These fast cameras have been around for quite a while. For a long time (>10years) they were very expensive and did not improve much. We used an old Kodak Ektapro for a long time which apparently cost about $100k or so many years ago. Recently the market has heated up and we got the Kodak Motion Corder for a mere $30k a couple years ago. It has finally hit a price point where a lot of people doing research can afford them. I know quite a few people who have one in fact. Now that people can afford them, there is a significant market for them and they are quickly getting better and cheaper.
** LINUX **
I've been doing remote control and video download from Kodak Motion Corders(up to 10,000 frames/sec at reduced resolution) under Linux for almost two years. I wrote the serial communications and SCSI data transfer myself, including a GTK front end, which means it is fully functional, but just barely;) You can download it here.
Interestingly, almost every person I've met who owns a Motion Corder is using my software under Linux instead of the DOS/Windows based software it ships with. In fact, the availability of Linux-based software was the reason a number of them chose this camera over the competitors.
This is an important issue. The authors of most free software (and documentation) are not compensated, which is fine for most people. However there are many situations where it would be better or even essential to provide some compensation.
I really dislike any of the proposed solutions, except possibly the tin cup for donations. I think it will be essential that software and documentation be completely Free, even more so in the future than now. The diverse types of distribution models, the advantages of truely free software/documentation, and the attitude of the community require completely Free products more and more all the time. These other proposals just aren't suitable.
Several existing solutions come to mind:
1) Sell printed books. Many publishers will publish Free documentation (eg. GFDL) if they believe enough copies will be purchased.
2) Tin can for donations. I doubt this will go far without some creativity, but it could help.
3) SourceXchange - this is partly what SourceXchange was invented to address. It is supposed to take care of the 3rd party/escrow issues, so companies and individuals can "pledge" money which is paid when milestones are met. It is an excellent idea, although I don't know how well it is working.
4) The Linux Fund - They give money to developers working on important/interesting projects. Right now it is capped at $1k per project, so this may not be enough for you, but it will help. I think they will be giving out more money in the future. *** Everybody go get your Linux Fund credit cards now so your credit card company can help pay for free software!!! *** (http://www.linuxfund.org/)
5) Direct corporate sponsorship. There are many companies who will gladly part with what is for them a small amount of money if you can provide something which is of value to them and they don't have to worry about all the details. Going through something like SourceXchange may make it easier for them to get involved.
For many books, going to a publisher is a good way to go. You can make a fair chunk of money and your document gets all the benefits of professional editors, indexers, etc. If this is a feasible option, do this. Make sure you tell them you'll only use a Free license, like the FDL. Also make sure you get a good contract. They usually slip in some nasty bits on the first draft of the contract hoping you'll miss them.
For most documents (and all software), we need another solution. I think we typically should do 2-5 all combined. ie. Get the Linux Fund to put up some money, ask individuals to send in some money, and try to get corporations to help too. Ideally SourceXchange would manage the whole process and help things go smoothly. The fact that nobody else has suggested them as a solution worries me a lot. I suspect it is because their web pages are not too friendly and Collab.Net doesn't advertise/emphasize this use for SourceXchange.
It also isn't clear if they've set things up right for this. Perhaps they should have a "subscription" where people "join" at one of various annual contribution levels (as with the PBS or NPR) and then the individual has the option of selecting which projects or project categories their $'s go to support. They could also implement matching funds from the Linux Fund or corporations. These methods work well for NPR and PBS(ie. radio and tv), so I don't see why it wouldn't work for software too. This also solves the payment problem. I'd rather write one $50 check a year than four $5 checks. It is just too much of a hassle. Then I could go to their web page every few months and click on a few projects I want my money to go to. (It could all be pro-rated by day, and divided into the projects I select...) SourceXchange would make sure they milstones are met and deliver the $ if they are met.
I am happy to hear there now is a VC firm specializing in Linux/Open Source companies, especially since it is headed by people who are already directly involved in the Linux/Open Source movement. I think this will be good for Linux and the computer industry. And congratulations to you for finding one of the coolest jobs around.
After reading some of the other posts and as a potential investor, I have a few questions:
1) Is every company LCG invests in expected to be profitable within a reasonable amount of time and provide an exit strategy for LCG to recover their investment (eg. IPO or buyout)? ie. will LCG look at every company in terms of commercial viability or will it also consider investing in non-profitable projects/ventures?
