It is not about which of our freedoms the concept most closely resembles, but rather about which definition of the word "free" is being used.
My dictionary has 15 definitions of "free", plus numerous subdefinitions. One only of them refers to the lack of monetary cost. I seems that languages that have two words for "free" are not much more precise than English. I find it interesting that the last definition is: "5 : open to all comers". Hmmm, maybe "Open Source" is the best name after all.
It is entirely possible for a free software project to be created that is in fact not available to anyone gratis.
In theory, anything is possible. Windows might be open sourced tomorrow, or the Sun might go nova. But I seriously doubt it. Likewise, I seriously doubt I would ever see a Free Software project be only available via monetary payment. I know of none now. I don't think you do either.
Another thing to remember: Free Software is Free Speech, not Free Beer.
Enough with the stupid slogans! All they do is lock your mind into simplistic and erroneous concepts.
Free Software is NOT free speech! If you have to compare it to anything in the Bill of Rights, it comes closest to Free of the Press. But the way some of you carry on, you would think it's Freedom of Religion!
Free speech means that I, myself, have the freedom to speak. But I already have the freedom to "speak" software. The only things that threatens it are software patents, and NOT the lack of a sufficient number of Free Software packages. If I use proprietary software, I still have the freedom to create my own software. I don't need Free Software to do that.
And it really is "free beer". I don't have to pay for it. As long as I am not the first user, it's free beer all the way. And if I am, you license grants me the permission to give it away to anyone for zero cost. The service and support might not be free, but the software is free as in gratis.
So think up another slogan, because this one is getting tired and cliched.
Shee-it, don't go telling those commie-pinko perverts in congress that there's industries out there still haven't been nationalized or regulated out of existance yet...
Business pay taxes too. It might not be popular to say so in today's culture, but it's true. I find it extremely hypocritical for the members of a community whose main motto is "software should not be owned", to turn around and argue against public domain.
Way back in the cretaceous, when I was in junior high, I had this crush on Lynnette. She was the epitome of perfection in my hormone addled mind. But I could never work up the courage to talk to her. She was just too perfect, and mere mortals like I didn't talk to perfect beings. Then one day I saw her pick her nose. Instantly she transformed from an alabaster statue of Aphrodite high upon Olympus unto a human being that I could talk to.
I like handmade rugs because they aren't perfect. They have all of the durability and attractiveness of machine made rugs, but that missing stitch here and there adds a quality to it that says "someone cared enough to make this". I like UNIX for the same reason. Those little warts say that people put their hearts into it, instead of merely following some sterile specs from marketing. It's craftsmanship.
Yup! One of the defining attributes of a geek is the unwavering conviction that they are absolutely correct, and will go out of their way to start arguments to demonstrate their correctness.
Re:Why is this a good thing?
on
Announcing WiFiBSD
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
If this works great, than WiFi vendors don't owe the community a cent.
BSD worked great for Apple. And guess what? They're giving back to the community! I just guess it goes to show that the public won't act like thieves when you don't treat them like thieves.
If it's not going to be Linux or BSD based, then it's going to be Windows based. And my bias makes me lean away from Windows.
For some devices, neither of these are appropriate, but try telling that to the CEO or his marketing department. But at least with a free Unix like OS, you can truly modify it for use on your unique hardware. And even if it's not a stock Linux or BSD anymore, when marketing demands it have a firewire port next year, you can still use the stock firewire driver.
The Microsoft mouse sounds better than a track-ball-in-mouse combination because fingers don't have as much range of motion side-to-side as they do when curling over a mouse wheel.
Try using a Logitech Trackman or [cough cough] Microsoft Explorer. The trackball is under your thumb, and you get a LOT of control with it. Much more than you would a mouse. You'll need a day or two to get used to it, just like you had to get used to a mouse back in day one. But once you get the feel of it, you'll never go back.
Before the world goes and congratulates Microsoft for putting the entire damned keyboard on the mouse, let's stop and think a bit...
I've been using a trackball for years, and will never go back to a mouse. Recently I tried a new trackball that had a scrollwheel. It was so damned superflous it wasn't even funny. Why not just use the trackball? A little side button to click to put it into scroll mode, and then use the trackball to scroll vertically, horizontally, diagonally, or any other direction you can manage to contort.
