a) There has been some legal development in what's left of the legal arguement that we don't know about, but is distinctly in Microsoft's favor, and has made them more bold
b) Dell might have decided that the "No OS" clause doesn't restrict them from selling Linux boxes, and along with other vendors allowed Microsoft to set these terms to get cheaper licenses. What Microsoft defines as "No OS" isn't clear, but Linux certainly isn't "No OS", at least here in the real world.
c) Microsoft is becoming increasingly worried that the legal proceedings are not going well, and wants to get this new contract into effect before the judge forbids such moves
d) Or the most likely of all - Microsoft is ignoring all legal and consumer issues and is being openly anticompetitive in order to milk the cash cow some more. Maybe they believe that if they act like the consumer doesn't and shouldn't give a rip about it, it will be true.
I see this question didn't make it, so I'll offer it up here - what is the status of the Lighthouse and Sarrus apps? Given the progress the GNUStep team is making, the possibilities of those tools as open source productivity apps is intriging.
I read a Time article on this movie, and it is quite clear that Lucas either doesn't understand or doesn't care just how bad Phantom really seemed to the majority of his fans (including me.) He blames the internet for the crushing negative reaction to Jar-Jar, saying that C3PO and the Ewoks also got a lot of negative feedback and the reason those characters weren't so heavly dumped on was there was no internet to spread the word. Incredible.
I readly confess the Ewoks in particular are weak, but at least they and 3PO weren't so incredibly annoying. Jar-Jar should have been cut out completely once the fan response became clear, whatever Lucas may think about the reasons for the reaction. He states he is in the business to make money - why then doesn't he listen to his customers?? Is the man's ego really that much out of control?
I may see Clones, but I suspect unless the critics rave about it I'll wait for it to reach the dollar movie theaters first. Lucas got more money than he earned for Phantom, and I see no reason to give him more. He needs to wake up to the fact that hype will only carry him so far, and eventually he's going to have to produce a good product again.
I agree that would be a good move, but remember AppleWorks isn't supposed to replace Office. It just provides basic functionality for a low price, and it is backed by Apple. That is enough for many needs, especially the iMac crowd. (Pre-G4 iMac, anyway...)
I suspect Apple will not put effort into something they don't control.
You might take a look at Dillo (http://dillo.sf.net) - it is small, fast, doesn't depend on mozilla, and generally makes a good fast browser. It is under development, but even so for what you describe it should work fine.
Several reasons. One is merely the licensing issues - Darwin is more or less open, but the graphical code very definitely is not. A lot of us like to be able to find out, at least in principle, what is going on at all levels of our system.
Another is the development focus of the linux teams - they will tend to have more cutting edge non-graphical stuff, like multiple journaling filesystems, before apple. Apple sells desktops, and you can bet that's what they will be gearing their operating system for. Some of us want more flexability, and more just plain cool cutting edge unstable cool features.
And finally, I want Blackbox instead of the OSX desktop. Call me crazy (probably true) but I like the mimimalistic, efficient desktop blackbox represents. If I want crazy graphics, I can have the system in dual boot.
Bottom line, OSX is not completely free. And there are plenty of us who will accept nothing less. I agree OSX is impressive, but I don't want to become dependent on it. The world is already paying the price for being dependent on one commercial operating system. I'm not keen on it being replaced with another, even if it is Apple's product. We've learned that lesson - let's remember it.
"For instance, applications for Linux and BSD are often grouped in as subcomponents with the operating systems that they are shipped with. For Windows, applications and subcomponents such as Explorer often have their own packages that are considered vulnerable or not vulnerable outside of Windows and therefore may not be included in the count."
And yet, Microsoft claims that it can't remove IE from Windows without destroying the operating system. The irony, the irony...
"Yes, if Apple had 90+% market share, they would be just as bad as Microsoft, maybe worse."
Probably, but at least their stuff WORKS.
"And if Sun had 90+% market share, they would be just as bad as Microsoft, maybe worse."
I disagree. Sun's a hardware company. They sell hardware. Cheap software means selling more hardware. Plus, since they aren't turned off by Linux, they could avoid $$$ in development costs.
"And if Oracle had 90+% market share, they would be just as bad as Microsoft, maybe worse."
Yep.
"And if IBM had 90+% market share... wait a minute, never mind."
Actually, if they had it again they might at least put out a little better product, because they got taken down once.
