Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Business

Linuxworld Fun 392

Posted by michael from the give-Cmdrtaco-a-wedgie-for-extra-karma dept.
The Linuxworld Expo is now in full swing, and there's a variety of news. The BBC has an overview. Microsoft has a booth at the Expo in the section intended for "new, up-and-coming companies". Sun is rolling out servers running Linux. And VA Software - Slashdot's owner - is moving Sourceforge.net to IBM's database software.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linuxworld Fun More

Linuxworld Fun

Comments Filter:

  • I'm just waiting... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by arkham6 ( 24514 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:02AM (#4061966)
    I'm just waiting for someone to start defacing the Microsoft booth. This will make us look REALLLY good to the corporate world.
    • It's largely unnecessary. The entire show will be shut down soon due to a sudden plague of distinctly un-American cancer.

      Or so the 'softies will claim.

      Kudos to everybody who has ever contributed to the spread of Open Source and the GPL. You've got Microsoft to the point that they pull stunts like this - keep it up!
    • I've got news for you, the corporate world is a complete and utter sham. There is no semblance of reality or professionalism what so ever any more. I work there, I see it everyday. Who cares about the corporate world, it is fraut with corruption, and it really is up to the little guy to make this whole thing work. The officers of companies that everyone looks to are really just figure heads who lie, cheat, and steal from us, the real muscle is in the little guy that needs to get his job done well and cheaply. If your company has a mandate that it will only allow M$ software, install FreeBSD (or Linux) anyways, then when everyone is down because of ILoveYou, Nimda, or Code Red, and you are still working away tell them why. Be smarter than the rest and you will be heard eventually. Screw the managers, the execs, and especially sales and marketing, be better and you will win. I really don't give a flying pigs shaved shiny ass what the corporate world thinks about Open source software, it works, period, and if they don't realize that because they are too busy stuffing their golden parachutes they will eventually fail, and you will win. Fight the good fight on whatever front there is. Playing the M$ game is just like the Brits lining up to be shot in the revolutionary war. It's a new battle field, kill or be killed. Just my $0.02.

  • Wow, go LNUX! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Otter ( 3800 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:03AM (#4061976) Journal
    And VA Software - Slashdot's owner - is moving Sourceforge.net to IBM's database software.

    Damn, I never thought I'd see this graph [yahoo.com] go upwards again!

    • Ditto that. It looks like LNUX will escape NASDAQ delistment. As of this post they are $1.20/sh, after having traded below a dollar since July 2. IIRC, 90 days below a dollar and the 'DAQ will delist you unless there are exceptional circumstances.

  • I can just see it now... (Score:5, Funny)

    by yeoua ( 86835 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:05AM (#4061994)
    At some point... every single linux geek in the entire place is going to collectively turn to and point at the Microsoft booth, and then in unison, laugh their asses off, when one of the machines bsod's.
    • Unfortunately, that probably won't happen. Outfitted with a video card and mobo with QUALITY drivers, Windows XP, which is no doubt what they'll be pimping with, is pretty damn stable. It's got plenty of OTHER issues, but stability isn't really one of them.

      I think what we can all laugh about is their absurd new licensing program, or their ridiculous notion that they could acheive the critical mass necessary to put Palladium into effect, or that stupid "Tablet PC" crap.

      Incidently, who the fuck wants a tablet PC? Seems like a neutered laptop to me, but for 85% of the price. No thanks. At $200, they'd be a great toy, nothing more.

  • from the guys at Microsoft... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by garcia ( 6573 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:06AM (#4062009)
    "Just please don't ignore us."

    For how many years did they pretend like they ignored us while plotting certain death?

    Until that booth has "MS Office TUX" I have no desire to see them at the Expo.

  • Yes, but why does Microsoft need a stand... (Score:5, Funny)

    by altgrr ( 593057 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:06AM (#4062010)
    when all the people at the show know about Microsoft software, and that's why they're running Linux?
    • but they don't know about MS. Didn't you read, it says:

      "Microsoft has a booth at the Expo in the section intended for "new, up-and-coming companies"."

      I am thrilled to finally have something else out there other than Linux. I mean have you ever heard of a Microsoft Windows expo? I didn't think so. Linux is has ruled the planet earth for long enough!

