Honestly? Because OS X just works. As much as I hate to say it they have done more with *nix than Linux has so far. I'd be happy to either VM Windows/Linux if needed, but OS X would stay.
I've been a Linux user for over 12 years, and I'm not too proud or zealous to say that Apple has created one hell of a nice bit of software. Sure, it will take some adjustments to accept the limited customization and some of the senseless expenses, but I've reached the point in life where my time has become more valuable than tinkering with an OS just to do what I want.
Plus, nothing says I can't do as you say if/when it gets to that point.
Wow, almost an intelligent troll except for that little thing called Bootcamp... you may want to read up on it. Also, Parallels is getting better and better DX support and with Vista sales low Microsoft may be forced to abandon it's GFW initiative.
Even though I'm a Linux guy, the closest I've seen to a possible laptop that could replace my desktop and be feasible is the latest Macbook Pro. DX10 graphics card, plenty of RAM, solid speed, LED LCD, good battery life, Superdrive, and big hard drive.
Once I see and read the reviews of the next OS X it may be time to make that jump to all laptop.
Absolutely not. Playing an MP3 that *I* ripped from a CD *I* bought or playing a DVD I paid for are as illegal as brushing my teeth. Sure, I could re-rip everything to OGG or whatever but I don;t care to and my MP3 player can't play them.
This is as stupid as limiting encryption for countries outside of the U.S. As if no one outside of the U.S. could come up with 128-bit encryption on their own.
I'm tired of corporation and companies somehow able to wiggle their way in to drag everything down and slow down progress for greed. Other countries are able to have tons of features on their cell phones, blazing fast Internet connections, and much more because it isn't being stifled by fucking companies.
OK, so we've all had this "discussion" before a million times, but it is important to revisit it right now. The reason is because never before has adoption and attention been so rapid and public as it is right now.
I don't mind there being 400+ distros available, but what is needed is a single solid foundation to build the main desktop around. Focused and intense development and streamlining needs to happen. Unifying UI across all packaged apps, ensuring ease of use, stability, and strength.
In my mind Ubuntu is the framework to use. Sure, people may have their own issues with it (even I do) but that doesn't take away from the fact that it is the best Linux has ever been on the desktop. We need to rally around it and make it as polished as possible, with as much attention and focus and more importantly *goals*. Apple has been able to do wonders with OS X due to this, yet many issues still remain 15 years later with Linux. Chaos and choice are great, but a full solid foundation to then let people build upon is better. Just as it is with the kernel it needs to be with the main package of apps and utils.
I tried on Digg to explain this more clearly to the R-tards who just say: "...but, MS Surface..." and "...iPhone..." and can't understand the significance of what they are seeing... it was a waste of time, hopefully it won't here.
This is not the same as Surface. Surface uses cameras to "see" the inputs, there are a finite (and low) number of inputs they can track simultaneously. Same with the iPhone, it can only track two inputs.
This is a complete framework to allow new and unique inputs to be created and then to allow apps to easily be created to interface with them. This also has no real limit on the number of inputs, so the possible applications are endless. This allows many *simultaneous* inputs from one or multiple inputs. It could accept a joystick, a mouse, a keyboard, a trackball, a glove interface, and more *all at once.* It isn't just one or two people using their fingers as mice, that is just a demo.
Imagine specialized interfaces that can simultaneously interact with many points on the screen at once... it is hard to do because it hasn't been done yet. Which is why it is hard to make people understand how different and revolutionary this really is.
Sorry, but you've totally missed it. Let me try to enlighten you. This is special because it is multiple inputs *simultaneously* and the framework to allow new apps and devices to be created and work together in ways never before possible. "Surface" uses a few cameras for input, which have a finite (and relatively low) number of inputs that can be tracked.
It has nothing to do with Google Earth, or any application shown in the video. This is not just about multi-touch, it is about an almost infinite number of simultaneous inputs and the ability to easily write programs to use them. This is much more revolutionary than most people can guess by the first glance.
Oh, but everyone will cry... "but, but, but, we need choice!!!1!" I totally agree with you, I'm not saying there cannot be other distros, just that until a rock solid foundation is built stop trying to build other ones. Let's pool the resources and efforts and make ONE distro as polished as possible, then let every 1337 haxor out there have a go at creating Suzie's Linux.
