That's the problem with the GNU license that will prevent it from being used in most corporate software. If I write a program that does something simple... say allows Apple Mail to access an exchange server via the OWA interface, I could proceed in two ways:
1) Spend the time to view TCP Dumps, analyze the protocol, write my own implementation, then incorporate that implementation into my plugin. -OR-
2) I could grab one of hundreds of open source implementations of the protocol and just write the plugin
The problem is that once I use any GPL code I am bound by the restrictions of the GPL. If I were to distribute the software to employees of the company I am required to distribute(or at least make available) the source code. This poses a real problem to corporations. In my example the only problems might be some server names or a domain name that were in the code, and those could be removed, but imagine if the code implemented a proprietary protocol and only used some GPL code to connect to an NTP server?
Releasing code as open source is great, but if you're going to do it why not just let it be completely free? Exploitation? If someone can take code that is completely free and turn it into a closed commercial product then that product must satisfy a need that's not being met by the open source community. There may be times that code is used without credit being given, but I think that there would be much more development if people using the code didn't have to worry about how the open source code was going to affect their future prospects for sale.
If you write software that you want to be paid for, release it under a for pay license.
If you write software that you don't want to be paid for, release it under a completely free license... maybe even anonymously.
If all software was released this way then there wouldn't need to be any odd licensing in a software package... everything is either free or for-pay.
In second grade I was pulled from my "normal" classes and given an IQ test by an administrator, apparently my scores earned me a spot in a "gifted program", then a "gifted school". Overall the program just consisted of all of the same books that someone who was 2-7 grades higher would use. When I moved to the "gifted school" the program basically consisted of college-style education.
The problem was that none of the instruction really stimulated me. I didn't get a chance to learn on my own, I was given latitude to explore my interests, I was basically just given more work. The idea that more work is better work is central to the problem of educating "gifted" students. In the US it seems that the majority of people hoping to get ahead just work more, get overtime, and get paid a little more; instead they should work smarter, work less, get the same amount done, and enjoy themselves. I kind of got off topic there, but mediocrity is reinforced because so many jobs just pay you to show up; there's no reward for doing more.
Educating "gifted" students should focus on creativity and problem solving, not piling more and more memory work on them. Someone with a good memory isn't smart, those who know how to conceptualize and form abstractions are the smart ones.
Maybe creating an ad model that locally caches the heavy part of an ad would be a good thing, ads could be updated with pushes or according to some schedule, but the main part of the add content could be served from whatever site is showing the ad.
In practice I don't really see slow ads as being a problem though.
Reports of a Linux boom have been greatly exaggerated... it's been slowly picking up market share over time and will continue to do so... nothing sensational is going to happen... it's a good OS... it's getting better every day... as the OS is made "idiot-proof" all of the idiots will adopt. A great strategy would be to get linux in the elementary and middle schools, get 'em young.... keep 'em for life. It's an ellipses heavy tuesday.
I see your point, and as I said a couple times in the scope of this thread, I like open source and the ideals. I just see too much of the good get polluted by people who would want everyone to run open source just for the sake of running open source.
I'm still not convinced that Ubuntu couldn't deliver the closed-source driver warning in a less scathing manner.
If everybody thought that way, then there wouldn't be any open source software.
Not true at all, there are thousands of open source projects that have no closed source equivalent. Open source has a distinct advantage in the fact that even with a small development team there can be a lot of people giving advice and feedback. Many products, especially experimental projects would never get off the ground in the closed source world. I love open source tools and enjoy using open source when it works, but if I am going to be creating an enterprise level database I would not choose any of the open source packages at this point in time.
Look at something like MySQL, while it's a great product and a great accomplishment it lacks enterprise level support for things as simple as check constraints, this alone would exclude it from my choices when data integrity is a must.
If given the choice between two equal software solutions, one being closed, one being open I would tend to choose the open source product, unless I was paying for guaranteed support. If I am faced with a choice between an open source project that "kinda works" and a well developed closed source project I'm not going to cripple myself just to use the open source solution.
If I see a promising future in a piece of open source software I may even contribute, but I'll probably hold off from using it until it is mature enough to meet my needs.
