h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: Open Your Source - A2953334
Author: Baryonic Being - (HHH - A2411191) - U234603

This is part of the collaborative Topic of the Week about the Open Source concept from a few months ago. I have split the Topic up into several entries:

An introduction, with advantages and disadvantages (this entry);
An entry about the best-of-breed Open Source applications;
An entry about Open Source licenses.

This entry is 'finished', so I can put it in Peer Review, but the other two entries are not quite finished, but they link from this entry. I shall probably put them into the Writing Workshop.

One question for you:

- Do I need another separate entry about the history of the Open Source concept, or is the explanation provided at the Edited entry about Linux (A311130) sufficient?

The original discussions are at A2520163.

Thanks.

Well....It's a well written well-researched entry. But let me say where' I'm coming from before I make any more comments. I am neither pro nor anti Open Source. As far as I'm concerned a computer is a tool and software a product, not a soapbox and a political statement. So I run Mandrake *and* XP at home. I can see advantages and disadvantages for both types of platform. And a lot of what you say about Open Source is very true. I would recommend OS to anyone who is highly computer literate and on a tight budget.

However, I'd hardly call a statement like 'Arguably the two could be compared to Fascism and Communism: Microsoft, being the former in this example...' balanced in the slightest. The vast majority of Open Source projects you find on SourceForge are (a) completely irrelevant to non-power users, (b) superfluous or redundant or (c) unfinished. Rather like Soviet Russion churning out tractor after tractor. There is very little MS stuff that you can fit into this category, no matter how buggy it is. And people like IBM start getting quite territorial when it comes to sharing their supposedly 'open' IP with competitors.

So, basically, I don't think that this is a suitable article for the EG because it's biased. It's also misrepresents some pretty basic facts: When I installed Mandrake on my old PC the USB ports wouldn't work. I then gave my Mandrake box to someone who simply wanted a PC to do basic wordprocessing. They found it too difficult to use and I can't pass it on to anyone now. I use it mainly to mess around with. All my *real* work gets done on my XP box.

This is a far better article about OS: http://itwriting.co.uk/opensource.php

Perhaps remove any comments like those compairing closed and open source to fasism and communism. It's difficult not to be biased in this area, I certainly am. The Guide does need good, up to date articles on Open source. In these days, Apache is the most used web sever worldwide, internet explorer is being ditched for firefox at a rate that suprises even the die hard OS evangelists and Linux is "getting there" as a desktop operating system.

My turn to make a comparison that might upset somebody. SourceForge is a bit like The Guide. Many projects are unfinshed and are being worked on, just like the article we are commenting on. There is a fantastic level of effort and contributing from volunteers in both cases. SourceForge produces alot of good software for all platforms. I have been using and recommending software such as cdex and virtualdub on windows for years, I only noticed they originated from sourceforge recently.

I'm sorry to hear about your experiences with Linux. Respect to you for giving it a go and making up your own mind. Perhaps it should be said that linux is difficult. I think it has got so much more user friendly in the last year. I formatted my computer recently and installed slackware 10 (latest version). I was worried about not remembering how to configure all my devices. On 1st boot my sound and network cards had been detected and implemented automatically and not long after I had my new toy, an external firewire harddrive, working too.

Dan

Thank you for your feedback!

Before I comment, I would just like to make it clear that when reading this, you should remember that it is not written by one person - most of it has been extracted from the conversations. All I have done is to attempt to link up and organise all the topics, embellishing them where necessary.

I remember even as I wrote the bit about Communism and Fascism that it would provoke disquiet. I shall remove it, but do note that I have always used vocabulary such as 'arguably' and 'it could be considered' and so on, so that it does not seem opinionated. However, you are right to say that it is biased, because my bias is always towards Open Source. It was difficult for me to suppress my instinctive intense hatred for the Monopoly That Shall Not Be Named.

Felonious Monk:
I agree with your three points about SourceForge, but then I have to remember that all the developers are most probably not full-time developers, and that these issues are almost certainly related to the lack of profit. But I digress.

