For some people, we don't have the choice of throwing away money just to help people.
This isn't about 'throwing money away' or solely altruistic goals. It's a matter of choosing an ethical employer, even if that means giving up a larger salary. I'm not advocating poverty, just reasonable lifestyle.
Musicians and music lovers need to get a few clues from the Open Source movement. If you're fed up with the establishment, you don't just whine and complain. You go do something about it!
Writing music is not that damn hard but people always make a big deal of it for some reason. Sure, if you're talking classical or big band jazz or other intricate music, then yes, you're going to need some serious time and education to do it right. But that's not what we're talking about here. That's not where RIAA members make their cash cows. No, we're talking about the people who lay down 3 or 4-chord patterns, add a weak rhythm section, then sing about their ex-ex-ex-ex-girlfriend being lonely without them or some such nonsense. Any armchair musician with a general ear for 'what sounds good' and a beginners book on music composition can do that or better.
Try this exercise if you've got some spare time. I think you'll find it enjoyable and rewarding..
- pick out a simple musical style and read up on it online. Read about its history, it's musical theory, and identify songs you already know that fit this style.
- pick a rhythm style that you'll compose to and decide on a time signature and tempo
- spend a few days writing poetry that fits the rhythmic parameters you've chosen. Write about something you feel pashionate about and let your emotions flow into your work.
- compose the basic rhythm (bass drum and snare - think drum machine)
- add a simple melody to sing your poetry to, spacing a simple chord progression appropriately
- go over the melody a few times to make it properly expressive of the feeling you want to convey in the words. Imitate melodic patterns you've heard in your favorite songs
- Congrats, your song is now ready for 1.0 alpha release. (-: Get feedback and suggestions, then flesh out the parts you kept simple at first and add a few twists.
- The last step, of course, is to actually play the song on real instruments, so you'll need a little help from other musically talented friends.. or at least some multi-track recording software.
If you like the final piece, go ahead and release it to the public -- the written music, your sample recordings, everything -- under an open license that keeps your name on your art but allows free distribution, performance, etc.
Who knows, you might have more musical talent than you ever thought.
You techno hippie open-source nerds need to quit watching 'Antitrust' like some kind of cult classic and go get a life. It's not for you to tell others they shouldn't sell their work. I never said they shouldn't sell their work They have every right to if they like. I'm just advocating that the users of software need to fully realize the power of collaboration to meet their needs. Most don't even give it a glancing first thought. It's a matter of priority. First (optimal) choice is to create or extend a collaborative open source project. If that is absolutely infeasible, THEN you go looking for proprietary solutions as a backup. And I'm neither a hippie nor an anarchist nor a nerd and I've never seen that cheezy 'antitrust' movie.
And yes, once you've been in corporate America, you'll see that this shitty money grabbing politics happens all the time. Enjoy college while you can.
Then don't work for 'corporate America,' silly. There's no law saying you have to. What's more important? -- living in a giant-box two story house in the suburbanite jungle with two cars and an SUV or fighting for freedom and goodness and doing your best to help make the world a better place by helping others. That's not to say all corporate jobs are bad or that all big business is corrupt, but in the areas geeks gravitate towards (in which 'intellectual property' is the focus), you really have to weigh the ethical pros and cons with who you work for. Money and success matter not. PEOPLE matter. Don't waste your life. Enjoy college while you can, then go make a difference.
"..The idea is to create a GUI for an ENDUSER. Somebody who wants to browse the web with Linux, write some letters and play some nice games.
I really believed that is even yet possible with Linux until I configured my girlfriend's box.
Yes indeed, I would like to thank Matthius and the rest of the KDE team for their enormous contributions to the future of Open Source. But most of all, I'd like to thank the nameless girlfriend who wasn't afraid to complain! (-:
Not everything needs to be free, bub. It's only free if people are willing to write it for free.
On the other hand, it makes no sense whatsoever for any software NOT to be free, regardless of whether or not the programmers are willing to work for free or not. For instance, companies who need a simulator can take FlightGear and pay someone to expand upon it to suit their own needs. Or a gov't agency can write open code which will benefit them AND the commercial aerospace industry (not to mention gamers..) The social value of generating public goods is immense. So lets dispense with this "not all software should be free" BS. Intellectual property wrecks havoc on the efficiency of dynamic industries such as software.
