If OSS projects are just created on a whim and we're fans "along for the ride," then don't complain when OSS projects aren't taken as seriously as commercial projects who are fully devoted to fulfilling the users' needs.
That's one of the things I really don't understand about OSS. Complain when things aren't taken as seriously in the mainstream, but then complain when people start to take a project more seriously as a product for users.
Translation: "If you don't like it, unless you're a software developer with knowledge of the internal codebase of GNOME, fuck off! We don't cater to user requests, we only cater to developers who can fork source trees on a whim."
Why can't we get them to swap their bad halves with each other and have a desktop pushing innovative internals AND new ideas in appearance while the other effort focuses on cloning Windows inside and out atop a *NIX base....
Because KDE and GNOME are obsessed with chasing Microsoft's tail. "You have a taskbar? Well, our taskbar can have multiple panels and applets and be moved anywhere and have endless buttons! You have a start menu? Well, our start menu can be moved anywhere and have endless items and be completely configurable!"
Nobody wants to speak up and say, "Wait a minute--taskbars and start menus SUCK as an interface to begin with..."
So, apparently Eugenia doesn't really understand how Open Source software development works.
Uh, apparently she does, or else she wouldn't be complaining about it.
Essentially, what you're saying is it's okay if user requests get ignored becuase "that's how OSS works." Well, then don't bitch when someone writes up an article complaining that their requests aren't heard!
Developers want to appear as putting out products that focus on usability, but don't want to deal with the users who are working with their products. Sorry, if you don't want to hear any complaints about your product, keep it on your private network and never release it. Just because it's a volunteer effort doesn't mean squat. Everything is a volunteer effort--it's just that in the commercial world, you also get paid for your work so there's more incentive to stay working.
No, they don't. They're using it in a sarcastic way to bash the Bush administration. You and I both know this. "Regime" has a connotation to it that is negative. That's why people also say "Saddam's regime" but aren't using it to refer simply to a prevailing government there. They're using the fascist definition of the world. Calling the Bush administration a regime is supposed to be ironic and witty in some way.
I can't believe Slashdot isn't posting about the much bigger news: The trailer for the new Zelda game that was released at the conference. Who didn't think the Revolution would have Wifi after the DS comes with it built-in?
The name is just the good marketing at Apple. Instead of calling something, say, the "Sony DRU-680A DVD+-RW", they just call it the "Superdrive" and tell you it burns and reads everything. Simpler for everyone.
People who say "regime" don't use it in that context. One of the definitions of the term is "fascist government," and that's the definition they're referring to. They're not using it to refer to "a current prevailing government."
Come on. It's silly I have to explain this; you know what they're talking about and so do I.
Yeah, right! I've already heard this hype. It was before the release of Attack of the Clones.
When Lucas attempts serious drama, we get a whiny Anakin bitching about Obi-Wan, rolling around on grassy Naboo hills, and poorly-done CG animal surfing in a romantic bonding moment.
"We live in the real world...come back to it." Ooooooh, serious acting! Why did she dress up in that cleavage-revealing outfit anyway if she wasn't wanting to get it on?
So, all those people in the CherryOS "stolen source code" article going on about how evil GPL copyright infringement is and how PearPC's authors should pursue legal action against the infringers will now presumably support this, or am I incorrect that there won't be any hypocrisy in this discussion?
I disagree completely. It was bad publicity. It makes Linux seem like this chaotic thing with lawsuits that you might get embroiled in. Windows would be the "safer" choice.
With the issues the 2.6 kernel had this year and last, the SCO negativity was the last thing Linux needed. I think this article is one of those positive rallying cries to make people feel better, but SCO was a very bad thing for Linux. It's no longer seen as the invincible little free operating system. Its heritage was brought into question, the issue of code attribution is now on people's minds now and in the future on OSS projects, and it has the PR taint of corporations and intellectual properties in its history.
Unfortunately, most of the centrists and non-extremists now occupy the Republican party. The Iraq war polarized the political field and turned a lot of people in the Democratic party into reactionary extremists. So we get comments like "Taliban wing" or "I hate Republicans" (that one's care of Dean).
I'm shocked they're trying to run Hillary in '08. Bill is seen as centrist, but Hillary is very polarizing and seen as hard-left, no matter how much she tries to change that image.
I think we should try to avoid the democrat vs. republican debate and just accept that the government is thinking about taxing the internet.
Translation: "Slashdot is perfectly okay with bashing Republicans at every possible opportunity and modding down conservative posts. But in this case, it's a Democrat being stupid, so let's suddenly be non-political and not bash Democrats.":)
It's called the standard process of capitalism. Business buy and merge with other businesses all the time.
