Free the Open Source 151
moria6 writes
"BackOffice Magazine has an article
Free the open source
which talks about hackers, Linus and Linux. It would seem
(to me) to suggest that the Open Source crowd is
clue-inhibited (I strongly disagree). Also an article on
Sun's .con-ing us all which
compares Linus' "hold" on Linux to that of Sun's on Java.
And last but not least Pavlov's Humans
which is a funny look at "Bug Avoidance 101" re: Win2K"
Slashdotted ALREADY? (Score:1)
Zontar
(somewhere in tenn.)
emailing developers on every bug (Score:1)
Linux is not any harder to install than Windows 98 (Score:1)
And all this just so I could start getting USB peripherals -- most especially a scanner -- so once Linux has better support for USB I'm in better shape for switching over completely.
Only thing I haven't gotten working on Linux is PPP (why the Sam Hill doesn't the default Red Hat kernel include PPP support? I was able to recompile the kernel, but sheesh!), once I have the time to work that out I may switch over for most of what I do.
Old Marxist Religion (Score:1)
2. I said commercial and that's what I meant. I will, however, concede that "proprietary" more strictly reflects the text of his rant. I believe that Stallman objects to anyone exerting and profiting from any ownership rights deriving from the labor of producing software.
This, in a funny way, argues against his position being "pinko". Tt's true that profitting from property rights is a classicly Capitalist behavior. However, in the case of a self-emplyed programmer, all of its value would accrue directly from her labor and so should accrue directly to her (setting aside all that from each according to his ability and to each according to his need crap).
He's Afraid (Score:1)
In his mind, he is saying "But Windows is better. Microsoft says so!"
To Jack Fegreus: Your server response is testament to your superior software.
BackOffice?!?!? (Score:1)
Something to at least think about.
Linux is not any harder to install than Windows 98 (Score:1)
Fastest /. effect ever? (Score:1)
Text of: ".con-ning" of us all (Score:1)
".con-ning" of us all
"Who's
Microsystems. It must have been a typo. The ad should have obviously
read: "Who's
pulled off a linguistic slight of hand with Java that would even give
a legalistic rush to the Prevaricator-in-Chief.
At the heart of the new Java jive is Sun's decision to follow in the
footsteps of LINUX. For Java, Sun has embraced the "open source" model
and will make Java source code available to one and all. Hey, "Open"
is Sun's middle name, right? Well, it's sort of open. It's just that
like a neurotic grasping mama, Sun can't quite let its Java baby go
into the world without a few apron strings attached.
Unlike open-source LINUX, if you want to make a commercial derivative
from anything that you build out of Sun's Java Open Source, you will
have to pay royalties to Sun. Is this cute or what? Sun "cons"
thousands of programmers around the world to slave away for nothing
and then charges them for the privilege of using their own work!
You've just got to love the sheer chutzpah of Scott McNealy. Even
Stonewall Bill Gates would have to blush under the Justice
Department's video cameras, if he had dared to try this stunt. But
wait, Sun's not-so-open Source scheme gets even better.
Before you can let your Java masterpiece loose in the world, your Java
application will have to be "certified" by Sun as being 100% Java
compliant. Ostensibly, this is so Sun can make sure there aren't
thousands of Java derivatives out there clobbering each other. Sun is
far too smart to let any set of proprietary advances vitiate the Sun
Java code license. What's more, this scheme also gives Sun a good look
at all the free work it just ".con-ned" out the ISV community.
So how is it that LINUX, which has none of this big mama nonsense,
hasn't splintered apart? Granted Linus Torvalds keeps a tight rein on
kernel development, but that's about it. You can buy an open-source
LINUX system from the likes of Red Hat or S.u.S.E. for your PC, and
each will install the same core system, in the same way, and with the
same machine-interaction behavior. This open-source point seems lost
on Sun. Or perhaps the point isn't lost on Sun at all.
After all, the big move is now under way to get Sun's Java into DTVs,
set-top boxes, and whatever else in the consumer home-electronics
market sports a microprocessor. But really, just what would a 100%
Aryan-Nation-Pure Java world provide for the typical "@home" consumer?
In theory, a consumer could instantly move any Java applet, such as a
TV or music-programming menu for example, from a Sony
home-entertainment center over to a competitive unit from the likes of
Hitachi, Panasonic, or Toshiba.
In practice, however, the user interface and controls for each of
these devices will be quite different. What good is hitting a Sony
CD-R rewrite button on a portable Java menu if no such function exists
on a Panasonic CD player? Then, there is the other matter that in all
likelihood the internal data structures for these competing devices
will be wildly different.
