By the time Linux had less than 20 developers, it was much less functional than Hurd today.
Maybe you should revise some of the history you know. Linux was created as an academical project, useless at the real world. The Hurd was created as the last step of a huge sucessfull project of creating a free Unix, but was hitted by politics and, later, lack of resources.
Linus is saying some dumb things since the begining if the BitKeeper incident. Now, he is focused on GPLv3 that he is arguing against since even before he know what is said.
If he had some constructive complains, he could have give then while the licence was being created. If you don't remember, that was a bigger than a year interval when lots of people around the world were giving constructive criticism about the GPLv3, and RMS was accepting most of it. But at that time, Linus was spreading some baseless flames.
Well, until now, there is no questionable code donated to Linux by IBM. But that isn't a reason to avoid suing, is it? Also, please, take a look at the diference beteween patents and copyrights.
Now, that code was created on a partneship between IBM and Microsoft, so, both of them probably have the rights of it. Diferently from Microsoft's, FOSS never had a big incident of "misplaced" code or patent violation, so we have no reason not to trust our partners.
"That link brought me to the conclusion that randomness doesn't exist as much as I thought."
There is a lot of randomness at quantum mechanics. Of course, we can't be sure it is really random, but everybody that tried a non-random explanation of it so far failed.
You can restore the top few inches of soil (at quite a hight cost). But any storm will cary it away if the lower land is still impermeabilized. And by "cary it away" I just mean it, togheter with all your crop.
Also, I'd like to know what you can plant on a foot of soil. Not corn or soybeans, or any kind of fruit... Maybe rice and some low grade pastures.
Except that you won't be able to grow any crop where there was a building for some decades. Economy doesn't change the laws of nature, and no crop grows on land that used to be paved.
And for the previous poster that mentioned Amazon, good luch growing anything there. There is a reason that florest wasn't chopped down before the XX century, and it wasn't because of ecologic movements.
Lets make it clear that it is a corruption perception index. Not an actual corruption index. An exemple of the difference is that fighting corruption usualy increases the index at short time.
Also, lets make it clear that the index isn't that precise, and its data isn't that reliable. Transparency International used to have a disclaimer at their FAQ that basicaly said that, unless you completely comprehend the methodology, if you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane. Comparations between countries aren't accurate, as aren't comparations of different years at the same country. Basicaly, the average Joe should stay away from the data.
For anybody pround of being able to write complex specs, take a lesson from Microsoft. IBM bought printed copies of the ODF and OOXML specs to the Hungary meeting. One of the presents toke a picture. Can you guess with pile is the OOXML spec?
"Yeah, but I remember this excitement last year... and the year before that. In the last few years, I've seen tremendous improvements in the ease-of-use of Linux, and yet there has been no corresponding increase in the number of users:"
I remember it differently. I don't remember business jumping at the hype, nor that homogeneous feeling. It seemed just restricted into a few people (altough I've recently being one of them).
And it is quite likely that a migration into Linux will be fast if it ever happen. The Microsoft monopoly is self sustaining, that is what makes it hard to destroy. Linux has already eroded near all of its sustaining bases, the monopoly now relyies almost only on itself.
Personaly, I have simply no prevision to Linux on 2008 (I had on 2007). Next year is looking fundamentaly different from today on a way I've never saw before, I simply can't understand it.
"The only thing I can figure is that the FOSSies are seeking to get PC manufacturers to indoctrinate new FOSSies, who will not know enough about computers to know they aren't getting Windows."
Or, more likely, they don't like to serve Microsoft and want to stop paying taxes to it.
Well, at my home computer, Linux still uses less than 2MB of memory... You are comparing the kernel memory usage right?
If not, then there is part of your answer, now we have GUIs and they suck a lot of power. By 1997 most PCs were unable to run X on any usable way. They were too slow and required custom low level optimizations that ended up at the API of the systems that implemented them. One need only to take a look at win32 API to see how bad it was. That made systems unstable and, sometimes, prone to viroses (with the help of some other factors).
A few years ago, PCs started to be good enough to, first run a bare X, then run some heavy widgets above it, then run entire desktop environments, and then to add effects to those desktop environments. That is where all the resources are going on sane systems. Anyway, we now seem to have enough resources to run a GUI, and usage is growing very slow nowadays.
Alternatively, you have Windows Vista. But that is just insane;)
"Yes of course, one could do that by hand, but that isn't necessarily the same, every once and a while there is a genuine bug in the compiler or something isn't being done the way that it should be, and paper tracing isn't going to find that."
