You want it to lie to you? A win"modem" isn't a modem.
It doesn't do the things you need to do to be called a modem. It has to be done completely in software, and the interface to the modem is kept secret by the hardware manufacturer.
No, it's not a good thing, and you are completely wrong about Adobe.
Adobe has supported open source more than most people know (or care to believe).
I don't particularly like Adobe either, but as a company, they aren't half bad. They have released the postscript and PDF specs, in full, for free, and the license allows anyone to write an implementation of them, without royalty or encumberment.
This has been an incredible boon for open source and Free Software. If you think printing in Linux sucks now, just imagine how bad it would have been had Adobe been dicks about PS and PDF standards. Adobe is way ahead of the game...
They realized they can make more money by getting a fully open standard adopted, rather than trying to force a closed standard down everyone's throats, and face competing standards that do basically the same time.
We would be downloading 3rd party open source postscript and PDF interperters from overseas to avoid patents, like we have to do now with mplayer codecs.
What Real is doing is a sham. They don't give a fuck about Free Software, this is just their way of trying to get in on that "Linux thing" without actually giving a little.
I know that Elcomsoft ordeal has left a bad taste in people's mouths, but we can't forget that Adobe isn't an unconditional enemy, they have been a strong ally in the past, and hopefully they saw the error in their ways regarding the DMCA.
You find a flaw in something that is not some Bob Blog v.001, and you can sell it to one of several security companies.
If money doesn't motivate you in such direct ways, you tell the authors, they fix it. You post to bugtraq, and your career gets a boost.
This is one part of open source that has viable business models. I don't think any more community effort than what is already being done (yes, people are auditing code) is going to fly.
People don't believe me when I tell them I used to pay $65 a month for 384down and 128 up on Charter. In 2000 too. With as high 50% downtimes. I hear that since I moved away, DSL came into the area and totally killed Charter. It's easy to see why.
ISPs buy symmetric links to the Internet, but provide mostly highly asymmetrical service to customers, through the design of cable modem systems and the structuring of DSL.
This technology has always gone against the spirit of the Internet, that every node is a peer, there's no such thing as a "server node" or a "client node" except in the context of a specific connection.
The irony is that while you are being capped to POTS speeds on your upstream, the ISPs outgoing link is probably nailed on the download, and 10-20% usage on the upload (assuming they don't do co-loc or something to balance things out).
I feel this effect particularly badly, being on satellite with up to 1000kbit/sec downloads, and 30-40kbit/sec uploads. Yeah, that's right, slower than a modem. The satellite ISPs have more of an excuse, but not much more.
Just make sure to tell them exactly why you cancelled your service if you do. Tell them you aren't an information consumer, you are a node and a peer on the internet.
The point to the story is that even in trying to sell it, I had the help of my direct manager who was ALSO a Linux fan and pushed the project on my behalf! I did the work, he did the sales.
This is an ideal situation which I am fortunate enough to be in. I get paid far less than other's in similar positions (last I checked at least), but having a good relationship with your boss, and letting him do the sales for you, is ideal, especially in my experience at a small/medium sized company (about 500 employees total over several locations).
Some keys to making this work:
Recognize when management is floundering for a solution.
Sometimes egos will get in the way when someone high up thinks they know what they are doing, but they don't. In general higher-ups don't want to micromanage everything, so if they clearly don't have a good idea, try to put one together.
Know when to give up
You can't win everything.
If they do force through a bad solution, try to mitigate damage
So they insist on using a closed solution, try to make sure they use open formats. Things like that. Try to leave the door open for when people realize the mistake.
Rally support, but don't polarize
It's sometimes hard to find allies without making foes, just make sure to pick your battles.
Make sure you address their goals, not just your goals
This seems pretty obvious, but make sure your goals are inline with upper management's goals, so that your solution is relevant to them.
Let other people above you take some credit for wins sometimes, but still take the fall if your idea screwed up
You need a symbiotic relationship with management. Sometime the first part can't be helped, but the last part is important. This doesn't mean you should let them walk all over you, but you do need to give a little.
This isn't just about reports and meetings, most of what people think of you comes from everyday interactions.