    • OK, if people don't read the article most of the time, they're just modded down, but if it's about Microsoft, nooooo, +4 Funny.

      Microsoft representatives at LinuxWorld plan to talk about the company's ASP.Net Web Matrix Project, a collection of free tools and programming code that allows developers to build Web-based applications.

      They will also highlight Microsoft's "Services for Unix," program, a set of tools intended to help businesses integrate their Unix and Windows networks.

      "This isn't about trying to get people to move from Unix to Microsoft products, it's about offering ways for both systems to peacefully coexist," Houston stressed.

      Now I'm not Microsoft's greatest fan, but fair play to them for trying to gain acceptance. I don't think they will, but that's beside the point :).

      • Re:Yes, but why does Microsoft need a stand... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by rhadc ( 14182 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @12:13PM (#4062625) Journal
        I don't mean to burst your bubble, but Microsoft knows everything it needs to know to "offer ways for both systems to peacefully coexist."

        On the technology front, the source for anything linux is there. But why would they need that? They have been involved with writing UNIX programs for quite a while. Its code is in SCO unixware. Hell, they wrote Xenix, their own UNIX operating system!

        Peacefully coexist!? They could start by NOT building anti-GPL verbage into their license agreements.

        Look, the bottom line is that Microsoft wants to destroy this open source community.

        rhadc
      • "Microsoft representatives at LinuxWorld plan to talk about the company's ASP.Net Web Matrix Project, a collection of free tools and programming code that allows developers to build Web-based applications"

        well herein lies the problem. the *free* tools that they are giving away is just like the crack dealer offering you "free" samples just long enough to get you hooked.

        its an open ploy - regardless of the technology there is one goal here - furture profits.

        no - that is not necessarily a bad thing. businesses need to make a profit. period. however what we dont like is the methods and tactics for gaining said profits. Microsoft has a history of bad business practices and monoplistic behaviour.

        so - even though they are giving away these free tools - be sure that the tools have some sort of caveat upon them that likely states that they get a stake in what you develope with the tools - and if it doesnt - it just means that you will be perpetuating the MS engine far into the future by making apps that you develop with their technology.

        that peaceful coexistence will last just long enough for them to stangle the last bit of cash out of every customer it can.

        dont be fooled by their PR engine... its plain as day.
        • I think an even bigger problem to add to this is the draconian licensing agreements you must abide by to have access to this "free" MS software. IIRC, when MS began to open the code for CIFS, you had to agree to an NDA that prevented you from working on a GPLed product after viewing the source code, even if the source code you create has NOTHING IN COMMON with MS's CIFS code. This is what prompted the Samba.org team to inform developers that if you sign the MS NDA, you are unable to contribute to samba on the grounds that having the knowledge of MS's CIFS implementation would infringe on MS intellectual property when coding for a GPLed project like samba.

          I know MS has a business to maintain, but they are still in the stone-age of licencing, and I think that most developers (GPL developers anyway) know this. I just hope that some of them are prepared to tell Microsoft this at their LinuxWorld booth. If I were there, I'd at least say something about it. Unfortunately, I've used most of my vacation this year already and hence won't be attending to address my concerns of draconian licensing.

      • Microsoft's Services for UNIX allows you to recompile your Linux programs for Windows. Of course, you get to pay extra for this privilege, and your UNIX services will feel "bolted on." Besides, Linux and Windows already play pretty well (no thanks to Microsoft).

        What Microsoft is trying to do with UNIX services for Windows is give UNIX users a way to migrate to Windows, pure and simple.

        I agree with you that this is a perfectly fair way to play, and I also agree that it isn't likely to work. After all, who is going to take a working Linux application and move it to a Windows box? That makes no sense at all.

      • "This isn't about trying to get people to move from Unix to Microsoft products, it's about offering ways for both systems to peacefully coexist," Houston stressed.

        In most conflicts, this sort of sentiment means that one party (eg Microsoft) has realized that it can no longer win, and is suing for peace before it is totally defeated. Since defeat occurs first in the mind of the enemy, this means they've already lost.

        OTOH, they could just be spewing a line of BS.

  • "please don't ignore us" (Score:3, Funny)

    by RichMan ( 8097 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:07AM (#4062017)
    Houston said.
    "Just please don't ignore us."

    I didn't know Microsoft was in that bad a way.