OS X has made huge progress in UI, unification, ease of use, and more in less than 10 years because they focused their efforts and had one goal. In my 12+ years with Linux I still see many of the same issues.
I honestly could care less which distro grabs the attention, what I do care about is that we finally come together somewhat and polish one distro to the absolute best it can be. The work can then be used to make every distro better, but it has to start somewhere.
FFS give up on creating yet another distro and let's make one as solid as possible, a true foundation. Instead of Linux Mint, put the effort into making Ubuntu that much better. Everyone wants their slice of the pie and attention in open source code, the part they miss is that they will gain even more if they are part of *the* distro that changes the balance.
What I would love to know is the actual sales numbers for Dell, after all this time they have yet to be stated. That would be a telling number, but I'm guessing MS has something to do with the fact that no number has come out yet.
You'd be surprised. I thought the same thing, that after that amount of time I would be useless... but it is the opposite... at least for IT. It gives you time for those long projects so you can bang them out without having to stop, go home, and then try to get back into it the next day. And it truly is no different than any normal day that you get stuck at work for an extra hour on a call or something. It is barely noticeable. I'd get home at 6-ish instead of 5pm due to the lack of traffic, so at the end of the day the difference really was only 1 hour! Also when I got home on both Tuesday and Friday I could actually relax, or go out, without any worry about getting to bed or thinking about work the next day. It is a freeing experience.
I agree it wouldn't work for everyone, and every job type, but for myself and the rest of the company it was awesome. There was not one complaint in my two years there, if anything people would tell their friends and they would apply to get in. If I had my way I'd work 7am-3pm and be pretty happy even M-F but I've yet to find that job.
I respect your reply, but I still think you are missing it a bit. Just as you admit artists/designers are needed, there is no avenue for them to get involved. They can't gain respect via writing code, they can gain respect by creating an environment that fits their style and opening up and asking for their help and input. You can't shoehorn them into a logical system that might make perfect sense to a coder, this has never been done to my knowledge.
In that same vein, you are minimizing management which is common and a terrible shame. You even point out how those coders of the kernel have now become "managers" and how well it works... I am saying the same thing but on the rest of the system.
Again the aversion is due to inept and B.S. managers that you and most everyone deals with daily, that is not representative of *all* managers and nothing is stopping some of the long standing app authors from taking on that role and keeping their respect. I'm not suggesting we just get a bunch of managers involved or "pure" architects. Nothing drives me nuts more either. As for my background, I have over 14 years in IT and have helped to create and run a number of multi-million dollar *innovative* companies. I now run one of the top University networks in the U.S. and am not just some schmuck with pie-in-the-sky ideas. Again, I truly believe in what I say and I am adamant about it because over the years I see the same thing over and over and it is maddening. I do have the capacity to gain acceptance and speak at conferences and as I continue to speak with others involved in OSS I am taking note of opinions and criticisms I grow closer to building a comprehensive speech that covers the most common reactions and objections.
In college I worked for a company who did 10 hour days, Monday/Tuesday, Wednesday off, and then Thursday/Friday. It was pure heaven. It makes life into short little two day weeks. Tuesday night becomes like a Friday since you don't have to work the next day, and then you get a weekday to either wear off what you did the night before or get errands and stuff done during the week when things are less busy. Then Thursday/Friday and the normal weekend. The only two days that kind of suck then are Monday and Thursday.
Absolutely the best work schedule ever, plus it cuts down on commuting since you are missing the standard rush hours, and since you are already at work the extra hour or two is no big deal when the reward is a full day off. I could care less about fluffy crap and I don't need to be treated like a superstar or anything, just let me work smarter and have an equal amount of time for my real life.
Great attitude, and you are not alone in your opinion. I'd rather not have you in my house, and instead being the king of your own little sandcastle. I'll be sure to kick it right the fuck in your face as I go.
I've never said things need to be standardized entirely. In fact I'm saying the opposite, there needs to be a solid foundation. Foundations are stable, not chaotic, and easy to then be creative and build upon. Why people continue to believe they can prove years of history wrong, and keep plodding along this path is beyond me. Sure there will be flashes of brilliance, and some areas may flourish, but it will not work as a whole.
We don't need government, we need guidance and steering and direction from some point above the coder level. Imagine the state of the kernel without it... now, why again do you think this is not the case with the rest? You are fooling yourself.
