Decision makers who understand the Open Source Model will thrive when other's struggle to keep up in the long run.
Whom do you trust with the keys to the data of your organization? How transparent are they? Maybe know some of what's talked about in non-vendor circles? Who are your competitors? Does competition have a purpose in the Open Source Community?
There was a novel called "When H.A.R.L.I.E. Was One" by David Gerrold. Harlie asked the question What is God? and created Graphical Omniscient Device (G.O.D.) Good story. Give it a read if you can find it.
IBM is one of the largest and most Open Source companies. Their market cap is said to be $152B. Last time I saw, market cap was the least of the concern of either company in question or the shareholder. Besides, MS isn't about to swallow a company that is in the Trillion Dollar club, amongst the likes of GM or a number of Japanese conglomerates, not the mention the age and the sheer brain power at Big Blue.
Me thinks, MS would struggle with the culture clash of absorbing an OSS company, even if they are a fairly progressive company.
Highly publicized buyouts, are a quick and dirty solutions that corporations often partake in to bolster shareholder and market confidence, rather than a longer term strategic maneuver.
You have to ask yourself: What company would add in a substantiative way to MS strategically? What OSS Company is in a niche that MS isn't, which upon acquisition would allow MS gain a marketshare that it couldn't otherwise due to barriers MS has to enter that market?? What OSS Company shares a market with MS which upon acquisition would allow MS to shift its advantage or gain an advantage that it couldn't otherwise due to barriers MS has to expand in that market?
And if you are familiar with the discussions/flame wars around this platform and code, I think it's safe to say there's a market for either one. Albeit, sometimes there's bad blood between closed source companies and the Open Source community, other entities who have profit as their prime motivator instead of passion for the idea have and do work and play well with the community.
At the end of the day, the choice is still yours since it is after your Source.
Funny...when I went to the link in the posting I'm replying to I saw a link for purchasing Dell's with Linux installed -- RedHat for that matter. Looks like Dell is already doing this.
that being said, is it the "Open Source" project which is only supporting these distributions?
The link takes us to a link for MySQL Enterprise. Since MySQL AB provides contract based service for MySQL, this is one way MySQL generates corporate cashflow which allows them to continue to work on MySQL.
Unfortunately, corporations have limited resources called humans who aren't always as zealous or passionate as people involved in an Open Source project. Therefore, they pick and choose which path to follow the money trail not their passion.
The concept of Open Source is not the same as the traditional monetary based business model.
is what everyone should feel approaching on the horizon when identity theft is being so mishandled and they're thinking about implementing a national ID system for immigration control/passports? More windows and doors of opportunity/motivators for the criminal element to hijaak people's personal information. I agree with the first reply that congress needs to wake up or be woken up. Till these issues are taken seriously, individuals will continue to pay the highest price personally in so many ways for this, not larger interests.
to anyone who wants to look at an Open Source project to see whether or not, the code is well written or not.
Indemnification of a product, like a closed-sourced product, requires either a trusted 3rd party review and not really likely to be done at the source code level. Yet an Open Source project is viewable to its core. Open source projects live and die by being best of breed for the solution they're designed for. Closed source products will maintain a shelf-life, provided a large enough marketing budget is behind them. Evolution of software is different for each path of the type of product.
When will people realize they're comparing two completely different paths to develop two completely different products who's core fundamentals or reasons for existence are driven by completely different motivators?
Start students with a language that imposes a structure and methodology so that they solidify good coding habits.
Yes, as some people have stated, for practical purposes, a language that teaches good habits doesn't necessarily fit the task well in the real world. Give learning programmers (aka students) a solid foundation built upon solid 1st principles of software development and programming and we'll all see much less of the BSOD and maybe people
I've taught programming and a large portion of students didn't even have fundamental problem solving skills. For example, I gave an exam and included a new function on the test, pretty simple one AND they had open access to the help files. Guess what, NOT ONE OF THEM LOOKED AT THE HELP SYSTEM. They all just complained they'd never seen the function before and this was after putting a statement about freely using the help system at the top of every page of the exam and talking about it the day before the exam.
Guess they all were suffering from hangovers and didn't remember what I'd said and didn't read the exam paper either
With regards to teaching students programming, make it fun, make it practical (yes even with PASCAL for example you can do both) and above all let them experiment and cultivate those who wanna go outside of the curriculum.
not whether PHP sucks or Ruby is better or any of the rest of the messages that have NOT been modded down. Come on people../ sure is going downhill these days.
To the original poster: As for a framework, I'm not all that clear why you're interested in a framework other than because of what you've read about Rails being a framework for Ruby. If you're looking to use one of them because of the pre-built objects they're giving you then I would think you'd want to spend the time exploring them to make sure the one you look to using allows you the greatest flexibility for what you're doing. Otherwise, I would just work with PHP5 and build up your own collection of objects that you can re-use as you need. Isn't that the whole point of the object oriented model?
holding software developers and companies responsible for poorly written software? Check out the EULA, Windows blows up and wipes out your accounting software, the most you can sue the vendor for is the cost of the software in question. Where's the incentive to software companies to write better code?
