I completely agree. I used to love using Skype on Linux up to Suse 9.3. With the release of Suse 10, their Linux client plain sucks as it makes use of OSS rather than ALSA.
Considering that OSS has been long deprecated and that Skype has been promising an updated linux client for months and months, I see very little hope for Skype on Linux.
Unfortunately, I made the mistake of buying both Skype-out credit and a Skype-in phone number.
If they improve, I might use them again. If not, as soon as my skype-in phone number subscription expires, I'll move over to Gizmoproject.
What distributions do you use? If you pick something like slackware, by definition, you know that you are in for a ride.
If you pick something like Suse 10 or Mandriva, then it is a very different story. Thing do just work. I am typing this on Suse 10 and it is the best operating system I have ever used.
I can easily view all video formats on the market, play music, read email, write documents, log-into my remote servers, share files on windows and unix networks, burn CDs and DVDs, print. I just don't get what problems people like you claim. If you could be a bit more specific, your story might sound more credible.
On the other hand, I know the woes of Windows all too well as I am often called by friends who are still being abused by that OS.
No he is not a millionare. And yes you are trolling.
Are you implying that Bill Gates who keeps for himself every bit of "intelectual property" that he has created or has had others create on his behalf is a better man than a guy who has shared his work with all of humanity?
"you are going to completely get moded down here. Not because you may not be right, but because Linus is worshiped here like a god. Many people here follow him like sheep."
And your bit of reverse psychology is intellectually corrupt as it skirts the issue by turning it into a character attack agaisnt Linus.
Linus leads because he has proven himself over 15 years of kernel development. His only power are his words and his design decisions, which many of us have evaluated over the years and continue to support for the most part.
There are times when I have publicly disagreed with Linus, but this isn't one of them. Gnome is a featureless mess of a desktop environment and the surest way to make sure that most users run back to Windows.
The lack of features are justified as a design decision, rather than simply admit that they don't have the community resources to develop the features that users need. Why don't they have the developer resources?
Because developing using gtk is as pleasant as walking on hot coals in the middle of a Haitian summer.
Gnome has long ceased to be useful. Not only that, it is built on top of an anemic toolkit and poorly conceived libraries. With the exception of GRAMPS (done in python and using gtk's interface bindings) and evolution, there are no Gnome applications that I find useful or well done. They tend to be buggy, underdeveloped, poorly integrated and lacking features. The range goes from the top applications (Nautilus, Abiword) to lesser known ones.
KDE not only advaces in leaps and bounds, but it has a very powerful toolkit (Please, GNOME fudders don't start the bullshit about Qt's licensing, we are simply sick of it).
I think Gnome has done a lot of harm to the potential for a free desktop having widestream acceptance. Its survival depends on two things: 1) a historical decision that Red Hat once made without enough thought based not on technical merit but its developer pool at the time 2)the ego of its existing developers who are too attached to their "toy" to give it up or assess its viability objectively.
I have done lots of terminal server installations and lots of user-testing and 85% of users simply prefer KDE. They find it easier to use, more intuitive and better thought out. Once KDE 4 is out(with the combination of new toolkit, Oxygen icons and the appeal project), it will simply be geourgeous and a wonderful platform that will have nothing to envy on the proprietary or free-software side.
Anyone who disagrees needs to try the latest kde (KPDF, ktb, kaffeine, Kontact, Tellico, konqueror, the range of kdeedu apps, krita, koffice). Try Suse 10 and compare. Give yourself at least a week to overcome your cognitive dependence on whatever else you have used before.
This whole topic is absolutely hilarious, almost designed to highlight the problems with Microsoft alternatives by not mentioning the best ones.
Kolab is simply amazing. It scales to thouands and thousands of users and it is dead easy to set up on Debian. http://kolab.org/
Egroupware has wonderful usability and offers far more than Exchange, all in a easy to use integrated package that allows you to pick and choose which modules you turn on or off. You need a project manager along with your calendar, tasks, email, etc. It's there. You need a troubleticket system, it's there. You want to share bookmarks, it's there. LDAP support and AD integration, it's there. Outlook and kmail plugins via xmlrpc, they are there.
The list of applications is awesome, the community incredible. The applications are modular, allow you to use ACLs to separate groups and users and what kind of access users and group get to each of the modules. Just try it.