"So, basically, I don't think that this is a suitable article for the EG because it's biased."

Do you think that the whole entry is biased? Wasn't it just the Fascism/Communism reference? Please could you find some other biased statements that may need modifying/removing if the former is the case?

"It's also misrepresents some pretty basic facts: When I installed Mandrake on my old PC the USB ports wouldn't work. I then gave my Mandrake box to someone who simply wanted a PC to do basic wordprocessing. They found it too difficult to use and I can't pass it on to anyone now. I use it mainly to mess around with."

I don't quite get what you mean by this. Nowhere does the entry insinuate that if you use Linux your USB ports are sure to work flawlessly (at least I don't think it does!). Nowhere does the entry mention that all Linux distributions are very easy to use. Perhaps the Mandrake box of which you speak was a version of Mandrake Linux that was not very user-friendly? To my mind, there are few ways that one could find Mandrake Linux 9 and above too difficult to use if you just want to do word-processing.

"All my *real* work gets done on my XP box."

*Shudder*. Well, whilst it surprises me that you manage to do this, I might suggest that perhaps your computer's hardware is in some way incompatible with Linux. I don't see Mandrake as a difficult-to-use distribution (and I certainly don't see XP as an OS designed for real work! But that's just me).

The article you refer to at the end may very well be 'far better', but what can I do about that? I edited, compiled and concatenated useful information from conversation forums (fora?) about the Open Source movement; I didn't expect it to be the best article about the subject in existence. Actually I thought I'd done rather well.

If you'd like to suggest some *specific* things that may require inclusion/modification, please do. I could, of course, provide a link to the article that you have referenced within the Entry, which I think I'll do.

I have added a paragraph about user-friendliness as suggested.

Glad you managed to Slackware 10 running so smoothly on your computer; Slackware 9.1 failed miserably on mine! I don't like to hide the fact that Linux has its faults, but in this case I will: I still hold that those Slackware 9.1 CDs were the product of corrupt downloads! Nothing more!

I'd appreciate some comment on the issue(s) I raised in my original post, if anybody can comment.

Thank you again.

Well, the primary point of feedback I'd give is that this topic has been done already, in a collaborative entry. You've written good and informative entries in the past, but I can't help feeling that this entry is pointless, being really an advocacy for how wonderful open Source is and how it will ultimately save Mankind. Moreover, it's cobbled together from conversations from other people. I'd like to see something rather more mature and considered than the 'four legs good, two legs bad' attitude that I come across every day with some people I work with.

I develop software for a living. The company that I work for has 40,000 odd desktops running W2K. We also have Unix servers, Oracle servers, Windows servers etc. I use what I need to. The work I do at home is done on XP because that's what most of the applications I use run on. It works perfectly well, almost flawlessly, actually. I'd suggest that if you have difficulties getting XP to do what you want it to do then it's not XP's problem.

Let me tell you a little story. Some time ago I announced I was going to start up a project to write a WYSIWYG GuideML editor. I got a fair way along to achieving this, but then a lot of other, quite bad, things happened and I couldn't do it all on my own. So I decided to open the source and invite others to join in. I decided to restrict it to Windows, and have it based upon the editing functionality in IE (after taking advice from the person who wrote this site's software), and programmed in C# and VB.NET (using freely available software), because that's what I was used to and no other browsers supported the kind of editing functionality I needed. Besides, that vast majority of h2g2 people would use Windows and IE to browse the site anyhow, so a requirement for cross-platform functionality started to invoke the Law of Diminishing Returns.

So, virtually all the people who said they were interested in helping suddenly said they weren't. Note that it was *open source*. They simply hated Microsoft, that was the long and the short of it. They really weren't interested in producing something of great use to a lot of people. One person, who shall remain nameless, said that he had more important things to do, like writing help documentation for an obscure functional programming language that runs under gtk. He was simply a dilletante who, like the others, didn't want to get his hands dirty using an MS toolkit.