In a world where most consumers still haven't figured out that they
can change their Netscape browser's home-page default to another of
their own choosing, how likely is this Java-on-the-move scenario? For
consumer electronics, the "write once, run everywhere" is an even
bigger ".con" Sun marketing sham than the Java "open source"
programming scheme.
It certainly helps Sun. It probably helps consumer-electronics
vendors. Better yet, it clearly hurts Bill Gates. Nonetheless, it does
precious little when it comes to rescuing consumers lost in a sea of
unnecessary device complexity. Yet the media and the market keep on
buying into this Java story. P.T. Barnum was right after all.
When it comes to ".con-ning" the world, however, McNealy is just in
catch-up mode. Few, if any, have learned the lessons of P.T. as well
as Bill G.
Legend has it that when crowds lingered too long and slowed the take,
Ol' P. T. cleared the tent with a sign: "This way to the egress."
Quite a story, but Ol' Bill G. has done Barnum one better. The lead
government lawyer, David Boies, pressured him to comment on a
statement by Russel Siegelman, an Microsoft executive, who said of the
Windows [dialog] box, "it's our one unique and valuable asset." When
the trust buster then somewhat ambiguously asked Mr. Gates about this
tremendously valuable "box" of his, Bill replied with a straight face,
"The Windows box is a piece of cardboard."
Hoo-hah! Talk about ".con-ning" the Justice Department.
Thank god it's not Microsofts fault then! (Score:1)
BTW - Just keep clicking reload - you'll get it eventually!
Pure FUD from an ignorant dinosaur. (Score:1)
Neet!! (Score:1)
HERE'S THE TEXT OF ONE OF THE ARTICLES (Score:1)
any company for that matter, were to create a serious business model
in which an OS was widely opened up all the way down to the kernel,
what would be the effects on quality, reliability, and ease of use? "
Could someone please explain to me what an "Open" or "Free" kernel has to do with quality, reliability, usability, etc at the
application level? It's not like application developers are free to add system calls whenever
they feel like it! Applications developed for Linux (or any other "Open Source" OS kernel) must still use and
conform to and use that OS's APIs, correct?
I'm not so sure about this guy's technical background.
One line says it all .... (Score:1)
feh.
It's funny, laugh (Score:1)
I have a better idea for the bug avoidance in W2K. When a bug occurs it should deposit $0.10 into your bank account. I figure that after about 5 days everyone will have earned enough money for the new PC required to run Windows and after 6 months everyone will have earned enough to retire and work on Linux full time.
Sending an email to the developers, how funny. How about sending an email message to Bill himself saying that his baby is broken?
FJ
BLACK ORIFICE (Score:1)
JACK FEGREUS' EMAIL ADDRESS (Score:1)
Jack Fegreus, Ph.D.
Associate Publisher/Editor-in-Chief
phone: 603-891-9116
email: jackf@pennwell.com
Look at this guy
"Nonetheless, the LINUX phenomenon begs an important question ..."
He means raises the question, begging the question is term used to describe a logical fallacy. Don't editors take english courses?
"We are talking about another OS built on top of the same kernel."
Uh, Linux is a kernel, and nothing more
Where did they GET this guy???
The .con-ing us all article has some good points. (Score:1)
Sun continue to talk in misleading ways about how Java is better than everything else.
For instance, the way they constantly point out how Java servlets are so much better than Perl CGI programs. Cough - try not mixing your architectures so much next time.
The multi-platform promises of Java are just that - promises.
I don't doubt for a minute that Sun see OSS as simply another feature on the marketing landscape to be used in the most profitable way possible.
There was FUD here, sure, but less than I see from Sun, and no more than I see in
Software that works =] (Score:1)
Internet JUNKBUSTER
TCP connection to 'www.backofficecto.com' failed: Broken pipe.
oh my.
Please pass the crack, Jack (Score:1)
I'm all for getting blown by dead women (Ayn Rand) but let's not confuse her philosophy and ideas with the philosphies and ideas expounded by people in her name. Rand, like Jesus, has a lot of fanatical followers who often use Her name to make a point - or maybe just to prove that they're Randroids. Who knows?
Rand's novels feature heroic men and women of reason fighting against people who rely on FUD. If you think I'm exaggerating go back and read them. In Atlas Shrugged, Dagny Taggart's competitors warned against using Reardon steel because no one had ever tried it before. Rand predicted FUD decades before the computer industry adopted it. If the BackOfficeCTO article isn't FUD, I don't know what is.
