Too Much Free Software
 by Marius Andreiana, in Editorials - Sat, Mar 29th 2003 00:00 PDT

The plethora of Free Software applications available today, none working perfectly, is a problem which stands in the way of major adoption of Linux on the desktop. In order to conquer the desktop, we have to stand united.

Too much Free Software? And you thought people were complaining about a lack of applications which makes them stick with Microsoft Windows. Well, they're right. On Linux, there's no decent movie player and no working sound recorder (like the one in Windows 95) shipped as the default by GNOME, but hey, there are more than 385 text editors! Choice is good, but it's frustrating when none of the alternatives works properly.

We have a lot of Free Software alternatives, but because there are so many, they usually remain at a low level of features, as Free Software developers are a limited resource. There are exceptions (GIMP), but they usually have major companies behind them (Open Office, Mozilla) which know what the users want and what to ask from their developers.

We also have a natural selection process which will result in the best software in time. In a lot of time. This would be the best selection if all the software in the world would be Free, but it's not, and we are running out of time. The legality of using some DVD players under Linux is unclear, people are put in prison for writing useful software, and Microsoft makes Palladium and has more than enough money to make it required by law. Soon, we won't even be able to borrow books anymore. Many Web sites require Microsoft Internet Explorer to be usable, including some which are running critical bank and government services.

In order to avoid this, we have to get more users to use Free Software. Non-Internet Explorer users can be safely ignored when they are less than 2% on the Web, but not when they're 50%. So how do we get more people using Free Software? Preaching about it doesn't work with the majority, which has been so dumbed down by the importance of money as not to care for liberty anymore. We could try making Free Software much better than the standard desktop operating system used today, Microsoft Windows, and for this we have to stand united.

As Craig Mundie says, the OSS development model leads to a strong possibility of unhealthy "forking" of a code base, resulting in the development of multiple incompatible versions of programs, weakened interoperability, product instability, and hindering [of] businesses' ability to strategically plan for the future. Microsoft trumpets the lack of choice on their platform as integrated solutions, but that's also what the majority of business and people want (less tech support costs and more advice for newbies who now quite often get "Hmm, I don't know, I don't use that, I use this..."). Choice should not only be limited to two or three options, but all of them should also have a common code base. Some examples:

Desktop Environment.

GNOME and KDE for the majority, Blackbox and Window Maker for modest hardware. The rest are simply wasted time, both for the developers and for users who try them and then delete them in disgust. GNOME and KDE should share more than a window manager specification, such as using GConf for storing preferences, a virtual file system like GnomeVFS, and aRts instead of esd (even if it's through GStreamer). Note that these are underlying technologies; they are not visible to the user, except that everything always works (saving preferences, browsing the network, and playing songs).

Graphical Toolkits

GTK+. That's it. Qt still has licensing problems, being non-Free for commercial applications. Motif, Tcl/Tk, wxWindows? Die! What they have over GTK+ doesn't compare with GTK+'s advantages over them, so instead of religiously sticking with them, help implement those missing features in GTK+. Imagine the joy of commercial software makers who might want to release Linux versions of their software learning only about GTK+ (which they could use for the Windows versions, too) instead of what they hear now. ("Well, there's GTK+, Qt, wxWindows, and others; how about starting with a study of the advantages and disadvantages of each?")

Office suites

Open Office has the most features, but since it requires a lot of resources, there are also GNOME and KDE offices. That should be all the office suites (LyX is in another category). These suites already have the majority of users, and that means more features, fewer bugs, and the rest of the world (e.g., Gobe) ignored, which is great. What's not so great is that there's nothing common between them (except glibc). They should all at least use the Open Office format (which is proposed as a standard) for file saving, and have common filters from/to other formats.

Sound

I don't know exactly what to write here, but it's bad. Hopefully, ALSA will be the only API to access sound devices, OSS will disappear, and maybe there will be only one sound server used by default on all distributions. The API to interface with the sound server will probably still vary (SDL, GStreamer, OpenAL).

Instant messaging

There's Gaim, GnomeICU, Licq, and many more. Gaim has a plugin system which allows the use of all major protocols and, for example, sending messages encrypted with GnuPG (a feature planned to be offered by Yahoo! in an "enterprise" version of their client). Gaim should separate all messaging functionality in UI-independent libraries which could be easily used by other applications (the rest of the instant messaging clients available today, and even your own application developed for the company's internal use).

A good example is Mozilla. There are lots of browsers available for Linux today, but most of them are based on Mozilla. Therefore, they work.

Linux is already winning on the server side. Why? It works! You have a Web server (even named "httpd" on Red Hat), two databases which cover all your needs from low to high end (MySQL and PostgreSQL), three mail servers (Sendmail, qmail, and Postfix), a name server, etc. You don't have "Yan -- Yet Another Nameserver" or "Ans -- Ans's Not Sendmail".

Please stop developing and using some obscure application when there are better alternatives. Not happy with them? Fix what's wrong, or if everything looks wrong, work at separating the functionality into a UI-independent library, then develop your own graphical interface. Reusing and improving existing code, not making your own, is the way. Drop the "not made here" syndrome and your 15 minutes of fame on freshmeat when making the announcement, and unite with the rest of the community. Starting a new project is a good way to learn to develop software, but you can also learn by doing bugfixing, unit testing, and development of new features and optimizations of existing applications. Sourceforge should start removing projects with less than 1% activity for the last six months (every week, they could propose several projects to be removed, and allow a month for the activity to increase).

Another problem is that major functionality is quite often rewritten from scratch. It's not unusual to see freshmeat announcements like "What's new: completely rewritten". Don't throw away all tested and working code and documentation to start all over again, introducing new bugs which annoy users and waste time. So what if there's a lot of refactoring? It's not bad if it doesn't refactor everything at once. Instead of rewriting everything, split the existing code into modules, make unit tests for them, and, after everything works as before, start rewriting/improving one module at a time. Unit tests are important, and the many eyeballs shouldn't be preferred to these.

Here's looking forward to Linux on the desktop!

References

• Mob Software: The Erotic Life of Code
• Things You Should Never Do
• The New Methodology
• Agile modeling
• Managing Projects the Open Source Way
• A Conversation with Martin Fowler

Author's bio:

Marius Andreiana is a software engineer who was enlightened in 1997 by Free Software. He is the founder of Galuna S.R.L., a Romanian provider of Linux-based IT solutions. He believes in freedom and art, spending his free time with friends, discussing, listening to music and the sound of growing grass, contributing to the Free Software community, biking, and contemplating the beauties of the world. He welcomes comments at marius at galuna.ro.

T-Shirts and Fame!

We're eager to find people interested in writing articles on software-related topics. We're flexible on length, style, and topic, so long as you know what you're talking about and back up your opinions with facts. Anyone who writes an article gets a t-shirt from ThinkGeek in addition to 15 minutes of fame. If you think you'd like to try your hand at it, let jeff.covey@freshmeat.net know what you'd like to write about.

[Comments are disabled]

Referenced projects ALSA driver - An alternative implementation of Linux sound support. Apache - A high performance Unix-based HTTP server. aRts - An analog realtime synthesizer. Blackbox - A window manager for X11 written in C++. esound - The Enlightened Sound Daemon. GConf - A configuration storage library. GIMP - GNU Image Manipulation Program. GnomeICU - Formerly GtkICQ, now Gnome Internet Communication Utility GnomeVFS - The virtual filesystem abstraction library for GNOME2. GStreamer - A streaming media framework. GTK+ - A library for creating graphical user interfaces. KDE - A powerful graphical desktop environment for Unix workstations. KOffice - An integrated office suite for KDE. Licq - An advanced graphical ICQ clone. LyX - An advanced LaTeX-based typesetting and text editing program. Mozilla Seamonkey - A Web browser and email client. MySQL - A fast SQL database server. OpenAl - A cross-platform API for interactive, spatialized audio. OpenOffice.org - An Open Source version of StarOffice. OSS - Audio drivers for most popular sound cards. Pidgin - A GTK2-based instant messaging client. Postfix - The Postfix MTA. PostgreSQL - A robust Object-Relational DBMS. qmail - A secure, reliable, efficient, simple message transfer agent. Qt - A cross-platform development framework/toolkit. Sendmail - A powerful and flexible Mail Transport Agent. Simple DirectMedia Layer - A library that gives portable low-level access for multimedia applications. Tcl/Tk - A portable scripting environment for Unix, Windows, and Macintosh. The GNU Privacy Guard - A PGP replacement tool. Window Maker - An X11 window manager with a NEXTSTEP look and feel.

 Comments

[»] Freedom of Choice vs. Trouble of Choice
by fraktalisman - Oct 18th 2004 09:54:08

Although I much appreciate freedom of choice and I don't like certain monopolies like M$, the author has a point. Quite recently I read a newspaper article about consumers' choice in supermarkets and why discounters have become so popular. There people can fulfil their basic needs without the trouble of choice.

A similar development can be seen on the web. There used to be many different search engines, various online bookshops and auction services etc. There used to be many freemail services. Now there is fewer choice, the big names have turned into professionalized companies or communities respectively, and they have become more popular among the general public. Ten years ago, geeks used the internet, mostly white american guys with a college degree. Now "everyone" uses the web, and some things have become quite common and thus easy to learn. Email addresses like firstname.surname@gmx.de are one example. Or someone asking me "How do I send mail attachments and how do I make my computer more secure?" - "You have Windows XP and Outlook Express?" - "Yes" - "OK, just read this computerbild article and follow the recommendations".

