Miscellaneous > Applications
Why not open source old stuff?
restin256:
But once we intergrated APIs that let multiple window managers run, as well as windows programs run natively, it'd be a pretty fun project.
hm_murdock:
... window managers.
you must be joking me.
seriously, say you're shitting me. IS THAT THE ONLY THING ON PEOPLES MINDS!?!!?! WINDOW MANAGERS?
window managers. What's wrong with having a system-default appearance? tell me, what's wrong with CONSISTENCY?
you do realize that having the ability to change window managers that alter the way you interact with windows BREAKS RULE #1 OF UI DESIGN?
What is rule 1?
CONSISTENCY CONSISTENCY CONSISTENCY CONSISTENCY
skyman8081:
Jimmy has a point. OSS people know nothing about UI design. there should not be 2 apps that look COMPLETELY different because on UI toolkit was made because the existing one was "not free enough".
Cheapskates.
Grow some balls and suck it up.
Linux will not make it on the desktop as is.
Why don't companies OSS old stuff.
do you think they write the whole thing themselves. you thing they studied the hardware architecture for all those devices writing all that stuff, not all the code in software was written by that company themselves, who might not want the sorce code of their apps released for all the world to see. what about the code with trade-secret protection. or a competing product. there are way to many legel reasons to keep the code to themselves then deal with the messy legal wranglings of OSSing old stuff.
grow some balls and accept that not all software will be the way YOU want it to be.
insomnia:
quote:Originally posted by root@localhost / BOB:
Jimmy has a point. OSS people know nothing about UI design. there should not be 2 apps that look COMPLETELY different because on UI toolkit was made because the existing one was "not free enough".
--- End quote ---
When GTK was created, QT wasn't free at all.
quote:Originally posted by root@localhost / BOB:
do you think they write the whole thing themselves. you thing they studied the hardware architecture for all those devices writing all that stuff,
--- End quote ---
Yes, "closed source" works like that.
quote:Originally posted by root@localhost / BOB:
not all the code in software was written by that company themselves, who might not want the sorce code of their apps released for all the world to see. what about the code with trade-secret protection. or a competing product. there are way to many legel reasons to keep the code to themselves then deal with the messy legal wranglings of OSSing old stuff.
--- End quote ---
Sounds like an argument to make everything OSS.
Competition should be about the best "end-product"
and not about who owns the most patents.
PS: If companies want to make "Closed Source", let them.
But the result is always the same: CRAP.
I don't like closed-crap cause it all sucks, and if you didn't know that already, your using the wrong apps(or OS).
[ March 05, 2004: Message edited by: insomnia ]
skyman8081:
quote:Originally posted by insomnia:
I don't like closed-[source] cause it all sucks, and if you didn't know that already, your using the wrong apps(or OS).
--- End quote ---
and people wonder why linux doesn't take off better.
the availiblity of source code has no effect of the quality of the app.
OSS apps can suck. and Closed Source apps can be good. "OMGOMGOMGOMG!!!! YOU USE TEH CLOSED-SOURCE APPS!!! YOUR GETTING LOCKED IN RIGHT NOW!!! SEE?!"
BS.
You can get locked into open-source just as much as Closed Source. have you even heard of a propgram called vi? it uses a poor user-interface, provides to feedback about what it is doing or what state it is in. yet people STILL flock to it with it was writted by God Himself, because they are too afraid to switch to something with a better user interface. that has more feedback or *GASP* can tell the user what the app is doing!
Get A Clue.
Stop making blind judgements on a software application, JUST because of a development method and style, it is childish, stupid, and makes the linux "community" look bad.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version