-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
____/ Tony(UK) on Saturday 25 October 2008 16:12 : \____
> On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 14:02:12 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
> .snipped for brevity
>> It's easy to just ignore issues that you don't want to know about and
>> don't want to care about. But just ignoring it won't make it disappear.
>>
>> By the way, as Brian Proffitt (LinuxToday executive editor) stated some
>> months ago, the Linux community was /never/ a 'happy family'. There was
>> always friction like this, so to accuse people or individual groups is
>> the wrong way to approach it.
>
> Thanks for the explanation, Roy.
Watch the new comment there from Bruce, the writer:
"Yes, in the past I have attacked Boycott Novell because of what I perceived as
attempts to attack me.
"However, if you can point to anything in the article that misrepresents
Boycott Novell or shows my prejudice against it (and reporting other peoples'
dislike doesn't count), then I would be interested to see it.
"Anyway, at the risk of upsetting your world view, in the course of doing this
article, I exchanged a couple of emails with Roy, and I believe that we are
now on friendlier terms."
This was said in response to someone who knows the history of the dispute and
pointed this out. It's mainly about OOXML, which Bruce thought Groklaw and BN
were wrong to discredit on the grounds that it would not help (defeeatism).
> The bit about the Linux community never being a 'happy family' is because
> of what exactly?
Brian explained this very well back in May:
http://www.linuxtoday.com/mailprint.php3?action=pv<sn=2008-05-16-019-26-OP-BZ-CY
"Ever since I crashed a 451 Group event at the Open Source Business Conference
last year in their San Francisco offices, I have kept more than half an eye
their 451 CAOS Theory blog. I figure if someone's provided me with a really
good cheese plate at a meeting I wasn't invited to, the least I could do is
read their stuff. It's just good karma."
"Normally I find the missives from the 451 crew pretty insightful. But in
Matthew Aslett's recent post, "Trouble in Paradise?" I find I have to take
some exception. Matt. Dude. It was never paradise.
"Aslett raises the alarm that lately there has been a significant rise in
animosity between the open source community the open source business vendors.
The Sun/MySQL kerfuffle and Matt Asay's recent misconstrued "free-riding"
remarks were the examples Aslett specifically pointed to as real problems
between the community and the commercial interests. I can cite other instances
that could be lent to Aslett's thesis: the ongoing vitriol between the
community and... Sun, Novell, and (depending on the day of the week)
Canonical."
Further down the reasons are explained. A lot of it is constructive criticism.
Watch how Canonical were pressured into contributing back their changes. It
came through a dispute with Greg K-H.
Think of it as open-source decision-making where people correct one another.
There is no one company deciding on a direction without getting flak.
> I am a member of the Mint, Ubuntu, and Pardus forums,
> and subscribe to debian, COLA, a.o.l.ubuntu, and pclinuxos newsgroups as
> well as researching quite extensively the Internet regarding Linux. I do
> this to learn the whole picture. In all areas I seem to look, Linux users
> range from tolerant to hostile regarding newcomers and each other, and in
> this newsgroup, almost all regular posters range from humorous to deep
> psychological problems. In some cases, Linux is treated in a derisory
> fashion.
That's true when it comes to Mac and Windows users too. A choice of an
operating system has little to do with personal things. The 'opposing sides'
love to paint a different picture though (just as they do in the elections as
a form of smear). Here is how Microsoft put it (leaked memo):
"Ideally, use of the competing technology becomes associated with mental
deficiency, as in, "he believes in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and OS/2."
Just keep rubbing it in, via the press, analysts, newsgroups, whatever. Make
the complete failure of the competition's technology part of the mythology of
the computer industry. We want to place selection pressure on those companies
and individuals that show a genetic weakness for competitors' technologies, to
make the industry increasingly resistant to such unhealthy strains, over
time."
--Microsoft, internal documen
> I stand by my accusations, as I do not understand how a group of
> individuals, some with great knowledge, can damage others commitment,
> personalities and enthusiasm to the extent that some wish others death,
> or post personal information about people's family. I simply do not
> understand them, and to say it has always been like this, so it will
> never change, is, to me, very wrong. Which way should someone like me
> approach it?
Physical threats sound like the type of tactics Microsoft munchkins employed
back in OS/2 days. The aggravation from the trolls in this newsgroup is
intended to have a similar effect. Disclosure of people's address, for
example, is a form of intimidation.
> I know I am not alone in this. A community is made up from many different
> persons, facets, but all with a common goal. That goal I feel, is to
> damage Linux beyond repair, then blame someone else for it's demise.
The code is shared by all and the umbrella is probably the licence. When
patents were introduced into the equation (Novell-type deals), then GPLv3 came
along to resolved this. Without vigilance, our sharing of code can be
imperiled. A lot of top lawyers in Microsoft would do anything to spoil our
code. Watch what SCO did...
- --
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | while (!0==1) echo 'Bill Gates' > /dev/null
http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Tasks: 140 total, 1 running, 139 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkkDT6kACgkQU4xAY3RXLo7QXwCgj29CxcVIxsc7YoNG6yd4mqa5
hIMAn2zW3iY0+pyFEj3CSa1ywUTBgPz1
=tCVv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
