Open Source Victories of 2008 378
Meshach writes "Ars Technica has an interesting run-down on the major open source victories of 2008. Some, like Firefox 3, we can probably mostly agree on. Others — KDE 4 comes to mind — will be more controversial. And Mono 2? What else should be on the list?"
We won already. Geez. (Score:4, Insightful)
Honestly, I wish people would just sit back, relax, and realize that there mere EXISTENCE of open source is the real victory here. Do we really need more than that? I have a choice in software. I have a freedom to choose. Neither Microsoft nor Apple dictate how I execute personal computing tasks.
We won. Let's give it up with the smug articles about how our sh*t doesn't stink. It's really tiresome.
Nokia ad (Score:5, Insightful)
Of the 7 "victories" listed, 3 involve Nokia:
Their opening up of Symbian
Their purchase of Trolltech
And the unveiling of Maemo 5
Yay.
Wine (Score:5, Insightful)
Uh, Wine went 1.0? How is this not on the list, but Google Chrome is? Chrome isn't even open source, Chromium is.
There are no "victories"... (Score:5, Insightful)
...because there is no war.
Re:I like KDE 4 (Score:5, Insightful)
You say that 4.0 was a temporary step backward from 3.5? 4.1 is still a step backward, just slightly less of one. 3.5 derived a lot of its power from a very solid, well refined OLE framework, and 4.1 has yet to even approach that. In 3.5, it was seamless to browse a tarball, because the ArK component would embed right into Konqueror. ArK does not embed into Dolphin or Konqueror in 4.1, and in standalone ArK, you cannot open most files without extracting, which is annoying and basically defeats the purpose of a tool like ArK. Many users, myself included, use (or used to use) keyboard shortcuts for various actions -- yet that is still completely broken in KDE 4.1, and worse yet, some application shortcuts are broken if you run the application with KDE as the WM, but work just fine if you use something else.
If the KDE team does not get their act together fast, and give people some sort of hope with the 4.2 release, KDE is going to die.
The problem with lists (Score:4, Insightful)
Listen to yourselves! (Score:5, Insightful)
Disclaimer: I am using KDE4. I like it for what it could be. As it is, I'm looking at alternatives.
Replace "4.0" with "Vista", "4.1" with "Vista SP1", and "4.2" with "Vista SP2" -- and, for good measure, "3.5" with "XP Pro", and you have a fair sense of what's going on here.
In fact, Microsoft has handled this better -- they still fix bugs in XP.
In KDE4, and in some of the bigger KDE4 apps (like AmaroK), there's this completely new, exciting, amazing version which almost has all the features you needed from the old version, in a very cool-looking but annoyingly different way, and sometimes crashes. Then there's the old, boring, unsupported version, which does everything you want it to do, but has some annoying bugs and deficiencies -- yet whenever you point them out, people close the bug "wontfix" as development has stopped on that branch, and the KDE4 version will be done so differently the bug is irrelevant.
At least Windows has a mostly-working version -- XP. KDE has no working version.
An example of something that worked in 3, but is broken in 4: The panel. Everyone always said, "Don't mind that, it's fixed in 4.1." Well, I'm running 4.1, and I can tell you, it's not even close. How do I make the panel thinner vertically? How do I adjust its translucency -- how do I give it a completely transparent background, but solid foreground?
An example of something that doesn't work anywhere (wontfix in 3, not done yet in 4) is encoding scripts in AmaroK. There's no longer a GUI option to tell AmaroK what your preferred format for a device is -- if you've got an iPod, it's going to give you mp3s, whether you want them or not, even if you can handle AAC just fine. Yet the KDE4 version of AmaroK doesn't yet support encoding scripts in any way, so my choice is mp3s, or no encoding at all. WTF?
Maybe I'm just using the wrong distro? I was pretty appalled at Kubuntu's handling of Intrepid. Bluetooth is broken, due to conflicting versions of a few packages. The only available solutions are, use the commandline (I tried, didn't work), go back to Hardy, or use the Gnome bluetooth GUI.
