[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: kde-devel
Subject: Re: Open source vs Closed source... What makes Open Source tick.
From: viwe lolwane <ghostnet2000 () gmail ! com>
Date: 2009-07-29 7:51:29
Message-ID: 6d02055d0907290051v6780dbeax3f2e8366ce6a7602 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]
Hi Michael
If 7 versions of Microsoft Operating system are all craps why is it that
they still up today
dominate the desktop market, even when KDE is distributed for free sure if
KDE was
such a good system users would have opted to use linux/KDE instead of
Microsoft OS. I
doubt that KDE is user friendly than Microsoft, I have seen many post
complaining about
userbility on this mailing list, it seem that the user friendly of KDE still
needs to be looked
at.
The model that open source uses, I would think that it has many weakness for
example it is
very hard for unexperienced programmers to get into the movement because of
very poooooor
documentation, For someone to contribute to the program he must be a very
skilled developer.
I know there are areas where non developers can work on like translation but
my focus is really
on the development side.
I would like to end this post by asking this question, Is it possible that
someday linux will dominate
the market or Microsoft is here to stay?
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 4:04 AM, Michael Howell <mhowell123@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Tuesday 28 July 2009 02:15:50 viwe lolwane wrote:
> > Hi everyone.
> > Just have a general question on open source, I would like to know what is
> > the reason behind
> > the success of open source development, looking at the success of
> products
> > like linux, kde
> > this are world class software products.. when you look at the
> development
> > process of open
> > source I can deduce that documentation is rare, the developers operate on
> > environments like
> > mailing list, forums, they rarely meet.
> >
> > How are reliable are open source softwares compared to closed source
> > softwares developed
> > like organizations, and i would also like to compare the development
> > process used by both. is
> > it fair to say that open source software must be full of bugs and errors
> > compared to closed
> > source because it is designed by volunteers but again it has been
> > successful. is the future
> > of development an open source development process or are we doomed to
> fail?
> >
> > What is really good about Open Source, and what are the disadvantages.
> Firstly: Open Source software is written by individuals and companies.
> Closed
> Source software is written by companies and individuals. For example,
> Trolltech wrote Qt, which backs KDE, and many companies have written
> drivers
> inside Linux.
>
> Now, to compare distributed OSS development vs. non-distributed CSS
> development (in other words, the typical models for both).
>
> In a distributed OSS model, all defects are immediately visible: already
> discovered ones are in the bug tracker, and unknown ones are visible in the
> code, ready to be found. Problems can be found before they are triggered,
> giving well-tested OSS, such as KDE3.5 very stable.
>
> In a top-down CSS model, defects are kept secret, to give investigators the
> illusion that the software is bug free. Bugs can last for a very long time
> in
> virtually unchanged code for years.
>
> In a distributed OSS model, vendor lock-in is impossible. Since the code is
> available, interoperability can easily exist. Giving KDE as the example
> again,
> we can look at the KIO, KParts, Plasma, etc that allow for KDE apps to work
> and act the same.
>
> In a top-down CSS model, the same work-together attitude does not exist.
> The
> win32 APIs are crap (yes, I said it, the raw win32 APIs are crap crap
> crap);
> even Microsoft-developed software usually contains their own layers between
> the win32 APIs and internal program structures. Microsoft Office and
> Windows
> Media Player are shining examples: neither of them use anything resembling
> the
> appearance of any other Windows applications. This can also be argued as
> being
> the fault of Microsoft having no UI standards, except that KDE3 didn't have
> any UI standards, either, but was still very consistent.
>
> In a distributed OSS model, the people making the software want good
> software.
> Often, they wish to use the software they are making. This can be a very
> good
> thing, because it means that the software will not include annoyware, will
> not
> contain DRM, etc. It can be a bad thing, too, because the software is often
> not very user-friendly.
>
> In a top-down CSS model, software is made to be sold, and to be sell-able.
> Things such as nagware, DRM, crippleware, etc, do exist. As an extreme
> example, look at the seven (yes, 7) versions of Windows 7. Microsoft wants
> people to buy the same software twice, and makes the software to ensure
> that
> happens by selling people crippleware to start with, and ensure that you
> want
> the Ultimate version, even if you'll never use the features it provides, by
> not making the difference clear.
> However, this also means that the software will be designed to be user-
> friendly, so that people will buy it.
>
> --
> Please don't send HTML mail. If you forward mail, please remove the
> garbage.
> Thanks!
>
> Michael Howell
> mhowell123@gmail.com
>
>
> >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to
> unsubscribe <<
>
>
--
viwe lolwane.
