-
Website
http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com -
Original page
http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/2008/07/rants-heard-round-community-ver-10_31.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
http://www.softpanorama.org/OSS/bad_linux_advoc...
http://www.modeemi.fi/~tuomov/b/
Anyone got moar?
Windows version of Firefox running under Wine is much faster than the native one. This goes for all distributions I've ever used. Things like Swiftfox or Swiftweasel are also painfully slow compared to Windows. I've done some googling and it turned out I'm not the only one with this problem, Ubuntu forums are full of people having it, including users with really powerful machines. I've tried some fixes, like disabling Ipv6- it helped with webpage rendering speed but everything else still feels like I'm using Vista on an EeePC. Scrolling is particularly annoying, on large webpages it sometimes hangs for several seconds, something I've never experienced under Windows. I guess the reason is simple: even Mozilla doesn't give a f*ck about Lunix, because they're here to make money and they know very well where the majority of their users is.
Ah, says I, I'll install Ubuntu and keep her from destroying the desktop. Of course, Ubuntu doesn't come with Flash or anything halfway useful built in. So after searching for a while and finding that I have to install restricted extras and a bunch of other shit with stern warnings (thanks RMS!), I get the Flash plugin going with Firefox. The desktop is easy enough to use; my daughter clicked the Firefox icon, typed in the address to NickJr.com, and navigated to her favorite Flash game.
But it wasn't the same game.
What used to be perfectly smooth and snappy animation on the Windows install was replaced with a virtual slide show complete with choppy audio. Don't worry, I told my daughter, I'm sure it's just a video driver thing.
Silly me, I assumed that Ubuntu didn't detect my Intel graphics chipset and was using the framebuffer driver. But nope, the i810 driver was working just fine.
I spent the next few hours on Google trying to find a fix. A few people with Intel chipsets were touting some god-awful options to add to the Xorg.conf file, but I didn't notice a difference. What amazed me the most was my difficulty in finding any acknowledgment whatsoever in the linux community that Flash was dead slow on linux using integrated graphics. Isn't Intel revered by the FOSStards because they have open source drivers?
I guess the lusers can't admit to using something so non-Free like Flash. I confirmed this when I asked how to get Flash up to speed on some message board somewhere. Not a single luser gave me a helpful response. Instead, all I got was a bunch of replies like: Flash is bloated, use Gnash! Anyone who browses with Flash and Javascript enabled isn't l337! Buy a Nvidia card, Intel graphics suck. Don't use linux if you can't handle it! Yadda, yadda, fuck off retards. All you did was teach my daughter and me to stay the hell away from Linux. I can't believe I fell for it in the first place.
Maybe if they'd help by disclosing to LinuxHater, even anonymously, what it is about Linux that makes it suck as a platform for running Flash we might be able to get a good bit of hate going. It could be the problems with X discussed in an earlier post, or something competely different.
Until we know what's going on, moaning about Flash sucking because of Linux is just mindless bashing. We need evidence to back up our claims.
No, it's not a straw man at all. It merely emphasizes how lame open source devs are. Even when a spec is handed to them on an open platter -- and if you've read it, you'd know that the Flash spec is pretty damned good -- they can't match what a closed source company has done. To coin a phrase, it's like watching a bunch of retards try to hump a doorknob.
You could unplug that head of yours from your ass and take a look at their specs. Oh sorry, you are still hungry. Take a look after you finished.
2) Buy the URL www.gnuTaxTardsRUs.com or www.kPartTaxFreedomOpenSourceFuckYouMS.com
3) Put picture of "tax penguin" on page
4) Post the site to digg and slashdot
5) Wait for freetard developers to sign on
6) ????
7) PROFIT!!
The "just works" shit that Ubuntu spews out like bait for the average joe to bite? Well, it's the finest example of bullshit I've ever come across. Even I bought into it.
Note that I"m one of those users whose friend was a freetard. Yes, to him, Linux was the goddamn bee's knees. After hearing about how good the audio software is coming up in Linux (must have been a complete lie), I was somehow convinced that Linux would be for me. After all, ZynAddSubFX sounded awesome!
So I was given Ubuntu to use.
My CD-ROM drive was broken, so he installed it via network cable or something. Ever since then I've been teaching myself this... "Linux" (GNU/Linux sounds gay to me honestly so I won't even say it) and the more I learn, the more I hate.
Everything was fine until I decided to try to find and download software to sequence AND PLAY MIDI files, which is required for an "intro to computer-generated music" class (only the elite get to use reason apparently). When I noticed--- there was little to NONE.
I wasn't able to play sequenced midi? Those things that are on every geocities page from the 90s?
I was shocked at first to find out that just playing a magyver midi would require installing a shitload of software, but sighed and went along with it. I found a small program called Qsynth, it was supposed to be a good synth program or something that took SF2 files. Sounds boss! I installed it.
Alright, it seems to be installed, that's good.
Now its' time to try it.
Uh... it's not working. I'll try again.
Still not working. Note that it's been about 2 hours downloading and trying shit at this point.
I give up and call my freetard friend. this is pretty much how the conversation went.
Me: "Hey, John, look, I can't get midi to work at all on Ubuntu."
Him: "Midi? What you need midi for?"
Me: "Uh, John, I do this for a living, it's never been this difficult to configure MIDI for a machine ever, not even in the 90s when I used SAMICK Hardware..."
Him: "You can't configure JACK?"
Me: "what the , you mean the MIDI Jack? I have one of those, dumm-"
Him: "You didn't configure JACK!"
Me: "what the CHRIST is JACK and why can't Ubuntu do what my computer from 1995 could do?!"
Him: "Oh, that? get timidity."
Me: "Look, uhhh.. I've already decided if I need to use MIDI, I'll use Windows, at least it can handle it, All I'm-"
Him: "OH it's so hard to do that! ugh it's so hard to plug in the keyboard and configure Jack!"
Me: "What the hell is JACK?"
Him: "Nevermind. Why are you using Midi files anyway? Use Reason."
Me: "Oh yeah this JUST WORKS doesn't it?"
Him: "Works for me. RTFM, n00b."
Now I know how the Incredible Hulk Feels.
I install Timidity out of curiosity and notice that it, as I expected, sucks. I can't specify my own SF2 files (it does this Gravis Ultrasound-like Bullshit), the patches that Ubuntu supplied with it are total ass, and futhermore, it's a software synth, which negates the reason for having a decent sound card in the first place!
Out of sheer interest at this point (because I was sure to do this when I had nothing else left to do) I installed a classic SoundBlaster, In hopes that I'd be able to, at LEAST, have OPL synthesis.
No dice. Nada. Nothing. NO sound at all.
I have never felt such rage in months. Apparently Midi is deprecated to the FOSStards like a 6 month old gnome dev module. But, Goddamnit, AMIGA Modules play without a hitch in Nautilus just by mousing over them!!1
Ubuntu 'Just Works' doesn't it? If by "works" they mean "Fails in every possible way to provide a friendly user experience", then they've got it down to a T!
As that king commie fucktard Stallman says, happy hacking!!
2. If open source projects don't provide an other more normal user friendly way to communicate with the project about the problems in the software,
How the fuck can the projects claim not being about just toys for nerds? That is really bad basis for any real development (== integrating the needs of the normal users with the technical implementation). Open source is doooomed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yoJI-Tl94g&feat...
Its not
Its not
Its not
Its not
Its not
So the company is forced to use mediocre hardware, like intel video, and install surplus hardware in the form of cardbus devices in order to give you a free-as-in-freedom system devoid of all of those nasty closed source drivers that come from nasty people who want to support their hardware under Linux but don't feel like kissing Stallman's ring.
I liked this line in particular
"The one thing that currently stops LAC systems from being entirely free is their BIOSes. However, LAC is experimenting with coreboot (formerly LinuxBIOS), and Sandine says that LAC's first free BIOS offering, on a server, "should be released any day now."
OMG my BIOS is Proprietary, and therefore EVIL!!
It's also the high point of insanity, in my opinion, to slap a crappy cardbus 802.11 card into a Thinkpad just to be able to use Free(dom) drivers instead of using the superior built-in wireless.
But I suppose some people are willing to trade convenience and performance in order to adhere to someone else's idealistic religion/crusade/jihad. Just how this makes one truly free, I cannot grok.
Just so long as it isn't pushed on to otherwise ignorant end-users^ as being a Good* solution.
^ ie all of those people who have Linux evangelists for friends that happily push them off the cliff.
* Good as in good-for-you rather than Good as in furthering-RMS's-agenda
Finding hardware that works with GNU/Linux is hard enough
No words needed ...
