Miscellaneous > Applications
Why not open source old stuff?
skyman8081:
quote:Originally posted by insomnia:
Are you saying Linux was better of without GNU and OSS?
--- End quote ---
No, just people who are blindly anti-Propeitary software in any way shape or form, like you.
quote:Originally posted by insomnia:
?!?!?!
You clearly don't undertand how a compiler works!
--- End quote ---
I do it translates human readable source code to the native machine language. I have used gentto linux before, there are slight technical advantages of an on-the-spot compile. they are all thrown away when you have a very complex application that can take several days to compile (like OOo on my AMD Athlon XP 1900). especially if you use a non-portable language like C or C++.
quote:Originally posted by insomnia:
Possible, but unlikely.
--- End quote ---
why? you seem to think source availibility is a "magic bullet" and that all software problems will be solved by opening up the source. your "advantages" only work on code that was always open. opening up closed code, can make things worse for a company. you don't take a turtle out of it's shell to help "make it better". you will kill it.
quote:Originally posted by insomnia:
?
--- End quote ---
That is the image that people like you put out to the general public. not very flattering, now is it?
quote:Originally posted by insomnia:
?
--- End quote ---
you think that lock-in in only for Closed-source you are wrong. RPM's are a perfect example of why that is, new package A will not install unless app B is upgraded to a newer version, when it works fine already.
quote:Originally posted by insomnia:
Is this a joke?
Their are more editors for Linux than for any other OS. Vi is SMALL(fits on a rescue floppy) and still powerfull.
--- End quote ---
do you USE all of those editors. I didn't think so. and vi, possibly the worst of them all, is the most popular and comes with all distros. so do most other editors like nano, or pico.
quote:Originally posted by insomnia:
Get some sources.
--- End quote ---
OK, howabout my firsthand experience running several major distros over the course of a year and giving out my observations on what I used. I used Read-hat slackware and gentoo for several months, and I am very comfortable with a CLI, but that does not equate to being better. A GUI is much more logical than the cryptic and confusing terminal apps of linux.
quote:Originally posted by insomnia:
You just made yourself look bad.
--- End quote ---
why? because I speak my mind and I go against the flow of linux/OSS. you people shun others who do not think EXACTLY the same as you do and get in HUGE fights over the preference of two different apps that do exactly the same thing.
[ March 05, 2004: Message edited by: root@localhost / BOB ]
hm_murdock:
I think I might install linux and play some games instead.
I'll be back in an hour or two after I compile everything and have gotten "locked in" to my new open source software.
--- Code: ---
--- End code ---
hm_murdock:
btw
Linux sucks ass
insomnia:
quote:No, just people who are blindly anti-Propeitary software in any way shape or form, like you.
--- End quote ---
That's a LIE. You attacked OSS...
Some OSS IS proprietary.
quote:I do it translates human readable source code to the native machine language. I have used gentto linux before, there are slight technical advantages of an on-the-spot compile. they are all thrown away when you have a very complex application that can take several days to compile (like OOo on my AMD Athlon XP 1900). especially if you use a non-portable language like C or C++.
--- End quote ---
Geuss what?
Unix/Linux [is] written in C or C++.
quote:why? you seem to think source availibility is a "magic bullet" and that all software problems will be solved by opening up the source. your "advantages" only work on code that was always open. opening up closed code, can make things worse for a company. you don't take a turtle out of it's shell to help "make it better". you will kill it.
--- End quote ---
Kill what?
A company?
...I couldn't care less.
Closed source protects companies, not software.
quote:That is the image that people like you put out to the general public. not very flattering, now is it?
--- End quote ---
?
quote:you think that lock-in in only for Closed-source you are wrong. RPM's are a perfect example of why that is, new package A will not install unless app B is upgraded to a newer version, when it works fine already.
--- End quote ---
That's an other LIE.
You don't have to resolve everything.(only noobs do)
quote:do you USE all of those editors. I didn't think so. and vi, possibly the worst of them all, is the most popular and comes with all distros. so do most other editors like nano, or pico.
--- End quote ---
You forgot GNU's Emacs.
And yes, I do use most of them.
Vi is very good cause it's small.
quote:why? because I speak my mind and I go against the flow of linux/OSS. you people shun others who do not think EXACTLY the same as you do and get in HUGE fights over the preference of two different apps that do exactly the same thing.
--- End quote ---
What are you talking about?
I'm not the one who started offending people.
[ March 05, 2004: Message edited by: insomnia ]
restin256:
Insomnia,
I wouldn't waste your time if I were you. I've gotten into these kinds of arguments and some people simply can't be changed, closed vs open is just a matter of opinion. Jimmy obviously has no idea what apt-get is, if he thinks he can be locked in by module dependancies.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version