2) The main value of a VC to a startup is usually not the money but the experience and contacts the VC's have in the particular domain. It appears that LCG will have very good experience and contacts within the Linux domain. I expect that LCG can give excellent help to startups in meshing into the Linux community, licensing, finding talented employees, etc. Do you feel LCG has the experience and contacts to help find CEO's and management, connect startups with clients outside of the Linux domain, and give advise on all the nuts and bolts of starting a new company and making it profitable?
You are right that it is not advertised on their Products page. This is probably because they first unveiled it last week at Comdex. Read today's press release. It WILL let people run Windows applications remotely from Unix/Linux/Windows/Java.
According to a previous press release, it will be available for Linux next month.
Everyone needs to do a little research before getting excited here.
First, Corel will not drop Wine any time in the near future. Wine is the most important part of Corel's business strategy over the next couple years. It allows them to port all their windows applications to Linux quickly and maintain these ports easily. This will be the first time Corel will improve its revenues in years, and it will be dramatic. From a revenue standpoint, I think Wine is more important to Corel than their new Corel Linux distro or the GraphOn partnership, at least in the short term. From a Linux user standpoint, it means we can all have a high-quality, stable office suite (and graphics suite) running natively under Linux very soon.
Graphon makes a line of products which allow software to run on a server running operating system Y by a client on a machine running OS Z, where Y and Z can be Windows, Unix/Linux, or Java. Obviously this is A GOOD THING, since it will help break the Microsoft monopoly and allow people more flexibility. It is also key for ASP's, which Sun and Microsoft are fighting for, but Graphon and Corel beat them to. Note that Corel originally wrote some of Graphon's products and traded it to Graphon earlier this year for 20% equity in Graphon. This is why Corel and Graphon have such a good relationship, which will be a good thing for anybody who wants to work outside of Microsoft's box.
As for GraphOn, Corel, Linux, and China - this is a good thing. It means a lot more people will be using Linux and a non-Microsoft office suite.
As for GraphOn's stupid patent on X clients on Windows, they aren't the first company to have a very dumb and indefendable patent.
Today's press release means that users of Corel Linux will be able to remotely run Windows applications on Corel Linux by connecting to a Windows application server. This is analogous to sitting at one Linux machine and logging into another to run a graphical application over X. Except in this case, you're sitting in front of Linux running some Windows app made by a company who doesn't care about Linux users and won't port to Linux. So, this too is A GOOD THING for Linux and Linux users:)
One last point: Anything which is bad for Microsoft is good for Corel. Corel is competing head to head with Microsoft on office suites which is the majority of Corel's revenue. Thus, anything which undermines Microsoft's monopoly will help Corel get market share. So Corel will happily help Linux, application serving, etc. even if it doesn't directly bring revenue to Corel just because every new Linux user is another person who may buy Corel Office instead of Microsoft Office. It is not clear that Corel will make any money off of its new Linux distribution, but they created a new Linux distro because they saw that no other distro was easy enough to use by most people. And they released their improvements (except 3rd party stuff) as GPL, since Corel wants people to use Linux, whether it is Corel Linux, Red Hat Linux, etc.
Is there any serious problem with embedding standardized, descriptive information in digital media (web pages, images, digital video, HDTV, digital audio). All of these formats could easily carry "fields" which describe what the media contains (which would be useful aside from censorship) as well as "fields" appropriate for censorship use. You could imagine a quite objective (and possibly detailed) set of fields describing aspects of the content (eg: adult language, levels of nudity, etc.) which everyone would be expected to embed in the media. Media which doesn't include the info can be blocked. The info can be "audited" on a random basis or by anybody in the world who notices that it does not follow the guidelines.
For censorship, this provides an objective (and fine grained) description of the content and allows the consumers (or their parents/school) to decide where to draw the line. It also is trivial to implement using computers (except for analog media) and includes a nice auditing system where any person can notice if some media has been mis-labeled.
For other uses, this can be quite valuable. If I am doing a study on tree leaves, I can search the web for images which have a field describing the image subject as a tree leaf. If I want all audio clips of Linus Torvalds, I can search for exactly that by reading the headers of all the audio clips I find. Search engines would actually find what you want, and not only for text, but any media.
This seems like such an obvious solution. Is there any serious problem with this? Is anyone implementing anything like this?
Slashdot Mirror
But does it play well with Linux?