  • Linux world and Linux land (Score:5, Funny)

    by brejc8 ( 223089 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:08AM (#4062022) Homepage Journal
    Doesnt Linux-world bring images of children going on rides with huge fluffy penguins.
    And wearing penguin ears? hmm maybe not penguin ears.
    • In all seriousness (well, kinda)... Do penguins have ears? I have a large stuffed "Tux" sitting on my monitor, and I just checked... He does not have any. But I find this hard to believe.

    • Re:Linux world and Linux land (Score:5, Funny)

      by Maran ( 151221 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:21AM (#4062136)
      Maybe there's an "educational" area where kids can watch fuzzy animatronic characters giving a glossed-over demonstration of how to recompile your kernel.

      And there's people dressed up as all the "old favourite" distros. But they've got their networking disabled, so they just move around a lot and pose, but can't say anything.

      And there's a shop selling lots of ThinkGeek gear, that's a real laugh in the park itself, but wearing it in the outside world results in people giving you strange looks.

      Maran
  • I can understand that MySQL and Portgres don't cut it for your particular need but, damn, what about SAP. Surely a repository for Free as in beer and Free as in speech software deserves to remain free.

    From a purely business standpoint I don't get it either. Source Forge isn't making a whole lot of money, if any, as it is. Can VA really afford to spend the money on DB2, or are they simply aligning themselves for the future? I can tell you now, if VA has any fantasy of turning Source Forge into a paid service, they'll be more than a bit suprised by the backlash/bitch slapping that they will receive from the community that they claim to hold so dearly.

    They couldn't really be stupid enough to think that? Could they?

  • DB2? Will it scale? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by emil ( 695 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:12AM (#4062065)

    While some may scoff at such a question, even the most basic DB2 documentation stresses the importance of keeping transactions short, due to limited resources for row-level locking and the dire effects of lock promotion on concurrency.

    Conversely, Tom Kyte in his first book stresses that Oracle provides an unlimited number of row-level locks (by storing the locks on disk), and never promotes a lock.

    Now, obviously, people have gotten DB2 to scale, since it powers some very large databases. I have an interest (and certifications) in both systems, but I can't help but wonder what sort of tricks must be played with the database to overcome concurrency issues with memory-based lock structures - does this require a 64-bit address space even for a moderately-sized db?

    • Yes it will (Score:3, Insightful)

      by RatFink100 ( 189508 )
      Speaking as someone who's worked with another RDBMS which uses memory based locking (Ingres) for over 10 years, I can say that this can scale and scale very well.

      Your application designers need to have concurrency issues in mind - but then that tends to make for better applications anyway. There's more to concurrency than simply the number of locks available in the system.

      Ingres has always used memory-based locking and has only been extended to 64-bit addressing in the last couple of years. There are people using Ingres with databases in the hundreds of Gb or higher and with thousands of concurrent sessions.

      I guarantee that any system of that size Ingres, Oracle, DB2 or Bob's own DBMS would need to consider concurrency pretty carefully regardless of how locking is implemented.

  • Gotta love those final comments (Score:5, Funny)

    by MarvinMouse ( 323641 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:13AM (#4062073) Homepage Journal
    "Tell us what we are doing right and what we are doing wrong"

    Well.. this is going to take a while.

  • Illiad said it best... (Score:5, Funny)

    by RicochetRita ( 581914 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:14AM (#4062076) Homepage
    in last month's User Friendly [userfriendly.org].

  • Perhaps they got something right! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Corporate Troll ( 537873 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:16AM (#4062098) Homepage Journal
    Microsoft is still less than convinced that flexibility is what most people want.

    Now, I'm no real Microsoft Affectionado, but this is probably the single most insightful thing I ever heard from a Microsoft representative. People don't want to fiddle with anything on their computers, just use the standard apps. Heck, most users don't even change their background nor their colours (God help them, the day they get XP!).
    I know this is going straight against the mantra on slashdot "choice-is-good", but normal users have no base on what to make a "choice", and there inflexibility is good: it makes the normal user feel "good" about his (non)choice. How many times have I told people to switch from Lookout Express to a better email client (especially when they just got infected by the virus/worm of the day), but it doesn't help: they are familiar with it, it comes with the computer and everyone uses it. That's infexibility, and the users are inflexible, hence they need inflexible software. Sad but true.

