In response to comments made…

12 Jun 2004

…on dalegroup.net regarding the state of operating system development (no permalink available due to the nature of the software that is being used for news over there).

I’ve been playing around with domains and forests (mmm trees) today. Connecting domain servers to different computers all talking to one central DNS box. Oh my how I love windows. Everything just works. Really I love windows. I don’t care what anyone else says. I find it stable, fast and easy to use. Isn’t that what computers are meant to be like? I also spent a far bit of time on a 12″ iBook with OSX 10.3.x very nice too. I like these operating systems because they have one company behind them pushing them in one direction, not some linux distro which has been split so many times it isn’t funny, or a technology release gone wrong (fedora anyone?). You need direction when building an operating system and that is what Microsoft and Apple both do. Great job guys.

Linux, whilst not guided in the same unilateral manner as both OS X and Windows, is still capable of consistent development values and policies allowing for a highly efficient, scalable and usable platform.  Linux on the desktop has not yet reached the maturity of even Windows (let alone the sophistication of OS X), a claim which I am yet to see contested.  Development policies resulting from Open Source are, by their very nature, open.  This does not REQUIRE fragmentation such as that which was described, although this is often a result.

The lack of control by a monolithic entity over a product permits innovation in the marketplace, resulting in technological advancement for the greater benefit of the entire community, not the bottom-line of a TNC software monopoly.  Not that TNC monopolies are bad – well, they are, but that isn’t the issue being discussed here.  TNC monopolies stifle innovation, and subject users to the decisions made by aforementioned monopoly – users have no choice, at this point, but to wait for the situation to change, or to switch platforms.

I can’t help but notice a striking parallel between Roman Catholicism and closed-source monopolist-software vendors.  My reasoning is a little abstract, so bare with me, here.  Both enjoy monolithic, absolute control over those within their respective structures – this, arguably, is a good thing – people with the knowledge are making decisions for the greater good of the organisation as a whole.

But what if those with knowledge aren’t making the correct decisions?  Or are pursuing a path which allows users no input or control over that which they are subject to (i.e. their belief system, being dictated by the Pope, or their software environment, being dictated by Microsoft)… are users supposed accept this path as being right, going with what those with knowledge tell them, or is there room for individual choice, even if this means questioning the entity, as Martin Luther did?

Open-Source, like the Protestant movement, does not require users follow an established structure.  To an extent, it allows users to choose for themselves – any apparent church structure within whatever denomination shouldn’t have the power to dictate the beliefs of individuals who profess that faith (as conservative Roman Catholics would believe); matters of faith are individual, as are all beliefs (n.b. this does not make individual beliefs CORRECT).

Because of this inherent propensity for deviation and fragmentation to occur, it has – not all people will see eye-to-eye on all things, and a framework in which people are free to make up their own mind does result in fragmentation.  Not always for the better.

Likewise, the Open-Source community allows for fragmentation to occur.  This is ideal for individuals, although not always for the community as a whole – this is where product vendors come in.

A key example, most relevant given comments made regarding Fedora Core 2, is that of RedHat.  They are an OS application vendor, with strong Open-Source ties, specifically in their financial and developmental support of the Fedora project.  Fedora exists both to serve the Open-Source community as a whole, as well as provide an environment in which development and testing may occur for the refinement of RedHats’ commercial-grade/Enterprise offerings.

In this, RedHat operates as an integrator.  Whilst the quality of freely (as in beer/speech/whatever else) available software released by the Fedora project may be of dubious quality at various stages of development, RedHat, operating as a commercial software solutions development organisation, ensures that the quality of their enterprise-grade offerings do not suffer.

Windows just works?  Often… although I would venture that in terms of ALL server related tasks, a solution from one proven OSS vendor would prove just as adequate.  Worried about interoperability?  That is a separate concern – remember, Windows doesn’t have a monopoly on the server market, and it is far from interoperable with *nix platforms.

Windows just works on the desktop?  Sure, in between the spyware and malware and virus outbreaks and other various system compromises.  I spent an hour today trying to get crap off a computer used by my brothers.  Spybot, AdAware – latest definitions, multiple scans, nothing resolved.  I spent the remaining 20 minutes manually hacking things down, thinking “this wouldn’t happen if this computer were running Linux”.

And it wouldn’t have.  I was (and am) sorely tempted to install a locked-down heavily customised version of Fedora (heh, Core 1, because 2 sucks, apparently ;)) on there, with Mozilla, aMSN and OpenOffice, and leave home indefinitely.  They would be perfectly fine until it ran out of disc space.