This episode could be included in the next Rand novel. A man writes an article indicting the crazy new tactics of his competition. His competition comes to read the article, but the server can't handle it, crashes. The
So don't assume that the granola copylefters would be on Rand's dark side. The GOP card poking into Fegreus's ass doesn't make his thoughts on Rand correct. They have to be argued in a public forum with logic reason to prop them up.
clueless about Java (Score:1)
And that 100% pure Java FUD the auther is spreading is pure bull. Anyone with a (free) JDK can build whatever Java application they want, attach it to all the native code they want, and release it to the world anytime they want. If you want to release a pure-Java app, take the test. But only the big boys bother with that, and most of us don't give a rat's ass.
Even according to Sun's pure-Java FAQ, not all good applications are pure and not all pure applications are good. It's just a label.
To make a little labeling technique out to be some terrible con is ridiculous and insulting.
one crunchy-granola dude who can at least use a co (Score:1)
"Perhaps, however,
the truth, as usual, is somewhere in the middle."
ummmm.....ok. Not finished yet?
"The scheme, of course, is the construct dubbed open-source software, which has been made infamous by Linus Torvalds and LINUX. LINUX, as we all know, is that remarkable operating system
that runs incredibly fast and incredibly flawlessly."
We ARE Winning (Score:1)
If Jack has any substantial objections to OSS, where are they? Where is the evidence that OSS is of poorer quality than Hidden Source? The simple fact is, Jack and his dinosaur brethren don't have this evidence. He even admits that OSS is created and served by a pool of serious and talented developers In the absence of real data, look at what poor Jack is reduced to: Trying to claim that "Free Software" is somehow separate from "Open Source," then enlisting the American
antipathy toward all things communist by calling us "the crunchy-granola crowd" and "left-of-Leningrad."
This piece isn't even FUD. It is the desperate propaganda of a true believer defending the faith against the onslaught of reality.
Quote from the ".com-ming" article (Score:1)
--
Mark Fassler
fassler at frii dot com
www.aynrand.com is running Apache/1.2.4 on Linux (Score:1)
See for yourself: http://www.netcraft.com/cgi-bin/Survey/whats?host
Maybe they needed a reliable web server that actually works?
The preaching on microsoft.aynrand.com is an interesting read. Then again, it lies in the nature of Objectivists that they are easily bought.
"As for Ayn Rand, she can blow me"
g0.
writer, founder of the philosophy objectivism (Score:1)
If you want to understand Objectivism in Practice, read any of Branden's books. He soaked up her uncontaminated musings, while she was intellectually free of greed and control; He put them to work in a therapeutic setting.
He still admires her, and I do too. OK, she was a feeble excuse for a philosopher, but the gonads it took for a woman to *declare* herself a philosopher in what is *still* (I can't believe I'm saying this) a male-only field was stunning. Give the bitch some credit, eh?
Branden's principles work, and are very in sync with open software. read any of his stuff, and you'll see why. Explaining here would be a losing proposition.
Start with the Alienated Self. It'll freak you out.
He has a web site: http://www.nathanielbranden.net . The site sucks, aesthetically, and looks corporate, and yada yada. It does run on apache, though. Hey, we can't all be geeks.
His point is to pay attention and THINK about all you do. Simple. Kinda Geeky, don't ya think?
Any disagreement? (Score:1)
to introduce the following excerpt as an example
of Pure, Unadulterated FUD (PUFUD):
Worse yet, the crunchy-granola crowd would hi-jack the open-source movement and turn it
into the free-software movement. That's fine and dandy for dusty academics living on NSF
grants, but Ayn Rand would never approve of such munificence. If the open-source
movement is to prove itself, it will need to produce a commercially viable product. Declaring
the K Desktop Environment (KDE) apostate because it contains some proprietary code from a
Norwegian company is beyond belief. For a dynamic market to grow up around an
open-source software product, the open-source movement will have to be unencumbered
from all of the left-of-Leningrad socio-economic claptrap.
I'm actually having difficulty believing that
this isn't a brilliant bit of satire written
by an open source advocate, especially since the
server barely managed to get the text out, much
less the images, after a dozen or so hits of the reload button.
The guy even refers to Ayn Rand, for chrissakes!
Gawd, I wish I had thought of doing something like
this.
Oh, this is too funny... I'm lucky I wasn't drinking anything when I read it, or it would
now be coming out my nose right now.
-Lungo
dazed and confused (Score:1)
He does know how to use commas (Score:1)
How well he adheres to rules of grammer and usage and whether or not he knows what he's talking about are two separate and distinct issues.
