" People work on whatever they find interesting, whereas Microsoft has to work on whatever is profitable."
Erm. Microsoft has money as a motivator here. OSS has... interest. What happens when nobody is interested in writing the copy and paste function in an app? What about when nobody's interested in making sure bookmark importing does the right thing on a freshly reinstalled computer? What happens when nobody's interested in writing the code to support an old standard?
I'm not making your point for you, you're making mine.
" This complaint about "UI problems" with GIMP, or "the lack of integration" issue, is missing the point:"
Um, no they're not. Open Source Software is not targeted specifically to the "doesn't wanna join the proprietary parade." As such, you get a wide variety of people wanting to try it out. Some want OSS software because it makes them 'cool' on Slashdot. Some want Gimp in particular because it's free. Some want it because a bunch of people say it's better than Photoshop. Etc. The unfortunate situation is that the people complaining about lack of integration or UI problems aren't missing the point, they're missing the ability to use Gimp for what they thought they could use it for.
Don't be so dismissive of people's complaints. They're quite legitimate.
"In principle, everything Windows can do, we can do better, and I assume we will."
In a reasonable amount of time? I know I'm going to get flamed to hell and back for saying this, but this hasn't been well demonstrated. I mean, look how long it took FireFox to become a viable Internet Explorer competitor. MS would be up to IE 8 or 9 by that time if they were staying on top of it. It's not good ending up 'better' if MS is still two steps ahead.
OSS needs to become more than a free carbon-copy of popular products in order to beat companies like Microsoft.
"Yeah, and look how it killed the PS2. You have to feel sorry for Sony, with that being such a collossal flop and everything."
I can't say I understand the relevance to this compared to my original post. I said it was a downside, not a downfall. Boy I'm sick of these "They were successful, therefore every single move they made was 100% right." fanatical posts. Never mind that Sony has little reason for its users to stay loyal from generation to generation. No no no, we love our PS2 and don't want to hear a lick of criticism about it.
" As Microsoft itself has proven many time, you cannot compete with free. Do you see any hope for Microsoft?"
Ugh I hate this "cannot compete with free" myth. Microsoft could easily compete and win with Linux, by making Windows a better OS. Ease of Use + Availability of interesting software > Free. Don't believe me? Ask any Mac user, especially those that specifically picked it over a PC.
MS may or may not succeed against Linux, but it's not even close to being a forgone conclusion. Don't forget that your priorities may not necessarily reflect the priorities of the masses.
"On one hand, I think that the box's listing of an internet connection as a requirement is sufficient."
Erm. Not really. I've heard stories of people having to download 10s of megs of stuff to get going with the game. Not everybody has a connection that appropriately handles that.
(Note: Since I don't have the game first hand, corrections invited.)
"As long as Microsoft doesn't make any move to obfuscate windows 98, I'm in the clear since it doesn't bloat as much as newer OSes."
The 'bloat' in Microsoft's later OS's means far greater stability than you can possibly get in Windows 98. Sorta like calling anti-lock-breaks 'bloat'.
"The only way space travel or Martian habitation will have a role in our (further) evolution is when/if they become selective pressures for a chunk of the population, either to be overcome with further transhuman methods, or by generations of adaptive breeding."
Your assumption is based on the idea that you entirely understand evolution. Nobody reputable is claiming that, yet.
"Purpose isn't a gene, evolution doesn't set goals, and there is no 'end' other than extinction."
You don't think it's odd that shortly (err on the cosmic scale, anyway) after the clean living dinos went out, we came along with the intelligence to leave the planet, and that's all topped off by the dinos turning into a convenient energy source that would end up being a factor in our desire to expand?
"We know we weren't "evolved for the purpose" of anything. Evolution is a phenomenon that happens as a side effect of random change. It doesn't have a purpose."
Given the fact that we're the only species on this planet capable of having the discussion we are now, I have a real hard time believing that. I don't think our intelligence was a random flip of a bit. Indisputably, we are a very unsual species on this planet. It's possible that we're the result of some great big coincidence. But you'd have to wonder: Why hasn't more of these accidents happened?