"The point is not how vicious other companies beside Microsoft may be (though I'll note that Apple has become considerably less closed in the OS X age than it used to be.) The point is that Microsoft has unique monopoly power right now, and that they are everyone's enemy. Let me make that clear: if you work for Apple or Sun or Oracle or IBM or any other computer company that is not Microsoft; if you prefer MacOS or Solaris or Linux or any operating system that is not Windows; if, in fact, you do not actually work for Microsoft or for some "company" that is really a marketing arm of Wintel, Inc. (e.g. Dell), Microsoft is your enemy."
Except if you're in the Bush administration, apparently...
"If and when Microsoft is toppled from its throne (and I sincerely hope it happens soon) there will be another company waiting to take its place, no doubt -- and it's entirely possible that one of the companies I mentioned above will be it. (Probably not; it will probably be someone we either don't know about or aren't particularly afraid of... like Microsoft itself was in the days of IBM dominance. Maybe Red Hat?)"
If Linux takes over, it will NEVER be like it is with Microsoft. Thank you GPL.
"Whoever it is, they will try all the same monopolistic dirty tricks as Microsoft has, and that IBM did before it, no doubt. And we will have to be on our guard against them, and fight them every step of the way -- hopefully we can keep them from ever getting that powerful, but if not, expect yet another long anti-trust saga that leaves no one satisfied."
If Microsoft gets taken down, hopefully that will be a lesson to whoever follows. Probably not, though.
"But right now, in 2002, that doesn't matter. What matters is that Microsoft is much too big and too powerful, that it is crushing innovation, that it is evil. Remember that Churchill and Roosevelt allied themselves with Stalin against Hitler, and they were right to do so."
Um, bad comparison. Microsoft isn't THAT bad (very few are, fortunately.) Plus, we don't have to crush Microsoft to succeed. (Although it would give us that little warm feeling inside...) I'm operating this computer without using any Microsoft software. I'm getting work done (well, not right now, but still...) I'd call that a victory.
If a commerical company were to circumvent a "copy protection measure" what would the RIAA do? Philips is capable of a big fight and would probably put one up just to improve their geek appeal, and thus sales. DeCSS will never break the DMCA, but this just might. Philips has enough resources to do it, if they want to. Will they be the ones?
The file is there, at http://simplygnustep.sourceforge.net/downloads/sta ge-1.iso.zip.0 but the permissions are wrong and the link on the page is wrong. Doesn't look like they'll let us grab it yet.
They must have known the slashdot effect was coming.
YESS!!! Finally, someone points that out. Now, how do we convince the GOVERNMENT to fund the research? Big business sure isn't going to, and universities can only do so much by themselves - they need funding. Unfortunately, the government also responds to pressure from big business, so it's a problem.
This point is not well understood by a lot of people who need to understand it - we NEED research very badly. It isn't something we do (as a society) just for the heck of it. As long as population pressures increase (and I can't see anything short of a plague or mass starvation changing that), demands on resources will get more intense. At some point in the future, we will burn up all the oil which we economically can. At that point, we are in deep S**T unless we have been gradually switching to something else. And in order to do that switching, we have to know how to build whatever we are switching to. Preferably, we would like to work out those details BEFORE our economy starts sliding due to rising energy costs. Yes, it will do so anyway, since unless we work out practical fusion we won't have the sheer mass of power we can generate right now, but the more gradual the shift, the better.
OK, enough ranting. Just remember, we WANT to here about politicians giving more money to research. It's not a luxury, folks. It's an absolute necessity.
I would critizise M$ products, if I cared about M$ stuff. But in their case it doesn't matter. Remember the Dave Barry article? They can shaft their users all they want and rely on sheer momentum. So far, it's working just fine.
And I'm not arguing FOR static interfaces, I'm just saying that's what a lot of people want. Familiar over better, especially when the better part is questionable. M$, in case you haven't noticed, doesn't have to care very much about what users want. They've already got millions of addicts plugged in.
This OS, despite the near magical quality of Windows and Linux applications on one system, looks to be a nitch OS even if it succeeds. Here's why.
In the article itself, the opinion is voiced that there are about 10 major applications that Windows users use. OK, granted. Unfortunately, what we are discussing here is an OS switch, and it's not that simple.
