I must say that after reading this article SCO has shown its lack of understanding of Open Source. The funny thing is that they say they have a "SCO Linux" to describe a closed source os that can not be used for commercial tasks.
In my eyes SCO will be (already is?) a dead company. Face it SCO, you're on the wrong train going the wrong way! I can't come up with one single reason why I should use UnixWare instead of Linux for any Intel server. Wake up!
I think he meant "releasing something as X.0 when it really has beta quality is against the spirit of open source". It should be released early and often, but it should be labeled beta until it is really stable. In other words, Redhat should have released 5.9.1, 5.9.2, 5.9.3 etc. util it was rock solid before calling it 6.0.
There is one thing that bothers me a bit and that I can't understand with "people like you". It seems as if the only thing that is important is money. I work with computers because I have a deep intereset in them and find them exciting. I participate in open source projects because I belive I can help in making the world a better place by sharing and helping each other. I live for the technology, not for the money or the marketshares. I guess we all have different views on things, but must say I feel sad when I see people in the computer business that don't really seem to be interested in computers, only the money.
This article says "Stampede has taken the Red Hat sources and recompiled them for Pentium-only architectures". This is defenetly NOT the case! Stampede has nothing to do with RedHat. Thank God for that!
I must say I agree with you when you say that GUI applications can be powerful, like CAD tools for instance. But it is my belief that GUIs are not the best solution for every task made on a computer. In other words the command-line will be always be useful.
Another thing that strikes me is that many seems to believe that natural-language communication with computers is the future. That may be true for some people/tasks, but I think that it will only (or mostly) be used for practical reasons, like helping disabled people or used in tasks when you hands are tied up with something else.
It may be interesting to look at other areas where man-machines-interaction is taking place. As an example, let's take a look at driving a car. I would not what to talk to the car, since I have much more precision with my hands and legs. In case of a sudden obstacle I could (almost) rely on my reflexes to save me, instead of having to think of the right phrase to stop the car or make it turn. By the time I have managed to remember the right phrase it may be too late.
I realize that this example may be a bit extreme (or even silly) but I believe there is a point. Just because we can talk to a computer it may not be a practical solution since talking is a relatively slow and indistinct communication method compared to keystrokes or mouse movements.
no, it's not about what window manager linux should have or not have, but instead about basic stuff like what the filesystem structure should look like, what basic libs should be included, what basic utilities should be included, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Are there any disadvantages to GNUStep compared to Gnome or KDE?
Gnome and KDE have a lot more apps, there are not very many apps using GNUstep yet, hopefully they will come.
Does anyone have any problems with NextStep that can't be overcome without switching to a completly different system?
Nextstep was/is a great system, I used it and loved it, BUT there was one big disadventage, the lack of applications.
I must say that after reading this article SCO has shown its lack of understanding of Open Source. The funny thing is that they say they have a "SCO Linux" to describe a closed source os that can not be used for commercial tasks.
In my eyes SCO will be (already is?) a dead company. Face it SCO, you're on the wrong train going the wrong way! I can't come up with one single reason why I should use UnixWare instead of Linux for any Intel server. Wake up!
Will pgcc be merged with gcc, or what is that status of that?
I advocate the use of Linux and X as much as I can
ok, please don't take this as a flame, it is not meant as a flame, but simply a question you maybe should think about. The question is:
Why do you advocate the use of X when you don't know what it is?
kind regards,
Per
I think he meant "releasing something as X.0 when it really has beta quality is against the spirit of open source". It should be released early and often, but it should be labeled beta until it is really stable. In other words, Redhat should have released 5.9.1, 5.9.2, 5.9.3 etc. util it was rock solid before calling it 6.0.
There is one thing that bothers me a bit and that I can't understand with "people like you". It seems as if the only thing that is important is money. I work with computers because I have a deep intereset in them and find them exciting. I participate in open source projects because I belive I can help in making the world a better place by sharing and helping each other. I live for the technology, not for the money or the marketshares. I guess we all have different views on things, but must say I feel sad when I see people in the computer business that don't really seem to be interested in computers, only the money.
This article says "Stampede has taken the Red Hat sources and recompiled them for Pentium-only architectures". This is defenetly NOT the case! Stampede has nothing to do with RedHat. Thank God for that!
I must say I agree with you when you say that GUI applications can be powerful, like CAD tools for instance. But it is my belief that GUIs are not the best solution for every task made on a computer. In other words the command-line will be always be useful.
Another thing that strikes me is that many seems to believe that natural-language communication with computers is the future. That may be true for some people/tasks, but I think that it will only (or mostly) be used for practical reasons, like helping disabled people or used in tasks when you hands are tied up with something else.
It may be interesting to look at other areas where man-machines-interaction is taking place. As an example, let's take a look at driving a car. I would not what to talk to the car, since I have much more precision with my hands and legs. In case of a sudden obstacle I could (almost) rely on my reflexes to save me, instead of having to think of the right phrase to stop the car or make it turn. By the time I have managed to remember the right phrase it may be too late.
I realize that this example may be a bit extreme (or even silly) but I believe there is a point. Just because we can talk to a computer it may not be a practical solution since talking is a relatively slow and indistinct communication method compared to keystrokes or mouse movements.
Just my 2....
no, it's not about what window manager linux should have or not have, but instead about basic stuff like what the filesystem structure should look like, what basic libs should be included, what basic utilities should be included, etc.
btw, the link is http://www.linuxbase.org/