The present DLL system can handle this sort of thing, they just failed to use it properly - as did all the vendors who use DLLs. Versioning information is available on each DLL already, and utilizing the versioning information would be a matter of a few more light calls. Further logistics could have been a folder with the name of the DLL, and names of files within being the versions.
Microsoft did not standardize this well.
If I told you I had a car every day, and I told you I was going to drive it in a few years, would you get excited? I certainly hope not.
I wonder if there were marked similarities in the bugs in Proprietary code compared?
Were these similarities found in FOSS code that was looked at, or did the dendritic peer review process handle that to some degree?
Were bugs found in the proprietary code that were already (verifiably) marked as things to be fixed, and if so, what was the average lag time (Bug turn over)? Do these companies keep track of their bug turn over periods, and what is the empirical comparison with that of FOSS?
Was there pro-active debugging done in the FOSS code that were results of known bugs in the proprietary code base, and if so, were these bugs addressed in the proprietary code?
Was there a verifiable process for maintenance in the proprietary companies that had changed in the 3-6 months prior to the testing?
I think that will do for now. Plenty more where that came from.:)
Agreed, Prof. Moglen appears quite rational. If people get past the quirks of many of the supposed 'zealots', they may find that the arguments are also quite rational.
Sometimes we look at the messenger instead of the message.
That said, there are some eccentricities that we attribute to 'zealots', yet these eccentricities are what created the Free Software movement... without them, who knows where we would be.
I wouldn't want the zealots in a sound-proof box, myself. Without people making some noise, maybe we would not discuss things we should discuss.
I think the best answer is that Prof. Moglen keep doing what he is doing. Why compare him to others? He stands well enough on his own.
Agreed. "Moore's Law" is a misnomer; it's "Moore's Observation".
Thank you for saying it first.
We all know that this 'Law' is very finite, and it's probability of being relevant every year decreases.
"I develop commercial closed-source software. I'd absolutely love it if some sugar daddy came up to me and said, keep doing what you're doing and I'll keep paying you what you're getting paid, except we're making the code open source. "
I think you may be afraid of not getting paid what you are getting paid, and that is reasonable.
However, you may not be getting paid what you were getting paid a few years ago.;)
Economics play a role, I agree, but I think economics transcends one person's bank account.
If Bill wishes to get philosophical, that's OK with me (he seems obsessed with 'phil' words, like 'philanthropy' and such. Maybe he's reading the dictionary again)
But - he is right in a way - there is a sociologic problem with not reporting bugs. And Microsoft and other lareg proprietary software companies helped create it, though I doubt that they consciously meant to do it. I offer, humorously, that they are not *that* smart.
The sociologic issue is not characteristic of a Luddite. It's characteristic of a user who feels no power over what they supposedly own - about having no power to impress people that something needs to be fixed.
Why is this? I think it's all that beaurecracy and red tape involved to simply report a bug. They feel unimportant, though the bug may be very pressing for them.
Let's be frank. When a Microsoft product crashes, it's not the product that is on people's minds as much as the data they lose. It's easier for people to say "Dumb Microsoft did it again" than to call the hotline, and BG is right about that.
But Microsoft isn't addressing the problem. Honestly, I don't think they can. That the people at Microsoft, with all their shrewd business acumen and 'technological wizardy' (heh) cannot support their own products is... well, it's damn funny.
Enter Free Software...
Thank GNU!
Slashdot Mirror
Man, I forgot that part about the COM protocol, thanks!
The present DLL system can handle this sort of thing, they just failed to use it properly - as did all the vendors who use DLLs. Versioning information is available on each DLL already, and utilizing the versioning information would be a matter of a few more light calls. Further logistics could have been a folder with the name of the DLL, and names of files within being the versions.
Microsoft did not standardize this well.
If I told you I had a car every day, and I told you I was going to drive it in a few years, would you get excited? I certainly hope not.
I wonder if there were marked similarities in the bugs in Proprietary code compared?
Were these similarities found in FOSS code that was looked at, or did the dendritic peer review process handle that to some degree?
Were bugs found in the proprietary code that were already (verifiably) marked as things to be fixed, and if so, what was the average lag time (Bug turn over)? Do these companies keep track of their bug turn over periods, and what is the empirical comparison with that of FOSS?
Was there pro-active debugging done in the FOSS code that were results of known bugs in the proprietary code base, and if so, were these bugs addressed in the proprietary code?
Was there a verifiable process for maintenance in the proprietary companies that had changed in the 3-6 months prior to the testing?
I think that will do for now. Plenty more where that came from. :)
TaranLife support?
Bill Gates?
When is the next 'new improved' Gates due for release?
Perl isn't a script language... it *can* be a script language, but it isn't defined as one. You can go native if you wish.
Agreed, Prof. Moglen appears quite rational. If people get past the quirks of many of the supposed 'zealots', they may find that the arguments are also quite rational. Sometimes we look at the messenger instead of the message. That said, there are some eccentricities that we attribute to 'zealots', yet these eccentricities are what created the Free Software movement... without them, who knows where we would be. I wouldn't want the zealots in a sound-proof box, myself. Without people making some noise, maybe we would not discuss things we should discuss. I think the best answer is that Prof. Moglen keep doing what he is doing. Why compare him to others? He stands well enough on his own.
Agreed. "Moore's Law" is a misnomer; it's "Moore's Observation". Thank you for saying it first. We all know that this 'Law' is very finite, and it's probability of being relevant every year decreases.
"I develop commercial closed-source software. I'd absolutely love it if some sugar daddy came up to me and said, keep doing what you're doing and I'll keep paying you what you're getting paid, except we're making the code open source. " I think you may be afraid of not getting paid what you are getting paid, and that is reasonable. However, you may not be getting paid what you were getting paid a few years ago. ;)
Economics play a role, I agree, but I think economics transcends one person's bank account.
If Bill wishes to get philosophical, that's OK with me (he seems obsessed with 'phil' words, like 'philanthropy' and such. Maybe he's reading the dictionary again) But - he is right in a way - there is a sociologic problem with not reporting bugs. And Microsoft and other lareg proprietary software companies helped create it, though I doubt that they consciously meant to do it. I offer, humorously, that they are not *that* smart. The sociologic issue is not characteristic of a Luddite. It's characteristic of a user who feels no power over what they supposedly own - about having no power to impress people that something needs to be fixed. Why is this? I think it's all that beaurecracy and red tape involved to simply report a bug. They feel unimportant, though the bug may be very pressing for them. Let's be frank. When a Microsoft product crashes, it's not the product that is on people's minds as much as the data they lose. It's easier for people to say "Dumb Microsoft did it again" than to call the hotline, and BG is right about that. But Microsoft isn't addressing the problem. Honestly, I don't think they can. That the people at Microsoft, with all their shrewd business acumen and 'technological wizardy' (heh) cannot support their own products is... well, it's damn funny. Enter Free Software... Thank GNU!
Despite all the politricks, legalities and bottom sniffing: One cannot debate with only one side there. That's all. That's it.