(as for Grandma, if she just wants her webcam to 'just work', she will be disappointed when she installs Vista and finds that drivers are no longer available for that model - unless she wants to spend $$$ on a brand new one. Or install modern Linux which does just work with more hardware than Windows nowadays!)
You expect Grandma to buy a Vista upgrade and install it? Or for that matter Linux?
I think the most important step was licensing DOS to Compaq and others instead of locking it up like Apple or making their own branded PCs. That is the single biggest game changing decision that resulted in cheap hardware and a standard API for application development or today we might be end up with only $5000 computers and/or 10 different APIs to target to sell software. Also, MS had the insight that selling home computers to regular Joes is a good market, unlike IBM which thought that enterprise was the only place where computers were really useful.
I wonder what would've happened if twitter was the judge. *shudder*. On the other hand it would be funny to see M$ plastered all over the court proceedings and arguments. Or his brain would explode from encountering the 'ev1l M$ lawyers' in flesh and blood.
One of the markings of a true software zealot is unable to objectively appreciate good design just because it's from the other camp. Please do not try to disguise zealotry as being of 'old school'.
Writing GUI-based GTK# applications does not require any libraries not covered by this promise. There are FOSS database access libraries available for Mono that interface with MySQL etc. without needing ADO.NET. In fact, none of the high profile C# complex(!) applications for Linux like FSpot, Banshee or Tomboy require any libraries not covered. And Mono is separating the source code into two parts in a future release so that you can run the libraries in doubt at your own discretion and risk. You're the one who's missing it, not everyone else. Here is a figure for clear delineation. http://primates.ximian.com/~miguel/tmp/two-stacks.png
If you file, maintain, or voluntarily participate in a patent infringement lawsuit against a Microsoft implementation of any Covered Specification, then this personal promise does not apply with respect to any Covered Implementation made or used by you
Is that a patent retaliation clause? Interesting.
Anyhow, the way I read that, you can't sue Microsoft if they make use of one of your patents in their own implementations, albeit limited to the specifications covered in this initiative. That probably wasn't very interesting in the context of what had previously been released under this scheme (HealthVault Service Specification, UI Automation v1.0 , etc.), but.Net/Mono is much more serious technology and therefore more likely to contain or sprout patents.
So, considering that isn't it more likely that it's the indie developer (less likely to take out patents on own work) who wouldn't mind this promise rather than any commercial technology provider (more likely to take out patents on own work)? If that logic holds then one effect of this Microsoft initiative would be to prevent the emergence of any real commercial Mono competition to.Net.
This is more like the GPL vs. LGPL vs. BSD, but for specifications as opposed to source code. Basically, Microsoft is saying that if you take their specs and innovate on top of it, you can't sue MS for copying them without losing your right to the MS patents on the specs.
How can you claim that 'closed-source software' is the cause of all the ills you mentioned?
Where exactly did he say that?
You sir, are a contender for the bad strawman of the day award.
Here. Bolded it for you.
TFA is saying that the closed-source software costs more when operating costs are included in the total price tag. How much does industry pay for malware protection, virus protection, trojan protection, downtime from infection, and loss of productivity as a result of closed-source software? Those costs are relevant to businesses and should be considered.
And you're the winner of the irrelevant and dumb usage of logic memes award.
Just keep jacking up the tax on gas to meet tax goals. That will have the benefits of getting people to drive less(less rush and less wear and tear), reducing the sales of polluting gas guzzling vehicles, reducing air pollution, reducing dependence on foreign oil and encouraging electric and alternative fuels.
No one said Linux is "bulletproof". Don't try to change the topic.
TFA is saying that the closed-source software costs more when operating costs are included in the total price tag. How much does industry pay for malware protection, virus protection, trojan protection, downtime from infection, and loss of productivity as a result of closed-source software? Those costs are relevant to businesses and should be considered.