Isn't that why you use a distro in the first place? So bullshit like this doesn't happen?
Here's hoping by 4.5, they'll finally attain the functionality of 3.5. Maybe they'll still have some users left by then. Meanwhile, I'm going to take a long, hard look at going back to Fluxbox or straight Compiz.
Re:KDE simply isn't a factor (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I like KDE 4 (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:There are no "victories"... (Score:2, Insightful)
When your opponent believes that you and he are not in a war, you have achieved 99% victory. When your opponent believes no one is at war with him he is a fool.
There is very much a campaign against open source and very much a campaign against closed source.
For example: There were many office suites until Microsoft entered the arena...then most fell. The OSS answer was OO.o and probably others.
IBM vs Sun
IBM vs Microsoft
Windows vs Linux
Windows vs Mac
Office vs OO.c
IE vs Moz/Firefox
then there was
Google Chrome vs Firefox.
I think the Mozilla Foundation is very nervous that Google created Chrome as Google is a major sponser of the Mozilla project. How long will it be before Google decides the marriage is no longer viable?
No war? I have to disagree.
Re:There are no "victories"... (Score:1, Insightful)
"I count him braver who overcomes his desires than him who conquers his enemies; for the hardest victory is over self." Aristotle
One not need to be at war to achieve victory, an accomplishment of a goal will do quite nicely.
1 : the overcoming of an enemy or antagonist
2 : achievement of mastery or success in a struggle or endeavor against odds or difficulties
Merriam-Webster [merriam-webster.com]
Wine? (Score:1, Insightful)
Okay, mod me flamebait if you want, but I fail to see how Wine is any sort of win for the open source community. Wine is a pretty good open source implementation of an ugly, broken and virtually unimplementable API that really shows its age and irrelevance in an increasingly Internet-driven world.
As another poster says, Django is a win. Pyjamas is a win. Even KDE 4 is more of a win. But Wine? No, Wine is nothing more than a legacy layer in a world that increasingly doesn't need such.
Re:We won already. Geez. (Score:5, Insightful)
Honestly, I wish people would just sit back, relax, and realize that there mere EXISTENCE of open source is the real victory here. Do we really need more than that?
yes, we do. we need software that actually works.
some of us have work that needs to get done. (that's why i use gnome and winXP.)
What about open source development platforms (Score:4, Insightful)
NetBeans and Eclipse namely.
They cover C, C++, Java, Python, Perl, PHP, JavaScript, Ruby, UML, XML, SVN, and many more - totally free. The compilers and interpreters for listed languages exist freely on Windows, and all are open source.
The best part is - these platforms are as good, and often better than paid versions such as Visual Studio.
They are also very popular in enterprise...
Re:Wine (Score:4, Insightful)
You ARE an oppressed minority. There's just about barely more mac os users on the interwebs than linux users.
Since when did Linux have 8.9% marketshare?
Re:Wine? (Score:5, Insightful)
Okay, mod me flamebait if you want, but I fail to see how Wine is any sort of win for the open source community. Wine is a pretty good open source implementation of an ugly, broken and virtually unimplementable API that really shows its age and irrelevance in an increasingly Internet-driven world.
No, you're not flamebait. The more applications that can work in Wine, the more options I have for migrating away from Windows. This year for the first time, I was able to get rid of my Windows box. Everything that I was keeping it for I can now run under Wine. I would say that Wine is a legacy layer that is continuously improving in a world that still needs it.
Re:Google Chrome (Score:2, Insightful)
No, it really is a rule. RTFA is hard and it takes mad clicking skillz. It's much easier to read 500 comments than RTFA, even if you have to pull the little slidy thing to "Full" and click "More" 5 times so you can get your AC nigger fix.
Re:I like KDE 4 (Score:5, Insightful)
A few years ago...I never thought I'd use GNOME, what with its child-proofing mentality.
But now its the only choice that's both functional and actually supported.