I've heard of "release early, release often" but this is ridiculous. (-:
Actually, I can't wait to see what 2.5 development will bring us. The fact that so much is changing even in the stable kernel likely means developers will really cut loose when 2.5 work begins. I think it's actually quite exciting. (As long as 2.4 gets all its holes patched up in the near future of course..)
Any music worth paying for will never be sold on these damaged discs because audiophiles just won't go for it. Two reasons: 1.) The sound degredation probably *is* discernable to the trained ear. 2.) Many high-end CD players with ultra-high quality transports expect to be able to read the disc cleanly bit-for-bit, similar to Plextor drives.
..that commercial software needs to be put out to pasture. When the heck are companies going to give up and realize that the future belongs to Open Source.
As Søren says "The problem here is that the structures in the headers is the whole story. That info tells how you read the proprietary struct off the disks, and was reverse engineered and documented by me after a lot of effort." Søren's intellectual property is tied up in those files.
The whole point of copyright with respect to Open Source is to keep proprietary commercialism OUT of our game. When you get right down to it, any sane Open Source coder hates the very idea of "intellectual property" by principle. To argue among Open Source licenses is pure stupidity. We're all on the same team here!
I would like to publically thank Søren for the work he did in reverse engineering and documenting the hpt raid interface. I would also like to thank the Linux ATA-raid developers for their work porting his code to Linux so that my HPT-370 finally works. On the other hand, I believe that in an academic sense, credit should be given where credit is due to promote unity in the Open Source community. A line that reads "Thanks to Søren of the BSD project for his excellent work documenting the HPT interface, on which this code is based" should be sufficient.
I'm sure all the hardened foreign *crackers* are just running in fear now that the US proposes stiffer penalties for attacking computers residing in.. *errhh.. wait a minute.. where is the geographic location of the machine with that destination IP address again?!... darn packet filters, anonymizers, and misconfigured routers. Geez, these guys must be routing through 20 machines or something.. *POOF* darn.. lost 'em again. Good thing we'll nail some clueless, immature middle/high-school/college kids for little mischievious acts, though. Gotta stop terror at it's source.
And writing viruses? Isn't that a 1st Amendment violation in the first place? The first 'viruses' were born in an academic environment surrounding the research of 'artificial life.' And ever consider that a binary sequence that represents a "virus" in the context of one operating environment could very likely be a benign set of instructions in another? (especially if you bitwise shift left or right or perform other transformations on the data such as compression). Try this if you have access to a windoze box: Load up a bunch of common virus scanners and then try to download some tarballs of your favorite source code. I guarantee you'll get "virus warnings" at random--some based on heuristics, some as direct matches. Computer viruses, like biological ones, can only co-exist with vulnerable hosts. Maybe instead we should outlaw operating systems without reasonable security and access controls. *cough*windows*cough*.
We might need some new laws to help fight terrorism, but this is NOT one of them. May I suggest: 1.) Repealing the restriction on US supported overseas assassinations 2.) Cockpit "airlock" (2 doors) and non-lethal defense mechanisms on all passenger aircraft 3.) More stringent background checks on immigrants and airport employees.
Here's a recipe for a job lifestyle that doesn't suck. Comments are welcome to improve and sharpen this idea..
1.) Live a simpler life; do with less. There's no happiness in posessions. You don't need to buy a shiny new house in the suburbs--find a nice plot of land in a more rural area and build your own small, efficient, eco-engineered dwelling. You don't need a brand new car. You don't need to buy every latest piece of super-fast hardware the day it comes out. You don't need to buy goofy little geek trinket items from online vendors. You don't need Cable TV or satellite. You don't need to order out--learn to cook instead.. You don't need a huge stash of caffeinated beverages--water is much more healthful. You don't need to go to Starbucks, Panera, or other trendy shop every other day. You don't need to buy your clothes at fancy shopping malls. I could go on and on but you get the picture.
