Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Open Source Maturity

  • Subject: Re: Open Source Maturity
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 10:38:52 +0100
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Organization: schestowitz.com / MCC / Manchester University
  • References: <dv4fcc$17lb$8@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk> <1143497391.214958.193020@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <i9cof3-qd9.ln1@nomad.mishnet> <WtrWf.16314$ES3.7126@trnddc02>
  • Reply-to: newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: KNode/0.7.2
__/ [ Mathew P. ] on Wednesday 29 March 2006 09:23 \__

> Hash: SHA1
> On 2006-03-28, JEDIDIAH spake thusly:
>> On 2006-03-27, Dirk Diggler <linux-sux@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>> http://insight.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,39020463,39257067,00.htm
>>>> ,----[ Open source comes of age ]
>>>> | A succession of high-profile patent cases do the open source movement
>>>> | no harm at all by pushing the issue of software ownership into the
>>>> | mainstream
>>>> `----
>>> Open source maturity? Is this some sort of stupid joke like Jumbo
>>> Shrimp, Military Inteligence or Married Life?

linux-sux@xxxxxxxxx already plonked! Kick the corpse yet again. *plonk*

>>> There are very few open source projects that are mature. The mature
>>> ones are crap that consumers don't want. Compilers, emacs editors and
>>> shit like that. Anything useful like office packages, music,
>>> multimedia, graphics, financial are all incomplete 3rd rate crapware.
>> My 3rd rate crapware handily trumps what Apple makes.

I happen to have hand-on experience with Macs and I can confirm that Apple
haven't anything but 'eye candy' to boast. In terms of effective work,
today's Linux beats Apple at every department. Cost factors aside.

>>> Emphasis on incomplete and crapware.
> I found this article thread especially interesting since I used
> to have similar assumptions about OS software and the OS
> philosophy in general. These assumptions about the "maturity" and
> uselessness of OS software were quickly dispelled when I began
> to put a little time into customizing Gnome to my particular needs,
> and exploring what software was available and which ones I liked and
> didn't like.

I am on the same boat. With KDE and software from Mozilla.

> I especially found the remarks about multimedia interesting because
> in my opinion, OS Mulimedia packages are some of the best I have come
> across. I especially like ogg-vorbis encoding, and pairing it with
> sound juicer is a pleasure. For instance, I have an eMac, and have
> bought some music via iTunes. Unfortunately, this music has a lame
> DRMS encoding system that is a pain in the butt, and unethical to
> those who have paid the download price. So I run it through
> sound juicer, convert it to ogg, and do anything I want with the
> music I paid for. For that matter, I could use sound juicer to
> convert the songs to MP3 format sans DRMS, and load them into any
> portable player I see fit. Of course I am ethical about it; I believe
> in fair use, something that cannot be said about most paid music
> sources. This is really what Open Source software is all about.
> The freedom from any other interests attempting to control my
> fair use of software. The fact that it is usually free of price,
> is secondary to the real power of OSS.

To be honest with you, what you describe above sounds (pun intended)
time-consuming. Consumption of time in entertainment accumulation is what I
always try to avoid, or what I attempt to optimise. At the moment, I use
wget to spider the Web and get myself plenty of music over HTTP. I probably
spend an everage of 5 minutes per 100 new songs that I get.

> On the subject of stuff that consumer really wants, I have found
> that many of the applications available in OSS are some of the
> best around. GnuCash, Dia Diagrams, Koffice and Openoffice are
> just a few examples.

I cannot say that I agree they are "the best around". Standards, openness and
security aside, Office is still better than Koffice and Openoffice, with
deserved respect.

> I *love* XMMS, and have never used any music media player
> that even comes close to it. I have a Yamaha DS-XG YMF 744 sound card
> and Kmix recognised it and supports all of it's features
> without any setup on my part. As for Compilers, Emacs, VI, and
> the host of languages and programming tools availble in Linux,
> the "average" user may or may not be interested in them. Frankly
> it's moot point. They will care about the applications created with
> these tools, and therefore, indirectly care very much about them.

I personally prefer AmaroK and Kate. Have a look at them when you get the
chance. I have used many editors and media players over the years (over 2
years of XMMS).

> Of course, as with any software, there are some duds. I have had some
> difficulty with some apps; I hate helix, and have never got Totem to
> do anything at all. The former is the result of comparison; Helix can't
> hold a candle to XMMS. The latter is probably my fault. I'm sure I am
> doing something totally goofy and not even realizing it.

Find the right media player and equip it with all the necessary codecs. Job
done. Be happy for life.

> At any rate, it sounds like some conclusions about OSS are being made
> without the benefit of unbiased, thorough, personal evaluation.

Conclusions are often made by so-called 'professionals' and journalists who
take Linux for a daily spin. They have been with Windows since 3.1, so
cannot assess things objectively.

> Then again, I could be wrong.

No, you are very right in my opinion.

> regards,
> Mathew

Best wishes,


Roy S. Schestowitz      | "Black holes are where God is divided by zero"
http://Schestowitz.com  |    SuSE Linux    ¦     PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
 10:25am  up 21 days  0:10,  10 users,  load average: 0.66, 0.71, 0.64
      http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index