It has been rock solid for me for over two years. By the way, I am just an enthusiastic user.
Jon "maddog" Hall is the president of Linux International, not of OSDL. The CEO of OSDL is Stuart Cohen.
Given that you cannot get the basic facts right on your FAP, I seriously doubt that you represent who you claim to represent and I seriously doubt that Linux, Cohen or Jon "maddog" Hall approve, condone or endorse your efforts.
"I've tried it and hate it. It's why I use macs: linux office apps suck. My office mate is a dieshard roll-your-own linux user and has been using star office as long as it has been around. He still truggles with it's byzantine menus. My other office mate is also a pure linux user and he gave up on it. He only uses TeX. He found remebering laTex is actually a lot easier and more consistent and powerful than remembering the star-office menu confusion."
Bullshit. OpenOffice 2 matches the menu layout of Microsoft Office. Come up with better excuses for your lame FUD.
A great deal of people working on open source today are paid to do so. They are motivated and passionate about what they work on. They are driven by technical and usability decisions, not trying to extract every single penny from every unsuspecting customer it can by holding their data at ransom.
Your post has all the great trademarks of the Microsoft shill engine. How many of you are just paid to post bullshit such as yours? Mix enough innuendo, some name-calling (slashbots, amateurs) and hope that no one is looking at the fact that the reason Microsoft Office worked better is because Microsoft Office does not interoperate with anything out there.
OpenOffice at least tries its damn hardest even if they are working with a close standard. I'll stop wasting my time with someone like you. [end of post].
As a paying customer, complain directly to Apple. You are more likely to succeed that way.
I have held off buying a Mac because I have 20 GB of music in Ogg Vorbis format and I have no plans to re-encode all of that. In fact, I love the way it sounds, so why should I?
"For the global software ecosystem, the best environment for innovation is the coexistence of OSS and commercial software."
Repeat it enough and hope it sticks. Microsoft PR at it's "best" or rather worse.
When they deliver this message to a developer-centric audience such as slashdot,they want developers to equate commercial software with proprietary software, which is plain bullshit and proof that Microsoft has not changed its stripes.
More importantly, as I expected, Slashdot never put to him any of the many questions about why the Office formats are not released in a bsd/gpl compatible license so that they can be used by its main competitor, OpenOffice. If Microsoft truly believed that they could win on merit, that's what they would do, but of course, all the BS about innovation is nothing but a PR charade.
Microsoft hasn't changed one bit and this interview is nothing more than cheap PR.
See if you can answer the following without the usual PR-let's-find-a-way-to-avoid-or-reformulate -the-question spin? Here's the question:
If Microsoft believes that it can win by innovating and playing fair, why don't they release network file formats (SMB) and Office file protocols with a BSD-compatible license so that I can access and use that data with any application I choose? And no, the recent "opening" of their office file formats is not enough as its license is completely incompatible with its major competitor, OpenOffice.org.
The day that Microsoft demonstrates that it is not trying to hold the data of my organization at ransom is the day that we will begin considering its products again.
Except that the FSF has a public charter and a public record of its actions. It only continues to survive because enough people value the very important work that it does.
For not having done anything, I am looking forward to *your* replacement of the wonderful GNU utilities.
Stop the character assassination. It's ugly, distasteful and shows that you have run out of arguments.
Attack the argument which RMS is making(software patents bad), not the man!
Great Rovian (as in Karl Rove) strategy. Propose something so out of whack with common sense that by claiming to be willing to go for the common ground, you end up getting what you really wanted anyway because the ground has shifted so much towards your position that the middle point really only reflects your interests.
No sir,software patents stifle innovation and serve no useful social purpose and thus must be defeated.
Let's see, directives are binding regulations passed that must be adopted by all member states within the period specified in the directive. The adoption of the directive often involves changes to national law to make sure that it is legally congruent with the EU directive.
In terms of the institutional make-up of the EU, it is a complex topic (I wrote a couple of chapters for a recent book on this).
Traditionally, it used to be that the commission proposes, the council decides, and the parliament advises.
In the last four years, the parliament has been vying for greater decision making power as it is truly the only directly elected body out of the three. Thus, it now enjoys certain co-decision making power on certain issues.
If you want a better answer, Slasdot really isn't the place.
Stallman exemplifies that old adage that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance or something to that effect.