Now, the disclaimer. Like I said, I have my boss sell this stuff for me. I'm not too savvy with sales, there's something about sales that grates me the wrong way. These strategies have worked for me, more or less, to help shape overall company direction. I was doubly lucky to get a job in a company that was already leaning away from the MS/proprietary world, and I've helped nudge it in the right direction.
it does NOT protect all open source development processes
You think non GPL stuff is somehow immune from this suit?
To Red Hat, the non GPL stuff isn't as important anyway. The GPL stuff is what their future is staked on, as a services company.
They need the GPL to prevent proprietary software companies from co-opting software and selling it as proprietary, bundling it with support. I know bundling has never been used before to kill smaller software companies in the tech industry, but it could happen, in theory, if there were some sort of monopolistic OS/app vendor with tons of cash in the bank. I know it's difficult to imagine.
It's a GPL Now Fund, not an OS Now Fund. They aren't protecting the Apache license, the BSD license (includes postgresql, openssh, etc. if I recall), or the X license (a project they ripped for their own commercial purposes).
They need to protect those things also, as Red Hat would be a lot less relevant without those projects.
I don't understand your "ripped" comment, after all, it's not like Red Hat made closed source modifications to X. The comment also implies that you don't like commercial use of open source code. If that is true, then why the hell would you care about BSD or similar licensed software, which has no protections at all from proprietary use?
On the broader topic of 'frivolous' lawsuits, I do deeply recommend to people that are interested in a fair society that they educate themselves about where that particular piece of memetic propaganda is coming from.
Maybe all the people sued by Scientology? Or Mattel? Or Fox? Or Paramount?
Or maybe a lot of us really don't care if those users run Linux particularly.
I run Linux. The servers at work mostly run Linux. I insist that the other developers at work run Linux on their machines too. It works great. I don't care if my parents run Linux or not. I don't care if gramma runs Linux.
I want to move other employees at work to Linux, and progress is being made, slowly. Linux is ideal for commercial settings, where everything can be managed by an IT department.
I think the real barrier to "consumer Linux" is that no one really cares. Mandrake might care, but they are so broke it doesn't matter. Red Hat cares a lot more about commercial users.
If someone gets motivated to do the things you mention, fine. Just don't break important functionality that people who know what they are doing use.
Unixish OSs, which is to say, everything except Windows these days, have the concept of "everything is a file". This works great, and programs can rely on it.
It's just one example of a clean abstraction that doesn't require sacrificing performance and using 4-10x more RAM.
It's not just Java, I hate all emulators. I don't like Wine either. When I run an app, I want full performance. If a programmer had to spend a couple more hours so I can have a usable app, rather than a bloated piece of crap, then so be it. I'm willing to pay extra for that benefit.
number of web sites exist whose server code is completely written in Java
A completely different matter. I'm talking about distributing Java programs for local execution.
It seems a lot of the rest you are talking about related to Windows. I don't use Windows really, so I can't comment. All I know is that whenever I see an app written in Java, I look elsewhere. I've tried and tried, but it still takes a whole lot of time getting any sort of Java app up and running. Java to me means "you'll have to dick with this for several hours and install closed source software if you want to run it".
Because pretty much the main drawback of Java is that it severly limits which platforms you can distribute to, ironically. Write once, run nowhere! The only other option is distributing a 50 meg JVM with every app, and increasing support costs by having to walk people through tedious installation procedures, for the JVM and your app.
If you can compile a native binary, you can distribute it to any binary compatible platform, regardless of what other software they have installed. You don't have to explain CLASSPATH to your users. You don't have to explain why they can't type "java filename.class", but instead must type "java filename".
GCJ is the only hope Java has of actually being more than an acedemic curiosity, and "something that Sun used for a few apps".
lose some of the advantages that the VM can provide you
And what were those anyway? We already had portable programming languages, the VM was just a silly idea, with an even sillier implementation.
I can't believe someone actually said "Hey, lets just compile for a machine that doesn't exist, and everyone can emulate that machine! I bet that will be fast and efficient!"
Slashdot Mirror
I just want Linux to say, "You have a modem"
You want it to lie to you? A win"modem" isn't a modem.
It doesn't do the things you need to do to be called a modem. It has to be done completely in software, and the interface to the modem is kept secret by the hardware manufacturer.
Glad you're back on the job. Honestly, I was beginning to miss you.
Keep up the good work!
You'd have 60 million dollars.
Haven't you heard? It's a battle of words!
If he has ruled, then he has ruled. He can't go back and reverse it now, unless it's remanded to him from an appeal.
