Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
News

The Economist notes Linux and Open Source 53

Posted by CmdrTaco from the stuff-to-read dept.
buzz lightyear writes "Today's Economist notes the value of Open Source together with some interestingly juxtaposed articles about deflation and lowering of prices..."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Economist notes Linux and Open Source More

The Economist notes Linux and Open Source

Comments Filter:
  • Wow, now that's impressive. Is there any place like netcraft which does monitoring of more services than just httpd... maybe a generalized version which checks FTP daemons, SMTP daemons, NNTP daemons, HTTP daemons, etc.

    I never did understand why people say sendmail is hard to configure. My configuration consists of a 3 line long .mc file and a number of hosts added to sendmail.cw. I would not consider the 6 minutes it takes me to get sendmail running back breaking work.

    And I have yet to see a fair comparison of Sendmail vs Qmail vs Zmailer vs Vmailer/Postfix. Everyone says Qmail is faster, but I see no numbers and it just seems like hype.
  • ESR is generally perceived as being a bit too much on the pro-business side of things, while ignoring the Free Software side of things, and personally snubbing RMS several times because RMS is inconvenient when talking to businesses. Selling Open Source is fine, but trying to hide the people that make it work in order to sell more of it isn't.

  • Agree. (Score:1)

    by cduffy ( 652 )
    ESR is, at the very least, one heckuva lot intimidating to outsiders. He does a good job in the ambassador position, too -- his papers are well-written and quite accurate.

    Not that I'm going to turn a deaf ear to RMS or advize that others do so... but it's ESR's papers I refer folks to when they want more reading material on open-source/free software.
  • Great article, but what's with that cartoon that started off the page: (this is the picture I'm talking about [economist.com].)

    Since when is open source 'thhhbbbbting' Silicon Valley?!? Silicon Valley is where it's strongest. It's "thhhbbbting" Redmond more than Silicon Valley.

  • I hate that Thatcherite rag. But, a surprisingly good read, nonetheless.

    The Economist has good writing, and more non-fluff info per square inch than all other big-time newsmags. Yeah, maybe the politics are shite; my solution: I don't inhale.

    --

  • Perhaps the software industry will eventually look a bit like a highway. The infrastructure (operating systems, networking technologies) will be largely a public good, while services (support, training) and specialised applications are for sale.

    I find it alarming that this idea seems to become more and more popular. Why is it that Free Software should be delegated to infrastructure? If Free Software is better because of the peer review process and more moral because it encourages sharing, then this is true for all programs, not just for operating systems. It's just that historically, operating systems, networking and systems utilities were the first free programs. There is absolutely no reason why it should stop there. I for one sure hope that it does not.

    --

  • Yes, it's annoying but still the thing most worth
    reading after Private Eye. Apart from the
    occasional piece of crass right-wingism, it's
    got the iconoclasm and tough-mindedness which
    I am sure is what most /.ers want. I have given
    up and taken out a subscription.
  • Good article. The Economist is often (surprisingly?) on the ball about things.
  • See Dan Bernstein's latest figures. [pobox.com]
  • You, like the Luddites, have no concern for society at large. Your concern, like the Luddites, is only for your own butt. I have no sympathy for you.
    -russ
  • ESR was the one who put the whole OSS thing into perspective for me.

    For a long time, I was a lurker, reading the posts and articles on /. and occasionally making a comment on some side issue, but basically not making any comment on OSS or free vs. proprietary software.

    Not because I didn't understand; I did, on an intellectual level. But basically, I didn't "get" it. I sure as hell wasn't passionate about it; just figured they were 2 equally-valid paradigms. (Please excuse the use of the marketroid-type hype word -- I think this is one of the few places where it is actually appropriate :-)

    Until I actually got around to reading "The Cathedral and the Bazaar", at which point I finally "saw the light" and understood where the passion came from.

    I previously understood on an intellectual level, but not on the emotional one. I didn't "get" it -- it took ESR's writings to do that for me.

    Hell... at this point, I'd follow him just about anywhere...

    (ok... that does it... no-one's ever gonna take me seriously again, right? :-)

    On the other hand, though, I do think RMS is (more than) a bit of a nutcase...

    - Sean


    - SeanNi
  • Articles this well researched are rare.


    --
  • MS is doomed, and the Economist acknowledges this. Most pieces I've seen lately emphasize the economic benefit of using the software, not the economic peril to proprietary software producers. A suprisingly mature reaction, especially considering similar situations (ie, mp3 and the RIAA) that are being handled so badly.


