I consider all of what you say, bugs. That is, I don't think anybody in Opera has deliberately tried to make the browser malfunction as the GP tries to imply. Instead they are working overtime to try to fix the plugin stuff. Preferences load and save very fast in 9.5.
In this regard, Firefox also has a lot of bugs, and they are also trying to fix them.
In my case I use Safari for windows when some flash doesn't work well in Opera.
I think your argument is true in general. That is, if we are talking about all closed source ever written vs. all open source code ever written.
However, in this particular case it seems to be very wrong. Opera is a much finer browser than Firefox, even with all the might of Google marketing behind Firefox. This is simply because Opera has nothing to gain doing dubious stuff, and a lot to lose, as it has a huge target market with lots of information about Opera and competitors. In fact I think that closed source is not an issue with mainstream software.
Your 'this may change in any moment' comment has no weight.
I can concede that, in most vertical software, the closed source versions are generally evil. Browsers in general, and Opera in particular are not vertical software.
Having (lots of) brothers is actually belonging to a small community, in fact it's belonging to a network of communities.
It helps a lot with social skills.
So yes, I do suggest, as the GP does, that being an only child predisposes children to become obsessed with games, and with anything obsessive.
Unless you go to a school without extreme competition and/or bulling. This rules out the USA, China, Korea and Japan. Everywhere else in the world is safe to be an only child.
You have a lot of valid points there, however, I can not see in any meaningful way why if you have e-mail, then you have to send HUGE pieces of text and PPS attachments.
In other words, I am the kind of person that uses e-mail and SMS the same way, in other words e-mail in no way forces you to use a keyboard and write huge essays for every message.
I'm no iPhone fanboy and I'm not defending it, but I have to answer to your point that looks to me like an ilogical rant and out of touch with reality.
"SMS excels over e-mail at putting together and sending quickly small messages" I still don't understand why e-mail can't do the same if that's how I use e-mail everyday.
And I can write SMS in my phone using my computer's keyboard, I don't think I can do that with the iPhone. Totally offtopic detail, of course.
Smartphones were going to eat iPods marketshare. The iPhone is the response to this. Now iPhones are the ones eating iPods marketshare, so no lose for Apple.
Selecting another smartphone or another MP3 player based on merits is simply the best choice.
And I have 2GB of DDR memory, not DDR2. It was the right choice for me a couple of months ago, and it has proven to be a great buy, in a performance/cost benefit point of view.
No Xfce or other weird software here, normal XP SP2 and lots of games.
Do you say this on the basis of wishful thinking, or prior experience? None. I believe it precisely because we learn from conflicts like this. No conflicts, no learning. I'm sure you and others will not forget the BK incident.
OTOH, there is IBM with a lot of OS stuff and Oracle (with their MyISAM engine) already co-existing in a more mature way with OSS.
The linux kernel's first license was further away from BSD than the GPL, and it was Linus's invention.
Without the GPL, no commercial use of the Linux kernel was possible.
GPL was then used because it was *more* *permissible*. Shocking isn't?
I believe that the GPL3 is bad, because it is a ugly hack to an ugly law. The right thing would be to invalidate software patents. However RMS is a hacker...
I believe that Miguel is a very very smart person and that he sold to MS more than five years ago. His actions have simply too many strategical consequences to maintain the naive view that there are coincidences in them. Basically he developed Midnight Commander and then he became the MS 'infiltrated spy' in the Open Source world.
Explanation (I'm quoting myself here.):
MS monopoly is all about protecting the API. As Ballmer said: developers, developers, developers! They had one API everybody used, win32, and it was their crown jewel. As long as everybody keep developing for win32, MS would win.
Then came Linux. If Linux distros could provide a competing API to Win32, MS would be screwed. MS solution? fragment the Linux API. You see, one of the main values of a successful API is that it's universal. So how to destroy Linux? Destroy the universality of the API. Make not one, but TWO competing APIs! Then developers would have endless religious wars and Linux would not grow as a competing commercial platform against Win32. How to do it? Make Gnome and start a religious war against the then 'closed license' QT libraries. Forward ten years and what's the result? Nobody uses either KDE or Gnome to develop commercial software, the 'developers, developers, developers' are still somewhere else. Oracle currently uses Java as the API when running in Linux. And who started Gnome? Icaza.