The defense probably moved for a judgement notwithstanding the verdict, and the motion was denied. It's standard practice to ask.
No, it's not a good thing, and you are completely wrong about Adobe.
Adobe has supported open source more than most people know (or care to believe).
I don't particularly like Adobe either, but as a company, they aren't half bad. They have released the postscript and PDF specs, in full, for free, and the license allows anyone to write an implementation of them, without royalty or encumberment.
This has been an incredible boon for open source and Free Software. If you think printing in Linux sucks now, just imagine how bad it would have been had Adobe been dicks about PS and PDF standards. Adobe is way ahead of the game...
They realized they can make more money by getting a fully open standard adopted, rather than trying to force a closed standard down everyone's throats, and face competing standards that do basically the same time.
We would be downloading 3rd party open source postscript and PDF interperters from overseas to avoid patents, like we have to do now with mplayer codecs.
What Real is doing is a sham. They don't give a fuck about Free Software, this is just their way of trying to get in on that "Linux thing" without actually giving a little.
I know that Elcomsoft ordeal has left a bad taste in people's mouths, but we can't forget that Adobe isn't an unconditional enemy, they have been a strong ally in the past, and hopefully they saw the error in their ways regarding the DMCA.
Users don't buy photoshop anyway. I don't know anyone who has a legitimate copy. You really think all those Fark people have legit copies too?
Face it, the only people buying photoshop are companies, and people who do graphics for a living.
If they don't distribute modified GPL stuff outside the company, they don't have to distribute source either.
Which security companies pay for notification of flaws ?
http://www.idefense.com/vcp_faq.html
I've seen a couple others, I can't recall offhand.
You find a flaw in something that is not some Bob Blog v.001, and you can sell it to one of several security companies.
If money doesn't motivate you in such direct ways, you tell the authors, they fix it. You post to bugtraq, and your career gets a boost.
This is one part of open source that has viable business models. I don't think any more community effort than what is already being done (yes, people are auditing code) is going to fly.
People don't believe me when I tell them I used to pay $65 a month for 384down and 128 up on Charter. In 2000 too. With as high 50% downtimes. I hear that since I moved away, DSL came into the area and totally killed Charter. It's easy to see why.
ISPs buy symmetric links to the Internet, but provide mostly highly asymmetrical service to customers, through the design of cable modem systems and the structuring of DSL.
This technology has always gone against the spirit of the Internet, that every node is a peer, there's no such thing as a "server node" or a "client node" except in the context of a specific connection.
The irony is that while you are being capped to POTS speeds on your upstream, the ISPs outgoing link is probably nailed on the download, and 10-20% usage on the upload (assuming they don't do co-loc or something to balance things out).
I feel this effect particularly badly, being on satellite with up to 1000kbit/sec downloads, and 30-40kbit/sec uploads. Yeah, that's right, slower than a modem. The satellite ISPs have more of an excuse, but not much more.
Just make sure to tell them exactly why you cancelled your service if you do. Tell them you aren't an information consumer, you are a node and a peer on the internet.
This is an ideal situation which I am fortunate enough to be in. I get paid far less than other's in similar positions (last I checked at least), but having a good relationship with your boss, and letting him do the sales for you, is ideal, especially in my experience at a small/medium sized company (about 500 employees total over several locations).
Some keys to making this work:
Sometimes egos will get in the way when someone high up thinks they know what they are doing, but they don't. In general higher-ups don't want to micromanage everything, so if they clearly don't have a good idea, try to put one together.
You can't win everything.
So they insist on using a closed solution, try to make sure they use open formats. Things like that. Try to leave the door open for when people realize the mistake.
It's sometimes hard to find allies without making foes, just make sure to pick your battles.
This seems pretty obvious, but make sure your goals are inline with upper management's goals, so that your solution is relevant to them.
You need a symbiotic relationship with management. Sometime the first part can't be helped, but the last part is important. This doesn't mean you should let them walk all over you, but you do need to give a little.
This isn't just about reports and meetings, most of what people think of you comes from everyday interactions.
Now, the disclaimer. Like I said, I have my boss sell this stuff for me. I'm not too savvy with sales, there's something about sales that grates me the wrong way. These strategies have worked for me, more or less, to help shape overall company direction. I was doubly lucky to get a job in a company that was already leaning away from the MS/proprietary world, and I've helped nudge it in the right direction.
