http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/2006-03/sunflash.20060321.3.xml
So OpenSolaris is dead and useless. JTD and Vihan do not bother proving otherwise, because certain class of people will never listen. The Sun UltraSPARC T1 certainly is not. So check out the above link.
Regards, Debarshi
On Thursday 18 January 2007 19:47, Debarshi Ray wrote:
http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/2006-03/sunflash.20060321.3.x ml
So OpenSolaris is dead and useless. JTD and Vihan do not bother proving otherwise, because certain class of people will never listen. The Sun UltraSPARC T1 certainly is not. So check out the above link.
It was almost dead. But gpl anything and they rise from the ashes. there are more brains in the rest of the world than in the place u happen to be. KG is not completely wrong.
On 18-Jan-07, at 8:50 PM, jtd wrote:
It was almost dead. But gpl anything and they rise from the ashes. there are more brains in the rest of the world than in the place u happen to be. KG is not completely wrong.
it is a toss-up whether opensourcing will revive the corpse - it failed with netscape (if I remember right), succeeded wildly with blender. I think it all depends on which stage in the life of the product it is opensource. If it is a last-ditch effort to revive it when all else has failed ...
Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On 18-Jan-07, at 8:50 PM, jtd wrote:
It was almost dead. But gpl anything and they rise from the ashes. there are more brains in the rest of the world than in the place u happen to be. KG is not completely wrong.
it is a toss-up whether opensourcing will revive the corpse - it failed with netscape (if I remember right), succeeded wildly with blender. I think it all depends on which stage in the life of the product it is opensource. If it is a last-ditch effort to revive it when all else has failed ...
Netscape became the popular Firefox and Thunderbird. Java IMHO may have done its utility and thats why it may have become open in the face of competition from Perl, Python etc. The commercial value of a product's paid version may also determine its FOSS popularity. If QCad and Blender can completely replace AutoCad and 3DSMax, it will become a rage.
Regards,
Rony.
___________________________________________________________ All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
On Friday 19 January 2007 09:37, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On 18-Jan-07, at 8:50 PM, jtd wrote:
It was almost dead. But gpl anything and they rise from the ashes. there are more brains in the rest of the world than in the place u happen to be. KG is not completely wrong.
it is a toss-up whether opensourcing will revive the corpse - it failed with netscape (if I remember right), succeeded wildly with blender. I think it all depends on which stage in the life of the product it is opensource. If it is a last-ditch effort to revive it when all else has failed ...
Indeed. In this case they have some excellent hardware (imo overpriced) with the OS and hardware being finely tuned to each other. And advantages in some impportant departments. When it was closed these together meant very little to anybody. But opening might just change that. Also differences in linux and slolaris will drop as ideas migrate both ways. Solaris may morph itself into linux rather than die a writhing death like novell netware.
Indeed. In this case they have some excellent hardware (imo overpriced) with the OS and hardware being finely tuned to each other. And advantages in some important departments. When it was closed these together meant very little to anybody. But opening might just change that.
True. In fact Sun seems to be opening up a lot of things :-) Around early last year they agreed to ship Ubuntu server on some of their AMD 64 boxes, then wonder of wonders Java is free and no longer ``shackled". The best part is - its NOT as if the company is highly in debt and ready to file for bankruptcy and is doing this as a face saving measure. They are doing it of their own free will.
Also differences in linux and slolaris will drop as
ideas migrate both ways. Solaris may morph itself into linux rather than die a writhing death like novell netware.
True. i hope Apple is listening :-D
Regards,
- vihan
On Friday 19 January 2007 11:36, Vihan Pandey wrote:
When it was closed these together meant very little to anybody. But opening might just change that.
The best part is - its NOT as if the company is highly in debt and ready to file for bankruptcy and is doing this as a face saving measure. They are doing it of their own free will.
Or because the writing is on the wall. Cannabalise your own product line and kill it like M$ or free it and create a bigger market for yourself and allow others to occupy all the small important niches, any of which may grow to gigantic proprtions and which u are too blind to see.
True. i hope Apple is listening :-D
Or go one "better" like Novell and pull wool over your own eyes.