What the hell does 'closed-source' software have to do with malware and all things you listed? Those depend more on popularity than FOSS or not. For example, check FireFox 'infected' with spyware http://i.d.com.com/i/dl/media/dlimage/14/92/50/149250_large.jpeg
"This is a very unfortunate incident to report about. Some Debian servers were found to have been compromised in the last 24 hours," the posting read.
Attackers compromised four servers, including those responsible for maintaining the project's bug tracking system, mailing lists, Web, Common Versioning System (CVS), security downloads and others.
As for developer tools - the visual studio tools doesn't help much, sometimes you need to analyze the end result in the web browser, and Firefox with Firebug will help a lot. And the source view in Firefox is a lot better since it's color-coded.
The developer tools are integrated right into the browser, you don't need Visual Studio. Screenshot http://bayimg.com/OabePaaCD
Using GPL code on another GPL ported program (to another programming language) is a ripoff? and I am using Gnote 0.3.1 and it has Applet support, Gnote is being converted from C# to C++, and features and plugins are being ported one by one
A line by line clone and completely identical GUI design to the pixel level and not respecting the developers wish can be called unethical even if it's legal under the GPL/LGPL. Most OSS developers won't mind some credit for their hard work. If Tomboy's developers do all the heavy lifting and Gnote just takes all of that and ports it line by line without adding any value except not having mono, that can be called a ripoff. Once Tomboy dies, Gnote might stagnate, because there is nothing more to ripoff and the single goal of Gnote(to remove Mono) has been achieved.
It is not a line by line clone. A small count: Tomboy has 13 addons that comes with the app, Gnote has 6. For one, Gnote does not have any synchronization addons.
So if I do a line by line cloning of Firefox into C#, and Adblock doesn't run on my clone because it's in C/C++ whatever and not in C# does that mean that my C# port was not a line by line clone?
Of course, it's under GPL so Gnote is within it's rights, but there's a thing called professional courtesy and respecting a developer's wishes.
Except that professional courtesy and respect go out the window when the developer (Joss) has never shown any of the same to the rest of the community, and so has widely gotten himself a public reputation as a complete dickhead. At that point people start going to significant trouble to code around him.
Monday 6 April 2009 15:39, by Rahul Sundaram:: # For Fedora, we had to remove tomboy from the live cd due to lack of space. Unfortunately, Gnote probably won't be a good replacement since it would pull in the gtkmm, boost and other dependencies. Have you considered Vala or PyGTK instead?
So the summary includes the dependencies for Tomboy but not for Gnote. If you add up gtkmm and boost and other dependencies, it might get close to 50MB. The summary is a troll for comparing apples to oranges.
Monday 6 April 2009 15:39, by Rahul Sundaram:: #
For Fedora, we had to remove tomboy from the live cd due to lack of space. Unfortunately, Gnote probably won't be a good replacement since it would pull in the gtkmm, boost and other dependencies. Have you considered Vala or PyGTK instead?
So the summary includes the dependencies for Tomboy but not for Gnote. If you add up gtkmm and boost and other dependencies, it might get close to 50MB. The summary is a troll for comparing apples to oranges.
Slashdot Mirror
(as for Grandma, if she just wants her webcam to 'just work', she will be disappointed when she installs Vista and finds that drivers are no longer available for that model - unless she wants to spend $$$ on a brand new one. Or install modern Linux which does just work with more hardware than Windows nowadays!)
You expect Grandma to buy a Vista upgrade and install it? Or for that matter Linux?
I think the most important step was licensing DOS to Compaq and others instead of locking it up like Apple or making their own branded PCs. That is the single biggest game changing decision that resulted in cheap hardware and a standard API for application development or today we might be end up with only $5000 computers and/or 10 different APIs to target to sell software. Also, MS had the insight that selling home computers to regular Joes is a good market, unlike IBM which thought that enterprise was the only place where computers were really useful.