Then after Linux it came Java, and it becomes MS new enemy. J++ and stuff. (Icaza was not involved with J++.)
Now what happens, MS decides to create a new API from zero, sacrificing their beloved Win32. The new API is then called.NET. Now MS has to protect.NET, make it the universal API that every developer use. Linux (as always) is a threat to MS. So what's MS strategy this time? The same they used against Java, just a little backwards. Against Java they used the embrace and extend, promoting J++, that used MS proprietary extensions to the Java language to achieve developer lock in. To protect.NET from Linux, they would do a backwards embrace an extend: give Linux a limited.NET implementation, so that developers would still be locked to.NET proprietary extensions in the Windows platform. This limited.NET implementation is MONO. And who started MONO? Icaza.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, and his character died.
Half-life 2 level load times come to my mind.
I consider all of what you say, bugs.
That is, I don't think anybody in Opera has deliberately tried to make the browser malfunction as the GP tries to imply.
Instead they are working overtime to try to fix the plugin stuff. Preferences load and save very fast in 9.5.
In this regard, Firefox also has a lot of bugs, and they are also trying to fix them.
In my case I use Safari for windows when some flash doesn't work well in Opera.
AFAIK they have refused to sell to MS or other big companies several times.
There's Opera 9.23 stable and there's Opera 9.5 Beta (codename Kestrel).
Even as Opera is known to be fast and use little memory, Opera 9.5 is faster and uses even less memory, being the best browser I have ever used.
I also use Safari sometimes (to have two gmail accounts open, for example) and I'm in windows. There's no reason to use IE at all.
However, it's still a beta, YMMV, etc.
I think your argument is true in general. That is, if we are talking about all closed source ever written vs. all open source code ever written.
However, in this particular case it seems to be very wrong. Opera is a much finer browser than Firefox, even with all the might of Google marketing behind Firefox. This is simply because Opera has nothing to gain doing dubious stuff, and a lot to lose, as it has a huge target market with lots of information about Opera and competitors. In fact I think that closed source is not an issue with mainstream software.
Your 'this may change in any moment' comment has no weight.
I can concede that, in most vertical software, the closed source versions are generally evil. Browsers in general, and Opera in particular are not vertical software.
There's no way you can make me use Azureus over uTorrent, or a browser written in Java over Opera.
MOD PARENT UP!!
This is the most educative post in this entire article.
Your arguments go to the sink the moment that I allocate 90% of my objects in the stack.
I don't use new if I don't need it.
Of course, if we were talking about some other language besides C++ your arguments would have been unbeatable.
Opera mail client did that before Gmail.
It has views and any mail can be in any view.
And filters can automatically move mail to certain views.
But views are not linear, they can be arranged as trees too.
In fact you can mix the tree and the view paradigms as you see fit.
And it worked that way in Opera's mail client before Gmail existed.
So yes, there are 'real' mail clients that good.
And that's why you save such powertoys, service packs and all other MS installers in a special folder.
I don't see any reason not to do it.
Having (lots of) brothers is actually belonging to a small community, in fact it's belonging to a network of communities.
It helps a lot with social skills.
So yes, I do suggest, as the GP does, that being an only child predisposes children to become obsessed with games, and with anything obsessive.
Unless you go to a school without extreme competition and/or bulling. This rules out the USA, China, Korea and Japan. Everywhere else in the world is safe to be an only child.
If you want a hacker to do something, you just have to tell him that this something is impossible.
Or that doing it will be just thinkering. Hackers love thinkering.
In my case if this is what's needed to stop GNU zealots to say that Linux is nothing without GNU and GNU is everything, then good for PCC.
In a practical note, I would appreciate a more modern compiler to replace Borland's BCC in windows. Now, that's a fast compiler ^^
In other words, I am the kind of person that uses e-mail and SMS the same way, in other words e-mail in no way forces you to use a keyboard and write huge essays for every message.