Frankly, today's mice have too many controls. And this is coming from a guy who demands three buttons! Don't put funky little doodads between the buttons. Don't hide wierd clicky thingies on the side or put them below the regular buttons. If people want them, sure go ahead and market them. But keep the standard pointing device simple. With a trackball and three buttons, all the controls you need are there already.
But seriously, why does apple need a new free software license? Aren't the ones being used now sufficient?
The set of "classic" Free Software licenses (pre-MPL) are not sufficient. I hate to say this, because I really detest license proliferation, but it's true. What these licenses do not address, or marginally address, are patents and trademarks. These are very big concerns for software companies today.
In addition, the simpler licenses like BSD and MIT are just too simple. While I like their simplicity (the user can actually understand them), the average lawyer runs away in terror at their terseness. Even the GPL is considered sloppy by some lawyers.
That's comforting to know. I've seen some Sonata reviews at "quiet PC" sites, and they all say it's noisier than they expected. What they "expected" is hard to tell, but since these are quiet freaks, they probably have unrealistic expectations from mass market consumer cases.
A trend that came about because there's too many damn fans in the systems nowadays. Some GPU's have fan's bigger than the CPU's! Browsing the case aisle at Fry's, some of them have six case fans, plus three or four on the PSU. Throw in a Barton and a high end Nvidia, and you have enough airflow to suck a cat through a 3.5" bay and spit out the back!
The trend for quiet PC's is a good one. The way things were going, pretty soon you would need a fan just to eliminate the heat all the other fans were creating. My new system (next week) is going to be an Antec Sonata. I want quiet dammit!
And I'm not following the crowd on this one. I suspect the trend is a bunch of folks who have independently decided that they don't want a Hoover masquerading as a PC. I didn't know that it was possible to get a fast and powerful system that was also quiet, until they gave me a new Dell (GX240) at work last year. Just as powerful as my home system, but I can't even tell that it's on, while I can hear my home system from another room.
That's what I'm doing. This coming weekend I'm going out to pixelusa and pick up the pieces for a new system. Nothing really wrong with the old system, except that it's too damned noisy even after blowing the dust off the fans, and I'm starting to get flaky startup problems (PSU?).
Anyway, with the help of a coworker who more geeky on the hardware side than I am, I've chosen the Antec Sonata that comes with the TruePower 380W PSU. I've also started taking the reviews more seriously. It looks like a sweet unit, and it would have been the PSU I would have gotten separately anyway.
The single biggest complaint I hear is, I bet this sounds familiar, "Where are my programs?".
That reminds me of one thing indicates that KDE is already at the level of Windows usability, if not beyond: The current usability compaints about KDE are almost invariably on the order of "needs more drop shadows", "needs transparent windows", or otherwise "needs geewhiz stuff". This is all cosmetic fluff. Nothing to do with real usability. Which tells me that that KDE is there.
I really don't see KDE or any other linux desktop software beating Windows or MacOS in usabilities tests anytime soon.
Did you read the article? Of course not, this is slashdot!
Let me quote: "Linux, once viewed as an operating system that only computer geeks could appreciate, is today a much more user-friendly software that companies, public administrations and consumers can master almost as easily as Microsoft Corp.'s Windows XP."
SuSE/KDE came damned close to meeting or beating Windows XP. I suspect that "anytime soon" they WILL meet or beat WinXP.
Why did WinXP win by a narrow margin in this test? The answer is simple. Look at the test subjects. Although none had previously used WinXP, they were familiar with computers, which means a very high probability that they were familiar with Win9x/NT/2K. WinXP isn't that much different from the older Windows desktop. It has some nice new features, and a huge facelift, but its foundation is still the familiar Windows desktop. WinXP beat out SuSE/KDE simply because the test subjects were already familiar with the basics of the WinXP desktop.
The hurdle facing the new UNIX desktops is not usability, but a public completely unfamiliar with UNIX.
Selling it to people with the "It's Free and Therefore Good" argument is pointless. Sell it with "It Works and Costs Less" and you might get somewhere.
You need a little bit more than that. What so many people in this community seem to miss is that Windows training is ubiquitous. The Linux and BSD operating systems aren't going to make much headway in the consumer market until training for "UNIX System Adminstration for Personal Systems" becomes widely available. Everyone has relatives, friends and neighbors using Windows. Finding a relative using a Mac is a bit tougher. I know people who have switched from Mac to Windows for precisely this reason. Finding a neighbor using Linux is several magnitudes more unlikely if you're not living near a university.