Wouldn't that be considered trading on insider information?
Got tired of smoting people and burning cities and raining plagues?
What about that whole revelations thing, have you given up on that too?
it does NOT protect all open source development processes
You think non GPL stuff is somehow immune from this suit?
To Red Hat, the non GPL stuff isn't as important anyway. The GPL stuff is what their future is staked on, as a services company.
They need the GPL to prevent proprietary software companies from co-opting software and selling it as proprietary, bundling it with support. I know bundling has never been used before to kill smaller software companies in the tech industry, but it could happen, in theory, if there were some sort of monopolistic OS/app vendor with tons of cash in the bank. I know it's difficult to imagine.
It's a GPL Now Fund, not an OS Now Fund. They aren't protecting the Apache license, the BSD license (includes postgresql, openssh, etc. if I recall), or the X license (a project they ripped for their own commercial purposes).
They need to protect those things also, as Red Hat would be a lot less relevant without those projects.
I don't understand your "ripped" comment, after all, it's not like Red Hat made closed source modifications to X. The comment also implies that you don't like commercial use of open source code. If that is true, then why the hell would you care about BSD or similar licensed software, which has no protections at all from proprietary use?
Slashdot won't accept links to Amazon Associate URLs in comments,
Funny, they allow them in book reviews. I guess they want to be the only ones making money covertly, while pretending to give an unbiased review.
(No offense meant to you, I'm sure you would have pointed out the referrer link)
On the broader topic of 'frivolous' lawsuits, I do deeply recommend to people that are interested in a fair society that they educate themselves about where that particular piece of memetic propaganda is coming from.
Maybe all the people sued by Scientology? Or Mattel? Or Fox? Or Paramount?
Your sig seems very ironic right about now.
Or maybe a lot of us really don't care if those users run Linux particularly.
I run Linux. The servers at work mostly run Linux. I insist that the other developers at work run Linux on their machines too. It works great. I don't care if my parents run Linux or not. I don't care if gramma runs Linux.
I want to move other employees at work to Linux, and progress is being made, slowly. Linux is ideal for commercial settings, where everything can be managed by an IT department.
I think the real barrier to "consumer Linux" is that no one really cares. Mandrake might care, but they are so broke it doesn't matter. Red Hat cares a lot more about commercial users.
If someone gets motivated to do the things you mention, fine. Just don't break important functionality that people who know what they are doing use.
I downloaded the .exe, ran it, and it worked.
What's an "exe"?
You don't need a VM to have clean abstractions.
Unixish OSs, which is to say, everything except Windows these days, have the concept of "everything is a file". This works great, and programs can rely on it.
It's just one example of a clean abstraction that doesn't require sacrificing performance and using 4-10x more RAM.
It's not just Java, I hate all emulators. I don't like Wine either. When I run an app, I want full performance. If a programmer had to spend a couple more hours so I can have a usable app, rather than a bloated piece of crap, then so be it. I'm willing to pay extra for that benefit.
number of web sites exist whose server code is completely written in Java
A completely different matter. I'm talking about distributing Java programs for local execution.
It seems a lot of the rest you are talking about related to Windows. I don't use Windows really, so I can't comment. All I know is that whenever I see an app written in Java, I look elsewhere. I've tried and tried, but it still takes a whole lot of time getting any sort of Java app up and running. Java to me means "you'll have to dick with this for several hours and install closed source software if you want to run it".
Because pretty much the main drawback of Java is that it severly limits which platforms you can distribute to, ironically. Write once, run nowhere! The only other option is distributing a 50 meg JVM with every app, and increasing support costs by having to walk people through tedious installation procedures, for the JVM and your app.
If you can compile a native binary, you can distribute it to any binary compatible platform, regardless of what other software they have installed. You don't have to explain CLASSPATH to your users. You don't have to explain why they can't type "java filename.class", but instead must type "java filename".
GCJ is the only hope Java has of actually being more than an acedemic curiosity, and "something that Sun used for a few apps".
lose some of the advantages that the VM can provide you
And what were those anyway? We already had portable programming languages, the VM was just a silly idea, with an even sillier implementation.
I can't believe someone actually said "Hey, lets just compile for a machine that doesn't exist, and everyone can emulate that machine! I bet that will be fast and efficient!"