This is getting nuts. LET THE MONOPOLISTS KEEP MONOPOLIZING MARKETS. It's all good.:P
Being a monopoly isn't illegal. If buying Groove Networks isn't abusing a monopoly position, it's a perfectly valid purchase. You can't step in and stop a company you don't like from doing things just because you don't like them. That would be unfair and biased intervention.
How many people this day and age outside of this site even know what Microsoft Bob is? It was an expansion shell on top of Windows 3.1 that came out 11 years ago for kiosks and some home users. Jesus, get over it!
Same with Clippy, who I haven't seen in a default install in five years. Whenever I did see him all those years ago, I magically clicked the right mouse button and selected "Hide." He never returned.
Except that very few people in the world understand the extremely complex Mozilla codebase. People think OSS means "someone will magically fork it and create a whole new project at will when something goes wrong," which is rarely how it happens. Not everyone is a programmer, and few are great ones.
Right, let's add even more bloat to an app that already defines its own generic string class and reinvents the wheel several times in its own code. Instead of downloading a simple web browser, I'll be downloading an "app container" that wants to be an OS that runs applications instead of just being a native application for the OS I already have.
Meanwhile, Opera will continue to be a ~4.5MB download...
The recent browser comparison article Slashdot posted showed that the Mozilla suite actually starts up faster than Firefox.
Firefox is prettier
There is very little difference in the interface. I doubt your standard user would even notice the difference if you replaced one with the other. If the only difference is the interface, Firefox should have just been an XUL theme for Mozilla in the first place then.
Firefox's Extensions
Extensions required a whole new browser?
the Mozilla suite seemed stagnant
And yet, the recent development trouble articles posted show that it is Firefox that is stagnating, due to lack of developers and commitment. 2.0 ain't coming out this year as planned. Just watch.
breaking Mozilla suit up made sense for development
This simply hasn't been shown to be the case. As for the end-user who just wants a browser, Mozilla has always had the "Browser Only" option during install.
Firefox, when you get right down to it, really is somewhat pointless. Not that it matters if people continue to like and use it, but I think a lot of people just use it because they've been told it's better than Mozilla, not because they actually decided that it was.
Slashdot Mirror
If OSS projects are just created on a whim and we're fans "along for the ride," then don't complain when OSS projects aren't taken as seriously as commercial projects who are fully devoted to fulfilling the users' needs.
That's one of the things I really don't understand about OSS. Complain when things aren't taken as seriously in the mainstream, but then complain when people start to take a project more seriously as a product for users.
Translation: "If you don't like it, unless you're a software developer with knowledge of the internal codebase of GNOME, fuck off! We don't cater to user requests, we only cater to developers who can fork source trees on a whim."
Assholes, indeed.
Why can't we get them to swap their bad halves with each other and have a desktop pushing innovative internals AND new ideas in appearance while the other effort focuses on cloning Windows inside and out atop a *NIX base....
Because KDE and GNOME are obsessed with chasing Microsoft's tail. "You have a taskbar? Well, our taskbar can have multiple panels and applets and be moved anywhere and have endless buttons! You have a start menu? Well, our start menu can be moved anywhere and have endless items and be completely configurable!"
Nobody wants to speak up and say, "Wait a minute--taskbars and start menus SUCK as an interface to begin with..."
See post subject. Also, see the bad English in your own post!
So, apparently Eugenia doesn't really understand how Open Source software development works.
Uh, apparently she does, or else she wouldn't be complaining about it.
Essentially, what you're saying is it's okay if user requests get ignored becuase "that's how OSS works." Well, then don't bitch when someone writes up an article complaining that their requests aren't heard!
Developers want to appear as putting out products that focus on usability, but don't want to deal with the users who are working with their products. Sorry, if you don't want to hear any complaints about your product, keep it on your private network and never release it. Just because it's a volunteer effort doesn't mean squat. Everything is a volunteer effort--it's just that in the commercial world, you also get paid for your work so there's more incentive to stay working.
She offered her opinion on a public, high-traffic website. It even got posted to Slashdot.
It's up to the devs if they want to pay attention to it or not.
No, they don't. They're using it in a sarcastic way to bash the Bush administration. You and I both know this. "Regime" has a connotation to it that is negative. That's why people also say "Saddam's regime" but aren't using it to refer simply to a prevailing government there. They're using the fascist definition of the world. Calling the Bush administration a regime is supposed to be ironic and witty in some way.
I can't believe Slashdot isn't posting about the much bigger news: The trailer for the new Zelda game that was released at the conference. Who didn't think the Revolution would have Wifi after the DS comes with it built-in?
Has anyone noticed Intel is being left out in the cold?
