Editorial: Open source is not about love

Filed under
OSS

As some open source developers seem to be unable to accept a mere reporting of a bug, this got me a reason for a long summary. I'll have to start by invoking the Evil before trying to prove that nowadays there is a severe lack of direction in whatever concerns the open-source desktop.

Here's Gartner explaining why Windows is broken. I will only quote a very limited amount of text, because it's enough by far:

«Microsoft's operating system (OS) development times are too long and they deliver limited innovation; their OSs provide an inconsistent experience between platforms, with significant compatibility issues; and other vendors are out-innovating Microsoft. That gives enterprises unpredictable releases with limited value, management costs that are too high, and new releases that break too many apps and take too long to test and adopt.»

This is why you should never trust the analysts! Yes, I agree that Windows is delivering "limited innovation", but what is what a customer needs: a product that fulfills some specific needs, or "innovation"? Are you normally going to buy "a sofa with innovation", "a car with innovation", "a computer with innovation", or a product that does its job the way it was supposed?

Then, if what we blame Microsoft for is the lack of innovation, how come that some open source people have found .NET such a marvelous innovation that they reimplemented it under the name of Mono? Mono is the most prominent Microsoft technology that has been adopted by Linux — and my faithful readers should already know that I deeply hate Mono!

Now it's time to switch to the open-source operating systems: are they chosen mostly for the innovative part of the picture? Once again, I don't believe this is the case.

More Here




Rant Royale

It seems like an annual ritual. I'll let it pass.

re: Beranger's editorial

I usually find reading Beranger both interesting and informative.

But for the love of all things typographical - Beranger, PLEASE take a remedial freaking design course.

Your 30 chapter SUPER-WIDE-ONE-COLUMN-WIDTH (un-floating) diatribe is an great example on how NOT to design a web page.

There's a reason newspapers are printed in columns - it's called READABILITY.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.