If you don't agree with the decisions in that link, please do us all (and yourself a favor), and go use something besides open source kernels. If you can't even be bothered to read (at least!) the executive summary in that link, then please stop posting.
To be honest, I've kind of "grown away" from video games (and before anyone gets resentful, no, I don't mean I'm "too grownup for video games", I just have other hobbies that eat all my time these days), but even if I were gaming more often, I have more than enough from TuxGames (especially ones I never finished or are endlessly fascinating to me). I tend to "suck the marrow from games" and get a lot of worth from them.
I am not really your target market. But I'll say this: maintaining Windows (or OSX) for games just isn't worth the hassle, and keeping the hardware up to spec eats too much into my budget. If I were still gaming, I would not buy a game that didn't run under Linux. Full stop.
Not really; since the platform that Romney stands for wants to deny control of their body to 50% of the population, what makes you think he'd be any more concerned about servers? Unless you were a big corporation, of course.
This dominant vendor was nearly able to kill off Apple with an OS that has no GUI and required MANUAL MEMORY MANAGEMENT.
Well, to be fair, let's not forget that Apple was pretty much the last org out there to offer protected memory and true multitasking; MacOS before X was a joke, something that looked like a student project, and a poor student at that. These days, even OSX is crippled by stupid policy.
I can second this, but I have to say that if I had to dump the current "winners" (KDE and GNOME), I'd push full-tilt for EFL. It's just incredible how fast and lightweight it is, plus it has teh shinee going for it.
There are two (well, 2.5) things that really need to get done for this to happen:
Bindings to something more portable than C. Sure, it will lose you some speed, but in this day and age, you really need to allow programmers to program in something like Java (or Python, Scala, Vala, Clojure, etc). Python bindings are already there, but the more (portable) languages, the better.
Stabilize things. EFL has been stable for a while, but I always have the fear that it will be re-written from scratch, yet again.
And someone big needs to push it, and push it openly. The problem with Tizen is that it isn't very open (invite only). I was excited to hear about a new open tablet, but slightly disappointed to find that it was KDE based. All due respect to the KDE and Qt camp, but you just can't beat EFL/Enlightenment for speed, small footprint or shininess.
Sure, I know these comments are aimed more towards tablets and phones, but for low end desktop, resources also matter, and the beauty of EFL and Enlightenment is that they encourage experimentation. Wanna build something radically different? Go ahead and try it out with EFL! Wanna build a run of the mill, just get it done but eat resources desktop app? Go with Qt and KDE.
about pair programming was how it was described that "one would be thinking while the other one typed". Huh?! Shouldn't both programmers be thinking? Maybe their editor wasn't designed very well and the one typing had to concentrate on typing too much. Probably wouldn't happen with a better editor
Didn't read even the summary, but here goes: started out as a used computer salesman in high school, built my own 486 to run OS/2, got to college and found out I needed to know Linux to do help desk, learned Linux for that and classes, became help desk monkey, applied for systems programmer job, mentored under UNIX/Mac guru, took his job over when he graduated, then I graduated, then I worked for a startup working on RTLinux (http://fsmlabs.com), then the crash happened, then I tried (and failed) to freelance (including a stint with some accounting programming under AIX), then I got hired by the DoD, and that's where I am today. Unfortunately, I don't always get to work with Linux anymore (I still miss my job at FSM, but that's also because we didn't have an office, so we worked from home; even working to midnight is fun, if the code is fun and you can do it on your couch). I've never really gotten the hang of contributing to open source projects, something I *really* need to do, because if there is anything that being involved in this industry has taught me, it's that you get paid for what you are good at, and you get good at something by doing it. Unfortunately, I get distracted easily (probably why I never went on to get my grad degree or start my own company), and I hate working with Microsoft or Apple products (besides the fact that they are crap technically, there's the principle of the thing too), but you do what you need to get the bills paid.