These poor people (Score:1)
Linux is NOT socialists (Score:1)
Microsoft is more like many of the neo-fascist regimes I have seen in my tour of duty as a USMC officer.
"One Program, One Operating System" -- Microsot
Nick
LSG
Old Marxist Religion (Score:1)
Kinda funny from someone who bristles at not getting proper credit whenever someone sasys Linux instead of GNU/Linux.
HERE'S THE TEXT OF ONE OF THE ARTICLES (Score:1)
Way to lick that M$ boot, Jack!
ranting about communism (Score:1)
In extreme-leftist publications, it is customary to call people the publication disapproves of "fascists". In extreme-rightist publications, words like "faggots" or "socialist" are used. In rightist publications, "communist".
Of course, nothing of this changes the FACTS or the FACTUAL REPORT. This isn't a coincidence that there's little fact in Mr Fergeus' column.
In a nutshell: I've seen often Communist leaflets or newspapers, and Mr Fergeus' column really reminds me of them...
Also, please note the style: lots of sentences containing obscure allusions, lots of babble...
I hope for the reputation of the university that granted Mr Fergeus' degree that he didn't write his dissertation like this.
Our Friend Jack.... (Score:1)
Attempting to sound intellectual, while not being able to adequately fake it.
Typical of Microsoft. All the buzzwords, with no content behind them. I seriously doubt if this person would even know how to install Linux, as he has obviously never used it.
Cheers,
Nick
Linux Systems Group
... Scary ... (Score:1)
I also find it interesting that Ayn Rand's "philosophy" is used as a defense for MS.
Check out this link
http://microsoft.aynrand.org/
I'm starting to read some more to see the connection, but this is kind of *weird*
Red Baiting Lives! (Score:1)
I agree. But he's not talking about the underlying windowing system, he's talking about the GUI toolkit (QT, in this case), which is a higher layer than X.
Microsoft FUD or clueless techical writer? (bah..) (Score:1)
He didn't say he tried Linux, and as for the KDE issue the Gnome team is catching up with a desktop without hidden licensing issues. So there... but if you REALLY want to run KDE (and have the extra RAM..) go freaking ahead! Does he expect Linux to have the same desktop look, or is he so cluecless he cannot buy the CD containing what he wants. "[Click] [click] [click].. I'm a computer expert - I can use Windows and a mouse. Microsoft made the internet possible"
He probably first heard of Linux with the Intel investment. Eventually he will be laid off and replaced by someone younger, someone with a clue about technology...
ppp hard on linux??? (Score:1)
first/last/every time I have tried to get an
internet connection under windoze... generally an hour or two. Although I haven't had to config a modem on windoze recently... just an ether card to route through the linux box...
references to Ayn Rand? (Score:1)
-Dean
Keep hitting RELOAD! :-) (Score:1)
I love it.
Ayn Rand ??? (Score:1)
Essentially, her 'philosophy' (which does not really deserve the title), which she calls 'objectivism' (thus usurping a term with a rather respectable philosophical history) is supposed to be an all-encompassing philosophical worldview, which she expressed as something to this effect (pasraphrasing from memory):
1) Metaphysics -- objective reality (i.e. 'I see it, it exists)
2) Epistemology -- reason ('reason is not just a tool, it's an entire toolbox')
Not too bad so far, eh?..
3) Ethics -- selfishness (she tacks on to this an idea that humans have a natural right to be not subject to violence, a VERY ad-hoc idea that is essential to making her ethics even remotely workable)
4) Economics/politics -- laissez-faire capitalism (anything goes as long as you don't commit violence upon others, more or less).
Even these points don't sound TOO bad (although her actual arguments are as full of holes as a sieve, and show a lack of familiarity with the existing body of philosophical thought), until you check out the Ayn Rand institute (www.aynrand.com) [aynrand.com] for a more detailed explanation of this stuff. Read the publication section, there's some scary stuff there (just two examples: environmentalism is evil, European conquest of America is good )...
All in all, appealing to Ayn Rand in this context is not much better that appealing to Institute for Creationist Research (www.icr.org) [icr.org] as an authority of paleontology...
writer, founder of the philosophy objectivism (Score:1)
It's interesting to see this reference to Ayn Rand. Howard Roark, the main character of The Fountain Head, is an architect who is constantly turning his back on capitalist ventures which he feels compromise his artistic integrity. The real pay off for him isn't in the money, but in the art and beauty of his creations. That kind of sounds familiar.
More information about Ayn Rand and objectivism can be found at aynrand.org [aynrand.org]
bnf
Letter to BackOffice CTO (Score:1)
Can they do anything right??
