Syllable looks a lot like the Amiga Workbench to me. They even use the "Prefs" terminology, the shell formatting is the same. Let me guess, it supports Rexx?
Yes, it is all bitch and moan. That's because for all the do-gooding in the Linux community, the truth is that it's Linux or nothing for most. People want to work with what they know.
Read the other messages in this discussion. People are emphasizing how pleased they are to be able to get support jobs in the OSS market, because those are the most important. These jobs exist no matter what platform you use, people will always need support.
Why don't you clarify those misconceptions? I don't buy into Linueconomics. It makes as much sense as outsourcing all your IT jobs and becoming utterly dependent on foreign countries.
Same thing happens: your population is reduced to service jobs and can't afford the so-called cheap goods that companies are now producing (and selling for the same expensive prices, I might add).
And there is no incentive for it to run on Windows and Linux unless Linux becomes an important consumer market share. And on top of that, if it's compatible with *nix variants only, it doesn't buy you anything anyway.
You sleep in the bed you make. The only reason you're stuck with service jobs and support is because the Linux crowd the rest of the cow away. Support is NOT the only part of IT, and it's not even close to the most important (I think research, followed by new product development is, because it creates new markets).
And we saw how well the communist economy, with everyone on a level playing field works. I for one hope that despite the OSS movement, people will be paid to WRITE software, not just be living in the computer equivalent of a McDonalds service-slave job market to everything given away for free. Not everyone dreams of maintaining Linux user accounts for a living.
There is plenty of software that works well for most platforms, including Linux and Windows. How does "growing demand" originate from multi-platform *nixware? Properly written Windows software works fine on Windows too. What's your point? You can write bad and good software for any platform, coding for Unix does not make it somehow magically nicer.
Using Linux does not create jobs. It shifts some of the existing jobs to a new platform (such as admins, product support, etc), lets the specialists of the old platform go, and creates some new specialist jobs. In the end, it does nothing other than cost more or less depending on what platform you moved to. Oh and in the case of OSS non-supported software, it may require you to hire additional devs to maintain your kernel.
But you saved some money on your licenses!!! Or did you?
If they need to hire even 2 of you (ie. Linux migration experts), then it wasn't so cheap to replace Sun now was it? The whole idea behind Linux is FREE, so stop asking to be paid for working on it. Accept your poison! There are tons of people willing to do your job for free in the OSS world. Why not just hire Windows or Sun admins instead? The cost of the seats compared to the salary of the admins is low and they already had the Sun seats in place. Once business starts figuring this out, attitudes to "free" will change.
> Nice troll.
Thanks.
>Wasn't stimulating competition the main reason for patents?
Absolutely not. Patents were designed to allow an individual a limited monopoly on their ideas, to encourage the growth of the sciences without destroying the profitability. It allows the inventor to earn money, while still sharing his work publically.
> Although IANAL, I maintain that patents pose no real threat to OSS development, since authorship of OSS is a "moving target" (especially where derivative works come into play).
Are we all anarchists now? This is like saying it's OK to kill people as long as you keep running and don't get caught. The OSS that infringes a patent, however difficult to catch, would always be in violation, and the spirit of the work would be illegal.
Patents do not protect abstract ideas. Again, do some homework before spewing an invective. Patents protect a process, composition of material or apparatus. Most awarded software patents show apparatus and/or process, and if they don't, a challenge will usually crush them.
One of the restrictions of a patent monopoly is that you may not *USE* the incarnation of the invention, so the user using the material that infringes patent is itself a violation.
This whole discussion is rather moot; just don't write OSS that infringes patents. Just because it's OSS doesn't give free reign to violate the law. If the OSS is innovating, then the OSS author can claim public art or file their own patent.
It's really that simple. If a company has a patent right to it, don't infringe!
Is a Millionaire "Next Door" who lives in a $100K house, with a rusting 20 year old car, drinks generic Diet Cola and wears clothes from the Biway extricating any advantage whatsoever from being a millionaire? What's the point of dying with a million bucks if you lived like a po' man your whole life and never enjoyed any of it?
Doesn't make any sense. There is more to life than saving to be rich when you die.
Ditto what some of the prior posts said; I've found that SP2 turns a lot of the "dangerous" stuff off and turns on the Firewall. The pop-up blocker works really well (so far), I have yet to see a stray pop-up. Sometimes it blocks video playback from some sites, but they could be seen as a pop-up. From what I've read about the crash-protection changes in the SP, I think the rest of the OS community should wish SP2 was worse.. who else are we going to complain about if MS cleans up their act?
I'm sure the backlash will happen anyway, Joe User is going to complain that it "breaks" all sorts of stuff because of the firewall and security settings... when in fact it's mostly doing what it should.
I love slashdot. The first response to anything on this site is "Microsoft is to blame for everything". Has anyone considered that the reason OSS interfaces suck is because there is no incentive to do better? This stuff is free, stop complaining. If you want quality, then pay someone for a better version where the financial gain is an incentive to meet your requirements. Capitalism is evolution; the consumer plays mother nature and chooses the best product. I believe this is true, even if monopolies form (there are monopolies in nature too, they all end eventually)
People didn't start using Windows 3.0 just because; it was the best choice for a consumer at the time. The reasons for "best" have now changed (ie. interoperatibility).
