Ximian is Miguel's, but Gnome belongs to the Gnome Foundation.
Mono, however, is something entirely in Miguel's hands. Whether or not the Foundation accepts his vision for making Gnome 4.0 a.NET system is another matter.
I hope they consider it carefully and don't dismiss it out of hand.
>"What is the intrinsic value of "easy to learn"?"
that which is not more difficult than a certain percentage within a standard distribution
That is a definition of ease of use, not a description of intrinsic value.
>"If that were true, why would people work on their own cars, or modify them to make them perform better?"
work on cars dosn't really fit within that area I don't think
The point I was trying to make is that 'ease of use' should not be the all-defining criteria for doing everything in life.
If ease of use were the sole basis for living, people wouldn't hang off of Zodiac on 165' ropes. They would take the nature trail up the back of El Capitan.
I believe it will become less important over time. Why? Because the high-flying VC money and gold-rush speculation that drove those fat boomtime salaries are what really paid for open-source.
Now that we have heard from Bill Gates, perhaps we can pump a little more reality into the discussion.
When I started using Linux in 1994, the Information Superhighway wasn't on the radar. MOST IT jobs were in the same sectors that they are in now: database management. At that time, I saw thousands of listings on usenet for DB administrators and sysadmins. What the hell did those jobs have to do with open source? Nothing! People got paid for computing and open source projects were flourishing. This momentary dip in open source funding does not equate to a death knell for non-proprietary software development.
But now that you have done your obligatory dance on the open source grave, keep this in mind: As long as there are programmers who are willing to collectivly contribute their spare time to a project, open source will survive. That may seem alien to you, but people contribute to all kinds of collaborative efforts without the expectation of monitary gain ($1BUSD donated to Red Cross).
You might not agree with the cooperative sentiment, but there is 400 years of history behind the open source philosophy.
I was laid off ten years ago (when I was 30) and went out and started a company. I was doing okay, but the bills were racking up fast and I needed to stem the cash flow problem. I took a job that I have held ever since.
Where would I be had I kept the company going?
Who knows?
It might have panned out beautifully.
Risk can be a good thing.
If these people are willing to take a short-term risk and keep coding, they may actually be in a better position in the long term.
If you think that certainty comes with age, talk to me again in 10 years.
I can sympathize with users who are overwhelmed with the abundance of information that they are fed each day. I have four interfaces that I use on a daily basis, each of which was declared 'dead' by a new technology. I read the newspaper while I eat my breakfast, I listen to the radio on my way to work, I use my computer when I get to work, I do research at home by browsing the web, and I watch my television for infotainment.
No one has proposed eliminating my car radio in any meaningful way. In fact, during the dot com rush, the radio was supposed to be replaced by a satellite fed computer that would do essentially the same thing - stream content. Why change what something that already worked fine *without* a satellite?
I was also supposed to tank my televison for a computer that would play mp3s, surf the web, stream video, and cook my dinner. Why change that interface when all I want to do is watch "6 Feet Under" or "The Sopranos"?
I like the systems the way they operate now. If the researchers were to study how people conduct their daily lives, they might learn that humans use a variety of interfaces to gather information. To use the metaphor of Gelernter, these people seem to be armed with a hammer and view every information problem as a nail.
Our office recieves several (>20) packages a week, most shipped via UPS. At the end of the fiscal year, that number is comprised by ~50% new computer systems. The boxes haven't a flaw on them.
I can only surmise that your experience is far outside the norm. You probably ride out at the 99th percentile of problem shipments. I don't know what your shipment looked like before, but your packing seems to have been a little light for such a valuable item.
As for the other UPS bashers on this thread, I guess you are too young to remember the days before UPS. Most packages arrived via the USPS and had approximately the same damage rate. The difference between before and after UPS is:
1) UPS delivers the boxes to your door - the Postal Service doesn't (and didn't).
2) UPS delivers faster now than the USPS ever did when it controlled nearly all non-industrial package shipments.
If you think that FedEx is any better, you might want to compare the volume of packages shipping through the two respective companies. Comparing UPS to FedEx or Airborne is not apples to apples.
Windows has already convinced the masses that no other operating system in the world is capable of letting them write grandma a letter while simultaneously surfing for pOrn.
Linux, an enviable system with a great deal of potential, will not dislodge Microsoft from its dominance on the desktop precisely because it has not disloged it from the minds of the average consumer. Even my IS support staff at work has three choices on their callin support line:
1) PC support
2) Mac support
3) UNIX support
When I called the PC helpdesk recently to get a URL for a site that mirrors the latest Linux binaries, he told me that he couldn't because he worked the *PC* support desk. Never mind that I WAS using a PC; in his mind (and most everyone elses) PCs only run Windows.
The OS folks can code until they are calcified from lack of movement, but until Linux distros actually engage in *advertising and marketing* to consumers, Microsoft will continue to dominate dispite this latest court action (or any future action).
On a separate note, Microsoft probably won't care whether it continues to keep the desktop in the next 5-10 years anyhow. They are trying to become a telco and broadcast company. They have been making that move since 1993 and have only stalled because of the surge in interest in the Internet.