2.) Now that you don't need $60k/year to support your lifestyle, do whatever the heck you please. You can easily make enough to support yourself by doing contract work, consulting, etc. and have plenty left over to put into savings. You don't have to figure out the latest and greatest radically new business idea to be self-employed. Go with something that works and have 6 months of living expenses in a seperate bank account in case of rough times. Focus on zero-debt. Get rid of any car loans or mortgages ASAP. (you didn't waste that much on a house/car did you?)
3.) Now, all of a sudden, you also have lots of free time because you're not stuck in a 9-5. What better way to use that time than to contribute to lots of Open Source projects. Work with the idea that better OSS will expand your opportunities in a consulting job.
4.) Save Save Save. Make $20k/year your goal. Invest it wisely. Retire early. Kick back and relax. Enjoy the easy life without being filthy rich.
5.) On the other hand, working for a big established company is a way to build up enough money to launch yourself into the position I've described, especially if you're just getting out of school and need to pay off your loans.
This whole licensing thing is turning into a mess. If I want to write an application and re-use bits and pieces of a dozen other packages which are "Open Source approved" but use different licenses, I'm basically out of luck because I would be violating every license by combining the code and adding a bunch of my own. So much for "free as in speech" and the idea that Open Source helps reduce 'wheel reinventing.' This situation is especially annoying, of course, if the program I'm writing is solely a personal project without any commercial intent whatsoever. Is there a good answer to this scenario?
One open source business model that has been ignored is that of a coordinator between users with needs and programmers willing to write open source code.
Just today I went browsing for any info I could dig up on notebook upgrade options. This always happens. I get an idea and see it on Slashdot the same day. Freaky.
Anyways, I've got a P2-266 laptop that I really wish I could upgrade the CPU on, however all I've seen are P2-300 replacements. It's really a shame because it has everything else I could possibly want--DVD, 14.1" TFT, everything's Linux friendly, etc.. Anyone have info on any sort of hacks to install a mobile P3 or other chip?
Why is SCSI equipment still so much more expensive than IDE? I can understand a small price premium, but 3-5 times the cost per Gb plus the cost of a controller is downright ridiculous. I've always been a fan of SCSI for its technical advantages, but as of late, IDE has become the only feasible option for my (bulk) mass storage needs. (Although I keep my system stuff on SCSI disks.) I can easily afford a 60Gb. IDE drive, but a SCSI equivalent is way out of my budget. So why is this? SCSI should be cheaper if anything because the controller is not built in. And the drives are made in the same plants by the same manufacturers. Something doesn't add up.
This doesn't make any sense. BC2k was released under GPL and with clear statements that no warranty was expressed or implied. So either way, the cat's out of the bag because anyone can set up a mirror for the last release. I have two guesses as to what really happened:
1.) The developers were legally threatened by some evil corporation as in "you haven't done anything wrong, but we're going to sue you anyways because we think we'll win regardless." If that's the case, find the best lawyer you can, raise a massive public fuss, disclose all communications with the party, refuse to compromise in any way, and wait for GREAT JUSTICE. Then countersue for massive damages after you win. IANAL, so don't take my advice.
2.) The developers realized their open source business model sucked and are using this whole warranty crap as an excuse to stop releasing new versions of their program under GPL, while they whip up BC 3000 as a proprietary project. Unfortunately, I think this case is more likely, given that other poorly managed 'open source' companies are playing the same game. If so, I'd have to say thanks, but no thanks. If you wanted to make money, you should have built that into the business model. I'm familiar with the pro-video market and trust me--there's a huge demand for production and equipment / technical services. Software IS a service. Remember that.
Either way, someone ought to take the GPL'ed source from BC2K and either develop it into a new/better program or incorporate it into another existing NLE package.
Just what we need.. another Windows. But on a more serious note, there's virtually no way that a single company can write a perfect replacement for Windows itself. It's just too large a task and Windows is a wavering and fast moving target anyways. Have these people been asleep during the whole beginning of the Open Source revolution? You can't fight Microsoft on their own turf, but you can undermine it. If they were smart, they'd join up with the Wine people and build a business around that instead. Use a business model similar to Transgaming, except for ordinary / custom applications that people want / need to hold on to as they transition to Linux / BSD.