These fast cameras have been around for quite a while. For a long time (>10years) they were very expensive and did not improve much. We used an old Kodak Ektapro for a long time which apparently cost about $100k or so many years ago. Recently the market has heated up and we got the Kodak Motion Corder for a mere $30k a couple years ago. It has finally hit a price point where a lot of people doing research can afford them. I know quite a few people who have one in fact. Now that people can afford them, there is a significant market for them and they are quickly getting better and cheaper.
** LINUX **
I've been doing remote control and video download from Kodak Motion Corders(up to 10,000 frames/sec at reduced resolution) under Linux for almost two years. I wrote the serial communications and SCSI data transfer myself, including a GTK front end, which means it is fully functional, but just barely ;) You can download it here.
Interestingly, almost every person I've met who owns a Motion Corder is using my software under Linux instead of the DOS/Windows based software it ships with. In fact, the availability of Linux-based software was the reason a number of them chose this camera over the competitors.
Dan
This is an important issue. The authors of most free software (and documentation) are not compensated, which is fine for most people. However there are many situations where it would be better or even essential to provide some compensation.
I really dislike any of the proposed solutions, except possibly the tin cup for donations. I think it will be essential that software and documentation be completely Free, even more so in the future than now. The diverse types of distribution models, the advantages of truely free software/documentation, and the attitude of the community require completely Free products more and more all the time. These other proposals just aren't suitable.
Several existing solutions come to mind:
1) Sell printed books. Many publishers will publish Free documentation (eg. GFDL) if they believe enough copies will be purchased.
2) Tin can for donations. I doubt this will go far without some creativity, but it could help.
3) SourceXchange - this is partly what SourceXchange was invented to address. It is supposed to take care of the 3rd party/escrow issues, so companies and individuals can "pledge" money which is paid when milestones are met. It is an excellent idea, although I don't know how well it is working.
4) The Linux Fund - They give money to developers working on important/interesting projects. Right now it is capped at $1k per project, so this may not be enough for you, but it will help. I think they will be giving out more money in the future. *** Everybody go get your Linux Fund credit cards now so your credit card company can help pay for free software!!! *** (http://www.linuxfund.org/)
5) Direct corporate sponsorship. There are many companies who will gladly part with what is for them a small amount of money if you can provide something which is of value to them and they don't have to worry about all the details. Going through something like SourceXchange may make it easier for them to get involved.
For many books, going to a publisher is a good way to go. You can make a fair chunk of money and your document gets all the benefits of professional editors, indexers, etc. If this is a feasible option, do this. Make sure you tell them you'll only use a Free license, like the FDL. Also make sure you get a good contract. They usually slip in some nasty bits on the first draft of the contract hoping you'll miss them.
For most documents (and all software), we need another solution. I think we typically should do 2-5 all combined. ie. Get the Linux Fund to put up some money, ask individuals to send in some money, and try to get corporations to help too. Ideally SourceXchange would manage the whole process and help things go smoothly. The fact that nobody else has suggested them as a solution worries me a lot. I suspect it is because their web pages are not too friendly and Collab.Net doesn't advertise/emphasize this use for SourceXchange.
It also isn't clear if they've set things up right for this. Perhaps they should have a "subscription" where people "join" at one of various annual contribution levels (as with the PBS or NPR) and then the individual has the option of selecting which projects or project categories their $'s go to support. They could also implement matching funds from the Linux Fund or corporations. These methods work well for NPR and PBS(ie. radio and tv), so I don't see why it wouldn't work for software too. This also solves the payment problem. I'd rather write one $50 check a year than four $5 checks. It is just too much of a hassle. Then I could go to their web page every few months and click on a few projects I want my money to go to. (It could all be pro-rated by day, and divided into the projects I select...) SourceXchange would make sure they milstones are met and deliver the $ if they are met.
Dan
I am happy to hear there now is a VC firm specializing in Linux/Open Source companies, especially since it is headed by people who are already directly involved in the Linux/Open Source movement. I think this will be good for Linux and the computer industry. And congratulations to you for finding one of the coolest jobs around.
After reading some of the other posts and as a potential investor, I have a few questions:
1) Is every company LCG invests in expected to be profitable within a reasonable amount of time and provide an exit strategy for LCG to recover their investment (eg. IPO or buyout)? ie. will LCG look at every company in terms of commercial viability or will it also consider investing in non-profitable projects/ventures?