So the next time you suggest to a friend that they should try Linux or BSD, offer to help them get started in it. Let them know they can call you for help.
If you give them a CD and walk away, you have only yourself to blame if they go back to Windows.
But try and think back to when you were first being introduced to the whole concept. If you're anything like me, it was months before you actually began to look at anything seriously.
It actually depends upon how old you are and when you started using computers. I'm old enough that Microsoft wasn't supplying operating systems when I started using computers.
The first real OS I used (not counting CP/M) was 4.3BSD at the university. After four years of that, MSDOS seemed like a toy. I never considered it anything more than a program loader.
So when I first heard about Linux (0.97) and FreeBSD (1.0), I knew they weren't toys. I took them seriously. So I kept an eye on them until I was able to afford a computer that they could run on. When I finally got a computer with a drive large enough for dual booting I took the plunge with Slackware. Eventually I tried FreeBSD and was home at last with a direct descendent of the OS I started with.
The way I understood it, was that the first cities were formed around the production of beer, rather than first forming and then trying to figure out what crops to cultivate. They formed because barley was already being cultivated. Barley makes a crappy bread (not enough glutin) but an excellent beer.
I've yet to taste any American beer that has the least bit of flavour to it.
Then I guess you haven't had many American beers then. Ignore the Budmilloors brand, and try some real beer made by people who love beer.
Anchor Steam Beer is probably one of the finest beers in the world. And it's made in San Fransisco. If you're not used to beer with hops in it (and why would you be, drinking that Budmilloors and crap), then try Gordon Biersch Marzen, then work your way up the ladder with Shiner Bock, and Anderson Amber. Graduate with Redhook ESB, Redtail Ale, and Sierra Nevada Pale Ale.
Slashdot Mirror
It is not about which of our freedoms the concept most closely resembles, but rather about which definition of the word "free" is being used.
My dictionary has 15 definitions of "free", plus numerous subdefinitions. One only of them refers to the lack of monetary cost. I seems that languages that have two words for "free" are not much more precise than English. I find it interesting that the last definition is: "5 : open to all comers". Hmmm, maybe "Open Source" is the best name after all.
It is entirely possible for a free software project to be created that is in fact not available to anyone gratis.
In theory, anything is possible. Windows might be open sourced tomorrow, or the Sun might go nova. But I seriously doubt it. Likewise, I seriously doubt I would ever see a Free Software project be only available via monetary payment. I know of none now. I don't think you do either.
As far as other celebrities go, Bruce Perens was there...
With black slacks and button-down white shirt. I would have fainted in shock but for the sugar rush I was having from the Microsoft Jelly Bellies.
Another thing to remember: Free Software is Free Speech, not Free Beer.
Enough with the stupid slogans! All they do is lock your mind into simplistic and erroneous concepts.
Free Software is NOT free speech! If you have to compare it to anything in the Bill of Rights, it comes closest to Free of the Press. But the way some of you carry on, you would think it's Freedom of Religion!
Free speech means that I, myself, have the freedom to speak. But I already have the freedom to "speak" software. The only things that threatens it are software patents, and NOT the lack of a sufficient number of Free Software packages. If I use proprietary software, I still have the freedom to create my own software. I don't need Free Software to do that.
And it really is "free beer". I don't have to pay for it. As long as I am not the first user, it's free beer all the way. And if I am, you license grants me the permission to give it away to anyone for zero cost. The service and support might not be free, but the software is free as in gratis.
So think up another slogan, because this one is getting tired and cliched.
So business people want fast file systems. Game geeks want to dump XFree86.
If you give everyone what they want, you'll end up with a system that can do everyone, but nothing, at the same time.
Shee-it, don't go telling those commie-pinko perverts in congress that there's industries out there still haven't been nationalized or regulated out of existance yet...
Business pay taxes too. It might not be popular to say so in today's culture, but it's true. I find it extremely hypocritical for the members of a community whose main motto is "software should not be owned", to turn around and argue against public domain.
