Last I checked, Apple indeed employs Jordan Hubbard, who was a major figure in the FreeBSD community (project lead, IIRC).
That said, Darwin, the OS underlying OS X is need basically FreeBSD with a Mach kernel (some of the man pages still say FreeBSD on them), and I've read comment from JKH that much code makes it's way back to FreeBSD.
How that helps Linux, is of course, circular, in that code may eventually make it's way back to Linux.
I think iTunes sucks. I know everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but when I see iTunes get lauded on this site as a playlist godsend, I shudder. Apple is a trendy company that makes trendy products. Unfortunately all of them don't work as well as the iPod, but the fanboys will use whatever is fed to them.
You realise how stupid you sound basically asserting that anyone who disagrees with you is a fanboy, right?
I whole-heartedly prefer iTunes to WinAMP, but it doesn't make me fanboy... it just means that I don't really like WinAMP. If I called you a WinAMP fanboy, would that make any sense?
Nope.
How this dudes opinion got modded up to insightful is beyond me. If I said "I Linux to Windows." would that get modded up? No... oh wait, this is/. - of course it would.
Here in Canada, when you go see a movie (at least, downtown Toronto at the Paramount or some of the larger "Famous Players" theatres), they are screening a short, 5 minute film before the feature presentation.
The film, at first, looks kind of interesting. It shows a portly teamster-looking gentleman talking about rigging up explosives to place on the back of cars in order to accomplish the spectactular car crash stunts seen in many movies (the example they show is in Enemy of the State, when the Will Smith and Gene Hackman characters are being persued by the NSA agents along the railway tracks). He talks about different special effects techniques and how dangerous, yes rewarding it can be both for the stuntmen, and ultimately the viewer.
This, of course, promptly degrades into a sermon about how "I'm such a nice portly man and I put in all this time and then someone makes a few clicks on their computer and STEALS all of that hard work.", followed by the new catch phrase of a movie industry that recently made this piece of shit: MOVIES: THEY'RE WORTH IT.
Then, following this propaganda, we were all warned warned that staff equipped with night vision technology would detain, violate and then charge anyone caught with any technology being used to record the film.
When I returned home, i stole 3 movie off the internet... and I never download movies from the internet.
When, oh when, is the MPAA going to notice that even the foolish RIAA is way ahead of them? At least the RIAA has tried to "meet us halfway" with things like the iTunes Music Store and Napster 2.0, etc. The MPAA is still locked into their early 20th century mentality and shows no signs of change. Perhaps when the current crop of studio execs retire and the younger, more enlightened next generation takes over, things will start to improve.
The fault of the protocol is that it doesn't allow multiple servers to be run by multiple providers - if it did then the scope for the fsck up would be a lot more limited. You will _always_ get screwups, part of protocol design is to limit the impact of said screwups. the AIM protocol (along with the MSN protocol, etc) were all designed by monopolies who wanted to be in charge of their own servers. The Jabber protocol was designed to be open and allow anyone to run their own server if they so choose.
In either this thread or the other,I've already condeded that yes, on paper, the Jabber protocol is a better design. You don't need to convince me.
That said, you talk like, as I said, AOL has all of AIM running on a P133 in the basement somewhere... AIM is clearly running on a huge cluster of redunant machines, probably spread out geographically. Yes. it's a closed protocol run by a private company, but it's very reliable and seems to be very well designed in this regard. The fact that some accounts have been locked has nothing to do with the protocol design though, and this is what keeps baffling me about your comments... you're arguing that Jabber is better for reason because it has a better protocol... and fair enough.
But, once again, this has nothing to do with the protocol... you're whole argument is tantamount to saying that Oracle RAC is garbage because it's possible for a DBA to incorrectly set your login password to the database. It's foolish to blame the architecture when it's clearly an administration problem that, as I i've saying, could have happened to anyone.
Advocacy is cool dude, but blind advocacy that isn't even related to the point at thand is just, well, baffling.
Am having to seperate conversations with the same guy (FireFury03) in two seperate threads and you just happened to get in the middle of it... I thought he had just AC'd a response..
So that said, if you had the other thread, you'd know what I was talking about with the server downage comments.
That said, yes, if you delete all the files on my computer, I can't use it.
The real point is that, regardless of weather or not my computer was open source or propritary, this would still be the case.
No, I do know how jabber works and I'm well aware of how inter-server messages are relayed, right down to the the XMPP schema that actually relays the message.