Linux users are quite accustomed to the notion of things like using 8 different IRC clients as the situation warrants. Windows users, on the other hand, quickly grow accustom to even the tiniest quirk of their default system. AOL can't change anything, even on their website, without causing some of their users to be unhappy about the difference.
The point is, if Lindows runs Office and a few other major apps well, that's enough for some businesses. But for home users, EVERYTHING must work as they expect from previous experience, or they won't even consider switching. If their bizarre little propritary note keeper doesn't work, no dice. They ain't movin.
Linux users, who you might think logically would be more interested, will be put off by the commercial nature of the project and are far more likely to wait for/help the wine project. Also, VMware and WinforLin allow people to run Windows programs. There's already compeition out there.
So the only conceivable mass market for this system is business. Great. Unfortunately, we all know how keen the vast majority of the business world is on switching to something different and untried. Especially if it involves retraining. Linux applications won't intice them much - there are other ways to get those, using cygwin, vnc, remote Xwindows connections, etc. Lindows does most of this, let's say. It does it a little better than the above solutions. But will it do ENOUGH better to justify businesses upgrading? Unlikely.
Don't get me wrong - I hope it succeeds. It's just going to have a heck of a time doing so.
Simple. It makes it possible for Sun machines and servers to integrate into a multi-pc environment, which whether Sun likes it or not is how the world works nowadays. Microsoft Office would never work on Sun, so they are automatically shut out of some markets. So they introduce StarOffice. But if StarOffice didn't work on Windows, using it would mean converting to ALL Suns, Linux, etc. Try flying THAT past the CEO. Their Office compatibility is good, but for most businesses it would have to be virtually perfect before they would trust it. No go. So they make the one program available on multiple platforms. This means Sun can begin to creep into new markets, since the same product is available on most popular platforms. But it's not as good as Office, so they need to offer some impressive incentive for people to switch. Hence, free downloads and open source. People can get off the Microsoft upgrade merry-go-round, and still get their work done, and save a crapload of money on license fees. The nugget for sun in all this is that their hardware becomes a possibility in new markets. And when businesses realise how good Sun hardware is compared to Compaq and co, things get interesting.
Whether it will work, I have no idea, but I suspect the rational goes something like that.
Actually, I've wanted to thank you guys for doing what you do, although not necessarily for just the finding maintainers part.
Sometimes saving old code is the best way to get a new developer going, or let someone find a good way to do something without having to reinvent the wheel. The project doesn't have to be renewed - just as a knowledge base in itself it's extremely valuable.
"The Debian installer is easy, as long as you know your hardware. Now, the two things that people most frequently site that supposedly would make it easier to use are hardware autodetection and the usage of an X installer.
Hardware autodetection is great, if you don't mind having it simply not work and freezing a user's system every once in a while. It's not hard to just have a person enter in their hardware."
Yes it is. There are many, many cases where there is no way to figure out the hardware, especially if you are trying to uphold the Linux reputation for bring old boxes back to life. Boards are notorious for not having all the needed information on them, and you may not have the luxury of the original documentation. Under those circumstances, hardware detection may be critical. I know, because I myself have been in this situation.
As for X, that is indeed overkill. I would like to see some small windowing system, like pgui, be adopted for this purpose. A friendly face is worth a lot to new users, and as long as the option is provided for the text install, I don't see what the problem is.
In this particular case, I don't think Apple really should complain - If people can use Unix applications under Aqua in a nice way, that will bring more users to the OSX platform. This works only on Apple's stuff, if I read this correctly.
As far as derivative looks is concerned, it's not really a case of not being original. We want users. Users know how to interact with only a few environments, and those environments are all commerical OS environments. They are not willing to try a free OS unless it is an almost zero effort proposition. Ergo, we have to accomitate that if we want to get users.
Blackbox is simple, elegant, efficient, and my window manager of choice. It also doesn't look remotely like MacOS* or Windows. However, if I were to sit anyone else down in front of it who had not seen it before and say "write a report for English" they would freak out. So for them it's not effective, despite being (IMHO) a clean, simple and efficient working environment.
People want familiar. And if this think can make Unix apps a little more familiar for Aqua users, I think the only thing anyone, including Apple, should have to say is thanks.
Sounds like http://www.directfb.org/ may be what you're after. It doesn't have all of X's features by any means, but you might get there eventually.