I wonder what would've happened if twitter was the judge. *shudder*. On the other hand it would be funny to see M$ plastered all over the court proceedings and arguments. Or his brain would explode from encountering the 'ev1l M$ lawyers' in flesh and blood.
One of the markings of a true software zealot is unable to objectively appreciate good design just because it's from the other camp. Please do not try to disguise zealotry as being of 'old school'.
Writing GUI-based GTK# applications does not require any libraries not covered by this promise. There are FOSS database access libraries available for Mono that interface with MySQL etc. without needing ADO.NET. In fact, none of the high profile C# complex(!) applications for Linux like FSpot, Banshee or Tomboy require any libraries not covered. And Mono is separating the source code into two parts in a future release so that you can run the libraries in doubt at your own discretion and risk. You're the one who's missing it, not everyone else. Here is a figure for clear delineation. http://primates.ximian.com/~miguel/tmp/two-stacks.png
According to information posted elsewhere, that page hasn't been updated yet and will be updated soon.
From the Microsoft Community Promise:
If you file, maintain, or voluntarily participate in a patent infringement lawsuit against a Microsoft implementation of any Covered Specification, then this personal promise does not apply with respect to any Covered Implementation made or used by you
Is that a patent retaliation clause? Interesting.
Anyhow, the way I read that, you can't sue Microsoft if they make use of one of your patents in their own implementations, albeit limited to the specifications covered in this initiative. That probably wasn't very interesting in the context of what had previously been released under this scheme (HealthVault Service Specification, UI Automation v1.0 , etc.), but .Net/Mono is much more serious technology and therefore more likely to contain or sprout patents.
So, considering that isn't it more likely that it's the indie developer (less likely to take out patents on own work) who wouldn't mind this promise rather than any commercial technology provider (more likely to take out patents on own work)? If that logic holds then one effect of this Microsoft initiative would be to prevent the emergence of any real commercial Mono competition to .Net.
This is more like the GPL vs. LGPL vs. BSD, but for specifications as opposed to source code. Basically, Microsoft is saying that if you take their specs and innovate on top of it, you can't sue MS for copying them without losing your right to the MS patents on the specs.
Correction to #3, Only ASP.NET MVC is open-sourced, not the much more popular ASP.NET.
That's because IE7 IS a update to IE6. How the heck is Safari an update to Quicktime or iTunes?
This one is less than two months old. http://www.switchingtomac.com/tutorials/how-to-make-safaris-private-browsing-feature-actually-private/
Except that it isn't so private. http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2008/03/13061/
How can you claim that 'closed-source software' is the cause of all the ills you mentioned?
Where exactly did he say that?
You sir, are a contender for the bad strawman of the day award.
Here. Bolded it for you.
TFA is saying that the closed-source software costs more when operating costs are included in the total price tag. How much does industry pay for malware protection, virus protection, trojan protection, downtime from infection, and loss of productivity as a result of closed-source software? Those costs are relevant to businesses and should be considered.
And you're the winner of the irrelevant and dumb usage of logic memes award.
Just keep jacking up the tax on gas to meet tax goals. That will have the benefits of getting people to drive less(less rush and less wear and tear), reducing the sales of polluting gas guzzling vehicles, reducing air pollution, reducing dependence on foreign oil and encouraging electric and alternative fuels.
I would rather hope that the computer of the future wouldn't have the "feature" of requiring apps to go through a approval process and not be rejected by a overlord --> http://www.juggleware.com/blog/2008/09/steve-jobs-writes-back/
I would rather have a 486 than that.
T. At least with Open Source you could go in and fix it yourself.
And have a lot of fun merging in the constant security updates and version upgrade changes.
I am sure this applies to FOSS as well. For example, the change from KDE 3.x to 4.x.
No one said Linux is "bulletproof". Don't try to change the topic.
TFA is saying that the closed-source software costs more when operating costs are included in the total price tag. How much does industry pay for malware protection, virus protection, trojan protection, downtime from infection, and loss of productivity as a result of closed-source software? Those costs are relevant to businesses and should be considered.