And if Linux is to be popular as a desktop computer system, it has to move into that direction. The reason why Linux is cool isn't that it's a complex toy for geeks, but it's cool because it's a flexible system to fit different needs, and because it's open source.

Let there be lots of software, yes! Where needed!
As a web designer, I don't need four or five different web browsers. One reliable, scalable, cross-platform browser would be just perfect, with IE's capabilities but more security and configuration options.
But if you need a specialized browser for a special purpose, go ahead and code it.

Just the same goes for all other kinds of software. More things like GIMP and Mozilla might make Linux popular for good reasons.

[reply] [top]

[»] and he's going to fix this by...
by Martin Pool - May 17th 2004 00:23:14

Starting yet another distribution! Not contributing a Romanian translation for Fedora or Debian or anything, but adding yet another set of bugs, security announcements, and complexity.

I think that's pretty damn funny.

Luckily for our author, the GPL gives him the freedom to say one thing and do another.

[reply] [top]

[»] Too Much (Bad) Software etc etc etc
by enorbet - Jan 4th 2004 13:21:07

As soon as I saw the forking directions that this thread exploded into I hesitated to comment, but then decided that perhaps a return to the overall theme and a move away from the specifics that begin such diversion, might actually be worthwhile to those who count most to me. They are at the extremes having a common effect, which is keeping an alternative OS growing and improving. They are at the most obvious extreme, the developers to whom I am greatly in debt and admire enormously, which occassionally includes me when I write or sufficiently alter an app to have something truly unique, special, and of specific value to me. On the other extreme is the newbie ( at Linux, if you aren't a newbie at something you are learning nothing ) and the "fence-rider" who is thinking of trying out Linux.

The last category is important to me because they increase demand which results in new hardware support as only one example of something that is very important to me. That demand is also beginning to translate into generating dollars ( witness Sun's amazing coup in China - 200 million plus desktops in one sweet deal virtually insuring Linux will be a contender for years just on it's own merit let alone the fire that ignites under developers ) all because Linux is beginning to be taken seriously. Despite some real specifics of areas in which Linux lacks or has too much duplication ( eg text editors ), overall Linux has improved greatly and will obviously grow into areas where it simply has the advantage. Which WM you choose makes little difference in this regard.

One good example is in multimedia production. I have seen that Linux is gaining serious ground in both serious/professional video and sound recording/editing, with the greatest gains so far being in audio work, simply because of low latency. There are other advantages to Linux that count in this area, like the ability to customize freely and extensively. If one was restricted from modifying tape recorders, multi-track would have never have become a reality. This is a huge advantage to Linux but low latency, the effective response time of controls, is enough all on it's own. Because I want to get away from specifics as soon as possible and get to the overall vision that Linux has improved and will continue to improve, despite the original poster's "complaints" ( which did not give sufficient "propers" imho to important events such as nVidia's excellent drivers , their existence at all as well as their frequent updating and superb quality as well as it's effect on "the community", which is perhaps the reason he thinks Linux does not have a decent media player since in my case, an nVidia user, both MPlayer and Xine keeps up, if not soundly defeats, WMP ) and this is without any "community view" or rules, dictums, policies, whatever you wish to call his request for some "guiding light" under which to organize.

Fact is, OSS and GPL works and "Cathedral and the Bazaar" thinking is winning out over "Man-Month Myth" thinking to the extent that not only is Linux doing exactly as it should, improving while finding niches that satisfy specific needs in a wide diversity, but also to the extent that nods are being given to the whole concept of the Open Source Concept in the mainstream press for example because it has become successful in other fields such as the politics of Democracy. One example, is Dean's adoption of "open sourcing" via web contest for his Presidential campaign slogan ( the winner being "Because Democracy should not be a spectator sport" , IMHO an excellent raison d'etre for running for office as well as drumming up voters and votes, regardless of my opinion of Dean as a candidate ) which has even stimulated the thought process of just how far can and should this line of thinking go in a real democracy in terms of "getting one's finger on the pulse" if not actually going quantum leaps further into more intensely pure democratic thnking and processes.

The bottom line is that Networking is better than standing alone and Linux and Linux people network better and it will win what it will win and lose what it will lose, as will MicroSoft, based on those fundamental differences in both the OSes and the processes that create them and the environment in which they operate. What the original poster is calling for is happening anyway, but within niches like Red Hat ( for enterprise ) and Xandros ( for the common man desktop ). That it doesn't occur everywhere in the whole Linux theatre is both healthy and desirable, since having room for that breadth or not ( M$ isolationism will make or break it, and so it will go with Linux and any other project/endeavor ) determines it's ability to improvise, adapt and prevail. It is built in to it's design philosophy and evolution has proven that goal-directed strategy is not a necessity for the development of complex, interactive systems of a high order of intelligence, stability, power and longevity.

Jimmy
Sold on SlackWare

[reply] [top]

[»] Hammer and saw
by swine - Nov 30th 2003 08:48:53

The things I need in software are stability, ease of use and transparency. (I like to know exactly what my system is doing). I use linux most of the time for whatever. and if linux doesn't have the tool that is needed, then I turn to windows. Both have stability in most cases and You have to admit that windows wins as far as ease of use goes, but using "windows" and "transparency" in the same sentence is akin to finding a hockey player with front teeth.(Canadian, eh!)
What I'm trying to say is that both systems are tools, and they are different tools that can do different things. I cant bring myself to dislike a tool because of who makes it. And I'm not going to use a hammer to saw wood.
The greatest thing about linux is the zillions of people that work on it and improve it every day and yes sometimes distributions include too many of the same type of program, but I think that over time software evolution will win out and only the strong will survive.
Windows, on the other hand is money based, not pride based and so programs that are hard to use and dont work properly will be discarded as newer, easier to use programs are created.
Both will evolve, and both will be used. After reading most of the comments I've come to the conclusion that windows bashing is a sensless waste of time, and makes the basher look goofy. Let us rejoice in the fact that were all not still stuck with the trs80's and commodore64's of yesteryear!
Keep your toolbox full!
(whew, not bad for only one cup of coffee)

--
insert vague but thought provoking comment here

[reply] [top]

[»] Good Article lots of information from all direction!!
by AskMe - Sep 13th 2003 07:35:07

Thanks everybody!!! I am new user in Open Source, I started to learn linux recently, but the choice and flexibilty which linux provide make me happy. Although I am MCSE in Win NT, I feel that Microsoft is cheating Computer Geeks, beacuse it hide so manythings( and not sure what mischief, or spying behind ). As far as good software is concern, and as it is pointed by many and author, all the coders(open source), should come more closer, coperate more and build, debug software, I feel it will be more effective. It need team work and proper guidence, surely.. Microsoft cannot win whole world, but if open source programmer remain devided then sure Microsoft will make benifit. But, I still feel that for begineers it is hard to come to open source, beacuse of Installation, configuration problem and some time use problem, Microsoft hide most of them and makes people life some what easier... but I am impressed my the Installation process of latest Linux(Red Hat 8) they try to automate it.. it is great for begineers.... but still i feel we have to do more... furnish and fine tune that free source... And more... such acticles which bring awareness in newbie like me... Thanks once again to all... KEEP THIS SITE ALIVE this is one of THE BEST Site I ever found on net.... for free source.

[reply] [top]

[»] Re: Good Article lots of information from all direction!!
by xxxsoftware - Nov 10th 2003 22:13:19


> Thanks everybody!!!
>
> I am new user in Open Source, I started
> to learn linux recently, but the choice
> and flexibilty which linux provide make
> me happy. Although I am MCSE in Win NT,
> I feel that Microsoft is cheating
> Computer Geeks, beacuse it hide so
> manythings( and not sure what mischief,
> or spying behind ). As far as good
> software is concern, and as it is
> pointed by many and author, all the
> coders(open source), should come more
> closer, coperate more and build, debug
> software, I feel it will be more
> effective. It need team work and proper
> guidence, surely.. Microsoft cannot win
> whole world, but if open source
> programmer remain devided then sure
> Microsoft will make benifit.
>
> But, I still feel that for begineers it
> is hard to come to open source, beacuse
> of Installation, configuration problem
> and some time use problem, Microsoft
> hide most of them and makes people life
> some what easier... but I am impressed
> my the Installation process of latest
> Linux(Red Hat 8) they try to automate
> it.. it is great for begineers.... but
> still i feel we have to do more...
> furnish and fine tune that free
> source...
>
> And more... such acticles which bring
> awareness in newbie like me...
>
> Thanks once again to all...
>
> KEEP THIS SITE ALIVE
>
> this is one of THE BEST Site I ever
> found on net.... for free source.
Linux/Unix has to improve the user interface to compete with windows.These systems are not user friendly as microsoft's products.