There are several inaccuracies in this post that need correction:
The moon surface is comprised mainly by tholiitic basalt - the same stuff that the Hawiian Islands are made of. It is extremely dense, hard rock.
The moon dust is just a surface veneer, just like blow sand in the Western US. Bore deep enough and you have a structurally stable environment to build habitable shelters.
As for geologic stability, the moon is tectonically dead (no seismic hazards), has no liquid water on its surface, and has no atmosphere to form winds. In short, there is no erosional capability other than by meteors.
As I said before, dig it deep enough (50 - 100 m), and your pretty safe.
Star Office is positioned to move forward, but they have not released anything for quite awhile. I have been waiting for something beyond the 5.2 release so that I can show our management that we can duplicate the current office app for less money.
StarOffice needs to get something out quick to keep the off-line (not.NET) crowd from finding another alternative.
By the way, here's a little piece of information for you, Texas can do this if it so chooses.
That is a position that can be argued was settled in 1865 with the defeat of the Confederacy.
Each of the states claim sovereignty above the federal government to some extent. They are in fact quasi-coequals with the ratification of the 11th Amendment.
The assertion that Texas could go its own way in all aspects of governance is hypothetical, but the reality is more important. Texas does not have its own independent military or foreign service, for instance. Texas may think they are indepenent of the will of the Federal Republic, but they are mistaken.
Slashdot Mirror
Aye, "Dr. Who and the Two Towers".
Leave it to Hollywood to find a nice, punchy title to grace this soon-to-be classic sci/fi thriller.
Shouldn't that be "Two Towers"?
Well, according to a 7th grade geography book I've looked at....Glaciers move uphill!!
The book was poorly written or you are misstating the interpretation.
Glaciers carve valley walls in the same way water erode stream channels. The flow on the valley walls is from side-stream erosion.
Ximian is Miguel's, but Gnome belongs to the Gnome Foundation.
.NET system is another matter.
Mono, however, is something entirely in Miguel's hands. Whether or not the Foundation accepts his vision for making Gnome 4.0 a
I hope they consider it carefully and don't dismiss it out of hand.
Available for viewing - roughly an hour long.
Here 'tis
>"What is the intrinsic value of "easy to learn"?"
that which is not more difficult than a certain percentage within a standard distribution
That is a definition of ease of use, not a description of intrinsic value.
>"If that were true, why would people work on their own cars, or modify them to make them perform better?"
work on cars dosn't really fit within that area I don't think
The point I was trying to make is that 'ease of use' should not be the all-defining criteria for doing everything in life.
If ease of use were the sole basis for living, people wouldn't hang off of Zodiac on 165' ropes. They would take the nature trail up the back of El Capitan.
Ease of use is important because time is a limited resource and different people have different priorities, asshole. DUH!
Then don't waste your time on it.
But don't expect me to waste my time on working on *your* problems (natural gas exploration, nuclear waste management).
After all, using your logic, only simple things should be useful.
Somehow I doubt the average office worker would have higher productivity if they used a Linux solution instead of a Windows one? I think not.
Is it fun arguing with yourself.
I've never advocated EVERYONE moving on to Linux.
But that is hardly the issue, is it?
Posting as an anonymous coward means never having to defend your assertions.
What is the intrinsic value of "easy to learn"?
If that were true, why would people work on their own cars, or modify them to make them perform better?
Are you saying that if physics were easy to learn, then it would be better?
Better than what?
The 'ease' argument is only valid for the marketplace. In that context I would agree that Linux has an extreme uphill battle.
But to question the validity of studying something due entirely to its ease of use?.....
Then why study anything?
And his shoes were divine.
I guess I'll be looking for a RedHat booth at my next anti-government, milita-sponsored gunshow.
You totally missed his point.
He made several points. I responded to the one I disagreed with.
He clearly said that he didn't think that Linux or other OSS projects would disappear; just the "business model".
And if his crystal ball is so accurate, why didn't he make this statement 5 years ago.
Hindsight is always so clear.
But,whatever. You got your karma; that was the point right?
Just to make you happy, I posted this at a "No Score +1 Bonus".
I guess you are not interested in *my* point, right?
Acronym filter = lameness filter.
How do employees of government agencies get on slashdot?
AFAIK.
IANATL.
I believe it will become less important over time. Why? Because the high-flying VC money and gold-rush speculation that drove those fat boomtime salaries are what really paid for open-source.
Now that we have heard from Bill Gates, perhaps we can pump a little more reality into the discussion.
When I started using Linux in 1994, the Information Superhighway wasn't on the radar. MOST IT jobs were in the same sectors that they are in now: database management. At that time, I saw thousands of listings on usenet for DB administrators and sysadmins. What the hell did those jobs have to do with open source? Nothing! People got paid for computing and open source projects were flourishing. This momentary dip in open source funding does not equate to a death knell for non-proprietary software development.
But now that you have done your obligatory dance on the open source grave, keep this in mind: As long as there are programmers who are willing to collectivly contribute their spare time to a project, open source will survive. That may seem alien to you, but people contribute to all kinds of collaborative efforts without the expectation of monitary gain ($1BUSD donated to Red Cross).
