - as his essay has alluded to quite clearly, it'll be damn hard to find a replacement.
CNN had little or nothing to do with this story.. they just post up whatever schlock IDG gives them, whether its from ComputerWorld or LinuxWorld, etc. (Nick Petreley of LinuxWorld fame had a CNN article recently..)
The problem is that while CNN usually has good reporting quality, they don't seem to display a great sense of judgement with regards to republishing technical articles...
i wish UWaterloo was that protective of its underachievers.. :) I wouldn't be worried about failing courses then... hehe
Oh, btw, try using GSM in Canada... haha! Only major cities have the coverage I believe...
(CDMA and TDMA are much more widely used here, and I believe also on the West Coast of the U.S...)
I was under the impression that one phone in the 61xx series could alternate between GSM and TDMA.. (At least that's what one of the sales people told me in passing... I thought "yeah right", but he insisted on it...)
Never got hooked on a MUD, huh? :)
it's sometimes fun to use the "virtual world" analogy, no matter HOW technical you are...
Thank you, Bruce, for all the effort you've been putting into this.
:)
I've noticed your public comments & essays have been a lot more "diplomatic" than what I think I have seen in past from you. I feel I've misjudged you in the past.
Anyway, I had to get that out in the open.
Sorry, I had read an article (I believe on PCWeek or Infoworld)
that was referring to the new licences for many of Sun's products that would allow
*anyone* to download them for non-commerical use. This includes the Java Developer Kit,
Java Workshop, Jini, one of Sun's UNIX applications.
I had assumed Solaris 7 was included under this "newer" licence.
I guess I was wrong.
Dude, I don't use *BSD, but your message WAS very much a temper tandrum. Their licence and development process are VERY open.
Furthermore, Solaris is *INFERIOR* to Linux? Are you basing that on a technical assumption? Please, explain.
Solaris has options for high (B1) security, 64-processor SMP, failover clusters, and best of all, its source code is freely available to look at (and modify for personal use).
From a technical perspective, when dealing with a high-end server (over 4 processors), it is difficult to argue in favour of Linux.
While the image is still vague, my impression (based my own observation, and the observation of some "clueful" industry consultants I know) of the "new and improved" software developer that companies want embodies the following, in no particular order:
- Confidence, communication and humility.
These are important in teamwork - don't let your views get lost because you're shy - but have the humility to concede when you're proven wrong.
- Being able to see the forest AND the trees.
To elaborate what I mean by that point:
- A specialization in an area of technology such that they can perform "high leverage" activities. I.e. instead of "plowing through" a problem that would take a generalist 3 days, it takes them 6 hours, because of their specialized knowledge. An example would be someone who is intimately familiar with distributed systems development vs. GUI interface design.
- On top of the specialization, a general *understanding* of the issues of management, economics, sociology, psychology, organizational behavior, and entrepreneurship.
I.e. they don't have to KNOW how to run a business, they don't have to LIKE running a business, but they should UNDERSTAND why a business does what it does, and whether it makes sense in the larger picture of the world economy.
Note that the above trait is probably the hardest one to find, mainly because there are so few people - even managers - in employment today that even understand basic principles of economics and innovation/entrepreneurship.
- A genuine belief that software development is first & foremost about *PEOPLE*, not technology.
That's what I see as the desired software developer of the future. Companies don't want "geeks", who spout hubris of their greatness while ignorantly criticizing business. They want "ubergeeks" who have workable SOLUTIONS to business problems, instead of just incessant complaining, and who can communicate their solutions in terms of RESULTS, not the technical details - but when pressed, can express themselves at ANY level of technical detail.
What companies want is not the fakery of IT-analysts of the past, who had little technical expertise. They want someone who systematically tries to match technology with reality, instead of someone who lives in a bubble - be it "business" or "programming". They want *flexibility*.
This is what the IT shortage is all about. A lack of a flexibility in the workforce.
(end rant)
Yes, the GPL is possible now because of copyright law.
However, if copyright laws were amended to ensure freedom of
copying and freedom of source (as RMS wishes to be done -
see his essays), then the GPL *WOULD NOT BE NEEDED*.
Now do you see my point?