Another thing I can recommend is going to conferences; I'm headed to Linux Plumbers Conference again because I found it so . . . invigorating? Inspirational? Heartening? In any case, it was nice to see that the Linux community is alive and kicking, and meet so many interesting people. It gives me hope that one day I may again get to hack on open source for a living. Preferably from my couch;)
I see two major issues here; first and foremost is denial. Yes, there is a problem, and if you can't see it, it's probably because you are part of it (and almost certainly a male). It's like how whites in the South think that racism isn't a problem anymore. This *needs* to be addressed, and the first step is admitting there is a problem. As for dealing with the problem itself, I can say that part of it is the whole "brogrammer" phenomenon which has cropped up in recent years. I can say unreservedly, brogrammers need to fuck off; they are not welcome, and if they won't police themselves, we will. Hacker culture is one that should, above all else, respect intellect and creativity; gender, oneupmanship and "frat" antics don't come into it at any point.
The second issue I see is that the answer to the article question is no, sexual harassment is not a part of hacker culture. If sexual harassment is happening, it needs to have a bright light shone upon it, like a software bug, so that it can be fixed. We need to not allow these broken windows to exist in our house. The perpetrators should be shamed and banned from conferences, at a minimum. Some of the anecdotes I've heard would warrant criminal charges being pressed. The New Atheist movement is having similar issues, and they are starting to respond by banning people. If you think this is "censorship", fuck off; you can get your own fucking website and post all the misogyny you want, but you can't force others to host it for you.
I went to university with Valerie, and she's very smart, probably smarter than a lot of people here (definitely smarter than the knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing, misogynistic brogrammers who have infested the computer industry). She's been writing and talking about this problem for long time; it would be wise to listen to her.
One last point: I'm not "disgusted" or "offended" by these acts; I consider them the vulgar acts of those not fully human (for they lack empathy) and therefore beneath my contempt. These people should be treated like the animals they act like, and kept out of hacker culture so that we can get on with real work.
I keep hoping people here would be a little more informed than average
Ah, see there's your mistake: not in assuming that the general crowd at slashdot is smarter than average (they are); you are overestimating the average level of intelligence.
One big reason why things are the way they are, is that corporate types want somebody to blame when things go pear-shaped. There's not many linux companies of enough size to handle that. Just RedHat and SuSe.
Hmm, well then they better not have too close a look at any of MS or Apple's EULAs. They're all "no indemnification" and all that. Good luck suing MS or Apple, or even getting a response unless you already paid out the ass for a support contract.
The simple fact of the matter is that when it comes to big companies and technology, the ones making the "corporate" decisions are blithering idiots. Think about it: where are the smartest people you know working? Either they are actually getting (fun) shit done (eg, engineers solving problems), or they are in charge of their own startups (and how many startups go with MS?). Also, as someone else mentioned, there are some other large factors known as "mindshare" (why do you think MS gives deep discounts to college students) and bribes. If there were any justice in this world, MS would have gone out of business ten years ago due to everyone seeing through their BS. The depressing reality is that PT Barnum was right (and even that is a good example of mass ignorance: Barnum didn't say that, his opponent Hull did).
Or as they are commonly known in the post-industrial world: meetings.
True story: years ago, before I had a seploplasty and dropped about 30lbs, I was fighting sleep in a meeting. Fortunately, it was one of those huge, 100+ people "let's all gather to waste everyone's time with slides we should have emailed" type of meetings. Unfortunately, a guy right next to me raised his hand to ask a question just as I was doing one of those head-slumping-attempt-to-jerk-myself-awake maneuvers. I was trying to stay awake in the useless meeting, but the boss took this as me insubordinately sleeping in a meeting and called me into her office aftwerword. She said "if you can't stay awake in meetings, don't bother showing up." I said, "Okay" taking it as a free pass to never show up to meetings again, as I had a habit of falling asleep in them. That apparently wasn't the correct interpretation (NB: she and I didn't have the best employee/manager relationship before this incident).