Just a opinion.

http://www.objectsdevelopment.com




[reply] [top]

---

[»] you cant ever have *too* much software
by kv9 - Aug 23rd 2003 14:46:46

its a very communist point of view placed into a very communist article comming from an author in a ex-communist country like ours is. and things are clearly viewed from a ex-windows-user-person perspective. `linux doesnt have this and that and would surely need that'. the hell w/ it. if the author had first made contact w/ something other than windows he woulda have something totally different to say. and about the other os. and also diversity is everything. why should anyone stand back and watch other do great things while them only contributing a bit. how would greater things come about then? i realize that every petty person feels the unstopable urge to go like `oh gee golly i already have one ov em program thingiez that does that why on earth would i need another?!'. well tough luck. because they can. do better things. or different at least. thats why. i certanly wouldnt like to be forced to use only THIS brand of software that does THAT thing only because its BIG and POPULAR and everyone is using it hence so should i. come on.

its like the windows environment is a defacto reality. and everyone should measure up to it. grow up ffs. the only 2 things i find windows useful is photoshop and 3dsmax. everything else i can do [better] on linux.

--
because i can

[reply] [top]

[»] We need wxWindows as well as GTK+
by Tom - Aug 20th 2003 20:56:18

I basically agree with the article. Differences need to be justified. Diversity and choice are good if there is the differences are meaningful, otherwise they are a waste of time.

In the case of wxWindows there is a simple, valid reason for it to exist as well as GTK+. It is a cross-platform library that maps to native OS widgets/etc. This is a significant difference that is worth preserving.

So, we need these two principal C++ cross-platform GUI libraries: wxWindows and GTKmm. One should be declared the 'default' for C++. I don't care which. All others should be demoted but not eliminated.

[reply] [top]

[»] i agree, with reservations
by punkfag - Aug 16th 2003 22:59:19

i agree somewhat. i can understand the confusion that a "newbie" has when (s)he is faced with thousands of software projects, many that seem very similar. i believe that diversity is a GoodThingTM but that redundancy and inconsistency is a BadThingTM. we don't want OneDesktop and OneShell and OneOfficeSuite for the same reason we don't want OneDistribution -- it goes against the nature of free software.

mozilla and openoffice are bad because they are bloated. it is not about load times but about the code base. it should be inconceivable for a single project to be that large (both are 30-40 mb). it makes it hard for everyday people to contribute because it is so hard to get oriented in hundreds of thousands of lines of code.

what we need is *modularization*. we need to split many projects up. this would reduce the redundancy. for example, we have gtkhtml, khtml, and gecko but all three are tied to larger projects. why not a single, standalone, html parser and another renderer? there are things we have already pretty much standardized on -- mpg123 / mpg321, aspell, etc. we simply need to continue this trend. aspell is simple but it *works*. we don't need every single program writing their own half-assed spell-checker.

i don't really care about LinuxOnTheDesktopTM or commercial developers, my viewpoint is of that of a developer. isn't it much easier to write a program where you can just reference another library rather than hacking out the code yourself? that way you can focus on the unique features of your project.

while i'm on it, remember that SimplerIsBetter. if you are writing a gtk+ application, use libglade -- it really cleans up your project. also, not to flamebait, but if your project is not terribly critical on time don't use C (don't even get me started on C++ and Java!), use Perl, Python or Ruby -- they can't be used for everything but many projects would be greatly improved if they were translated into a higher-level language.

so what can you do to help? write libraries and modules so that user-level programs can be cleaned up and mature, move ui code to glade/qtdesigner, and just figure out a way to help. i believe that anyone who is relatively comfortable using gnu/linux can help. you may not be a semidivine kernel maintainer but you may be able to help translate or something. just try to get involved and give back to the community.

Software Libre!

[reply] [top]

[»] Ups and Downs
by ShadowRage - Jul 29th 2003 14:23:33

This is a great idea, though I do disagree on the decent media player bit
we do need unification, or at least a common protocol that will enable compatibility between programs.. however, one drawback is that the community might lose focus on free software and start making dominatory software that could not be as good as say, some little unknown project which is leaner and works a hundred times faster and sounds or works better than the "standard"
That's the issue, we see that with microsoft everyday.

The standard could end up being worse than the little guy.
thats what opensource was founded on. the little guy.
so we shouldnt just ignore little projects and sweep them under the carpet, someone could have a great technology, but it not getting well known and he/she may not be confident enough to boast it off in full, just confident enough to put it up online.
what should be done is deprecate the cream of the crap.
the stuff that doesnt work without major hacking and isnt very well liked by anyone, including the developers themselve, who abandon the project right away.
Too often I see many sourceforge projects that have NOTHING.. literally, nothing. they have a description.. that's it.
I think there should be a hard to abuse rating system that will flag a project if it really sucks and doesnt show any improvements. then have fun deleting it.

that would help freshmeat and othet projects.

When I do things, I always wanna make sure it hasnt been done, or make an improvment on it

but that's where my second argument comes in..
We all know that a good chunk of the developers out there are anti-social and want the credits all to them. no one else shall help or take credit in their work, hence why some people get really shitty when you take their OPENSOURCED program and make a fix to it, they get all pissed off and troll you like no tomorrow.
ths is a problem which stands as a barrier againt a common protocol or fixing others' apps.
however, something IS working becuase I've been seeing more and more freeware windows programmers going into opensource, and they get results.

Yeah.
But we need to stop bitching about trivial things.. and beat the hell outta some of these greedy assholes who dont want you touching their code...
if you have that attitude.. go back to coding microsoft applications.

I've seen this happen so much, you edit a theme that is GPL'ed or freely distributable.. you get contacted and bitched at, even though you included the credits to the original author, he (usually a he) will bitch at you screaming you stole his precious theme/code
you know what? fuck them. tell them they made it gpl'ed.. and you simply took their idea, credited them on it and expanded it and made it more creative.


anyways, I'm now ranting.

Back to what I was saying, there are ups and downs to this.
The down is that you may get sub-par software that is the standard, overly bloated, and nothing really stopping these software makers either, becuase they ARE the standard, and they have "proprietary" power over everyone else. they make the standard and everyone must follow, thus you have a "free" microsoft.

The up is that we may get better software and a lot of the subpar software will go away. and we'll have more compatibility. But to what extent, all you do is make a standard that everyone is forced to use, and to force them to use this standard.. you must override teh gp itself.. thus free software becomes no better than what it's fighting against.

I think, for the typical Desktop user.. there should be one standard, since the typical desktop user isnt used to having much choice or freedom with software, so keep them in their little world of sunshine and lollipops, and leave a few rabbit holes for them to venture out into the real world.
For the geek, no standard. Becuase the true geek is the anti-standard.
The Administrator already as a standard. so nothing to bother with there.

I think if we go with with that pattern, we will have the best results. everyone is happy except the proprietary companies which will cry and scream and throw lawsuits right and left to get what they want.. but doubtfully will succeed much.
But, then again, Who gives a damn about those assholes? ;)

Projects like wine (once matured) might help ease the windows user into linux too.

We also want alternatives.. which we must work on more; For the sake of originality and to show that we can take the top dog's idea and put it to use and make it better, faster and stronger. You do that, you catch the eye of the typical corporate user, and eventually, the eye of the typical computer user; Once they show interest and start using these new apps, you got the corporate eye again, in both good and bad ways, You got the software makers and Game makers heading for this platform which seems to be getting demand and popularity, they can make a decent cashflow there too. They can also show off their product to a new group and sell it to a new group as well. Hardware makers will focus more on compatibility with this platform, Along with corporate funding to the opensource movement and unselfish, no-strings-attached help and marketing.

It'll also catch the eye of the dark corporate side, who wish to use dirty tactics to make this platform their platform so they can make profit again, instead of playing nice and making software for this platform, they want the whole deal and want money and fame off this. A perfect example of this is the IBM/SCO lawsuit. SCO thinks becuase linux came from unix they own it. All of a sudden they care becuase it's beating out their property.

Yeah, these are all the ups and downs, but we must be willing to take this issues head on and beat them to iberate the average user from the proprietary iron fist.

[reply] [top]

[»] Linux or Windows - tough choice
by Katrina Kirellii - Jul 24th 2003 07:43:30

I have been working with both sides of the equation for as long as I can remember. See my project "Katrina Kirellii's SST Graphical Console" for my latest endeavor. Okay credentials provided and free advertisement of latest project - cool.

The problem I see is not enough applications someone wants to use on the Linux side and prices on the Windows side.

Let me drift back to my free project. It works 9 times as fast in Windows wherever I use it to play starshiptraders in graphical mode. (It is also playable at www.starshiptraders.com in webmode or telnet mode.) This is because Windows has available graphic acceleration drivers for my cards. (Which were bought independent of my Windows focused machines.) Now, my laptop, I talked with Intel about because I wanted the best Intel chip that supported Windows and Linux. I had to settle for a very fast Celeron as they are eyeing the market to decide whether to take Linux for real. Don't want to upset Microsoft is my take. (Now I know that my Radeon Mobility on my laptop is not the coolest Linux acceleration solution - but I don't manufacture laptops and that is what they as money making companies feel is the best solution.)

Okay. Until someone makes the Linux drivers or updates the compilers so that the Linux and Windows versions of my EXACTLY the SAME program - run EXACTLY the SAME, then I have to say Windows XP is the coolest thing since sliced bread and you should go get you some. (With some RedHat Cygwin butter.)

I love Open Source. I love Linux. I love the brightest fringe programmers.

Take a look at a real example of a Windows versus Linux program that does something real - plays a cool game. Tell me Linux is better - I would love to hear it - but so far - it is not.

