I don't see how supporting an obfuscated, potentially patent-infested format designed not to be interoperable with anything, will do anything other than strengthen the position of the monopolist who is one of the main obstacles for more widespread adoption of Free Software in the first place.
Everything in the software world is patent infested, but in this case the Microsoft Open Specification Promise covers OOXML 1.0. It may not cover future versions, you may not trust them, but there it is. I am less concerned about Microsoft-owned patents than those owned by patent trolls. We're actually in a similar position to Microsoft on this front.
Microsoft will be in a stronger position if users don't have the opportunity to adopt FLOSS products because they don't interoperate with existing documents (including those of their friends and work colleagues). OpenOffice.org has been a success not just because it's "good enough" and "cheap", but because users don't have to drop everything to use it. If OpenOffice.org didn't support the binary Microsoft document formats, the barrier to entry would be way too high, and no one would bother.
I say support here because the OOXML format will be far more powerful if it is certified as an open standard, and I understand that the GNOME Foundation is a part of this process. [...] So what we may end up with is a somewhat less obfuscated format which is still too complex for anyone to implement to perfection, which is considered open because even the GNOME Foundation worked on its development/refinement.
The GNOME Foundation is not contributing to, endorsing, improving or developing OOXML independently or towards ISO standardisation. We are involved in ECMA TC45-M to get as much documentation out of Microsoft as possible. If OOXML is crappy, particularly on the terms of ISO voting bodies, having good documentation only helps to illustrate that crappiness. We're not making it less crap.:-)
At the moment where governments and companies are increasingly standardising on ODF because they want truly open formats, the last thing we want is to have a Microsoft-created format with 6000 pages of documentation to be adopted instead, creating another lockin.
Of course, the problem with your comments is that the GNOME Foundation **doesn't** contribute to or endorse OOXML... We're drilling Microsoft for documentation, so we can make sure FLOSS products (not just GNOME products) can interoperate with it. In terms of conspiracy theories, that's not very potent.:-)
There is a very valid point of disagreement: whether engagement will be perceived (or should be perceived) as support, and whether Microsoft will try to do that themselves. I hope that as a community, we can agree to disagree in circumstances such as this, without demonising community participants in the process. Sadly, the black-and-white community outcry has done more to support the idea that "GNOME supports OOXML" than Microsoft have so far.
From our perspective, our goal here is about SOFTWARE FREEDOM. Making sure that we can interoperate with Microsoft products so that users are able to adopt FLOSS products without cutting off access to their old documents or interrupting co-operation with their friends or colleagues.
No, the major problem here is that fantastic Free Software contributors such as Jody -- who have infinitely more experience and credibility to make judgements about these formats than pretty much all of the noisy advocates -- are spending more time arguing with bigots on both sides of the debate than actually writing Free Software.
Jody has an extremely balanced view of ODF and OOXML, which comes directly from his experience creating FLOSS office software and file formats. It's such a balanced view that it tends to take some folks by surprise... I am not at all shocked to see that you are offended by his stance, given the overwhelming strength of his credibility, and your utter lack of relevance or experience in the matter.
Neither he nor the GNOME Foundation are answerable to such dedicated, multi-forum, anti-GNOME trolls as yourself, segedunum. You keep whinging, we'll keep rocking!
The background is really simple: While Jody Goldberg (Gnumeric maintainer extraordinaire) was at Novell, he had been doing rocking work on the ECMA committee to make sure OOXML didn't just slip through, under-specified and uninvestigated. Jody put them through the wringer!
So, when Jody left Novell, the GNOME Foundation supported his participation on the ECMA working group, so he could continue to "keep the bastards honest".:-)
The GNOME Foundation does not support ISO standardisation of OOXML. But whether or not that happens, we're still going to have to support Microsoft document formats, just like everyone else. Should we let Microsoft shove OOXML through ECMA without challenge? Hell no. That's why we have one of our best hackers in there, holding their feet to the fire.
Thanks,
- Jeff Waugh, GNOME Foundation Board
(Given how often it comes up, I suppose it's also important to note that Miguel does not speak for the GNOME Foundation or the GNOME project in general.)
When Ubuntu ships, references to the codenames cease, except in community discussion and sources.list. They're just not relevant outside the scope of enthusiast discussion and the development process.
Next time, just call it "Ubuntu". Or, if for whatever reason the specific release is relevant to your client, call it "Ubuntu 6.06 LTS" (or appropriate).
As with every previous release of Ubuntu, proprietary drivers will be provided and installed by default, but they won't be used by default unless the free drivers do not function at all on the hardware present (a choice that has nothing to do with 3D acceleration). This decision just means that the plans to use proprietary display drivers by default have been nixed, but only for feisty.