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered Linux community when IDC confirmed that Linux market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that Linux has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Linux is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be the Amazing Kreskin [amazingkreskin.com] to predict Linux's future. The hand writing is on the wall: Linux faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for Linux because Linux is dying. Things are looking very bad for Linux. As many of us are already aware, Linux continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
Ubuntu is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time Ubuntu developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: Ubuntu is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
Fedora leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of Fedora. How many users of SuSE are there? Let's see. The number of Fedora versus SuSE posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 SuSE users. Slackware posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of SuSE posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of Slackware. A recent article put Ubuntu at about 80 percent of the Linux market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 Ubuntu users. This is consistent with the number of Ubuntu Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, Canonical went out of business and was taken over by Red Hat who sell another troubled OS. Now Red Hat is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that Linux has steadily declined in market share. Linux is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If Linux is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. Linux continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, Linux is dead.
:)
Hmm.. the number of USENET posts DO not equal distro users. At any given time, both the SUSE and Fedora forums have much greater number of users than you cite. Even if we say that those forum users aren't all users of that particular distro, your numbers just aren't an accurate representation of usage data AT ALL.
> Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, Canonical went out of business and was taken over by Red Hat who sell another troubled OS. Now Red Hat is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
WTF? Where are you getting this from?
You actually had a decent post and a good point to make before you started talking out of your ass.
The Cathedral and the Bazaar:
Eric S Raymond wrote the Bazaar and the cathedral, where he argues that the power of the masses - the accumulated work of small cells of programmers, working individually, can eventually, through evolution and natural selection - a chaotic, self selecting bottom up process - The Bazaar, produce software that is better than software produced by using a top down, centrally designed and dictated process - the Cathedral.
This theory is complete bullocks.
Lets examine the main commandments of the Bazaar, and see how reality shatters it to pieces:
Self motivated, self managed meritocracy of developers - the bazaar claims that successful software products can be made by a counsel of peers - highly technical people working together to further a common goal. In reality, most successful projects are centered not around a common goal, but around a Leader, a single authority figure that inspires and lead the project, acting as central management, and have the final say on any major technical matter. Examples are many : Theo De Raat of freeBSD, Linus of the kernel, Miguel de Icaza of Gnome, Richard Stallman for GCC, and Mark Shuttleworth for Ubuntu. When those leader figures are gone from the picture, the project loses it's focus, and stagnate. Well known example is the GNOME project, which, for the last couple of years, stagnated.
Do note that following a central Leader is more or less any company is run, with the CEO or the founders acting as the focal point. The difference is that working for a commercial company gets you well compensated, while working for a FOSS project requires both following a Leader and adhering a strict time table, without the side benefit of monetary compensation.
The Bazaar claims that innovation comes from Chaos, from the masses who can test their ideas in the wild, try anything they want, in whatever way they want, and from that unchecked creative process, new idea and innovation will arise. This flies in the face of reality. There has been no innovative product coming from the FOSS community. Every FOSS software product is either a weak copy, or an incomplete copy, of existing commercial product. Innovation requires time, and time costs money. True innovative people use their ideas in order to either start their own businesses, or to further the goals of the environment which gives them the time to work on those ideas. Microsoft and Apples produces each year alone more innovative ideas than the FOSS movement ever created. There is no innovation in FOSS land.
The Bazaar claims that working together, the community can produce complete, useful products. This claim is mostly wrong, good examples are GTK, wxWidgets, 7zip. Yet, those projects are either stagnate due to lack of developers (GTK), unknown and mostly unused (wxWidgets), or the work of a single individual (7zip). those are the exceptions, rather than the rule. Lets take a look at the some truly successful FOSS projects, and try to find the common denominator - Eclipse, OpenOffice.org, Firefox, Blender, Qt - all those projects, with the exception of Eclipse, are commercial products that were completed, and than open sourced. All of the were designed by a Cathedral, and only than released as FOSS. Note that Eclipse, OpenOffice.org, and Firefox are all ran by commercial entities, using top down, hierarchical management structure, and solid, consistent funding (FYI - Firefox is funded almost completely by Google).
The Bazaar claims that the community of users can become full members of the development core, and that their needs will be better served, since there's no marketing pressure, and their ideas and complaints can be heard without the filter of PR. This is also wrong. The Core developers of many projects actively shuns the users, ignore their needs and wants, and relegate them to the position of unpaid QA. In order to have the right to use FOSS product, ask for help, or have the right to be heard, they must pay by doing one of the most boring, repetitive jobs in the software development world - QA, with the full responsibly of testing person - submit technical bug report, maintain the status and relevancy of the bug, and the rest of the responsibilities that a paying costumer wouldn't do. A FOSS user is either a burden, or a second rate worker.
The Bazaar claims that openly developed code is better, with less bugs and better security. This claim is also without merit. Most eyes examine the same portions of code - the most visible ones, the easiest to understand, the pieces that requires the least expertise and knowledge. This allow for major security breaches, like the famous Debian SSL encryption misshapen, stay unchecked for extremely long time - two years in the case of Debian. Furthermore - Security experts are hard to come by, and expensive to hire, so most FOSS projects actually have pretty poor security [1].
The Bazaar claims that FOSS will be able to fund itself by using services, rather than the software.
This is only partially correct, and only in one special case - that of Redhat (4b$). There are only two other major players in the FOSS world - Sun (8.3b$) [2] and Novell (2b$) [3], where Sun is nose diving toward oblivion, and Novell and Redhat fails to show any growth for the last 5 years. The combined market value of the three major players in the FOSS field is 14b$ (14*10^9 $), about half of that of Adobe (24b$), all confined to a specific niche - cheap web servers, where Microsoft's Windows Server and IIS is gaining market share fast. They are essentially cornered, since they failed to break out of that very specific niche [4] [5].
The Open Source movement have been around for more than 20 years, and thus far failed to stand up to it's promise. The only foothold it got is slipping away. The Bazaar has failed when with reality.
FOSS is DEAD
[1] http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2222164/enter...
[2] http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=JAVA#chart5:...
[3] http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=NOVL#chart4:...
[4] http://www.search-this.com/2007/06/27/microsoft...
[5] http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2008/07/07/ju...
Exactly. The fact is, there is no substitute for good leadership. Thinking of your software from the point of view of users (whoever they are - other programmers, artists, anybody) has a way of focussing your work, exposing you to new concepts you wouldn't otherwise have thought of, and as a result providing some fertile ground in your head for you to come up with some innovative ideas.
This is for you
This is also true for Qt, even before Trolltech was aquired by Nokia.
ps. to add my three cents to list of broken things in GNU/Linux - please compare the way Windows and GNOME handle read-only(yes!) files in trashcan, and what happen when GNOME cannot empty such files already being there. I also wonder why trashcan cannot just be ".trash" in user's directory, and must be so cryptic location such "./local/share/trash". I suppose it helps all those grannies to switch from Windows to GNU/Linux and keep their harddrives clean. ;-)
I think you could add a point about the Linux Kernel APIs (not even to mention ABIs!) not remaining stable even with minutes version changes (eg: 2.6.N -> 2.6.N+1) and the consequences for hardware support. It could be interesting to explain the average Linux zealot reaction when one mentions this fact. (I personaly liken their reaction to that of people conditionned to repeat propaganda, without questionning the message).
You are dead on target as far as the "Me Too" features on FOSS products are concerned.
http://linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/interviews/4...
Please review my rant for grammar, structure, and correctness (I'm not a native English speaker).
Much appreciated.
LIS
P.S.
1. For those who wonder, I'm a male. LIS is an acronym.
2. I do not work for Microsoft.
3. I don't hate Linux, it's mostly pity, since the basic idea has a lot of appeal. unfortunately, the real world bitch slapped both FOSS and Linux, and I'm afraid that it's decaying. the late 90' are gone, and with them, most of the funding and interest in FOSS.
That's all folks.
Yet, those projects are either stagnate due to lack of developers
Should be:
Yet, those projects are either stagnant due to lack of developers
I'm shit at English grammar and what not, so I don't know the technical terms. But you use stagnate like: the GNU project will stagnate. It is similar to a pool of Stallman's piss, accidentally left in a bowl under the sink.
You generally write like a native though. I wouldn't have guessed otherwise.
Perhaps "The Bazaar" should have been called "The Sandbox" to more accurately portray what goes on in it.
Fast and furious development isn't necessarily a bad thing, but at some point it must hit the stage where you need that central authority to manage and steer a project for there to be any real hope of it maturing.
We see some of that in the relationship between Fedora and RHEL, save that Redhat isn't at all concerned with having/selling a full featured, mature and stable consumer desktop.
The chaos theory of the bazaar is true in that it will create some good logical and innovative programs. But this is chaos, it causes more crap to fly out than the odd gem.
Perhaps you've been reading a different blog, but this isn't so much whining about how I can't get my wireless/video/sound/drives/APCI/printer... to work quite right as it is satyrizing the zealots who mindlessly defend something that they don't have a firm grasp on. Nothing is perfect and by defending to the death that it worksForMe() is just one of th reasons why the bazaar doesn't work .