"Bottom line for Sun and StarOffice: If you keep aiming where Microsoft has already been, then your opportunities will be in China"
Let's get some facts straight:
1.) The first question I get asked when offering to install Linux on a non-technical person's machine is "can it run MS Office?" The slightly more informed ask me, "can I access my MS Office documents somehow?" The fact is, lack of a good office suite has been the largest stumbling block to Linux/BSD's widespread acceptance. Star/Open Office is an extremely important project right now. Don't underestimate it just because Emacs meets your needs. (I'm a vi fan myself.. Oops! *flame shields up*)
2.) Forget StarOffice 5.2. Go download the latest build (638 I believe) of OpenOffice (which will become StarOffice 6 eventually). Not only is it very mature and stable by now, but the new interface is very well done and so close to MS Office that most non-technical folks would be unable to tell the difference. It is extremely close to a feature-for-feature clone. Once the import filters are improved, it will be practically a drop-in replacement for MS Office.
3.) Just because Microsoft has already touched a market does not mean it belongs to them. That's what innovation is all about. The market for new office suites is not going to magically disappear when XP is released. Fact is, MS can't make that much of change to their office suite because people won't buy something radically different from what they're used to. And managers don't want to pay for new licenses AND retraining classes. That's why 'upgrades' typically include only minor improvements.
4.) Opportunities in China might indeed be a good thing as far as democratizing the world through technology.. especially if MS's product activation nonsense puts a damper on Chinese bootlegging operations.
The title of this article should be "Is OpenOffice Ready to Take on MS Office?" The answer is a very obvious, YES! But am I the only one who thinks Slashdot has been pushing way too much anti-Opensource FUD recently? I guess you could call it sensational journalism for nerds. (-:
10.) torture devices -- bang two old hard disk platters together, then hold one up to each ear as they ring. It's a really cool but annoying effect.:-)
There are nearly endless uses for old hardware. Be creative.
Is Open Source actually working as intended?
on
Linux Office Suites
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I had never heard of Gobe and Hancom prior to this article, yet they appear to have Office suites far superior to KOffice, Gnome Office, and OpenOffice, and which were developed quite rapidly. Both companies appear to be small and efficient with tight-knit programming teams. Both companies focus on Linux and receive all the benefits therein. Both companies are *selling* their products as proprietary closed software, but for very reasonable prices compared to Microsoft Office and with far more flexible licensing.
This tells me two things:
1.) Open Source development in office suites is not working as it stands today. Progress is slow and the results are mostly crap. I'm sorry, but I've had far too many crashes and frankly, that is entirely unacceptable. It is not that damn hard to write a stable piece of software. StarOffice is perhaps an exception, but remember that StarOffice started out as a commercial product and was then bought and given away to the community by Sun as a means of undermining their biggest competitor. The fact that the Open Source office suites are largely failing means that the experienced programmers are not being supported enough to work on them full time.
2.) Gobe and Hancom are meeting their operating costs by charging reasonable licensing fees for their software. I venture to bet they are only marginally profitable, yet they are stable businesses at the moment. In return, their programmers get paid to write Linux software full-time -- software that appears thus far to be superior to free open source offerings. In other words, their development model is working for them. While these two companies have every right to choose their means of business, it is my belief that true open source companies could do at least as well. The problem is a lack of open source entrepreneurs. There are dozens of business models that have not been explored for making money from writing free software. There are dozens more not even dreamed up yet. What we need as a community is creativity. Eric Raymond's list of business models in "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" is a good start, but it is by no means complete.
Open Source is a powerful idea, but it must be exploited wisely. Whining has never solved any of the world's problems. Nor has complacence. Open Source programmers, look at yourselves and believe that you can change the world, for you can if you will only believe. You are intelligent, you are capable, you are innovative. Go make a difference while you have a chance. I certainly plan to.
Slashdot Mirror
For some people, we don't have the choice of throwing away money just to help people.
This isn't about 'throwing money away' or solely altruistic goals. It's a matter of choosing an ethical employer, even if that means giving up a larger salary. I'm not advocating poverty, just reasonable lifestyle.
Musicians and music lovers need to get a few clues from the Open Source movement. If you're fed up with the establishment, you don't just whine and complain. You go do something about it!