    --
  • Isn't this quote attributed to Linus?
    'Course how can I expect the Economist to know that...


    --
  • Yes, this analogy doesn't work, or at least it has some bad connotations. Most "public" infrastructure is just a subsidy to one group or another, taken from taxpayers whether they use it or not. This kind of taking is more akin to the Microsoft tax than to OSS contributions, which are voluntary and decentralized.



  • There are ? question mark characters all over the place, which leads me to believe they typed it up in some brain-dead Microsoft product and the quotes got converted to ?'s. (MS doesn't follow character set guidelines, which of course *only* looks bad in non-Microsoft browsers since their browsers aren't standardized either).

  • Though I don't know him very well, I've met Brett Glass on many occasions (back in the fabled Amiga Days, admittedly), and this doesn't sound like something he would write.

    I think it's an impostor.

    Schwab

  • For a short article, it did have a surprisingly lot of important information. This is a great thing, the Econmist has a relativly small circulation, but a very high circulation among, heads of business and government.

    The observation that Open Source could be and should be the Freeways of the future for digital commerce is an excellent one.

    Open Source is great for Capitalism. The infra-structure needs to be public, it will be most efficient way for people to communicate. People like windows because they can share programs and files. Free software should replace that as the common ground.

    Not all software will become "Free," games, and specialized software will always get someone to pay. (for games at least as long as hardware advances rapidly).

    Also for as many enemies as ESR has made, he IS the leading intellectual among the hacker community, he has written better essays than any one else.
  • They got it mostly right -- interesting that the somewhat tricky ideas of open source (value != $$, competitive advantage to using non-proprietary code and giving stuff away) are finally permeating the main-stream media. Somewhat ironic to have a mag titled "the economist" touting the value of free software...
  • There are lots of things that has made ESR fall in my opinion, but the picture where he compares Hitler and Bill Gates is just too fucking much. How the HELL can you be so moronic and utterly tasteless?
  • :Because this procedure, called compilation, is
    :hard to reverse, firms can sell a program without
    :revealing the instructions that underlie
    :it--rather as Coca-Cola can market soft drinks
    :without giving away its secret recipe.

    Man, I wish Coke would open source... ;)


  • The Economist is the best magazine out there in my opinion. I don't find it suprising in the least that they'd do a good job of reporting this issue. They tend not to jump on the band wagon, they don't repeat the sentiments of the industry 'pundits' and the like. The economist is more worthwhile than all of the American newspapers combined. ;P

  • Qmail (Score:1)

    by Crakor ( 12469 )
    Qmail is actually faster from what I could tell. But unfortunatly it's config files are poorly done and as such is a pain to use on large systems
  • I just noticed, there's a special free membership sign-on for the full Economist this week...no credit card stuff...just sign on.

    I haven't got shares in the E., Honest!

    There's an excellent Special this week on Innovation in Industry...should appeal to futurists...and avaiable only for members.

    Buzz.
  • Last time I checked, those companies' livelihood aren't software development, right?
  • I would have greatly preferred if they had put Linux and UNIX next to each other on the graphs. I think they intentionally seperate them to make NT look stronger than it is because if people were to group Linux and UNIX together as they naturally will, it would show the combined total to be around the same size as NT.
  • ...and it would have been nice if the NT part of the graphs had been at the opposite side from Linux. So that amount of growth of Linux could have been more easily compared to NTs.

    Very true. Just for my own comparison purposes, I snagged the image, then cut and pasted the parts of each graph to move the Linux and UNIX segments together, and aligned the two graphs next to each other along the boundary between UNIX/Linux and NT. That makes the graphs a whole lot more interesting to compare. Looking at that it is clear that NT's market share remained relatively flat, and most of Linux's growth in market share has come at the expense of Netware and Other rather than from UNIX, as some might suggest.
  • Really. I read an interview of his about a year ago. He reads The Economist for relaxation. I think this issue might have been more of a laxative.

  • Actually, the Economist knows what it is
    talking about here. The key word here is
    "intellectual", and Raymond has done more
    than most in researching the reasons behind
    the open source model, why and how it works
    and why it can give good results, and is
    also the most visible about it.

    What Stallman is is an ideologue and
    visionary, the ones who gets the balls
    rolling.

Slashdot Top Deals

Math is like love -- a simple idea but it can get complicated. -- R. Drabek

Close