I'm not sure how I or anyone can be "wrong" about their opinion, but I will try to respond. I also want to have "fun" and working on something cool when I write OSS code... but that doesn't mean I can't be working inside of some sort of high-level constraint or with some design/integration in mind. I'm not saying these overlords need to be cracking a whip and forcing you to code a burning program when you want to make a new notepad... I'm saying there needs to be visionaries with a full view of the big picture and then it actually makes it easier for everyone else from there down.
I'm not trying to jam any square pegs into round holes, I'm trying to have some method to the madness (and no it money has no part in what I am saying). Just as boring as some of your daily tasks are, so are the days for us managers... especially managers who are skilled and talented and not just a PHB (yes, we exist). I'd much rather be helping to steer a big ship destined for something truly great, rather than listen to people bitch about Suzie in the next cube's radio or hearing yet-another excuse as to why you need every Friday off for 5 months.
Linux needs more management and it needs more artists/designers, there are talented folks in these areas who are willing to work just as hard as the coders, and yes, even for free. They lead just as unfulfilling professional lives too and would be a breath of fresh air.
Very well stated! I do agree for the most part with you and I wish more folks were as level headed and could see this as clearly. I, however, believe it is the view because of people's normal life experience with *corporate* management and architects. I'm not tooting my own horn, but I manage a very large network and team, and I am one of the most talented and skilled managers because I'm not a hands-off guy and have tons of experience in the trenches. I don't do well in corporate management for that reason, and there many other like myself and in all areas including development/coding. Just because you have some PHB who got to his/her spot via some underhanded dealings or other B.S. doesn't mean all managers are the same.
It is about seeing the bigger picture and stepping outside of your own little box and truly making a difference and making something revolutionary. But revolution does not stem from chaos.
Sorry, I disagree. The OSS community is leaps and bounds ahead of any single entity such as Apple, and the money has very little to do with it. MAny folks probably work at/for Apple but still contribute and work on OSS projects.
The real issue is the fact that everyone wants their own sandbox, and not to be told what to do or when. It is the wild west. And while so many people think that is kewl and fun, it is inefficient and a waste. Imagine a company running that way, even the best local food co-op's have structure and oversight. Managers and oversight for some reason are seen as a waste (probably because of people's daily lives at work) but it is not always so. Programmer's see graphic designers as a waste too... and it shows in the difference between Linux and OS X, and to some extent even Windows.
It is about stepping outside of your self and your own selfish desires and making something better for the whole. It is also the fundamental flaw in this model, which is why all through history it has failed each and every time be it in government or business. It is so frustrating it makes me want to scream, and has for 12+ years, I am even toying of the idea of speaking at some Linux expos to get this message out and heard. It is absolutely the #1 thing to get resolved before Linux will ever go much further.
And you sir have summed up the exact problem here. You've glossed over the fact that nothing from NeXTstep just showed up magically working on BSD, it had to be coded from the ground up new. The point was it was done, done well, and in fairly short order.
You honestly believe that 300 half-working yet-another-whatever-app that is just as buggy as the other 299 is better than 1 or 2 excellent apps with more eyes and talent focused on them? There is a point when a million and one false starts gets exasperating for folks to follow. This week it is Compiz, then next you need Beryl, then next week scrap it all and grab Compiz-Fusion, and on and on. That project is actually doing well too... think of all the ones that don't. Every week there is a new hotness, and the program that was #1 for the task last week is already not being developed anymore and another is. That doesn;t help anyone's cause, and the chaos is impossible to hold still long enough to make it truly great.
So with focus things would be worse eh? Tell that to Canonical/Ubuntu. Because they are the closest thing to my theory so far in Linux and they just got into a ton of Dell's and all over the Internet. Why? Because it is a central, slower moving target. I could code for Sally's-Distro-of-the-Week and my work can be made obsolete when she gets a job, a life, hit by a car, or I can put my effort into a distro with a long-term release, huge support and userbase, stable and clear goal (for the most part), and some oversight. If you took all the talent from small projects like Puppy, DSL, Joe-Sixpack's Distro and got them together on one goal the outcome would be tremendous.