Yes you get more eyes on the project, but human nature has a tendency to pop up about the time that the individual gets it working for themselves. When a program 's only documentation is a wiki/post written by a user there might be a few problems. There can be the tendency to either be too superficial or too technical, that's why a project with funding can take the time to have the documentation vetted by some people who don't know the inner workings of the software.
p.s. There's this great key called return/enter, it's great for breaking an argument into this other interesting concept called sentence and paragraph structure. The eye has a tendency to skip over most of a paragraph if it is too long.
Looking at applications in both proprietary cathedral model and free software in both cathedral and bazaar models an awful lot of very bad (or simply unwanted) software is produced whatever the method and a there is a small amount of really excellent applications and a small amount of innovation. The good free software tends to survive and improve if it attracts users and developers because it's what people want or need. Occasionally promising projects die as well because the principal developer moves on. I think it's fine that there are vast numbers of free projects which don't succeed. The model is natural selection and evolution, in which the majority dies and the best get better, or at least survive. This is the natural environment of free software, it lives or dies by its quality, usefullness or necessity. On the other hand proprietary software has to meet those same criteria and also turn a profit (generally speaking) or at least be useful. An interesting area is that of commercial organisations who pay developers to work on free software, examples being Novell, IBM, Sun, Red Hat, Google and others. There the motivation isn't coming from a group of basement nerds scratching an itch, or an attempt to directly monetize the work. It's because the tools being developed benefit the companies overall strategy, or give them leverage and an ability to influence the direction of a free project. Prominent examples would be the Linux kernel, Samba, Wine, all of which get a lot of input from developers paid by some of the most successful proprietary or mixed proprietary/free companies in the world. This is clearly a massively different situation than 6 years ago and imo does make that particular article a history piece.
well, fosstards don't think so but their propaganda just make things worse.
"nature" (the market) will tell.
True, but that drive behind it means that it's going to get more than a few hours a night in attention (if that much) if the dev starts going to late into the night they start making more and more mistakes - the normal person can't code effectively for hours and hours on end.
Which brings up a question. Much of the time spent developing a program requires a series of steps. 1) getting the requirements from the user and analyizing them, 2) taking that analysis and creating a roughed out version of pseudocode and an initial list of class/function/variable/etc..., 3) only after all this is done does it begin to be coded, troubleshot, recoded, etc... until they have a fairly shiny turd that they can release to the public.
So the question is, when people are potentially thousands of miles apart, how effectively are they collaborating on all three steps?
For example, the very existence of some great quality FOSS applications (like Firefox, Blender and Mplayer, to name a few) are proof enough that when done with leadership and co-ordination, the Bazaar model works very well.
Where FOSS has failed is that it promised that open-source would be revolutionary and that it was better than commercial apps in all ways. Of course this isn't true.
Interesting assertion.
Hmm let's see....bittorrent, wget, firefox, thunderbird, stellarium, nmap, phatch, f-spot, avidemux, vlc, easytag, xfwm, kwin, fluxbox, openbox, wubi, link/elinks, 7-zip, vim, emacs, GordianKnot/AutoGK, Media Player Classic, tor, privoxy, Ogg Vorbis, emule, truecrypt, ....I'm just looking at stuff i have installed on XP and/or Debian.
Many of these are original applications which don't copy or mimic any proprietary app, though they may perform similar tasks. Some are simply unique such as nmap and tor. Other like Firefox , Thunderbird, Media Player Classic clearly offer massive improvements over the proprietary apps they were designed to replace. Or do you really believe Outlook Express is superior to Thunderbird, or IE6/IE7 superior to Firefox or WMP7/8/9/10/11 are more capable media players than VLC or MPC? Maybe you can point out the proprietary application that bittorrent was copied from? Or show us the encryption tool that truecrypt is a weak copy of? Do you actually think emule is inferior to the now defunct edonkey client? Or do you prefer a backdoored proprietary client?
Your arguments initially look well informed and well presented but this example I've quoted is actually typical. It's a baseless and easily negated assertion presented as a fact, and then another layer of argument is based on the flawed logic. It's a shame because the subject matter of cathedral vs bazaar is well worth dissecting and even a casual observer can see areas where each approach is likely to be more successful than the other. It's also worth investigating how bazaar like the so called bazaars really are, and what actually are the limitations and benefits of each model (and variations/mixes) in the real world. But if you can't argue the case in an honest or even rational way then you're just another luser, no better than the idiots who installed Ubuntu or PCLinuxOS last week and now claim it's some kind of holy perfection. Does that make you a proptard? A closetard? A MStard? I'm not sure what the word is but it's bound to have tard at the end of it. Maybe dumb bstard?
wget, part of the GNU userland, the GNU userland as a whole is a knockoff of the initial Unix userland apps. In fact, wget is predated by GetURL (and possibly by BSD's Fetch). Original? No, sorry.
- firefox AHAHA. Firefox is based on Mozilla code, which is in turn the Netscapr codebase, which is in turn at least partially based on Mosaic. Oh and lets not forget the part about new and supposedly "innovative" features "introduced" by Firefox, having actually been introduced by Opera. Further, I would say that yes, IE7 is 'better' than Firefox, at least in terms of memory use.
- thunderbird, Also, stemmed from Mozilla mail, which in turn is borne from the Netscape Messenger codebase. Instantly comes the shot at outlook. How about Eudora, Mail.app, Netscape Mail, etc, etc, etc?
- Phatch is an image resizing app, sorry budfdy, nothing original there, it's essentially pre-empted by any preceding graphics application.
- EasyTag? I'm sorry dude, there've been ID3 tag editors availible for as long as ID3 tags have existed.
- Ogg Vorbis is essentially an mp3 knockoff,
- Encryption packages have been availible (and built into the OS) long before Truecrypt. 7zip? Sorry, file compression isn't new or original, fail.
- Vim is a clone of Vi, you lose again.
- Emacs is satan, and come on, a text editor qualifies as original?
- f-spot, iPhoto, Picasa, ACDSee, anyone? ACDSee > *. Pure and simple.
- vlc, right because the concept of a media player is so outrageously original, and I like how you automatically mention WMP, what about Winamp? What about QT? What about any of the hundreds of media player applkocations and frameworks out there?
- openbox forked off of Flux, which forked off of Blackbox, GG.
So essentially yes, lots of these are knockoffs. I find it cute that in your first paragraph, you assert the originality of said apps, but later on, you acknowledge they're copies, and say "it's okay, because they're 'superior' anyway. Riiight. Fail.
"Does that make you a proptard? A closetard? A MStard"
Case in point. If you think any of these are even remotely clever, it's a good example of FOSS' fixation with creating cheap knockoffs. Freetard was a clever play on words. Each of your offering is a copy of a copy. Fail.
The fact that tag editors already existed doesn't mean easytag is a clone, it simply performs the same function but it has its own layout, tools, codebase and so on, and is also as capable a tag tool as you'll find. It's not a copy and it's not weak.
f-spot: It isn't a clone or copy of any of the graphics tools you mentioned. It doesn't look like them, it doesn't do things the way they do, it doesn't use their code. Actually if you have used any of those a lot (I have) they are very different. But it does exist to manage photo collections. F-Spot is actually something that stands out in terms of being free of charge, free software and capable of good integration with other editors and tools. Amongst the free tools it's the only one that does a decent job with non-destructive editing.
I mentioned the windows managers/environments to illustrate that there is a whole range of tools which may be derived from other free software projects but have no connection at all with proprietary tools.
Vim is an extension of Vi. both are opensource!
Phatch is unlike any other batch editor out there. It has some really innovative ways of working and is much much more than a resize tool. Have you ever even used it? Again it's not a copy of anything, it's an amazing tool whose capabilities perhaps have to be used to be appreciated. It's clear you don't really know even what it is or what it can do.
let me again state the asseertion I dispute: "Every FOSS software product is either a weak copy, or an incomplete copy, of existing commercial product"
Perhaps you can read it again and consider it and what i wrote in response. There certainly are some free software apps which fit that description but all of them? No way. There are even clones which are massively better than the original MPC being a case in point. And there are original apps which are simply original like tor.
Firefox is obviously a derivative of the closed netscapt. It is open source and it's closest competitor is obviously IE. I use both and find memory use pretty dreadful in both once many tabs are open. But Firefox has more functionality so for me it's the better browser. It definitely isn't a copy of Opera and Opea is a rather different apps as it included mail client and bittorrent as well.
media players. Again the point isn't that they already existed. The point is whether the free software players are eith a wek or incomplete copy of an existsin commercial tool. MPC is a clone in looks only of the old WMP 6 It has proven to be massively superior for many years to any of MS's lter versions. So it's not weak or incomplete copy. VLC has almost nothing in common with any other media player. It's unique in so many ways. To compare it with winamp is just crazy, it has vastly different functiionality. You can use it a s streaming server, as a player, as a transcoder and so on.
I think you have to learn to use some of these applications because your criticisms demonstrate your lack of knowledge and your general arguments illustrate that you can't even understand a simple assertion and its rebuttal.