On Fri, 2007-01-19 at 11:36 +0530, Vihan Pandey wrote:
True. i hope Apple is listening :-D
Its only a matter of time that other companies will fall in line =P With the hype about "security", people will want to see the source code that runs their machines, that stores their sensitive information! =P
True. i hope Apple is listening :-D
Its only a matter of time that other companies will fall in line =P With the hype about "security", people will want to see the source code that runs their machines, that stores their sensitive information! =P
With Apple its the Aqua GUI interface(and a certain apps with come with the O.S that are closed) which comes to about 30%-40% of the system. The rest is, G N U + Python + Apache + TeX + etc etc etc....
The main complaint is with the way they support DRM to sell music on their iTunes music store and how they react when someone violates it(remember the entire sarovar.org episode). In fact they kind of set a trend(like always) of DRM in digital music and video.
However i have to make one statement here. i LOVE Apple. Surprised? i'm not ashamed to admit it. Its their creativity and artistic brilliance which is UNPARALLELED. The way they take care of every single thing that is needed for a good user experience is simply beautiful and VERY inspiring. It is also probably the only company that only stole an idea(GUI from Xerox PARC) JUST once in its life - and that's it since then they have ALWAYS been original. Its hard to find such a culture in today's world.
Regards,
- vihan
On Friday 19 January 2007 18:50, Vihan Pandey wrote:
However i have to make one statement here. i LOVE Apple. Surprised? i'm not ashamed to admit it. Its their creativity and artistic brilliance which is UNPARALLELED.
Their engineering skill is brillant too. Open any Mac and see. It's arranged like an orchestra. The pc otoh is like a garbage can.
However i have to make one statement here. i LOVE Apple. Surprised? i'm not ashamed to admit it. Its their creativity and artistic brilliance which is UNPARALLELED.
Their engineering skill is brillant too. Open any Mac and see. It's arranged like an orchestra. The pc otoh is like a garbage can.
Very True, in fact i remember check the inside of a Power Mac G5, guess what NO SCREWS :-) No screws AT ALL :-)
Regards,
- vihan
On 19/01/07 18:50 +0530, Vihan Pandey wrote: <snip>
With Apple its the Aqua GUI interface(and a certain apps with come with the O.S that are closed) which comes to about 30%-40% of the system. The rest is, G N U + Python + Apache + TeX + etc etc etc....
After all, it is the interface which defines the Mac experience.
The main complaint is with the way they support DRM to sell music on their iTunes music store and how they react when someone violates it(remember the entire sarovar.org episode). In fact they kind of set a trend(like always) of DRM in digital music and video.
But Apple has never been a big FOSS supporter. They have usually been more closed than Microsoft.
However i have to make one statement here. i LOVE Apple. Surprised? i'm not ashamed to admit it. Its their creativity and artistic brilliance which is UNPARALLELED. The way they take care of every single thing that is needed for a good user experience is simply beautiful and VERY inspiring. It is also probably the only company that only stole an idea(GUI from Xerox PARC) JUST once in its life - and that's it since then they have ALWAYS been original. Its hard to find such a culture in today's world.
Lets see, they attempted to sue Microsoft into not shipping a GUI (one of the earliest look and feel lawsuits).
Microsoft and Apple took two entirely different routes into the market. Apple is primarily a hardware vendor, and they attempt hardware lockin. Microsoft is a software vendor, and they attempted to run on as many systems as possible. They got lucky with the price of the x86 system.
The PC revolution was driven by Compaq, who beat IBM in the reverse-engineering lawsuit of 1984. The PC world adopted fairly open standards while Apple was closed. This kept the price of Macs high, while the prices of PCs kept falling, and performance increasing.
Today, by running on a locked down PC, Macs are essentially competing with midrange to top of the line PC hardware in laptops, but they still aren't all that competitive in desktops. Again, you can get cheaper laptops by avoiding brand names, and then Apple is suddenly not competitive. Hardware will just work, as long as it is Apple approved hardware, or USB (Intel invented USB and PCI, PCIX, Bluetooth, Sun opened the Sparc architecture and NFS amongst other things). Solaris runs on Sun hardware, Intel, and Fujitsu hardware.
