If Troll really wants to become a world power, then they would release Qt as free for open source software under Win32. I can't imagine something that would make M$ shake more than to see a serious competitor to MFC and Visual Studio. Qt is it, and I can't help but think that Troll is short-sighted to not realize yet just how powerful their library would be if made available for Open Source developers on Windows. Now that would *change* the world.
This is not to somehow imply that Windows with Qt is better than Linxu (bleh). It's just a reality check that many people, like myself, are confined to Windows by the powers that be, for one reason or another. Not to mention the fact that if I want to create some software for my friends/relatives I'm not about to start signing my life over to them to support Linux on their machines when they are perfectly happy in the M$ setup [for now]. I'd love to write software, but I am definitely not paying for MFC...definitely not an elegant library there.
...but it seems to me that any so-called unification of this past year is overly connected to ESR's own style of [Oo]pen [Ss]ource. If 'unification' means 'comercialism' (and hype) we'd better hope that big biz doesn't just up and wreck the freedom of Linux (fat chance).
I'm certainly not a religious fanatic in the o'reilly vs stallman war, but if 'unification' is 'interoperability' he's obviously forgetting other (more?) important details such as posix, gcc [and gpl in general], and gnu tools.
Perhaps if 'unification' simply means 'common enemy' then we should thank MS more than linux, har har. Keep MS running then, I say, otherwise all the distros (at least those who are big biz wannabees) will start their own embrace and extend tactics.
If 'unification' means 'locked in to the Linux' way then perhaps we'll all just be chained again to another one true way [sic] until new freedom fighters emerge to release us from the tyranny. *nix may be flexible a stellar OS, but this is, after all, only perhaps the second day of creation in computer history.
If 'unification' means 'eyeballs', then we're really screwed up to think that having everyone Linux-enabling their software is going to make the world a better place. Don't forget that every one of those publicly gambled companies is bound by law to serve the interests of their gamblers (oops, stockholders) alone, and will simply change their biz strategy away from open source the moment they feel it doesn't serve them any more.
Are we stupid, or what? Of course these big companies like SGI, IBM, and many more, want to line up behind *nix, and want the latest buzz to succeed. It releases them from subservience and/or fighting over the crumbs that MS leaves behind in the mass consumer world. It is not that traditional UNIX has failed them technically up until now, it's just that it doesn't have the buzz.
Oh well, enough flame bait for one night (berlin time).
Slashdot Mirror
If Troll really wants to become a world power, then they would release Qt as free for open source software under Win32. I can't imagine something that would make M$ shake more than to see a serious competitor to MFC and Visual Studio. Qt is it, and I can't help but think that Troll is short-sighted to not realize yet just how powerful their library would be if made available for Open Source developers on Windows. Now that would *change* the world.
This is not to somehow imply that Windows with Qt is better than Linxu (bleh). It's just a reality check that many people, like myself, are confined to Windows by the powers that be, for one reason or another. Not to mention the fact that if I want to create some software for my friends/relatives I'm not about to start signing my life over to them to support Linux on their machines when they are perfectly happy in the M$ setup [for now]. I'd love to write software, but I am definitely not paying for MFC...definitely not an elegant library there.
...but it seems to me that any so-called unification of this past year is overly connected to ESR's own style of [Oo]pen [Ss]ource. If 'unification' means 'comercialism' (and hype) we'd better hope that big biz doesn't just up and wreck the freedom of Linux (fat chance).
I'm certainly not a religious fanatic in the o'reilly vs stallman war, but if 'unification' is 'interoperability' he's obviously forgetting other (more?) important details such as posix, gcc [and gpl in general], and gnu tools.
Perhaps if 'unification' simply means 'common enemy' then we should thank MS more than linux, har har. Keep MS running then, I say, otherwise all the distros (at least those who are big biz wannabees) will start their own embrace and extend tactics.
If 'unification' means 'locked in to the Linux' way then perhaps we'll all just be chained again to another one true way [sic] until new freedom fighters emerge to release us from the tyranny. *nix may be flexible a stellar OS, but this is, after all, only perhaps the second day of creation in computer history.
If 'unification' means 'eyeballs', then we're really screwed up to think that having everyone Linux-enabling their software is going to make the world a better place. Don't forget that every one of those publicly gambled companies is bound by law to serve the interests of their gamblers (oops, stockholders) alone, and will simply change their biz strategy away from open source the moment they feel it doesn't serve them any more.
Are we stupid, or what? Of course these big companies like SGI, IBM, and many more, want to line up behind *nix, and want the latest buzz to succeed. It releases them from subservience and/or fighting over the crumbs that MS leaves behind in the mass consumer world. It is not that traditional UNIX has failed them technically up until now, it's just that it doesn't have the buzz.
Oh well, enough flame bait for one night (berlin time).