However, my vote goes for Berlin, using the GGI project's stuff. They project is concentrated on getting it right. Here are the reasons I believe it is better to support the Berlin project:
1) Better design. They are focused on doing it right. So many systems are focused on getting it done fast, and so few seem to worry about high quality. Yes, Berlin is slow in coming. But when it is ready, whenever that may be, it will be truly awesome.
2) Corba is not necessarily a bad thing. It depends on how it is used. Yes a Corba call is relatively expensive, but for things like graphics over the network (where such things are likely to matter the most) the number of calls is sufficiently small that compared to the X method of blasting bits across the network, things should actually improve. Also, remember that machines will continue to get faster. Overhead will be worthwhile for more flexiblity and power. And when the machines are there, Berlin will not have to be rewritten to take advantage of them.
Yes a lot of applications would have to be rewritten. But considering the potential benefits, and the fact that an X compatability layer is not out of the question (since both systems are open that's a big plus) make the future transition tolerable. Apple rewrote their graphical desktop, and released OSX. We can do the same. Only we won't have to run an entire classic environment. It can work. And when it does, Berlin will begin to redefine the desktop computer experience.
"We've already seen several organizations win lawsuits against GPL/warranty free software writers because of damage that software caused to the organization."
Does anyone know what they are talking about? They mention some RIAA stuff and mp3 people, but I can't think of a case where people doing ordinary end user stuff went and sued. The RIAA is trying to keep their death grip on their industry, and ditto MPAA. Broadcast 2000 wasn't using DeCSS, to the best of my knowledge, and anyone who uses free software knows (or had better figure out) that they have no right to sue the writers! That's like bringing me your computer, me saying very clearly I'll be happy to try and fix it at no cost but I can't guarantee anything, and then you suing me because I couldn't make it work and you lost too much time while I was trying! At this rate no one will be willing to help anyone do anything ever for fear of being sued! Free software is a gift to the world. If you want to use something where you have the right to sue someone, you'd better find a commercial company and pay them some money. Insurance companies don't give out free insurance - you pay them to assume the risk that you are going to get large sums of money from them in the future. These people seem to be treating free software like free insurance. I doubt the law will accept that. If so, I wouldn't be surprised if the technical people desert this country and move somewhere where people don't try and use generosity as a way to blame people and force them to pay for their generosity with cash. Talk about screwed up...
There actually is a reason for this difficulty - it provides the proper setting for people to learn whether they really do or don't want to do this.
The curve handles the grade thing, and provides room for the really bright people to spread their wings. That's what university science is about - finding the one or two percent who have what it takes to really be good scientists. It's not foolproof, but it's the best we've got.
Science is very very hard. There is no way around that. I have never had much difficulty with English classes, but have always struggled in science and math. I am a Physics major. Maybe I should have gone into English, but since there was some chance I might be able to do science I tried it. This is some tough stuff.
So don't come down on science departments too hard - most of them think they don't teach nearly enough. They are fighting poor high school training, student fear of the subject, apathy, and many who are there only as a requirement as will the minimum needed to pass. That's a frustrating combination. They are teaching for majors, and usually in intro classes one student in 20 is a possible major. It is those people they are targeting.
Will this cause problems for the ISS?
on
Meteor Showers
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Will the International Space Station pass through this?
One of the problems with having such a large contained area in space is that it's that much easier to puncture it. Lots of small holes would be very bad, although I know the odds of that are slim to slimmer. Still, is there a plan in case this happens? I assume my usual "When in danger, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout" wouldn't really cut it...
Don't know about those, but vendettas have been a way of life in most political circles since we can remember. People hate other people, and they don't care about consequences beyond their own emotions. Hence, stuff happens that shouldn't.
I'm curious about these vandettas, though. Is that like vendetta version 2.0? The new, improved vendetta?
(Ordinarily I would let it slide, but since it's the title of an excellent Star Trek book...)
"If Microsoft had offered common external interfaces in the first release of NT, and not those bloated buggy propriety standards years later, they might actually have managed to produce a useable OS that enterprises could then integrate into their existing data centres, rather than boxes that perform tasks in independant installations."