Apples are nice toys, but they don't even come close to Sun. As for desktops, those are being turned into thin clients in corporate environments again, so about the only place where Apple is making any headway is in tech circles, where Unix geeks are moving to Macs because they need something to run MS Office and would rather not run the even more broken Microsoft Windows.
Devdas Bhagat
But Apple has never been a big FOSS supporter. They have usually been more closed than Microsoft.
i was referring to U.C Berkeley culture, which was one of Freedom and Rebellion two qualities which i really admire. Jobs and Wozniak came from that culture and so did many others in the initial Apple. Unfortunately now that same spirit is limited to aesthetics and great design(and not freedom). They do have their reasons for doing so, but nothing reallt justifies being closed.
Lets see, they attempted to sue Microsoft into not shipping a GUI (one
of the earliest look and feel lawsuits).
In fact it was one of the first law suits of its kind. It was motivated more due to Apple feeling betrayed for giving out their hard work to M$.
Microsoft and Apple took two entirely different routes into the market.
Apple is primarily a hardware vendor, and they attempt hardware lockin.
Can you give me an example of Apple doing hardware locking pre-1990 ? If you are referring to not giving out hardware details or only partially giving out hardware details that isn't exactly locking.
The PC revolution was driven by Compaq, who beat IBM in the
reverse-engineering lawsuit of 1984. The PC world adopted fairly open standards while Apple was closed. This kept the price of Macs high, while the prices of PCs kept falling, and performance increasing.
Agreed.
Today, by running on a locked down PC, Macs are essentially competing
with midrange to top of the line PC hardware in laptops, but they still aren't all that competitive in desktops. Again, you can get cheaper laptops by avoiding brand names, and then Apple is suddenly not competitive. Hardware will just work, as long as it is Apple approved hardware, or USB (Intel invented USB and PCI, PCIX, Bluetooth, Sun opened the Sparc architecture and NFS amongst other things). Solaris runs on Sun hardware, Intel, and Fujitsu hardware.
Agreed. Only Apple is more keen on making those who can afford a Mac do the switch. Anyway Mac's are a lot more cheaper in U.S/Europe and the kind of offers they have for students there are unbeatable.
Apples are nice toys, but they don't even come close to Sun. As for
desktops, those are being turned into thin clients in corporate environments again, so about the only place where Apple is making any headway is in tech circles, where Unix geeks are moving to Macs because they need something to run MS Office and would rather not run the even more broken Microsoft Windows.
They ARE giving the better alternative.
Anyway, if you so desire to know why i would still vouch for Apple - Its because of Steve Jobs. i haven't seen a better presenter and a more passionate and charismatic man EVER. In fact if you read his personal history from rags to riches to rags to riches its one of the MOST inspiring tales in human hostory.
If anyone's interested - just ask.
Regards,
- vihan
On 18-Jan-07, at 7:47 PM, Debarshi Ray wrote:
proving otherwise, because certain class of people will never listen.
this is uncalled for - please refrain from personalities
Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On 18-Jan-07, at 7:47 PM, Debarshi Ray wrote:
proving otherwise, because certain class of people will never listen.
this is uncalled for - please refrain from personalities
A lot of things on this list is uncalled for, kis kis ka mooh bandh karoge tum?? 3 cheers for abusing democracy..
- dhawal
So OpenSolaris is dead and useless. JTD and Vihan do not bother proving otherwise, because certain class of people will never listen.
i'm sure KG has a good reason for thinking so :-)
Anyway opinions may differ but mutual respect and discussion do exist. Moreover the differences add to a more diverse community thus furthering one's understanding.
'Tis the FOSS way :-)
Regards,
- vihan
I want to unsubscribe. Can someone take me out of this mailing list?
-----Original Message----- From: linuxers-bounces@mm.glug-bom.org [mailto:linuxers-bounces@mm.glug-bom.org] On Behalf Of Vihan Pandey Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 11:20 AM To: GNU/Linux Users Group, Mumbai, India Subject: Re: [ILUG-BOM] Sun Ultra SPARC T1
So OpenSolaris is dead and useless. JTD and Vihan do not bother proving otherwise, because certain class of people will never listen.
i'm sure KG has a good reason for thinking so :-)
Anyway opinions may differ but mutual respect and discussion do exist. Moreover the differences add to a more diverse community thus furthering one's understanding.