You're another dumb bstard
A piece which was not originated (or initially invented) in prop-world?
Pretty-please?
comon someone show me that bittorrent was knocked off from something proprietary lol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent_Open_So...
Bittorent, as it's stands today, IS propriety.
konqueror is a mess of a file explorer - a Windows Explorer look alike, work alike, with extra special shitty interface.
vi - existed since 1976, Long before FOSS.
emacs - yet again, created in 1976, by RMS himself. I thought that innovation means progress and evolution, rather than grasping to an ancient design and refusing to take advantage of newer technologies when they present themselves.
long-list-of-window-managers - cloning CDE again and again with no visible improvement is not innovation, it's something else that end with -ation.
tells me this:
The BitTorrent Open Source Licence, is derived from the Jabber Open Source Licence, which is an Open Source
Initiative (OSI) approved license. Former versions of the BitTorrent client (before 6.0) and related pieces of software are licensed under this License which is available here: http://www.bittorrent.com/bittorrent-open-sourc...
But somehow you read this to say the exact opposite. Originally bittorrent client and protocol were open source. I belive bittorrent client from version 6 became proprietary, but the fact remains the protocol and client were created as free software.
Konqueror in no way resembles or functions like Windows Explorer beyond the fact that a file manager inevitably supports icon views/tree views etc and is likely to have a title bar, status bar and a menu bar. It's so massively different I have to believe you perhaps have never even used it or maybe never even seen it being used. Show me agin how WE has different profiles, split views, can manage ssh sessions, integrates a web browser, has integrated pdf viewing, can rip an Audio CD with a simple copy command.
I'm familiar with both Konqueror and Windows Explorer. Aside from the superficial and mandatory stuff like having window borders, icons and a title bar they are utterly unalike in concept and execution. I'm pretty sure you're experience of Konqueror amounts to seeing a screenshot circa 2002 lol
Now arguing that beyond icon views and tree views there is notrhing similar is a hollow argument, in that this means it is simply little more than a re-implimentation of the same desktop metaphor. There are several such FM concepts,
- the orthodox file manager (DOpus, Norton Commander, Krusader, FAR, MC, etc)
- The file-list file manager (flist on OpenVMS)
- Navigational File Managers (Windows Explorer, OS X Finder, XTree)
- Spatial file manager (Finder on Mac OS Classic, RISC OS Filer, Amiga Workbench, Nautilus post v2.6, etc)
Then there are the hybrid modes, which were at the time innovative, Windows Explorer in win95, for example worked in spatial mode by default, but also worked as a navigational file manager. Same goes for OS X's implimentation of Finder.
So yes, the way a filemanager displays files is precisely what defines it as being original or not.
Onwards.
Now there's the typical "let's compare it to MS's offering, because "original" only means stuff MS's offerings don't do, ignoring the decades of computing before Windows). But hell, I'll bite.
"Show me agin how WE has different profiles"
Different users use different profiles.
"split views"
tree on left pane, spatial on right constitutes a split view, though lets be honest here, the dual-pane view is a decades old FM concept, it's not unique to Konq, nor is it new.
"can manage ssh sessions"
I believe mc did this, but I'm not sure, also I'm told DOpus did this.
"integrates a web browser"
You realise that's what got Microsoft in trouble with Antitrust in the first place, right? The whole browser in integrated into file manager, which is (not only integrated into) the desktop shell itself, which is integrated into the core of the system. (and that's how they rendered Netscape insignificant). Fail.
"has integrated pdf viewing"
The browser component of WE (might have heard of it, it's called IE) opens PDFs through a plugin. Fail.
"can rip an Audio CD with a simple copy command"
Yeah, um, WE has had this for years, sorry (open blank CD's directory, copy files to it, it's done). Try again.
I like Konqueror a lot as a file manager, it's powerful as an FM (shitty browser mind you, but I thank the KDE team for KHTML, which produced WebKit). But I don't claim that it's anything unique or originasl.
Split views: yes, it's nothing new but still it's useful if your file manager can do it. I was just pointing out that WE can't. Having a tree to one side is not split view ;-)
pdfs: well maybe you got me there but my WE has never opened a pdf for viewing within the file manager, it always calls the default pdf viewer. If you can tell me how to have the pdf viewed within WE and without launching another window I'd be pleased to know.
CD ripping. I have to admit yet again you got me on that one. I've never discovered Windows Explorer hidden cd ripping ability. Where can I set the default encoder and encoding settings? I also can't find how to set any defaults for naming, tagging or creating a playlist. Again, this sounds like a fantastic feature and I would love to know how it's all done within Windows Explorer. I'm sure this can't be done in 98/2000 or XP without a 3rd party ripper/encoder which adds an entry to the explorer contect menu. Or maybe it's a new feature in Vista?
IMO bittorrent came later. And it has exactly the same capability - execept the "search" feature is missing.
konqueror - and ugly explorer rip off.
vi / emacs - I hate them both and I'm definetly not allown.
fluxbox, blackbox, ... - What is original? Some ugly windows on a screen?
Later 2-level P2P file sharing systems use a similar design to eDonkey2000 (downloading files in pieces by hash from multiple peers simultaneously) but innovate in the design of the server network, such as in the case of BitTorrent, which separates the file search feature ("torrent search") from the download peer locating feature ("torrent tracker").
konqueror is nothing like either Windows explorer or Internet Explorer. Konqueror is both a web browser and perhaps the most fully featured file manager avilable on any platform. Again you're simply publicly exposing the fact that you haven't a clue about what the application is, it seems you also don't even realise that Windows Explorer and Internet Explorer both exist and are different applications.
vi/vim/emacs. Again you seem to think that your personal taste has some bearing. If your argument is merely that you don't like something, well OK you don't like it. So what? I don't like baked beans but I don't feel the need to start a campaign against them.
fluxbox/blackbox: you've clearly no understanding of what a window manager does. I doubt you're even aware that in Windows you use one.
You seem to have no knowledge or experience of the free software you criticise and amazingly also no knowledge of the proprietary software you prefer. You're a cretin.
You seem to throw around names and concepts without doing a minimal research, with a lame hope that you'll find a magic word that nobody else knows.
I'll help you, since it's getting ridiculous.
I know nothing about web servers, databases, system administration, web development, accounting software (other than R being a copy of SPSS), super computers, spreadsheets, and Australian Aborigine Mythology. Fill free to to claim whatever you want on those subjects, and I won't bother to dispute you, since those are topics I simply don't care about (with the exception being Australian Aborigine Mythology).
Happy Googling!
Fill <-- Feel
won't bother to dispute you <-- Wont Bother disputing.
Sorry for the spelling mistakes.
My GF is Australian Aboriginal/Fijian. She can surely help out if you start posting similarly ill informed stuff about her culture (she puts me right often enough).
So they went about copying every single bit of Unix, thing is they couldn't get a kernel. Along came Linus and voila they have a viable working Unix rip off. So the very heart of the FOSS movement is based off of stealing other peoples ideas, making functional( not better, just operational) copies of them and saying it's the best thing since sliced bread.
What an amazing coincidence.
And what about the tracker? The eDonkey-Server - is - the tracker.
There is no need for one central eDonkey Server.
>> fluxbox/blackbox: you've clearly no understanding of what a window manager does. I doubt you're even aware that in Windows you use one.
Bullshit! I think I have a very detail understanding what a "window manager" does. It's a technical detail to seperate the window management functions in a seperate process. There is nothing inovative about a window manager. Amiga, Atari ST, GEOS on the C64, Apple, ... all have "window managers". Whats you point about moving windows on the screen? I just don't get it. The ironic is: The concept of window management as it is done with X11 and "window managers" is the most slugish one: Resize a window in Gnome, KDE or whatever. It's slow its slugish its shit.
Compare this to XP.
>> You seem to have no knowledge or experience of the free software you criticise and amazingly also no knowledge of the proprietary software you prefer. You're a cretin.
HAHA! I have worked on many "open source projects". I was probably one of the first 1000 Linux lusers in 1992 - Well it was necessary to hack the kernel to get my IO-Cards working. I have written two commercial succesful games. I have worked together with Microsoft consulting to get the first IIS-Servers running for hosting providers (OK - This was one of my most painful experiences...). I'm programming since 24 Years...
So, don't tell me I have no clue. - Use your vim, emacs and fuckbox and get an orgasm.
This wasn't always the case. Microsoft was forced to decouple the FM and browser. (but check what happens when you type a url into WE when IE7 isn't installed, or try local paths in IE6 without ie7 installed)
"vi/vim/emacs." I agree personal prefs are a moot point. However point remains that Vim is a reworking of Vi (which predates FOSS, sorry). and Emacs is both archaic in concept and in general.
"fluxbox/blackbox: you've clearly no understanding of what a window manager does. I doubt you're even aware that in Windows you use one."