(Functional is a relative term. The release that shipped with Intrepid has entirely broken session management, which is a regression from even the ancient releases)
Re:Wine (Score:3, Insightful)
Chrome got a lot of buzz and people talking this year. It also has a pretty solid / minimalistic interface UI, and brings forth some interesting ideas in browsing (generated start pages and dynamic searching comes to mind). Also, while Google has always been supportive of Mozilla, them putting their weight behind a browser *could* become quite significant.
Also, my understanding is that Chromium is Chrome with the logo / branding stripped out for trademark reasons, similar to Netscape / Mozilla in the early days. To say that they're separate at the moment is like arguing Linux vs Gnu/Linux. One's technically righter than the other, but they still both work.
And yes, Wine hitting 1.0 needs to be on that list.
Re:Awfulbar (Score:5, Insightful)
1) It's big, ugly, and distracting, mixing a variety of font sizes, italics, etc. (That's my subjective opinion).
2) It is unpredictable, hence less useful. It used to bring up URLs that were previously typed in the field, that began with the letters typed. Now it searches other places and other fields, in a way that is not obvious, and can change unpredictably. My son was complaining about how the webcomic he reads keeps on turning up multiple times in the "awesomebar", because every strip has a different title.
3) It can pull up results that were never typed into the bar. That's non-intuitive; it should use the same 'type-ahead' system of selecting from previous entries that would work for other fields, such as html input fields. Don't make a crazy new interface for one field; make a interface that works sensibly for all fields.
4) It's marketing-driven. It was given a ridiculous name, and seemingly was at the top of a 'new 3.0 feature' bullet list that Mozilla wanted to 'push'... Then they removed options (which existed in the betas) to switch between the new and old configuration. That's skirting close to BIG BAD COMPANY behavior.
Doesn't it remind you of how the search feature in every MS OS has been getting worse and worse every version, despite the added features?
Re:KDE simply isn't a factor (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh, and before some idiot comes in with "hurf durf we don't want your PROPRIETAAAAAAAARY code!!!111", note that I release code under the MPL and/or BSD licenses as the situation calls for--but not the rights-restrictive GPL. Developers deserve freedom too, not just downstream users.
Re:Open-source database (Score:3, Insightful)
If MySQL didn't suck, yes, it would be.
MySQL is a very fast database because it takes out the parts of a database that make it a database. Data validation? Pfft! Who needs that?!
Re:I like KDE 4 (Score:3, Insightful)
Plasmoids can be embedded in the taskbar, and could be useful for something like a little weather applet.
In other words, the KDE team destroyed a perfectly functioning desktop environment to build a better Weatherbug. This is coming from a long time KDE user, Gnome hater, and still Fedora 6 user (previously Fedora 4 user). I can't upgrade to the newer Fedoras due to bugs. In other words, if it is not going to work "out of the box", there isn't much benefit. Maybe I will switch to Debian.
Cheese with your Whine? (Score:5, Insightful)
... And along with your increased ability and incentive to move away from 'doze, comes increased incentive for developers to NOT move away from WinXX API.
If Wine works well, why should I, (a developer) want to port my appz to *nix? (not that I haven't, and we've offered OSX support for some time, but in all these years I've NEVER been asked about a Linux port) Of course, I won't officially support Wine on XYZ Linux, so the end result is a perpetual second-rate support for Linux.
On top of this, there's no particular incentive for us to support Linux anyway, since it's such an incohesive environment. Support RPM? Apt? Tar? Compiled sources? CUPs? PDF through Adobe? Ghost? Kghost? KDE? Gnome?
Each of these is important, because end users often have trouble finding the power switch. In this environment, having 24,000 flavors of the same O/S is *NOT* a good thing. And I say this despite using Linux for ALL of our core infrastructure and tech workstations!
Is this what you wanted? 'Cause it's what you are getting...
Re:We won already. Geez. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm so happy to have switched from Linux to OSX. After 10 years of jumping through hoops to get simple things done, struggling with software that's far behind in capabilities and ease of use compared to commercial software, and listening to conversations like this (it's crap now but in a few weeks/months/years...) I'd had enough. Now I have a system that works most of the time. And that is worth every penny I paid for it.