(Notice of Disclaimer: I am expanding and including more things in this program as I have decided to embed my programs within the program as features. I have included stuff in such as way as to NOT impact performance. However, I am human. If anyone wants to point out my errors so that I become a better programmer and/or human, I welcome honest input delivered kindly.)

[reply] [top]

[»] I just don't get it
by Helgi Hrafn Gunnarsson - Jul 10th 2003 06:15:18

I don't get it.

People can talk endlessly about how to get Linux on the desktop, but there's always this crucial question that remains in the cold.

WHY?

Why on Earth do we care what other people use?

I believe Microsoft has sort of made it a common misunderstanding that everybody has to use the same software in order for that software to talk to something else.

Microsoft does Windows which is now incompatible in almost every aspect with every single other OS on the face of the planet.

Microsoft does Office, which is specifically intended to be hard to implement elsewhere, for obvious reasons.

The same thing goes for all of this.

Occationally I give KDE and GNOME a try and flee in panic. I always go back to IceWM, because it has precisely what I need. Nothing more, nothing less. I use X-Chat. I use Sylpheed for mail. I use Mozilla for a browser (which will kick IE's butt any day, regardless of IE-specific nonsense). I have more than what I need. What about you? Before you answer that, ask yourself why I care. The answer is simple, I don't! It's none of my business! It has absolutely zero impact on my computing experience what 99% of the world uses.

The beauty of Linux is precisely the opposite of popular demand. It's the "hackers for hackers" philosophy that makes Linux what it is. The moment the masses start using Linux as opposed to Windows, first of all we will have a nightmarish war with Microsoft which is not worth fighting (and they WILL win anyway, they know all the dirty tricks honorable people won't use). Second of all, it will only result in the crap-ass plague of software written for Windows, leading directly to Linux. And the gain? Anyone?

Linux is not good for any other reason than that it is open-source, and that it is maintained by people who are not on payroll to satisfy Joe Moron @ The Microsoft Fanclub. Developers and hackers implement features and resolve bugs to serve only their own values. This means that the evolution is towards knowledge, not ignorance. We geeks get the features WE need, not the features that our grandmothers need. We WANT to know what's under the hood, and we hate software that doesn't allow that. And we hate it for a damn good reason.

The shear fact that most people can actually live with Windows, is absolute proof of the masses' complete ignorance of software use and development.

Why on Earth are we interested in taking over any of Microsoft's market share? What's in it for us? More idiot-proof, crapped-up, money-brainwashed software that does little else than install viruses, backdoors and stupid little desktop creatures that try to run your life? If that's what you want, then why are you using Linux to begin with?

I just don't see the point anymore. We don't need size. We don't need the masses. In fact, we are where we are precisely because the average user is not!

I'll cut off my reproductional organs before I'll take part in changing Linux into Windows.

--
The Code must be Pure.

[reply] [top]

[»] Starting from scratch
by docv - Jul 7th 2003 10:58:09

Where would the linux OS be if no one started from scratch?

[reply] [top]

[»] Here is what I think ...
by Nilesh Trivedi - Jun 13th 2003 15:27:25

So .. what you are suggesting is that we should have only 3-4 apps for each task and make them better. OKAY .. we do it and make these apps so much better that they work for MOST people ..

Work for MOST people , not ALL !!

Now , just tell me what should I do if I am not one of those MOST people ??

To enjoy having a choice , you have to make the effort of making a choice !!

BTW :- Agreed that right now, making this choice is very confusing , because we dont have a good rating system in place.

[reply] [top]

[»] Bill is our time's greatest communist!
by Vidar Håkestad - Jun 12th 2003 11:38:31

He's the great equlizer. When I write something, draw something, calculate something (get the picture...;-)), I know that any receipient will be able to read the contents of my document.

Seriously, most professional users of software are not developers, they just want to finish their report in time and in a format readable to their boss. Then, conformity becomes a major issue for 99.6% of the users, not the output from some nice but not-very-much-used tool (that crashes from time to time, but hey...! So does Excel).

Taking on the *real* arguments.
Iff we want to have an operating system (or a windowing system, or...) at the level of W2kxxx with the same amount of production hours behind it, we as community, would have to agree on a tight requirement spec for that system. When the specified requirements have been met (programmed and tested), NO CHANGES OF THE ALREADY SPECIFIED FEATURES SHOULD BE ALLOWED, because it have to be stable, the very keyword for having reliable software. Now, when something is stable, where is the room for development? Where would I put all my energy and good ideas? Into additional features (and the software grows...). So there is a distinct contradiction (or even tug of war) between 'good' stable reliable software and development of new ideas (in my view).

Next, how would we agree on what is the best path to follow? Who decides that KDE is better that Gnome? So, who is to decide on the strategy, here? Strategies are not democratic, as communities are. They are often a result of a teamwork of a few people (often even by just one person).

My next question is: If all solutions to problems are free/gratis and readable by everyone, how do I make a living out of my great applications? 15 minutes in the sun won't cater for 40 years of living.

Consequently, the free software and the numerous ways to solve a problem enables a lot of people to get fresh ideas on problemes they struggle with, which then may result in commercial software (not free and open), but which reliably solves problems for people not particulary interested in software and platforms. Those people are the majority of software users, and the very commercial reason for me as a developer having a job.

We have a rich library of ideas. Lets make it richer! We are experts in sorting and categorizing, so we'll find solutions or ideas to solutions. Hill Google and the likes!

Regards
vidar
vidar@hawkis.no

--
hawkis

[reply] [top]

[»] diversity
by Marius Andreiana - May 31st 2003 06:42:44

Hi

I'm an ex-Windows user since 1998, but I interact a lot with people who use Windows and I know what their problems are.

Yes, I could simply leave them alone and have over 90% use MS, but if you have read all the article you woould have seen that's bad for us ( palladium, lack of drivers, lack of standards for web sites and documents ).

What many people forget (and still think that MS sucks at programming) are the huge resources they have. They could always hire people not only to implement features, but to do auditing, code cleanup, API documentation, testing, things which are missing from a lot of OSS development.

Instead, OSS developers do what they like and don't cooperate. I can't blaim them for this, I'm very gratefull for the libre software they write for free, but without cooperation MS will win. There are a lot of examples of programming hours which could be better used ( latest one: ephiphany vs. galeon )

On Sî, 2003-05-31 at 06:53, Matthias Buelow wrote:
Hi,
>
> with disgust I've read your article on freshmeat, "Too Much Free
> Software". Why do you ex-Windows users always whine that Linux (or Unix
> in general) doesn't work like Windows, doesn't look like Windows,
> doesn't have the horrible Office applications available, or is simply
> not "ready for the desktop" (whatever that may mean)? I wonder why,
> when it's not ready, I've been using it for the last 10 years, and
> productively if I may say so. That's something I cannot say about any
> of the Microsoft offerings, or Apple, until on ly very recently (MacOS X).
>
> You want to unify stuff without understanding that the diversity you shy
> so much is exactly the power that permeats the Unix environment. The
> day we have just some uniform Gnome (or whatever) desktop left, and only
> one browser, only one text editor, only one shell, and no choice and
> room for experimentation will be the day when it's probably best looking
> for a job in gardening or truck driving, instead of using computers.
> If you want to use Windows, you know where to get it. If that's what
> you want, then please don't spoil _our_ system. And no, I don't think
> that Unix is a good system for the uneducated end-user. It never was
> and it'll never be, without transforming it into something that most
> Unix users wouldn't recognize and certainly wouldn't want to use. It
> simply does not have the same target audience like, for example,
> Windows. Therefore it simply doesn't make sense, and is actually
> counter-productive, trying to turn it into some integrated
> next-next-finish-hell like Windows. Basically, I don't give a fuck if
> 99% of the computer-using community don't use the same system or desktop
> like I do, but I do get very angry if some people want to shove that
> which 99% of the end-users are using down _my_ throat.
>

[reply] [top]

[»] Re: diversity
by Helgi Hrafn Gunnarsson - Jul 15th 2003 11:54:20

Uhm... "What many people forget (and still think that MS sucks at programming) are the huge resources they have. They could always hire people not only to implement features, but to do auditing, code cleanup, API documentation, testing, things which are missing from a lot of OSS development." They implement features that fuck up everything they make. I understand that they NEVER clean up code or rewrite anything, it simply doesn't pay. They never do auditing... "the hardware always catches up". Auditing, code cleanup and decent API documentation is missing in every bit of software made. I honestly can't say that my Unix software isn't faster and more reliable than any Windows counterpart! Honestly! Sure, there do EXIST open-source projects that are slower and less reliable than their Windows counterparts, but that's only because so many open-source developers insist on this childish idea of writing free software for someone else than themselves. They're not interested in cleaning code that they're not going to use themselves. I say fuck the desktop. I asked it before and I'll ask it again, WHY ON EARTH do you want Unix on the desktop? What do you need that Unix doesn't have? All the mumbojumbo CRAP that you're using Unix to escape to begin with? We don't need another Windows! We don't need another Windows! We don't need another Windows! We don't need another Windows! We don't need another Windows! We don't need another Windows! We don't need another Windows!

--
The Code must be Pure.

[reply] [top]

---

[»] Frees software and food
by Manuel Gutierrez Algaba - May 24th 2003 03:32:44

Go to the supermaket, you'll find 1500 products
to eat, you'd survive eating 15 of those
products, why do you need the rest 1485 ?