"It's a virgin soil and it has to remain so : we have to much to learn about it instead of polluting it : When Mankind can prove it can live in equilibrium oni Earth, then it can spread elsewhere."
Who's to say that (evolution --or-- our maker, depending on your beliefs) didn't intend for us to do exactly that? I mean, think about it: While we're stuck on Earth, we are one nuclear war or asteroidal impact away from extinction. How do we know that we weren't (made --or-- evolved) for the purpose of having the intelligence we needed to eventually spread our civilization out to other planets? I mean, if we lived in equilibrium, why would we ever leave the planet? If we leave the planet, we could spread our influence out in a few directions, and possibly even exist to the end of time.
You've gotta think about the bigger picture, here. You cannot assume we have an infinite time available on Earth to do our basic living.
Slashdot Mirror
" People work on whatever they find interesting, whereas Microsoft has to work on whatever is profitable."
Erm. Microsoft has money as a motivator here. OSS has... interest. What happens when nobody is interested in writing the copy and paste function in an app? What about when nobody's interested in making sure bookmark importing does the right thing on a freshly reinstalled computer? What happens when nobody's interested in writing the code to support an old standard?
I'm not making your point for you, you're making mine.
"/* Copyright © 2000 Apple Computer, Inc. All rights reserved. */" /* Special thanks to Xerox */
"$49 software with an expiry date is software that could've lasted you for life for $49. People resent being treated that way."
*Cough*Valve*Cough*.
" This complaint about "UI problems" with GIMP, or "the lack of integration" issue, is missing the point:"
Um, no they're not. Open Source Software is not targeted specifically to the "doesn't wanna join the proprietary parade." As such, you get a wide variety of people wanting to try it out. Some want OSS software because it makes them 'cool' on Slashdot. Some want Gimp in particular because it's free. Some want it because a bunch of people say it's better than Photoshop. Etc. The unfortunate situation is that the people complaining about lack of integration or UI problems aren't missing the point, they're missing the ability to use Gimp for what they thought they could use it for.
Don't be so dismissive of people's complaints. They're quite legitimate.
"Maybe stop complaining and try to do something about it
Become part of the project."
Or, if it's really that important that you have a good imaging app, buy Photoshop.
Buying software is not a sin.
"In principle, everything Windows can do, we can do better, and I assume we will."
In a reasonable amount of time? I know I'm going to get flamed to hell and back for saying this, but this hasn't been well demonstrated. I mean, look how long it took FireFox to become a viable Internet Explorer competitor. MS would be up to IE 8 or 9 by that time if they were staying on top of it. It's not good ending up 'better' if MS is still two steps ahead.
OSS needs to become more than a free carbon-copy of popular products in order to beat companies like Microsoft.
"Yeah, and look how it killed the PS2. You have to feel sorry for Sony, with that being such a collossal flop and everything."
I can't say I understand the relevance to this compared to my original post. I said it was a downside, not a downfall. Boy I'm sick of these "They were successful, therefore every single move they made was 100% right." fanatical posts. Never mind that Sony has little reason for its users to stay loyal from generation to generation. No no no, we love our PS2 and don't want to hear a lick of criticism about it.
" As Microsoft itself has proven many time, you cannot compete with free. Do you see any hope for Microsoft?"
Ugh I hate this "cannot compete with free" myth. Microsoft could easily compete and win with Linux, by making Windows a better OS. Ease of Use + Availability of interesting software > Free. Don't believe me? Ask any Mac user, especially those that specifically picked it over a PC.
MS may or may not succeed against Linux, but it's not even close to being a forgone conclusion. Don't forget that your priorities may not necessarily reflect the priorities of the masses.
"Don't new systems require a killer app at launch?"
That's the big downside to having a company that doesn't make its own games making the system.
"This is fascinating ... why, exactly?"
Because Google's entering the blog space. With their "Do no Evil" policy, you'd think that'd mean they accept the good with the bad.
