The prima donna syndrome has ruined many a software project and product. If we could harness the power of all the egos in the software development world they could meet the world's energy demands in perpetuity. The amount of energy we constantly pour into coaxing people into cooperative behaviors seems like an inefficient waste of time. And yet the problem persists.
You can't coax these massive egos; you must shove foot up their ass.
You get them to cooperate by requiring that all discussions be done in public, that all decisions be made in public; that all issues be solved in public; that nothing is decided behind closed doors. Then the system will work..
Then the prima donnas can fork or cooperate. And life goes on.
That's why I work with MacOS-X now.. because I've got tired to wait KDE/GNOME/whatever never truly invent but slowly trying to catch up and getting slower and slower to implement what's state-of-the-art
That's what you get with a developer-driven model because they only see from the code up and not the user down. They implement a better wheel rather than create a new mode of transportation. They re-arrange deck chairs on the Titanic.
They do create new things, but those things are rarely of practical use to users. (Tabs on top, anyone?)
The question really is why does Apple force a ToS that prohibit the use of GPL code.
Because they are free to choose whatever ToS they desire for whatever reason they desire. It's their app store, their platform and their customers voting with their wallets.
The second question is if the benefit of GPL and other free code is strong enough to make these closed platforms uncompetative. In some cases it will be better to simply use the GPL code and not realase on platforms that don't allow GPL code.
No. The ToS presents an artificial barrier that favors apps that abide by their ToS. Since there is a profit incentive to be a successful app and no profit incentive to be a ideologically pure app, I suspect that the ToS-compliant apps and their platforms will survive nicely (lot's of people don't care about FOSS ideology) and GPL apps will never be allowed to compete in those official app stores.
The big story is that many in leadership positions are asshats? And these egocentric farts are acting like a bunch of bitchy little girls? And their constant need for self-aggrandizement has held back the development of FOSS in general (and GNOME and KDE in particular)?
Wow.
That's not news.
To summarize Neary's rant for the non-GNOME-KDE-Canonical-oriented: 1. the leadership is not well organized 2. the leadership does not communicate well 3. the leadership does not cooperate well
And Neary's solution? 1. bring all discussion into the open (good) 2. eliminate the riff-raff amateurs (elitist) 3. anoint the leadership through invitation-only (even more so) 4. coerce the asshats into behaving and cooperating with a code of conduct (delusional)
Really? And he expects success with a group consisting in large part of infantile prima donnas?
The current model works well enough with all those personalities involved. It's just messy and inefficient and unprofitable and not likely to lead to world domination. But it's a world where anybody can make a copy of the football and take it home with them and Neary's plan doesn't accommodate that. It attempts to offer the imprimatur of what a corporate world needs, to marginalize the 'amateurs' and consolidate power in a select few all at the expense of the chaos that makes FOSS a living thing.
Continuing his role as shill and apologist for Microsoft, Miguel once again misdirects the crticism and blame on the FOSS community.
Having video and audio systems that rarely break is a function of having the specs of the hardware to write stable drivers. This is not the fault of the FOSS community who have done great work in reverse-engineering many hardware specs without manufacturer support.
So, can someone tell me why I should go with IE9 over Firefox, especially when I don't even have that choice unless I shell out for an OS upgrade?
They won't tell you that because they can't, at least not with a straight face.
TFA concludes that while FF has better javascriopt performance and IE has better hardware acceleration, they are essentially equal for the average user.
Therefore, choose the one from the developer who accommodates you the best and offers you the most flexibility and consistency regardless of OS choice. In most cases, I suspect that will be Firefox.
Both browsers are fast JavaScript browsers and the differences are unlikely to be noticed in average browsing today.
Firefox 4 and IE9 are substantially upgraded browsers when compared to their predecessors and show few weaknesses in any benchmark.
It is obvious that Firefox has a great JavaScript engine.
IE9s hardware acceleration engine is the one to beat.
Firefox's only real competition is Chrome for the standpont of what the author calls and unexplained "unique feature set" which IE9 appears to lack altogether.
So it's a draw on performance. No evaluation was done from the very important security standpoint. The most striking difference not commented upon but highlighted by the results is the poor performance of the Intel graphics chipset in both browsers.
The reason they took minimize/maximise out is that they can't fix their implementation of it. They must be remembering the Open File dialog debacle that plauged them for years. Why do they code themselves into these corners?