You might not agree with the cooperative sentiment, but there is 400 years of history behind the open source philosophy.
I was laid off ten years ago (when I was 30) and went out and started a company. I was doing okay, but the bills were racking up fast and I needed to stem the cash flow problem. I took a job that I have held ever since.
Where would I be had I kept the company going?
Who knows?
It might have panned out beautifully.
Risk can be a good thing.
If these people are willing to take a short-term risk and keep coding, they may actually be in a better position in the long term.
If you think that certainty comes with age, talk to me again in 10 years.
I can sympathize with users who are overwhelmed with the abundance of information that they are fed each day. I have four interfaces that I use on a daily basis, each of which was declared 'dead' by a new technology. I read the newspaper while I eat my breakfast, I listen to the radio on my way to work, I use my computer when I get to work, I do research at home by browsing the web, and I watch my television for infotainment.
No one has proposed eliminating my car radio in any meaningful way. In fact, during the dot com rush, the radio was supposed to be replaced by a satellite fed computer that would do essentially the same thing - stream content. Why change what something that already worked fine *without* a satellite?
I was also supposed to tank my televison for a computer that would play mp3s, surf the web, stream video, and cook my dinner. Why change that interface when all I want to do is watch "6 Feet Under" or "The Sopranos"?
I like the systems the way they operate now. If the researchers were to study how people conduct their daily lives, they might learn that humans use a variety of interfaces to gather information. To use the metaphor of Gelernter, these people seem to be armed with a hammer and view every information problem as a nail.
Our office recieves several (>20) packages a week, most shipped via UPS. At the end of the fiscal year, that number is comprised by ~50% new computer systems. The boxes haven't a flaw on them.
I can only surmise that your experience is far outside the norm. You probably ride out at the 99th percentile of problem shipments. I don't know what your shipment looked like before, but your packing seems to have been a little light for such a valuable item.
As for the other UPS bashers on this thread, I guess you are too young to remember the days before UPS. Most packages arrived via the USPS and had approximately the same damage rate. The difference between before and after UPS is:
1) UPS delivers the boxes to your door - the Postal Service doesn't (and didn't).
2) UPS delivers faster now than the USPS ever did when it controlled nearly all non-industrial package shipments.
If you think that FedEx is any better, you might want to compare the volume of packages shipping through the two respective companies. Comparing UPS to FedEx or Airborne is not apples to apples.
Nah, you're not the only one.
I saw those initials for the first time and thought the same thing.
I found it odd that people kept saying "RMS said this.." and "RMS said that...".
I just assumed it was geek-speak.
Windows has already convinced the masses that no other operating system in the world is capable of letting them write grandma a letter while simultaneously surfing for pOrn.
Linux, an enviable system with a great deal of potential, will not dislodge Microsoft from its dominance on the desktop precisely because it has not disloged it from the minds of the average consumer. Even my IS support staff at work has three choices on their callin support line:
1) PC support
2) Mac support
3) UNIX support
When I called the PC helpdesk recently to get a URL for a site that mirrors the latest Linux binaries, he told me that he couldn't because he worked the *PC* support desk. Never mind that I WAS using a PC; in his mind (and most everyone elses) PCs only run Windows.
The OS folks can code until they are calcified from lack of movement, but until Linux distros actually engage in *advertising and marketing* to consumers, Microsoft will continue to dominate dispite this latest court action (or any future action).
On a separate note, Microsoft probably won't care whether it continues to keep the desktop in the next 5-10 years anyhow. They are trying to become a telco and broadcast company. They have been making that move since 1993 and have only stalled because of the surge in interest in the Internet.
There are several inaccuracies in this post that need correction:
The moon surface is comprised mainly by tholiitic basalt - the same stuff that the Hawiian Islands are made of. It is extremely dense, hard rock.
The moon dust is just a surface veneer, just like blow sand in the Western US. Bore deep enough and you have a structurally stable environment to build habitable shelters.
As for geologic stability, the moon is tectonically dead (no seismic hazards), has no liquid water on its surface, and has no atmosphere to form winds. In short, there is no erosional capability other than by meteors.
As I said before, dig it deep enough (50 - 100 m), and your pretty safe.
...pretending to be a master of international intrigue...
His comments were directed at domestic security initiatives.
You obviously didn't read the article.
There isn't a news source in the world that is unbiased...
only slightly less biased than the other guy...
Star Office is positioned to move forward, but they have not released anything for quite awhile. I have been waiting for something beyond the 5.2 release so that I can show our management that we can duplicate the current office app for less money.
.NET) crowd from finding another alternative.
StarOffice needs to get something out quick to keep the off-line (not
Here's a real Zippy processor.
None. You have difficulty with basic US civics.
That is a position that can be argued was settled in 1865 with the defeat of the Confederacy.
Each of the states claim sovereignty above the federal government to some extent. They are in fact quasi-coequals with the ratification of the 11th Amendment.
The assertion that Texas could go its own way in all aspects of governance is hypothetical, but the reality is more important. Texas does not have its own independent military or foreign service, for instance. Texas may think they are indepenent of the will of the Federal Republic, but they are mistaken.