Everyone seems to make a big deal about the display drivers, but Ubuntu has shipped proprietary wifi drivers since warty, and they are used by default on vastly more hardware than the display drivers.
The other search engines have all replicated, to a certain extent, the Google front page and search result designs. Google came in, focused on user goals, made life simple.
Here's a topical answer for you: One of the major factors in Ubuntu's technical success has been the no-questions-asked, "Just Works" philosophy it shares with GNOME, and the application of that philosophy to the entire operating system stack. If you needed any proof that real users are begging for simplicity in their digital life, look no further than the spectacular rise of Ubuntu and the even more spectacular rise of Google.
Wait... We changed from an unmaintainable (and back then, officially unmaintained because the only person who understood it went to work for Apple and wasn't allowed to hack on it anymore) hairball that was substantially different from everything else in the GNOME stack, to a simple, familiar window manager with basic accoutrements... and you think this shows that GNOME was hijacked by suits?
Dude, as release manager at the time (definitely not a suit - I was doing consulting at the time, and relished the opportunity to work from home and forego wearing pants), I pushed really hard for us to switch to metacity for the very first 2.0 release, because sawfish was in such a state. I distinctly remember stumbling around at the Ximian sponsored party at GUADEC, convincing all the stakeholders it was ready to go, and then attempting to get Havoc drunk so we could convince him. Alas, he was entirely correct in his refusal to ship it quite so early. We ended up doing it for 2.2.
Yes, metacity is unexciting. But precisely how exciting do you want window management to be? Further to that, precisely how exciting does your Mum want window management to be? Beyond our vocal minority of geeks who love computers, no one actually cares.
Ubuntu is not solely focused on the "consumer desktop" market, it just happens to be extremely good at it.:-) See the recent announcement of the Ubuntu Foundation and extended support lifecycles for Ubuntu 6.04 -> that's definitely not being done for the consumer desktop market.:-)
DESTDIR is used by almost every packaging system and distribution available. If it didn't work for GNOME tarballs, there'd be a heck of a lot of noise about it.
HP cancelled their GNOME on HP-UX port, which should tell you more about HP-UX than GNOME... ie. that HP-UX is not their leading workstation OS anymore, so it doesn't require active graphical desktop development. HP continue to be involved in the GNOME Foundation, to great effect.
GNOME is generally closer to Mac OS than Windows, particularly given recent design decisions. We certainly DO NOT aim to clone either interface - we tend to think that the "not quite Windows" feeling has a strong, negative impact on training, worse than being obviously (and positively) different.
Your distributor may set their GNOME defaults up to be familiar to Windows users, however.
Yeah, the interview was done in the middle of the linux.conf.au wireless area, with a tape recorder. It seems a fair few things were lost along the way.;-)
Check out GTK-Wimp: http://gtk-wimp.sourceforge.net/ Very tasty, if you run GTK+ applications under Windows (particularly XP). It's even mentioned on the Gaim website.:-)
I'm kinda surprised that Slashdot haven't updated the GNOME category logo, considering that it's been 18 months and three major releases since the logo change.:-)
You're right. There are lots of differing views in the GNOME community.
For instance, between the eight people on GNOME's release team, we have all sorts of disagreements. Trying to decide between Galeon and Epiphany, and trying to analyse the wishes of the community were particularly difficult. Incredibly, the following points of view were held amongst the eight members of the release team:
We shouldn't ship a browser with the Desktop release at all
We shouldn't ship Galeon or Epiphany until they're ready
We should ship Epiphany
We should ship Galeon
So, it also turns out that I wrote the sentence you referred to as "petty corporate or academic politics".:-) You're vaguely right, I suppose. It was worded that way because we had to be very diplomatic about our rationale; it was a fairly heated issue.
Without the thickened diplomacy, it means that the current Galeon developers didn't seem to care about GNOME. They've viciously criticised the direction of the project, and did not get involved on the mailing lists when we were discussing the module selection process (so, in a way, they forfeited). Given these issues, it would not have made sense for the project to commit to Galeon.
Before you flame...! I wasn't convinced that we should have chosen a browser at all for the 2.4 Desktop release, because I don't think they're "ready" (qualitatively and philosophically). I use Galeon, and haven't enjoyed using Epiphany so far, yet my choice has nothing to do with "features" or "options"!:-)
But, as you can see, there are more important factors that we have to deal with than random personal opinions - even those of the release team!
Hrm, no, Red Hat would have gone with Epiphany regardless of the GNOME Desktop choice. They had pretty much made up their minds before we even started discussing it. Although it would have been annoying for both Red Hat and GNOME if we'd chosen differently, their choice wasn't particularly important to ours, as evidenced by the discussion on d-d-l.
