Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Okay, I'll be the one to say it... (Score 1) 416

I'm not dismissing closed source, I simply said what I thought was true, but you're right and I agree. Programs which are niche perhaps are more capable of having closed source programs lead. I don't know though, I think it mostly comes down to companies needing to get used to working together. If you need a program to do something, you should find others who need it as well, and then pay for its development collaboratively, or if the way this happens is with someone making it first and then getting support from companies to make it better, whichever. Maybe niche open source software would actually do better than more mainstream software simply because there is less competition from other open source software. Ecosystems are pretty complex and hard to predict, that is my conclusion. ^^

Comment Re:Okay, I'll be the one to say it... (Score 1) 416

Sometimes it's fun to remember the horrible commercial programs that many used in the earlier days of computing before a lot of great open source programs came along and dominated most all of them. There may always be areas in which commercial outdoes open source, and open source outdoes commercial, though I tend to think that among the really complex programs open source will tend to dominate more as it may usually be just too much work to develop an entire closed source program that is complex when you can just throw in a little bit of code to an existing open source program to make it do what you want..

Comment Re:Except Chrome OS is shit. (Score 1) 296

"Needless to say, Apple offers nothing. As usual."

Their strategy for quite a long time has been hardware style and to some degree quality of course, but that's not such a good business angle during a recession, and certainly not when faced with the netbook competition. Closed OS, fairly closed hardware still, over-priced...something has to break eventually. I'm just wondering what will give first.

Comment Re:Except Chrome OS is shit. (Score 1) 296

It will be, and Chrome OS will have an advantage of being incredibly slim even over full-blown Linux desktops like Ubuntu. I would think Ubuntu would actually do better at first, if it weren't for Google's brand name recognition as well as Ubuntu machines needing a tad bit more power. Even if it's a small amount, being the cheapest is going to score you loads of buyers.

Comment Re:Except Chrome OS is shit. (Score 1) 296

"Basically, they all said it was shit. They didn't like how they couldn't play their existing games or use their existing apps, for instance."

"One of the teachers already has a MacBook from her school, and says it works perfectly fine at the Starbucks when she gets her morning coffee. Plus she can use all of her other apps."

Chrome OS doesn't have any apps for it, while OSX is loaded with apps that *everyone* wants, needs, and uses. Gotcha. Geezus, biased much? While I agree that it sucks being confined to a browser as a lot of apps I use are not, a lot of computer users now days use very web-centric programs. IM, email, and games being some of the more commonly used apps. Our opinions don't really matter, the only question is will web app use continue to rise? I think it will. The web as a "platform" runs on all the major OSes, and thus it continues to be a big lure for developers. As web apps become able to do more, which they are especially with OpenGL coming to the web, it will continue to increase. I think Google has it right and are wise to that, but I will continue using Chromium and Firefox on my full-featured Linux desktop.

Comment Re:So they can't talk about proprietary products?? (Score 1) 587

Bill Gates also went with what "worked". Proprietary software "works" sometimes as does open source, and a combination of the two. The debate is on what works "better", keeping in mind the question "better for whom?". I think BSD-style openness is better for everyone's freedom in theory, and proprietary software is better for corporations in theory, but when you enter reality with those theories you find that certain sides may get more development work than others, and it may and does shift. Proprietary software used to be the shiznet, and now the landscape is largely about open source, both to corporations and individuals.

So, I guess my point is that ultimately what "works" is a complex subject, and something that will continue to evolve over time.

Comment Re:Because? (Score 1) 587

Open source is all about putting consumers in control. It's unfortunate to see many consumers getting used to companies screwing them over in every way they can come up with. It seems that very few companies fight for consumers anymore, but instead strictly have their own interests in mind and in screwing over consumers, sometimes maliciously, like Microsoft does.

Capitalism would be a lot nicer if there was still some kind of morality and decency involved, but instead it seems the majority of the assholes have become the CEOs.

Comment Re:A view from Asia-Pacific (Score 1) 389

Sorry but JAlexoi's comment is no Linux fanboy statement and is mostly true. Most consumers still don't know about Linux nor even understand that if they buy the Windows computer they will be paying for Windows (they think that because it is "lost" in the price, and part of the "package", it somehow means it is free). If they do know about Linux, chances are it was from a Best Buy Microsoft trainee telling them that Windows is Better (tm), or something like that.

If you switched Microsoft's position with, say, Canonical's or Red Hat's, and suddenly Microsoft was the one without those "insider special deals and discounts" (monopolistic bribery) for getting their OS on the majority of retail computers bundled with them, and Linux was, you would see an almost perfect flip-flop in the sales figures, and most likely I would think more of a demand for Linux. In other words, the sales figures for Linux aren't because Linux sucks, it's mostly because of marketing and the existing monopoly, and I think a lot of consumers would prefer Linux, even the gamers because at that point you'd have most every game being release for Linux, or at least a lot more Linux games.

Comment Re:Oh for.... (Score 1) 322

"The only thing I wish would happen is that the market demand fair pricing, so we can see reasonable network service charges like I saw in Asia: unlimited Internet, whether mobile browsing or tethered access, should cost about $30/month and be available unbundled from contracts."

This is what I've been waiting for for a very long time, and why I've had no cell phone here for several years. I refuse to use their current laughable "Internet" services. Capitalism doesn't equate to technological progress here like is promised, but rather makes companies squeeze and slow down the advancement of each industry so that they can milk every last cent from old technology. There's no reason they can't offer these kinds of plans here.

On a similar note, I also can't wait for phones to behave just like computers so that you can easily install a Linux OS on them instead of waiting for a port for a specific model. Phones should be no different than a PC, with a unique CPU arch, screen, and other hardware, so that as long as you have the drivers and a desktop environment that works on small screens, you're good to go. AFAIK though distros like Android aren't trying to implement drivers for as much phone hardware as they can and you can't just go and download it and install it to USB or whatnot to use to install on your phone. I see no "download Android" links off the main site page, for example, so it looks like just the source is available. Please correct me if I'm wrong about any of this though.

Comment Re:Chrome OS? (Score 1) 176

I guess the problem is Google is concerned about the Internet, which means browsers, and couldn't care less about a specific OS. Focusing on programming for web standards means you're programming for all OSes. It's more of a side swipe than a direct attack against M$. Besides, a lot of the software for Linux competes against Google, like being able to run OpenOffice on Chrome OS instead of having to use Google Docs. Not that OOo would run on a netbook super well but you get the point. So while Google could push for OSS by siding with Linux, I think they'd rather get rid of both Linux and Windows as far as basing apps on either and focus on the web which has their interests at heart.

Don't get me wrong, having a quick-loading OS that just loads a browser WILL be useful for many and Good Enough, but of course being a Linux user I want to see normal Linux distros become ultra fast and make it onto desktops more as well. (and so should Mac and Windows users as it means more competition and lower prices for them)

Slashdot Top Deals

They laughed at Einstein. They laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. -- Carl Sagan

Working...