You're obviously not aware that you in fact, have an almost disgusting array of choices in terms of WMs in Windows. Personally, I like LiteStep, but there are also geoshell, SharpE, Aston, blackbox (yes, that one) and it's spinoffs: Xoblite, BBlean, etc, BeOSwin (9x only), Emerge, EVWM, and so many others.
"You seem to have no knowledge or experience of the free software you criticise and amazingly also no knowledge of the proprietary software you prefer. You're a cretin."
You seem to have no knowledge of the proprietary software (or the free alternatives availible!) you criticize. Pot. Kettle. Black. Fail.
Software is built by incremental improvement. There are plenty of innovative features, including ones in FOSS applications, but it is pointless to argue based on these as the LinuxHater crowd will denounce the application as a whole.
FOSS is also in a bad place, in terms of innovation, because it has yet to catch up with proprietary software's functionality. The users want software to replace what they're already doing on their Windows desktops, yet they also want innovation at the same time. Basically FOSS developers are fucked no matter what they do, the commenters on this blog understand the problem and use it to their advantage.
They're just trolling, ignore it. Otherwise you'll be drawn into an argument that's cannot possibly win.
Otherwise you'll be drawn into an argument that's impossible to win.
"Imitate, than innovate" is usually the way software production is done.
The problem with FOSS products, is that they're still catching up with exiting commercial products.
Since that feature and usability gap is still huge in most parts, FOSS is stuck in a race it cannot win - a red-queen race.
The innovation belongs to the entity that first climbs the next lever in the evolutionary ladder.
Two examples of innovation is FOSS are the CFS and Ad-block.
As for the rest of the software stack.. well, Eventually(tm).
Congratulation, .troll, you win an internet.
:)
*happy dance, someone actually produced a worthwhile counter argument*
I don't care too much if I win or lose the argument, to some extent it's sport.
Anyway my 2 line response has got overweight, time to go.
It's the classic yet stupid LinuxIsAKernel(tm) argument.
("Linux crashed!" "No, X crashed, Linux is the kernel" "Window drawing in Linux is slow!" "no, Linux is a kernel, it does not draw windows, gtk does").
And yes, it's a sport. No internets for you, yet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy
Just what, the fuck, are you talking about LIS?
so I'm not coming at this from a position of blindness or ignorance.
I appreciate already that you're coming into this argument with technological knowledge, but was concerned that you weren't aware of the trap that was being laid.
As long as the argument is only debunking the idea that 'Every FOSS software product is either a weak copy, or an incomplete copy, of existing commercial product.' then I don't mind taking part. Off the top of my head: Synaptic Package Manager, the Disk Usage Analyser and Transmission BitTorrent Client aren't rip-offs, as far as I know. Correct me if I'm wrong of course.
No doubt LIS will completely miss the point here and post some more drivel on the subject of the Cathederal and The Bazaar.
The obvious distinction is that while FOSS includes OSS, OSS doesn't include (Stallman's) freedom component (as defined by the FSF and Stallman's definition of "freedom:"). A tidbit that is important to keep in mind is that the FSF does not consider old-style BSD to be compatible with FOSS. Stallman himself, also draws a distinction between OSS and FOSS.
This is important because it means you, in defending FOSS, cannot claim the work done as OSS as an achievement of FOSS, due to the distinction between the two (and because it becomes a red herring argument, think "the chewbacca defense). Also as has already been brought to light, one cannot,
claim work done (not only as OSS) but also under the Cathederal model, as an achievement of FOSS and the Bazaar model.
Furthermore, since the argument here is also being made against originality in FOSS, projects introduced as alternatives to pre-existing non-FOSS packages are, by definition, not original. Now, we proceed.
Apache was developed at NCSA, turned OSS, and introduced as an alternative to Netscape Communications Corporation web server (currently known as Sun Java System Web Server), So it's neither FOSS, nor original, and possibly the affiliation to NCSA may even make it a product of the Cathederal model. Try again.
Sendmail is a descendant of the original ARPANET delivermail program (e.g. not original!), Further, it was originally introduced to ship with Berkeley's BSD4.1, which predates FOSS, sorry, try again.
BIND, although original, was designed at Berkeley, for inclusion with BSD4.3 (predates FOSS). Furthermore, BSD development is, to this day, both OSS (not FOSS) and closer to the Cathederal model than the Bazaar, in that although the same userland applications that exist on a GNU system exist on a BSD system, the BSD applications are in fact, either rewritten from the ground up (or based on original Berkeley applications), in a top-down (cathederal) manner, for integration into a BSD system, this remains true for modern day BSDs (ass opposed to GNU systems which simply fetch code from upstream and package them into distributionbs (Bazaar)).
Ergo, BIND, although original, is neither FOSS, nor a product of the bazaar model. Try again, sorry.
Actually, this rings true for BIND also, it was developed by Berkely, for inclusion with BSD4.3. Now, while all three are surely open source, they aren't "free software" by Stallman's standards, and development in BSDland is actually closer to the Cathederal method than the Bazaar method.
The argument isn't against OSS in general, it's against Foss, and the bazaar model,
*F-spot is a picture viewer/ library. it's crap at organizing large collections of photos. Picasa is much, much better. That was one of the worst examples you could have made..
*Patch - I never knew it existed. I guess that AutoIt is much better for batch processing.
*MPC is a direct clone of WMP6.
*VLC is a shitty media player, with statically linked codec libraries. That's poor design, rather than innovation. WMP (which I strongly dislike) got media streaming, automatic client discovery, and more. VLC is not unique in any way.
* Firefox - poor argument. You argue that Opera is more functional, therefore Firefox is not an imitation. You should have mentioned the add-ons, which sounds like an argument, until we remember that IE had them first.
* vi/Vim/emacs - behemoth, stagnate editors. Try sourceInsight, TextMate, or Ultraedit.
You could have an argument by mentioning Python, which is really impressive piece of kit.
My counter argument would have been that its syntax is almost direct derivative of Matlab, while it's speed is about two orders of magnitude slower.
You should have mentioned boost, which is an open source, high performance standard library extension.
My counter argument would be that it is an extension to STL, which was developed by the now defunct SGi, a commercial entity, using the Cathedral.
I actually have to argue on your side, and than bring counter arguments.. teh lolz
f-spot may or may not be crap, that's entirely subjective. But it isn't a copy of anything else, it has unique layout and functionality. Seems you just don't like it.
MPC, yes it's a clone but your argument is that it must by definition of being free software be a aweak clone, when in fact it offers vastly superior functionality within a familiar/cloned interface.
Again your argument was "Every FOSS software product is either a weak copy, or an incomplete copy, of existing commercial product"
This is simply and easily shown untrue, and now you're arguing something else entirely.
vi/vim: not a clone, not weak, also extremely powerful and widely used. But you personally don't like it. Sorry but your personal preference is not the core of the dispute as you wrote it, though it may be the only basis for much of what you write. You wrote, again! as you seem to have trouble remembering
"Every FOSS software product is either a weak copy, or an incomplete copy, of existing commercial product"
When the truth is that some free applications do fit that description, many don't. Some of the clones have surpassed the originals, and there are unique original successful applications too. As you base an entire argument on that premise you fall down.
That's the same class of argument as "LinuxIsAKernel(tm)"
I better wording might have been - "concept" rather than "product" - I was trying to make a point about the lack of innovation in FOSSland, rather than a wide assertion about FOSS being a bunch of copy-cats (which they mostly are).
Thank you for your help in refining my argument.
Ok, lets do a point by point rebuttal, since it's oh so fun:
* Tag editing is a trivial concept, Both TagAndRename and EasyTag implement that concept. TagAndRename is not only remarkably better, but also existed before EasyTag. While they both share the same functionality, they don't do it quite as well. Hence - easytag is a weak copy of tagAndRename.
* F-spot is is a photo library/ viewer, another trivial, well known software class. Being useless crap is not a measure of innovation. Please compare the functionality and ease of use of f-spot and Picasa, than report back to which is better achieving it goals.
*vi existed since 1976, long before FOSS was even an idea. It's not only a clone, is a Nth generation clone.
* well, MPC is a direct clone, I think that "either" was pretty clear.
Thanks again for your help in refining the argument, much appreciated.
Whether f-spot or picasa is crap is hardly relevant, neither is a copy of anything else as far as I can tell. Asserting something is useless crap doesn't make it so, it only shows your personal opinion and adds nothing to prove/disprove the assertion. I like Picasa. My father runs Vista and I installed Picasa for him as it exactly fits his needs. On my own Windows install I prefer FastStone, a free proprietary application. In Debian where I actually do the bulk of my photo editing I prefer, on a moderately powerful PC, to use F-Spot & Gimp and on a less powerful machine to use Gthumb and Gimp.
My favourite out of those is F-Spot. Its tagging is better than the others, its handling of non-destructive editing is hugely superior, it's the best at integrating with external editors and raw converters, email clients, flickr(and similar) uploaders, file managers, archiving tools.
