Open Source > Linux > LQ
May 18, 2005 4 Comments
Just posted an interview with James Turner and Dee-Ann LeBlanc, who recently stepped down from Sys-Con. The levels came out much better this time and the content was very good. We also have a BitTorrent tracker up now, which should help with the bandwidth issues. I'd like to thank both Dee-Ann and James for taking the time to be on the show.
–jeremy
May 17, 2005 Leave a comment
The LQ Wiki has been upgraded. Let us know if you notice any problems. Remember – we are trying to build the largest free general Linux knowledge base on the web and you can help. All content is licensed under a creative commons license. Thanks goes to david_ross once again.
–jeremy
May 16, 2005 Leave a comment
I blogged about this here and we also discussed it a bit on the first LQ Radio show. Here is some information that will hopefully clear things up. Seems my first assertion, that this thing was being blown a bit out of proportion, is indeed true. Good to see that since the article the Wecore and KHTML folks have discussed how code could be shared easier. Due to the differences in implementation (X11/QT/KHTML/Konq vs. OSX/Aqua/Webcore/Safari) it's clear that not all code will always be able to go back and forth, but open discussion is a fantastic start IMHO.
–jeremy
May 15, 2005 Leave a comment
I am proud to announce that the inaugural episode of the LQ Radio Show has been posted. We had to work through a couple of technical issues, but overall I think the show came out quite well. Thanks to Robin, John and Dave for agreeing to be the first panelists. If you have any feedback on the show, please post it to the LQ Radio site. I've attached one last audio reminder that the RSS feeds have moved from my blog to the LQ Radio site, to catch any last podcatchers that may be pointed here.
–jeremy
May 14, 2005 1 Comment
After this post I received some feedback and also noticed this post asking why I though Red Hat was dropping support for OpenLDAP. From a session I attended at FedoraCON, that was the idea I got. Looking into it further, it seems this is untrue and that Red Hat will likely be supporting both. I apologize. I think supporting both is probably best anyway – choice is always good. The linked post also makes a good point, and one that I actually meant to mention last time but didn't (while I didn't read all 62 pages, I did read the page referenced). Comparing AD and OpenLDAP really isn't fair – AD is a purpose-built system that is a native User Management mechanism in win2003. Much effort has gone into that integration. OpenLDAP is not a native User Management mechanism in RHEL, nor has much effort gone into any integration. Additionally, OpenLDAP is a full featured LDAP implementation that in the end in infinitely more flexible than AD. I think this brings out one of the great things about the blogosphere. We can have frank and honest discussions about things and learn from one another.
May 13, 2005 Leave a comment
This seems to be another case of the media playing something up way beyond what it is. They sure do like a fight, don't they? Some KDE/KHTML developers recently made comments about how they were unhappy with the way the Apple/KHTML relationship had worked out. Next thing you know, you have articles with titles like “Open-source divorce for Apple's Safari?”. From my POV, the KDE guys made it clear that Apple is following the licensing requirements. The ability to fork is something inherent in Open Source, so being angry that Apple is taking WebCore in a different direction then KHTML seems a bit odd to me. To be fair though, I've really not looked into the details of this enough to form a valid opinion on who is right or wrong here – if anyone even is right/wrong). Sure, it'd have been ideal if both teams had the exact same vision and code fluidly moved back and forth. This is not an ideal world though. Ben Goodger, the lead Firefox engineer, also had something to say about the matter. One comment in his post struck me as odd though. It seems to me that rushing features to hit a deadline really isn't them Open Source way. Release it when it's ready. Of course, there is a line you have to walk – you don't want to have no releases at all while you tweak things beyond belief (which is what I think he was trying to say), but cutting corners to hit a release date will in the end come back to bite you.
–jeremy
May 12, 2005 Leave a comment
The second part of this article has been posted. Not as much info as the first piece, but still interesting. The article outlines six “battles” that Microsoft must face: Sort out security, Get into the living room, Get them young, Go mobile, Serious software and Open source. They have been focusing on security for some time now, but still have a long way to go in this department. Will Longhorn be as secure as they claim? Too early to tell of course, but getting it truly secure without changing the paradigm of how Windows works, and therefore confusing the “average” user, is certainly going to be a challenge. They are doing well in the living room and the new Xbox2 should help that quite a bit. So far their Mobile attempts have been lackluster at best, especially in the cell phone segment. The one ironic statement in the article came from Bill Gates. When discussing Open Source, he said: “Such software, Bill Gates tells customers, might not be “interoperable”. Is he really trying to say that Open Source, which is almost always based on open standards, is somehow less “interoperable” then Windows and the other Microsoft products? Comments like these have to make some Microsoft employees cringe.
–jeremy
May 11, 2005 Leave a comment
To answer Doc's questions – No, I don't think Microsoft would buy Red Hat. There are just too many obstacles. The potential anti-trust issues involved would be one (Microsoft already has a near OS monopoly and then buys the leader in the Linux market? The deal might not even be approved). Next are the culture issues. How much talent would Red Hat lose if this happened? My guess is a lot, as Red Hat has a ton of people who breathe Open Source. Also, how many of Red Hat's clients went with Linux to get away from Microsoft. Lastly, the damage this would do to the ego's of some high Microsoft execs surely couldn't be tolerated. I can think of a couple more reasons, but in the end, while anything is possible I think this one is HIGHLY unlikely. As I mentioned earlier though, Microsoft has been a bit more open to the competition, and this is a trend I think will continue. Will it go as far as some sort of MSFT/RHAT partnership some day? Only time will tell.
–jeremy
May 11, 2005 2 Comments
As a follow-up to this story, it looks like Maureen O'Gara will no longer be writing for sys-con. In addition, old material is being removed from the sites. Good to see that sys-con came to their senses and kudos to the LinuxWorld editors who chose to take a stand on this.
–jeremy
May 10, 2005 Leave a comment
An interesting BBC article about Microsoft's increasing competition. Competition that is coming from an ever increasing number of directions. So is Microsoft going to implode? No, it's more like death from 1000 cuts. Let's not forget though, Microsoft has enough money for quite a few bandaides. And they still have a ton of talent, even if they aren't innovating at the moment. What I think is going to happen is a slow erosion of some of Microsoft's cash cow products, such as Office and Windows. Don't get me wrong, when Longhorn finally comes out it will ship a ton of units. But the damage the delays and feature cuts have have done to thier image – that they won't get back. The article makes a good point; companies are no longer afraid to compete with Microsoft. Not only that, some companies are competing and actually staying in business. Imagine that. So where does that leave MSFT? They'll surely try to get into other markets, but most of those won't allow them the margins and revenues that shareholders have come to expect. Like their business practices or not, Microsoft puts up very good numbers very consistently. What market is large enough? Entertainment and Media, which is a direction that Microsoft is already headed in. I would not be surprised at all if in ten years they generate as much revenue from those industries as they do from software, if not more. Only time will tell. What do you think?
–jeremy
Jeremy's Blog 
You must be logged in to post a comment.