Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> A look inside Google's open-source kitchen
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | DiBona: We use the Linux kernel. We've got the GNU tools, we use a lot
> | of the compiler collection from the Free Software Foundation. We use
> | some Apache libraries--we don't use the Apache Web servers so often, but
> | we do use a lot of their libraries. We use a lot of OpenSSL and OpenSSH.
> | We use languages like Python and C. We use a fair amount of MySQL, all
> | kinds of things.
> |
> | [...]
> |
> | Yet proprietary code is very important to Google as well. Is it
> | important to keep your business secrets secret?
> |
> | DiBona: Yes, for sure! We couldn't very well release any of the
> | ranking functions. Not because of security through obscurity or anything
> | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> | bogus like that, but because those techniques themselves are a part of
> | the war. It's more like releasing the key to cryptography rather
> | than releasing cryptography itself.
> `----
>
>
http://news.com.com/A+look+inside+Googles+open-source+kitchen+-+page+2/2008-7344_3-6143465-2.html?tag=st.num
That is a good example model to show commercial companies that Linux and
OpenSource can mix very well with their propriatary code and ideas. There
is no need for commercial companies to be afraid of Linux.
Googles planned OS, though still in early days of development, looks to me
to be heading in the right direction. There is a lot of free access
software involved, increased Office software (their Docs/Spreadsheet
experiment was well received), their plan includes extending this further
with some master computer, I couldn't see any detailed information on this
but it apparently isn't due until 2010 anyway so maybe the full plan isn't
written yet.
I know I've said it before, but I really do think that the way forward is
actually a step back towards where the computing world started. With the
applications on the server, one point to maintain, assuming secure comms it
is also one point to protect. With the current communications speeds there
is no disadvantage to those on a network. That extends to being able to use
those applications from an Internet source.
There would have to be some kind of local engine involved even if only for
the sake of interface response times. But these engines are already showing
improvements in that area, including the java engine and yes, the .NET2
engine what ever else might be said about it it does respond very well to
user interaction and the web back end.
(if only they could make it work well with a mix of html generated controls
and code generated controls, overlapping web page sections are tricky to
read).
|
|