So, to sum up, I have a rather jaundiced view of the OS movement because I suspect their motives. I also think they should get out more often. Most people really don't care about whether the wordprocessor they use is OS or not. Which, I suspect, is why this thread hasn't provoked a great deal of interest.

I respect your opinion and your right to that opinion, no matter how vehemently I might disagree.


"this topic has been done already"
- where?

"You've written good and informative entries in the past"
- thank you.

"but I can't help feeling that this entry is pointless being really an advocacy for how wonderful open Source is and how it will ultimately save Mankind"
- save Mankind? That's going a bit far isn't it? I don't think the entry mentions it in such a light. I take your point about over-bias in the endorsement of its agreeable attributes; henceforth I shall endeavour to include a paragraph headed: 'The Disadvantages of Open Source Software', which I hope will be balanced, full, frank, honest and detailed.

"Moreover, it's cobbled together from conversations from other people."
- that was not my choice, you understand; it was necessary to use the conversations specifically in the construction of the entry because it was a collaborative topic.

"I'd like to see something rather more mature and considered than the 'four legs good, two legs bad' attitude that I come across every day with some people I work with."
- It would be helpful if you could point out some specific offending passages that you feel fall into this numeral-limb category.

"The company that I work for has 40,000 odd desktops running W2K."
- Oh, I am sorry.

"I use what I need to."
- Of course you do. I confess that I too have the need to revert to the dreaded Transparent Vents of Doom, though this is only because the developers of the software I need to use have flatly refused to port their software.

"It works perfectly well, almost flawlessly, actually."
- Shock! You are a marvel, Felonious Monk. I congratulate you unquestioningly. Sorry. I jest. I'm sure there are plenty of people who can use XP without troubles. If it was as troublesome as I and many others make it out to be, nobody would use it, assuredly.

"I'd suggest that if you have difficulties getting XP to do what you want it to do then it's not XP's problem."
- Likewise you and Linux then!
Well, perhaps you are quite correct, but I have used - or tried to use - XP on a number of machines, and the experience I have with it is nothing to change my opinion that I abhor it. But remember that I attack not only XP's general stability, if there is any, but the reputation of its creators. Almost as much of my anger is directed at the company that gave birth to it than of its faults in itself; almost as much do I avoid it as a matter of moral principle, as a protest against 'tyranny' than I do for its instability and security vulnerabilities.

I respect your opinion and your right to that opinion, no matter how vehemently I might disagree.


"this topic has been done already"
- where?

"You've written good and informative entries in the past"
- thank you.

"but I can't help feeling that this entry is pointless being really an advocacy for how wonderful open Source is and how it will ultimately save Mankind"
- save Mankind? That's going a bit far isn't it? I don't think the entry mentions the saviour of our race at all. I take your point about over-bias in the endorsement of its agreeable attributes; henceforth I shall endeavour to include a paragraph headed: 'The Disadvantages of Open Source Software', which I hope will be balanced, full, frank, honest and detailed.

"Moreover, it's cobbled together from conversations from other people."
- that was not my choice, you understand; it was necessary to use the conversations specifically in the construction of the entry because it was a collaborative topic.

"I'd like to see something rather more mature and considered than the 'four legs good, two legs bad' attitude that I come across every day with some people I work with."
- It would be helpful if you could point out some specific offending passages that you feel fall into this numeral-limb category.

"The company that I work for has 40,000 odd desktops running W2K."
- Oh, I am sorry.

"I use what I need to."
- Of course you do. I confess that I too have the need to revert to the dreaded Transparent Vents of Doom, though this is only because the developers of the software I need to use have flatly refused to port their software.

"It works perfectly well, almost flawlessly, actually."
- Shock! You are a marvel, Felonious Monk. I congratulate you unquestioningly. Sorry. I jest. I'm sure there are plenty of people who can use XP without troubles. If it was as troublesome as I and many others make it out to be, nobody would use it, assuredly.