Way back in the cretaceous, when I was in junior high, I had this crush on Lynnette. She was the epitome of perfection in my hormone addled mind. But I could never work up the courage to talk to her. She was just too perfect, and mere mortals like I didn't talk to perfect beings. Then one day I saw her pick her nose. Instantly she transformed from an alabaster statue of Aphrodite high upon Olympus unto a human being that I could talk to.
I like handmade rugs because they aren't perfect. They have all of the durability and attractiveness of machine made rugs, but that missing stitch here and there adds a quality to it that says "someone cared enough to make this". I like UNIX for the same reason. Those little warts say that people put their hearts into it, instead of merely following some sterile specs from marketing. It's craftsmanship.
you guys.
Yup! One of the defining attributes of a geek is the unwavering conviction that they are absolutely correct, and will go out of their way to start arguments to demonstrate their correctness.
If this works great, than WiFi vendors don't owe the community a cent.
BSD worked great for Apple. And guess what? They're giving back to the community! I just guess it goes to show that the public won't act like thieves when you don't treat them like thieves.
If it's not going to be Linux or BSD based, then it's going to be Windows based. And my bias makes me lean away from Windows.
For some devices, neither of these are appropriate, but try telling that to the CEO or his marketing department. But at least with a free Unix like OS, you can truly modify it for use on your unique hardware. And even if it's not a stock Linux or BSD anymore, when marketing demands it have a firewire port next year, you can still use the stock firewire driver.
The Microsoft mouse sounds better than a track-ball-in-mouse combination because fingers don't have as much range of motion side-to-side as they do when curling over a mouse wheel.
Try using a Logitech Trackman or [cough cough] Microsoft Explorer. The trackball is under your thumb, and you get a LOT of control with it. Much more than you would a mouse. You'll need a day or two to get used to it, just like you had to get used to a mouse back in day one. But once you get the feel of it, you'll never go back.
Before the world goes and congratulates Microsoft for putting the entire damned keyboard on the mouse, let's stop and think a bit...
I've been using a trackball for years, and will never go back to a mouse. Recently I tried a new trackball that had a scrollwheel. It was so damned superflous it wasn't even funny. Why not just use the trackball? A little side button to click to put it into scroll mode, and then use the trackball to scroll vertically, horizontally, diagonally, or any other direction you can manage to contort.
Frankly, today's mice have too many controls. And this is coming from a guy who demands three buttons! Don't put funky little doodads between the buttons. Don't hide wierd clicky thingies on the side or put them below the regular buttons. If people want them, sure go ahead and market them. But keep the standard pointing device simple. With a trackball and three buttons, all the controls you need are there already.
But seriously, why does apple need a new free software license? Aren't the ones being used now sufficient?
The set of "classic" Free Software licenses (pre-MPL) are not sufficient. I hate to say this, because I really detest license proliferation, but it's true. What these licenses do not address, or marginally address, are patents and trademarks. These are very big concerns for software companies today.
In addition, the simpler licenses like BSD and MIT are just too simple. While I like their simplicity (the user can actually understand them), the average lawyer runs away in terror at their terseness. Even the GPL is considered sloppy by some lawyers.
That's comforting to know. I've seen some Sonata reviews at "quiet PC" sites, and they all say it's noisier than they expected. What they "expected" is hard to tell, but since these are quiet freaks, they probably have unrealistic expectations from mass market consumer cases.
a new trend in PC homebuilding - low noise.
A trend that came about because there's too many damn fans in the systems nowadays. Some GPU's have fan's bigger than the CPU's! Browsing the case aisle at Fry's, some of them have six case fans, plus three or four on the PSU. Throw in a Barton and a high end Nvidia, and you have enough airflow to suck a cat through a 3.5" bay and spit out the back!
The trend for quiet PC's is a good one. The way things were going, pretty soon you would need a fan just to eliminate the heat all the other fans were creating. My new system (next week) is going to be an Antec Sonata. I want quiet dammit!
And I'm not following the crowd on this one. I suspect the trend is a bunch of folks who have independently decided that they don't want a Hoover masquerading as a PC. I didn't know that it was possible to get a fast and powerful system that was also quiet, until they gave me a new Dell (GX240) at work last year. Just as powerful as my home system, but I can't even tell that it's on, while I can hear my home system from another room.
That's what I'm doing. This coming weekend I'm going out to pixelusa and pick up the pieces for a new system. Nothing really wrong with the old system, except that it's too damned noisy even after blowing the dust off the fans, and I'm starting to get flaky startup problems (PSU?).