Re:We won already. Geez. (Score:2, Insightful)
Nice to hear you are satisfied. FOSS still gives you a choice. And Mac is based on OSS anyway.
Re:I like KDE 4 (Score:4, Insightful)
I like Gnome because it doesn't get in the way.
Doesn't get in the way ? As soon as you click in a window it comes to the front and obscures the material you were trying to view.
I suppose that it makes sense to Windows and Mac users but for the rest of us it's seriously irritating. I suppose it can be turned off by editing the Gnome XML configuration file (a staple of the traditional Gnome user friendliness) but it's a major pain in the neither region. As are a number of other defaults picked by the Gnome people who want to make the experience as "Windows-like" as possible for the corporate users.
I just can't wait for the transition to KDE4 to be complete. KDE works *for* me, not against. I don't want a desktop that "doesn't get in the way", I want one that actively makes things easier. KDE does that for me.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Awfulbar (Score:2, Insightful)
No, simply that it's new isn't a problem. A few reasons:
1) It's big, ugly, and distracting, mixing a variety of font sizes, italics, etc. (That's my subjective opinion).
I don't see what you mean with variety of font sizes, italics, etc... It looks good once you get used to it.
2) It is unpredictable, hence less useful. It used to bring up URLs that were previously typed in the field, that began with the letters typed. Now it searches other places and other fields, in a way that is not obvious, and can change unpredictably. My son was complaining about how the webcomic he reads keeps on turning up multiple times in the "awesomebar", because every strip has a different title.
The bar is supposed to guess what you want, not the other way around. I also think it adapts to what you choose when searching.
I don't have to type more than 3 letters to get exactly where I want.
Maybe you shouldn't try to predict what the bar will do and instead let the bar predict what you want.
4) It's marketing-driven. It was given a ridiculous name, and seemingly was at the top of a 'new 3.0 feature' bullet list that Mozilla wanted to 'push'... Then they removed options (which existed in the betas) to switch between the new and old configuration. That's skirting close to BIG BAD COMPANY behavior.
Ridiculous name? Unlike many other open source products?
Doesn't it remind you of how the search feature in every MS OS has been getting worse and worse every version, despite the added features?
No, it reminds me of how google toolbar does a great job at searching for everything in my desktop.
The only thing you didn't mention, and I could have agreed with that, is the issue of performance. The awesomebar can get really slow (unlike google toolbar, which searches my whole computer much faster) and that's something I dislike. But it is a common problem in firefox as a whole (it can take long to startup, long to shutdown, slow to run web applications, etc)
As for the functionality, I'm really glad they added it. Versatile search and tagging functionality are two great features in my experience.
I don't use history anymore, and bookmarks were replaced by tags.
That said, what features of firefox 3 do you need? I mean, why can't you just roll back to firefox 2 if you don't like ff3?
Re:I like KDE 4 (Score:3, Insightful)
it doesn't embed into Dolphin, no, because that's not Dolphin's design goal.
What? What kind of *nix file manager leaves out tarballs? Hell, even Explorer does zip.
Rule of thumb: if it does less than mc, it sucks.
Re:Listen to yourselves! (Score:1, Insightful)
oh, and if you're tempted to say "they should have just held 2.0 until January, then", don't bother: making releases from the code repository is an absolutely requirement to keep open source projects moving, and one of the downsides of that is that often a first release of a new series isn't what a consumer-grade user is going to what to cut their teeth on. that's why there is another step in row, e.g. distributions. not that they seem to always be doing their users the best favours lately in that regard. *shrug*
Although I don't use KDE (nor Gnome at the moment), I have to say that making frequent releases for the benefit of developers is probably best done as "previews", "alphas", or "betas". Or hell, even internal development builds. Not major "point-0" releases. Shifting the blame to distros (which decentralizes it, and lacks any sort of organization) is almost as bad as shifting the blame to users. They have certain expectations of a "point-0" release and shouldn't be tasked with working around beta software released as a major version.