If one can't find it by paper tracing, I really doubt he will do with a debugger. A person that doesn't compreend the code well enough to paper trace it will also not know what to look on the debuger.
Despite that, debuggers are really a time savers, mostly because it lets you refine your traces without the need of inserting statements and recompiling every time. It also saves the shame of not locating all the debugging statements (altough there are other ways of avoiding it).
Debuggers are also very nice for reverse engeneering. But I think they should be used after most of the work is done. First, you read documentation and see the program running (black box), then you find the main functions and read them, then you use tools to create the needed diagrams, only then, if still needed, you launch the debugger.
"But, if all they do is office, and you've already got them using Openoffice..."
I'm talking about 4 thousand people... Near all of them use Office and Outlook, but there is a myriad of programs also used by them. Some developed in-house, some of them brought, and very probably some that they shouldn't have.
Also, they don't run Open Office. There was an experiment on migrating them, but it was considered a failure and we still use MS Office. Our focus now is more intense on servers.
Maybe I have a too pessimist view of migration... I'm helping migrate a 4K people (and other 4K outsourced) government agency into FOSS and it is, well, hard. Maybe that should be expected, since no one can spell "inertia" as the Governemnt:)
I don't think on migrating desktops to Linux yet, but we (not me personaly) have some experience on migrating people into Open Office and it was bad. I never said people can't adapt, they can and quite easily, but they won't. At least not until forced to do so, and good luck forcing managers unrelated to you to do anything... Support from the highter managers also don't help, since they have more important problem to solve (and they do have, it isn't just an excuse).
Replacing Outlook is another can of worms (but I'd love to open it). Most people first contact with calendar software is trought Outlook, and they will be suspicious of anything else you show them (and I simply can't go around showing software for people, it's too much software and too much people). To replace Outlook I need a tool that will run on Windows, is more functional then Outlook is pretty (more important than most would assume) and easy to use. I'm also waitting for the day that KDE will be released on Windows, Kpin (the entire suite) is a nice replacement, and since KDE has a lot of nice tools, it will probably be very easy to get people hooked (and they still can run all the old programs). Maybe I'll be even able to change them directly into KOffice:)
Slashdot Mirror
By the time Linux had less than 20 developers, it was much less functional than Hurd today.
Maybe you should revise some of the history you know. Linux was created as an academical project, useless at the real world. The Hurd was created as the last step of a huge sucessfull project of creating a free Unix, but was hitted by politics and, later, lack of resources.
Linus is saying some dumb things since the begining if the BitKeeper incident. Now, he is focused on GPLv3 that he is arguing against since even before he know what is said.
If he had some constructive complains, he could have give then while the licence was being created. If you don't remember, that was a bigger than a year interval when lots of people around the world were giving constructive criticism about the GPLv3, and RMS was accepting most of it. But at that time, Linus was spreading some baseless flames.
The WGA server obviously runs Linux...
Looks like extorsion, not thieft.
But what would I know? I don't have even one bilion dollars...
Nice, Microsoft making people really pay for Windows is one of the best things that can happen to Linux.
Well, until now, there is no questionable code donated to Linux by IBM. But that isn't a reason to avoid suing, is it? Also, please, take a look at the diference beteween patents and copyrights.
Now, that code was created on a partneship between IBM and Microsoft, so, both of them probably have the rights of it. Diferently from Microsoft's, FOSS never had a big incident of "misplaced" code or patent violation, so we have no reason not to trust our partners.
There is a lot of randomness at quantum mechanics. Of course, we can't be sure it is really random, but everybody that tried a non-random explanation of it so far failed.
Funny, our Congress has just proposed such law here at Brazil. It's for our safety.
The press is going mad on that (thanks God we still have a press, I was doubting before that) and manufacturers don't like the proposal at all.
Near all VNC programs are GPL. There are some that are closed source, but I've never saw any BSD one (and I researched it a lot).
No, but I do realize you also have intelectual property laws there. Must have took a long time to develop that faster than light communication system.
You can restore the top few inches of soil (at quite a hight cost). But any storm will cary it away if the lower land is still impermeabilized. And by "cary it away" I just mean it, togheter with all your crop.
Also, I'd like to know what you can plant on a foot of soil. Not corn or soybeans, or any kind of fruit... Maybe rice and some low grade pastures.
Yeah, and reducing liabilities does not increase wealth... Fine.
Except that you won't be able to grow any crop where there was a building for some decades. Economy doesn't change the laws of nature, and no crop grows on land that used to be paved.
And for the previous poster that mentioned Amazon, good luch growing anything there. There is a reason that florest wasn't chopped down before the XX century, and it wasn't because of ecologic movements.