FWIW, I'm still using Galeon. Epiphany hasn't sucked me in yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did at some stage in the future.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Everything in the software world is patent infested, but in this case the Microsoft Open Specification Promise covers OOXML 1.0. It may not cover future versions, you may not trust them, but there it is. I am less concerned about Microsoft-owned patents than those owned by patent trolls. We're actually in a similar position to Microsoft on this front.
Microsoft will be in a stronger position if users don't have the opportunity to adopt FLOSS products because they don't interoperate with existing documents (including those of their friends and work colleagues). OpenOffice.org has been a success not just because it's "good enough" and "cheap", but because users don't have to drop everything to use it. If OpenOffice.org didn't support the binary Microsoft document formats, the barrier to entry would be way too high, and no one would bother.
The GNOME Foundation is not contributing to, endorsing, improving or developing OOXML independently or towards ISO standardisation. We are involved in ECMA TC45-M to get as much documentation out of Microsoft as possible. If OOXML is crappy, particularly on the terms of ISO voting bodies, having good documentation only helps to illustrate that crappiness. We're not making it less crap.
No disagreements there!
Of course, the problem with your comments is that the GNOME Foundation **doesn't** contribute to or endorse OOXML... We're drilling Microsoft for documentation, so we can make sure FLOSS products (not just GNOME products) can interoperate with it. In terms of conspiracy theories, that's not very potent. :-)
There is a very valid point of disagreement: whether engagement will be perceived (or should be perceived) as support, and whether Microsoft will try to do that themselves. I hope that as a community, we can agree to disagree in circumstances such as this, without demonising community participants in the process. Sadly, the black-and-white community outcry has done more to support the idea that "GNOME supports OOXML" than Microsoft have so far.
From our perspective, our goal here is about SOFTWARE FREEDOM. Making sure that we can interoperate with Microsoft products so that users are able to adopt FLOSS products without cutting off access to their old documents or interrupting co-operation with their friends or colleagues.
No, the major problem here is that fantastic Free Software contributors such as Jody -- who have infinitely more experience and credibility to make judgements about these formats than pretty much all of the noisy advocates -- are spending more time arguing with bigots on both sides of the debate than actually writing Free Software.
Jody has an extremely balanced view of ODF and OOXML, which comes directly from his experience creating FLOSS office software and file formats. It's such a balanced view that it tends to take some folks by surprise... I am not at all shocked to see that you are offended by his stance, given the overwhelming strength of his credibility, and your utter lack of relevance or experience in the matter.
Neither he nor the GNOME Foundation are answerable to such dedicated, multi-forum, anti-GNOME trolls as yourself, segedunum. You keep whinging, we'll keep rocking!
G'day,
:-)
The background is really simple: While Jody Goldberg (Gnumeric maintainer extraordinaire) was at Novell, he had been doing rocking work on the ECMA committee to make sure OOXML didn't just slip through, under-specified and uninvestigated. Jody put them through the wringer!
So, when Jody left Novell, the GNOME Foundation supported his participation on the ECMA working group, so he could continue to "keep the bastards honest".
The GNOME Foundation does not support ISO standardisation of OOXML. But whether or not that happens, we're still going to have to support Microsoft document formats, just like everyone else. Should we let Microsoft shove OOXML through ECMA without challenge? Hell no. That's why we have one of our best hackers in there, holding their feet to the fire.
Thanks,
- Jeff Waugh, GNOME Foundation Board
(Given how often it comes up, I suppose it's also important to note that Miguel does not speak for the GNOME Foundation or the GNOME project in general.)
Why did you mention it?
When Ubuntu ships, references to the codenames cease, except in community discussion and sources.list. They're just not relevant outside the scope of enthusiast discussion and the development process.
Next time, just call it "Ubuntu". Or, if for whatever reason the specific release is relevant to your client, call it "Ubuntu 6.06 LTS" (or appropriate).
As with every previous release of Ubuntu, proprietary drivers will be provided and installed by default, but they won't be used by default unless the free drivers do not function at all on the hardware present (a choice that has nothing to do with 3D acceleration). This decision just means that the plans to use proprietary display drivers by default have been nixed, but only for feisty.
Everyone seems to make a big deal about the display drivers, but Ubuntu has shipped proprietary wifi drivers since warty, and they are used by default on vastly more hardware than the display drivers.
Eugenia, Eugenia, Eugenia, when will you learn?
g shot-you-said/
http://eugenia.blogsome.com/2006/05/31/mugshot-mu
The other search engines have all replicated, to a certain extent, the Google front page and search result designs. Google came in, focused on user goals, made life simple.
Here's a topical answer for you: One of the major factors in Ubuntu's technical success has been the no-questions-asked, "Just Works" philosophy it shares with GNOME, and the application of that philosophy to the entire operating system stack. If you needed any proof that real users are begging for simplicity in their digital life, look no further than the spectacular rise of Ubuntu and the even more spectacular rise of Google.