What the hell does 'closed-source' software have to do with malware and all things you listed? Those depend more on popularity than FOSS or not. For example, check FireFox 'infected' with spyware http://i.d.com.com/i/dl/media/dlimage/14/92/50/149250_large.jpeg
Debian servers attacked http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1000000189,39118062,00.htm
"This is a very unfortunate incident to report about. Some Debian servers were found to have been compromised in the last 24 hours," the posting read.
Attackers compromised four servers, including those responsible for maintaining the project's bug tracking system, mailing lists, Web, Common Versioning System (CVS), security downloads and others.
RedHat/Fedora itself being attacked http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/150212/hackers_crack_into_red_hat.html
The last two examples are almost the equivalent of Windows Update being attacked and distributing malware, which hasn't happened (yet).
How can you claim that 'closed-source software' is the cause of all the ills you mentioned?
As for developer tools - the visual studio tools doesn't help much, sometimes you need to analyze the end result in the web browser, and Firefox with Firebug will help a lot. And the source view in Firefox is a lot better since it's color-coded.
The developer tools are integrated right into the browser, you don't need Visual Studio. Screenshot http://bayimg.com/OabePaaCD
Using GPL code on another GPL ported program (to another programming language) is a ripoff? and I am using Gnote 0.3.1 and it has Applet support, Gnote is being converted from C# to C++, and features and plugins are being ported one by one
A line by line clone and completely identical GUI design to the pixel level and not respecting the developers wish can be called unethical even if it's legal under the GPL/LGPL. Most OSS developers won't mind some credit for their hard work. If Tomboy's developers do all the heavy lifting and Gnote just takes all of that and ports it line by line without adding any value except not having mono, that can be called a ripoff. Once Tomboy dies, Gnote might stagnate, because there is nothing more to ripoff and the single goal of Gnote(to remove Mono) has been achieved.
It is not a line by line clone. A small count: Tomboy has 13 addons that comes with the app, Gnote has 6. For one, Gnote does not have any synchronization addons.
So if I do a line by line cloning of Firefox into C#, and Adblock doesn't run on my clone because it's in C/C++ whatever and not in C# does that mean that my C# port was not a line by line clone?
Except that professional courtesy and respect go out the window when the developer (Joss) has never shown any of the same to the rest of the community, and so has widely gotten himself a public reputation as a complete dickhead. At that point people start going to significant trouble to code around him.
Citation needed.
Speak for yourself. There are users who either don't care or don't mind using a application that has Mono as a dependency.
Monday 6 April 2009 15:39, by Rahul Sundaram :: # For Fedora, we had to remove tomboy from the live cd due to lack of space. Unfortunately, Gnote probably won't be a good replacement since it would pull in the gtkmm, boost and other dependencies. Have you considered Vala or PyGTK instead?
So the summary includes the dependencies for Tomboy but not for Gnote. If you add up gtkmm and boost and other dependencies, it might get close to 50MB. The summary is a troll for comparing apples to oranges.
Monday 6 April 2009 15:39, by Rahul Sundaram :: #
For Fedora, we had to remove tomboy from the live cd due to lack of space. Unfortunately, Gnote probably won't be a good replacement since it would pull in the gtkmm, boost and other dependencies. Have you considered Vala or PyGTK instead?
So the summary includes the dependencies for Tomboy but not for Gnote. If you add up gtkmm and boost and other dependencies, it might get close to 50MB. The summary is a troll for comparing apples to oranges.
Gnote is not just a "re-implementation" of Tomboy, it's a line by line ripoff of Tomboy's C# code to C++ and GUI design. See http://robertmh.wordpress.com/2009/06/12/mono-in-the-default-install/for screenshots. And the developers of Tomboy are not happy.
If they didn't want people creating derivative works of their software, they shouldn't have released it as LGPL.
True, but lots of clones and forks do hurt a project.