The problem is ego and tunnelvision. It can be hard to wrangle a bunch of truly talented folks, and sometimes you don't get your way. Now, you just take your ball and go home to create yet-another-half-assed-distro or app. This isn't about FUN it is about being part of something greater, and the fun you sacrifice to be part of it instead of going nowhere by yourself is reaped tenfold when you get to the end and see what a huge impact you *helped* to create. But that satisfaction is delayed and not as instant as the perceived fun you get by having a few hundred people download your app from your.edu webpage and get some direct feedback... you could have a couple million download it and have your name actually be attached to a major project.
Again, I've heard a thousand people react the way you did... it is the knee-jerk reaction, but I guarantee it is the wrong one. Time will bear it out.
I don't claim to have all of the answers, I do have quite a bit of experience and first-hand knowledge of working on a number of projects over the years. I have seen and continue to see this as the single biggest problem facing Linux, I wouldn't even try if I didn't truly believe in it.
I know you were just trying to be a smart-ass AC, but let me add this... In the same way that I (an individual person) cannot have all of the answers, neither can a lone developer no matter how good their intentions. You need a central *team* of oversight and management to steer development and ensure interoperability and the "unfun" stuff that otherwise would be left undone because it isn't flashy or even seen by the user but contributes to the whole.
Open source isn't about chaos, and that is all it has seen for a long time. Occasionally great stuff will be born from chaos, but to make it all part of a large *orderly* system, there needs to be more focus.
I spend a lot of time online trying to get through to folks on this issue but everyone just blows it off. I have been a Linux user/contributer for over 12 years now and have nothing but the best interests in what I say. The biggest problem is the fact that the only area to have any management and direction is the kernel. The rest is far too chaotic and self-serving to ever become a cohesive system.
Some examples: OS X. In ten years or so a fairly small team has taken BSD and turned it into what it is. In over 12 with Linux I still see many of the same issues and problems persist... why? Because Apple *focuses* their efforts and the entire project is properly managed and steered. Imagine with the same focus and direction what the huge amount of OSS talent could accomplish?
Interoperability. Most applications are one-off programs made with no thought or care as to how it fits in the bigger picture. Unification, interoperability, and consistency are very important.
Fleeting Nature. Projects worked on while in college, hosted on random servers, work/girlfriends/distractions. These all can bring even successful and popular projects down overnight.
What needs to happen is to work under a single focus to create the most perfect distribution possible with clearly defined goals and concepts. Democracy, choice, and chaos have their place and they can be utilized still... just with some oversight and management before it goes live. Once there is a very good foundation (such as how OS X is now) then folks can branch out and work on their own projects and offshoots. I'm not suggesting that all choice needs to be eradicated, just that instead of trying to build a million individual sandcastles on a foundation of Jell-o we could be building a mansion on a sheet of bedrock.
The talent is here, the passion is here, the momentum is here... the oversight and direction is not.
Seriously. I even like a number of Apple's products, surprisingly not the iPod either, but honestly this thing is going to go nowhere outside of the 20-somethings who just need to be trendy. The network isn't all that hot, the phone is fairly low on storage for a "Jesus Phone," and it is lacking a lot of important things.
I'm so tired of the frothy masses herded like sheep into believing this is some life altering product. I guess I got the un-tainted Kool-Aid, but we'll see in a few weeks/months what the response is...
I'd happily give up my personal cell phone for ever for 100k. It is convenient but I could easily live without it. I had one of the first cell phones way back when and then went for a number of years without one by choice when they started to get trendy. I guess it is more of a generational thing, or the fact that I like privacy every now and then. I have no need to call someone every 30 seconds, or stand at the store making a call about which peas I should get... I just buy some damned peas.
Give me a true GPS, wifi, MP3/video, phone and a reasonable plan price, say $20-30/mo. and I'd care a lot more. Plan prices are out of hand and simply not worth it. How is it that my original Motorola Teletac Analog phone plan was $19.99/mo. and I got 750 daytime/unlimited nights and weekends... but for a crappy digital phone (300 day/unl. n/w) it is $42?
I run a large campus network and we just upgraded to a 100mbps connection (ethernet handoff) and during the summer when traffic is low the bandwidth being used is only maybe 3-9mbps, so it would be usable. However with such a large network packet shaping and other checks and balances would not allow a single user to hit the internet at those speeds. It would be nice though, port to port connections are blazing fast here.
802.11n is not a finished product, in a smaller uni like this one it might be OK but where I am requires 100% full outdoor coverage and it just wouldn't be worthwhile. Neat but not for me.