"I'd suggest that if you have difficulties getting XP to do what you want it to do then it's not XP's problem."
- Likewise you and Linux then!
Well, perhaps you are quite correct, but I have used - or tried to use - XP on a number of machines, and the experience I have with it is nothing to change my opinion that I abhor it. But remember that I attack not only XP's general stability, if there is any, but the reputation of its creators. Almost as much of my anger is directed at the company that gave birth to it than of its faults in itself; almost as much do I avoid it as a matter of moral principle, as a protest against 'tyranny' than I do for its instability and security vulnerabilities.



Sorry! I hit the Post Message button by mistake, which means that there may be some expurgation or content verification that has gone unnoticed in the preceeding post. I apologise if this is the case. I shall continue...


"a WYSIWYG GuideML editor" - wow! I wanted to make one of those! Of course, I planned on using Qt - a cross platform C++ GUI framework, which would make the program compatible with just about every OS in existence.


"So, virtually all the people who said they were interested in helping suddenly said they weren't."
I'm sorry to hear of your somewhat distressing tale. I hope not too much of your effort was lost. Of course, the reaction of the people you mention would most probably be tantamount with that of my own; I have no use for anything compatible only with IE. You can't blame me for not wanting to use IE, though. I have justifiable reasons. A) It's more vulnerable security-wise. B) It only runs on Windows; whereas I use Linux almost all the time now. C) It doesn't have tabs. Oh! I cannot imagine a life without tabs! I think point C is the one that deters me the most from it. No tabs? It's just unthinkable. I can't imagine having ten or twelve 'windows' open - how messy! Of course, it's just personal preference.

"They really weren't interested in producing something of great use to a lot of people."
- That is a shame. But surely there were others who wanted to help in the completion of the project, people with similar views to your own?

"I also think they should get out more often"
- Please don't revert to unjustifiable generalisations. I shall ignore that comment.

"Most people really don't care about whether the wordprocessor they use is OS or not"
- That may be true, but perhaps it is _because_ they don't know about the Open Source movement! Perhaps they don't know about what a great advantage it might be if it were an Open Source wordprocessor, although, it is true that they probably wouldn't have any use for editing the source code; they may not know how.

Again, I believe that the reason that I am so resentful towards using Word, for example, is not _because_ it is not Open Source, but because of the concomitant business practices that interfere so fundamentally with my world view of justice and fair-play. Thinking about Microsoft's tactics makes me very angry, and using Word would only provoke this anger.

"Which, I suspect, is why this thread hasn't provoked a great deal of interest."
- Unless it's because it has only just been put into Peer Review, or because it is too long that people can't be bothered to read it?


Again, your feedback is useful, and I thank you on that account. If you have any views on the questions posed above, and the original question(s) that I posed in post 1, they would be graciously received.

Etcetera.

I'm not going to reply to all these points as I really have more important things to do. I'll just say that there was a topic of the week: A2520163, which is why I thought it was done before. Also, this statement I think sums the whole thing up: 'Thinking about Microsoft's tactics makes me very angry, and using Word would only provoke this anger.' When I get very angry, it's about rather more substantive issues. But, I suppose if the worst you've ever had to endure is forking over a bit of cash for some overpriced software, then Microsoft must really seem like the embodiment of utmost evil.

Oh, this particular entry A2998407, written by Yours Truly, has been in PR for a much shorter time. Perhaps it's had more comments because it's provoked more interest? Whatever. Good luck with your entry. I won't be picking it.

Sorry, I should have said 'it's been in PR for a comparable time'. But my general argument still stands.

A2520163 _is_ the Topic of the Week. In post 1 I think I said something about it. It's the same Topic of the Week from whose conversations I have compiled this entry.

Fair enough if you have other things to do; I should hopefully get somebody else to comment later on. I rather thought that Microsoft's practices - whether or not you are aware of all of them - were quite substantive enough to warrant some form of frustration. Perhaps anger is not the word (no pun intended!). Of course, overpricing is not the only issue, you understand, but this is beyond the scope of constructive comment for the good of the entry.

I've bookmarked the other entry you mention for further reading as its another subject I'm quite keen on, and one that is, as you suggest, far more interesting.

I get the vague impression you were intending to be in some way insulting with your comments. Please don't feel that I was trying to do the same.