Ah, but then there would be no incentive in the future to replace those machines. Microsoft, as the subscription based licenses show, cannot merely sell a product and live off the income. That's not how you maximize profit. You keep them paying, and make sure they can't pay anyone else. That's how a monopoly works - you don't play nice with anyone else.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, this might mean any of several things:
a) There has been some legal development in what's left of the legal arguement that we don't know about, but is distinctly in Microsoft's favor, and has made them more bold
b) Dell might have decided that the "No OS" clause doesn't restrict them from selling Linux boxes, and along with other vendors allowed Microsoft to set these terms to get cheaper licenses. What Microsoft defines as "No OS" isn't clear, but Linux certainly isn't "No OS", at least here in the real world.
c) Microsoft is becoming increasingly worried that the legal proceedings are not going well, and wants to get this new contract into effect before the judge forbids such moves
d) Or the most likely of all - Microsoft is ignoring all legal and consumer issues and is being openly anticompetitive in order to milk the cash cow some more. Maybe they believe that if they act like the consumer doesn't and shouldn't give a rip about it, it will be true.
I see this question didn't make it, so I'll offer it up here - what is the status of the Lighthouse and Sarrus apps? Given the progress the GNUStep team is making, the possibilities of those tools as open source productivity apps is intriging.
I read a Time article on this movie, and it is quite clear that Lucas either doesn't understand or doesn't care just how bad Phantom really seemed to the majority of his fans (including me.) He blames the internet for the crushing negative reaction to Jar-Jar, saying that C3PO and the Ewoks also got a lot of negative feedback and the reason those characters weren't so heavly dumped on was there was no internet to spread the word. Incredible.
I readly confess the Ewoks in particular are weak, but at least they and 3PO weren't so incredibly annoying. Jar-Jar should have been cut out completely once the fan response became clear, whatever Lucas may think about the reasons for the reaction. He states he is in the business to make money - why then doesn't he listen to his customers?? Is the man's ego really that much out of control?
I may see Clones, but I suspect unless the critics rave about it I'll wait for it to reach the dollar movie theaters first. Lucas got more money than he earned for Phantom, and I see no reason to give him more. He needs to wake up to the fact that hype will only carry him so far, and eventually he's going to have to produce a good product again.
I agree that would be a good move, but remember AppleWorks isn't supposed to replace Office. It just provides basic functionality for a low price, and it is backed by Apple. That is enough for many needs, especially the iMac crowd. (Pre-G4 iMac, anyway...)
I suspect Apple will not put effort into something they don't control.
You might take a look at Dillo (http://dillo.sf.net) - it is small, fast, doesn't depend on mozilla, and generally makes a good fast browser. It is under development, but even so for what you describe it should work fine.
Really good hardware for the price.
Several reasons. One is merely the licensing issues - Darwin is more or less open, but the graphical code very definitely is not. A lot of us like to be able to find out, at least in principle, what is going on at all levels of our system.
Another is the development focus of the linux teams - they will tend to have more cutting edge non-graphical stuff, like multiple journaling filesystems, before apple. Apple sells desktops, and you can bet that's what they will be gearing their operating system for. Some of us want more flexability, and more just plain cool cutting edge unstable cool features.
And finally, I want Blackbox instead of the OSX desktop. Call me crazy (probably true) but I like the mimimalistic, efficient desktop blackbox represents. If I want crazy graphics, I can have the system in dual boot.
Bottom line, OSX is not completely free. And there are plenty of us who will accept nothing less. I agree OSX is impressive, but I don't want to become dependent on it. The world is already paying the price for being dependent on one commercial operating system. I'm not keen on it being replaced with another, even if it is Apple's product. We've learned that lesson - let's remember it.
"For instance, applications for Linux and BSD are often grouped in as subcomponents with the operating systems that they are shipped with. For Windows, applications and subcomponents such as Explorer often have their own packages that are considered vulnerable or not vulnerable outside of Windows and therefore may not be included in the count."
And yet, Microsoft claims that it can't remove IE from Windows without destroying the operating system. The irony, the irony...
What does this mean for the use of OpenGL in open source? Are we going to have to start developing our own open source replacement for OpenGL now?
"Yes, if Apple had 90+% market share, they would be just as bad as Microsoft, maybe worse."
... wait a minute, never mind."
... like Microsoft itself was in the days of IBM dominance. Maybe Red Hat?)"
Probably, but at least their stuff WORKS.
"And if Sun had 90+% market share, they would be just as bad as Microsoft, maybe worse."
I disagree. Sun's a hardware company. They sell hardware. Cheap software means selling more hardware. Plus, since they aren't turned off by Linux, they could avoid $$$ in development costs.
"And if Oracle had 90+% market share, they would be just as bad as Microsoft, maybe worse."