Go to the shoe shop. 250 different shoes, any
would serve you to walk with no bare feet.

Go to the disco, 350 different girls...

You're proposing communistic planning, 5-yearly,
a la "romanian".

Free soft is a gift, gifts are welcome. As simple
as that. You can't demand anything to someone
that's granting you a gift.

[reply] [top]

[»] Whats wrong with too much?
by no-exit - May 23rd 2003 18:23:20

I do agree that *some* open-source projects need better management and more precise goals.

But I would never agree to removing ANY open-source project if it is inactive. That defeats the purpose of open-source and free software.

People seem to forget that GNU and the Free Software movement were based on the idea of COMMUNITY. They were not based on the idea of KILLER APPS.

If some guy wants to re-invent the wheel, so be it. In fact it is not only a good learning experience for him, but for the COMMUNITY. Other people many be able to learn from his code.

I started using Linux in 1995 and havent looked back, and the greatest thing about it is the abundance of open code to look at and learn from. I basically learned to program by downloading and messing with other peoples code.

There is no breakdown of the GNU or Free Software movement.

One last thing. I WOULD NEVER go back to a windows machine if the going got tough!

[reply] [top]

[»] is this guy a newbie?
by 800mHz of stupidity - May 20th 2003 20:41:28

Although I seem to agree with most of what has been said in this little rant, I am in no place to complain about the situation.
Its like getting the government to work with the factory workers in that it will never be an issue that will be resolved. The makers and the wanters will never be on common ground.
I'm not going to throw in any comment about Microsoft because most of you dont live under a rock and know enough about them.
The only way a consumer will be totaly satisfied is if they totaly build something themselves thus no longer having anything to buy. You either are a builder or a buyer. This articlewas a waste of 1's and 0's. You might as well tell me the sky is blue. No, we cant just get along, and no, the whole linux thing isnt a community, its a pecking order now full of people who talk about how things are "gay" in yahoo chat rooms, and dont even know what a 'man page' is.

--
yes my computer may suck, but yours is taking your life away minute by minute

[reply] [top]

[»] User participation
by peter - May 19th 2003 20:06:08

OK, good thinking. Lots of project are supply driven. Would like that user can PARTICPATE in design (not everybody knows how to code but most of us know what they like). Somehow the same system as in the themes section (vote: good - bad). Such a simple and very direct voting system is something I would prefer over "sourceforge should remove projects with less than 1% activity".

[reply] [top]

[»] Too much free software, that's right, most of it crap
by networkr - May 11th 2003 17:15:10

I agree with your article whole-heartedly. I am not a programmer, and will always go back to my Windows box when the going gets tough unless you can forever free me from the command line. Syntax is for guru's. But in case you hadn't noticed, most of the user base is NOT in that category. Cheers,

[reply] [top]

[»] Re: Too much free software, that's right, most of it crap
by utish - May 15th 2003 05:39:34

The author is correct that there is a need for COMMON BASE for the application to compete with the current dominant Windows. It is true that desktop domain cannot be captured until there is stylish and easy interface, good sound and vidio system. Programmers need to converge their efforts to integrate their work to produce robust applications. I DO NOT AGREE THAT software in freshment with less than 1% activity should be removed. LET PROGRAMMERS GROW. THEY WILL EVENTUALLY FIND THEIR WAY TO BUILD GREAT APPLICATIONS LIKE MOZILLA, GIMP AND SO ON.

[reply] [top]

---

[»] Re: Too much free software, that's right, most of it crap
by Willie F. Hood - Apr 24th 2004 02:41:52


> The author is correct that there is a
> need for COMMON BASE for the application
> to compete with the current dominant
> Windows. It is true that desktop domain
> cannot be captured until there is
> stylish and easy interface, good sound
> and vidio system. Programmers need to
> converge their efforts to integrate
> their work to produce robust
> applications.
> I DO NOT AGREE THAT software in
> freshment with less than 1% activity
> should be removed. LET PROGRAMMERS GROW.
> THEY WILL EVENTUALLY FIND THEIR WAY TO
> BUILD GREAT APPLICATIONS LIKE MOZILLA,
> GIMP AND SO ON.

GNU/Linux is never going to compete with Windows on the desktop. It's a UNIX clone, and no matter how many pretty GUI's you put on top of it, it's still not going to be a user-friendly desktop OS. And if someone did completely rework the system for desktop use ala OSX, as someone said before, it would no longer be the GNU/Linux that we all know and love. It would be a lame hybrid OS, and personally, I don't want to use an integrated Windows-like system, I want to use UNIX.

There is a "common base" for 99% of Linux distributions - it's called GNU. It's very robust. Many, many developers have "converged their efforts" to make it so, and have been doing so since before Windows 95 ever entered the public conciousness. If you want to know why it hasn't dominated the desktop market, look no further than the fact that it's a UNIX clone.

OSX "works" because it's users don't want UNIX - they want a user-friendly hand-holding desktop OS with a command line. That's what OSX is, and that's what GNU/Linux will never be, because it's UNIX.

--
-WFH

[reply] [top]

---

[»] Free IM
by MG55 - May 8th 2003 12:57:21

Why saying nothing about Jabber and Gabber? Why proposing IM clients based on propietary protocols? We can't stand united if we use different clients for IM. We must support Jabber. At least, we couldn't ignore it.

--
That's all, folks! MG55

[reply] [top]

[»] Re: Too much free software
by cryptopo - May 4th 2003 13:05:18

There are too many programmers in this world too, why not just kill all those who are starter or have not yet released anything useful in 6 months or so ?

Obviously this guy is a crackhead, how about trying to be a programmer first before criticizing programmers ?

How many successful projects he mentioned didn't start from scratch at one point ? And not a clone or something similiar to others ? Forget about the hatress toward Windows for a moment, how many popular projects from Linux have started as an alternative of some other Win apps ?

Another point is that most starting programmers want to try something easy, from scratch to gain experience. You don't know jack if you think any one can just jump into some projects like Mozilla and understand anything.

[reply] [top]

[»] What we _really_ need...
by Brad Fears - Apr 28th 2003 13:32:00

...is a Marius Andreiana linux distro with all kinds of wonderful open source choices, including all of the open source projects he has contributed code to in his career. Oh, wait, he didn't mention any of those... Hmm...

Perhaps he's just talking out his ass and insulting thousands upon thousands of developers who have contributed their time and effort to open source projects.

Perhaps what we _really_ need is for more hard-working developers to stop coding and start shooting off at the mouth (like Mr. Andreiana) about what they don't like about everyone else's product. Yeah, that would accomplish far more than individual efforts. Great idea, Marius! You've inspired me to stick my head up my ass too!

[reply] [top]

[»] Free or Free&Marginal&Redundant&Buggy&Incomplete
by TAAMinator - Apr 25th 2003 06:43:19

"Too Much Free Software" or "Too Much Free Marginal
or Redundant or Incomplete or Old Software"?

I agree that there seems to be too much free,
marginal, redundant, buggy, incomplete, old software.
When the user seeks software for a specific function
and must wade through 666 apps only to find that a
single piece of software with that specific function does
not exist, then there is a malfunction in 'the free
software system.'

The cure for that is a better system to function-list
and user-rate software. Advertisers for different levels
of products have balloons to show 'has' or 'has limited'
or 'has not.' Perhaps the time is now to create a system
for creators and users to function-list their software. For
example, mylinuxmovieplayer - Plays - MPG, QT. Does
Not Play - WMP. Records - Nothing. Timer - None.
Saves - All. Editting - None. User - Beginner. Similarly,
as stated previously, a moderated wishlist of specific
applications and functions is appropriate. At the same
time, we need to protect developers from the newbies'
unending 101s without charring the newbies and turning
them to the gate$ side of the force.

There are ego and Quixotic problems therein. Why be
part of a project when you can develop and distribute
YATE (yet another text editor) which is named after
you? And, if you've ever tried to make software that
uses a proprietary giant's crown jewels, you know that
some things are almost impossible.

As far as 666 flavors of text editor and user
preferences. I SUPPORT INDIVIDUAL CHOICE. This is
not medicine. Previously, doctors ONLY used the two
dozen meds they were taught in med school. [Perhaps
that is why leeching is making a comeback.] As a
consequence, continuing medical education requires
that doctors learn about new meds. But, this is not
medicine. This is software. And, for the non-business
user, this is not a legal case for mandatory application
usage. This is optional. I think many flavors of text
editor is good in principle. In the workplace, unity is
power. [Or is it "mind-numbing is control"?]

What is the optimal amount of text editors? I do not
know. When you go to BR31, they only have 31 flavors,
but they have a core of constant flavors and a few
changing flavors. That works. At its lowest point, KFC
had over 200 menu items. As a consequence, if you
were to order a few of the less popular items, you
would be waiting for an extended period of time. Mr.
Dave (Wendy's) Thomas realized this was
dysfunctional. Mr. Thomas reduced the menu to about
three dozen items. KFC service and quality improved
instantly, and, wait times reduced drastically.

Free versus free and redundant ...

Free versus free but does not do what the user wants
...

Free versus free, old and still maintained for the few
users who refuse to change ...

... Makin' a list and checkin' it twice.



Now, where was I --

# vi .cshrc

--
I can do anything with a Mac!