I usually can stay awake in meetings these days, even if they are useless, although I try to make sure that meetings I attend stick to three simple rules: 1) no longer than an hour 2) must have an agenda or schedule (at a minimum, a topic to be discussed or question to be answered) 3) attendees should want to be there (ie, no "mandatory" meetings; everyone present should have a stake in the agenda items).
Perhaps the minds of the masses haven't been made yet, but I am always cautious when it comes to marketers and advertisers and Google is definitely one of those.
Agreed.
I think this tying together of services is a way of locking in and firmly identifying its users.
Their push against pseudonymity/anonymity has me and many others worried.
I as well, but one of the amazing things about Google is that most of the time, when someone calls them on something or complains, Google listens. How many times has Apple or Microsoft changed policy because of user complaints? Google could be better, and if you talk them, they probably will be.
And let him show a better place than google for tech employees at this moment. 'losing its appeal to tech workers' my ass.
Precisely. I wouldn't consider working for Apple or Microsoft, and it's not just because my experience is primarily with Linux. Google is the place to be for software guys, even if you're not staying there permanently. Everything I've seen and heard leads me to believe it's an incredible work environment, whether you are a code monkey or want to do research in computer science. Could they improve some things? Sure. Are they anti-competive, anti-choice and anti-consumer? No, and lockin to Google is FUD.
I think the real question is: "who's paying for the continual stream of anti Google stories in the tech media; why are they so desperate; and do they really think we are that stupid"
If I were a betting man, I'd wager that the answer to your first question would likely be Apple, Microsoft, Oracle, or all three. As for your second question, it should be obvious why they are so desperate. Unfortunately, the answer to your third question is that they don't care what *we* think - if they can convince enough end users, IT procurers, legislators and judges, that's all that matters to them. Technical superiority doesn't come into the equation. That's what FUD is all about.
Yet, most applications do not use X for that anymore and render everything by themselves, sending to X only the final image to display. X became a simple display driver with a fancy network interface. Why the layer is needed at all?
Okay, if this is the case, why is Wayland ignoring network transparency? Fine, the X rendering layer isn't used anymore and should go away; maybe the entirety of X should go away; why does it immediately follow that network transparency should go away? Don't throw out the baby with the bath water.
Another memorable problem is that X is unable to support full-screen games.
That's funny, I could have sworn I used to run all sorts of games full screen, across multiple monitors no less, since at least 2001. And yes, this was Linux with X11, with games that made heavy use of OpenGL (NWN, Unreal, etc).
So those behind Wayland are not only bubbling windows fanatics - but also people who want to stream-line Linux' graphics stack.
Fine, but I ask again - why does network transparency have to go? I might be more convinced that those behind Wayland weren't bubbling Windows fanatics if their solution to the remote GUI apps problem wasn't the same as Windows and MacOSX. No, remote desktops in their own window *isn't* good enough. If I really wanted that, I can *choose* it, but I'm not *forced* to run remote GUI apps that way.
I would love to have some guarantees that X would survive and I would be able to run a GUI app remotely, but something tells me that the days when I was taking that for granted are counted.
And this exact same feeling is why others are wailing so loudly against Wayland.
So Microsoft, Apple and Oracle wanted Google to join them and jointly bid with them, allowing access to the patents for everyone. Google didn't join, and lost the bidding when they tried to get it all for themselves. Who is the real hostile company here?
Let me propose a little thought experiment, let's call it an "analogy" if you will: say a bunch of "family men" came to you with a proposal: if you give them just a small pittance of your income, they promise nothing bad will happen to your business. Sure, others you do business with might not be so lucky, but these guys are trying to help you and only want to band together for yours (and their) own good. Would you be "hostile" for refusing to join them?