Yep.
"And if IBM had 90+% market share
Actually, if they had it again they might at least put out a little better product, because they got taken down once.
"The point is not how vicious other companies beside Microsoft may be (though I'll note that Apple has become considerably less closed in the OS X age than it used to be.) The point is that Microsoft has unique monopoly power right now, and that they are everyone's enemy. Let me make that clear: if you work for Apple or Sun or Oracle or IBM or any other computer company that is not Microsoft; if you prefer MacOS or Solaris or Linux or any operating system that is not Windows; if, in fact, you do not actually work for Microsoft or for some "company" that is really a marketing arm of Wintel, Inc. (e.g. Dell), Microsoft is your enemy."
Except if you're in the Bush administration, apparently...
"If and when Microsoft is toppled from its throne (and I sincerely hope it happens soon) there will be another company waiting to take its place, no doubt -- and it's entirely possible that one of the companies I mentioned above will be it. (Probably not; it will probably be someone we either don't know about or aren't particularly afraid of
If Linux takes over, it will NEVER be like it is with Microsoft. Thank you GPL.
"Whoever it is, they will try all the same monopolistic dirty tricks as Microsoft has, and that IBM did before it, no doubt. And we will have to be on our guard against them, and fight them every step of the way -- hopefully we can keep them from ever getting that powerful, but if not, expect yet another long anti-trust saga that leaves no one satisfied."
If Microsoft gets taken down, hopefully that will be a lesson to whoever follows. Probably not, though.
"But right now, in 2002, that doesn't matter. What matters is that Microsoft is much too big and too powerful, that it is crushing innovation, that it is evil. Remember that Churchill and Roosevelt allied themselves with Stalin against Hitler, and they were right to do so."
Um, bad comparison. Microsoft isn't THAT bad (very few are, fortunately.) Plus, we don't have to crush Microsoft to succeed. (Although it would give us that little warm feeling inside...) I'm operating this computer without using any Microsoft software. I'm getting work done (well, not right now, but still...) I'd call that a victory.
If a commerical company were to circumvent a "copy protection measure" what would the RIAA do? Philips is capable of a big fight and would probably put one up just to improve their geek appeal, and thus sales. DeCSS will never break the DMCA, but this just might. Philips has enough resources to do it, if they want to. Will they be the ones?
The file is there, at http://simplygnustep.sourceforge.net/downloads/sta ge-1.iso.zip.0 but the permissions are wrong and the link on the page is wrong. Doesn't look like they'll let us grab it yet.
They must have known the slashdot effect was coming.
"the way to win the game is to maximize research"
YESS!!! Finally, someone points that out. Now, how do we convince the GOVERNMENT to fund the research? Big business sure isn't going to, and universities can only do so much by themselves - they need funding. Unfortunately, the government also responds to pressure from big business, so it's a problem.
This point is not well understood by a lot of people who need to understand it - we NEED research very badly. It isn't something we do (as a society) just for the heck of it. As long as population pressures increase (and I can't see anything short of a plague or mass starvation changing that), demands on resources will get more intense. At some point in the future, we will burn up all the oil which we economically can. At that point, we are in deep S**T unless we have been gradually switching to something else. And in order to do that switching, we have to know how to build whatever we are switching to. Preferably, we would like to work out those details BEFORE our economy starts sliding due to rising energy costs. Yes, it will do so anyway, since unless we work out practical fusion we won't have the sheer mass of power we can generate right now, but the more gradual the shift, the better.
OK, enough ranting. Just remember, we WANT to here about politicians giving more money to research. It's not a luxury, folks. It's an absolute necessity.
I would critizise M$ products, if I cared about M$ stuff. But in their case it doesn't matter. Remember the Dave Barry article? They can shaft their users all they want and rely on sheer momentum. So far, it's working just fine.
And I'm not arguing FOR static interfaces, I'm just saying that's what a lot of people want. Familiar over better, especially when the better part is questionable. M$, in case you haven't noticed, doesn't have to care very much about what users want. They've already got millions of addicts plugged in.
This OS, despite the near magical quality of Windows and Linux applications on one system, looks to be a nitch OS even if it succeeds. Here's why.
In the article itself, the opinion is voiced that there are about 10 major applications that Windows users use. OK, granted. Unfortunately, what we are discussing here is an OS switch, and it's not that simple.