For all the BS he often gets from the newly-lobotomized Microsoft "ain't that bad" and "Apple's so cool that we must lick its DRM" crowd, he has much respect for consistently fighting the good fight, which is something that is rare to find in these funny times when people gloat about not believing or standing up for anything.
The truth is that you don't understand how or why people use open source software.
You are the ultimate reviewer because you can download it for free, test it on your hardware, see if it really meets the needs of your organization without the pressures of trial software or of a vendor looking over your shoulder.
The age of organic IT has arrived, which is the age of real IT. In five years time, people will not buy into the marketing drivel that often promises the earth with very little in situ quantifiable evidence.
Open Source software gives you the ultimate support peace of mind. Anyone can support it and lots of people will.
Under the guise of reasonableness, you are still spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt. More so, because there is nothing specific in your post that detracts points from open source. Quite on the contrary, access to the app and the source is the ultimate test environment and the optimal support environment.
Today's phone have the power that my old computer used to have. Strip Linux to the bone and linux will run just fine there.
See, the power of Linux is in providing a whole set of tools and interfaces from the network stack to the i/o system that are well tested. While work would be required, today's phones are very accommodating. In two year's time, it will make little sense to keep these niche operating systems around,except for very limited cases.
Don't take it bad, but your post shows that you neither understand how DRM works or how public cryptograpy works.
Further, it shows that you are willing to go to extreme lentghs to appease publishers of their fears, which they market has historically shown to be just that, fears.
"Is this the beginning of the end for the global, unregulated, uncensored, Internet?"
No, it's not the beginning of the...
It's been that way from the very beginning. Telcos and national ISPs have exerted control over access and content for a long time. In fact, there are web sites here in the US that are also blocked "for your own good". I'll leave it to you to figure out which sites those are.
he complains about something that isn't actually raised. Mandrake is not going to be using alien, neither is Debian. They are both going to be using a new package tool, called SmartPM. Google for it.
The tool is able to use debian and rpm repositories natively. It also does a lot of good things that no other tool, yum, apt or urpmi currently does. The people doing the research for it are current and former apt and urpmi developers and they have done their homework.
So, stop spreading misinformation about something which you have not taken the time to understand.
"We should not simply capitulate like the Spanish because that sends the message that terrorism works, and simply passes the problem on to our neighbours."
And pray tell us, how did the Spanish capitulate?
Would that be by voting ouf of office the government that send troops abroad without the approval of the Spanish congress which is unconstitutional in Spain?
Or would that be by demonstrating by the millions nationwide on the street and proving that democracy was alive and well and that the Spanish people would not be intimidated?
Finally, if you are referring to the pullout of the Spanish troops from Iraq, that was a campaign promise of Zapatero, the Spanish prime minister. He said that only through the approval of Congress would Spanish troops be sent abroad.
Given that the war in Iraq was justified on a string of falsehoods and that over 92% of Spaniards opposed the war in Iraq, being part of that farce is nothing the Spanish people wanted.
So pray tell me how is that the Spanish capitulated? By being informed and not falling for the crap that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the WTC attacks? Or is it by demonstrating and making sure that its government did not use terrorism for political ends by attributing the attacks to ETA, in full knowledge that this was not the case?
What your posts shows both in its language and content is that you have internalized, perhaps inadvertently, the propaganda campaigns put out by the neocons and their servants in the media.
Given that software is always bound to have flaws, modularized code allows you to fix the problem once and have it fixed in all applications that use that library, which is what I just did in my Debian system.
To pretend that replicating the same fuctionality across thousands of incompatible libraries in different operating systems is the solution is as close to blindness as you can get.
You say that modular code helps in maintainability. Yeah, and a big part of the maintainability is making the code maintainable from a security point of view. In summary, I want to fix things once and have them fixed across the board in all applications that use a library.
Of course, you appear to be coming from the world of proprietary operating systems, where the concept of a distribution of software that works well together and is maintained as a whole of does not exist.
The fact that on Windows, you may have to get the same fix from Microsoft, Adobe, Corel and a thousand other vendors only highlights the fact that open source code is both more reusable and more maintainable and thus ultimately more secure because the security process can be optimizied through modularity: Fix once, fix everywhere!
Slashdot Mirror
I completely agree. I used to love using Skype on Linux up to Suse 9.3. With the release of Suse 10, their Linux client plain sucks as it makes use of OSS rather than ALSA.