    • Most uses aren't aware that there is choice, give them something and they'll use it, even if it breaks all the time and is crap.

      In my experience :
      10% of people who buy something from a shop that doesn't work that well just bin it.
      40% will use it even though it isn't fully functional
      40% will take it back and get a replacement (or alternative if they know there is one)
      5% will moan like hell and take the shop to court.
      and the other 5% will fix it and have a fully functionally product.

      If the user doesn't know that something is broken, or doesn't understand what they have there far less lightly to take it back.
    • they are less than familiar w/OE. It's the fact that they are either a) too clueless or b) too lazy to go out and get something else.

      OE has that neat little icon on their taskbar, it is usually auto-linked from their Mail option under the IE menubar, and it has a big icon on their desktop.

      The people who get email through this software have no idea how to use it. They call up tech support who sets it up for them. You ask them to do a "Send and Receive" and they go huh? "You know the big button near the menu bar, Send/Receive", "I don't see any button that says that."

      They close and then reopen OE and there's their mail. They want the attachments to auto-open, god forbid they have to click on the little paperclip!

      They downloaded McAfee remember? They don't need to worry about viruses.
      • oh yes, my point was that it's not that they don't want flexibility they really don't have a choice. MS appeals to the laziness inherent in every person. If the complete functionality is there and is easily accessable, why bother worrying about something else?
    • There's more to a flexibile OS than twiddling with colours and switching apps once in a while (though for those that use their computer regularly, it's nice to have that ability).

      Flexibility also means that someone can set up your computer to be orientated towards your tasks, have nothing but the apps you need, the buttons and shortcuts you need, the functions you need, at hand. Having an OS as flexible as GNu/Linux lets you do stuff like that OEone desktop easily, securely, and quickly.

      And I don't think it's entirely true to say that users don't want choice in their software. When you're talking about Windows (and, increasingly, MacOSX and perhaps even KDE), you're given most of the apps you need out of the box, so few feel the need or the motivation to look for different apps. But when you can select from the start the app that does what you want, it's a good thing and something a lot of people value. I can't tell you how many people got fed up of the power of Outlook2000, or the lack of modularity in MS Office when I worked as an IT trainer. I've also found people respond really well to being shown IE, Mozilla and Opera, and then choosing the one that best suits their needs.

      It all depends on how flexibility is approached, from the kernel developers, to the app developers, to the marketers, right through to the people that set-up/sell the boxes and the training users get. I've always found Microsoft's one-size-fits-all attitude rather at odd with what people want. Afterall, look at how many different stereos you can get - consumers do want the choice, when properly presented.
    • victim of collision on the open sea
      nobody ever said that life was free
      sink swim go down with the ship
      but use your freedom of choice
      i'll say it again in the land of the free
      use your freedom of choice
      in ancient rome there was a poem
      about a dog who found two bones
      he picked at one he licked the other
      he went in circles till he dropped dead
      freedom of choice is what you got
      then if you got it you don't want it
      seems to be the rule of thumb
      don't be tricked by what you see
      you got two ways to go
      freedom from choice is what you want
    • I totally agree, but that should not keep microsoft from making users ABLE to choose if they want. There's absolutely no good reason not to. It's not as though standard apps, and the choice of non-standard apps/configuration are mutually exclusive...
    • I know for myself I don't like MY data locked into YOUR app. When I tire of using an app or it doesn't do what I want, I should be able to get to MY data and use another app to do what I want. With alot of apps, once I use them, I am locked in because there is know way to get access to MY data except through THEIR app.

  • nice BBC article (Score:5, Funny)

    by Clover_Kicker ( 20761 ) <clover_kicker@yahoo.com> on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:16AM (#4062099)
    From the linked BBC article:

    >Linux is gaining corporate fans is because it is
    >cheap, easy to maintain and much more secure than
    >Microsoft software.

    You can't buy advertising like that.