"Yes, but they don't create wealth."
If you think doctors don't create wealth, you should stop seeing them...
Lets make it clear that it is a corruption perception index. Not an actual corruption index. An exemple of the difference is that fighting corruption usualy increases the index at short time.
Also, lets make it clear that the index isn't that precise, and its data isn't that reliable. Transparency International used to have a disclaimer at their FAQ that basicaly said that, unless you completely comprehend the methodology, if you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane. Comparations between countries aren't accurate, as aren't comparations of different years at the same country. Basicaly, the average Joe should stay away from the data.
For anybody pround of being able to write complex specs, take a lesson from Microsoft. IBM bought printed copies of the ODF and OOXML specs to the Hungary meeting. One of the presents toke a picture. Can you guess with pile is the OOXML spec?
I use dirt cheap computers, and not top line ones.
Changed atitude since dirt cheap computers started running everything I needed (somewhen around 2003).
I remember it differently. I don't remember business jumping at the hype, nor that homogeneous feeling. It seemed just restricted into a few people (altough I've recently being one of them).
And it is quite likely that a migration into Linux will be fast if it ever happen. The Microsoft monopoly is self sustaining, that is what makes it hard to destroy. Linux has already eroded near all of its sustaining bases, the monopoly now relyies almost only on itself.
Personaly, I have simply no prevision to Linux on 2008 (I had on 2007). Next year is looking fundamentaly different from today on a way I've never saw before, I simply can't understand it.
Or, more likely, they don't like to serve Microsoft and want to stop paying taxes to it.
Well, at my home computer, Linux still uses less than 2MB of memory... You are comparing the kernel memory usage right?
If not, then there is part of your answer, now we have GUIs and they suck a lot of power. By 1997 most PCs were unable to run X on any usable way. They were too slow and required custom low level optimizations that ended up at the API of the systems that implemented them. One need only to take a look at win32 API to see how bad it was. That made systems unstable and, sometimes, prone to viroses (with the help of some other factors).
A few years ago, PCs started to be good enough to, first run a bare X, then run some heavy widgets above it, then run entire desktop environments, and then to add effects to those desktop environments. That is where all the resources are going on sane systems. Anyway, we now seem to have enough resources to run a GUI, and usage is growing very slow nowadays.
Alternatively, you have Windows Vista. But that is just insane ;)
If one can't find it by paper tracing, I really doubt he will do with a debugger. A person that doesn't compreend the code well enough to paper trace it will also not know what to look on the debuger.
Despite that, debuggers are really a time savers, mostly because it lets you refine your traces without the need of inserting statements and recompiling every time. It also saves the shame of not locating all the debugging statements (altough there are other ways of avoiding it).
Debuggers are also very nice for reverse engeneering. But I think they should be used after most of the work is done. First, you read documentation and see the program running (black box), then you find the main functions and read them, then you use tools to create the needed diagrams, only then, if still needed, you launch the debugger.
One can dream, right? It would be more correct as "programs should be able to handle that", although they won't.
I'm talking about 4 thousand people... Near all of them use Office and Outlook, but there is a myriad of programs also used by them. Some developed in-house, some of them brought, and very probably some that they shouldn't have.
Also, they don't run Open Office. There was an experiment on migrating them, but it was considered a failure and we still use MS Office. Our focus now is more intense on servers.
Maybe I have a too pessimist view of migration... I'm helping migrate a 4K people (and other 4K outsourced) government agency into FOSS and it is, well, hard. Maybe that should be expected, since no one can spell "inertia" as the Governemnt :)
I don't think on migrating desktops to Linux yet, but we (not me personaly) have some experience on migrating people into Open Office and it was bad. I never said people can't adapt, they can and quite easily, but they won't. At least not until forced to do so, and good luck forcing managers unrelated to you to do anything... Support from the highter managers also don't help, since they have more important problem to solve (and they do have, it isn't just an excuse).
Replacing Outlook is another can of worms (but I'd love to open it). Most people first contact with calendar software is trought Outlook, and they will be suspicious of anything else you show them (and I simply can't go around showing software for people, it's too much software and too much people). To replace Outlook I need a tool that will run on Windows, is more functional then Outlook is pretty (more important than most would assume) and easy to use. I'm also waitting for the day that KDE will be released on Windows, Kpin (the entire suite) is a nice replacement, and since KDE has a lot of nice tools, it will probably be very easy to get people hooked (and they still can run all the old programs). Maybe I'll be even able to change them directly into KOffice :)
As always, Groklaw comes to the rescue.
I also recommend reading the top page for info what is happening at other countries.