The name is just the good marketing at Apple. Instead of calling something, say, the "Sony DRU-680A DVD+-RW", they just call it the "Superdrive" and tell you it burns and reads everything. Simpler for everyone.
Microsoft is supporting both. VC-9 is a required part of the spec for both formats.
People who say "regime" don't use it in that context. One of the definitions of the term is "fascist government," and that's the definition they're referring to. They're not using it to refer to "a current prevailing government."
Come on. It's silly I have to explain this; you know what they're talking about and so do I.
Yeah, right! I've already heard this hype. It was before the release of Attack of the Clones.
When Lucas attempts serious drama, we get a whiny Anakin bitching about Obi-Wan, rolling around on grassy Naboo hills, and poorly-done CG animal surfing in a romantic bonding moment.
"We live in the real world...come back to it." Ooooooh, serious acting! Why did she dress up in that cleavage-revealing outfit anyway if she wasn't wanting to get it on?
So, all those people in the CherryOS "stolen source code" article going on about how evil GPL copyright infringement is and how PearPC's authors should pursue legal action against the infringers will now presumably support this, or am I incorrect that there won't be any hypocrisy in this discussion?
Translation: "We got caught with our pants down."
How is Google punishing anyone? All they're doing is now choosing to follow their own rules.
I disagree completely. It was bad publicity. It makes Linux seem like this chaotic thing with lawsuits that you might get embroiled in. Windows would be the "safer" choice.
With the issues the 2.6 kernel had this year and last, the SCO negativity was the last thing Linux needed. I think this article is one of those positive rallying cries to make people feel better, but SCO was a very bad thing for Linux. It's no longer seen as the invincible little free operating system. Its heritage was brought into question, the issue of code attribution is now on people's minds now and in the future on OSS projects, and it has the PR taint of corporations and intellectual properties in its history.
I see anti-Republican and anti-Bush posts modded up ALL THE TIME. Someone criticizes Democrats, and instant -1.
Unfortunately, most of the centrists and non-extremists now occupy the Republican party. The Iraq war polarized the political field and turned a lot of people in the Democratic party into reactionary extremists. So we get comments like "Taliban wing" or "I hate Republicans" (that one's care of Dean).
I'm shocked they're trying to run Hillary in '08. Bill is seen as centrist, but Hillary is very polarizing and seen as hard-left, no matter how much she tries to change that image.
Translation: "Slashdot is perfectly okay with bashing Republicans at every possible opportunity and modding down conservative posts. But in this case, it's a Democrat being stupid, so let's suddenly be non-political and not bash Democrats."
It's called the standard process of capitalism. Business buy and merge with other businesses all the time.
Being a monopoly isn't illegal. If buying Groove Networks isn't abusing a monopoly position, it's a perfectly valid purchase. You can't step in and stop a company you don't like from doing things just because you don't like them. That would be unfair and biased intervention.
How many people this day and age outside of this site even know what Microsoft Bob is? It was an expansion shell on top of Windows 3.1 that came out 11 years ago for kiosks and some home users. Jesus, get over it!
Same with Clippy, who I haven't seen in a default install in five years. Whenever I did see him all those years ago, I magically clicked the right mouse button and selected "Hide." He never returned.
Except that very few people in the world understand the extremely complex Mozilla codebase. People think OSS means "someone will magically fork it and create a whole new project at will when something goes wrong," which is rarely how it happens. Not everyone is a programmer, and few are great ones.
Right, let's add even more bloat to an app that already defines its own generic string class and reinvents the wheel several times in its own code. Instead of downloading a simple web browser, I'll be downloading an "app container" that wants to be an OS that runs applications instead of just being a native application for the OS I already have.
Meanwhile, Opera will continue to be a ~4.5MB download...
The recent browser comparison article Slashdot posted showed that the Mozilla suite actually starts up faster than Firefox.
There is very little difference in the interface. I doubt your standard user would even notice the difference if you replaced one with the other. If the only difference is the interface, Firefox should have just been an XUL theme for Mozilla in the first place then.
Extensions required a whole new browser?
And yet, the recent development trouble articles posted show that it is Firefox that is stagnating, due to lack of developers and commitment. 2.0 ain't coming out this year as planned. Just watch.
This simply hasn't been shown to be the case. As for the end-user who just wants a browser, Mozilla has always had the "Browser Only" option during install.
Firefox, when you get right down to it, really is somewhat pointless. Not that it matters if people continue to like and use it, but I think a lot of people just use it because they've been told it's better than Mozilla, not because they actually decided that it was.
That's why they make what we in the biz call "database privileges."
I hear MySQL even lets you create accounts with passwords and everything, and assign permissions to them. Crazy stuff.