Linux users are quite accustomed to the notion of things like using 8 different IRC clients as the situation warrants. Windows users, on the other hand, quickly grow accustom to even the tiniest quirk of their default system. AOL can't change anything, even on their website, without causing some of their users to be unhappy about the difference.
The point is, if Lindows runs Office and a few other major apps well, that's enough for some businesses. But for home users, EVERYTHING must work as they expect from previous experience, or they won't even consider switching. If their bizarre little propritary note keeper doesn't work, no dice. They ain't movin.
Linux users, who you might think logically would be more interested, will be put off by the commercial nature of the project and are far more likely to wait for/help the wine project. Also, VMware and WinforLin allow people to run Windows programs. There's already compeition out there.
So the only conceivable mass market for this system is business. Great. Unfortunately, we all know how keen the vast majority of the business world is on switching to something different and untried. Especially if it involves retraining. Linux applications won't intice them much - there are other ways to get those, using cygwin, vnc, remote Xwindows connections, etc. Lindows does most of this, let's say. It does it a little better than the above solutions. But will it do ENOUGH better to justify businesses upgrading? Unlikely.
Don't get me wrong - I hope it succeeds. It's just going to have a heck of a time doing so.
Simple. It makes it possible for Sun machines and servers to integrate into a multi-pc environment, which whether Sun likes it or not is how the world works nowadays. Microsoft Office would never work on Sun, so they are automatically shut out of some markets. So they introduce StarOffice. But if StarOffice didn't work on Windows, using it would mean converting to ALL Suns, Linux, etc. Try flying THAT past the CEO. Their Office compatibility is good, but for most businesses it would have to be virtually perfect before they would trust it. No go. So they make the one program available on multiple platforms. This means Sun can begin to creep into new markets, since the same product is available on most popular platforms. But it's not as good as Office, so they need to offer some impressive incentive for people to switch. Hence, free downloads and open source. People can get off the Microsoft upgrade merry-go-round, and still get their work done, and save a crapload of money on license fees. The nugget for sun in all this is that their hardware becomes a possibility in new markets. And when businesses realise how good Sun hardware is compared to Compaq and co, things get interesting.
Whether it will work, I have no idea, but I suspect the rational goes something like that.
Actually, I've wanted to thank you guys for doing what you do, although not necessarily for just the finding maintainers part.
Sometimes saving old code is the best way to get a new developer going, or let someone find a good way to do something without having to reinvent the wheel. The project doesn't have to be renewed - just as a knowledge base in itself it's extremely valuable.
So anyway, thanks.
"The Debian installer is easy, as long as you know your hardware. Now, the two things that people most frequently site that supposedly would make it easier to use are hardware autodetection and the usage of an X installer.
Hardware autodetection is great, if you don't mind having it simply not work and freezing a user's system every once in a while. It's not hard to just have a person enter in their hardware."
Yes it is. There are many, many cases where there is no way to figure out the hardware, especially if you are trying to uphold the Linux reputation for bring old boxes back to life. Boards are notorious for not having all the needed information on them, and you may not have the luxury of the original documentation. Under those circumstances, hardware detection may be critical. I know, because I myself have been in this situation.
As for X, that is indeed overkill. I would like to see some small windowing system, like pgui, be adopted for this purpose. A friendly face is worth a lot to new users, and as long as the option is provided for the text install, I don't see what the problem is.
In this particular case, I don't think Apple really should complain - If people can use Unix applications under Aqua in a nice way, that will bring more users to the OSX platform. This works only on Apple's stuff, if I read this correctly.
As far as derivative looks is concerned, it's not really a case of not being original. We want users. Users know how to interact with only a few environments, and those environments are all commerical OS environments. They are not willing to try a free OS unless it is an almost zero effort proposition. Ergo, we have to accomitate that if we want to get users.
Blackbox is simple, elegant, efficient, and my window manager of choice. It also doesn't look remotely like MacOS* or Windows. However, if I were to sit anyone else down in front of it who had not seen it before and say "write a report for English" they would freak out. So for them it's not effective, despite being (IMHO) a clean, simple and efficient working environment.
People want familiar. And if this think can make Unix apps a little more familiar for Aqua users, I think the only thing anyone, including Apple, should have to say is thanks.
Sounds like http://www.directfb.org/ may be what you're after. It doesn't have all of X's features by any means, but you might get there eventually.