"On one hand, I think that the box's listing of an internet connection as a requirement is sufficient."
Erm. Not really. I've heard stories of people having to download 10s of megs of stuff to get going with the game. Not everybody has a connection that appropriately handles that.
(Note: Since I don't have the game first hand, corrections invited.)
" If a Star Trek show is in such a bad state that it needs to rely on fan charity to survive... it isn't worth keeping."
Tell that to Farscape or Futurama Fans.
Frankly, if enough fans band enough money together to get it back on the air, then who are you to judge whether it's worth keeping or not?
"And donate the money to Africa or asia. They need the money much more!"
Instead of posting on Slashdot, you should be reading to children!!!!!!!!!! What is wrong with your messed up priorities!?!?!
"Older hardware not as good as newer hardware! Crowds shocked!"
Shocked? I got my ass chewed here once because I said the GC was more powerful than a PS2.
"Do you say "If there was ever a single Dt-Dt reaction, it's a star", or do we require continuous reactions?"
*Tap Tap* I think my babel fish is getting old.
"As long as Microsoft doesn't make any move to obfuscate windows 98, I'm in the clear since it doesn't bloat as much as newer OSes."
The 'bloat' in Microsoft's later OS's means far greater stability than you can possibly get in Windows 98. Sorta like calling anti-lock-breaks 'bloat'.
"nobody cares about optimizing code anymore."
On top of that, some of us like having anti-aliased fonts or visual feedback that gives me visual cues as to what my computer is doing.
"My girlfriend has a cycle every month."
Heat?
"The only way space travel or Martian habitation will have a role in our (further) evolution is when/if they become selective pressures for a chunk of the population, either to be overcome with further transhuman methods, or by generations of adaptive breeding."
Your assumption is based on the idea that you entirely understand evolution. Nobody reputable is claiming that, yet.
"Purpose isn't a gene, evolution doesn't set goals, and there is no 'end' other than extinction."
You don't think it's odd that shortly (err on the cosmic scale, anyway) after the clean living dinos went out, we came along with the intelligence to leave the planet, and that's all topped off by the dinos turning into a convenient energy source that would end up being a factor in our desire to expand?
... nearly all Game System names sound stupid at first. PlayStation, DreamCast, XBOX, GameBoy, 3DO (D'oh! D'oh! D'oh!)...
"We know we weren't "evolved for the purpose" of anything. Evolution is a phenomenon that happens as a side effect of random change. It doesn't have a purpose."
Given the fact that we're the only species on this planet capable of having the discussion we are now, I have a real hard time believing that. I don't think our intelligence was a random flip of a bit. Indisputably, we are a very unsual species on this planet. It's possible that we're the result of some great big coincidence. But you'd have to wonder: Why hasn't more of these accidents happened?
"We'd spread because we'd be curious about what else is out there.
Not because we ran out of oil."
Which do you really think is more likely to happen? If we did it out of curiosity without a real need to do it, would we do it.
Right.
"It's a virgin soil and it has to remain so : we have to much to learn about it instead of polluting it : When Mankind can prove it can live in equilibrium oni Earth, then it can spread elsewhere."
Who's to say that (evolution --or-- our maker, depending on your beliefs) didn't intend for us to do exactly that? I mean, think about it: While we're stuck on Earth, we are one nuclear war or asteroidal impact away from extinction. How do we know that we weren't (made --or-- evolved) for the purpose of having the intelligence we needed to eventually spread our civilization out to other planets? I mean, if we lived in equilibrium, why would we ever leave the planet? If we leave the planet, we could spread our influence out in a few directions, and possibly even exist to the end of time.
You've gotta think about the bigger picture, here. You cannot assume we have an infinite time available on Earth to do our basic living.
"Are phishers going to bother trying to use this exploit if it works on less than 10% of their potential victims?"
Why not? Alternative browsers are picking up steam. How many FireFox users also have a PayPal account?
"This is just more FUD people"
Ah, I get it. When it's about FireFox, it's FUD. When it's about Microsoft, it's just another reason to switch. Am I getting warm?