Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Wiley Programmers Work for Peer Respect

Filed under
Linux

Please don't take this as being overly critical. I think that Mr. Starks viewpoint is shared by many other people and I don't see anything wrong with it. However, I'd like to try and explain why things work the way they do. Hopefully the following will sheds some light in that respect.

In Ken Starks open letter he brings up quite a few salient points. Any OS needs a clean interface that serves it's users well. Linux needs to have an accounting package similar to QuickBooks so that users of QuickBooks will use Linux.

I've read this last one in quite a few places from quite a few random people. Sometimes the program is QuickBooks, sometimes PhotoShop, or sometimes a more esoteric special purpose application.

That didn't really draw my attention. In some ways, exhorting free software hackers to program you a clone of application Y has attained a sort of ritualistic quality to it. Dance around monolith, sprinkle water, rinse, repeat. It's easy to do with little practical effect.

One of the reasons it's not effective is pointed out in the next paragraph. After querying why developers don't work on their spare time to create an interface that's not what they want to use, it's pointed out that two developers do their work for peer acknowledgment. I suppose when I phrase it that way it becomes somewhat more apparent.

What I do find odd is that people expect the developer "community" that works on packages running on Linux to care about them. They expect their wants addressed (by random developers) or they'll stop using Linux. Who this should be addressed to is commercial vendors, not random application developers. Distribution vendors actually do care if you use Linux.

People that develop software in their spare time generally do so to scratch an itch. Maybe they need something to benchmark hardware (like I did). Maybe they just want some recognition of their talent by their peer group (like our two examples).

I think the disconnect may be that people forget the reason behind open source applications being created. It tends to be to satisfy the programmer's (or institution's) need.

Full Story.

Thank you for your candid response

Thank you for your level-headed response and concise explanation. The inferno that is my email inbox is full of responses ranging from angry disagreements to threats of physical abuse. Overwhelmingly though, there are messages of support and agreement. No complaints here...the points I raised in my letter are important enough to me that I will withstand all manner of critisism.

Please let me assure you, I have been in contact with software vendors for three years now, lobbying the Linux Case. I did this long before my appeal to the Development Community. The response to my requests may as well have been copied and pasted from a single source. "At this time, the low user base of Linux does not merit the expense of developing our software to fit those needs." So I turn to you.

In more than one response to my letter, I have been accused of being on a "crusade". I have been told that I am "pissing in the wind" and that until Linux Developers are compensated for their time and efforts, Linux is destined to remain a hobby for geeks and a far-off promise for the computing world. I see some of this validated by your response and some of the link examples you provide. So where does that leave the millions of people who have put their faith and trust in Linux? No...I really want that question answered. Where does that leave the rest of us? As well, where does that leave the brilliant distribution development teams that have provided us such astonishing efforts as PCLinuxOS, Mepis and Kanotix? If we are to fully accept those explanations you provide as to why Linux Developers do not create the software needed to make Linux a viable desktop alternative, then the question becomes rhetorical.

I suppose when it is boiled down to its base ingrediants, the solution is to use Red Hat, Suse, Xandros or any of the other proprietary distributions and hope their development teams can answer our needs. Thats a shame, because people like me would be more than happy to pay for a native Linux application that rivals Quickbooks or Quicken. Yes, Gnucash is a fine effort, but others besides myself consider it to be one of the half-finished apps that litter Linux. Many people find it perfect for their needs as you do, but many small and medium businesses do not.

While I truely appreciate your candid and timely response, I cannot feel anything less than discouraged by it. Basically you have explained to me what most people already knew. Linux users are subject to the whims of its developers and should consider themselves blessed when manna trickles down upon them. If this is indeed true, then the only other thing that needs to be written for Linux is its obituary.

Ken Starks

re: Thank you for your candid response

> Basically you have explained to me what most people already knew. Linux users are subject to the whims of its developers and should consider themselves blessed when manna trickles down upon them.

lolol...

good comeback helios! take no prisoners. Big Grin

----
You talk the talk, but do you waddle the waddle?