  • Pirates of Silicon Valley? (Score:4, Funny)

    by MarvinMouse ( 323641 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:18AM (#4062108) Homepage Journal
    Anyone remember that scene from the movie "Pirates of Silicon Valley" where there was an Apple booth and the company MS worked with at the expo. Everyone ignored the other booth and went over to the Apple booth. When Bill tried to talk with any of the Apple reps, he was ignored.

    wouldn't that be great if that happened here. The entire MS booth is barren while everyone is busy doing what they came to a _Linux_ expo for. To look at _Linux_ products, not Windows products.

    just a thought. :-)
    • Hm, I think a more appropriate part of that movie was where Gates and Balmer are at that Mac convention at the end as "friends" of Apple.

      Worry about Microsoft most when they're smiling.

  • I don't get it. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by caluml ( 551744 )
    You move from free to expensive software "VA Software, whose roots lie in the open-source world of Linux, is trying to move more toward proprietary software in an effort to boost its revenue", and your share price doubles? "VA Software's shares surged by more than 50 percent on the news, rising 42 cents to $1.24 in early trading"

    What gives?

    • That the irrational exuberance or the dot com era is indeed, not dead. Like a dormant virus it occasionally rares its ugly head.

      It also proves, yet again, that investment analysts are complete morons. No wonder the economy is in such a shambles.

  • Ok, I think this is the straw that broke the camel's back for me. First it was the poor site interface, then it was the auto-download system, and now this converting to DB2. Sourceforge offically now sucks in my book. I wish everyone would start moving their projects off sourceforge.

    • Re:Sourceforge down the hole (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      What if the upgrade to DB2 and WebSphere improves the performance of the site? Does it automatically suck because it doesn't use open source software? If the functionality you get is still there, what is the difference? Open Source people have got to show a little maturity if they want people to listen to them, taking all your toys home is not a good response to this. Making MySQL better than DB2 IS a good response.

  • m$ office TUX (Score:3, Interesting)

    by dollargonzo ( 519030 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:22AM (#4062150) Homepage
    since the representative said that he thinks all users want is ease of use "out of the box" and not flexibility, then porting, say, microsoft office to linux would make some people happy, and at the same time not harm microsoft, because linux is supposedly NOT easy to use out of the box.

    obviously, i disagree. i have had enough fun with windows video drivers that don't work causing the screen to be black, but since EVERYTHING is gui, i can't do anything about it, which means i need to reinstall. can i switch back to vga? NO. but that is besides the point. frankly, linux comes with far more out of the box than windows ever will. but that is besides the point.

    if microsoft is bold enough to say that their operating system is easier to use, and then appear at linuxworld, i think they should at least be bold enough to port some software (as a software vendor not, operating system creator) to prove their point. it seems they are kissing up to linux geeks to pull some PR move or some other unpredictable stunt.

    QED

  • What's up with this? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by un4given ( 114183 ) <`bvoltz' `at' `gmail.com'> on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:22AM (#4062151)
    From Netcraft:

    The site www.linuxworldexpo.com is running Microsoft-IIS/4.0 on NT4/Windows 98.

    • According to Netcraft they are running Solaris and Apache.. Not IIS See here [netcraft.com]
      • Um, wrong site.

        The site www.linuxworldexpo.com is running Microsoft-IIS/4.0 on NT4/Windows 98. FAQ

        NT4/Windows 98 users include ABB Asea Brown Boveri Ltd, Gillette, British Nuclear Fuels Ltd and Ernst & Young International

        Microsoft-IIS is also being used by www.dellhost.com, www.datapipe.com, geotrust and Ferrari
    • No biggie, really.

      Wagner LLC did some backend work for Linuxexpo as a level II sub contractor for IBM (a big shout out to the chief IBM tech Pablo Cruise in the design lab!!!) and it turns out the company who did the webpage design/artwork was a photoshop/Windows only shop and needed the new .asp extensions that are only experimental in Apache so the whole works ended up on and NT server. This stuff is always contracted out and means nothing regarding the whole webserver debate. It's just a matter of what tools they are comfortable using.

      Warmest regards,
      -Jack

  • M$ Schwag? (Score:4, Funny)

    by smartin ( 942 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:23AM (#4062157)
    What are they giving out? I like to give any Microsoft T-shirts i get to homeless people. Puts them to a good cause :)
  • I wonder what those MS employees did to get sent there. Somebody's not well liked.

    Hopefully everyone will react with nothing but class.

  • Time to move to Savannah (Score:4, Informative)

    by Phil Hands ( 2365 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:25AM (#4062180) Homepage
    For those of you that use sourceforge for their free software projects, it looks like it's time to move to savannah.gnu.org [gnu.org].

