Better than the other way around. The Mambo / Joomla ( http://www.joomla.org/ ) split comes to mind, where Miro wanted to start a foundation but didn't include most of the core development team on that foundation. In that case, the foundation seemed to serve the purpose of bringing an open source product BACK in control of the company that set it free as OSS in the past.
I would be nervous to make such a blanket statement about a free (beta) tool. Also, you may want to consider other options since it sounds like you're trying to do live network monitoring and reporting, which is barely within the scope of what Ethereal was written for.
Have you taken a look at Nagios, for example? ( www.nagios.org )
I have a feeling that your tone of voice won't be received well here, despite all the work you've done to get Ethereal to work in your environment. Good luck to you.
You're right that this is a great way to go. Trust me, there are some CMS companies picking up on this. Due to the fact that many of these organizations are going for the private sector first, you may not see a public incarnation of the technology right off the bat.
Anyone know of public domain implementations of WebDAV? I'm sure it's on the horizon if not already there...
I've been an AMD fan for quite a while, as anyone who reads articles at Anandtech tends to become. This has been more or less already stated, but... where is this going to lead without a strong media presence or public interest? I wonder how Sun and AMD plan to educate non-techies and convince them that they're cool.
I wish the both of them the best of luck, and one of these days, may good engineering prevail. I hope.
I am glad others are noting the difference between open standards and open source. Currently there is a significant segment of businesses working in the "commoditization market" for open standards. Here are some I can think of off the top of my head:
- Red Hat Linux - MacOS X (sort of, since it's based off BSD) - XML based content management systems - Microsoft Office 2003 (hehehehe... well they do support some XML output but it's not all that open either)
I believe that many organizations are still leery of implementing open source systems for fear that it's "too complicated" or there is no guarantee of service for them. Red Hat is certainly making good off of this very concept, and I'm sure many other companies are following suit.
Is this a good thing? Probably, at the very least in the short run. I'm glad there are some projects that remain pretty easy to use/install and are entirely free (i.e. Mozilla) but other technologies aren't quite there yet, and that's okay.
For example, a content management system is probably tough to make into a "simple" product. There are many open technologies to aid in building dynamic web sites but they take a significant amount of customization. Consulting companies or even 3rd party vendors of software pitch in by trying to make the process easier to take on.
(wow... this is my first post on slashdot. Hope this was ok reading for some...)
Slashdot Mirror
Better than the other way around. The Mambo / Joomla ( http://www.joomla.org/ ) split comes to mind, where Miro wanted to start a foundation but didn't include most of the core development team on that foundation. In that case, the foundation seemed to serve the purpose of bringing an open source product BACK in control of the company that set it free as OSS in the past.
I would be nervous to make such a blanket statement about a free (beta) tool. Also, you may want to consider other options since it sounds like you're trying to do live network monitoring and reporting, which is barely within the scope of what Ethereal was written for.
Have you taken a look at Nagios, for example? ( www.nagios.org )
I have a feeling that your tone of voice won't be received well here, despite all the work you've done to get Ethereal to work in your environment. Good luck to you.
You're right that this is a great way to go. Trust me, there are some CMS companies picking up on this. Due to the fact that many of these organizations are going for the private sector first, you may not see a public incarnation of the technology right off the bat.
Anyone know of public domain implementations of WebDAV? I'm sure it's on the horizon if not already there...
I wish the both of them the best of luck, and one of these days, may good engineering prevail. I hope.
I am glad others are noting the difference between open standards and open source. Currently there is a significant segment of businesses working in the "commoditization market" for open standards. Here are some I can think of off the top of my head:
- Red Hat Linux
- MacOS X (sort of, since it's based off BSD)
- XML based content management systems
- Microsoft Office 2003 (hehehehe... well they do support some XML output but it's not all that open either)
I believe that many organizations are still leery of implementing open source systems for fear that it's "too complicated" or there is no guarantee of service for them. Red Hat is certainly making good off of this very concept, and I'm sure many other companies are following suit.
Is this a good thing? Probably, at the very least in the short run. I'm glad there are some projects that remain pretty easy to use/install and are entirely free (i.e. Mozilla) but other technologies aren't quite there yet, and that's okay.
For example, a content management system is probably tough to make into a "simple" product. There are many open technologies to aid in building dynamic web sites but they take a significant amount of customization. Consulting companies or even 3rd party vendors of software pitch in by trying to make the process easier to take on.
(wow... this is my first post on slashdot. Hope this was ok reading for some...)