Slashdot Mirror
Honestly? Because OS X just works. As much as I hate to say it they have done more with *nix than Linux has so far. I'd be happy to either VM Windows/Linux if needed, but OS X would stay.
I've been a Linux user for over 12 years, and I'm not too proud or zealous to say that Apple has created one hell of a nice bit of software. Sure, it will take some adjustments to accept the limited customization and some of the senseless expenses, but I've reached the point in life where my time has become more valuable than tinkering with an OS just to do what I want.
Plus, nothing says I can't do as you say if/when it gets to that point.
Wow, almost an intelligent troll except for that little thing called Bootcamp... you may want to read up on it. Also, Parallels is getting better and better DX support and with Vista sales low Microsoft may be forced to abandon it's GFW initiative.
KTHXBAI
Even though I'm a Linux guy, the closest I've seen to a possible laptop that could replace my desktop and be feasible is the latest Macbook Pro. DX10 graphics card, plenty of RAM, solid speed, LED LCD, good battery life, Superdrive, and big hard drive.
Once I see and read the reviews of the next OS X it may be time to make that jump to all laptop.
Absolutely not. Playing an MP3 that *I* ripped from a CD *I* bought or playing a DVD I paid for are as illegal as brushing my teeth. Sure, I could re-rip everything to OGG or whatever but I don;t care to and my MP3 player can't play them.
This is as stupid as limiting encryption for countries outside of the U.S. As if no one outside of the U.S. could come up with 128-bit encryption on their own.
I'm tired of corporation and companies somehow able to wiggle their way in to drag everything down and slow down progress for greed. Other countries are able to have tons of features on their cell phones, blazing fast Internet connections, and much more because it isn't being stifled by fucking companies.
OK, so we've all had this "discussion" before a million times, but it is important to revisit it right now. The reason is because never before has adoption and attention been so rapid and public as it is right now.
I don't mind there being 400+ distros available, but what is needed is a single solid foundation to build the main desktop around. Focused and intense development and streamlining needs to happen. Unifying UI across all packaged apps, ensuring ease of use, stability, and strength.
In my mind Ubuntu is the framework to use. Sure, people may have their own issues with it (even I do) but that doesn't take away from the fact that it is the best Linux has ever been on the desktop. We need to rally around it and make it as polished as possible, with as much attention and focus and more importantly *goals*. Apple has been able to do wonders with OS X due to this, yet many issues still remain 15 years later with Linux. Chaos and choice are great, but a full solid foundation to then let people build upon is better. Just as it is with the kernel it needs to be with the main package of apps and utils.
MHO.
I tried on Digg to explain this more clearly to the R-tards who just say: "...but, MS Surface..." and "...iPhone..." and can't understand the significance of what they are seeing... it was a waste of time, hopefully it won't here.
This is not the same as Surface. Surface uses cameras to "see" the inputs, there are a finite (and low) number of inputs they can track simultaneously. Same with the iPhone, it can only track two inputs.
This is a complete framework to allow new and unique inputs to be created and then to allow apps to easily be created to interface with them. This also has no real limit on the number of inputs, so the possible applications are endless. This allows many *simultaneous* inputs from one or multiple inputs. It could accept a joystick, a mouse, a keyboard, a trackball, a glove interface, and more *all at once.* It isn't just one or two people using their fingers as mice, that is just a demo.
Imagine specialized interfaces that can simultaneously interact with many points on the screen at once... it is hard to do because it hasn't been done yet. Which is why it is hard to make people understand how different and revolutionary this really is.
Sorry, but you've totally missed it. Let me try to enlighten you. This is special because it is multiple inputs *simultaneously* and the framework to allow new apps and devices to be created and work together in ways never before possible. "Surface" uses a few cameras for input, which have a finite (and relatively low) number of inputs that can be tracked.
It has nothing to do with Google Earth, or any application shown in the video. This is not just about multi-touch, it is about an almost infinite number of simultaneous inputs and the ability to easily write programs to use them. This is much more revolutionary than most people can guess by the first glance.
Oh, but everyone will cry... "but, but, but, we need choice!!!1!" I totally agree with you, I'm not saying there cannot be other distros, just that until a rock solid foundation is built stop trying to build other ones. Let's pool the resources and efforts and make ONE distro as polished as possible, then let every 1337 haxor out there have a go at creating Suzie's Linux.