If FOSS is all about providing choice to the user, GNOME has long ago chosen to focus on restricting and removing choice from the user. I have nothing against a consistent UI, but GNOME goes too far. I recall that a lot of GNOME devs work for RedHat who, corporately, wanted a minimalistic, easly locked-down desktop for corporate use, Instead of allowing an admin to lock or remove features, they just gutted them from the GNOME desktop (and from KDE as well) and justified it as some glorious quest for 'simplicity'.
If I want complicated and highly configurable , I'll use KDE, If I want simple but flexible, it's IceWM. If I want simple with a little glitz, it's LXDE.
So, about 50% of the IE6 users worldwide are chinese... Actually, the top 10 countries with the highest IE6 usage are non-english... and they didn't think of approaching IE6-users in their own language? *sigh*
What they really need is a free upgrade path from the pirated versions of Windows.
Opera is an application for accessing adult things on the Internet like cogent arguments and reasoned thoughts. Not the usual Mac-versus-PC drivel that you Apple fanbois enjoy. Get off my lawn.
(Written on a Mac so I could be uber-snarky and cool.)
When I got divorced, my ex asked me to build her a computer. I obliged, and as a parting shot, told her I installed the latest-greatest operating system from Microsoft... hope you enjoyed ME, dear.
Slashdot Mirror
The prima donna syndrome has ruined many a software project and product. If we could harness the power of all the egos in the software development world they could meet the world's energy demands in perpetuity. The amount of energy we constantly pour into coaxing people into cooperative behaviors seems like an inefficient waste of time. And yet the problem persists.
You can't coax these massive egos; you must shove foot up their ass.
You get them to cooperate by requiring that all discussions be done in public, that all decisions be made in public; that all issues be solved in public; that nothing is decided behind closed doors. Then the system will work..
Then the prima donnas can fork or cooperate. And life goes on.
That's why I work with MacOS-X now .. because I've got tired to wait KDE/GNOME/whatever never truly invent but slowly trying to catch up and getting slower and slower to implement what's state-of-the-art
That's what you get with a developer-driven model because they only see from the code up and not the user down. They implement a better wheel rather than create a new mode of transportation. They re-arrange deck chairs on the Titanic.
They do create new things, but those things are rarely of practical use to users. (Tabs on top, anyone?)
The question really is why does Apple force a ToS that prohibit the use of GPL code.
Because they are free to choose whatever ToS they desire for whatever reason they desire. It's their app store, their platform and their customers voting with their wallets.
The second question is if the benefit of GPL and other free code is strong enough to make these closed platforms uncompetative.
In some cases it will be better to simply use the GPL code and not realase on platforms that don't allow GPL code.
No. The ToS presents an artificial barrier that favors apps that abide by their ToS. Since there is a profit incentive to be a successful app and no profit incentive to be a ideologically pure app, I suspect that the ToS-compliant apps and their platforms will survive nicely (lot's of people don't care about FOSS ideology) and GPL apps will never be allowed to compete in those official app stores.
The big story is that many in leadership positions are asshats? And these egocentric farts are acting like a bunch of bitchy little girls? And their constant need for self-aggrandizement has held back the development of FOSS in general (and GNOME and KDE in particular)?
Wow.
That's not news.
To summarize Neary's rant for the non-GNOME-KDE-Canonical-oriented:
1. the leadership is not well organized
2. the leadership does not communicate well
3. the leadership does not cooperate well
And Neary's solution?
1. bring all discussion into the open (good)
2. eliminate the riff-raff amateurs (elitist)
3. anoint the leadership through invitation-only (even more so)
4. coerce the asshats into behaving and cooperating with a code of conduct (delusional)
Really? And he expects success with a group consisting in large part of infantile prima donnas?
The current model works well enough with all those personalities involved. It's just messy and inefficient and unprofitable and not likely to lead to world domination. But it's a world where anybody can make a copy of the football and take it home with them and Neary's plan doesn't accommodate that. It attempts to offer the imprimatur of what a corporate world needs, to marginalize the 'amateurs' and consolidate power in a select few all at the expense of the chaos that makes FOSS a living thing.
Continuing his role as shill and apologist for Microsoft, Miguel once again misdirects the crticism and blame on the FOSS community.
Having video and audio systems that rarely break is a function of having the specs of the hardware to write stable drivers. This is not the fault of the FOSS community who have done great work in reverse-engineering many hardware specs without manufacturer support.