Thanks for the lesson though... it'd have been better if ya, you know, commented on the point rather than just having a fan-boy outburst.
IF YOUR STAFF CRASH YOUR JABBER SERVER, I CANNOT TALK TO YOU. THIS IS NOT BECAUSE JABBER IS OPEN OR CLOSED, BUT BECAUSE SOMEBODY CRASHED THE SERVER.
As much as you think it can unite warring cultures, send men to Mars and create water-powered cars, open source/protocols/technologies still can't save you from human error... which is exactly what caused this AOL problem.
Of course, most of the real old-schoolers still use ICQ because we've been using it since it was first released and just never changed... slowly but surely I've been converting over to AIM since most people I know are moving to AIM, and AIM these days will talk to ICQ users anyways (assuming they have the ICQ that supports AIM, so who knows if ICQ support is actually in AIM or if AIM support is in ICQ.. never bothered to check).
That said, what's the most popular outside North America? I'd figure MSN, yeah?
But it doesn't change the fact that having a myriad of dispirate Jabber Networks is far less useful than a single unified network, for the average users perspective... at least in the context of instant messaging as most people think of it.
Much regards to Jabber, but saying "hey, use this product that isn't quite the same as what you're using because it's open" to most people is a lost cause...
I have AIM, you have AIM, we can talk.
I have Jabber, you have Jabber... are we on the same Jabber network? How do I connect to your network?
This is why, as cool as Jabber is, it will never (alas) supplant AIM or MSN.
Unfortunately, in the real world, few people actually care much about vendor lock in. If they did, there would be no monopolies, a la Microsoft.
We'd all be kidding ourselves if we thought that Linux's growth wasn't largely fueled by it's price. Most companies look at Linux quite simply: It works -enough- that since it's free, they don't care about the stuff it doesn't do because they likely won't need that anyways.
Ultimately, the price and the product are what people care about. The parents point was simply that if an IT guy had to choose between a free Solaris, a free AIX and Linux, Linux's growth could easily be curbed because it's biggest selling point was now mooted by the more established players.
Of course, all of this applies to the server space (which is what the article was about), so nobody respond with arguments about Linux on the desktop being more usable than Solaris and blah blah blah...
Them: "Why? Nobody I know is on this thing except you and it doesn't seem any better than MSN/AIM/ICQ anyways. You say it's "open". What does "open" mean? Oh, I see. So what?"
As long as AOL is the worlds largest ISP, AIM will probably be the largest instant messaging system. As long as Windows Messenger comes with Windows, it'll probably be right there in second (if not first at some point).
I'd love to see Jabber take over, but I hold no illusions. FireFox is bad-ass, but will it ever totally supplant IE? Probably not.
Download an open source Jabber server, set it up. Create a ton of accounts. Then, turn it over to a team of staff members to run.
One day, when they accidentally delete some accounts, or lock some out, our make a typo in a.conf somewhere and a kill -HUP promptly turns into a kill -9, I'll say that open source is flakey and untested.
And I'd be equally stupid for saying so...
This isn't an issue of "closed protocol"/"closed source" and more of an issue of "poor management". This can happen just as easily (and arguably easier, in fact) with open source products.
Well, as has been pointed out already, most/. readers were oh-so-sure that Apple couldn't convince anyone to pay their "premium" on both the full size and mini iPod's.
I say premium in quotes because, frankly, preminum implies you pay more for the same. Having owned several iPods, you pay more for more... straight up, and anyone else who's ever owned an iPod would agree.
Some people "get it" right away, but a lot never understand the value of one until they see one up close. I can't count the number of people I know who've said "Bah! I'll just buy a $50 MP3-CD player... why would I pay Apple's idiot tax?", then promptly bought an iPod after having used one for a few days, eating crow the whole way to the Apple store.
Of course, most/. readers think that Apple is going out of business (since 1984 I hear) and that nobody would ever bother to pay $0.99 for a song on the internet (100,000,000 songs later)... so who really cares what/. readers think anyways?
That said, when Apple is done taking over the flash based player market as they have the hard disk based market because -a lot- of people are more than happy to buy a superior product for a few extra dollars, you can post a retraction to your journal, ok?
Have I seen the flash player? No... so no, I don't "know" that it's a superior product. But let's face it... they've done it twice already when every self-declared pundit on/. said they couldn't.
Well, if you find this interesting, I have a shiny light you can stare at.