The open source community is full of misguided evangelicals. If open source is so great it should stand on its own merits, not need some political figures shoving its virtues down our throats. When I installed Ubuntu(which I love, btw) on one of my boxes that happened to have an NVidia card I was confronted with a message that talked about how bad closed source drivers were before I could enable them and get a good resolution for my display. If some notice needs to be there due to licensing that's fine, but don't try and mold my views or express your personal beliefs in place like that.
If the NVidia drivers really are so hard to maintain, then they should break in the future... if closed source software really does run slower with more bugs then I should notice it.
I'm all for open source software, and I can identify with the ideals of the FOSS movement, but I also see that there is sometimes a need for software that works well, even if it is closed source.
I would rather have a closed source project that worked perfectly than an open source product that is a work in progress.
Linux has grown by leaps and bounds and is perhaps one of the best examples of open source does right, but the political figures in the linux world, while entertaining, do nothing but hurt the product with their constant bickering and injection of personal politics into a product that should be "free".
It's open beta right now, but I believe that SocialDetour.com will give control to users as to what info they would like open to the rest of the net as well as to other users, their friends, and their personal friends.
I think that with the exception of a few select coders the FOSS developers are mediocre at best, but luckily our computers are more than fast enough to make up for poorly implemented code. Unfortunately, a mediocre artist doesn't have the same latitude that a mediocre coder does. If an artist does a half assed job we will notice it right away, if a coder writes a routine that takes twice as long to execute as it should chances are the end user will never notice.
That's not to say that there are not a lot of great software packages, just that most of them provide a good utility, but are not implemented ideally. Along with artists I've noticed that FOSS overall suffers from a lack of really good UI designers. I think that we'll continue to see a lack of great UI and great Art because there are so few that do a truly great job and they enjoy compensation.
I'm getting pretty excited about Leopard, mainly because of the dev tools that will be coming along with it. The new version of XCode is supposed to support Objective-C 2.0 which includes garbage collection, dot syntax, and the remaining features in the IDE that Visual Studio could boast over XCode.
Another thing that may help out is the CHUD Tools, available at Apple's Developer Connection.
The CHUD Tools are "applications and tools for measuring and optimizing software performance on Mac OS X as well as for hardware bringup and system benchmarking". Developers use them to find any type of optimization problem with their applications, but you may be able to use them to monitor performance in your specific configuration and send a bug report to Apple to have a look at, surprisingly Apple has been very responsive to any bug supports and feature requests I have sent in over the years.
Feel free to contact me via e-mail if you'd like any other info or to toss ideas back and forth.
One thing that you may find helpful if you are having trouble with the finder is the "Quit Finder" feature that can be enabled with the help of some third party tools. I believe that it is still functional in the latest release of OS X, although I do not make use of it personally. I semi-decent write up can be found here/
Otherwise, running OS X binaries on a Linux Machine will be next to impossible with any current software, although the pulse of the Mac OS X development community hints at the Cocoa Libraries being moved to Windows(and possibly Linux) by Apple, which would enable any independent software developers to "write once, compile anywhere" using the cocoa frameworks.
what happens when you need to check two lambda expressions for equivalence? For something simple like continuing to supply power to any of the mechanical components?
I'd have to ask what environment you write code in. I find that Xcode on OS X is one of the best environments that I've ever developed in, there are a few things about the IDE that bother me, but it's great overall and is getting better with each new release, and designing websites is really where OS X shines.
I can agree with you on Linux being an easier to use server platform, but OS X runs almost all of the same tools so that may change if I used it as a server more often.
I just want to know why you would want to replace OS X with Linux? I understand the FOSS ideals, but you could always run linux in a virtual machine. I've installed Linux on quite a few of my Macs over the years, but since OS X I find that almost all of the linux functionality is sitting right in OS X.
What do you hope to gain by installing Linux as the full-time OS? Please don't flame me, I'd like some logical points, or even a "just because".
This is exactly the attitude that causes the GP to have no positive feelings towards sysadmins.
Why would you be petty and vindictive? You have a small amount of power in an artificial system, lose the god complex. If you were to do anything like this you'd more than likely be fired anyways and go back to being your normal self.