You keep saying stuff is crap or stuff is better but offer zero examples, merely your opinion.
Anyway it's clear that tthe assertion "Every FOSS software product is either a weak copy, or an incomplete copy, of existing commercial product" is not supportable.
I'm still waiting for someone to explain how bittorrent is a clone or poor software. Or please show us all what nmap was derived from or how it's weak?????
WorksForMe(tm)
WorksForMe(tm)
Bittorent is a propriety protocol, Wikipedia reference provided.
Server stuff. No idea, not interested in checking it, therefore, no comment.
"We are committed to maintaining the preeminent reference implementation of BitTorrent under an open source license."
btw nmap is not "server stuff", neither is it obscure. I run it from my desktop using a happy clicky gui. nmap is probably the most widely used and well known network exploration and security testing tool in the world, it runs on all major operating systems and can be used as a graphical app or terminal app. It's free open source software.
Being unable to defend your assertion seems to leave you to simply respond with the word syntactics, which means "The branch of semiotics that deals with the formal properties of signs and symbols. "
Are you sure you chose the right word? Perhaps you confused the word syntactics with another word and mean somethign else?
So here it is again as a direct question/challenge:
can you show me that nmap was developed as or was derived from a proprietary application?
can you show me that bittorrent was developed as a proprietary application or was derived from one?
I'm arguing against the Bazaar model of development, yet you keep referring to a single statement in the whole article; I've already thanked you for improving the statement. I thank you again.
Please note that you're making a strawman argument based on wording, rather then content, hence, Syntactics(tm).
I believe that I've clearly mentioned the exceptions to the rule: FOSS developed under the Cathedral model are sometimes usable. This does nothing do weaken my assertion that the Bazaar model is broken.
Single man project, such as 7zip, and apparently, bittorent, where clearly mentioned as exceptions. There is no project more centralized than a project created, led, and maintained by a single person.
On to bittorrent License:
"Open Source claims
Although the licence is derived from an OSI approved license, this licence has not been approved. Furthermore, the approved version of the Jabber licence is no longer used or recommended for use by its authors"
nmap: I don't know, I don't care, networks are of no interest to me. I'll leave this spot open for someone else.
Please note that you've abandoned all of your initial claims and example. Keep searching, I'm sure that somewhere, sometime, the internet held (or is holding), the magic word you seek. Bring it forth from the vast sea that is the internet, oh noble seeker, for your eyes burn with the passion of a true believer!
I'll go fix myself lunch. Nom nom.
Your claim was:
"Every FOSS software product is either a weak copy, or an incomplete copy, of existing commercial product."
This claim is clearly and demonstrably unfounded, and as you use it a basis for further arguments those are also unfounded.
Whatever the status of bittorrent protocol currently it was created and developed open source. The reference protocol and all versions of the client pre version 6 remain so.
I really enjoy reading Linuxhater's stuff, he's well informed and when he rants and crticises it's funny because it's accurate and true, also contemporary.
Unfortunately he's attracted a crowd of fanboys/fangirls who try to do the same but are woefully ill informed, have little or no experience of the stuff they seek to criticise and can't tell the difference between preference/assertion and presenting facts. Digging up redundant and practically speaking irrelevant discussions from 6 years ago is symptomatic of this.
Linuxhater's diatribes are brilliant because they come from a position of knowledge and experience. They are angry but not dishonest or disingenous. They address real issues that people deal with right now. That's why his blogs are great reading and yours are the same kind of 3rd class drivel as propounded by the only dumbest and narrowest of free software advocates.
Your method so far:
1. Find some syntactic error.
2. Claim victory.
3. Ignore Claims to contrary. Repeat Original claim.
4. Repeat steps #2, #3 until your fingers bleed.
5. Go home to fuck your conveniently Half-Fijian-Half-Aboriginal girlfriend.
Do you know what the word syntactic means? It seems not.
For your information:
A syntactic error is an error caused by an unexpected, missing, or misplaced symbol, token, or phrase.
So you see you didn't make a syntactic error and I haven't addressed any syntactic error. What you did was make a false and easily negated assertion:
You asserted "Every FOSS software product is either a weak copy, or an incomplete copy, of existing commercial product."
And I demonstrated that this isn't true. Please point out the syntactic error. Where is it?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics
As far as I know, syntactic errors means using the wrong words to imply meaning - mostly errors in content, rather than intent - while semantics error means what the actual content of the sentence is wrong.
If I made a grammatical/syntactic/ semantic mistake, I stand corrected.
Thanks again.
Because I think you two are so stupid, let me break it down into a single sentence:
The license does not influence the quality of the software.
That's it. Done. If the dev is nice, they'll open source it. If they want to make money (not unethical), they'll sell it. It's that fucking simple, and yet we still have contests on the internet to see who can be the biggest and most illogical dipshit.
Congratulations, you both one. Both of you are the biggest dipshits on the planet, does that make any of you feel any better?
Go code under the license you pick. If you code usable software and its worth it for me to use it, I'll pay/donate to you. Bitching about how other people are so stupid because their choice of license rules out any chance of their product being good or bad is retarded and a waste of your (and my) time. Stop being dipshits and get a fucking life!
Note to LinuxHater: While I'm not going to start a LinuxHaterHater blog, this column with is too incredibly small. Way to go.
While other theoretical incentives exists, they failed to manifest in the last 20 or so years.
good day
foss apps being copies of proprietary ones but that there are still a lot of copies missing!
and i mean real professional equivalents
(my vote: autocad)
(and don't tell me about wine, we're talking about free alternatives)
>> This claim is clearly and demonstrably unfounded, and as you use it a basis for further arguments those are also unfounded. <<
Well, I think you can find exceptions in nearly all patterns of social interactions. IMO LIS obervations are valid.
"The exception proves the rule."
I agree that there exists good open source sofwtare - not backuped by commercial interests.
But thats the exception.
As smaller and less complex an application is as bigger gets the chance to find good FOSS not backuped by comercial interests.
Usually peopel can only stay motivated and focused on a project for a limited time. If there is no central management - and money - projects start loosing its focus.
Money helps people to stay on focus.
So, what replaces money In the FOSS world?
Sadly my experience is:
It is replaces by reglion. The FOSS movement uses similar rewards, patterns and brain washing techniques like some religios groups.
But as time passes luckily most people wake up from there trance state and realize in which kind of distorted reality they were living the whole time.
It looks like the FOSS gurus can not keep the sheeps long enough in the trance state - working for free and nothing - to reach a desired goal.
The confusion that free software developers are all unpaid or that the commercial world and the free software world are different places is best set aside. Free software may or may not prevail on the desktop, I don't know. But in embedded devices, servers (especially web servers) and in places where a high degree of customisation is needed it's already prevalent. Everybody in the developed world is already using it, knowingly or not. Items with embedded audio devices, from something as simple as a child's toy upwards, more an more use Ogg Vorbis because it's freely available and the manufacturers can forget about patent issues or paying a per unit royalty for mp3. If you use a networked storage device nearly all of these now use samba (though there are a few which still use proprietary protocols). They do this because it saves licensing costs and ensures the widest compatibility with the different operating systems out there. You wouldn't even know unless you notice the gpl license drop out of the box along with all the other paperwork. If you run a ADSL router the chances are it's running embedded Linux and busybox. If you watch in flight entertainment it's probably running on Linux. Free software actually is endemic, perhaps to the point where the debates about desktop suitability are in fact a side issue. Personally I prefer Debian to XP but I have both. XP does some things exceptionally well but overall I still prefer Debian+Gnome or Xfce. I have the chance to run applications on both systems and while there are a few areas where windows and Mac wipe the floor with distros (principally DV editing, graphics for publication, gaming, desktop search, just off the top of my head) I find that the majority of the free software applications I use are at least as good as or better than the ones available to me for XP.
Some of the control dialogues in XP are 1st class, such as configuring networking, firewall or setting up dual/extended monitors and these are areas where free desktops are clearly lacking but overall I find Gnome or Xfce much more versatile and easy to configure and use. I appreciate that this is personal opinion and preference and others may differ. I don't seek to present my opinions as facts, nor do I think there is one true holy way of doing things that everyone should conform to.
I'd also like to point out that there's plenty of stuff in Windows that's assumed unquestioningly to work well and in GNU/Linux not to. It isn't always as simple as it seems. My older laptop, a Pentium-M centrino in Windows occasionally fails to resume from suspend but always resumes fine from hibernate. The same laptop running Debian always resumes fine from suspend but occasionally needs some persuasion to resume from hibernate. In XP on resume from hibernate or suspend the wirelss doesn't resume. In Debian it always does. ACPI is extremely well implemented on this hardware and Gnome power manager actually gives me more control than the equivalent Windows power management. But i also have another laptop, a Core Duo centrino that simply won't support automatic screen dimming unless on XP or Vista. It won't even run Win 2000 at all, lack of drivers. So sometimes holding up the well tested fully supported proprietary OS as the gold standard of functionality is a mistake. Anyway I use both Debian and XP, both have their frustrations and ommissions as well as good points but for me Debian is the one I'd keep if I had to choose unless I needed to prepare graphics for publication or use Autocad when I'd choose XP.
f-spot is a direct clone of Adobe Photoshop Album.