    In case you're wondering, the gnu.org in there does not imply that your project needs to be under the GPL/LGPL --- any Free Software [gnu.org] projects are welcome.

    Why would you want to move? Well, from what I hear, extracting some of your meta-data is already hard/imposible from Sourceforge --- this seems like a trend that is likely to continue, so perhaps you should get out while you still can.

    At least you can be sure that the Free Software Foundation won't pull any similar tricks.

    • Re:Time to move to Savannah (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:55AM (#4062435)
      http://savannah.gnu.org/phpsysinfo/

      OK EVERYONE move all their projects from VA's 8+ high end servers and bandwidth with a compile farm attached, to the 1 server (with ide drives) that savannah has. I'm sure savannah can take the load. look their system has 20 gigs of space to use (not in the audio-video dir), don't you think that it can hold all the worthwhile free software? Come on everyone! grab your files and GOOOO sf is obviously sucky now since they are going to use... *GASP* a paid for program.

      I mean seriously guys.. no one else can replace what sf.net does for our community so SHUT THE FUCK UP unless you have a good pipe, a pile of servers, and some time to take the sf.net code base and modify it to your microcosm of a vision for how it SHOULD be done.
    • Why would you want to move? Well, from what I hear, extracting some of your meta-data is already hard/imposible from Sourceforge --- this seems like a trend that is likely to continue, so perhaps you should get out while you still can.

      I have two projects on SourceForge. Please tell me when exactly should I expect problems. I hadn't single SourceForge problem yet.
      I am not SF fanatic, I just like this service (and for example IRC support) so tell me what is wrong with it.

      • Re:Time to move to Savannah (Score:4, Insightful)

        by FreeUser ( 11483 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @12:09PM (#4062590)
        I have two projects on SourceForge. Please tell me when exactly should I expect problems. I hadn't single SourceForge problem yet.

        Not exactly into being proactive, are we.

        The concerns are (a) difficulty to extract meta-data from SF (already mentioned), (b) the uncertainty of whether or not the free (beer) SF service will be around for the forseeable future, even for non-commercial, free projects, and (c) the uncertainly as to whether or not VA will be around to offer the service, in any form, for the forseeable future.

        Contrast this with the FSF, which is a charity that has been around since the eighties (at least), isn't going to 'go under' like the rest of the dot bomb anytime soon, if ever, and will never pull the kinds of stunts SF does to make obtaining and extracting one's information more difficult over time, or to change the conditions of use.

        It isn't about predicting trouble with certainty, it is about recognizing a vulnerability and doing something about it before the problem can arise.

        But it is your project, so if you prefer to wait until trouble actually arises, that is your perogative, and in the end, your fault.

        • But it is your project, so if you prefer to wait until trouble actually arises, that is your perogative, and in the end, your fault.

          His fault for what? If for some reason VA could not longer afford to run sf.net and nobody else wanted to step up and pay for it, then it would shut down. Ok, it might be somewhat of an inconvenience, but you would still have the important part - the source code - to continue and host the project somewhere else.

          I don't get the bitching about sf.net. Ok, so some people don't like the fact that VA is selling a closed-source fork, but does that really impact the service? And there are a lot of stupid stage 1 projects in there that are going nowhere, but again, does that really impact the service?

          People amaze me with the ability to complain about something that has been such a tremendous help to the open source community. Look at the number of important high-profile projects hosted there. Alternatives like GNU Savannah are good, but they don't have the server capacity (or features, yet) to measure up to sf.net.

          It would be a huge loss to the community if sf.net shut down, and maybe that was your point. However, I prefer to look at the glass half full and hope that either VA will pull through or someone else will step up to pay for sf.net. Either way, sticking with them to host your project in the meantime is hardly stupid or short-sighted.

          • I believe the issue here is mainly that they will not be running on FreeSoftware, nor OpenSource software. Instead, they will be running on who knows what OS inside of IBM's proprietary DB. I think I would have a problem with that if I were trying to make a socio-political statement by writing FreeSoftware too. Case in point the current state of cvs -vs- bitkeeper use on Linux kernel development. It becomes less open when you _have_ to use the proprietary tools. It's not about wanting something for nothing, but about wanting everything for everyone! I can afford it, but someone else may not. That shouldn't keep innovations from occuring.