Re:I like KDE 4 (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Cheese with your Whine? (Score:4, Insightful)
Our stuff IS written to be cross-platform. We already support OSX. We can support Linux but why? The point is that there's no point in porting it, because the cost of supporting it would be too high, even if there was demand, which there isn't.
Instead I might write my own solution, release it as open source and become a competitor to you, with version that is portable and free.
And, that works for you in one of two scenarios:
A) The software has a broad need for applicability, EG: an O/S kernel or a word processor.
B) The software is very simple.
OSS pretty much fails at niche software - software with a small user base and a high cost of entry. Niche software can be very extensive, as business rules and requirements get written into the code. And ultimately, the cost of maintaining all these requirements has to come from *somewhere*. So it's either done in-house (in which case open-sourcing the software effectively destroys your company's investment) or by a small software house (such as mine) which reduces the cost of managing the software by distributing the cost across multiple clients.
Don't get me wrong - I'm a big OSS advocate, I use OSS wherever I can, and have standardized on RedHat Linux for all of our infrastructure! We've extensively reviewed the idea of open sourcing our product, as well. But our product is a niche product, and there's really no point in releasing our wares to the world like that.
Re:Listen to yourselves! (Score:4, Insightful)
Then that should be a clue that the KDE developers need to still be fixing bugs in 3.5.
Re:Listen to yourselves! (Score:3, Insightful)
What hardware would that be?
Okay, but don't laugh. It's a Pentium D processor, Intel onboard graphics, and I just recently upgraded from 1 to 2 gig of RAM. Compiz barely runs (haven't tried since the memory upgrade, to be fair). Kwin absolutely flies. I realize this is a battle of anecdotes and proves nothing, but it's my experience, fwiw. Also, I have never gotten artifacts with Kwin. I don't think I've ever seen it crash on me either (Plasma is another story altogether...)
The desktop and the panel are still different, although the same widgets can now go in both places.
No they're not. Plasma is built on the idea of "containments." Widgets, the desktop, and the panel are all containments. They can contain data and/or they can contain other containments. I wish I could find the link to Seigo's blog that explains this better...
And they do have to be widgets -- applications won't do.
This guy [blogspot.com] made a "window-swallowing" widget within about four months of the dot-oh release. Also, see the "web browser" plasmoid which is really just a stripped-down version of Konqueror. Granted, that "window-swallowing" link is more of a concept piece than a working idea, but yeah, it can totally be done.
The desktop background is not drawn by a widget.
No, the desktop is a containment. See above. Which is one of the cool things about this. There's no more "coding for a desktop widget" or "coding for a panel applet" or "coding for X or Y." You're just coding for Plasma. And as an added bonus, you can write for Plasma in whatever language you like. This is the same thing that allows Plasma to use Google Widgets, Screenlets, etc.
Really, I am far more interested in the technical improvements and concepts of Plasma than I am the eye candy factor. Not that that isn't cool, but as you say, it's been done. But this stuff hasn't been done before. No, it's not a paradigm shift in terms of user interface, but it most certainly is a pretty major shift in how you code for the desktop.
(This is the part where I skip over Amarok, because really it's not related to the topic, and I certainly don't like Amarok all that much either.)
And they did so by perverting the meaning of version numbers in the same way Microsoft has for decades.
Way to drag out Microsoft as a strawman there. Whether you like their version numbering or not, they told you what was coming. Some people did not listen, and that's their own damn fault. Some distribution packagers did not listen, and that's a damn shame, but there it is.
Granted. But Firefox 3 was over two years in the making, and they still managed to pull off a solid release.
Okay, but again, "making" means something totally different in the context of a single application (especially something like a web browser, which is a pretty well mapped-out space already), and it certainly means something different when your "making" means adapting and updating an existing code base. There may be other examples you could use in this spot, but Firefox isn't one.