Here is a link to the free version
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshopalbum/st...
The difference is: Photoshop Album really work. It doesn't crash like f-spot does, the features that are - really work - compared to the half-assed knock-off that is f-spot.
F-Spot in previous versions was not so stable. It's a long time since I had any problems with it. I'm using 0.4.4, I think the stability issues were fixed several versions ago. Here are some of the extra features (beyond the usual crop/colour correct stuff)so you can compare it with Adobe Photo Album and decide if it really is a clone:
Versioning (allows non-destructive editing by default)
Export to Flickr, 23, Picasa Web or SmugMug or to Gallery or O.r.i.g.n.a.l. powered websites.
ChangePath. If you need to move your photo collection you can resync the database with the new location
DevelopInUFraw: This extension adds an option to the popup menu, allowing the development of your RAW images using UFRaw and saving the result as a new version
MetaPixel integration for photomosaic generation
PictureTile integration for photowall generation
RawPlusJpeg : You can merge your existing RAW and Jpeg pictures as multiple versions of the same photo. This will soon be automatically done on import.
Zip export
Exiflow: * ExiflowEditComment lets you edit EXIF comment of selected photos. When used on images that already contain comments, a summary of all comments to be merged is presented to the user. This extension is meant to provide a replacement for Gthumb's mass commenting. It may also be useful for people not using Exiflow (http://exiflow.sourceforge.net/).
* ExiflowMerge is based on the RawPlusJpeg extension, but is able to detect and merge any count of Exiflow revisions regardless of their type.
* DevelopInUFrawExiflow is based on the DevelopInUfraw extension, but generates filenames conforming to the Exiflow revisioning scheme.
Bibble (Pro) : * SendToBibbleWorkQueue is an extension which sends all selected files in F-Spot to a work queue in Bibble Pro (Bibble Lite does not support work queues) named "F-Spot".
* ImportRawProcessed is a very simple extension. It just searches for other files with the same name but other file extensions in the directory of the selected file(s) in f-spot. It depends on your workflow and Bibble settings if this make sense to you. If you store your processed files in the same directory and with the same base name as your RAW files it could be useful for you even if you don't use Bibble.
And of course it integrates perfectly with Gimp, Phatch, your mail client, your cd/dvd burner, other photo editors like gthumb, your printer etc.
sorry the post is a bit messy, hope it's legible. Having used Photoshop Album and F-Spot I know for certain they have almost nothing in common except the generic features found in all photo collection tools.
Yes, the open source community has issues. It has issues with publicity, usability, and community interaction- all things that companies do well. If you've ever used Redhat, or Solaris extensively, then you know they do these things extremely well. Redhat and Solaris are not intended for desktops, but as hard-core always on servers. And they do it well, with documentation, classes, help lines, and techs galore.
Both the Cathedral and the Bazaar have pros and cons to how they work. Its just the way things are.
Can you have my fucking baby???! I am single!!
DEATH to FOSS!
* http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=124068
* http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=330676
* https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gtk+2.0/+b...
The gist of is that several core GNOME applications, especially Epiphany, have user unfriendly and surprising behavior when it comes to tabs. They disappear and are hard (two-click) to navigate. Other apps have good and non-surprising behavior (such as Firefox). It would be easy to fix, Gtk+ and GNOME supports the fixes. There's even plugins to fix them. But the armchair usability gurus of the browser noone uses are making a lot of unfounded, unsourced and handwaving statements that really mean: "we hate Firefox for no real reason so we can't do what they do even when it works". In other words, lots of statements that this version is actually better somehow that isn't closer specified, but trust me. Someone even resorted to saying that it was faster to close many tabs this way... as if that was the core functionality of many tabs. Others say that people who use more than 3 or 4 tabs are using the internet wrong. Dammit that I can't access the mailing list properly! There is comedy gold there - even more so as this position still apparently hasn't changed!
Oh, and these are the same guys that has utterly failed at making a good browser experience, constantly blamed Gecko for this, and now thinks that switching to Webkit will make everything alright.
I think they usually try to defend themselves with the HIG too in various issues, not noting that it's a) GUIDELINES which may be overriden if needed and b) might be horribly broken as they are not ever reviewed or changed.
I know there are usability issues in various desktops/applications and it's satsifying to have a rant but can people at least get their assertions somewhere in the realm of reality? This complaint about tabs appears quite well informed at first, what with mentions of various bugs, Gnome usability guidelines and so on, but actually it's grade A bullshit by someone too fuckwitted to even work a mousewheel or a keyboard. Ty Rex it may be news to you but there are more ways to use your computer than the left mouse button. Maybe this is an illustration of the results of 10 years of click click click next next next culture combined with the complete absence of even a grain of initiative or intelligence.
Out of curiosity I opened Internet Explorer 7 on XP and opened multiple tabs. It behave exactly like Firefox, that is it reduces tab size and then moves tabs out of view and requires 2 clicks to navigate to them. I can't find a mousewheel plug-in for IE7 though.
I believe they now have no excuses not to adopt the Firefox approach, since it has mitigated any usability problems that may have been used as an excuse.
1) Games.
2) Blu-ray player.
There. That's it. Linux fails at both. What kind of brain damage must you have to even contemplate installing Linux on a PS 3? I cannot even begin to speculate...
Bzzzt, challenge from Clement: deviation from the English language as we understand it.
There is no period in which Linux fails, it's all fail.
Note youtube also works on it using the same qemu trick and the closed source flash. Or updated open source flash that support youtube.
Most common uses of PS 3 with linux is a media centre. Does that job quite well. Also normal computer size screen will kill you. Critical Large plasma or Large LCD.
http://www.mesa3d.org/cell.html Predates even the basic 3d drivers for Cell so games are out.
Some reviewers are simply incompetent .
Also he should have installed yellow dog on a normal PPC machine would have seen something it sucks just as bad in appearance on a normal screen. Some distributions need to die.
Not sure how few people would be interested in doing that, and whether there are cheaper methods to get the same amount of processing power, but the PS3's cell processors are pretty sweet for tasks requiring high levels of concurrency.
Maybe this is the answer for people trying to write a Ruby on Rails app that needs to serve more than three simultaneous connections.
http://home.att.net/~Tom.Horsley/mini.html
"After many adventures (including kdebluetooth getting my system in a state where no input devices of any kind worked at all), I finally decided linux needs another few years of bluetooth experience. I could make the Mini work, but I constantly had to manually connect, which sort of put a crimp in the kicking back across the room experience."
That's the solution to everything in Linux, the infinite number of monkeys working away in the Bazaar with their (non-Bluetooth) keyboards adding one-line kernel patches for another couple of years till it finally works... until it breaks again.
If you be moneyful and immortal, you can has many funny years open sorez code looking reading. It is such happy joy time.
Yes. You can has linux juice from linux juice pipe. Linux is today, tomorrow. Have a pony!
Otherwise, it sucks.
it not a bug, it's NOT small and it's no conspiracy.
Oh, I almost forgot.... "common sense" riiiiight... I think I saw it somwhere around "0x0400: error resilience"
http://mpt.net.nz/archive/2005/04/11/ubuntu
1: "it doesn't function exactly the way Mac does". labeling a username as such is not a problem, and to use 'login' twice would be just as confusing nor is using the term reboot which is a standard term that is in common use. he also complains about some non-default settings that he doesn't know where they get changed and calls them bugs. along with the "I'm afraid of technical information as my computer starts and stops" I happen to like knowing if something failed to work, I did in dos, and as I have to trouble shoot start up problems, I like knowing it in windows and I like knowing it (though I've never had to troubleshoot start-up problems yet, thankfully) in linux
or
2: he doesn't know how to use the system at all. he complains that he can open a music file in a video player as is under the assumption that you have to used 2 different audio programs two play two different audio formats, which is not and never was correct
he would have these same kind of issues with windows for the same kind of reasons.
the remaining 10% were valid complaints and most (if not all) have been fixed since then.
Read it again pricktits. He was saying that it ignores known user interface laws (Fitts' Law et al.), and that Mac is much better in this respect. Probably because they hired some interaction designers and actually specced out their interfaces before they started coding.
2: he doesn't know how to use the system at all.
Uh yeah, that's the point. You FOSStards are always wanking over how great Linux is, but when someone tries to use it, finds a glaring usability fuck up and points it out, you all cry: RTFM!
Nobody reads the RTFM, if the shitty OS doesn't work or behaves in a way the user does not expect it is the fault of the OS not the user. Remember: a problem is never the fault of the user. Ever.