Any time I've been tasked as a sysadmin I've made it a point to treat all my users with respect and take the extra moment to explain things if it seemed like the user wanted to know a little more. Those actions gained me real respect and power. If you want appreciation as a sysadmin start treating the users that you administer with more respect and make sure that their needs are taken care of before they have to ask. If you have a good relationship with your users you'll hear from them regarding things other than problems... like maybe an invite to the bar, or coffee in the morning.
Having a specific day to "appreciate" anything is stupid, if you do a good job and treat people well you will be appreciated every day.
the politics in that case would be those of the kernel devs. It's somewhat annoying having a message that talks about drivers that are nearly imossible to maintain. It's easy to see the open-source ideology being screamed in that statement.
I really don't care if the drivers are closed-source as long as the company updates them and responds to bug reports. I hate to see politics creep into Ubuntu where I have to explicitly enable NVidia drivers, that makes it more trouble for me to use the drivers than it should.
LOL... I thought the same thing. Nintendo made sure to get it's classics out right away. Now that they have a solid library of base games they're branching out and trying new things. There are even some new Mario games on the way. I think that the author kind of missed the point, but it's interesting to think about the new directions that nintendo is opening up.
I think that new types of games are a necessary thing, and focusing on new types of gameplay is a very good move by nintendo that will benefit the entire industry. Microsoft and Sony systems now have production and development costs that are so high that the manufacturers cannot afford to take risks, but nintendo not only is focusing on the gameplay with their in-house development, but they also have begun to open the platform to independent developers so we can start to see a bunch of great smaller titles in the future.
that article was not very good, it wasn't even good. The entire thing lacked substance, it ended abruptly, and it did nothing to prove its point. At this point I think that this article is written by Ubuntu's PR firm.
I couldn't hear the sound at the office, but it was so great when everything turns to black dust and fills the container. I sent it to everyone in the office that doesn't read/.
what specifically did the Clinton-era government do? It seemed to me that he rode the prosperity of the Internet boom and left our economy in shambles(relatively speaking, of course).
Slashdot Mirror
That's the problem with the GNU license that will prevent it from being used in most corporate software. If I write a program that does something simple... say allows Apple Mail to access an exchange server via the OWA interface, I could proceed in two ways:
1) Spend the time to view TCP Dumps, analyze the protocol, write my own implementation, then incorporate that implementation into my plugin.
-OR-
2) I could grab one of hundreds of open source implementations of the protocol and just write the plugin
The problem is that once I use any GPL code I am bound by the restrictions of the GPL. If I were to distribute the software to employees of the company I am required to distribute(or at least make available) the source code. This poses a real problem to corporations. In my example the only problems might be some server names or a domain name that were in the code, and those could be removed, but imagine if the code implemented a proprietary protocol and only used some GPL code to connect to an NTP server?
Releasing code as open source is great, but if you're going to do it why not just let it be completely free? Exploitation? If someone can take code that is completely free and turn it into a closed commercial product then that product must satisfy a need that's not being met by the open source community. There may be times that code is used without credit being given, but I think that there would be much more development if people using the code didn't have to worry about how the open source code was going to affect their future prospects for sale.
If you write software that you want to be paid for, release it under a for pay license.
If you write software that you don't want to be paid for, release it under a completely free license... maybe even anonymously.
If all software was released this way then there wouldn't need to be any odd licensing in a software package... everything is either free or for-pay.
In second grade I was pulled from my "normal" classes and given an IQ test by an administrator, apparently my scores earned me a spot in a "gifted program", then a "gifted school". Overall the program just consisted of all of the same books that someone who was 2-7 grades higher would use. When I moved to the "gifted school" the program basically consisted of college-style education.
The problem was that none of the instruction really stimulated me. I didn't get a chance to learn on my own, I was given latitude to explore my interests, I was basically just given more work. The idea that more work is better work is central to the problem of educating "gifted" students. In the US it seems that the majority of people hoping to get ahead just work more, get overtime, and get paid a little more; instead they should work smarter, work less, get the same amount done, and enjoy themselves. I kind of got off topic there, but mediocrity is reinforced because so many jobs just pay you to show up; there's no reward for doing more.
Educating "gifted" students should focus on creativity and problem solving, not piling more and more memory work on them. Someone with a good memory isn't smart, those who know how to conceptualize and form abstractions are the smart ones.