'Tis the FOSS way :-)
Regards,
- vihan
On 19-Jan-07, at 11:19 AM, Vihan Pandey wrote:
Anyway opinions may differ but mutual respect and discussion do exist. Moreover the differences add to a more diverse community thus furthering one's understanding.
'Tis the FOSS way :-)
my thesis is this: just because source is released under some license, that does not make a project a foss project. Or rather a true foss project. The criterion for a true foss project is *not* the license chosen or the fact that the source is available, *but* the development model followed. The closer it is to the bazaar model of development, the better chance it has of surviving. We tend to lose sight of this very often. And why is this important?
If you look at wikipedia, around 850 people have contributed 50% of the english content. The rest is contributed by tens of thousands of people. And a lot of this contribution is one-off contribution. And it is these one-offs or minor contributions that make up half of wikipedia. A developmental environment that efficiently harvests these 'minor' contributions is a healthy 'fossy' environment. Which is why I dont like the environment provided by mono or mysql where a patch will not be accepted unless copyright is assigned.
Yes, in most projects, the core team with commit rights, the main contributors are few. Sometimes just one person. But the community around the project is important. Does sun have the culture to build such a community? Will some outsider be allowed into the inner circle to decide directions. Are decsions made by a meritocracy - or by the company heirarchy. These are the important things.
my thesis is this: just because source is released under some license, that does not make a project a foss project. Or rather a true foss project. The criterion for a true foss project is *not* the license chosen or the fact that the source is available, *but* the development model followed. The closer it is to the bazaar model of development, the better chance it has of surviving. We tend to lose sight of this very often. And why is this important?
If you look at wikipedia, around 850 people have contributed 50% of the english content. The rest is contributed by tens of thousands of people. And a lot of this contribution is one-off contribution. And it is these one-offs or minor contributions that make up half of wikipedia. A developmental environment that efficiently harvests these 'minor' contributions is a healthy 'fossy' environment. Which is why I dont like the environment provided by mono or mysql where a patch will not be accepted unless copyright is assigned.
Yes, in most projects, the core team with commit rights, the main contributors are few. Sometimes just one person. But the community around the project is important. Does sun have the culture to build such a community? Will some outsider be allowed into the inner circle to decide directions. Are decsions made by a meritocracy - or by the company heirarchy. These are the important things.
Agreed.
However i'd like to add that yes its a step in the right direction, and i hope they take more of the same. The ``elitism" of not accepting commits without surrendering copyrite never benefits anyone and is a self defeating policy i hope Sun does not(never does) implement it.
Regards,
- vihan
On Friday 19 January 2007 13:09, Vihan Pandey wrote:
my thesis is this: just because source is released under some license, that does not make a project a foss project. Or rather a true foss project. The criterion for a true foss project is *not* the license chosen or the fact that the source is available, *but* the development model followed.
Without the source, an open development model is nearly impossible. And without the gpl's protection u are uneccessarily exposing your code to crooked behaviour, atleast in the short and middle term. Java was a very limited exception (providing u made the observation at the precise time), now overtaken by other foss projects.
The closer it is to the bazaar model of development, the better chance it has of surviving. We tend to lose sight of this very often. And why is this important?
Agreed. But they have learnt that gpl is better than a closed licence. They will learn - hopefully before eol , and that is visible on the horizon - that thay also have to open the process.
And it is these one-offs or minor contributions that make up half of wikipedia. A developmental environment that efficiently harvests these 'minor' contributions is a healthy 'fossy' environment. Which is why I dont like the environment provided by mono or mysql where a patch will not be accepted unless copyright is assigned.
agree completely.
-
Debarshi Ray -
Devdas Bhagat -
Dhawal Doshy -
Dinesh Joshi -
jtd -
Kenneth Gonsalves -
Nikhil Parva -
Rony -
Vihan Pandey