[reply] [top]

[»] Constitution, Economy and GPL-Open Source
by m6s - Apr 21st 2003 18:31:20

I think the magic word around here is that when people use Internet Explorer all head to a monopolium of e- and non e- commerce. Thus it comes to a company such as Microsoft, or Sun or anyother (do not be fool that only M$ is really bad) who will embrace the daily transactions. Yes the fellow is right...There is too much of free software, of free coded lines. But also there is a huge anarchy in the whole process of this sofware making. What I mean... Well, think about it. We created -as mankind- a new deal of economy. A new aspect. The e-commerse. And yes if you ain't got I.E. you are doomed...unless you use a decent netscape which might the bank let you use or unless you use Konqueror who might has plugins to fake your identity...Sure...that is freedom we want? Yes? Is that? I do not think.... What is going then? On my opinion Marius should set it, in a different basis. He should say 2 things. 1) There must be at last a standarization. Based on the demand? Perhaps...Based on the most productive solutions? Perhaps... Who is responsible for that? That is the second thing... 2)Who is going to be in charge. But to give an answer I must turn your views to some other aspects of our e-economy but also our economy as we know.... How people claim what they deserve? THey protest, they get loud in the streets, and finally after a revolution, a war, laws are made...and furthermore constitutions. A constitution gives the path to set up your freedom area. Right? Can you have justice when a king or a dictator rules your life? Freedom? No. Result? Constitution. Tell me one more thing, who's got the power to build economies? People with money... What is the money? Power. Don't tell me about some revolutionists! Stick to the reality, please. Follow my process. Who has control over law? Some multinational multi-billionar companies? (at 99%?) Yes they have. Microsoft, Sun are too such companies. So Microsoft thrives for goverment contracts, and Sun leaks on her wounds. Priests the Linux. But...Linux becomes a tool to those people. Fundamentally beyond Linux is GPL is the licence. And what does that mean? That there is a war. Between companies who wish to have closed the paths to knowledge, and people who do want to make a difference. Result? sourceforge.net, freshmeat.net, kde.org, gnome.org. All cool up to here. But! Microsoft has 90% of the internet users, and governments such as India and USA run central systems. Why, Gentlemen? Why Ladies? The answer is one. Because those companies have trespassed the universities' asylum! Yes in-deed. When a company pays a university, the university has to follow company's instructions. When something new is invented and it is not registered at the benefits of this company this 'good' goes wasted or....proprietary and plugin to any windows XP2000NT98 or Apple2010203. So my concern, is that in the bottom line, companies have taken the place of teacher, and of educator in general. They instruct what should we learn and we learn it. 'The Matrix' again and again. And when that happens, Open Source remains at those few fanatics, who yes they do support ALSA and OSS, they do support KDE but GNOME too. And they can not do nothing more. Just pray that each technology that comes up won't pass them by. Why microsoft made us, to use the windows systems? She did on DOS. A freely distributed OS that became Trojan Horse. And from DOS now we need Paladium. What is the best way to cope with this? And make OO really a competitor? Not much. Just to ask freedom for education once more. We need to roll the dice, again.Perhaps we can achieve it. Economy, people is based on laws.Law on constitution. It's about time to set e-economy on a new type of research. In other words, let me put it this way the second thing.... If no one is in charge of OO by anyway, who has set in charge a Bank to close the door for me, just because I like to wear a 'suit' like linux? Who? Politics? Lawyers? Laws? What laws? Even economically there is only one fundamental rule. 'Supply and Demand'. A law that all modern western economies -especially USA- appreciate it. But supply means a cool and justiful race between different products under rules. Where is that rull that denies me to have an identity on the modern e-world with the tools I want? Is there written? Because I am tired, I close up, here. My conclusion is just that we have very good source of minds, and software. What we need is 'protection' and 'liberation of the knowledge through universities'. Linux and GPL make up what unis should do long time ago, instead of wasting money on fat or beautiful ladies standing in the corridor of a library and sharing time among axious students who wish to seek the database of the university from the corridor of the university! Pf! My /usr/share/doc is endless of texts and help, thanx to this anarchy. So how are we gonna make a /global/share/doc? Only this is the weapon against proprietary software and moreover, companies. I am angry at the fact, that when they say that knowledge is power, they have taken us this power. We have to pay $$ and $$ and yet we will see only a 1% of the knowledge. And the payment goes to companies endly. Which in return re-sell us products that we in anyway run to the same company to buy. A non-ended loop. While (;;). And I am asking... What is the means to achieve Open Source?

--
Power to the people!

[reply] [top]

[»] Didn't anyone recognize the obvious?
by Sebastian Hültenschmidt - Apr 14th 2003 03:57:12

IMHO there are just two different opinions/approaches posted here.
On one side are the ones like Marius, who benefit from open source efforts (he offers professional services) but do not contribute,
on the other hand are the contributors who just do their thing as they like.
Where is the point in pushing contributer towards greater success/better merchability/personal usability of their projects???
I mean, all those contributors develop for their own individual pursue of happiness.
You should better keep that in mind. This is what makes the os community strong.
By the way, i think, "community" is the term non-contributers use to adress the contributers.
There is no joint effort to create this or that or dominate the world or something (as far as i can see).
I am not trying to say that open source is not commercial grade/merchable/enterprise ready/busines capable,
i myself are a open source consultant too (see www.eqiq-software.de), but i see oss as it is,
a great gift from individuals to the world
and i think you should appreciate it.
I think there is a basic rule to all things you may want to happen in a certain way.
Doing it yourself is easier, faster and more satisfactoring than convincing others to do it for you.
Trying to have "the community" do this or that is completely useless effort.

HAND

Sebastian Hültenschmidt, Bochum, Germany

--
Sie brauchen professionelle und erschwingliche IT Beratung? Besuchen Sie www.eqiq-software.de.

[reply] [top]

[»] wait a moment
by Daniel E. Testa - Apr 8th 2003 19:10:23

"GNOME and KDE for the majority, Blackbox and Window Maker for modest hardware"...

KDE 3 needs 128 Mb of RAM, why such amount of memory? and it's not as good as explorer (window$) the same for GNOME.
FluxBox runs in less than 2 MB of RAM on any machine.

"Motif, Tcl/Tk, wxWindows? Die!"...

Tcl is a scripting language and Tk is a toolkit commonly used with Tcl and python, so if I want to make a script with a GUI why should I use C and GTK? is just a script. First learn the differences between a compiled language and a interpreted one, then talk.
QT is natively a C++ library so if you are just a C programmer you must read something about C++ that is a waste of time. The GTK native API is C; bindings are available for C++ and others.

"Too Much Free Software"

There are too many languages too... so if we think like this, we should just keep C, HTML, C++ or Java and maybe Perl to write some scripts and then drop the rest. Now to write a webpage you have: HTML, XML, DHTML, ASP, PHP, JavaScript, VRML, Flash, etc etc I lost the count, when you are done 10 more languages were just created. So, as I said, if we think in this way lots of thinks that make gnu/linux what it is now should be disappear.

There are too many distributions too. We have Distributions like Redhat, SuSE, Mandrake etc etc that turns gnu/linux into window$98, you just change the window$ logo by a penguin and you don't see the difference and you can get a gnu/linux system installed on you machine as insecure and unstable as window$ if you don't know what you are doing using lot of harddisk with things that you don't know why are there, that is a waste of time and a waste of HD space. Distributions like this ones are no longer distributions they are companies like microsoft.


"Drop the "not made here" syndrome and your 15 minutes of fame on freshmeat when making the announcement"...

This is so selfish that it's sucks. I've never expected something like this from a gnu/linux user or from a person who calls inself a gnu/linux user.

Gnu/Linux is free, means freedom. You want to help computer users and make a better world with gnu/linux then read lots of books and texts and stop saying programmers and people what should they do. We have the right to choose the programming library and desktop we want. Gnu/Linux exist thanks to programmers and their libraries.

[reply] [top]

[»] I have said this for *years*
by Corran - Apr 8th 2003 18:45:27

I agree with you. All these skilled, talented people donating thousands of man-hours could be put into better (IMO) use if we/they could gather around fewer projects. Coordination is virtually non-existing, and we end up with hundreds if not thousands of semi-professional, semi-finished software, which all tend to do the same or very, very similiar work.

Not that diversity is not a good thing, but the Linux community lacks kick-ass software! (Yes, we do!)

I'd bet that if more programmers (not better, but MORE) contributed to, let's say, SDL we wouldn't have the need to turn to Windows (DirectX) for games - it would outperform anything else. If more people was involved with the Gimp, we would not need to turn to Windows (Photoshop) - it would be at least at par with it.
The list could be made long.

There is, however, one single piece of software which I feel has had its turn, and should be replaced (if we would like to fulfill our innermost dreams of having a Linux in every household)... and that is X11. It's good for computer pros, it's awful for the causal user. IMHO, it should be dragged around back and shot. We could adopt Photon (from QNX) or the GUI-part of BeOS (now of OpenBeOS). Anything but X11.

So, there's MY take on things ;)

[reply] [top]

[»] Feeding the trolls
by Thomas Worthington - Apr 8th 2003 07:00:45

I know I should ignore the trolls even when they are advertised as an article but:

GNOME and KDE for the majority, Blackbox and Window Maker for modest hardware.

GNOME and KDE are garbage and I never install them. WindowMaker works well on modest hardware, but it works even better on my 1.5GHz .5GB machine. I have used Linux as my ONLY desktop machine for four years now. It's more than up to the job.