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Text of: Pavlovs humans (Score:1)
Pavlovs humans
A man walks into the doctor's office and says, "Doctor, when I walk
this way it hurts." The doctor responds, "Well, then don't walk that
way!"This joke reminds me of how we adapt to using software. I used to
think that as time went by the software that I use became more stable.
A buggy Windows 3.0 was upgraded to a less buggy Windows 3.1.
The same thing happened with Windows NT. The first version, 3.1, had
more bugs than Joe's Apartment. They were crawling all over the place.
Then, as time went by, the bugs went away. Or so I thought.
I have been using the Windows NT 5.0-I mean Windows 2000-beta since it
was released. The first beta of the product was so bug ridden that I
de-installed post haste. When beta 2 was released, I gave it another
chance. It was still buggy, but not so much that I couldn't use it,
and I did so on a daily basis. Now, five months later, I can honestly
say that Windows 2000 beta 2 is a very stable product.
What's that you say? Windows 2000 beta 2 is the same product I
installed five months ago? Can't be. There must have been a service
pack since then that fixed the bugs. Right? Wrong!
Windows 2000 beta 2 is the same product I installed five months ago.
It is I who have changed.
You'll have to bear with me, because my theory is kind of strange and
I'm frazzled after enduring a weeklong move to a new building. I have
come to believe that computer software does not become more stable
over time-people become more stable over time.
It appears that, like Pavlov's dogs, I have been trained by my
computer not to do the things that cause me pain. This, of course,
means that my subconscious screams at me to use the delete button on
the Outlook button bar, not the delete key, because every time I use
the delete key, my system freaks out and goes berserk. After a few
times, the randomly generated mouse clicks, which depending on where
my mouse pointer is pointing may or may not be disastrous, get more
than a bit annoying. So, as a defense mechanism, I don't do that
anymore.
This is not just a theory that applies to beta software. I have
noticed that many released software packages are unstable until they
train me to use them properly. At this point, I think I could teach a
class in "Bug Avoidance 101," or write the book The Complete Moron's
Guide to Bug Avoidance.
What I really need is a new function in all of my software that gives
me a treat every time I avoid a bug. Press the delete button, get a
nilla wafer! Of course, any freshman psychology student can tell you
that a combination of positive and negative reinforcement works best.
I guess that means that every time I use the delete key, a hand should
come out of my screen and slap me in the face!
As wonderful as these new functions might be, I think that people
might object to being slapped in the face every time the software
hiccups, and who could afford the nilla wafer refills that most
software would entail.
I have a better idea. Software manufacturers should be required to
ship a component as part of their software that e-mail's a nasty
message to the developer who wrote the code each time a bug occurs.
Imagine how much e-mail these developers would receive every day.
They'd clean up their act mighty quick.
Our initial reaction to bug-ridden code is to accept that there is
nothing we can do about it and try to avoid the bug in the future.
This is the wrong attitude. When bugs occur, report them. If it is
beta software, send in the bug incident report. If it is release
software, complain. You pay good money for software and software
companies should be held accountable for software that doesn't work.
Until the complaints of IS managers everywhere lead to more stable
software, I guess I will just have to take it on the chin and refill
my computer's nilla wafer dispenser.
Chris Amaru is Technical Director of BackOffice CTO Magazine.
Don't waste your time reading this article. (Score:1)
This is CRAP! Nothing shown, nothing proposed, NOTHING.
(And their server sucks nutz.)
Reactionary (Score:1)
-- adr
Microsoft Haters? (Score:1)
I smell fear. (Score:1)
bnf
Microsoft Haters? (Score:1)
What I *really* hate is that people always seem to lable you a "Microsoft Hater" just because you want to use R-E-L-I-A-B-L-E software instead of a Microsoft product.
By no means am I a "Microsoft Hater", I am not a "Microsoft Lover" either. I am still new to Linux but in the past 3 months I've been continually running it, I have not had a single crash or application failure! I can't even go a single day without something dying on me in Windows.
Everyone is free to choose the software that they want to run. Just because someone doesn't like to or want to run a Microsoft doesn't mean that they are a Microsoft Hater. Many people are just fed up with running buggy software.
In my eyes, these people are just being smarter than those who keep rebooting.
HERE'S THE TEXT OF ONE OF THE ARTICLES (Score:1)
and turn it into the free-software movement. That?s fine and dandy for dusty
academics living on NSF grants, but Ayn Rand would never approve of such
munificence.