Insurance companies will not honour your home insurance or car insurance policy in the event you left your car unlocked and it was stolen.
This is why insurance companies are now looking at how they insure around the liability with regards to the operating system companies use and efforts that have been made to secure infrastructure. Bruce Schneier has discussed the insurance and network security issue often, like here.
The onus still lies on the end user to make the effort to secure their asset. And the criminal will still be charged with unlawfull entry, but the insurance industry will use lack of effort on the owner's part as an out to not pay out on the policy.
Sounds like Apple will implement Freescale's dual core G4 embedded processor in the laptop to maintain a luxury lineup based on the PowerPC. In time they will open the door to the commodity PC marketplace with the Intel based lineup. Thereby, maintaining their existing customer base and opening way for a whole new level of consumer to have the "Apple Experience" I can see Apple making a big push into the education market, much like the recent announcement about Microsoft putting XBOX's in Japanese schools. They continue to develop for both platforms and observe the proliferation of the PowerPC/Power core with IBMs industrial partners and the Cell processors (Power based). I believe that eventually Apple will embrace the Cell as it gains traction and it bears fruit for Sony/Toshiba/IBM. Actually, in retrospect of Apple's announcement it is actually a very strategic move for them. And they have not closed the door on either pathway really with the time period of this shift. Something to think about. All that and OS X is based on BSD. The future looks interesting and will be exciting to watch.
I have always said Psalm 37:11 Exhortation to Patience and Trust Of David says "But the meek shall inherit the land, and delight themselves in abundant prosperity." should read "But the geeks shall inherit the land, and delight themselves in abundant prosperity."
for a number of reasons to start with as a code base. Moreso considering they're interacting with an IBM processor. There's still enough of the OS/2 code base involved in Windows 2000 and W2K is by far one of the most stable versions of Windows to date. So, start with a mature and stable codebase and work from there. Gamers DEMAND stability. Blue screens, won't be tolerated by the community so MS knows it's got to get it's proverbial engineering act together to not self-destruct in the marketplace.
Slashdot Mirror
Decision makers who understand the Open Source Model will thrive when other's struggle to keep up in the long run.
Whom do you trust with the keys to the data of your organization? How transparent are they? Maybe know some of what's talked about in non-vendor circles? Who are your competitors? Does competition have a purpose in the Open Source Community?
How do companies differentiate themselves?
So what Open Corporate Culture would promote and reward good behaviour in a realistic way?
not while you are driving.
Like Duh!!
Way to go with creating another generalization in the mass media.
And mass media wonders why newspapers are failing and considered obsolete?
In my surfing I came across The Modern Firm Hosting Services and they may be what you're looking for.
Hope this helps.
a grab for power, money. backdoor or indirect DRM and a shot against net neutrality.
Take a look at Allmydata Tahoe. I think it will do what you're looking to do. It also sounds robust as well. Hope this helps.
There was a novel called "When H.A.R.L.I.E. Was One" by David Gerrold. Harlie asked the question What is God? and created Graphical Omniscient Device (G.O.D.) Good story. Give it a read if you can find it.
Novel's market cap: $2B
Red Hat's market cap: $4B
Microsoft's market cap: $292B
IBM is one of the largest and most Open Source companies. Their market cap is said to be $152B. Last time I saw, market cap was the least of the concern of either company in question or the shareholder. Besides, MS isn't about to swallow a company that is in the Trillion Dollar club, amongst the likes of GM or a number of Japanese conglomerates, not the mention the age and the sheer brain power at Big Blue.
Me thinks, MS would struggle with the culture clash of absorbing an OSS company, even if they are a fairly progressive company.
Highly publicized buyouts, are a quick and dirty solutions that corporations often partake in to bolster shareholder and market confidence, rather than a longer term strategic maneuver.
You have to ask yourself:
What company would add in a substantiative way to MS strategically?
What OSS Company is in a niche that MS isn't, which upon acquisition would allow MS gain a marketshare that it couldn't otherwise due to barriers MS has to enter that market??
What OSS Company shares a market with MS which upon acquisition would allow MS to shift its advantage or gain an advantage that it couldn't otherwise due to barriers MS has to expand in that market?
Take a look at the differences between two systems/groups that parallel your questions.
Sveasoft on the commercial side.
OpenWRT or DD-WRT on the Open Source side.
And if you are familiar with the discussions/flame wars around this platform and code, I think it's safe to say there's a market for either one. Albeit, sometimes there's bad blood between closed source companies and the Open Source community, other entities who have profit as their prime motivator instead of passion for the idea have and do work and play well with the community.
At the end of the day, the choice is still yours since it is after your Source.
Funny...when I went to the link in the posting I'm replying to I saw a link for purchasing Dell's with Linux installed -- RedHat for that matter. Looks like Dell is already doing this.
MySQL is an Open Source project, correct? Yes.
that being said, is it the "Open Source" project which is only supporting these distributions?
The link takes us to a link for MySQL Enterprise. Since MySQL AB provides contract based service for MySQL, this is one way MySQL generates corporate cashflow which allows them to continue to work on MySQL.