Wait... We changed from an unmaintainable (and back then, officially unmaintained because the only person who understood it went to work for Apple and wasn't allowed to hack on it anymore) hairball that was substantially different from everything else in the GNOME stack, to a simple, familiar window manager with basic accoutrements... and you think this shows that GNOME was hijacked by suits?
Dude, as release manager at the time (definitely not a suit - I was doing consulting at the time, and relished the opportunity to work from home and forego wearing pants), I pushed really hard for us to switch to metacity for the very first 2.0 release, because sawfish was in such a state. I distinctly remember stumbling around at the Ximian sponsored party at GUADEC, convincing all the stakeholders it was ready to go, and then attempting to get Havoc drunk so we could convince him. Alas, he was entirely correct in his refusal to ship it quite so early. We ended up doing it for 2.2.
Yes, metacity is unexciting. But precisely how exciting do you want window management to be? Further to that, precisely how exciting does your Mum want window management to be? Beyond our vocal minority of geeks who love computers, no one actually cares.
1) Small set of supported packages? That's Ubuntu main. :-)
:-)
2 a+b) See the recent Ubuntu Foundation and extended support lifecycle announcement.
2 c) From Canonical and partners around the world, for Ubuntu on desktops and servers.
2 d) Know what the answer to a+b means?
(see my answer re: consumer desktops earlier in the thread)
Ubuntu is not solely focused on the "consumer desktop" market, it just happens to be extremely good at it. :-) See the recent announcement of the Ubuntu Foundation and extended support lifecycles for Ubuntu 6.04 -> that's definitely not being done for the consumer desktop market. :-)
DESTDIR is used by almost every packaging system and distribution available. If it didn't work for GNOME tarballs, there'd be a heck of a lot of noise about it.
(Builds on http, rather.)
That's what they said about HTML. Annodex is http and html for multimedia.
Note that Ubuntu is a commercially supported distribution.
HP cancelled their GNOME on HP-UX port, which should tell you more about HP-UX than GNOME... ie. that HP-UX is not their leading workstation OS anymore, so it doesn't require active graphical desktop development. HP continue to be involved in the GNOME Foundation, to great effect.
GNOME is generally closer to Mac OS than Windows, particularly given recent design decisions. We certainly DO NOT aim to clone either interface - we tend to think that the "not quite Windows" feeling has a strong, negative impact on training, worse than being obviously (and positively) different.
Your distributor may set their GNOME defaults up to be familiar to Windows users, however.
Yeah, the interview was done in the middle of the linux.conf.au wireless area, with a tape recorder. It seems a fair few things were lost along the way. ;-)
Check out GTK-Wimp: http://gtk-wimp.sourceforge.net/ Very tasty, if you run GTK+ applications under Windows (particularly XP). It's even mentioned on the Gaim website. :-)
I'm kinda surprised that Slashdot haven't updated the GNOME category logo, considering that it's been 18 months and three major releases since the logo change. :-)
Havoc had very little to do with the decision.
For instance, between the eight people on GNOME's release team, we have all sorts of disagreements. Trying to decide between Galeon and Epiphany, and trying to analyse the wishes of the community were particularly difficult. Incredibly, the following points of view were held amongst the eight members of the release team:
We shouldn't ship a browser with the Desktop release at all
We shouldn't ship Galeon or Epiphany until they're ready
We should ship Epiphany
We should ship Galeon
:-) You're vaguely right, I suppose. It was worded that way because we had to be very diplomatic about our rationale; it was a fairly heated issue.
:-)
So, it also turns out that I wrote the sentence you referred to as "petty corporate or academic politics".
Without the thickened diplomacy, it means that the current Galeon developers didn't seem to care about GNOME. They've viciously criticised the direction of the project, and did not get involved on the mailing lists when we were discussing the module selection process (so, in a way, they forfeited). Given these issues, it would not have made sense for the project to commit to Galeon.
Before you flame...! I wasn't convinced that we should have chosen a browser at all for the 2.4 Desktop release, because I don't think they're "ready" (qualitatively and philosophically). I use Galeon, and haven't enjoyed using Epiphany so far, yet my choice has nothing to do with "features" or "options"!
But, as you can see, there are more important factors that we have to deal with than random personal opinions - even those of the release team!
Hrm, no, Red Hat would have gone with Epiphany regardless of the GNOME Desktop choice. They had pretty much made up their minds before we even started discussing it. Although it would have been annoying for both Red Hat and GNOME if we'd chosen differently, their choice wasn't particularly important to ours, as evidenced by the discussion on d-d-l.
:-)
FWIW, I'm still using Galeon. Epiphany hasn't sucked me in yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did at some stage in the future.