S A Square Kilometer Array Telescope
cell +2782 367 9417
Phone (w) :021 531 7282
Fax:021 531 9761
Website: www.ska.ac.za
[Attachment #5 (text/html)]
Hi Michael<div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>If 7 versions of \
Microsoft Operating system are all craps why is it that they still up today \
</div><div>dominate the desktop market, even when KDE is distributed for free sure if \
KDE was</div> <div>such a good system users would have opted to use linux/KDE instead \
of Microsoft OS. I</div><div>doubt that KDE is user friendly than Microsoft, I have \
seen many post complaining about </div><div>userbility on this mailing list, it seem \
that the user friendly of KDE still needs to be looked</div> <div>at. </div><div><br \
class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>The model that open source uses, I would \
think that it has many weakness for example it is </div><div>very hard for \
unexperienced programmers to get into the movement because of very<span \
class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);"> poooooor </span></div> \
<div>documentation, For someone to contribute to the program he must be a very \
skilled developer.</div><div>I know there are areas where non developers can work on \
like translation but my focus is really</div><div>on the development side.</div> \
<div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>I would like to end this post by \
asking this question, Is it possible that someday linux will dominate</div><div>the \
market or Microsoft is here to stay? <br><br><div class="gmail_quote"> On Wed, Jul \
29, 2009 at 4:04 AM, Michael Howell <span dir="ltr"><<a \
href="mailto:mhowell123@gmail.com">mhowell123@gmail.com</a>></span> \
wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px \
#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"> <div class="im">On Tuesday 28 July 2009 02:15:50 viwe \
lolwane wrote:<br> > Hi everyone.<br>
> Just have a general question on open source, I would like to know what is<br>
> the reason behind<br>
> the success of open source development, looking at the success of products<br>
> like linux, kde<br>
> this are world class software products.. when you look at the development<br>
> process of open<br>
> source I can deduce that documentation is rare, the developers operate on<br>
> environments like<br>
> mailing list, forums, they rarely meet.<br>
><br>
> How are reliable are open source softwares compared to closed source<br>
> softwares developed<br>
> like organizations, and i would also like to compare the development<br>
> process used by both. is<br>
> it fair to say that open source software must be full of bugs and errors<br>
> compared to closed<br>
> source because it is designed by volunteers but again it has been<br>
> successful. is the future<br>
> of development an open source development process or are we doomed to fail?<br>
><br>
> What is really good about Open Source, and what are the disadvantages.<br>
</div>Firstly: Open Source software is written by individuals and companies. \
Closed<br> Source software is written by companies and individuals. For example,<br>
Trolltech wrote Qt, which backs KDE, and many companies have written drivers<br>
inside Linux.<br>
<br>
Now, to compare distributed OSS development vs. non-distributed CSS<br>
development (in other words, the typical models for both).<br>
<br>
In a distributed OSS model, all defects are immediately visible: already<br>
discovered ones are in the bug tracker, and unknown ones are visible in the<br>
code, ready to be found. Problems can be found before they are triggered,<br>
giving well-tested OSS, such as KDE3.5 very stable.<br>
<br>
In a top-down CSS model, defects are kept secret, to give investigators the<br>
illusion that the software is bug free. Bugs can last for a very long time in<br>
virtually unchanged code for years.<br>
<br>
In a distributed OSS model, vendor lock-in is impossible. Since the code is<br>
available, interoperability can easily exist. Giving KDE as the example again,<br>
we can look at the KIO, KParts, Plasma, etc that allow for KDE apps to work<br>
and act the same.<br>
<br>
In a top-down CSS model, the same work-together attitude does not exist. The<br>
win32 APIs are crap (yes, I said it, the raw win32 APIs are crap crap crap);<br>
even Microsoft-developed software usually contains their own layers between<br>
the win32 APIs and internal program structures. Microsoft Office and Windows<br>
Media Player are shining examples: neither of them use anything resembling the<br>
appearance of any other Windows applications. This can also be argued as being<br>
the fault of Microsoft having no UI standards, except that KDE3 didn't have<br>
any UI standards, either, but was still very consistent.<br>
<br>
In a distributed OSS model, the people making the software want good software.<br>
Often, they wish to use the software they are making. This can be a very good<br>
thing, because it means that the software will not include annoyware, will not<br>
contain DRM, etc. It can be a bad thing, too, because the software is often<br>
not very user-friendly.<br>
<br>
In a top-down CSS model, software is made to be sold, and to be sell-able.<br>
Things such as nagware, DRM, crippleware, etc, do exist. As an extreme<br>
example, look at the seven (yes, 7) versions of Windows 7. Microsoft wants<br>
people to buy the same software twice, and makes the software to ensure that<br>
happens by selling people crippleware to start with, and ensure that you want<br>
the Ultimate version, even if you'll never use the features it provides, by<br>
not making the difference clear.<br>
However, this also means that the software will be designed to be user-<br>
friendly, so that people will buy it.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
Please don't send HTML mail. If you forward mail, please remove the garbage.<br>
Thanks!<br>
<br>
Michael Howell<br>
<a href="mailto:mhowell123@gmail.com">mhowell123@gmail.com</a><br>
</font><br><br>
>> Visit <a href="http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub" \
target="_blank">http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub</a> to \
unsubscribe <<<br> <br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>viwe \
lolwane. <br>S A Square Kilometer Array Telescope<br><br>cell +2782 367 9417<br>Phone \
(w) :021 531 7282<br>Fax:021 531 9761<br>Website: <a \
href="http://www.ska.ac.za">www.ska.ac.za</a><br>
</div>
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic