Re: MICROSOFT HIRED THESE PEOPLE TO SABOTAGE OPEN SOURCE
Le 08.04.2013 12:44, Nate Bargmann a écrit :
* On 2013 08 Apr 03:24 -0500, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
Please, continue at email@example.com
Why? This list does not have an iron fisted moderator.
Some of the assertions in the picture are true, at least as to the
behavior of software and personalities, and this affects me as a
user and is NOT off-topic, IMO. So, I'm staying right here.
What I've seen in the picture are insults for people which try to make
things going in the good direction. Well, the direction which they think
is the good one.
In France, we have... well, we had, sadly, since it starts to
disappear, what we named "innocence presumption".
Where do I want to go with that?
Easy. This dirty image (I have no idea about the other link, except
that it is a 404 error) shows insults on people which have not been
judged, and there is not even the start of a debate. It says that those
people are hassles (between other insults), show their faces, and
extract some informations from their context to prove it's assertions.
Because there is a but!
Who made this image? Did this person contributed *any* line of code?
How could MS introduce enough people in core dev teams to have the
possibility to make the majority of votes about integrating stuff or
And, finally, those tools are all free softwares, are not they?
If they go in wrong direction, do not insult people with different view
than yours, just fork, and federate everyone who think you are right.
Then, well, infiltrated projects will die by themselves.
Please, remember that: contributing source code to big software is
hard, takes time, and that work is not every-time well recognized.
Some of it is good and helpful and others seem little
more than needless disruption coming from *somewhere*.
Well, if they were poisoned, how could have good decisions come?
Actually, I did my first try of Debian at potato version. I miserably
failed, because the installer did not installed Xorg at that time. I
tried Ubuntu the same year. I did not liked the DE: Gnome. At that time,
I did not known that it was possible to change it so just came back to
my good old XP, thinking that I will successfully install a Debian some
I tried again around 4 years ago, with success. Gnome, again. But by
that time, I played at school with a distro with KDE (I do not remember
the distro name) which I thought was really better. It made me learn
many things about linux distributions, by example that you can choose
almost everything you install.
So, when I tried, I also took a look at all major existing DEs:
KDE I had used at school. Too heavy for my tastes.
Gnome was... too strange, and "closed", not possible to change enough
XFCE4.6. Yes. It was lightweight, and I was quickly able to make it
like my usual windows's DE.
Now, I am not using a DE anymore, and also planning about creating a DE
based on a tiling WM and minimalistic tools that you can use in keyboard
only. Since my first contacts with linux, KDE made a total rewrite (if I
understood correctly what I can read here and there) and since I am
using linux on a daily base, gnome started it also, and Ubuntu made
their own. And what do I see? People saying decisions are bad, but not
acting. Some do: parts of gnome have been forked, but their forkers are
not even able find a consensus and work together.
So, what? Are the bad decision you speak about really bad, or is it
simply *your* opinion?
If they were really bad, people would have made a successful fork of
each of them by the time.
Since it is not the actual situation, I deduce that it is just bad
decision in the opinion of some people, which failed to make something
better in the opinions of the majority, so major DEs are still major,
and forks are still minor.
It has worked as companies have remained with MS
Well... I have never seen anything which was a true value adding
feature in OpenOffice.org. It simply copied interface and features of MS
Office, in my opinion, and is just as boring to use. On the other hand,
MS tried new interfaces (which I personally hate) and people often say
me that OpenOffice is good, but lacks powerful features of MS Office.
I do not know enough that kind of tools to judge myself, honestly. I
prefer from long time raw texts, HTML pages and now LaTeX. Funny thing:
LaTeX is powerful, but have no real good WYSIWIG editor...
Perhaps a study of the Halloween Documents from 1998 and onward is in
Hey, funny name, do not you think?
And, how is market going for MS since then? As far as I can see, it is
slowly falling, which makes me think they just failed.
In those 15 years, they also have changed their politics about Open
Source. I am more feared my Google that by Microsoft, honestly.
Including the witch-hunting it belongs to /dev/null.
What witch hunting? I too am frustrated by the directions some major
projects have taken in recent years and have moved to projects that
haven't yet taken such a track toward a "screw you" attitude. I want
know who these people are and their motivations. While I would
immediately distrust anyone who uses the term "product vision" out
I respect Linus because he clearly knows what belongs in the kernel
what doesn't and is not afraid to say so without need of buzz words..
The one that the OP tries to start, with accusations, insults, and no
clues or real facts.
I know that I am feeding the troll, but that kind of messages really
hurts me on a list where I am more used to see help than dirty words
like the OP's ones.