I just realized. Lusers are the vuvuzelas of the software world.
OMG OMG OMG. In addition to totally fucked window controls, we now have a font!
I'm so excited about this thing because it's going to fix so many problems. It's going to make my 30 inch monitor work, and give me awesome 3d graphics, and all the game companies will port to linux to take advantage of this font, and my wireless problems will go away. And it will make Intel open source their gpu, and Microsoft will roll over and die.
I mean seriously. That's what happened when they release Bitstream Vera, and Liberation. Right? All the free desktop was missing was a fucking font.
Oh btw, will this make other websties that specify the standard web fonts look good? No?
Sunday, July 11, 2010
I just realized. Lusers are the vuvuzelas of the software world.
Monday, May 10, 2010
I was just taking a look at S-man's announcement for Ubuntu Unity and Light versions. Most of it is blah, except for this tidbit:
... The dual-boot, web-focused use case is sufficiently different from general-purpose desktop usage to warrant a fresh look at the way the desktop is configured. We spent quite a bit of time analyzing screenshots of a couple of hundred different desktop configurations from the current Ubuntu and Kubuntu user base, to see what people used most. We also identified the things that are NOT needed in lightweight dual-boot instant-on offerings...
Wut. Ok. Let me learn you something. I've seen lots of Linux screenshots in my time. If you were actually optimizing for the freetard, basically what you'd have is a desktop with two semi-transparent terminals. One tailing a syslog, and another showing an irc session. Oh and like some pager with a bazillion virtual desktops that are totally useless. Oh, and don't forget the scantily-clad, objectified female as the wallpaper image.
As for the rest of the article? OMG, You put a fucking dock on the side. In OSX and Win7, doing the same thing takes like 3 seconds. Do you really need to write a whole giant announcement about it?
Oh and I like the two sections at the end, about "Relationship to Gnome Shell" and "Relationship to KDE". Even the S-man has figured out that you can't just go "innovate" in the OSS community without shouting out to everyone. Because we don't want to piss off the ten people who care about Gnome Shell or KDE. Fuck. Could you imagine an Apple announcement saying something like "Relationship to Windows"?
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Woah, Lundude is at it again.
Don't worry, it's mostly the same stuff. Linux Desktop sucks. It still sucks. Even a year later. When it's sucked for the last N years, why do you think N+1 will make it so much better? But I'm sooooo sure that there's just a business plan hiding under there somewhere, and I'm the only person to think this hard about it..
The rest of us know that if there were a business model that made sense and could be presented in a 45 minute slide-deck in some classroom, then someone would have done it already.
But I had some other funny thoughts:
The big players in the linux desktop are the distributions. They distribute stuff. They're somewhat ok at distributing their own stuff. But they're supremely awesome at making it hard for third parties to distribute their stuff. It's the distributions (and more precisely, the fact that there are so many of them) that make the actual distributing hard. Go figure.
Another thing. Why are y'all _still_ focused on random niche desktop thick client apps. Linux's problem is not a lack of thick client apps. Hardly anyone uses them, other than Office. And besides, that problem is solved. Distributing thick client apps to generic PC hardware is MS's turf. You wouldn't try to take on Google's search advertising business with a rag tag group of volunteers would you? So why the fuck would you go after MS's bread and butter? You win by solving the problem in a new better way, not making the problem worse in a shittier way.
Besides, the desktop is dying. Web apps are taking over. And it so happens that Linux is in a pretty good place to be an awesome web terminal. Even Google thinks so. But it still takes a google to herd enough people together to produce something like ChromeOS. Y'all could have probably put something like that together in as much time, if you could only focus and stop chasing after Microsoft's sinking boat.
Y'all bitch an complain that nobody writes apps for Linux. Boo hoo. Hardly anyone writes apps for windows either these days. They all write for the web. You got your fucking level playing field that you've been bitching about for years. But I'm sure it's still going to take some eeeevil corporation with a giant clue stick to show y'all how it's done.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Oh Ogg. The format that trapped many a user's music files on lowly Linux desktops. I know I've got some oggs somewhere that I can't listen to any more in itunes. Or any device that I care about, for that matter. And I'm too anal to re-encode them into the only format that matters: mp3.