Writing music is not that damn hard but people always make a big deal of it for some reason. Sure, if you're talking classical or big band jazz or other intricate music, then yes, you're going to need some serious time and education to do it right. But that's not what we're talking about here. That's not where RIAA members make their cash cows. No, we're talking about the people who lay down 3 or 4-chord patterns, add a weak rhythm section, then sing about their ex-ex-ex-ex-girlfriend being lonely without them or some such nonsense. Any armchair musician with a general ear for 'what sounds good' and a beginners book on music composition can do that or better.
Try this exercise if you've got some spare time. I think you'll find it enjoyable and rewarding..
- pick out a simple musical style and read up on it online. Read about its history, it's musical theory, and identify songs you already know that fit this style.
- pick a rhythm style that you'll compose to and decide on a time signature and tempo
- spend a few days writing poetry that fits the rhythmic parameters you've chosen. Write about something you feel pashionate about and let your emotions flow into your work.
- compose the basic rhythm (bass drum and snare - think drum machine)
- add a simple melody to sing your poetry to, spacing a simple chord progression appropriately
- go over the melody a few times to make it properly expressive of the feeling you want to convey in the words. Imitate melodic patterns you've heard in your favorite songs
- Congrats, your song is now ready for 1.0 alpha release. (-: Get feedback and suggestions, then flesh out the parts you kept simple at first and add a few twists.
- The last step, of course, is to actually play the song on real instruments, so you'll need a little help from other musically talented friends.. or at least some multi-track recording software.
If you like the final piece, go ahead and release it to the public -- the written music, your sample recordings, everything -- under an open license that keeps your name on your art but allows free distribution, performance, etc.
Who knows, you might have more musical talent than you ever thought.
You techno hippie open-source nerds need to quit watching 'Antitrust' like some kind of cult classic and go get a life. It's not for you to tell others they shouldn't sell their work.
I never said they shouldn't sell their work They have every right to if they like. I'm just advocating that the users of software need to fully realize the power of collaboration to meet their needs. Most don't even give it a glancing first thought. It's a matter of priority. First (optimal) choice is to create or extend a collaborative open source project. If that is absolutely infeasible, THEN you go looking for proprietary solutions as a backup. And I'm neither a hippie nor an anarchist nor a nerd and I've never seen that cheezy 'antitrust' movie.
And yes, once you've been in corporate America, you'll see that this shitty money grabbing politics happens all the time. Enjoy college while you can.
Then don't work for 'corporate America,' silly. There's no law saying you have to. What's more important? -- living in a giant-box two story house in the suburbanite jungle with two cars and an SUV or fighting for freedom and goodness and doing your best to help make the world a better place by helping others. That's not to say all corporate jobs are bad or that all big business is corrupt, but in the areas geeks gravitate towards (in which 'intellectual property' is the focus), you really have to weigh the ethical pros and cons with who you work for. Money and success matter not. PEOPLE matter. Don't waste your life. Enjoy college while you can, then go make a difference.
.. is a woman!
From Matthius' original newsgroup post:
"..The idea is to create a GUI for an ENDUSER. Somebody who wants to browse the web with Linux, write some letters and play some nice games.
I really believed that is even yet possible with Linux until I configured my girlfriend's box.
Yes indeed, I would like to thank Matthius and the rest of the KDE team for their enormous contributions to the future of Open Source. But most of all, I'd like to thank the nameless girlfriend who wasn't afraid to complain! (-:
Not everything needs to be free, bub. It's only free if people are willing to write it for free.
On the other hand, it makes no sense whatsoever for any software NOT to be free, regardless of whether or not the programmers are willing to work for free or not. For instance, companies who need a simulator can take FlightGear and pay someone to expand upon it to suit their own needs. Or a gov't agency can write open code which will benefit them AND the commercial aerospace industry (not to mention gamers..) The social value of generating public goods is immense. So lets dispense with this "not all software should be free" BS. Intellectual property wrecks havoc on the efficiency of dynamic industries such as software.
I've heard of "release early, release often" but this is ridiculous. (-:
Actually, I can't wait to see what 2.5 development will bring us. The fact that so much is changing even in the stable kernel likely means developers will really cut loose when 2.5 work begins. I think it's actually quite exciting. (As long as 2.4 gets all its holes patched up in the near future of course..)
