Originally posted by Del_
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Shuttleworth On Mir: "A Fantastic Piece of Engineering"
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Ramiliez View Post??? So instead of using or contributing to Wayland he will burn money on duplicating Wayland?
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by johnc View PostI was responding to the notion that Canonical was intending to be nothing more than an integrator of community-provided free software. It's an unsustainable long-term strategy, financially speaking.
Comment
-
Originally posted by AdamW View PostWell, you posted the graph . I agree that their numbers are probably somewhat subject to anomalies because the Linux base is so tiny - I don't think their sample size is huge. But the trend is more or less the same as w3schools: slow growth, short faster growth, flat. It's flat for two and a half years; hard to write off as an anomaly, especially when w3schools shows the same thing.
Originally posted by AdamW View PostSo it often doesn't matter much to you what it is that provides that shell, so long as it's competent. Ubuntu would do fine. So would Fedora, or Arch, or RHEL, or anything else at all. Maybe you like one more than the other in some other context, but in the EC2 context, it probably just doesn't matter.
Originally posted by AdamW View PostSo the fact that Ubuntu goes to the trouble to make tested images that work right out of the box available right from Amazon's AMI download page counts for a lot. You're not going to bother going out and trying to find Fedora's or Arch's AMI images, which probably don't work as well anyway. Because Ubuntu's done the work to be the big prominent Linux choice on the AMI download pages, you'll just grab Ubuntu. It's there, and it'll get you to a Linux environment with a shell, and you're happy. You probably don't care about expert paid tech support for your EC2 instance, or whether it'll still have updates in five years' time, or any of that crap; you just want a working Linux environment.
Originally posted by AdamW View PostPersonally I vastly prefer engineers to analysts. RH engineers have been building the basic pieces of the cloud since before the cloud was a thing. We're perfectly on top of the trends, thanks.
Originally posted by AdamW View PostIt seems plausible, I'll give you that; I'm just not sure I'd be confident stating it as an unalloyed fact.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View PostUhuh you keep telling yourself that, come back to me when you've actually figured out linguistics and how it relates to math and other languages, and learn enough history and the way things work to not make an absolute fool of yourself. In fact reading up on history is perhaps the best thing you can do to get back in touch with reality since you don't seem to have any clue about how development cycles of anything actually works.
- Counting from the creation of Assembly in 1949 Programming as we know it is 64 years old
- Counting from the creation of C in in 1972 Modern languages have been around for 51 years
- Counting from the creation of C++ in 1983 and ratification in 1998 Object Oriented Programming has been around for 30 years and usable for 15
(yes one can argue to dating to other languages besides the assembly one but the ultimate point is that Software engineering is an extremely young field)
On the other hand Building engineering has been around for almost as long as humanity has so that they get things right the first time is to be expected (although even then it's not always true, see Galloping Gertie) because all the hard R&D is done. Space Travel counter to your spouting is the perfect example of why that adobe guy and you are full of shit. Don't take my word for it, actually research the history of NASA, and look and realize that there's a real world out there, and in that real world the math doesn't always work (should you be surprised? no, math is a model and so by definition can't be the real thing and so you have to expect limitations), and solutions aren't just automatic when you do the math. There is development and planning of models required. Dark matter is a perfect example of the limitations of math, despite the scifi nonsense Dark Matter is purely fudging the calculation in order to make it work. That's right it's a hole in the model and so they shoved this placeholder in there to balance the books, and it's not the only place holder they have for that particular hole just the one that's well known because the SciFi writers liked the term.
When we do finally have enough quality permissively licensed well tested modular components available to cover almost all use cases (such that people aren't having to write their own) we will finally be able to do the equivalent of just throwing out a bridge on time and without meaningful bugs, but until that point writing software is and will continue to be in the R&D stages of an Engineering Field. That said for being 64 years old software engineering is in an absolutely amazing state, it is one of if not the most rapidly developed engineering disciplines to have come into existence.
Just ask Knuth or Dijsktra (if you could) what programming really is and stop just throwing out things that do not sum up to nothing. I'm mathematician and you have no fscking idea what it is really all about, so stop talking about it like if you did, because you are embarassing yourself. Also, linguistics? WTF, you have no idea what you are saying.
Now, keep thinking that OOP is the true foundation for programming (I don't care if you don't want to open yourself and have such a NARROW view of programming), but stop implying that Knuth or Dijkstra or even Stepanov are just fools, or even imply that Alonso Church and Kurt G?del are also that, because you own much of what you do to people like them.
"Math is a model and so by definition..." Haha, you are lost...
Comment
-
Hahaha...
Yeah... OK...
Fedora is lightyears ahead. And if one can't install it on their hardware, then that's because they didn't do their homework on buying good hardware. Of course all the hacks and exceptions will be added later on so it can be installed on shitty chipsets and/or pisspoor driver hacks.
Never ever was my Linux experience pitch-perfect. It screams performance, stability and quality I've never seen in a Linux distro, ever.
Ubuntu doesn't have multiseat (requires Wayland). Ubuntu is only now picking up systemd. Unity search is piss-poor and malware, even. Unity doesn't even come near Gnome 3.6. Ubuntu touch will get slaughtered by Gnome 3.8's touch work. Unity has Mesa glitches that are fixed only recently in the open drivers (can be seen with Intel and Radeon GPU's)... What was Canonical thinking? Probably has something to do with cognitive-decline.
While Android grows more towards vanilla (it's s till a GNU-toolchainless-crapfest), Canonical seems to think that Android is the way to go. Boy they are wrong...
PS: Oh and don't forget Gnome/KDE/GTK/Qt HTML5 work, so X.org can be axed. Yet Canonical thinks a C++-based Qt SDK and X.org is the way to go. Jeez... Even Microsoft realizes HTML5 is the future.Last edited by V!NCENT; 08 March 2013, 07:14 PM.
Comment
-
An ecosystem, simply put, is a system where organisms interact with eachother and their environment.
A software ecosystem is a system where software/programs interact with eachother and their environment (the OS, or even the computer itself, if you will).
I don't see it as that much of a stretch. On the other hand, a software biosphere would be something to see...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Nobu View PostAn ecosystem, simply put, is a system where organisms interact with eachother and their environment.
A software ecosystem is a system where software/programs interact with eachother and their environment (the OS, or even the computer itself, if you will).
I don't see it as that much of a stretch. On the other hand, a software biosphere would be something to see...
Following the same metaphor, Android doesn't have or isn't an ecosystem - it's more like a colony or outgrowth of the Linux ecosystem. Windows and MacOS aren't ecosystems at all - they're more like zoos: you have to pay to enter and see the animals, some of the animals are glad to be there because they don't know of anything better, but ultimately the zookeeper controls what the selection of animals looks like and what kinds of animals the zoo is capable of supporting.
In a larger sense, the free software community could be called an ecosystem also - with each FOSS software project being an organism. Sometimes, these organisms get infected by proprietary parasites. When an organism is infected by these parasites, their descendants also carry the infection and become inable to interact with their original ecosystem, being instead forced to only work for the benefit of the parasite. Luckily, most of the organisms have developed an immunity - the GPL gene. However some organisms are still without that immunity, so they get exploited by proprietary parasites - BSD being the prime example, poor thing has been suffering from a bad case of the Apples, and refuses to take the antidote...
Comment
Comment