I must have missed Ayn Rand's conversion to a deity. Anyway, this sentence was where I stopped reading..the mention of Ayn Rand's name is a good clue that the author is immune to logic..hope I didn't miss anything as amusing as the rest of his 'article'.
Daniel
Ad reloading (Score:1)
OSS Isn't Socialist. (Score:1)
Free Software/Open Source Software has NONE of these attributes.
1. Force. The establishment of socialism invariably involves some degree of force; this may be violent revolution or may merely be expropriation or forced nationalization ("eminent domain") of resources. Free Software doesn't involve any sort of force: nobody is attempting a violent overthrow of Microsoft, nor "expropriating" (pirating) Windows source code to use in FS projects.
2. Common ownership of the means of production. In socialism, the means of production (factories, farms, etc.) are owned by the government. In Free Software, the "means of production" would be computers, compilers, and the Internet infrastructure itself. None of these are owned in common --- you own your own computer; the compiler is licensed to you by its owners under the GPL; the Internet infrastructure is owned by the various ISPs, telcos, and other such entities.
3. Involvement of the state. In socialism, the state administers the use of resources and means of production. The state is not involved at all in Free Software, except insofar as a state agency contributes to FS (e.g. Beowulf, from NASA), or uses FS. At no point is the state involved in the administration of FS as a whole: FS is administered severally by such people as package maintainers, kernel maintainers (thank you Alan and Linus!), and such.
4. Operation in the name of the people. A socialist regime operates (or claims to operate) in the name of the people. Very few Free Software authors write their software with "the public good" as their primary aim; they generally write it because they need to solve a problem, or because they believe it to be interesting.
5. Intention of economic egalitarianism. It is the aim of socialism (though it has never been accomplished) to achieve economic equality among the people --- to abolish the so-called "class system" of "capitalism". Economics is rarely a concern in the world of Free Software; the "freedom" involved is that of "free speech" (i.e. liberty) and not "free beer" (i.e. unlimited economic opportunity). Those who theorize about the economics of FS tend to compare it neither to a "command economy" (socialism) nor a "market economy" but rather a "gift economy".
I am really rather tired of hearing FS/OSS referred to as socialist. If I had to ascribe any political ideology to FS in general, it would be something like "communitarian libertarianism". This would take the ideal of voluntary cooperation (communitarianism) and couple it with the ideal of freedom from coercion (libertarianism).
This would distinguish this ideology from "communitarian socialism" (that variety of socialism which would use communitarian structures such as intentional communities and local governments to establish a larger socialist regime) and from "individualist libertarianism" (that variety of libertarianism which proclaims competition to be the sole law of the jungle, ignoring the fact that cooperation is just as natural).
Woof! Woof! (Score:1)
"Server too busy" (Score:1)
The words "Too busy" shouldn't be in a web server's vocabulary.
If you're going to set up a web server, make sure network bandwidth, not CPU or RAM, is your bottleneck...
Please pass the crack, Ayn (Score:1)
into my fortune database.
Thank you, and good night.
-Lungo
Red Baiting Lives! (Score:1)
It's been quite a few years since I've read anything that impunes that someone is a communist if they fit a certain behavior set. Especially WRT an OS - talk about stupid. Running Linux makes you a pinko commie faggot. Don't be that way!
(Although I personally don't really care about KDE licencing issues, I don't think MS, Apple, IBM, Be or anyone else would base their GUI on someone else's toolkit. Silly to imply that Linux should.)
Agree (Score:1)
Has anyone else noticed that the Windows install is too brain dead to reinstall the boot loader??? I tried to install Win95 on a HD that I'd put Linux on before, and even after doing a FORMAT /S, it kept coming up with the LILO boot prompt.
Duh...
bah! (Score:1)
TheJackal.
Left of Leningrad (Score:1)
Left of St. Petesburg is Poland.
I can certanly agree that Free Software should be sanitized from all its polish-oriented ideals such as Popes, sausages and low salaries.
Nevertheless it makes a good T-Shirt also:
"I'm a crunchy-granola slashdot longhair from left-of-Leningrad"
finally connected (Score:1)
-Lkb-
Left of Leningrad socio-economic claptrap? (Score:1)
It's unacceptable, to some, to have code that is freely licensed only for non-commercial purposes because it restricts how you can conduct business with that code. There is the threat that the status of the code may revert to one that is purely commercial, which could be devastating to any industry that had spun up around that code base.
This is not ``Left of Leningrad'' thinking at all, whatever that means. (To me, Leningrad symbolizes the suppression of the free exchange of, as well as oppressive government involvement and intervention in the affairs of citizens. What this has to do with free software is beyond me.)