Unfortunately, corporations have limited resources called humans who aren't always as zealous or passionate as people involved in an Open Source project. Therefore, they pick and choose which path to follow the money trail not their passion.
The concept of Open Source is not the same as the traditional monetary based business model.
What episode would this be now in this ongoing saga?
is what everyone should feel approaching on the horizon when identity theft is being so mishandled and they're thinking about implementing a national ID system for immigration control/passports? More windows and doors of opportunity/motivators for the criminal element to hijaak people's personal information. I agree with the first reply that congress needs to wake up or be woken up. Till these issues are taken seriously, individuals will continue to pay the highest price personally in so many ways for this, not larger interests.
to anyone who wants to look at an Open Source project to see whether or not, the code is well written or not.
Indemnification of a product, like a closed-sourced product, requires either a trusted 3rd party review and not really likely to be done at the source code level. Yet an Open Source project is viewable to its core. Open source projects live and die by being best of breed for the solution they're designed for. Closed source products will maintain a shelf-life, provided a large enough marketing budget is behind them. Evolution of software is different for each path of the type of product.
When will people realize they're comparing two completely different paths to develop two completely different products who's core fundamentals or reasons for existence are driven by completely different motivators?
....2nd paragraph should end... and maybe people will have fun too.
Start students with a language that imposes a structure and methodology so that they solidify good coding habits.
Yes, as some people have stated, for practical purposes, a language that teaches good habits doesn't necessarily fit the task well in the real world. Give learning programmers (aka students) a solid foundation built upon solid 1st principles of software development and programming and we'll all see much less of the BSOD and maybe people
I've taught programming and a large portion of students didn't even have fundamental problem solving skills. For example, I gave an exam and included a new function on the test, pretty simple one AND they had open access to the help files. Guess what, NOT ONE OF THEM LOOKED AT THE HELP SYSTEM. They all just complained they'd never seen the function before and this was after putting a statement about freely using the help system at the top of every page of the exam and talking about it the day before the exam.
Guess they all were suffering from hangovers and didn't remember what I'd said and didn't read the exam paper either
With regards to teaching students programming, make it fun, make it practical (yes even with PASCAL for example you can do both) and above all let them experiment and cultivate those who wanna go outside of the curriculum.
not whether PHP sucks or Ruby is better or any of the rest of the messages that have NOT been modded down. Come on people. ./ sure is going downhill these days.
To the original poster: As for a framework, I'm not all that clear why you're interested in a framework other than because of what you've read about Rails being a framework for Ruby. If you're looking to use one of them because of the pre-built objects they're giving you then I would think you'd want to spend the time exploring them to make sure the one you look to using allows you the greatest flexibility for what you're doing. Otherwise, I would just work with PHP5 and build up your own collection of objects that you can re-use as you need. Isn't that the whole point of the object oriented model?
Just my two cents.
holding software developers and companies responsible for poorly written software? Check out the EULA, Windows blows up and wipes out your accounting software, the most you can sue the vendor for is the cost of the software in question. Where's the incentive to software companies to write better code?
Insurance companies will not honour your home insurance or car insurance policy in the event you left your car unlocked and it was stolen.
This is why insurance companies are now looking at how they insure around the liability with regards to the operating system companies use and efforts that have been made to secure infrastructure. Bruce Schneier has discussed the insurance and network security issue often, like here.
The onus still lies on the end user to make the effort to secure their asset. And the criminal will still be charged with unlawfull entry, but the insurance industry will use lack of effort on the owner's part as an out to not pay out on the policy.
Sounds like Apple will implement Freescale's dual core G4 embedded processor in the laptop to maintain a luxury lineup based on the PowerPC. In time they will open the door to the commodity PC marketplace with the Intel based lineup. Thereby, maintaining their existing customer base and opening way for a whole new level of consumer to have the "Apple Experience" I can see Apple making a big push into the education market, much like the recent announcement about Microsoft putting XBOX's in Japanese schools. They continue to develop for both platforms and observe the proliferation of the PowerPC/Power core with IBMs industrial partners and the Cell processors (Power based). I believe that eventually Apple will embrace the Cell as it gains traction and it bears fruit for Sony/Toshiba/IBM. Actually, in retrospect of Apple's announcement it is actually a very strategic move for them. And they have not closed the door on either pathway really with the time period of this shift. Something to think about. All that and OS X is based on BSD. The future looks interesting and will be exciting to watch.
I have always said Psalm 37:11 Exhortation to Patience and Trust Of David says "But the meek shall inherit the land, and delight themselves in abundant prosperity." should read "But the geeks shall inherit the land, and delight themselves in abundant prosperity."
for a number of reasons to start with as a code base. Moreso considering they're interacting with an IBM processor. There's still enough of the OS/2 code base involved in Windows 2000 and W2K is by far one of the most stable versions of Windows to date. So, start with a mature and stable codebase and work from there. Gamers DEMAND stability. Blue screens, won't be tolerated by the community so MS knows it's got to get it's proverbial engineering act together to not self-destruct in the marketplace.
I'm a Canadian and I'm seeking postiions, contracts in the US, any recommendations or advice?
Could we move our conversation to email?
Would you go back? What would you do differently yourself?