Any music worth paying for will never be sold on these damaged discs because audiophiles just won't go for it. Two reasons: 1.) The sound degredation probably *is* discernable to the trained ear. 2.) Many high-end CD players with ultra-high quality transports expect to be able to read the disc cleanly bit-for-bit, similar to Plextor drives.
Just a year ago, Linux folk were still clamoring that they wanted a port of IE. I'd say the latest Konqueror and Mozilla have been worth the wait.
Hey, but why is everything 'Titanium' now anyway? Laptops. Batteries. Video cards. I wonder if I can get titanium plating.
No, but if you act now, you can afford all that and more with our new new low-APR, no monthly fee titanium **click** hello? hello sir?
just say no to credit
..that commercial software needs to be put out to pasture. When the heck are companies going to give up and realize that the future belongs to Open Source.
As Søren says "The problem here is that the structures in the headers is the whole story. That info tells how you read the proprietary struct off the disks, and was reverse engineered and documented by me after a lot of effort." Søren's intellectual property is tied up in those files.
The whole point of copyright with respect to Open Source is to keep proprietary commercialism OUT of our game. When you get right down to it, any sane Open Source coder hates the very idea of "intellectual property" by principle. To argue among Open Source licenses is pure stupidity. We're all on the same team here!
I would like to publically thank Søren for the work he did in reverse engineering and documenting the hpt raid interface. I would also like to thank the Linux ATA-raid developers for their work porting his code to Linux so that my HPT-370 finally works. On the other hand, I believe that in an academic sense, credit should be given where credit is due to promote unity in the Open Source community. A line that reads "Thanks to Søren of the BSD project for his excellent work documenting the HPT interface, on which this code is based" should be sufficient.
I'm sure all the hardened foreign *crackers* are just running in fear now that the US proposes stiffer penalties for attacking computers residing in.. *errhh.. wait a minute.. where is the geographic location of the machine with that destination IP address again?!... darn packet filters, anonymizers, and misconfigured routers. Geez, these guys must be routing through 20 machines or something.. *POOF* darn.. lost 'em again. Good thing we'll nail some clueless, immature middle/high-school/college kids for little mischievious acts, though. Gotta stop terror at it's source.
And writing viruses? Isn't that a 1st Amendment violation in the first place? The first 'viruses' were born in an academic environment surrounding the research of 'artificial life.' And ever consider that a binary sequence that represents a "virus" in the context of one operating environment could very likely be a benign set of instructions in another? (especially if you bitwise shift left or right or perform other transformations on the data such as compression). Try this if you have access to a windoze box: Load up a bunch of common virus scanners and then try to download some tarballs of your favorite source code. I guarantee you'll get "virus warnings" at random--some based on heuristics, some as direct matches. Computer viruses, like biological ones, can only co-exist with vulnerable hosts. Maybe instead we should outlaw operating systems without reasonable security and access controls. *cough*windows*cough*.
We might need some new laws to help fight terrorism, but this is NOT one of them. May I suggest: 1.) Repealing the restriction on US supported overseas assassinations 2.) Cockpit "airlock" (2 doors) and non-lethal defense mechanisms on all passenger aircraft 3.) More stringent background checks on immigrants and airport employees.
Here's a recipe for a job lifestyle that doesn't suck. Comments are welcome to improve and sharpen this idea..
1.) Live a simpler life; do with less. There's no happiness in posessions. You don't need to buy a shiny new house in the suburbs--find a nice plot of land in a more rural area and build your own small, efficient, eco-engineered dwelling. You don't need a brand new car. You don't need to buy every latest piece of super-fast hardware the day it comes out. You don't need to buy goofy little geek trinket items from online vendors. You don't need Cable TV or satellite. You don't need to order out--learn to cook instead.. You don't need a huge stash of caffeinated beverages--water is much more healthful. You don't need to go to Starbucks, Panera, or other trendy shop every other day. You don't need to buy your clothes at fancy shopping malls. I could go on and on but you get the picture.