2) The main value of a VC to a startup is usually not the money but the experience and contacts the VC's have in the particular domain. It appears that LCG will have very good experience and contacts within the Linux domain. I expect that LCG can give excellent help to startups in meshing into the Linux community, licensing, finding talented employees, etc. Do you feel LCG has the experience and contacts to help find CEO's and management, connect startups with clients outside of the Linux domain, and give advise on all the nuts and bolts of starting a new company and making it profitable?
Thanks and Best of Luck,
Dan
What is a qualified investor? Does money and the willingness to trust you with it qualify somebody, or is there more to it?
Thanks,
Dan
GraphOn's Product DOES exist.
You are right that it is not advertised on their Products page. This is probably because they first unveiled it last week at Comdex. Read today's press release. It WILL let people run Windows applications remotely from Unix/Linux/Windows/Java.
According to a previous press release, it will be available for Linux next month.
Dan
Everyone needs to do a little research before getting excited here.
First, Corel will not drop Wine any time in the near future. Wine is the most important part of Corel's business strategy over the next couple years. It allows them to port all their windows applications to Linux quickly and maintain these ports easily. This will be the first time Corel will improve its revenues in years, and it will be dramatic. From a revenue standpoint, I think Wine is more important to Corel than their new Corel Linux distro or the GraphOn partnership, at least in the short term. From a Linux user standpoint, it means we can all have a high-quality, stable office suite (and graphics suite) running natively under Linux very soon.
Graphon makes a line of products which allow software to run on a server running operating system Y by a client on a machine running OS Z, where Y and Z can be Windows, Unix/Linux, or Java. Obviously this is A GOOD THING, since it will help break the Microsoft monopoly and allow people more flexibility. It is also key for ASP's, which Sun and Microsoft are fighting for, but Graphon and Corel beat them to. Note that Corel originally wrote some of Graphon's products and traded it to Graphon earlier this year for 20% equity in Graphon. This is why Corel and Graphon have such a good relationship, which will be a good thing for anybody who wants to work outside of Microsoft's box.
As for GraphOn, Corel, Linux, and China - this is a good thing. It means a lot more people will be using Linux and a non-Microsoft office suite.
As for GraphOn's stupid patent on X clients on Windows, they aren't the first company to have a very dumb and indefendable patent.
Today's press release means that users of Corel Linux will be able to remotely run Windows applications on Corel Linux by connecting to a Windows application server. This is analogous to sitting at one Linux machine and logging into another to run a graphical application over X. Except in this case, you're sitting in front of Linux running some Windows app made by a company who doesn't care about Linux users and won't port to Linux. So, this too is A GOOD THING for Linux and Linux users:)
One last point: Anything which is bad for Microsoft is good for Corel. Corel is competing head to head with Microsoft on office suites which is the majority of Corel's revenue. Thus, anything which undermines Microsoft's monopoly will help Corel get market share. So Corel will happily help Linux, application serving, etc. even if it doesn't directly bring revenue to Corel just because every new Linux user is another person who may buy Corel Office instead of Microsoft Office. It is not clear that Corel will make any money off of its new Linux distribution, but they created a new Linux distro because they saw that no other distro was easy enough to use by most people. And they released their improvements (except 3rd party stuff) as GPL, since Corel wants people to use Linux, whether it is Corel Linux, Red Hat Linux, etc.
Dan
Is there any serious problem with embedding standardized, descriptive information in digital media (web pages, images, digital video, HDTV, digital audio). All of these formats could easily carry "fields" which describe what the media contains (which would be useful aside from censorship) as well as "fields" appropriate for censorship use. You could imagine a quite objective (and possibly detailed) set of fields describing aspects of the content (eg: adult language, levels of nudity, etc.) which everyone would be expected to embed in the media. Media which doesn't include the info can be blocked. The info can be "audited" on a random basis or by anybody in the world who notices that it does not follow the guidelines.
For censorship, this provides an objective (and fine grained) description of the content and allows the consumers (or their parents/school) to decide where to draw the line. It also is trivial to implement using computers (except for analog media) and includes a nice auditing system where any person can notice if some media has been mis-labeled.
For other uses, this can be quite valuable. If I am doing a study on tree leaves, I can search the web for images which have a field describing the image subject as a tree leaf. If I want all audio clips of Linus Torvalds, I can search for exactly that by reading the headers of all the audio clips I find. Search engines would actually find what you want, and not only for text, but any media.
This seems like such an obvious solution. Is there any serious problem with this? Is anyone implementing anything like this?