Slashdot Mirror
Syllable looks a lot like the Amiga Workbench to me. They even use the "Prefs" terminology, the shell formatting is the same. Let me guess, it supports Rexx?
Yes, it is all bitch and moan. That's because for all the do-gooding in the Linux community, the truth is that it's Linux or nothing for most. People want to work with what they know.
Yes, yes. Let's all rush to copy Windows. MS never innovates...er, wait? oh.
Read the other messages in this discussion. People are emphasizing how pleased they are to be able to get support jobs in the OSS market, because those are the most important. These jobs exist no matter what platform you use, people will always need support. Why don't you clarify those misconceptions? I don't buy into Linueconomics. It makes as much sense as outsourcing all your IT jobs and becoming utterly dependent on foreign countries. Same thing happens: your population is reduced to service jobs and can't afford the so-called cheap goods that companies are now producing (and selling for the same expensive prices, I might add).
And there is no incentive for it to run on Windows and Linux unless Linux becomes an important consumer market share. And on top of that, if it's compatible with *nix variants only, it doesn't buy you anything anyway.
You sleep in the bed you make. The only reason you're stuck with service jobs and support is because the Linux crowd the rest of the cow away. Support is NOT the only part of IT, and it's not even close to the most important (I think research, followed by new product development is, because it creates new markets).
And we saw how well the communist economy, with everyone on a level playing field works. I for one hope that despite the OSS movement, people will be paid to WRITE software, not just be living in the computer equivalent of a McDonalds service-slave job market to everything given away for free. Not everyone dreams of maintaining Linux user accounts for a living.
There is plenty of software that works well for most platforms, including Linux and Windows. How does "growing demand" originate from multi-platform *nixware? Properly written Windows software works fine on Windows too. What's your point? You can write bad and good software for any platform, coding for Unix does not make it somehow magically nicer.
Using Linux does not create jobs. It shifts some of the existing jobs to a new platform (such as admins, product support, etc), lets the specialists of the old platform go, and creates some new specialist jobs. In the end, it does nothing other than cost more or less depending on what platform you moved to. Oh and in the case of OSS non-supported software, it may require you to hire additional devs to maintain your kernel. But you saved some money on your licenses!!! Or did you?
If they need to hire even 2 of you (ie. Linux migration experts), then it wasn't so cheap to replace Sun now was it? The whole idea behind Linux is FREE, so stop asking to be paid for working on it. Accept your poison! There are tons of people willing to do your job for free in the OSS world. Why not just hire Windows or Sun admins instead? The cost of the seats compared to the salary of the admins is low and they already had the Sun seats in place. Once business starts figuring this out, attitudes to "free" will change.
> Nice troll. Thanks. >Wasn't stimulating competition the main reason for patents? Absolutely not. Patents were designed to allow an individual a limited monopoly on their ideas, to encourage the growth of the sciences without destroying the profitability. It allows the inventor to earn money, while still sharing his work publically.
> Although IANAL, I maintain that patents pose no real threat to OSS development, since authorship of OSS is a "moving target" (especially where derivative works come into play). Are we all anarchists now? This is like saying it's OK to kill people as long as you keep running and don't get caught. The OSS that infringes a patent, however difficult to catch, would always be in violation, and the spirit of the work would be illegal.
Patents do not protect abstract ideas. Again, do some homework before spewing an invective. Patents protect a process, composition of material or apparatus. Most awarded software patents show apparatus and/or process, and if they don't, a challenge will usually crush them.
One of the restrictions of a patent monopoly is that you may not *USE* the incarnation of the invention, so the user using the material that infringes patent is itself a violation. This whole discussion is rather moot; just don't write OSS that infringes patents. Just because it's OSS doesn't give free reign to violate the law. If the OSS is innovating, then the OSS author can claim public art or file their own patent. It's really that simple. If a company has a patent right to it, don't infringe!
Is a Millionaire "Next Door" who lives in a $100K house, with a rusting 20 year old car, drinks generic Diet Cola and wears clothes from the Biway extricating any advantage whatsoever from being a millionaire? What's the point of dying with a million bucks if you lived like a po' man your whole life and never enjoyed any of it? Doesn't make any sense. There is more to life than saving to be rich when you die.
Ditto what some of the prior posts said; I've found that SP2 turns a lot of the "dangerous" stuff off and turns on the Firewall. The pop-up blocker works really well (so far), I have yet to see a stray pop-up. Sometimes it blocks video playback from some sites, but they could be seen as a pop-up. From what I've read about the crash-protection changes in the SP, I think the rest of the OS community should wish SP2 was worse.. who else are we going to complain about if MS cleans up their act? I'm sure the backlash will happen anyway, Joe User is going to complain that it "breaks" all sorts of stuff because of the firewall and security settings... when in fact it's mostly doing what it should.
I love slashdot. The first response to anything on this site is "Microsoft is to blame for everything". Has anyone considered that the reason OSS interfaces suck is because there is no incentive to do better? This stuff is free, stop complaining. If you want quality, then pay someone for a better version where the financial gain is an incentive to meet your requirements. Capitalism is evolution; the consumer plays mother nature and chooses the best product. I believe this is true, even if monopolies form (there are monopolies in nature too, they all end eventually) People didn't start using Windows 3.0 just because; it was the best choice for a consumer at the time. The reasons for "best" have now changed (ie. interoperatibility).