Once again, a "fan boy" mod would have been far more in order.
Why, oh why, people have to slip random "Look at me, I recompiled my kernel and made some random piece of hardware work. Linux rocks so much, aren't we all so l33t for liking it?" in the middle of an otherwise useful discussion is beyond me.
Of course, somebody points it out, it gets tagged "Off Topic", "Troll" or "Flame Bait"... but sneaking the random fan boy-isms in are "Interesting" and "Insightful".
Just because the story ends of a fucking Penguin riding in and saving the day, it's modded up to "god damn nobody could have said anything more relevant than this."
I also agree. As much as people want to mod the parent (as well as the two current replies) down as "off topic" or "troll", the glaring reality is that I'd bet that professional photographers are probably the least represented amongst the Linux installed base.
That said, as much respect as I have for the accomplishments of "The Gimp", you have to understand that on the Mac (and Windows), there are widely supported and understood color management systems (ColorSync, for example) and image formats that Linux currently doesn't offer analogs for.
As much as you hate to admit it, Linux isn't perfect, and photography may be one of the places that Linux doesn't quite make the grade in.
My point was really that the "majority of Solaris" users are always going to be a fraction of the total computer base, simply because the majority of people aren't building server systems, the hardware for which Solaris supports fairly well.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I'd be more inclined to pay attention if you weren't loosely implying that "western" eyes were somehow more just or fair.
"Interesting", indeed. Interesting to a racist, perhaps.
There is only one true enemy of peace.
Last I checked, Apple indeed employs Jordan Hubbard, who was a major figure in the FreeBSD community (project lead, IIRC).
That said, Darwin, the OS underlying OS X is need basically FreeBSD with a Mach kernel (some of the man pages still say FreeBSD on them), and I've read comment from JKH that much code makes it's way back to FreeBSD.
How that helps Linux, is of course, circular, in that code may eventually make it's way back to Linux.
What do the Brits have - just standard English and that silly dialect where people call things after other words that rhyme.
Cockney? Cockney rules.
Barney Rubble. Trouble!
Though to be fair, it's hard to categorize the language spoken by Americans as "English". "Americanese" or just "American" is proabably a better name.
I think iTunes sucks. I know everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but when I see iTunes get lauded on this site as a playlist godsend, I shudder. Apple is a trendy company that makes trendy products. Unfortunately all of them don't work as well as the iPod, but the fanboys will use whatever is fed to them.
You realise how stupid you sound basically asserting that anyone who disagrees with you is a fanboy, right?
I whole-heartedly prefer iTunes to WinAMP, but it doesn't make me fanboy... it just means that I don't really like WinAMP. If I called you a WinAMP fanboy, would that make any sense?
Nope.
How this dudes opinion got modded up to insightful is beyond me. If I said "I Linux to Windows." would that get modded up? No... oh wait, this is /. - of course it would.
Here in Canada, when you go see a movie (at least, downtown Toronto at the Paramount or some of the larger "Famous Players" theatres), they are screening a short, 5 minute film before the feature presentation.
The film, at first, looks kind of interesting. It shows a portly teamster-looking gentleman talking about rigging up explosives to place on the back of cars in order to accomplish the spectactular car crash stunts seen in many movies (the example they show is in Enemy of the State, when the Will Smith and Gene Hackman characters are being persued by the NSA agents along the railway tracks). He talks about different special effects techniques and how dangerous, yes rewarding it can be both for the stuntmen, and ultimately the viewer.
This, of course, promptly degrades into a sermon about how "I'm such a nice portly man and I put in all this time and then someone makes a few clicks on their computer and STEALS all of that hard work.", followed by the new catch phrase of a movie industry that recently made this piece of shit: MOVIES: THEY'RE WORTH IT.
Then, following this propaganda, we were all warned warned that staff equipped with night vision technology would detain, violate and then charge anyone caught with any technology being used to record the film.
When I returned home, i stole 3 movie off the internet... and I never download movies from the internet.
When, oh when, is the MPAA going to notice that even the foolish RIAA is way ahead of them? At least the RIAA has tried to "meet us halfway" with things like the iTunes Music Store and Napster 2.0, etc. The MPAA is still locked into their early 20th century mentality and shows no signs of change. Perhaps when the current crop of studio execs retire and the younger, more enlightened next generation takes over, things will start to improve.
Then again....