Miguel is wrong. Again.
you fools gave your houses to the right wing party. politicians anywhere around the world, always support corporations over people. .
FTFY
Yet again another worthless Slashdot article. I can read FARk for this stuff.
All that aside, it's the Democrat party, people. Not the Democratic party.
That's what these pedants should be required to teach.
they might get some sex.
Just like video gamers.
No, this is Wikipedia process-wankery and why they're losing editors in droves.
This move to re-move is simply political trolling and biatchy bumfuggery on the part of some over-active asshat.
Whores.
So, can someone tell me why I should go with IE9 over Firefox, especially when I don't even have that choice unless I shell out for an OS upgrade?
They won't tell you that because they can't, at least not with a straight face.
TFA concludes that while FF has better javascriopt performance and IE has better hardware acceleration, they are essentially equal for the average user.
Therefore, choose the one from the developer who accommodates you the best and offers you the most flexibility and consistency regardless of OS choice. In most cases, I suspect that will be Firefox.
Paraphrased somewhat with an additional comment.
Both browsers are fast JavaScript browsers and the differences are unlikely to be noticed in average browsing today.
Firefox 4 and IE9 are substantially upgraded browsers when compared to their predecessors and show few weaknesses in any benchmark.
It is obvious that Firefox has a great JavaScript engine.
IE9s hardware acceleration engine is the one to beat.
Firefox's only real competition is Chrome for the standpont of what the author calls and unexplained "unique feature set" which IE9 appears to lack altogether.
So it's a draw on performance. No evaluation was done from the very important security standpoint. The most striking difference not commented upon but highlighted by the results is the poor performance of the Intel graphics chipset in both browsers.
I tried installing IE9, but it refuses to install and run. Firefox4 installs and runs with no problem.
I using kernel 2.6.36.2, so that can't be the problem.
That means it's Firefox for me. And IE9 looked so cool. 8(
Am I allowed to mark something as "Not like"???!?!??!?!
Mark it as "F-ing Hate".
We need more choices.
Or not.
(shrug)
I'm thinking maybe I need to change some of my "bio" information to a few lies..... like born in 1888, or living in Shang-ri-la
Include something about goats .. .
So is it possible to hack this code to allow us to show a FB page on our own site in an iframe? That's something FB prohibits now.
Somewhere a million Microsoft employees are smiling.
Does that include sellout gnomista Miguel de Icaza?
The reason they took minimize/maximise out is that they can't fix their implementation of it. They must be remembering the Open File dialog debacle that plauged them for years. Why do they code themselves into these corners?
If FOSS is all about providing choice to the user, GNOME has long ago chosen to focus on restricting and removing choice from the user. I have nothing against a consistent UI, but GNOME goes too far. I recall that a lot of GNOME devs work for RedHat who, corporately, wanted a minimalistic, easly locked-down desktop for corporate use, Instead of allowing an admin to lock or remove features, they just gutted them from the GNOME desktop (and from KDE as well) and justified it as some glorious quest for 'simplicity'.
If I want complicated and highly configurable , I'll use KDE, If I want simple but flexible, it's IceWM. If I want simple with a little glitz, it's LXDE.
But never GNOME.
So, about 50% of the IE6 users worldwide are chinese... Actually, the top 10 countries with the highest IE6 usage are non-english... and they didn't think of approaching IE6-users in their own language? *sigh*
What they really need is a free upgrade path from the pirated versions of Windows.
...just make that site best viewed in IE6?
That'll do the trick.
FTFY
Now what will the Libyan army do for the weekend? They have to work out that aggression somehow . . .
And it makes it easier to put in code that detects if it's an oracle repackage and spew out "ORACLE SUCKS" on the text console and in the logs.
So it's not done until Oracle won't run?
Sounds familiar.
I'm 12 and what is this?
Opera is an application for accessing adult things on the Internet like cogent arguments and reasoned thoughts. Not the usual Mac-versus-PC drivel that you Apple fanbois enjoy. Get off my lawn.
(Written on a Mac so I could be uber-snarky and cool.)
Here's the highest rated comment:
When I got divorced, my ex asked me to build her a computer. I obliged, and as a parting shot, told her I installed the latest-greatest operating system from Microsoft... hope you enjoyed ME, dear.
He's a mean SOB, he is.
A guarantee of no sex with the ex.