I'm no iPhone fanboy and I'm not defending it, but I have to answer to your point that looks to me like an ilogical rant and out of touch with reality. "SMS excels over e-mail at putting together and sending quickly small messages" I still don't understand why e-mail can't do the same if that's how I use e-mail everyday.
And I can write SMS in my phone using my computer's keyboard, I don't think I can do that with the iPhone. Totally offtopic detail, of course.
Smartphones were going to eat iPods marketshare. The iPhone is the response to this. Now iPhones are the ones eating iPods marketshare, so no lose for Apple.
Selecting another smartphone or another MP3 player based on merits is simply the best choice.
No, actually as both dollar and kilogram will lose value you will then weight much more kilograms.
:P
So you will be very fat
I do use graphics software and games.
And I have 2GB of DDR memory, not DDR2. It was the right choice for me a couple of months ago, and it has proven to be a great buy, in a performance/cost benefit point of view.
No Xfce or other weird software here, normal XP SP2 and lots of games.
You keep telling that to yourself.
I want my Half-Life 2 levels to load faster.
I'm sure you and others will not forget the BK incident.
OTOH, there is IBM with a lot of OS stuff and Oracle (with their MyISAM engine) already co-existing in a more mature way with OSS.
Mmm reading the Buddha stuff I agree much more with the first comment than with the post.
The linux kernel's first license was further away from BSD than the GPL, and it was Linus's invention.
Without the GPL, no commercial use of the Linux kernel was possible.
GPL was then used because it was *more* *permissible*. Shocking isn't?
I believe that the GPL3 is bad, because it is a ugly hack to an ugly law. The right thing would be to invalidate software patents. However RMS is a hacker...
He could have designed his own license.
Ohh, in fact he did it, and it had more restrictions than the GPL. (No propietary use. At all.)
After a while he changed to GPL because of that, to have less restrictions (without being BSD).
And the new GPL has more restrictions... what would anybody think Linus reaction would be?
Well, Linus learnt A LOT from BitKeeper, and that helped him to write Git as good as it is.
You can't only see bad things in closed source software.
McVoy was overreacting and it hurt him and his company in the long term.
So in the end, closed source was hurt more than open source. There are no IFs in history.
In the future closed source is here to stay, as much as open source. People will simply be more mature and responsible about it.
I believe that Miguel is a very very smart person and that he sold to MS more than five years ago. His actions have simply too many strategical consequences to maintain the naive view that there are coincidences in them. Basically he developed Midnight Commander and then he became the MS 'infiltrated spy' in the Open Source world.
.NET. Now MS has to protect .NET, make it the universal API that every developer use. Linux (as always) is a threat to MS. So what's MS strategy this time? The same they used against Java, just a little backwards. Against Java they used the embrace and extend, promoting J++, that used MS proprietary extensions to the Java language to achieve developer lock in. To protect .NET from Linux, they would do a backwards embrace an extend: give Linux a limited .NET implementation, so that developers would still be locked to .NET proprietary extensions in the Windows platform. This limited .NET implementation is MONO. And who started MONO? Icaza.
Explanation (I'm quoting myself here.):
MS monopoly is all about protecting the API. As Ballmer said: developers, developers, developers! They had one API everybody used, win32, and it was their crown jewel. As long as everybody keep developing for win32, MS would win.
Then came Linux. If Linux distros could provide a competing API to Win32, MS would be screwed. MS solution? fragment the Linux API. You see, one of the main values of a successful API is that it's universal. So how to destroy Linux? Destroy the universality of the API. Make not one, but TWO competing APIs! Then developers would have endless religious wars and Linux would not grow as a competing commercial platform against Win32. How to do it? Make Gnome and start a religious war against the then 'closed license' QT libraries. Forward ten years and what's the result? Nobody uses either KDE or Gnome to develop commercial software, the 'developers, developers, developers' are still somewhere else. Oracle currently uses Java as the API when running in Linux. And who started Gnome? Icaza.
Then after Linux it came Java, and it becomes MS new enemy. J++ and stuff. (Icaza was not involved with J++.)
Now what happens, MS decides to create a new API from zero, sacrificing their beloved Win32. The new API is then called
I don't think any of this is a coincidence.