Microsoft, Apple and Oracle can't keep up with Google technologically, so they're trying every trick in the book to shut them down, from FUD to legal bullying. They are no different from thugs and need to be stopped; at the very least, patents need some serious reform; at best injuctions should be put in place against them.
I know it's not.NET in particular, but it certainly applies: What Languages Fix. The problem that C# was invented to fix? Java is controlled by Sun. Same goes for.NET vs. JVM.
So, MSM is going to get less advertising bucks from the oil majors. Hmm, I wonder how they feel about that? Expect some attack stories in the near future along with the doom and gloom, and then the MSM will find someone else to attack and it'll all be ignored.
I couldn't help but crack a little smile when I read that. This may not be a "victory" for the little guy, but I still find it amusing that the same lying whores (the MSM) who the greedy bastards (the oil companies) paid might turn on their masters. The MSM gets screwed, rightly, and the oil companies get screwed, rightly. I can't help but laugh and cheer and feel that justice sometimes makes for good entertainment.
. . . litigate. Come on fanbois, I want to hear how this is "innovative" and "no one has ever done it before". Better yet, tell me how this is Apple "making a better product". Is Apple a law firm now, as well as marketing company?
PS - Apple is still a member of MPEG-LA and BSA, right beside Microsoft.
The concern is, if we don't consider our inalienable human rights to be derived from a deity, where do they come from?
Where did those rights come from? Our ancestors earned them. With their, and others blood. They fought and died, and yes, killed, to have the freedoms we take for granted (and are slowly losing) today. Sometimes all it takes is for someone to stand up to the tyrants (the priests and kings) and say enough is enough. And if the priests and kings object, well then it's time to kill or be killed. Live free or die.
But anybody with a free developer account could compile the source code for MAME for IOS (assuming it exists) into an app, sign that build with their developer certificate, then upload the binary onto their own phone.
And, why, pray tell, should I have to have a "developer account"? No, it doesn't matter that it is "free", it's just an unneccesary layer between me and my hardware. Not to mention that I can develop software for my current (non Apple) phone on any platform I please, including the phone itself.
If Apple is serious about attracting OSS devs and people who like to tinker, they should consider not putting up artificial barriers to entry.
I hate the BSA (and their members) just as much as the next person, but I would like to propose a new strategy. Now I know there are many posters claiming that Free software can't meet their needs, but I'll bet they haven't even looked. Maybe Free solutions to their problems aren't being created because they are infringing on copyrights instead of paying someone to create a Free version?
So here's my plan: take the BSA up on their offer. Start reporting *everyone* who infringes on copyright. No, of course, not for the reward (which it sounds unlikely to be given anyway), but to force people to make the hard choice they've been avoiding: either pay the price of non-Free software, or fund someone to make a Free version.
Sound evil? It wouldn't be possible without copyright. Of course, if we abolished, or at least limited, copyright, and outlawed restrictive licenses and groups like the BSA, these problems might go away. But I really don't feel any pity for anyone using non-Free software. There *are* options, people *have* been warned. The most effective way to combat the BSA is to stop giving money to and stop using software from their members (like Apple and Microsoft).
Slashdot Mirror
*Sigh*. I guess I'll just have to post this for the millionth time:
http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/stable_api_nonsense.html
If you don't agree with the decisions in that link, please do us all (and yourself a favor), and go use something besides open source kernels. If you can't even be bothered to read (at least!) the executive summary in that link, then please stop posting.
If you think Debian Stable is too old to be useful, you're a retard.
To be honest, I've kind of "grown away" from video games (and before anyone gets resentful, no, I don't mean I'm "too grownup for video games", I just have other hobbies that eat all my time these days), but even if I were gaming more often, I have more than enough from TuxGames (especially ones I never finished or are endlessly fascinating to me). I tend to "suck the marrow from games" and get a lot of worth from them.
I am not really your target market. But I'll say this: maintaining Windows (or OSX) for games just isn't worth the hassle, and keeping the hardware up to spec eats too much into my budget. If I were still gaming, I would not buy a game that didn't run under Linux. Full stop.