Anyway, with the help of a coworker who more geeky on the hardware side than I am, I've chosen the Antec Sonata that comes with the TruePower 380W PSU. I've also started taking the reviews more seriously. It looks like a sweet unit, and it would have been the PSU I would have gotten separately anyway.
The single biggest complaint I hear is, I bet this sounds familiar, "Where are my programs?".
That reminds me of one thing indicates that KDE is already at the level of Windows usability, if not beyond: The current usability compaints about KDE are almost invariably on the order of "needs more drop shadows", "needs transparent windows", or otherwise "needs geewhiz stuff". This is all cosmetic fluff. Nothing to do with real usability. Which tells me that that KDE is there.
WinAmp, Windows Media Player, WinZip, WinACE. Just off the top of my head...
No, KDE does not have a "Start" button to stop the system with.
I really don't see KDE or any other linux desktop software beating Windows or MacOS in usabilities tests anytime soon.
Did you read the article? Of course not, this is slashdot!
Let me quote: "Linux, once viewed as an operating system that only computer geeks could appreciate, is today a much more user-friendly software that companies, public administrations and consumers can master almost as easily as Microsoft Corp.'s Windows XP."
SuSE/KDE came damned close to meeting or beating Windows XP. I suspect that "anytime soon" they WILL meet or beat WinXP.
Why did WinXP win by a narrow margin in this test? The answer is simple. Look at the test subjects. Although none had previously used WinXP, they were familiar with computers, which means a very high probability that they were familiar with Win9x/NT/2K. WinXP isn't that much different from the older Windows desktop. It has some nice new features, and a huge facelift, but its foundation is still the familiar Windows desktop. WinXP beat out SuSE/KDE simply because the test subjects were already familiar with the basics of the WinXP desktop.
The hurdle facing the new UNIX desktops is not usability, but a public completely unfamiliar with UNIX.
Selling it to people with the "It's Free and Therefore Good" argument is pointless. Sell it with "It Works and Costs Less" and you might get somewhere.
You need a little bit more than that. What so many people in this community seem to miss is that Windows training is ubiquitous. The Linux and BSD operating systems aren't going to make much headway in the consumer market until training for "UNIX System Adminstration for Personal Systems" becomes widely available. Everyone has relatives, friends and neighbors using Windows. Finding a relative using a Mac is a bit tougher. I know people who have switched from Mac to Windows for precisely this reason. Finding a neighbor using Linux is several magnitudes more unlikely if you're not living near a university.
So the next time you suggest to a friend that they should try Linux or BSD, offer to help them get started in it. Let them know they can call you for help.
If you give them a CD and walk away, you have only yourself to blame if they go back to Windows.
But try and think back to when you were first being introduced to the whole concept. If you're anything like me, it was months before you actually began to look at anything seriously.
It actually depends upon how old you are and when you started using computers. I'm old enough that Microsoft wasn't supplying operating systems when I started using computers.
The first real OS I used (not counting CP/M) was 4.3BSD at the university. After four years of that, MSDOS seemed like a toy. I never considered it anything more than a program loader.
So when I first heard about Linux (0.97) and FreeBSD (1.0), I knew they weren't toys. I took them seriously. So I kept an eye on them until I was able to afford a computer that they could run on. When I finally got a computer with a drive large enough for dual booting I took the plunge with Slackware. Eventually I tried FreeBSD and was home at last with a direct descendent of the OS I started with.
Relax, don't worry, have a homebrew!
The way I understood it, was that the first cities were formed around the production of beer, rather than first forming and then trying to figure out what crops to cultivate. They formed because barley was already being cultivated. Barley makes a crappy bread (not enough glutin) but an excellent beer.
I've yet to taste any American beer that has the least bit of flavour to it.
Then I guess you haven't had many American beers then. Ignore the Budmilloors brand, and try some real beer made by people who love beer.
Anchor Steam Beer is probably one of the finest beers in the world. And it's made in San Fransisco. If you're not used to beer with hops in it (and why would you be, drinking that Budmilloors and crap), then try Gordon Biersch Marzen, then work your way up the ladder with Shiner Bock, and Anderson Amber. Graduate with Redhook ESB, Redtail Ale, and Sierra Nevada Pale Ale.