            • It becomes less open when you _have_ to use the proprietary tools.

              I'll give you that, but sf.net isn't forcing you to run anything - they'll just be running some closed source stuff behind the scene.

              I could see how some people might have a problem with that, but I am a bit more pragmatic. For example, would you refuse to visit Slashdot if it was hosted on a Solaris box running Oracle? I wouldn't!

  • It used to be free for the exhibition floor, and you only had to pay for the seminars. It's no longer, the exhibition is now $30.

    Gee, I guess that will be the first year I'm not attending, even though I'm local. It's kinda hard to justify to pay just to get exposed to ads, isn't it?

    • I know.. and I'm guessing you're like many of us that had no idea that it was going to be $30. I didn't see any mention of it anywhere.. until I went to the LWE website to register for the exhibits-only pass and noticed the price. It was only $10 before a certain date, but again, we all thought it would be free still.
      A letdown, for sure..I wish that I had checked the site before.
  • For those with nothing better to do this afternoon... you can watch Sun's presentation via a webcast at 1pm EST here [sun.com]

  • sourceforge moves off of free software. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by r00tarded ( 553054 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @11:47AM (#4062357)
    And VA Software - Slashdot's owner - is moving Sourceforge.net to IBM's database software.
    I think this is a much bigger story then linux kernel 2.34.56 is released, yet its a one liner? Next time you wanna bury a story throw it into a slashback or a jon katz story.
  • microsoft announces they'll have a booth at linuxworld.
    sales of nerf weapons and super soaker water pistols rise to all-time highs.
  • Peaceful coexistence appears to be Microsoft's new mantra.

    Does this remind anyone else of that really bad ST:TNG episode with the parasites that looked like trilobytes? You know, the "Vitamins do wonders for the body" one where the trilobytes try to take over starfleet? "We seek peaceful coexistance"

  • I'll get flamed for this, but...

    Microsoft would get a much better reception if they went to the expo with actual Linux products.

    Think about it. They have (or have had) a copy of IE for linux kicking around internally. IE exists for other unixes (too lazy to go check which at the moment tho). They have a media player for unixes (or they did). Wouldn't it be nice if they went to the show and released those, or annouced something about them, rather than hawking Visual Studio .NET and XP Embedded.

    Just my .02

  • I love this quote (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Frag-A-Muffin ( 5490 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @12:47PM (#4062902)
    from the article:

    "This isn't about trying to get people to move from Unix to Microsoft products, it's about offering ways for both systems to peacefully coexist," Houston stressed.

    Then why aren't the office formats open?
  • Good to see that Sun believes in Linux enough to put some hardware effort behind it. I wasn't so sure, when I read this Sun article a ways back.

    Linux on the Mainframe--Not a Good Idea [sun.com]
  • > "What you will see from Sun is a lot more attention paid to
    > Linux on the desktop, because there is a lot more growth there
    > than anyone is willing to suggest," said Jonathan Schwartz,
    > executive vice president for Sun's software group.

    This is in direct contrast to IBM's approach, and IMO it makes
    sense for Sun, because it hurts a certain competitor with a very
    large market share more than it hurts Sun. Think about it: Sun
    doesn't want to commoditise the server market if they have any
    brains, because that's where they make their money. But they
    *do* want to commoditise the desktop market, because that will
    prevent anyone from leveraging control of the desktop market
    (since no one entity can control a commoditised market) to push
    Sun (along with other competitors) out of the server market.

    This is Sun being smart. *And* it's something the Linux
    community really needs badly: a major desktop OEM.

    Now, granted, this is highly speculative, since the product
    they're unveiling right now is a low-end server. But I would
    very much like to see Sun (or any major OEM -- sorry, WallMart
    doesn't count as a major OEM) unveil an affordable Linux-based
    desktop system.

    It's different for IBM, because they make a lot of money on
    the consulting and support end of the business, so that if
    the server becomes a commodity, it doesn't hurt them really.
    Sun has a bottom line in the server market to worry about,
    but they can better afford to commoditise the desktop, since
    that's a natural complement of the server.

    Am I making any sense?

Slashdot Top Deals

In the long run, every program becomes rococco, and then rubble. -- Alan Perlis

Close