Not really; since the platform that Romney stands for wants to deny control of their body to 50% of the population, what makes you think he'd be any more concerned about servers? Unless you were a big corporation, of course.
Well, to be fair, let's not forget that Apple was pretty much the last org out there to offer protected memory and true multitasking; MacOS before X was a joke, something that looked like a student project, and a poor student at that. These days, even OSX is crippled by stupid policy.
I can second this, but I have to say that if I had to dump the current "winners" (KDE and GNOME), I'd push full-tilt for EFL. It's just incredible how fast and lightweight it is, plus it has teh shinee going for it.
There are two (well, 2.5) things that really need to get done for this to happen:
Sure, I know these comments are aimed more towards tablets and phones, but for low end desktop, resources also matter, and the beauty of EFL and Enlightenment is that they encourage experimentation. Wanna build something radically different? Go ahead and try it out with EFL! Wanna build a run of the mill, just get it done but eat resources desktop app? Go with Qt and KDE.
That's okay; maybe in ten years OS X will have finished copying all the eye candy from Enlightenment. I doubt it will ever be as fast, though.
about pair programming was how it was described that "one would be thinking while the other one typed". Huh?! Shouldn't both programmers be thinking? Maybe their editor wasn't designed very well and the one typing had to concentrate on typing too much. Probably wouldn't happen with a better editor
Didn't read even the summary, but here goes: started out as a used computer salesman in high school, built my own 486 to run OS/2, got to college and found out I needed to know Linux to do help desk, learned Linux for that and classes, became help desk monkey, applied for systems programmer job, mentored under UNIX/Mac guru, took his job over when he graduated, then I graduated, then I worked for a startup working on RTLinux (http://fsmlabs.com), then the crash happened, then I tried (and failed) to freelance (including a stint with some accounting programming under AIX), then I got hired by the DoD, and that's where I am today. Unfortunately, I don't always get to work with Linux anymore (I still miss my job at FSM, but that's also because we didn't have an office, so we worked from home; even working to midnight is fun, if the code is fun and you can do it on your couch). I've never really gotten the hang of contributing to open source projects, something I *really* need to do, because if there is anything that being involved in this industry has taught me, it's that you get paid for what you are good at, and you get good at something by doing it. Unfortunately, I get distracted easily (probably why I never went on to get my grad degree or start my own company), and I hate working with Microsoft or Apple products (besides the fact that they are crap technically, there's the principle of the thing too), but you do what you need to get the bills paid.
Another thing I can recommend is going to conferences; I'm headed to Linux Plumbers Conference again because I found it so . . . invigorating? Inspirational? Heartening? In any case, it was nice to see that the Linux community is alive and kicking, and meet so many interesting people. It gives me hope that one day I may again get to hack on open source for a living. Preferably from my couch ;)
I see two major issues here; first and foremost is denial. Yes, there is a problem, and if you can't see it, it's probably because you are part of it (and almost certainly a male). It's like how whites in the South think that racism isn't a problem anymore. This *needs* to be addressed, and the first step is admitting there is a problem. As for dealing with the problem itself, I can say that part of it is the whole "brogrammer" phenomenon which has cropped up in recent years. I can say unreservedly, brogrammers need to fuck off; they are not welcome, and if they won't police themselves, we will. Hacker culture is one that should, above all else, respect intellect and creativity; gender, oneupmanship and "frat" antics don't come into it at any point.
The second issue I see is that the answer to the article question is no, sexual harassment is not a part of hacker culture. If sexual harassment is happening, it needs to have a bright light shone upon it, like a software bug, so that it can be fixed. We need to not allow these broken windows to exist in our house. The perpetrators should be shamed and banned from conferences, at a minimum. Some of the anecdotes I've heard would warrant criminal charges being pressed. The New Atheist movement is having similar issues, and they are starting to respond by banning people. If you think this is "censorship", fuck off; you can get your own fucking website and post all the misogyny you want, but you can't force others to host it for you.