Maybe this sorry-ass Microsoft-pushing motherfucker also thinks that it's ``Left of Leningrad claptrap'' to want to breathe air without paying for it. Someone should put a patent on the process of absorption of oxygen into the blood, and then charge everyone licensing fees for breathing, right?
free-vms (Score:1)
Being "free-vms" it is, of course, www.free-vms.org not
dylan_-
--
interesting.... (Score:1)
Microsoft!
Microsoft!
Microsoft!
What a joke.
Read the negative press. (Score:1)
Seriously though, this sort of article gives you an idea of the kind of problem the suits have with our OS:
- These guys must be pretty dumb if they're working their butts off for free. Why don't they get together and make some money for us?
- What a bunch of nasty pinko neo-commies! We've got to stop them! They'll be marching through the streets forcing people out of their offices and into Collective Workplaces next!
- Command line? Must be primitive, hard-to-use, etc.
My solution? Explanation, installation, demonstration.Open Source to Free Software (Score:1)
What a backward and absurd statement!
Author of VMS headed development of NT (Score:1)
What dose Backoffice mean ? (Score:1)
1 : A suite of Server products from Microsoft
2 : The room where you keep all the servers and switches etc... I.e. The place where the network admin works. See above for why they shouldn't talk about this.
If back office means something else that I am not aware of then it's OK. Anybody can commit a major blunder when setting up a server. just not someone who is selling advise to netprofesionals.
Don't waste your time reading this article. (Score:1)
Nothing there to refute... Hey, the guy does some name calling and dredges up the tired old, "This ain't a valid business model" drivel, but he has nothing new to say. I'll agree with you that there's plenty of shaking out to take place in the OSS development model, and we have yet to see how it scales on more and more complex projects, but ANYONE can tell you that. Again, this article does nothing more repeat the same old FUD we've been hearing all along.
JACK FEGREUS' EMAIL ADDRESS (Score:1)
I myself think that the use of titles like "PhD" in contexts where they don't belong is awfully pretentious...
Ignore the pointy haired boss behind the curtain (Score:1)
Just ignore the silly article. It's typical pointy haired boss claptrap. While the pointy haired bosses sits around worrying about the granola eaters who want free software (clearly without the faintest idea of what "free softare" means) and communism, their capitalist loving underlings will cheerfully use and support free software to get their jobs done. As other articles have pointed out, many people are "sneaking" linux boxes and other free software into their jobs to make their lives easier, their network stabler, and generally running the company. Free software will continue to grow, not because CTOs decide that's it's now the hip thing to do, but because it's so darn useful those in the trenches.
Letter to BackOffice CTO (Score:1)
I am shocked at some of the inacccuracies and logic errors in a couple of you more recent columns. In particular, I am referring to columns regarding Linux and Java: "Free the Open Source", by Mr. Fegreus and "'.con-ning' of us all" by Mr. Vitaliano.
First, allow me to point out what appears to be a lack of research or understanding in both articles. It may seem "nit-pickey", but why is "Linux" continually capitalized? "Unix" is sometimes capitalized, but I have never seen someone knowledgeable about Linux capitalized "Linux". This seemingly trivial issue nonetheless represents a basic lack of understanding and connection to the Linux and "open source" community.
Also, Mr. Fegreus is blatantly wrong when he calls Linux "another OS built on top of the same kernel". Linux _is_ the kernel. The rest of what Mr. Fegreus seems to be referring to as the OS is a collection of utilities, mostly GNU utilities. Linux itself is the kernel, and shares no code in common with any other commercial Unix distribution. It may have a similar API, but that is _vastly_ different from having "the same kernel". Mr. Fegreus's statement shows a lack of research and technical understanding on his behalf.
In Mr. Vitaliano's article, he shows a basic misunderstanding of the open source model. Allowing free distribution of an open source product, but requesting royalties if it will be sold comercially, is not a new concept to the open source community. Rather, it is simply one model that open source software can follow. In fact, this is the same model that the Norwegian company Troll Tech previously used in its Qt toolkit, about which Mr. Fegreus expressed his lack of understanding to the objections against it. Most other models offer similar "trade-offs". For instance, in the popular GNU public license, the code is normally free, but if the company chooses to distribute its own changes to it, it must also release its modified source code. The common thread here is that the open source community typically does not object to the "you can have this for free, as long you don't try to make money off of my work" approach.