OS X has made huge progress in UI, unification, ease of use, and more in less than 10 years because they focused their efforts and had one goal. In my 12+ years with Linux I still see many of the same issues.
I honestly could care less which distro grabs the attention, what I do care about is that we finally come together somewhat and polish one distro to the absolute best it can be. The work can then be used to make every distro better, but it has to start somewhere.
FFS give up on creating yet another distro and let's make one as solid as possible, a true foundation. Instead of Linux Mint, put the effort into making Ubuntu that much better. Everyone wants their slice of the pie and attention in open source code, the part they miss is that they will gain even more if they are part of *the* distro that changes the balance.
What I would love to know is the actual sales numbers for Dell, after all this time they have yet to be stated. That would be a telling number, but I'm guessing MS has something to do with the fact that no number has come out yet.
awww, jeez you hurt me deeply.
You'd be surprised. I thought the same thing, that after that amount of time I would be useless... but it is the opposite... at least for IT. It gives you time for those long projects so you can bang them out without having to stop, go home, and then try to get back into it the next day. And it truly is no different than any normal day that you get stuck at work for an extra hour on a call or something. It is barely noticeable. I'd get home at 6-ish instead of 5pm due to the lack of traffic, so at the end of the day the difference really was only 1 hour! Also when I got home on both Tuesday and Friday I could actually relax, or go out, without any worry about getting to bed or thinking about work the next day. It is a freeing experience.
I agree it wouldn't work for everyone, and every job type, but for myself and the rest of the company it was awesome. There was not one complaint in my two years there, if anything people would tell their friends and they would apply to get in. If I had my way I'd work 7am-3pm and be pretty happy even M-F but I've yet to find that job.
I respect your reply, but I still think you are missing it a bit. Just as you admit artists/designers are needed, there is no avenue for them to get involved. They can't gain respect via writing code, they can gain respect by creating an environment that fits their style and opening up and asking for their help and input. You can't shoehorn them into a logical system that might make perfect sense to a coder, this has never been done to my knowledge.
In that same vein, you are minimizing management which is common and a terrible shame. You even point out how those coders of the kernel have now become "managers" and how well it works... I am saying the same thing but on the rest of the system.
Again the aversion is due to inept and B.S. managers that you and most everyone deals with daily, that is not representative of *all* managers and nothing is stopping some of the long standing app authors from taking on that role and keeping their respect. I'm not suggesting we just get a bunch of managers involved or "pure" architects. Nothing drives me nuts more either. As for my background, I have over 14 years in IT and have helped to create and run a number of multi-million dollar *innovative* companies. I now run one of the top University networks in the U.S. and am not just some schmuck with pie-in-the-sky ideas. Again, I truly believe in what I say and I am adamant about it because over the years I see the same thing over and over and it is maddening. I do have the capacity to gain acceptance and speak at conferences and as I continue to speak with others involved in OSS I am taking note of opinions and criticisms I grow closer to building a comprehensive speech that covers the most common reactions and objections.
In college I worked for a company who did 10 hour days, Monday/Tuesday, Wednesday off, and then Thursday/Friday. It was pure heaven. It makes life into short little two day weeks. Tuesday night becomes like a Friday since you don't have to work the next day, and then you get a weekday to either wear off what you did the night before or get errands and stuff done during the week when things are less busy. Then Thursday/Friday and the normal weekend. The only two days that kind of suck then are Monday and Thursday.
Absolutely the best work schedule ever, plus it cuts down on commuting since you are missing the standard rush hours, and since you are already at work the extra hour or two is no big deal when the reward is a full day off. I could care less about fluffy crap and I don't need to be treated like a superstar or anything, just let me work smarter and have an equal amount of time for my real life.
Great attitude, and you are not alone in your opinion. I'd rather not have you in my house, and instead being the king of your own little sandcastle. I'll be sure to kick it right the fuck in your face as I go.
I've never said things need to be standardized entirely. In fact I'm saying the opposite, there needs to be a solid foundation. Foundations are stable, not chaotic, and easy to then be creative and build upon. Why people continue to believe they can prove years of history wrong, and keep plodding along this path is beyond me. Sure there will be flashes of brilliance, and some areas may flourish, but it will not work as a whole.
We don't need government, we need guidance and steering and direction from some point above the coder level. Imagine the state of the kernel without it... now, why again do you think this is not the case with the rest? You are fooling yourself.