I went to university with Valerie, and she's very smart, probably smarter than a lot of people here (definitely smarter than the knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing, misogynistic brogrammers who have infested the computer industry). She's been writing and talking about this problem for long time; it would be wise to listen to her.
One last point: I'm not "disgusted" or "offended" by these acts; I consider them the vulgar acts of those not fully human (for they lack empathy) and therefore beneath my contempt. These people should be treated like the animals they act like, and kept out of hacker culture so that we can get on with real work.
Ah, see there's your mistake: not in assuming that the general crowd at slashdot is smarter than average (they are); you are overestimating the average level of intelligence.
Hmm, well then they better not have too close a look at any of MS or Apple's EULAs. They're all "no indemnification" and all that. Good luck suing MS or Apple, or even getting a response unless you already paid out the ass for a support contract.
The simple fact of the matter is that when it comes to big companies and technology, the ones making the "corporate" decisions are blithering idiots. Think about it: where are the smartest people you know working? Either they are actually getting (fun) shit done (eg, engineers solving problems), or they are in charge of their own startups (and how many startups go with MS?). Also, as someone else mentioned, there are some other large factors known as "mindshare" (why do you think MS gives deep discounts to college students) and bribes. If there were any justice in this world, MS would have gone out of business ten years ago due to everyone seeing through their BS. The depressing reality is that PT Barnum was right (and even that is a good example of mass ignorance: Barnum didn't say that, his opponent Hull did).
I'd like to say, congratulations! Android has very nearly caught up with where Maemo was when it was released in 2009. Also, suck it Wayland!
True story: years ago, before I had a seploplasty and dropped about 30lbs, I was fighting sleep in a meeting. Fortunately, it was one of those huge, 100+ people "let's all gather to waste everyone's time with slides we should have emailed" type of meetings. Unfortunately, a guy right next to me raised his hand to ask a question just as I was doing one of those head-slumping-attempt-to-jerk-myself-awake maneuvers. I was trying to stay awake in the useless meeting, but the boss took this as me insubordinately sleeping in a meeting and called me into her office aftwerword. She said "if you can't stay awake in meetings, don't bother showing up." I said, "Okay" taking it as a free pass to never show up to meetings again, as I had a habit of falling asleep in them. That apparently wasn't the correct interpretation (NB: she and I didn't have the best employee/manager relationship before this incident).
I usually can stay awake in meetings these days, even if they are useless, although I try to make sure that meetings I attend stick to three simple rules: 1) no longer than an hour 2) must have an agenda or schedule (at a minimum, a topic to be discussed or question to be answered) 3) attendees should want to be there (ie, no "mandatory" meetings; everyone present should have a stake in the agenda items).
Agreed.
Then you'll be happy to know that Google themselves discourages lockin.
I as well, but one of the amazing things about Google is that most of the time, when someone calls them on something or complains, Google listens. How many times has Apple or Microsoft changed policy because of user complaints? Google could be better, and if you talk them, they probably will be.
Precisely. I wouldn't consider working for Apple or Microsoft, and it's not just because my experience is primarily with Linux. Google is the place to be for software guys, even if you're not staying there permanently. Everything I've seen and heard leads me to believe it's an incredible work environment, whether you are a code monkey or want to do research in computer science. Could they improve some things? Sure. Are they anti-competive, anti-choice and anti-consumer? No, and lockin to Google is FUD.
If I were a betting man, I'd wager that the answer to your first question would likely be Apple, Microsoft, Oracle, or all three. As for your second question, it should be obvious why they are so desperate. Unfortunately, the answer to your third question is that they don't care what *we* think - if they can convince enough end users, IT procurers, legislators and judges, that's all that matters to them. Technical superiority doesn't come into the equation. That's what FUD is all about.