Considering that OSS has been long deprecated and that Skype has been promising an updated linux client for months and months, I see very little hope for Skype on Linux.
Unfortunately, I made the mistake of buying both Skype-out credit and a Skype-in phone number.
If they improve, I might use them again. If not, as soon as my skype-in phone number subscription expires, I'll move over to Gizmoproject.
What distributions do you use? If you pick something like slackware, by definition, you know that you are in for a ride.
If you pick something like Suse 10 or Mandriva, then it is a very different story. Thing do just work. I am typing this on Suse 10 and it is the best operating system I have ever used.
I can easily view all video formats on the market, play music, read email, write documents, log-into my remote servers, share files on windows and unix networks, burn CDs and DVDs, print. I just don't get what problems people like you claim. If you could be a bit more specific, your story might sound more credible.
On the other hand, I know the woes of Windows all too well as I am often called by friends who are still being abused by that OS.
Would you be willing to publish the code that does the php to odt generation out there?
No he is not a millionare. And yes you are trolling.
Are you implying that Bill Gates who keeps for himself every bit of "intelectual property" that he has created or has had others create on his behalf is a better man than a guy who has shared his work with all of humanity?
I didnt think you were.
"you are going to completely get moded down here. Not because you may not be right, but because Linus is worshiped here like a god. Many people here follow him like sheep."
And your bit of reverse psychology is intellectually corrupt as it skirts the issue by turning it into a character attack agaisnt Linus.
Linus leads because he has proven himself over 15 years of kernel development. His only power are his words and his design decisions, which many of us have evaluated over the years and continue to support for the most part.
There are times when I have publicly disagreed with Linus, but this isn't one of them. Gnome is a featureless mess of a desktop environment and the surest way to make sure that most users run back to Windows.
The lack of features are justified as a design decision, rather than simply admit that they don't have the community resources to develop the features that users need. Why don't they have the developer resources?
Because developing using gtk is as pleasant as walking on hot coals in the middle of a Haitian summer.
Gnome has long ceased to be useful. Not only that, it is built on top of an anemic toolkit and poorly conceived libraries. With the exception of GRAMPS (done in python and using gtk's interface bindings) and evolution, there are no Gnome applications that I find useful or well done. They tend to be buggy, underdeveloped, poorly integrated and lacking features. The range goes from the top applications (Nautilus, Abiword) to lesser known ones.
KDE not only advaces in leaps and bounds, but it has a very powerful toolkit (Please, GNOME fudders don't start the bullshit about Qt's licensing, we are simply sick of it).
I think Gnome has done a lot of harm to the potential for a free desktop having widestream acceptance. Its survival depends on two things: 1) a historical decision that Red Hat once made without enough thought based not on technical merit but its developer pool at the time 2)the ego of its existing developers who are too attached to their "toy" to give it up or assess its viability objectively.
I have done lots of terminal server installations and lots of user-testing and 85% of users simply prefer KDE. They find it easier to use, more intuitive and better thought out. Once KDE 4 is out(with the combination of new toolkit, Oxygen icons and the appeal project), it will simply be geourgeous and a wonderful platform that will have nothing to envy on the proprietary or free-software side.
Anyone who disagrees needs to try the latest kde (KPDF, ktb, kaffeine, Kontact, Tellico, konqueror, the range of kdeedu apps, krita, koffice). Try Suse 10 and compare. Give yourself at least a week to overcome your cognitive dependence on whatever else you have used before.
This whole topic is absolutely hilarious, almost designed to highlight the problems with Microsoft alternatives by not mentioning the best ones.
Kolab is simply amazing. It scales to thouands and thousands of users and it is dead easy to set up on Debian. http://kolab.org/
Egroupware has wonderful usability and offers far more than Exchange, all in a easy to use integrated package that allows you to pick and choose which modules you turn on or off. You need a project manager along with your calendar, tasks, email, etc. It's there. You need a troubleticket system, it's there. You want to share bookmarks, it's there. LDAP support and AD integration, it's there. Outlook and kmail plugins via xmlrpc, they are there.
The list of applications is awesome, the community incredible. The applications are modular, allow you to use ACLs to separate groups and users and what kind of access users and group get to each of the modules. Just try it.