Felonious Monk:

If you develop software for a living using VB and C# (so I'm taking a guess its not cross-platform) then your welfare depends on people using windows platforms and therefore gives you more motive than the rest of us to be biased.

Dan

No, I wasn't trying to be insulting. Apologies if it were taken that way. I was merely musing on why people become so passionate about such a relatively mundane issue.

Actually, I develop using C++ (not just MS), VB.NET, C#, Oracle and J2EE. A pretty catholic mix, wouldn't you say? I've recently had a battle with an OS purist who refuses to use any other CM tool apart from CVS on his project, despite the fact that I had provided a much better one (StarTeam) which was from a company known for its agnosticism and desire to serve all communities (Borland). I find the zealotry of certain factions in software development far more obstructive to my daily work than the dubious practices of big software corporations. As do most of my colleagues.

Have you tried Qt, then? It's just a set of cross-platform Open Source GUI C++ classes. Worth a look in my opinion. Adobe Illustrator was made with it, apparently.

On the other subject: well, personally I wouldn't call it a mundane issue, but I take your point and sorry if I misinterpreted your musings. It's just that the richest company in the world continues to be as greedy as possible, delivering software that is full of security holes, and does its utmost to stamp out all competition (the SCO, RealNetworks, Lindows and other cases are examples; their obsession with software patents is also quite... worrying, for want of a better word). That's just the way I see it.

But don't forget - it's not all my entry. The conversations, perhaps entirely coincidentally, just turned up nearly 100% positive comments on the Open Source concept.

I tend to follow Tim Anderson's line on this issue. Open Source *is* a good thing. It's just not a panacea, and MS aren't the foul spawn of the devil. I think that even they have wised up to the security issue. I also really like the .NET Framework, and the new functionality in Longhorn looks fantastic, especially if you are writing a GuideML editor .

It's instructive to remember that the people who opened the Pandora' box of software patents happened to be Apple. Microsoft, at the time that all this started, didn't patent their software. Richard Stallman got so annoyed with Apple that he even refused to port GNU Emacs (which I wrote my PhD thesis with) to the Mac. I was pretty annoyed with that attitude at the time as Apple weren't making better software, but using litgation to force other people to make worse stuff. Now, having seen so many organisations shift into and out of the role of Bogeyman I eventually decided that it was amusing than anything else.

PS: I haven't tried Qt, but if you post a link, I shall cderianly give it a look.

Thinking more about your entry, it would make a very good Post article. There, opinion pieces are welcome. Give it a thought.

Regards
FM

Thank you. Words of wisdom there, FM. I take your point.

http://www.trolltech.com is the place for Qt. Note that to get Qt for free you must license your software under the GNU GPL. A commercial license is quite expensive.

Hi BB,

How is it going? Are you going to persevere with this as a potential Eg or submit it elsewhere?



Mort

I think I will now remove it from Peer Review until I have more time to work on it, which might just be over the weekend if I'm lucky.

Interesting debate that, wasn't it? Scanning the backlog as I have just done does seem to show me up as an Open Source purist of sorts, doesn't it?

I see a mention of Longhorn too - it'll be interesting to see what comes out of it if they ever release it - but after some of the info I've read on it I don't see how it can possibly exceed Apple's Quartz and other graphical interfaces, or the new Enlightenment graphical libraries.

Keep an open mind. The attitude of being open to new influences, wherever they came from, never hurt anyone. And Longhorn looks absolutely fantastic.

Thanks FM.

If it's looks we're talking about, the ultimate showdown is a sample screenshot from the interfaces of tomorrow:

http://www.eweek.com/slideshow_viewer/0,2393,l=&s=25986&a=130460&po=15,00.asp
(Apple's Mac OS X Tiger)

http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/longhorn_alpha2.asp
(Windows Longhorn)

http://lude.net/edocs/img/entrance.png
(Enlightenment DR17 for X11)

Perhaps these shots don't do them justice. I know for a fact that DR17's main strengths are in animation, after all.