I'm not sure how I or anyone can be "wrong" about their opinion, but I will try to respond. I also want to have "fun" and working on something cool when I write OSS code... but that doesn't mean I can't be working inside of some sort of high-level constraint or with some design/integration in mind. I'm not saying these overlords need to be cracking a whip and forcing you to code a burning program when you want to make a new notepad... I'm saying there needs to be visionaries with a full view of the big picture and then it actually makes it easier for everyone else from there down.
I'm not trying to jam any square pegs into round holes, I'm trying to have some method to the madness (and no it money has no part in what I am saying). Just as boring as some of your daily tasks are, so are the days for us managers... especially managers who are skilled and talented and not just a PHB (yes, we exist). I'd much rather be helping to steer a big ship destined for something truly great, rather than listen to people bitch about Suzie in the next cube's radio or hearing yet-another excuse as to why you need every Friday off for 5 months.
Linux needs more management and it needs more artists/designers, there are talented folks in these areas who are willing to work just as hard as the coders, and yes, even for free. They lead just as unfulfilling professional lives too and would be a breath of fresh air.
Very well stated! I do agree for the most part with you and I wish more folks were as level headed and could see this as clearly. I, however, believe it is the view because of people's normal life experience with *corporate* management and architects. I'm not tooting my own horn, but I manage a very large network and team, and I am one of the most talented and skilled managers because I'm not a hands-off guy and have tons of experience in the trenches. I don't do well in corporate management for that reason, and there many other like myself and in all areas including development/coding. Just because you have some PHB who got to his/her spot via some underhanded dealings or other B.S. doesn't mean all managers are the same.
It is about seeing the bigger picture and stepping outside of your own little box and truly making a difference and making something revolutionary. But revolution does not stem from chaos.
Sorry, I disagree. The OSS community is leaps and bounds ahead of any single entity such as Apple, and the money has very little to do with it. MAny folks probably work at/for Apple but still contribute and work on OSS projects.
The real issue is the fact that everyone wants their own sandbox, and not to be told what to do or when. It is the wild west. And while so many people think that is kewl and fun, it is inefficient and a waste. Imagine a company running that way, even the best local food co-op's have structure and oversight. Managers and oversight for some reason are seen as a waste (probably because of people's daily lives at work) but it is not always so. Programmer's see graphic designers as a waste too... and it shows in the difference between Linux and OS X, and to some extent even Windows.
It is about stepping outside of your self and your own selfish desires and making something better for the whole. It is also the fundamental flaw in this model, which is why all through history it has failed each and every time be it in government or business. It is so frustrating it makes me want to scream, and has for 12+ years, I am even toying of the idea of speaking at some Linux expos to get this message out and heard. It is absolutely the #1 thing to get resolved before Linux will ever go much further.
And you sir have summed up the exact problem here. You've glossed over the fact that nothing from NeXTstep just showed up magically working on BSD, it had to be coded from the ground up new. The point was it was done, done well, and in fairly short order.
.edu webpage and get some direct feedback... you could have a couple million download it and have your name actually be attached to a major project.
You honestly believe that 300 half-working yet-another-whatever-app that is just as buggy as the other 299 is better than 1 or 2 excellent apps with more eyes and talent focused on them? There is a point when a million and one false starts gets exasperating for folks to follow. This week it is Compiz, then next you need Beryl, then next week scrap it all and grab Compiz-Fusion, and on and on. That project is actually doing well too... think of all the ones that don't. Every week there is a new hotness, and the program that was #1 for the task last week is already not being developed anymore and another is. That doesn;t help anyone's cause, and the chaos is impossible to hold still long enough to make it truly great.
So with focus things would be worse eh? Tell that to Canonical/Ubuntu. Because they are the closest thing to my theory so far in Linux and they just got into a ton of Dell's and all over the Internet. Why? Because it is a central, slower moving target. I could code for Sally's-Distro-of-the-Week and my work can be made obsolete when she gets a job, a life, hit by a car, or I can put my effort into a distro with a long-term release, huge support and userbase, stable and clear goal (for the most part), and some oversight. If you took all the talent from small projects like Puppy, DSL, Joe-Sixpack's Distro and got them together on one goal the outcome would be tremendous.