2.) Now that you don't need $60k/year to support your lifestyle, do whatever the heck you please. You can easily make enough to support yourself by doing contract work, consulting, etc. and have plenty left over to put into savings. You don't have to figure out the latest and greatest radically new business idea to be self-employed. Go with something that works and have 6 months of living expenses in a seperate bank account in case of rough times. Focus on zero-debt. Get rid of any car loans or mortgages ASAP. (you didn't waste that much on a house/car did you?)
3.) Now, all of a sudden, you also have lots of free time because you're not stuck in a 9-5. What better way to use that time than to contribute to lots of Open Source projects. Work with the idea that better OSS will expand your opportunities in a consulting job.
4.) Save Save Save. Make $20k/year your goal. Invest it wisely. Retire early. Kick back and relax. Enjoy the easy life without being filthy rich.
5.) On the other hand, working for a big established company is a way to build up enough money to launch yourself into the position I've described, especially if you're just getting out of school and need to pay off your loans.
This whole licensing thing is turning into a mess. If I want to write an application and re-use bits and pieces of a dozen other packages which are "Open Source approved" but use different licenses, I'm basically out of luck because I would be violating every license by combining the code and adding a bunch of my own. So much for "free as in speech" and the idea that Open Source helps reduce 'wheel reinventing.' This situation is especially annoying, of course, if the program I'm writing is solely a personal project without any commercial intent whatsoever. Is there a good answer to this scenario?
One open source business model that has been ignored is that of a coordinator between users with needs and programmers willing to write open source code.
Just today I went browsing for any info I could dig up on notebook upgrade options. This always happens. I get an idea and see it on Slashdot the same day. Freaky.
Anyways, I've got a P2-266 laptop that I really wish I could upgrade the CPU on, however all I've seen are P2-300 replacements. It's really a shame because it has everything else I could possibly want--DVD, 14.1" TFT, everything's Linux friendly, etc.. Anyone have info on any sort of hacks to install a mobile P3 or other chip?
Why is SCSI equipment still so much more expensive than IDE? I can understand a small price premium, but 3-5 times the cost per Gb plus the cost of a controller is downright ridiculous. I've always been a fan of SCSI for its technical advantages, but as of late, IDE has become the only feasible option for my (bulk) mass storage needs. (Although I keep my system stuff on SCSI disks.) I can easily afford a 60Gb. IDE drive, but a SCSI equivalent is way out of my budget. So why is this? SCSI should be cheaper if anything because the controller is not built in. And the drives are made in the same plants by the same manufacturers. Something doesn't add up.
This doesn't make any sense. BC2k was released under GPL and with clear statements that no warranty was expressed or implied. So either way, the cat's out of the bag because anyone can set up a mirror for the last release. I have two guesses as to what really happened:
1.) The developers were legally threatened by some evil corporation as in "you haven't done anything wrong, but we're going to sue you anyways because we think we'll win regardless." If that's the case, find the best lawyer you can, raise a massive public fuss, disclose all communications with the party, refuse to compromise in any way, and wait for GREAT JUSTICE. Then countersue for massive damages after you win. IANAL, so don't take my advice.
2.) The developers realized their open source business model sucked and are using this whole warranty crap as an excuse to stop releasing new versions of their program under GPL, while they whip up BC 3000 as a proprietary project. Unfortunately, I think this case is more likely, given that other poorly managed 'open source' companies are playing the same game. If so, I'd have to say thanks, but no thanks. If you wanted to make money, you should have built that into the business model. I'm familiar with the pro-video market and trust me--there's a huge demand for production and equipment / technical services. Software IS a service. Remember that.
Either way, someone ought to take the GPL'ed source from BC2K and either develop it into a new/better program or incorporate it into another existing NLE package.
Just what we need.. another Windows. But on a more serious note, there's virtually no way that a single company can write a perfect replacement for Windows itself. It's just too large a task and Windows is a wavering and fast moving target anyways. Have these people been asleep during the whole beginning of the Open Source revolution? You can't fight Microsoft on their own turf, but you can undermine it. If they were smart, they'd join up with the Wine people and build a business around that instead. Use a business model similar to Transgaming, except for ordinary / custom applications that people want / need to hold on to as they transition to Linux / BSD.
Maybe they should have named their company "Fahrenheit 451" instead.
