Board index » kylix » Re: Twisting in the wind?

Re: Twisting in the wind?


2004-02-23 10:43:22 PM
kylix1
"John Roberts" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
Sadly I agree with you. I do think Borland is cutting their losses.
Welcome to the lion's den<g>.
 
 

Re:Re: Twisting in the wind?

"John Roberts" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
ps
I applaud your efforts and hope you do produce something cool.
I'm just very skeptical about open source projects.
Open Source is as much a religion as anything else. You're either a true
believer or a skeptic.
 

Re:Re: Twisting in the wind?

John Roberts wrote:
Quote
I'll check it out, but I'm inherently suspicious about open-source projects
producing something of commercial quality. I did a paper about this
topic for one of my graduate CS classes. Check out my link off of:

www.cs.pdx.edu/~robertsj/

The specific paper link is:

www.cs.pdx.edu/~robertsj/debunk.html
Phew, basing the failure of Open Source upon exactly *one* example,
Mozilla, which I consider to be a success btw, is really bad.
Open Source is not about speedy development. It's about freedom of
speech, making what you want to be made. Like: 'if enough people want
it, it will be made'.
Each open source project has to be reviewed on it's own. You cannot say
"open source cannot produce anything of commercial grade quality",
that's a hideous generalisation.
Most of the points you consider bad, are actually a good. Code forking
allows for new ideas for example, and the best design will probably
stay, because it's least buggy and best fit for the job. (Although this
may be a generalisation too).
Just a few cents,
Micha.
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: Twisting in the wind?

"John Roberts" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message news:4039ff4a$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
Quote

"JQP" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
news:4038c47a$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
>"juliusz" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
>news:403794be$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
[snip]
>If you're convinced that Linux is on the verge of a desktop takeover, it
>looks like Borland is making a mistake. If not, it looks like Borland is
>coming to their senses and cutting their loses. After 3 years of real
>experience in this "market", management obviously has serious doubts as to
>whether there can ever be a "moneymaking future of Kylix".

Sadly I agree with you. I do think Borland is cutting their losses.

It seems to me that Linux has made an enclave into corporate server-style
computing, but has not and probably will not push into the desktop.

In part I agree. I actually think the corporate environment is where
the greatest immediate opportunity for the Linux desktop penetration
exists. A corporation can control the homogeneity of distro installations.
In theory this could ease the hassles of Kylix deployment. That said
it's also a great enviroment for Java/J2EE development which could be
good for Borland but not necessarily for Kylix.
--
Hilton Evans
-----------------------------------------------
ChemPen Chemical Structure Software
www.chempensoftware.com
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.593 / Virus Database: 376 - Release Date: 2/20/04
 

Re:Re: Twisting in the wind?

"Micha Nelissen" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message news:403a1592$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
Quote
John Roberts wrote:
>I'll check it out, but I'm inherently suspicious about open-source projects
>producing something of commercial quality. I did a paper about this
>topic for one of my graduate CS classes. Check out my link off of:
>
>www.cs.pdx.edu/~robertsj/
>
>The specific paper link is:
>
>www.cs.pdx.edu/~robertsj/debunk.html

Phew, basing the failure of Open Source upon exactly *one* example,
Mozilla, which I consider to be a success btw, is really bad.

Open Source is not about speedy development.
One of the oft stated advantages of open source is that bugs
get fixed and features get added faster. So it might not be
exclusively about speedy development it's often cited as one
of O.S.'s strengths.
Quote

Each open source project has to be reviewed on it's own. You cannot say
"open source cannot produce anything of commercial grade quality",
that's a hideous generalisation.
Especially since commercial and open source are not mutually exclusive.
Open source and proprietary /are/.
--
Hilton Evans
-----------------------------------------------
ChemPen Chemical Structure Software
www.chempensoftware.com
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.593 / Virus Database: 376 - Release Date: 2/20/04
 

Re:Re: Twisting in the wind?

"JQP" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in news:403a128e$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM :
Quote
Open Source is as much a religion as anything else. You're either a true
believer or a skeptic.
It's not.
--
Iman
 

Re:Re: Twisting in the wind?

"John Roberts" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
It seems to me that Linux has made an enclave into corporate server-style
computing, but has not and probably will not push into the desktop.
Saw this interview with Michael Dell where he basically substantiated what
most people already knew:
www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1501767,00.asp
- Most of the Linux demand has been on the server, not the desktop.
- Most of the server "growth" is from *nix conversions, not Windows.
- Windows on the server is still "strong".
 

Re:Re: Twisting in the wind?

"Hilton Evans" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
In part I agree. I actually think the corporate environment is where
the greatest immediate opportunity for the Linux desktop penetration
exists. A corporation can control the homogeneity of distro
installations.
In theory this could ease the hassles of Kylix deployment. That said
it's also a great enviroment for Java/J2EE development which could be
good for Borland but not necessarily for Kylix.
Distro homogeneity is only one aspect of the problem. Regardless of which
distro/version you standardize on, compatibility will remain an issue unless
you're prepared to develop all of your own apps. The city of Munich may be
prepared to do that but how many businesses are willing to follow suit?
And if they do, will it provide any cost savings in the long run?
 

Re:Re: Twisting in the wind?

"Iman L Crawford" <ilcrawford.at.hotmail.dot.com>wrote in message
Quote
It's not.
You're wrong.
 

Re:Re: Twisting in the wind?

"JQP" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in news:403a2512$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM :
Quote
You're wrong.
No I'm not.
--
Iman
 

Re:Re: Twisting in the wind?

"Iman L Crawford" <ilcrawford.at.hotmail.dot.com>wrote in message
Quote
No I'm not.
Yes you are. And to prove it, my dad can beat up your dad<g>.
 

Re:Re: Twisting in the wind?

"JQP" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in news: XXXX@XXXXX.COM :
Quote
Yes you are. And to prove it, my dad can beat up your dad<g>.
oh yeah... well... uh, uh... My mom can make you and your dad feel bad.
--
Iman
 

Re:Re: Twisting in the wind?

"Iman L Crawford" <ilcrawford.at.hotmail.dot.com>wrote in message
Quote
oh yeah... well... uh, uh... My mom can make you and your dad feel bad.
Your mom is so ugly, I feel bad for your dad<g>.
 

Re:Re: Twisting in the wind?

"JQP" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in news: XXXX@XXXXX.COM :
Quote
Your mom is so ugly, I feel bad for your dad<g>.
Don't make me pull out all the "yo mama's so ugly" jokes.
--
Iman
 

Re:Re: Twisting in the wind?

JQP wrote:
Quote
the cash from Kylix sales. After all, it's a common thing for a company to
abandon a money making product. They do it all the time.

Actually it happens more often than you think. Did you ever heard
about a very common situation where a crop grower is actually paid for
not producing.? Or a company do to gained benefits of a new business
relation is willing to discontinue some own products in order to
promote different technology? Sometimes a company has to sour the
deal for some products in order to push a specific technology forward.
Do you think if company would really like to sell specific product
and actually would like to maximize the profit related to this product
would not fix easily fixable defects in this product, so the product
could be more attractive or simply sellable? Would not provide some
support for the product so the consumer could be assured that the
company actually stands behind the product and that is worth to give
money for it.? ... would not retrofit the product, so actually could
be use in contemporary environment, environment what actually is used
by the targeted consumer group, so consequently people could consider
it as potentially useful? Wouldn't they?
juliusz
--
InstallMade - Kylix-specific installer
www.superobject.com/installmade/
www.superobject.com/imoe/download.html