Okay, if this is the case, why is Wayland ignoring network transparency? Fine, the X rendering layer isn't used anymore and should go away; maybe the entirety of X should go away; why does it immediately follow that network transparency should go away? Don't throw out the baby with the bath water.
That's funny, I could have sworn I used to run all sorts of games full screen, across multiple monitors no less, since at least 2001. And yes, this was Linux with X11, with games that made heavy use of OpenGL (NWN, Unreal, etc).
Fine, but I ask again - why does network transparency have to go? I might be more convinced that those behind Wayland weren't bubbling Windows fanatics if their solution to the remote GUI apps problem wasn't the same as Windows and MacOSX. No, remote desktops in their own window *isn't* good enough. If I really wanted that, I can *choose* it, but I'm not *forced* to run remote GUI apps that way.
And this exact same feeling is why others are wailing so loudly against Wayland.
Let me propose a little thought experiment, let's call it an "analogy" if you will: say a bunch of "family men" came to you with a proposal: if you give them just a small pittance of your income, they promise nothing bad will happen to your business. Sure, others you do business with might not be so lucky, but these guys are trying to help you and only want to band together for yours (and their) own good. Would you be "hostile" for refusing to join them?
Microsoft, Apple and Oracle can't keep up with Google technologically, so they're trying every trick in the book to shut them down, from FUD to legal bullying. They are no different from thugs and need to be stopped; at the very least, patents need some serious reform; at best injuctions should be put in place against them.
I know it's not .NET in particular, but it certainly applies: What Languages Fix. The problem that C# was invented to fix? Java is controlled by Sun. Same goes for .NET vs. JVM.
I couldn't help but crack a little smile when I read that. This may not be a "victory" for the little guy, but I still find it amusing that the same lying whores (the MSM) who the greedy bastards (the oil companies) paid might turn on their masters. The MSM gets screwed, rightly, and the oil companies get screwed, rightly. I can't help but laugh and cheer and feel that justice sometimes makes for good entertainment.
. . . litigate. Come on fanbois, I want to hear how this is "innovative" and "no one has ever done it before". Better yet, tell me how this is Apple "making a better product". Is Apple a law firm now, as well as marketing company?
PS - Apple is still a member of MPEG-LA and BSA, right beside Microsoft.
Where did those rights come from? Our ancestors earned them. With their, and others blood. They fought and died, and yes, killed, to have the freedoms we take for granted (and are slowly losing) today. Sometimes all it takes is for someone to stand up to the tyrants (the priests and kings) and say enough is enough. And if the priests and kings object, well then it's time to kill or be killed. Live free or die.
And, why, pray tell, should I have to have a "developer account"? No, it doesn't matter that it is "free", it's just an unneccesary layer between me and my hardware. Not to mention that I can develop software for my current (non Apple) phone on any platform I please, including the phone itself.
If Apple is serious about attracting OSS devs and people who like to tinker, they should consider not putting up artificial barriers to entry.
I hate the BSA (and their members) just as much as the next person, but I would like to propose a new strategy. Now I know there are many posters claiming that Free software can't meet their needs, but I'll bet they haven't even looked. Maybe Free solutions to their problems aren't being created because they are infringing on copyrights instead of paying someone to create a Free version?
So here's my plan: take the BSA up on their offer. Start reporting *everyone* who infringes on copyright. No, of course, not for the reward (which it sounds unlikely to be given anyway), but to force people to make the hard choice they've been avoiding: either pay the price of non-Free software, or fund someone to make a Free version.
Sound evil? It wouldn't be possible without copyright. Of course, if we abolished, or at least limited, copyright, and outlawed restrictive licenses and groups like the BSA, these problems might go away. But I really don't feel any pity for anyone using non-Free software. There *are* options, people *have* been warned. The most effective way to combat the BSA is to stop giving money to and stop using software from their members (like Apple and Microsoft).