More commonly, the Ogg proponents will respond with hand-waving arguments best summarised as Ogg isn't bad, it's just different. My reply to this assertion is twofold:
- Being too different is bad. We live in a world where multimedia files come in many varieties, and a decent media player will need to handle the majority of them. Fortunately, most multimedia file formats share some basic traits, and they can easily be processed in the same general framework, the specifics being taken care of at the input stage. A format deviating too far from the standard model becomes problematic.
- Ogg is bad. When every angle of examination reveals serious flaws, bad is the only fitting description.
The third reaction bypasses all technical analysis: Ogg is patent-free, a claim I am not qualified to directly discuss. Assuming it is true, it still does not alter the fact that Ogg is a bad format. Being free from patents does not magically make Ogg a good choice as file format. If all the standard formats are indeed covered by patents, the only proper solution is to design a new, good format which is not, this time hopefully avoiding the old mistakes.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Huh. GregKH is complaining. Again. Big suprise.
Short story: Google uses Linux to create Android. Google makes some kernel modifications, in their own tree. Google has no time to deal with kernel community to re-architect their stuff so that it can go mainstream. GregKH whines like a baby.
Dude, get a clue. Seriously.
You can go on and continue to waste keynotes at conferences (yea, I'm sure the the organizers are super happy about that) to complain about people "stealing" your code. Waaa Waaa. Someone took my hippy license and took my code and isn't giving it back. Waaa.
Hello? Did someone not realize that Google is basically all about stealing Linux and "forking" it? Do you think that google server that you're hitting is really running bleeding edge Linux 2.6.35RC62? No, they're probably running some 2 year old kernel with their own patches, because they want to insulate themselves from upstream idiocy. They're not going to give you those patches, and even if they did, they probably couldn't because of upstream churn.
When it comes to Android, Google has done what the license asks. Make all the modifications public. If you and your rag-tag bunch of kernel developers want _their_ HOT new shit, the suck it up and bring the code in. It looks like they've even produced patches and sent you reviews. Don't like what they got? well, they're already doing more than what's required, so stop complaining.
You see, they've got this product to ship. And they've also got this competitor called Apple. You may have heard of them. So, yea, they _could_ sit their rearchitecting their interfaces so that some kernel dev which they don't pay and don't give shit about can feel like he's important... and watch Apple eat their lunch.
Or they could say fuck you guys. We're the one that's actually building something here. We'll get around to it, maybe, after we win.
Seriously, has this guy shipped real software before? And before someone gives the obvious answer, shipping upstream kernel releases does not count as "shipping" or "real". Just go look at the redhat kernel to see why that's the case.
Also, why go after google? There are tons of folks that do the same shit. They're just not as big. By doing so, you just look opportunistic and self-centered. Me me me me me me.
PS. I was thinking, maybe he should change the "staging" tree to the "hostage" tree. I mean, that's basically what it's used for.
Friday, January 29, 2010
Well, it looks like there's at least one business model out there that kinda works for companies shipping open source software: be some search engine's bitch.
Mozilla is Google's bitch. And now Ubuntu is Yahoo's bitch. Maybe Novell will be Bing's bitch?
I gotta better idea for you Ubuntu. Why don't you take your awesome hardware auto detection capabilities, and make it such that every time you install, you hit a server, which in turn causes an instant live auction between bing, google, and yahoo, who will bid money to make their search engine the default for that install.
I'm warning all you freetards. Some day, Ubuntu's installer is going to ask you if you want to install the google/yahoo/bing toolbar. And it will be present on every single window. Even your panel, and your xterm. Every shell command that you mistype will result in a google search. Then canonical can make ass loads of money and give you a crappy desktop system for free. It's going to be awesome. And some search engine will get like a hundred new people visiting their site.
BTW, it's amazing how desparate Yahoo looks at this point. A me-too search engine in bed with a me-too operating system. That's some nice thought leadership there Yahoo. Because you know, Google's all going to be like, we need to find some other distro that we can sponsor. Wait, what? They're building their own distro? It's going to ship on supported hardware and be somewhat usable? And it's based on Linux? ha ha ha. That's bullshit. Everybody knows that open source products won't succeed unless they have the support of the FSF. The FSF knows that the people want. Please. Stop your nonsense.
Some other notes for yahoo:
- These are Linux users. They are too cheap to click on your ads.
- These are freetards. They think it's cool to use adblock and pirate music.
So yea, uh, have fun trying to actually generate revenue from them.