It has been rock solid for me for over two years. By the way, I am just an enthusiastic user.
Jon "maddog" Hall is the president of Linux International, not of OSDL. The CEO of OSDL is Stuart Cohen.
Given that you cannot get the basic facts right on your FAP, I seriously doubt that you represent who you claim to represent and I seriously doubt that Linux, Cohen or Jon "maddog" Hall approve, condone or endorse your efforts.
"I've tried it and hate it. It's why I use macs: linux office apps suck. My office mate is a dieshard roll-your-own linux user and has been using star office as long as it has been around. He still truggles with it's byzantine menus. My other office mate is also a pure linux user and he gave up on it. He only uses TeX. He found remebering laTex is actually a lot easier and more consistent and powerful than remembering the star-office menu confusion."
Bullshit. OpenOffice 2 matches the menu layout of Microsoft Office. Come up with better excuses for your lame FUD.
Insightful, my ass.
A great deal of people working on open source today are paid to do so. They are motivated and passionate about what they work on. They are driven by technical and usability decisions, not trying to extract every single penny from every unsuspecting customer it can by holding their data at ransom.
Your post has all the great trademarks of the Microsoft shill engine. How many of you are just paid to post bullshit such as yours? Mix enough innuendo, some name-calling (slashbots, amateurs) and hope that no one is looking at the fact that the reason Microsoft Office worked better is because Microsoft Office does not interoperate with anything out there.
OpenOffice at least tries its damn hardest even if they are working with a close standard. I'll stop wasting my time with someone like you. [end of post].
As a paying customer, complain directly to Apple. You are more likely to succeed that way.
I have held off buying a Mac because I have 20 GB of music in Ogg Vorbis format and I have no plans to re-encode all of that. In fact, I love the way it sounds, so why should I?
"For the global software ecosystem, the best environment for innovation is the coexistence of OSS and commercial software."
Repeat it enough and hope it sticks. Microsoft PR at it's "best" or rather worse.
When they deliver this message to a developer-centric audience such as slashdot,they want developers to equate commercial software with proprietary software, which is plain bullshit and proof that Microsoft has not changed its stripes.
More importantly, as I expected, Slashdot never put to him any of the many questions about why the Office formats are not released in a bsd/gpl compatible license so that they can be used by its main competitor, OpenOffice. If Microsoft truly believed that they could win on merit, that's what they would do, but of course, all the BS about innovation is nothing but a PR charade.
Microsoft hasn't changed one bit and this interview is nothing more than cheap PR.
See if you can answer the following without the usual PR-let's-find-a-way-to-avoid-or-reformulate -the-question spin? Here's the question:
If Microsoft believes that it can win by innovating and playing fair, why don't they release network file formats (SMB) and Office file protocols with a BSD-compatible license so that I can access and use that data with any application I choose? And no, the recent "opening" of their office file formats is not enough as its license is completely incompatible with its major competitor, OpenOffice.org.
The day that Microsoft demonstrates that it is not trying to hold the data of my organization at ransom is the day that we will begin considering its products again.
Except that the FSF has a public charter and a public record of its actions. It only continues to survive because enough people value the very important work that it does.
For not having done anything, I am looking forward to *your* replacement of the wonderful GNU utilities.
Stop the character assassination. It's ugly, distasteful and shows that you have run out of arguments.
Attack the argument which RMS is making(software patents bad), not the man!
My comment was in response to this one.
Unfortunately, I was careless and it got posted in the general discussion.
Great Rovian (as in Karl Rove) strategy. Propose something so out of whack with common sense that by claiming to be willing to go for the common ground, you end up getting what you really wanted anyway because the ground has shifted so much towards your position that the middle point really only reflects your interests.
No sir,software patents stifle innovation and serve no useful social purpose and thus must be defeated.
Let's see, directives are binding regulations passed that must be adopted by all member states within the period specified in the directive. The adoption of the directive often involves changes to national law to make sure that it is legally congruent with the EU directive.
In terms of the institutional make-up of the EU, it is a complex topic (I wrote a couple of chapters for a recent book on this).
Traditionally, it used to be that the commission proposes, the council decides, and the parliament advises.
In the last four years, the parliament has been vying for greater decision making power as it is truly the only directly elected body out of the three. Thus, it now enjoys certain co-decision making power on certain issues.