However, my vote goes for Berlin, using the GGI project's stuff. They project is concentrated on getting it right. Here are the reasons I believe it is better to support the Berlin project:
1) Better design. They are focused on doing it right. So many systems are focused on getting it done fast, and so few seem to worry about high quality. Yes, Berlin is slow in coming. But when it is ready, whenever that may be, it will be truly awesome.
2) Corba is not necessarily a bad thing. It depends on how it is used. Yes a Corba call is relatively expensive, but for things like graphics over the network (where such things are likely to matter the most) the number of calls is sufficiently small that compared to the X method of blasting bits across the network, things should actually improve. Also, remember that machines will continue to get faster. Overhead will be worthwhile for more flexiblity and power. And when the machines are there, Berlin will not have to be rewritten to take advantage of them.
Yes a lot of applications would have to be rewritten. But considering the potential benefits, and the fact that an X compatability layer is not out of the question (since both systems are open that's a big plus) make the future transition tolerable. Apple rewrote their graphical desktop, and released OSX. We can do the same. Only we won't have to run an entire classic environment. It can work. And when it does, Berlin will begin to redefine the desktop computer experience.
"We've already seen several organizations win lawsuits against GPL/warranty free software writers because of damage that software caused to the organization."
Does anyone know what they are talking about? They mention some RIAA stuff and mp3 people, but I can't think of a case where people doing ordinary end user stuff went and sued. The RIAA is trying to keep their death grip on their industry, and ditto MPAA. Broadcast 2000 wasn't using DeCSS, to the best of my knowledge, and anyone who uses free software knows (or had better figure out) that they have no right to sue the writers! That's like bringing me your computer, me saying very clearly I'll be happy to try and fix it at no cost but I can't guarantee anything, and then you suing me because I couldn't make it work and you lost too much time while I was trying! At this rate no one will be willing to help anyone do anything ever for fear of being sued! Free software is a gift to the world. If you want to use something where you have the right to sue someone, you'd better find a commercial company and pay them some money. Insurance companies don't give out free insurance - you pay them to assume the risk that you are going to get large sums of money from them in the future. These people seem to be treating free software like free insurance. I doubt the law will accept that. If so, I wouldn't be surprised if the technical people desert this country and move somewhere where people don't try and use generosity as a way to blame people and force them to pay for their generosity with cash. Talk about screwed up...
There actually is a reason for this difficulty - it provides the proper setting for people to learn whether they really do or don't want to do this.
The curve handles the grade thing, and provides room for the really bright people to spread their wings. That's what university science is about - finding the one or two percent who have what it takes to really be good scientists. It's not foolproof, but it's the best we've got.
Science is very very hard. There is no way around that. I have never had much difficulty with English classes, but have always struggled in science and math. I am a Physics major. Maybe I should have gone into English, but since there was some chance I might be able to do science I tried it. This is some tough stuff.
So don't come down on science departments too hard - most of them think they don't teach nearly enough. They are fighting poor high school training, student fear of the subject, apathy, and many who are there only as a requirement as will the minimum needed to pass. That's a frustrating combination. They are teaching for majors, and usually in intro classes one student in 20 is a possible major. It is those people they are targeting.
Will the International Space Station pass through this?
One of the problems with having such a large contained area in space is that it's that much easier to puncture it. Lots of small holes would be very bad, although I know the odds of that are slim to slimmer. Still, is there a plan in case this happens? I assume my usual "When in danger, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout" wouldn't really cut it...
vandettas?
Don't know about those, but vendettas have been a way of life in most political circles since we can remember. People hate other people, and they don't care about consequences beyond their own emotions. Hence, stuff happens that shouldn't.
I'm curious about these vandettas, though. Is that like vendetta version 2.0? The new, improved vendetta?
(Ordinarily I would let it slide, but since it's the title of an excellent Star Trek book...)
"If Microsoft had offered common external interfaces in the first release of NT, and not those bloated buggy propriety standards years later, they might actually have managed to produce a useable OS that enterprises could then integrate into their existing data centres, rather than boxes that perform tasks in independant installations."
Ah, but then there would be no incentive in the future to replace those machines. Microsoft, as the subscription based licenses show, cannot merely sell a product and live off the income. That's not how you maximize profit. You keep them paying, and make sure they can't pay anyone else. That's how a monopoly works - you don't play nice with anyone else.