Sounds like you've learned your free software advocacy lessons from the pages of Atlas Shrugged.
"Directive 24-7-420 equalizes opportunity for free software developers by forever abolishing the quaint notions of owning the products of one's own mind. What is mind, anyway, other than a collection of chemicals that produces software?"
Dr. Richard Stallman
Director
The People's Foundation of Free Software.
Technology looking for a problem to solve
on
Linux Is Going Down
·
· Score: 1
Like NDS, Volution is proprietary. NDS didn't take over the world. Volution won't either.
The problem with Caldera and Novell before them is that they keep misunderstanding the nature of why people buy software products. They keep thinking that people are going to buy their "really fast and scalable" implementation of an open standard.
But people buy solutions to solve some problem. What problem does Volution really solve? Volution is really an enabling technology that should be open sourced to get ubiquity. Then Caldera should use the growing installed base of open source Volution users to sell complementary products like ZENworks for Linux.
Caldera is trying to sell both the razor and the blades.
There are other, smarter people developing high performance and open source Linux directory servers. These other servers will quickly push Volution into a few little niches, then destroy it utterly.
open source developers tend to create many new projects instead of adding features to a single project;
maintainers of open source projects are rejecting useful code from other participants due to political agendas
Replace the phrase "open source" with the word "commercial software," and the assertions are just as true.
Whether open source or commercial, software creation takes place in a social context of intelligent male primates who fight for supremacy using lines of code instead of rocks and stones.
This doesn't mean open source has a fatal flaw, but that it's not a magic bullet for mitigating the distortions of politics.
Let's see. MacOS 7 on Intel . . . about as interesting now as Windows 3.1. Now if Apple released a version of OS X for Intel, that would be interesting.
MacOS X on Intel probably would blow the value prop of the Mac. The Cubes and the G4 towers are cool, but still roughly double the price of an equivalent PC. If MacOS X on Intel only ran half as well, you'd still be getting your money's worth.
Rhapsody DR2 for Intel was a precursor to MacOS X, and its story backs up my assertion. Rhaptel only ran apps compiled against OpenStep or the BSD layer, and it was a weird combination of Macisms and the OPENSTEP GUI, but hey, it was more or less the next-generation Mac on Intel!
If you liked the price/performance value proposition of Mac clones, you would have liked running Rhaptel on your PC boxen. Some benchmark software showed that a native-compiled MacOS on a Pentium Pro 200 ran just as well as it did on a PowerPC 604 200--and at half the price!
Macs are cool, but clearly MacOS X is a competitive advantage that Apple intends to keep for itself on its own hardware.
Right now, TurboLinux is the strongest Asian distro . . . but not for long. Clearly this is a move to nuke Turbo. It'll probably work, too. No competing Linux vendor can stand a chance against the economic firepower IBM can bring to bear on this market.
Slashdot Mirror
"Stiffle" is not a word.
Sounds like you've learned your free software advocacy lessons from the pages of Atlas Shrugged. "Directive 24-7-420 equalizes opportunity for free software developers by forever abolishing the quaint notions of owning the products of one's own mind. What is mind, anyway, other than a collection of chemicals that produces software?" Dr. Richard Stallman Director The People's Foundation of Free Software.
The problem with Caldera and Novell before them is that they keep misunderstanding the nature of why people buy software products. They keep thinking that people are going to buy their "really fast and scalable" implementation of an open standard.
But people buy solutions to solve some problem. What problem does Volution really solve? Volution is really an enabling technology that should be open sourced to get ubiquity. Then Caldera should use the growing installed base of open source Volution users to sell complementary products like ZENworks for Linux.
Caldera is trying to sell both the razor and the blades.
There are other, smarter people developing high performance and open source Linux directory servers. These other servers will quickly push Volution into a few little niches, then destroy it utterly.
Big deal. Cynics could claim that Linux is the reason the Microsoft DNS crashed recently.
The computers on the Enterprise are probably already running Linux.
- open source developers tend to create many new projects instead of adding features to a single project;
- maintainers of open source projects are rejecting useful code from other participants due to political agendas
Replace the phrase "open source" with the word "commercial software," and the assertions are just as true.Whether open source or commercial, software creation takes place in a social context of intelligent male primates who fight for supremacy using lines of code instead of rocks and stones.
This doesn't mean open source has a fatal flaw, but that it's not a magic bullet for mitigating the distortions of politics.
Reread Larry Niven's Tales of Known Space series and look for "stage trees."
MacOS X on Intel probably would blow the value prop of the Mac. The Cubes and the G4 towers are cool, but still roughly double the price of an equivalent PC. If MacOS X on Intel only ran half as well, you'd still be getting your money's worth.
Rhapsody DR2 for Intel was a precursor to MacOS X, and its story backs up my assertion. Rhaptel only ran apps compiled against OpenStep or the BSD layer, and it was a weird combination of Macisms and the OPENSTEP GUI, but hey, it was more or less the next-generation Mac on Intel!
If you liked the price/performance value proposition of Mac clones, you would have liked running Rhaptel on your PC boxen. Some benchmark software showed that a native-compiled MacOS on a Pentium Pro 200 ran just as well as it did on a PowerPC 604 200--and at half the price!
Macs are cool, but clearly MacOS X is a competitive advantage that Apple intends to keep for itself on its own hardware.
Would you like to touch my monkey?