Maybe creating an ad model that locally caches the heavy part of an ad would be a good thing, ads could be updated with pushes or according to some schedule, but the main part of the add content could be served from whatever site is showing the ad.
In practice I don't really see slow ads as being a problem though.
Reports of a Linux boom have been greatly exaggerated... it's been slowly picking up market share over time and will continue to do so... nothing sensational is going to happen... it's a good OS... it's getting better every day... as the OS is made "idiot-proof" all of the idiots will adopt. A great strategy would be to get linux in the elementary and middle schools, get 'em young.... keep 'em for life. It's an ellipses heavy tuesday.
I see your point, and as I said a couple times in the scope of this thread, I like open source and the ideals. I just see too much of the good get polluted by people who would want everyone to run open source just for the sake of running open source.
I'm still not convinced that Ubuntu couldn't deliver the closed-source driver warning in a less scathing manner.
If everybody thought that way, then there wouldn't be any open source software.
Not true at all, there are thousands of open source projects that have no closed source equivalent. Open source has a distinct advantage in the fact that even with a small development team there can be a lot of people giving advice and feedback. Many products, especially experimental projects would never get off the ground in the closed source world. I love open source tools and enjoy using open source when it works, but if I am going to be creating an enterprise level database I would not choose any of the open source packages at this point in time.
Look at something like MySQL, while it's a great product and a great accomplishment it lacks enterprise level support for things as simple as check constraints, this alone would exclude it from my choices when data integrity is a must.
If given the choice between two equal software solutions, one being closed, one being open I would tend to choose the open source product, unless I was paying for guaranteed support. If I am faced with a choice between an open source project that "kinda works" and a well developed closed source project I'm not going to cripple myself just to use the open source solution.
If I see a promising future in a piece of open source software I may even contribute, but I'll probably hold off from using it until it is mature enough to meet my needs.
Very true, I see all types in FOSS.. hopefully my statements aren't taken too literally :)
The open source community is full of misguided evangelicals. If open source is so great it should stand on its own merits, not need some political figures shoving its virtues down our throats. When I installed Ubuntu(which I love, btw) on one of my boxes that happened to have an NVidia card I was confronted with a message that talked about how bad closed source drivers were before I could enable them and get a good resolution for my display. If some notice needs to be there due to licensing that's fine, but don't try and mold my views or express your personal beliefs in place like that.
If the NVidia drivers really are so hard to maintain, then they should break in the future... if closed source software really does run slower with more bugs then I should notice it.
I'm all for open source software, and I can identify with the ideals of the FOSS movement, but I also see that there is sometimes a need for software that works well, even if it is closed source.
I would rather have a closed source project that worked perfectly than an open source product that is a work in progress.
Linux has grown by leaps and bounds and is perhaps one of the best examples of open source does right, but the political figures in the linux world, while entertaining, do nothing but hurt the product with their constant bickering and injection of personal politics into a product that should be "free".
It's open beta right now, but I believe that SocialDetour.com will give control to users as to what info they would like open to the rest of the net as well as to other users, their friends, and their personal friends.
I think that with the exception of a few select coders the FOSS developers are mediocre at best, but luckily our computers are more than fast enough to make up for poorly implemented code. Unfortunately, a mediocre artist doesn't have the same latitude that a mediocre coder does. If an artist does a half assed job we will notice it right away, if a coder writes a routine that takes twice as long to execute as it should chances are the end user will never notice.
That's not to say that there are not a lot of great software packages, just that most of them provide a good utility, but are not implemented ideally. Along with artists I've noticed that FOSS overall suffers from a lack of really good UI designers. I think that we'll continue to see a lack of great UI and great Art because there are so few that do a truly great job and they enjoy compensation.
I'm getting pretty excited about Leopard, mainly because of the dev tools that will be coming along with it. The new version of XCode is supposed to support Objective-C 2.0 which includes garbage collection, dot syntax, and the remaining features in the IDE that Visual Studio could boast over XCode.
Another thing that may help out is the CHUD Tools, available at Apple's Developer Connection.
