[News] Alan Cox Explains Why Free Software Beats Proprietary Development Model - Linux

This is a discussion on [News] Alan Cox Explains Why Free Software Beats Proprietary Development Model - Linux ; Alan Cox on open-source development vs. proprietary development ,----[ Quote ] | When you release a free software project, you do things in a different order. | Firstly, you get some code. Hopefully, it just about works. And you document ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: [News] Alan Cox Explains Why Free Software Beats Proprietary Development Model

  1. [News] Alan Cox Explains Why Free Software Beats Proprietary Development Model

    Alan Cox on open-source development vs. proprietary development

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | When you release a free software project, you do things in a different order.
    | Firstly, you get some code. Hopefully, it just about works. And you document
    | it as "Needs fixing, needs this, needs that."
    |
    | But most free software code, to get other people involved in the project, it
    | has to work. It doesn't matter if it's hard to compile. It doesn't matter if
    | it only works on one machine in five. And it doesn't matter if it eats the
    | data file every so often. So long as sometimes, the right results happen,
    | people will start to pick up the project and use it. They start to use it,
    | and then they have to fix it.
    `----

    http://blogs.cnet.com/8301-13505_1-9...bj=TheOpenRoad

    Another turn to open source...

    SiteScape Announces Availability of Its ICEcore(TM) Integrated Collaboration
    Environment as an Open Source Project and an Enterprise Software Suite

    http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/071024/0319586.html

  2. Re: [News] Alan Cox Claims Free Software Beats Proprietary Development Model, But Virtually All Free Software Is Inferior to Proprietary

    Thread title fixed.




  3. Re: [News] Alan Cox Claims Free Software Beats Proprietary Development Model, But Virtually All Free Software Is Inferior to Proprietary

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, DFS

    wrote
    on Thu, 25 Oct 2007 10:58:37 -0400
    <0a2Ui.7847$c9.6975@bignews8.bellsouth.net>:
    > Thread title fixed.
    >


    And people wonder why anyone even pays attention to you.

    Of course, these sort of vague, unsubstantiated statements
    are why we get suspicious.

    [1] What did Alan Cox claim?
    [2] Why did he claim it?
    [3] Did he give specific examples? If not, he's no better than
    some of the Wintrools on this newsgroup. To be sure, I
    suspect he had some ideas in mind -- and one of the more
    interesting tests for GNU software is throwing random
    data (/dev/random / /dev/urandom) at it, to see whether it
    blows up in interesting ways. Of course part of the reason
    that test works at all is because of a very stupid design
    decision (in retrospect) regarding Unix/C strings -- strings
    in VMS, for example, use an 8-byte descriptor, indicating
    length, type (it's a string, of course), and address.
    [4] What have you claimed?
    [5] Did you give specific examples?

    For instance, one might claim that the MS Office "ribbon"
    GUI is superior to the fairly boring, conventional GUI
    expressed in OpenOffice (one can jazz the latter up a bit
    by flipping on the "Tools > Gallery" setting, which allows
    for, among other things, parquet flooring, various weaves,
    coffee bean bullets, green-and-yellow striped rulers,
    and an orange slice, but it's not even close to the same
    functionality -- though it might be more useful).

    Another claim is that MS Office is more interoperable.
    This may very well be true, only because everyone
    uses Microsoft Word format to transport their
    documents, as MS Word format is more convenient than a
    multipart/alternate Email format including .xml, .xsl,
    and .css files, along with attached images; or one can
    have the recipient manually unpack such by sending .zip
    or .tgz payloads, but with MS Word, one merely needs to
    double-click -- which brings one to mind the latter part of
    http://www.randelshofer.ch/animation...d3.animVE.html
    -- requires Java, and I'm glad someone's immortalized this;
    it's still pretty funny. Note the imaginative if crude icons.

    A relatively new .odt form is now possible as well, for those
    with OpenOffice.

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    If your CPU can't stand the heat, get another fan.

    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


+ Reply to Thread