The problem is ego and tunnelvision. It can be hard to wrangle a bunch of truly talented folks, and sometimes you don't get your way. Now, you just take your ball and go home to create yet-another-half-assed-distro or app. This isn't about FUN it is about being part of something greater, and the fun you sacrifice to be part of it instead of going nowhere by yourself is reaped tenfold when you get to the end and see what a huge impact you *helped* to create. But that satisfaction is delayed and not as instant as the perceived fun you get by having a few hundred people download your app from your
Again, I've heard a thousand people react the way you did... it is the knee-jerk reaction, but I guarantee it is the wrong one. Time will bear it out.
I don't claim to have all of the answers, I do have quite a bit of experience and first-hand knowledge of working on a number of projects over the years. I have seen and continue to see this as the single biggest problem facing Linux, I wouldn't even try if I didn't truly believe in it.
I know you were just trying to be a smart-ass AC, but let me add this... In the same way that I (an individual person) cannot have all of the answers, neither can a lone developer no matter how good their intentions. You need a central *team* of oversight and management to steer development and ensure interoperability and the "unfun" stuff that otherwise would be left undone because it isn't flashy or even seen by the user but contributes to the whole.
Open source isn't about chaos, and that is all it has seen for a long time. Occasionally great stuff will be born from chaos, but to make it all part of a large *orderly* system, there needs to be more focus.
I spend a lot of time online trying to get through to folks on this issue but everyone just blows it off. I have been a Linux user/contributer for over 12 years now and have nothing but the best interests in what I say. The biggest problem is the fact that the only area to have any management and direction is the kernel. The rest is far too chaotic and self-serving to ever become a cohesive system.
Some examples: OS X. In ten years or so a fairly small team has taken BSD and turned it into what it is. In over 12 with Linux I still see many of the same issues and problems persist... why? Because Apple *focuses* their efforts and the entire project is properly managed and steered. Imagine with the same focus and direction what the huge amount of OSS talent could accomplish?
Interoperability. Most applications are one-off programs made with no thought or care as to how it fits in the bigger picture. Unification, interoperability, and consistency are very important.
Fleeting Nature. Projects worked on while in college, hosted on random servers, work/girlfriends/distractions. These all can bring even successful and popular projects down overnight.
What needs to happen is to work under a single focus to create the most perfect distribution possible with clearly defined goals and concepts. Democracy, choice, and chaos have their place and they can be utilized still... just with some oversight and management before it goes live. Once there is a very good foundation (such as how OS X is now) then folks can branch out and work on their own projects and offshoots. I'm not suggesting that all choice needs to be eradicated, just that instead of trying to build a million individual sandcastles on a foundation of Jell-o we could be building a mansion on a sheet of bedrock.
The talent is here, the passion is here, the momentum is here... the oversight and direction is not.
Seriously. I even like a number of Apple's products, surprisingly not the iPod either, but honestly this thing is going to go nowhere outside of the 20-somethings who just need to be trendy. The network isn't all that hot, the phone is fairly low on storage for a "Jesus Phone," and it is lacking a lot of important things.
I'm so tired of the frothy masses herded like sheep into believing this is some life altering product. I guess I got the un-tainted Kool-Aid, but we'll see in a few weeks/months what the response is...
range and actual coverage are two different things, believe me.
I'd happily give up my personal cell phone for ever for 100k. It is convenient but I could easily live without it. I had one of the first cell phones way back when and then went for a number of years without one by choice when they started to get trendy. I guess it is more of a generational thing, or the fact that I like privacy every now and then. I have no need to call someone every 30 seconds, or stand at the store making a call about which peas I should get... I just buy some damned peas.
Give me a true GPS, wifi, MP3/video, phone and a reasonable plan price, say $20-30/mo. and I'd care a lot more. Plan prices are out of hand and simply not worth it. How is it that my original Motorola Teletac Analog phone plan was $19.99/mo. and I got 750 daytime/unlimited nights and weekends... but for a crappy digital phone (300 day/unl. n/w) it is $42?
I run a large campus network and we just upgraded to a 100mbps connection (ethernet handoff) and during the summer when traffic is low the bandwidth being used is only maybe 3-9mbps, so it would be usable. However with such a large network packet shaping and other checks and balances would not allow a single user to hit the internet at those speeds. It would be nice though, port to port connections are blazing fast here.
802.11n is not a finished product, in a smaller uni like this one it might be OK but where I am requires 100% full outdoor coverage and it just wouldn't be worthwhile. Neat but not for me.