You then failed to read the part where he said that he has had many similar problems with windows and MacOS. He never said that this was just about how bad Ubuntu is, just some general observations... as a user... you know the people that a software designer (completely different from a script kiddy or random programmer) needs to know in order to improve. And the linux community in general is fairly flacid on this. "Submit a bug report" (in the circular file, you know the little round metal can by my desk), or better yet "submit a patch" (hmmmm, let's just make all of this stuff patches instead of stopping everything, cleaning it all up and making sure it works effectively and efficently.) How about the number of times that new users get a reams worth of technical jargon that sums up to worksForMe().
Most people don't need or want to see a verbose boot and shut down screen. Don't tell me this unless I ask for it, but make sure you write it to a log so that I can check it every now and then just to make sure.
Its free and its better than any Mac or Vista. The internet says so.
Check it: http://www.efytimes.com/efytimes/fcreative.asp?...
Evidently the hopes and dream of the entire Linux universe rest on a buggy bit of beta software called KDE4.1
I updated my Kubuntu KDE4 install to 4.1 and...well, you lot don't want to read another "Doesn't work for me" post, do you, so I'll just say that it didn't work for me, and stfu.
I expect it will work just dandy, someday...
Which distribution are you using where the "It works for me" program actually works?
Mine's busted, and I don't want to recompile it.
Secondly, WorksForMe(tm) is often used by FOSStards who're presented with undeniable evidence that something is wrong in the land of Linux. Often the FOSStard in question has not taken the time to understand the nature of the problem and merely defers to The Gospel According to Stallman:
And God did come to Stallman and said unto him: 'any argument may be won by the holy argument of WorksForMe(tm).'
Gotta' love the fact that this is a public release that is currently defective by design - they admit that it there are plenty of features that don't work yet, and who knows, we might not even keep some. I wonder if they took any general user input, or just what they devs wanted.
On a side note, I've never liked the up and down arrows for maximize and minimize. They make me think I'm waiting for an elevator.
The filthy FOSS pervert responsible for that image should be hung! You can't make it up!
In the past years, I've converted countless people to Ubuntu. Nearly all of them are the most basic computer users you could imagine. I converted them because Windows was too complicated for them.
This comment underscores why I come here to help spread the hatred.
Instead of showing his grandma how to use Windows this luser took the opportunity to install another copy of linux to help the revolution. Ugh.
Though he learned the lesson that it is often dumb to play the smart computer guy, and likewise smart to play the idiot, people who he has switched have encountered a virus for more sinister than any they ever found by googling "free porn please".
When you install Linux or a pirated version of Windows for someone you become tech support. If your cousin johnny keeps "somehow" getting adware (porno searching) , tell him to buy a mac-mini off ebay. Installing Linux on his computer will only drain time that you could spend downloading porn for yourself.
- A linux-hating, .net writing jerkface
I use linux on 2 out of 3 of my computers (zenwalk on home pc and puppy linux on my old portege) and I like it.
But fosstards arguing that it is fastest, most stable and most secure system on the planet are idiots. It had some advantages but also many many problems.
And for normal user - I always recommend XP or 2000 Sp4.
FOSS is DEAD
My God! It is the Dragon that heralds the end of the world!
Run away while the ground is whole, as the Dragon who will end all is yet at your doorstep! Run away, to the hills, to the desert, to the wide ocean, where the Dragon will find you not!
Long will be the light, hard will be the journey, but we Shall prevail! We shall fight! We shall win! We shall dance with joy when the Monster of the Red Mountain is slain! We shall drink mead and ale from the skulls of the false believers, and oil our righteous turrets with their blood!
For Victory! For Stallman!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPYGFNIv_Ak
http://www.netsplit.com/2008/08/04/lsb-4/
"25 • Parsix (by William on 2008-08-04 17:14:30 GMT from United States)
In my opinion, FOSS is theologically and politically neutral. That is the core of open source."
And Microsoft, meanwhile, drives fossies into fits of paranoia because it is closed and proprietary and costs money. *sigh*
'ditcher' out there - jwz ( http://jwz.livejournal.com/494040.html ).. The bad thing is that he ditched a few years ago (so the freetards will say it's all better now) but if even he can't cope with it who can?
/bin$ sudo ln -s ls lol
Well that doesn't FIX THE DAMN PROBLEM retard.
If you want to "FIX THE DAMN PROBLEM" (as you so maturely out it), talk to the people who made the installer. They're the ones to blame.
That should never have been put there in the first place.
Um, dipshit, the point is that the freetard *application* was fuck-all useless when providing a way to view a help file. It would likely show up the same way on any *nix install.
I pity your utter retardedness.
I started using Ubuntu Linux 8.04 yesterday, and I have to say it fucking rules!
Sorry guys, no more anti-Linux rants from me.
Go Linux!
Try harder Homer!
Go Linux!
PROPRIETARY Software is DEAD
STOP IT! STOPTIT !!
Will the real LIS step forward please :P
As Tom Barclay, senior product marketing manager for Adobe’s Platform Business Unit told Wired.com in a telephone interview [...] Adobe considers Linux a major platform and will continue to make all Flash releases simultaneous across platforms.
Looks like you were wrong about FOSS being dead LIS.
Don't waste another second not using flash on linux. Are you still not installing flash on your linux machine? Don't you realise the fun you could be having??? Linux flash installation is the best. You should try it.
Do it now!! Hurry the fuck up! Why aren't you doing it yet? Don't you want freedom? Install the freedom!! Feel the installation of freedom.
1) Find a disc with linux on it, and force it into your machine, even though its crying and telling you to stop.
2) Install flash for linux, completing the humiliation
3) ????
4) PROFIT!!!
Now you can has a linux machine with flash!! Truly this is awesome.
I've got flash on my windows machine, but after hearing that its available for linux, I can't help wondering what I'm missing out on by not running it on top of a Linux + GNU tools base. I'm worried that by not running it under the auspices of linux, that I'm missing out on feeling true, minty, moist freedom juice all over my face and pants, and that I'm not joining the community of the free thinking double free part of humanity that exists under the protection of free linux, and its loyal free defenders of freedom, freshness, good and orange juice.
You're right, FOSS isn't quite dead, just choking on its own drool.
GO TO HELL FREETARDS! I LOVE DRM!
And as for workarounds, surely not on "just works" windows because of a windows designed "for your benefit" feature? What is it y'all bitch about here again?
Welcome to the age of disposable digital music, whether you like it or not. And it's not the same as say buying movies again because VHS is outdated, or new Beatles when vinyl went to the wayside. This is media you spent good money for, as a good little consumer, that you suddenly can't use anymore for no really good reason. It's an issue of having to work around a problem that shouldn't be there in the first place.
And here comes the final nail in LHB's coffin.
Your blog was going downhill for a lot of posts before (seriously, you did 11 versions of posting other user's rants?). Now you've officially declared you've run out of material. Oh well, it was a fun few weeks with quite a lot of valid points. Now it's just nutjobs in the comments trying hard to become the next LH but mostly making fools of themselves.
[IRC Channel]
(I'm away, if anyone talks in the next 30 minutes, its my brother being a jerk)
Disregard that, I suck cocks.
;)
This blog sucks. You are boring.
Timbo and LIS are a waste of space and matter.
PS: I use Linux and I love it.
Good day.
I think its not too bad. Its on my computer, and it seems to be ok.
Microsoft is composed of a bunch of retarded chimpanzees.
Really? Oh dear. I don't want to deal with a company of retarded chimpanzees.
No offense to to retarded chimpanzees.
Thats nice of you.
Apple are a bunch of metrosexual crackheads.
Thats a fairly strong generalisation. Many of them are, but not all of them.
They can be a source of free stuff. If you befriend one of them, when Steve Jobs releases another iPhone in a few months there is a good chance they will dump their old one on you.
This blog sucks. You are boring.
I hope that this will change, and that you will start to feel excited and entertained soon.
Timbo and LIS are a waste of space and matter.
Given that space is infinite and matter plentiful, I'm sure they will find this so insulting, that you may very well provoke a response. Well done!
PS: I use Linux and I love it.
This "Linux" you speak of sounds interesting. Based on your recommendation I will replace my functional but unaffectionate Windows system with it. (why am I suddenly overcome by a wave of terror...)
Lets summarize your response:
Whine(tm)
Whine(tm)
AdHominem(tm)
AdHominem(tm).
WorksForMe(tm).
Good day to you as well.. :)
Perhaps this troll should be open-sourced; ask the community for improvements?
Bonus points will be awarded if the troll forks; if portions are written in Aramaic, Basque, Mandarin, Swahili, or Latin; or if it needs to be parsed, compiled, or otherwise processed for each new blog entry.
Points will be deducted for clarity and efficacy.
If you aren't going to bother quantifying your assertions, I could simply rebut with:
"I use yo momma and she loves it"
Or
"You wank your matter into retarded chimpanzees"
And we would be on the same level of intellectual discourse.
Tosser