The fault of the protocol is that it doesn't allow multiple servers to be run by multiple providers - if it did then the scope for the fsck up would be a lot more limited. You will _always_ get screwups, part of protocol design is to limit the impact of said screwups. the AIM protocol (along with the MSN protocol, etc) were all designed by monopolies who wanted to be in charge of their own servers. The Jabber protocol was designed to be open and allow anyone to run their own server if they so choose.
In either this thread or the other,I've already condeded that yes, on paper, the Jabber protocol is a better design. You don't need to convince me.
That said, you talk like, as I said, AOL has all of AIM running on a P133 in the basement somewhere... AIM is clearly running on a huge cluster of redunant machines, probably spread out geographically. Yes. it's a closed protocol run by a private company, but it's very reliable and seems to be very well designed in this regard. The fact that some accounts have been locked has nothing to do with the protocol design though, and this is what keeps baffling me about your comments... you're arguing that Jabber is better for reason because it has a better protocol... and fair enough.
But, once again, this has nothing to do with the protocol... you're whole argument is tantamount to saying that Oracle RAC is garbage because it's possible for a DBA to incorrectly set your login password to the database. It's foolish to blame the architecture when it's clearly an administration problem that, as I i've saying, could have happened to anyone.
Advocacy is cool dude, but blind advocacy that isn't even related to the point at thand is just, well, baffling.
Hey,
Am having to seperate conversations with the same guy (FireFury03) in two seperate threads and you just happened to get in the middle of it... I thought he had just AC'd a response..
So that said, if you had the other thread, you'd know what I was talking about with the server downage comments.
That said, yes, if you delete all the files on my computer, I can't use it.
The real point is that, regardless of weather or not my computer was open source or propritary, this would still be the case.
No, I do know how jabber works and I'm well aware of how inter-server messages are relayed, right down to the the XMPP schema that actually relays the message.
Thanks for the lesson though... it'd have been better if ya, you know, commented on the point rather than just having a fan-boy outburst.
IF YOUR STAFF CRASH YOUR JABBER SERVER, I CANNOT TALK TO YOU. THIS IS NOT BECAUSE JABBER IS OPEN OR CLOSED, BUT BECAUSE SOMEBODY CRASHED THE SERVER.
As much as you think it can unite warring cultures, send men to Mars and create water-powered cars, open source/protocols/technologies still can't save you from human error... which is exactly what caused this AOL problem.
It's pretty popular in Canada, too.
Of course, most of the real old-schoolers still use ICQ because we've been using it since it was first released and just never changed... slowly but surely I've been converting over to AIM since most people I know are moving to AIM, and AIM these days will talk to ICQ users anyways (assuming they have the ICQ that supports AIM, so who knows if ICQ support is actually in AIM or if AIM support is in ICQ.. never bothered to check).
That said, what's the most popular outside North America? I'd figure MSN, yeah?
Oh no, I'm well aware of how it works...
But it doesn't change the fact that having a myriad of dispirate Jabber Networks is far less useful than a single unified network, for the average users perspective... at least in the context of instant messaging as most people think of it.
Much regards to Jabber, but saying "hey, use this product that isn't quite the same as what you're using because it's open" to most people is a lost cause...
I have AIM, you have AIM, we can talk.
I have Jabber, you have Jabber... are we on the same Jabber network? How do I connect to your network?
This is why, as cool as Jabber is, it will never (alas) supplant AIM or MSN.
OK... you totally missed my point, so I'll use your argument to make my point again.
Build a Jabber server, connect it to a jabber network. Say there are 1M users, 100,000 of which are on your machine.
B0rk your machine.
100,000 people are now unable to connect.
Is this Jabbers fault? No... it's your fault for b0rking your server.
That said, I'm happy to blame AOL for being idiots... but blaming the OSCAR protocol just because it's closed is idiotic.
Unfortunately, in the real world, few people actually care much about vendor lock in. If they did, there would be no monopolies, a la Microsoft.
We'd all be kidding ourselves if we thought that Linux's growth wasn't largely fueled by it's price. Most companies look at Linux quite simply: It works -enough- that since it's free, they don't care about the stuff it doesn't do because they likely won't need that anyways.
Ultimately, the price and the product are what people care about. The parents point was simply that if an IT guy had to choose between a free Solaris, a free AIX and Linux, Linux's growth could easily be curbed because it's biggest selling point was now mooted by the more established players.
Of course, all of this applies to the server space (which is what the article was about), so nobody respond with arguments about Linux on the desktop being more usable than Solaris and blah blah blah...