"Bottom line for Sun and StarOffice: If you keep aiming where Microsoft has already been, then your opportunities will be in China"
Let's get some facts straight:
1.) The first question I get asked when offering to install Linux on a non-technical person's machine is "can it run MS Office?" The slightly more informed ask me, "can I access my MS Office documents somehow?" The fact is, lack of a good office suite has been the largest stumbling block to Linux/BSD's widespread acceptance. Star/Open Office is an extremely important project right now. Don't underestimate it just because Emacs meets your needs. (I'm a vi fan myself.. Oops! *flame shields up*)
2.) Forget StarOffice 5.2. Go download the latest build (638 I believe) of OpenOffice (which will become StarOffice 6 eventually). Not only is it very mature and stable by now, but the new interface is very well done and so close to MS Office that most non-technical folks would be unable to tell the difference. It is extremely close to a feature-for-feature clone. Once the import filters are improved, it will be practically a drop-in replacement for MS Office.
3.) Just because Microsoft has already touched a market does not mean it belongs to them. That's what innovation is all about. The market for new office suites is not going to magically disappear when XP is released. Fact is, MS can't make that much of change to their office suite because people won't buy something radically different from what they're used to. And managers don't want to pay for new licenses AND retraining classes. That's why 'upgrades' typically include only minor improvements.
4.) Opportunities in China might indeed be a good thing as far as democratizing the world through technology.. especially if MS's product activation nonsense puts a damper on Chinese bootlegging operations.
The title of this article should be "Is OpenOffice Ready to Take on MS Office?" The answer is a very obvious, YES! But am I the only one who thinks Slashdot has been pushing way too much anti-Opensource FUD recently? I guess you could call it sensational journalism for nerds. (-:
..or maybe, what don't I do with old hardware. (:
:-)
1.) firewall boxen
2.) bench test hardware
3.) extra terminals for my home LAN
4.) car Ogg Vorbis player
5.) keychains
6.) wall decorations
7.) spare electronics parts
8.) Christmas tree ornaments
9.) scrap metal / plastic
10.) torture devices -- bang two old hard disk platters together, then hold one up to each ear as they ring. It's a really cool but annoying effect.
There are nearly endless uses for old hardware. Be creative.
I had never heard of Gobe and Hancom prior to this article, yet they appear to have Office suites far superior to KOffice, Gnome Office, and OpenOffice, and which were developed quite rapidly. Both companies appear to be small and efficient with tight-knit programming teams. Both companies focus on Linux and receive all the benefits therein. Both companies are *selling* their products as proprietary closed software, but for very reasonable prices compared to Microsoft Office and with far more flexible licensing.
This tells me two things:
1.) Open Source development in office suites is not working as it stands today. Progress is slow and the results are mostly crap. I'm sorry, but I've had far too many crashes and frankly, that is entirely unacceptable. It is not that damn hard to write a stable piece of software. StarOffice is perhaps an exception, but remember that StarOffice started out as a commercial product and was then bought and given away to the community by Sun as a means of undermining their biggest competitor. The fact that the Open Source office suites are largely failing means that the experienced programmers are not being supported enough to work on them full time.
2.) Gobe and Hancom are meeting their operating costs by charging reasonable licensing fees for their software. I venture to bet they are only marginally profitable, yet they are stable businesses at the moment. In return, their programmers get paid to write Linux software full-time -- software that appears thus far to be superior to free open source offerings. In other words, their development model is working for them. While these two companies have every right to choose their means of business, it is my belief that true open source companies could do at least as well. The problem is a lack of open source entrepreneurs. There are dozens of business models that have not been explored for making money from writing free software. There are dozens more not even dreamed up yet. What we need as a community is creativity. Eric Raymond's list of business models in "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" is a good start, but it is by no means complete.
Open Source is a powerful idea, but it must be exploited wisely. Whining has never solved any of the world's problems. Nor has complacence. Open Source programmers, look at yourselves and believe that you can change the world, for you can if you will only believe. You are intelligent, you are capable, you are innovative. Go make a difference while you have a chance. I certainly plan to.
"Microsoft Flaws Cost Estimate For 2001 Tops $10 Billion" Oops.. That number would be a little too optimistic. Oh well. Try again next year.