There are also many other things that I could comment on -- Mr. Fegreus' referral to Linux's manual, which would only apply to one book about Linux or one distribution of Linux; Mr. Fegreus' misunderstanding on why Troll Tech's Qt software package used in KDE was viewed as a potential problem until recently; Mr. Vitaliano's implications to the role and Linus and distributors in Linux -- but I believe my point has been made. When writing about something with which you may be unfamiliar (such as Linux and open source development), please be sure to do proper research to gain a full understanding of all the matters involved. Thank you.
What did you expect? (Score:1)
Now, BackOffice Magazine has a special filing place at my office--the trash can.
PHB alert (Score:1)
So, everyone - let's slashdot it again! :-)
Ford 'Mostly Harmless' Prefect
Please pass the crack, Jack (Score:1)
Does this guy have a clue about the timeline for the creation of the term 'Open Source' vs. 'Free Software'? Obviously not.
Declaring the K Desktop Environment (KDE) apostate because it contains some proprietary code from a Norwegian company is beyond belief. For a dynamic market to grow up around an open-source software product, the open-source movement will have to be unencumbered from all of the left-of-Leningrad socio-economic claptrap.
Believe it dude. Read the GPL and consider the potential (ill)legality of including QT in something released under said licensing terms... Concern over KDE's inclusion of QT was real considering their use of the GPL. If they had chosen a BSD or MIT license that wouldn't have been an issue... but they didn't. This is not about granola crunchy leftist pinko commie 'guild of computer programmers' out to kill the commercial White Knight of technological distribution to the masses and their standardized easy to use GUI (never mind the irony of calling MS a 'White Knight' or considering the terrible effect allowing a monopoly to control the entire software industry, as is obviously MS's intent, would have on our economy as a whole). It's an arcane legal Intellectual Property rights issue meant to maintain the validity of copylefting as a technique. That means protecting the authors code from unscrupulous corporate players who have in the past stolen and copywrited others' work given out to the public domain. All the Open Source licenses exist in order to protect authors' ownership rights (and to a lessor extent protect the authors from implied warrenty issues).
As for the pinko commie trite - since when has sharing for a common collective good among individual citizens for a nonpolitical goal ever been a communist activity? By this line of logic any community service or charitable donation, church activity or otherwise, would be considered communist. Of course, I think you really mean it's communist once it affects your business's bottom line, which has nothing to do with communist politics and everything to do with your corporate marketing spin.
Also: as for Ayn Rand and her extreme philosophy of egoism as the center of creativity: she can blow me.
Another One Bites The Dust (Score:1)
Hmm.. (Score:1)
Linux is not any harder to install than Windows 98 (Score:1)
Fortunately for me, I happen to be well acquainted with such command line gobbledy gook as "fdisk", "format c:", "edit config.sys", etc.
Major nit: none of the Windows-98 CD's I have are bootable. 'Cmon guys! This ain't rocket science!
For comparison, the last time I installed Redhat, I went from unformatted HD to complete Linux/X in about 4 hours. Including the surface scan for bad blocks.
What's a Backoffice ? (Score:1)
1 : A suite of Server products from Microsoft
2 : The room where you keep all the servers and switches etc... I.e. The place where the network admin works. See above for why they shouldn't talk about this. A good admin knows that when his server budget falls below where an NT solution wold be adequet he shul go with [Linux/*BSD]+Apache.
If "backoffice" means something else that I am not aware of then it's OK. Anybody can commit a major blunder when setting up a server. just not someone who is selling advise to networking profesionals.
Neet!! (Score:1)
Here I had been using the 15" monitor that came with the machine all this time..
Well, I guess when you have an OS that actually does something you begin to realize the advantages of a bigger monitor much sooner.
(I know a lot of people that think running more than one program will crash the machine)
Ayn Rand ??? (Score:1)
or... (Score:1)
while [ true ];
do
lynx -dump http://www.backofficecto.com/home/genartx.asp?art
done
this will get you the text (eventually). substitute the art_id=xxx for the other articles, if ya fancy.
It doesn't matter (Score:1)
Neet!! (Score:1)
Speaking as a man with a 21" monitor, AMEN!!
(I know a lot of people that think running more than one program will crash the machine)
Considering the "stability" of Windows, can you blame them? Hell, sometimes it's a challenge just getting ONE program to run!
"Server too busy" (Score:1)
www.backofficecto.com is running Microsoft-IIS/4.0 on NT4 or Windows 98
Info was obtained with the help of
http://www.netcraft.com/cgi-bin/Survey/whats?ho
or
http://www.netcraft.com/
Regards
Igor
UPDATE: www.FUD-central.com (Score:1)
Yarr, Harr, Harr!
Love it!
Well, Well, Well... (Score:1)