The CHUD Tools are "applications and tools for measuring and optimizing software performance on Mac OS X as well as for hardware bringup and system benchmarking". Developers use them to find any type of optimization problem with their applications, but you may be able to use them to monitor performance in your specific configuration and send a bug report to Apple to have a look at, surprisingly Apple has been very responsive to any bug supports and feature requests I have sent in over the years.
Feel free to contact me via e-mail if you'd like any other info or to toss ideas back and forth.
Thanks for the reply :)
One thing that you may find helpful if you are having trouble with the finder is the "Quit Finder" feature that can be enabled with the help of some third party tools. I believe that it is still functional in the latest release of OS X, although I do not make use of it personally. I semi-decent write up can be found here/
Otherwise, running OS X binaries on a Linux Machine will be next to impossible with any current software, although the pulse of the Mac OS X development community hints at the Cocoa Libraries being moved to Windows(and possibly Linux) by Apple, which would enable any independent software developers to "write once, compile anywhere" using the cocoa frameworks.
what happens when you need to check two lambda expressions for equivalence? For something simple like continuing to supply power to any of the mechanical components?
I'd probably catch 'em with an overhand right... just to embarrass them a little more
I'd have to ask what environment you write code in. I find that Xcode on OS X is one of the best environments that I've ever developed in, there are a few things about the IDE that bother me, but it's great overall and is getting better with each new release, and designing websites is really where OS X shines.
I can agree with you on Linux being an easier to use server platform, but OS X runs almost all of the same tools so that may change if I used it as a server more often.
I just want to know why you would want to replace OS X with Linux? I understand the FOSS ideals, but you could always run linux in a virtual machine. I've installed Linux on quite a few of my Macs over the years, but since OS X I find that almost all of the linux functionality is sitting right in OS X.
What do you hope to gain by installing Linux as the full-time OS? Please don't flame me, I'd like some logical points, or even a "just because".
This is exactly the attitude that causes the GP to have no positive feelings towards sysadmins.
Why would you be petty and vindictive? You have a small amount of power in an artificial system, lose the god complex. If you were to do anything like this you'd more than likely be fired anyways and go back to being your normal self.
Any time I've been tasked as a sysadmin I've made it a point to treat all my users with respect and take the extra moment to explain things if it seemed like the user wanted to know a little more. Those actions gained me real respect and power.
If you want appreciation as a sysadmin start treating the users that you administer with more respect and make sure that their needs are taken care of before they have to ask. If you have a good relationship with your users you'll hear from them regarding things other than problems... like maybe an invite to the bar, or coffee in the morning.
Having a specific day to "appreciate" anything is stupid, if you do a good job and treat people well you will be appreciated every day.
the politics in that case would be those of the kernel devs. It's somewhat annoying having a message that talks about drivers that are nearly imossible to maintain. It's easy to see the open-source ideology being screamed in that statement.
I really don't care if the drivers are closed-source as long as the company updates them and responds to bug reports. I hate to see politics creep into Ubuntu where I have to explicitly enable NVidia drivers, that makes it more trouble for me to use the drivers than it should.
LOL... I thought the same thing. Nintendo made sure to get it's classics out right away. Now that they have a solid library of base games they're branching out and trying new things. There are even some new Mario games on the way. I think that the author kind of missed the point, but it's interesting to think about the new directions that nintendo is opening up.
I think that new types of games are a necessary thing, and focusing on new types of gameplay is a very good move by nintendo that will benefit the entire industry. Microsoft and Sony systems now have production and development costs that are so high that the manufacturers cannot afford to take risks, but nintendo not only is focusing on the gameplay with their in-house development, but they also have begun to open the platform to independent developers so we can start to see a bunch of great smaller titles in the future.
oh wow! one person that goes against the stereotype! alert teh intArnetz :p
that article was not very good, it wasn't even good. The entire thing lacked substance, it ended abruptly, and it did nothing to prove its point. At this point I think that this article is written by Ubuntu's PR firm.
I couldn't hear the sound at the office, but it was so great when everything turns to black dust and fills the container. I sent it to everyone in the office that doesn't read /.
what specifically did the Clinton-era government do? It seemed to me that he rode the prosperity of the Internet boom and left our economy in shambles(relatively speaking, of course).