Comment viewing options

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

More in Tux Machines

Games: Two Point Hospital, PLAY WITH ME and More

OSS: HIT, SUSE, FSFE, Meaning of Open, Bell Canada

  • How Open Source, Crowdsourcing Aids HIT Development
    HIT development is important for health IT infrastructure growth as organizations continue to go through their digital transformations. Entities are interested in the most innovative and advanced technology to assist with increased workflows and improve patient care. Open source and crowdsourcing to improve innovation are key to quickly building on technology being developed for healthcare. This is especially true when it comes to newer technology like artificial intelligence (AI) and blockchain. Healthcare organizations and healthcare technology companies cannot simply wait around for advanced technology to develop around them.
  • Open source in the enterprise: Trends and opportunities in 2018
    Some big events are set to come in 2018 – the recently announced Royal Wedding, the football World Cup in Russia and the incoming general data protection regulation (GDPR) to name just a few. And 2018 is also set to be a significant year for business technology. Some of the key trends in enterprise IT will include the continued move to hybrid cloud, the emergence of the container infrastructure ecosystem and ongoing growth in software-defined infrastructure and storage. Most interestingly, we foresee a number of significant open source developments here. So what exactly should we expect to see? And how can IT teams make the most of these emerging opportunities?
  • Keeping an Irish home warm and free in winter
    This issue would also appear to fall under the scope of FSFE's Public Money Public Code campaign. Looking at the last set of heating controls in the house, they have been there for decades. Therefore, I can't help wondering, if I buy some proprietary black box today, will the company behind it still be around when it needs a software upgrade in future? How many of these black boxes have wireless transceivers inside them that will be compromised by security flaws within the next 5-10 years, making another replacement essential? With free and open technologies, anybody who is using it can potentially make improvements whenever they want. Every time a better algorithm is developed, if all the homes in the country start using it immediately, we will always be at the cutting edge of energy efficiency.
  • The Meaning of Open
    Open systems create gravity wells. Systems that are truly open tend to attract others to join them at an ever-accelerating pace. In ecosystems that are ruled by a despot no matter how successful other participants in the ecosystem are, they fundamentally just empower the despot to have more leverage over them, because they have more to lose and their success feeds the despot’s success. In open systems, on the contrary, participants see that they don’t have to fear their own success fueling their own increasing subservience to a despot. Each individual entity who can’t plausibly build their own similarly-sized proprietary ecosystem to compete — the overwhelming majority of entities — is incentivized to pitch in on the open ecosystem. Investment in an open ecosystem by any one entity helps the entire ecosystem as a whole. This fact, combined with the fact that ecosystems generally get exponentially more valuable the more participants there are, means that in many cases over sufficient time scales truly open ecosystems create gravity wells, sucking more and more into them until they are nearly universal.
  • Bell Canada brings open source automation ONAP into production
    Bell Canada has implemented it's first automation use case using the Linux Foundation's Open Network Automation Platform (ONAP) as part of the telco's Network 3.0 transformation initiative. With an initial focus on its data center network infrastructure, Bell Canada is working with its network integration and back-office partner Amdocs to reduce costs and delivery capabilities.
  • Bell Canada Reaches Milestone in Network 3.0 Vision with Open Network Automation Platform (ONAP) and Strategic Partnership with Amdocs

Linux Kernel 4.15 Delayed

  • Linux Kernel 4.15 Delayed Until Next Week as Linus Torvalds Announces a Rare RC9
    While the Linux community was looking forwards to the final Linux 4.15 kernel release today, Linus Torvalds just delayed it for another week, announcing the ninth Release Candidate (RC) instead. It's not every day that you see a ninth Release Candidate in the development cycle of a new Linux kernel branch, but here we go, and we can only blame it on those pesky Meltdown and Spectre security vulnerabilities that affect us all, putting billions of devices at risk of attacks.
  • Linux 4.15 becomes slowest release since 2011
    Linus Torvalds has decided that Linux 4.15 needs a ninth release candidate, making it the first kernel release to need that much work since 2011. Torvalds flagged the possibility of an extra release candidate last week, with the caveat that “it obviously requires this upcoming week to not come with any huge surprises” after “all the Meltdown and Spectre hoopla” made his job rather more complicated in recent weeks. Fast-forward another week and Torvalds has announced “I really really wanted to just release 4.15 today, but things haven't calmed down enough for me to feel comfy about it”.
  • No 4.15 final release today
    As might have been expected from watching the commit stream, the 4.15 kernel is not ready for release, so we'll get 4.15-rc9 instead. Linus said: "I really really wanted to just release 4.15 today, but things haven't calmed down enough for me to feel comfy about it, and Davem tells me he still has some networking fixes pending. Laura Abbott found and fixed a very subtle boot bug introduced this development cycle only yesterday, and it just didn't feel right to say that we're done."

Linus Torvalds Calls Linux Patch for Intel CPUs "Complete and Utter Garbage"

The patch submitted by David Woodhouse, ex-Intel kernel engineer that now works for Amazon described a so-called new feature for Intel processors to address Indirect Branch Restricted Speculation (IBRS) by creating macros that would restrict or unrestrict Indirect Branch Speculation based on if the Intel CPU will advertise "I am able to be not broken." The "x86/enter: Create macros to restrict/unrestrict Indirect Branch Speculation" feature implies that the IBRS (Indirect Branch Restricted Speculation) bit needed to be set at boot time to "ask" the processor not to be broken. Linus Torvalds immediately reacted to the patch calling it "complete and utter garbage" despite the developer's efforts to explain why he implemented the nasty hack. Read more Original: [RFC 09/10] x86/enter: Create macros to restrict/unrestrict Indirect Branch Speculation