I just installed my own Jabber server, but nobody I know has an account on it so I'm now talking to myself.
How am I further ahead, exactly?
Me: "AIM is down. Try this cool new program."
Them: "Why? Nobody I know is on this thing except you and it doesn't seem any better than MSN/AIM/ICQ anyways. You say it's "open". What does "open" mean? Oh, I see. So what?"
As long as AOL is the worlds largest ISP, AIM will probably be the largest instant messaging system. As long as Windows Messenger comes with Windows, it'll probably be right there in second (if not first at some point).
I'd love to see Jabber take over, but I hold no illusions. FireFox is bad-ass, but will it ever totally supplant IE? Probably not.
Sigh...
I mod you down as a fanboy.
.conf somewhere and a kill -HUP promptly turns into a kill -9, I'll say that open source is flakey and untested.
Download an open source Jabber server, set it up. Create a ton of accounts. Then, turn it over to a team of staff members to run.
One day, when they accidentally delete some accounts, or lock some out, our make a typo in a
And I'd be equally stupid for saying so...
This isn't an issue of "closed protocol"/"closed source" and more of an issue of "poor management". This can happen just as easily (and arguably easier, in fact) with open source products.
Don't forget Biggus' wife, Incontinentia Buttocks.
Ok, ok... no more Monty Python references from me........
Release Bwyan!
It's rather tough emulating something that doesn't exist I guess...
At least, doesn't exist by Mac standards.
Well, as has been pointed out already, most /. readers were oh-so-sure that Apple couldn't convince anyone to pay their "premium" on both the full size and mini iPod's.
/. readers think that Apple is going out of business (since 1984 I hear) and that nobody would ever bother to pay $0.99 for a song on the internet (100,000,000 songs later)... so who really cares what /. readers think anyways?
/. said they couldn't.
I say premium in quotes because, frankly, preminum implies you pay more for the same. Having owned several iPods, you pay more for more... straight up, and anyone else who's ever owned an iPod would agree.
Some people "get it" right away, but a lot never understand the value of one until they see one up close. I can't count the number of people I know who've said "Bah! I'll just buy a $50 MP3-CD player... why would I pay Apple's idiot tax?", then promptly bought an iPod after having used one for a few days, eating crow the whole way to the Apple store.
Of course, most
That said, when Apple is done taking over the flash based player market as they have the hard disk based market because -a lot- of people are more than happy to buy a superior product for a few extra dollars, you can post a retraction to your journal, ok?
Have I seen the flash player? No... so no, I don't "know" that it's a superior product. But let's face it... they've done it twice already when every self-declared pundit on
Well, if you find this interesting, I have a shiny light you can stare at.
Once again, a "fan boy" mod would have been far more in order.
Why, oh why, people have to slip random "Look at me, I recompiled my kernel and made some random piece of hardware work. Linux rocks so much, aren't we all so l33t for liking it?" in the middle of an otherwise useful discussion is beyond me.
Of course, somebody points it out, it gets tagged "Off Topic", "Troll" or "Flame Bait"... but sneaking the random fan boy-isms in are "Interesting" and "Insightful".
Because this is /.
"News for Nerds" actually means "if you aren't sucking Linus Torvalds' cock right now, it's flamebait or trolling".
How did this get modded up to "Interesting"?
How is this interesting?
Who cares.
Just because the story ends of a fucking Penguin riding in and saving the day, it's modded up to "god damn nobody could have said anything more relevant than this."
Yes, Linux recognizes a scanner.
Who cares?
I also agree. As much as people want to mod the parent (as well as the two current replies) down as "off topic" or "troll", the glaring reality is that I'd bet that professional photographers are probably the least represented amongst the Linux installed base.
That said, as much respect as I have for the accomplishments of "The Gimp", you have to understand that on the Mac (and Windows), there are widely supported and understood color management systems (ColorSync, for example) and image formats that Linux currently doesn't offer analogs for.
As much as you hate to admit it, Linux isn't perfect, and photography may be one of the places that Linux doesn't quite make the grade in.
Yet...
My point was really that the "majority of Solaris" users are always going to be a fraction of the total computer base, simply because the majority of people aren't building server systems, the hardware for which Solaris supports fairly well.
I have to say... I thought I was the only one that hated the fact that Timmy Ho-Ho's didn't take Interac.
Solidarity, brother.