If they wish to play games?  Then why are they still using a Pentium 166 (OC’d to 200) with 48MB of RAM?  That doesn’t appear to be a consideration from where I am sitting.

What a shame, they won’t be able to install any software they want.  No dialers for you, I’m sorry.

English Journal Entry #3

10 Jun 2004

English Journal Entry #3
Thursday, June 10, 2004
—–
Today was really productive!  We matched people to the roles we developed yesterday, and made minor alterations to our dialog, so that the roles were consistent with the elements of jealousy demonstrated in soliloquies (that is, so everyone has a decent soliloquy which matches their character within the play) — we managed to throughly confuse ourselves with the idea (perhaps it was too twisted?), but eventually got our heads around it.

There are three types of jealousy demonstrated (thank goodness we had no more people to try and script for!), these being jealousy of confidence/conviction, ideas and imagination, and leadership abilities.  Those three roles correspond to Tori, Kim and myself, respectively.

We wrote intermediate dialog (the key features of the play being the soliloquies), decided how we were to end the play, and cemented the basis of what was to be said in our soliloquies.  After school, I sat in study hall and scripted what Kim had written today — she wanted to do her own soliloquy, so there is still a gap where that is to go, but the play is complete with that one exception.

It shall be interesting to see how it all goes, once we rehearse it in its complete form.  Due to the nature of it (i.e. we’re playing ourselves), not much rehearsal is required, which is useful.

English Journal Entry #2

10 Jun 2004

English Journal Entry #2
Wednesday, June 09, 2004
—–
I’d jotted some notes down on the bus about ideas and whatever else, in terms of what should happen – obviously, if it’s going to be recursive, we still need to have stuff happen to make it interesting – imagine a mirror reflecting into infinity without an image to reflect.

So we got a basic start to it all slammed up, because that is invaluable, just for the sake of getting the ball rolling.  I think Tori was writing everything down, and we developed a plot up to the first soliloquy — and we also established a list of character attributes (and aspects of jealousy associated with these).  We didn’t decide who these attributes would be assigned to, that happens tomorrow.

Essentially, the play starts with us sitting down and saying “So, what are we going to do for this play?” – giving an impression that absolutely NO preparation has gone into it.  We start bouncing ideas around, and then hit the one that we’re going with — at that point, Tori launches into soliloquy. She doesn’t think it’ll work, and is jealous of the apparent confidence of other characters.  We’ve only written down rough notes… I’ve borrowed Tori’s book, and typed + emailed copies of what we have so far to everyone.

ChilOut Rally

10 Jun 2004

http://www.chilout.org

There were some excellent speakers, I especially thought that the refugee speakers were… powerful.  I was impressed that there were representatives from all significant parties there, regardless of the official policy of their respective organisations.

It’s reassuring to know that there are some people in politics capable of compassion over paranoia and selfishness.  Asylum seeker does not mean terrorist, nor does it mean queue jumper, in many, many cases.

When I arrived at the rally, a little late, one of the first speakers I heard was telling of how a fourteen year old kid had tried to hang himself, and then to cut himself, and starve himself.  Our detention centres are doing this to children – from a purely selfish Australian perspective, seeing that nine out of ten of these kids will eventually be let in to this country anyway, think about the kind of people our centres are turning them into.

I’m not going to convince anyone either way on this one, anyway.  People dodge the issue by saying “but what about the parents” – what about the children?  But it’s okay to put them in detention: if we do it long enough, the problem will go away.

Do corpses need visas?

Compulsorary viewing: http://www.chilout.org/gallery/childrens_art1.html

Obligatory daily post

08 Jun 2004

At least, that’s what it feels like.  Sort of.  I just went to go to bed, then realised I hadn’t stuck anything up.

I guess this is sort of a good vent for the day, helps to wind-down and whatever else.  On the other hand, I am only able to post the stuff I won’t mind people reading here, which means that all the crap is left floating in my head… meh, it’s nice to have some people share in the little good things that happen, if not here in the form of comments, then in the real world.

A good thing happened today, which I cannot share with the world, because of the not-so-good things surrounding it.  I’m thankful that there were other people there also, so at least there are some people who I can share with and talk to about it… it’s kind of like that with many things, but especially in this instance.

With things I will freely talk about, however, thanks heaps to everyone who has been kind enough to comment on my story, both here and on the Dalegroup forums.  Especially to Soolie :)