If you want a better answer, Slasdot really isn't the place.
Stallman exemplifies that old adage that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance or something to that effect.
For all the BS he often gets from the newly-lobotomized Microsoft "ain't that bad" and "Apple's so cool that we must lick its DRM" crowd, he has much respect for consistently fighting the good fight, which is something that is rare to find in these funny times when people gloat about not believing or standing up for anything.
The truth is that you don't understand how or why people use open source software.
You are the ultimate reviewer because you can download it for free, test it on your hardware, see if it really meets the needs of your organization without the pressures of trial software or of a vendor looking over your shoulder.
The age of organic IT has arrived, which is the age of real IT. In five years time, people will not buy into the marketing drivel that often promises the earth with very little in situ quantifiable evidence.
Open Source software gives you the ultimate support peace of mind. Anyone can support it and lots of people will.
Under the guise of reasonableness, you are still spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt. More so, because there is nothing specific in your post that detracts points from open source. Quite on the contrary, access to the app and the source is the ultimate test environment and the optimal support environment.
Today's phone have the power that my old computer used to have. Strip Linux to the bone and linux will run just fine there.
See, the power of Linux is in providing a whole set of tools and interfaces from the network stack to the i/o system that are well tested. While work would be required, today's phones are very accommodating. In two year's time, it will make little sense to keep these niche operating systems around,except for very limited cases.
Don't take it bad, but your post shows that you neither understand how DRM works or how public cryptograpy works.
Further, it shows that you are willing to go to extreme lentghs to appease publishers of their fears, which they market has historically shown to be just that, fears.
"Is this the beginning of the end for the global, unregulated, uncensored, Internet?"
...
No, it's not the beginning of the
It's been that way from the very beginning. Telcos and national ISPs have exerted control over access and content for a long time. In fact, there are web sites here in the US that are also blocked "for your own good". I'll leave it to you to figure out which sites those are.
he complains about something that isn't actually raised. Mandrake is not going to be using alien, neither is Debian. They are both going to be using a new package tool, called SmartPM. Google for it.
The tool is able to use debian and rpm repositories natively. It also does a lot of good things that no other tool, yum, apt or urpmi currently does. The people doing the research for it are current and former apt and urpmi developers and they have done their homework.
So, stop spreading misinformation about something which you have not taken the time to understand.
"We should not simply capitulate like the Spanish because that sends the message that terrorism works, and simply passes the problem on to our neighbours."
And pray tell us, how did the Spanish capitulate?
Would that be by voting ouf of office the government that send troops abroad without the approval of the Spanish congress which is unconstitutional in Spain?
Or would that be by demonstrating by the millions nationwide on the street and proving that democracy was alive and well and that the Spanish people would not be intimidated?
Finally, if you are referring to the pullout of the Spanish troops from Iraq, that was a campaign promise of Zapatero, the Spanish prime minister. He said that only through the approval of Congress would Spanish troops be sent abroad.
Given that the war in Iraq was justified on a string of falsehoods and that over 92% of Spaniards opposed the war in Iraq, being part of that farce is nothing the Spanish people wanted.
So pray tell me how is that the Spanish capitulated? By being informed and not falling for the crap that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the WTC attacks? Or is it by demonstrating and making sure that its government did not use terrorism for political ends by attributing the attacks to ETA, in full knowledge that this was not the case?
What your posts shows both in its language and content is that you have internalized, perhaps inadvertently, the propaganda campaigns put out by the neocons and their servants in the media.
Given that software is always bound to have flaws, modularized code allows you to fix the problem once and have it fixed in all applications that use that library, which is what I just did in my Debian system.
To pretend that replicating the same fuctionality across thousands of incompatible libraries in different operating systems is the solution is as close to blindness as you can get.
You say that modular code helps in maintainability. Yeah, and a big part of the maintainability is making the code maintainable from a security point of view. In summary, I want to fix things once and have them fixed across the board in all applications that use a library.
Of course, you appear to be coming from the world of proprietary operating systems, where the concept of a distribution of software that works well together and is maintained as a whole of does not exist.
The fact that on Windows, you may have to get the same fix from Microsoft, Adobe, Corel and a thousand other vendors only highlights the fact that open source code is both more reusable and more maintainable and thus ultimately more secure because the security process can be optimizied through modularity: Fix once, fix everywhere!