GTK+. That's it. Qt still has licensing problems, being non-Free for commercial applications.

GTK+ is as ugly as sin and is only available for commercial due to the existance of the LGPL which is an abomination: if I produce a 450K binary which has 45K of my code and the rest is library code then it's just a joke to say that I'm not deriving my code from the library programmers' code. QT have the licencing right; GTK+ is in the wrong here.

Open Office has the most features, but since it requires a lot of resources, there are also GNOME and KDE offices.

I do need OO for reading files and converting them to editiable version for non-Linux users. If I don't need them to be edited then I make PDFs using TeX and Ghostscript (or a dvi to pdf converter). The GNOME and KDE versions of OO are not in a usable state.

I don't know exactly what to write here, but it's bad.

As a sound user I have no idea what you are talking about. I can listed to or record sound in just about any format I've ever heard of and have been able to since I first started using Linux.

Instant messaging

Jesus, who cares? What a waste of time. I bet you send text messages on your mobile phone too. Get a life.

A good example is Mozilla. There are lots of browsers available for Linux today, but most of them are based on Mozilla. Therefore, they work.

Mozilla is still too slow to be even entertained as an option on anything under 1GHz. I use Opera and I'm happy with it. You can use Moz if you want but I think you just may be a masocist.

Another problem is that major functionality is quite often rewritten from scratch.

Yes, that's something that "proper" software projects can only dream of. I'm sure there's not a single senior developer in MS that wouldn't like the chance to re-write IE without Active-X but they're stuck with it. We are the lucky ones, they are the losers.

Don't throw away all tested and working code and documentation to start all over again, introducing new bugs which annoy users and waste time.

Nobody actually does that, as I'm sure you know. But they are free to, and do, throw away code that is a kludge or is designed in a way which does not scale etc. This does introduce new bugs but you are assuming that these outnumber the bugs that would have emerged in the old code.

Here's looking forward to Linux on the desktop!

It's on my desktop and has been for years. It's on every desktop I get authority over and non-Linux users sometimes don't even realise that it's not Windows (most Windows users don't know what a desktop even is).

Every time the "Let's get Linux on the desktop" trolls come out it emerges that what they mean is "Let's clone Windows".

Let's not.

[reply] [top]

[»] Re: Feeding the trolls
by Tommi Asiala - Apr 19th 2003 05:14:54

GNOME and KDE are garbage and I never install them.
Why are Gnome and KDE garbage?

The GNOME and KDE versions of OO are not in a usable state.
How so?

Jesus, who cares? What a waste of time. I bet you send text messages on your mobile phone too. Get a life.
You´re absolutely right! I mean it´s so childish and stupid..

Mozilla is still too slow.. You can use Moz if you want but I think you just may be a masocist.
Take a look at the new roadmap: http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap.html

[reply] [top]

---

[»] About Developers & Users
by fofito - Apr 8th 2003 06:42:46

Well, when it comes to developers, I think the more, the better. It gives people more to study, use and re-use, but talking about users and mainstream, I agree with the autor.
So, remains one question - at least for me -: Is there a way to please both?

[reply] [top]

[»] Re: About Developers & Users
by Stephen Ward - May 23rd 2003 10:54:25


> Well, when it comes to developers, I
> think the more, the better. It gives
> people more to study, use and re-use,
> but talking about users and mainstream,
> I agree with the autor.
> So, remains one question - at least for
> me -: Is there a way to please both?
I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. Although there is a segment of the Linux community that seems committed to making Linux compete with Windows on the desktop, there is also a segment that enjoys the freedom from dictated development approaches that Linux offers. Why force the removal of this benefit to satisfy the desktop fanatics..

I think that what is needed is to acknowledge (as this post suggests) both of these agendas. For those developers and users that are committed to empowering Linux on the desktop, why not try and focus the efforts around the better applications. For those who enjoy the freedom of Linux - leave them alone and let them use that freedom to solve problems as they see fit and quite probably generate ideas and progams that the first class of people would never deam of.

To deal with the proliferation of software projects why not (as was already suggested) set up a way to rate and group the available choices so that end users who are simply trying to get their tasks done can be directed to the projects that are the most refined and suitable.

Personally, I have been using Linux on the desktop for four years or so and the only Windows that exists on my computers is in vmware for windows development (a necessary evil to obtain revenue). However, I have had no difficulties getting any task done with Linux software and I applaud the efforts of the OpenOffice, Mozilla, GIMP, and on and on ... groups for the level of software that they have generated. I do not find myself need or wanting to use the Windows alternatives.



[reply] [top]

---

[»] Choices
by arschlesinger - Apr 7th 2003 13:44:55

Choices are good, I agree, but too many of them, as this article explains, is bad. My Experience with Linux has been mostly searching for the perfect app, and wishing that some features from one app were mixed with other features from another app.

darn. Linux has a long way to go because of this problem.

[reply] [top]

[»] Re: Choices
by svachi - Apr 21st 2003 22:11:10

One of the strong points of Free Software is that people can
modify the source and redistribute it. If there is a feature that
you really need ported from another software, you can do it
yourself, if you have the skills, or you can try offering some
rewards (like that money you have to spend buying a
commercial software if the free software is not good enough)
on the project mailing list for people who will port it for you.

I think the trick is to use availble resources wisely ;-) In short,
if you have skills, code. If you have money, pay people to do it for you.



> Choices are good, I agree, but too many
> of them, as this article explains, is
> bad. My Experience with Linux has been
> mostly searching for the perfect app,
> and wishing that some features from one
> app were mixed with other features from
> another app.
>
> darn. Linux has a long way to go because
> of this problem.
>
>


[reply] [top]

---

[»] Too Much Software ??..win 95 sound recorder??
by zara994 - Apr 6th 2003 22:21:18

For dvd/vcd and audio streams, Xine and Gxine (Gxine is just one of a plethora of alterantives to the standard xine interface) work very well....Personally , I cannot imagine and competent user, on any platform, having any use at all for anything like the windows 95 soundrecorder--just weak,uselesspap/garbage..There ARE decent recording interfaces for linux, but I personally prefer using my own customized scripts...Look, the tenor of you article is to argue the merits of a dumbed-down distribution ; and that's great, if that's all you are capable of..If you cannot make icewm (the best of the lightweight windowmanagers, imo) work for you, you have done nothing to discredit it and everything to discredit yourself...You sound like i windows 98 se guy to me! I want nothing to do with you dumbed-down computing world..

--

[reply] [top]

[»] Other comments
by Marius Andreiana - Apr 6th 2003 10:54:06

Thanks for all constructive comments. I hoped the good parts in this article would span a constructive discussion. For example, the idea with Sourceforge eliminating projects was completly stupid.
Benjamin's 'wasted time' comment summed up my ideas really good.

Here are others from my mails and replies:

*******
Matthew Carpenter wrote:
> GTK+ may be a good religeous choice, but unfortunately you can hardly
> reconcile the fact that it's procedural and ugly. Qt, while licensing may not
> be politically correct for OSS, is well written, cross-platform, and
> Object-Oriented making maintenance of code easier.
GTK+ and Qt both need to exist, as they differ in concepts ( visions ). I don't know
what code could be shared here ( pango? ), but they are sharing ideas and try to bring
the best from one to the other. Let's not forget about http://www.gtkmm.org/

I did not know that Gaim was so powerful, as I use Everybuddy, so thanks for
> the tidbit.
> Hopefully both would use a common library for sending messages. You may like Everybuddy UI more than Gaim's. You could even make your own, which would be easy if a common library for sending messages and setting up accounts would exist. These projects could have bugs such as not displaying smileys properly, but they would never crash on sending messages or not work with Yahoo's protocol, which is the most important.


****

Subiect: Re: The Linux Article Of The Year

On Sî, 2003-04-05 at 04:39, Marcel Kunath wrote:

>Like this guy who left Red Hat and created Ark because he disagreed with the
>KDE interface. I am sure I don't know all the details of the problems
>between him and Red Hat but he had four choices:
>
>- work it out with Red Hat
>- transfer to a company with his vision (like SuSE maybe)
>- do something entirely different
>- create a new distribution
>
>Unfortunately he chose the last one and now we have another distro which is
>"designed especially for desktop use, primarily for people without prior
>Linux experience." Just like the other 50+ distros before Ark.
>
> My point wasn't about that I dislike the distributions. My point was about
> the waste of human resources. I don't want to tell people to stop developing
> software because their code is crap. I didn't say their code is crap. I
> dislike the dis-array within the development community and lack of forward
> thinking/planning.
>
> I want people to realize that (in most cases) it is more efficient to join a
> project already under way or reuse code than create another "new"
> implementation/branch/fork/re-batched distro which does the same thing in
> different fashion but no more efficient manner.
This was the focus of the article. But, indeed, as Matt said, it may not
be so easy to join other projects, though I believe these are only
seldom cases and, usually, outside help is welcome.

For example, I think glimmer and other one or two gnome IDEs decided to
join their efforts into a single project, and nobody worked anymore at
the new combined project. Also, I got mail from someone who told me he
tried to contribute to a project, even with writing documentation, but
he was completely ignored.

The article was also about desktop applications. There are many
variations here only because some developers didn't like the existing
UI. I think it would be better if they would put aside their ideas
temporarily, get involved in an existing project which is the closest
with their vision, start separating the code from UI (and improving it
at the same time), and then use the same code ( keep it in a common
library, not fork ) for their initial vision. Example: instant
messaging. If there is already a common library which does instant
messaging with all protocols, you need only to make your own interface
in whatever toolkit you want. And it will work!

********
Subiect: Re: [TTLUG] Too Much Free Software

Taran Rampersad writes:
>wxWindows allows users this freedom. GTK+ doesn't. We cannot curtail
>Freedom by defining Freedom as something within a specific subset. It
>does not suffer recursion. wxWindows works well with Linux, as does
>GTK+. wxWindows is coming to version 3.0 soon, who knows what else the
>future holds?

I know I should have worked more on the article and put more focus on
sharing code rather than 'abandoning' some of the existing applications.
I know wxWindows makes portability very easy (and porting MFC
applications to Linux with it). I wish GTK would have this too, as I
wish wxWindows would have GTK's features of i18n, accesibility and RAD
tools such as Glade.

> What Marius is talking about is Linux conquering the desktops, world
> domination and all this sort of stuff
Right. I see this more as a necessity rather than a religious thing.
Here in Romania I cannot access on-line banking or pay taxes on-line
because I don't have Internet Explorer. I cannot go to competition as
all banks imposed this limit and the government has no competitor.

> He's not interested in
> multiplatform development
I am, as long as all platforms have open standards. This is not the case
with Microsoft.

*********
Y. Yifrah talks about Class projects/student stuff:

How much of the open source out there do you think is just some students
class assignment he released into open source? These people HAVE to
code from scratch, its part of their assignment.

It would be pretty cool if you could get professors to assign
contributions to open source projects for their classes, instead of
writing some arbitrary blood bank simulation or some such. If you could
get professors together to support a few projects they could act as
practical senior software engineers and get the hordes of upper-class CS
students to write some feature or other concrete goal in an open source
project as an assignment. Then merge in the best implementation to the
existing code tree, perhaps have a website for professors to goto to
find out about various projects, one that picked the applications to
focus on, maybe have suggested assignments professors could "check out"?
(help entice those professors that don't like to come up with new
assignments every semester).

It would give a more focused effort to the table, and bring expose even
more people to open source.

I don't know about the legal aspects and all that, but I'm sure you
could get SOME professors to do it, because I think this would motivate
students to be better programmers if they know someone might actually
USE their class assignment, instead of being Yet Another Hello World

When I was in school, minix was state of the art for free UNIX
implementations, there was nothing like Linux and what's happening
today. I was just thinking how cool it must be for CS students now, and
that idea popped into my head.

**********
James Atwill:

One thing you touched on, but you didn't seem to realize you did is that
many open source projects gravitate around what they feel is "complex".

For example (as you mentioned), there are many web browser, but they all
use Gecko. There are many media players, but they all use libmpg123 (and
libvorbis). There are many CD ripper programs, but they all use
cdparanoia. There are many 3D screensavers out there, but they all use
OpenGL. Lots of GUI apps, they all use GTK+ (or QT) - you don't see many
people writing X calls directly anymore. There's a number of apps that do
spell checking, but they all use libaspell.

All these things that are used are "complex" to the author of the app -
but provided an easy mechanism to integrate it.

A missing roll in open source land is that of the lone coder who takes a
project and splices it up such that the complex part (Instant Messaging
protocols, video codecs - gstreamer will help that, etc) are encapsulated
and can be re-used in other places. That coder will likely suffer the
wrath of the original author's ego however. :-(

Anyway, you're absolutely right - and I agree with you 100%. I hope you
don't get flamed too much.

*******
Robyn has the same problems as me. I'm not new to Linux, but I am trying to gather applications to satisfy a regular user needs ( from office to games ) and this is the problem:

I know u've gotten a lot of negative feedback just viewing the responses to your article, but i agree with what you say. Maybe that's because i am a new user to Linux, and not a programmer, but i really want to use linux, however i cant get ANYTHING to work very well... it's very frustrating and forcing me to boot into windows all the time.

********
On Sî, 2003-04-05 at 23:53, Adam Muise wrote:
> I think your article was right on the money. I swear that if I could
> just get these people in a real work environment for a change I might be
> able to get them to see what the real world is really about. The world
> does not need another text editor.
>
> Testing code and consolidating effort is what the open source community
> is all about. If you left Linux to the critics of your article, we'd
> have no regular distributions because no one would be willing swallow
> their pride and work on something that they didn't dream up themselves.
>
> I should really listen to what I am saying here because I am starting a
> new open source project. It is yet another P2P application but it does
> have unique features that I couldn't find in an existing app
> This is not the case with the 300 editors. So you should start the new project, but try to use already existing code where possible ('use' not as in fork). Of course we must keep starting new projects when they bring new concepts.

**********
Keith Hurd:

Just wanted to say that I agree whole-heartedly with your assessment of free applications. There is too much fragmentation in the community and in general applications overall. That is one of the primary reasons I stopped using Linux as my primary OS in 98.

Anyway, just wanted to say great article, and I hope your way of thinking starts to spread outward more, and consolidate a lot of the ok apps into fewer great apps.

**********
Tom:

How can a basically anarchist movement stand united. If it does this it
will become governed, which is not what members want to happen.

Social anarchism is all about mobs. If you would stand up and lead a new
mob with your aims in mind, then I am sure the Open Source community
would join your mob. Maybe you can get enough of a mob together to
attract the funding and support you need from united commercial groups.

Of course you, like all members of the open source movement, will have to
put a lot of energy and time into your idea.

[reply] [top]

[»] Re: Other comments
by Taran Rampersad - Jun 3rd 2003 22:05:29


>
> Taran Rampersad writes:
> >wxWindows allows users this freedom.
> GTK+ doesn't. We cannot curtail
> >Freedom by defining Freedom as
> something within a specific subset. It
> >does not suffer recursion. wxWindows
> works well with Linux, as does
> >GTK+. wxWindows is coming to version
> 3.0 soon, who knows what else the
> >future holds?
>
> I know I should have worked more on the
> article and put more focus on
> sharing code rather than 'abandoning'
> some of the existing applications.
> I know wxWindows makes portability very
> easy (and porting MFC
> applications to Linux with it). I wish
> GTK would have this too, as I
> wish wxWindows would have GTK's features
> of i18n, accesibility and RAD
> tools such as Glade.
>
> > What Marius is talking about is
> Linux conquering the desktops, world
> > domination and all this sort of
> stuff
> Right. I see this more as a necessity
> rather than a religious thing.
> Here in Romania I cannot access on-line
> banking or pay taxes on-line
> because I don't have Internet Explorer.
> I cannot go to competition as
> all banks imposed this limit and the
> government has no competitor.
>
> > He's not interested in
> > multiplatform development
> I am, as long as all platforms have open
> standards. This is not the case
> with Microsoft.
Intriguing. I didn't know that the email would be posted.
We have similar problems in Trinidad and Tobago - but you seem to be one step ahead. You can pay your bills online. ;)
Microsoft does not have Open Standards, that's implicit whenever the name is mentioned. However, being able to run software on Microsoft systems that also runs on GNU/Linux, MacOSX, etc. is also important from an engineering standpoint.

Besides, if the applications work on the Operating System that users presently use - then when they migrate they can use it on another system.

Yes. GNU/Linux needs to survive, and it will. But I think people get caught up in GNU/Linux being FOSS, when GNU/Linux is only an example of FOSS. A prominent example, mind you, but still an example.



--
Taran Rampersad http://www.knowprose.com

[reply] [top]

---

[»] Choice is OK, But Give Us Assistance in Selection.
by Adnan Khan - Apr 5th 2003 22:28:37

I think FreshMeat and SourceForge should implement - at the least - download.com style Most Popular (or Top Downloads) and Our Pick in each category. That makes selection for new users to a category easy and let developers know what the users want. Current situation is like you go for a cube of ice, and rather get a blizzard. Its too confusing.

For example, I want a Content Management System. For weeks, I am trying to decide which is better by searching reviews etc. I have downloaded and installed one or two and checked them (as good as a first-timer newbie can), but dont know yet with which system I should stick to. If there was a Most Downloaded or Our Pick type of system, I would simply stick to one of the top 3 or so, and later, when I know what this category is really all about, I would be in a position to judge others as an expert as I would already know what exactly do I need.

This is getting important as open source projects get too complex and big. It is not possible to simply install the 50 most famous for a category and check personally which is better. If a better new product comes up, it would bubble up to the surface automatically.

Now everyone goes with apache, due to its massive user base. There might be other products that are better than apache, but users stick to it due to its userbase and features. Let us make the same thing true for other projects as well, and stop confusing and scaring away new users.

Current rating system of freshmeat does not tell anything meaningful when its says popularity is 0.543% or rating is 8.92/10. Rating (though understandable here) alone cannot decide which way should I go. I think, feature-wise, BeOS was rated better than its competitors at the time, but was it a better choice to stick to it?

Quantity and freedom of choice is ok, but what OpenSource really need is helping users to make first selection.

--
----------------------------------------------- Developer's Bug is Marketing's Feature -----------------------------------------------

[reply] [top]

[»] fallacies in article
by Ken - Apr 5th 2003 17:00:31

This article has several fallacies.

1. The assumption of what I will call "conservation of effort": that if