 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Java Forum / General / April 2006DO NOT USE JAVA BECAUSE IT IS NOT OPEN SOURCE
Programing Languiges Are Ment to be free. That is why i am starting The <i>Coo De Tar</i> thats french for Blow of state it is a flash/java alternative and if you are going to use a server side languige use Perl,Python or better yet Ruby. What is the point of a languige without a standerd and without a open source distrabution. Coo De Tar will be released as a api for perl,python and ruby. Java sucks because it IS NOT FREE. I AM A GNU GUY I BELEVE THAT SOFTWARE MUST AND SHALL BE FREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! do not use java because it is an oxymoron A Propriatary Languige Is An Oxymorron!!!! A propriatary OS is An Oxymoron!!!! Take Pro-DOS for example A Knock-off of MS-DOG, the worst operating system it did not use ONE IOTA OF MS CODE BUT IT was a sucsefull knockoff. same thing will happen to JAVA!!!! ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ GEORGE ROGERS > Programing Languiges Are Ment to be free. That is why i am starting The > <i>Coo De Tar</i> thats french for Blow of state it is a flash/java [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > NOT FREE. I AM A GNU GUY I BELEVE THAT SOFTWARE MUST AND SHALL BE > FREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! do not use java because it is an oxymoron Dear Mr Troll, There are GNU implementations of JVM and compiler. And just because Sun's Java is not GNU does not mean it is not free. Now go get a life. -- LTP :) > > Programing Languiges Are Ment to be free. That is why i am starting The > > <i>Coo De Tar</i> thats french for Blow of state it is a flash/java [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > There are GNU implementations of JVM and compiler. Dumbass! If you knew anything you would know that GNU stands for "GNU is Not Upen source." That is why the Coo De Tar project is vital. It uses a "WINDOWS Is Nifty, Dependable, Open, and WINDOWS Source" (WINDOWS) license which is uber-open source. > And just because Sun's Java is not GNU does not mean it is not free. Sun's JAVA is uber-proprietary. > Now go get a life. Check your calendar! > -- > LTP > > :) >> Programing Languiges Are Ment to be free. That is why i am starting The >> <i>Coo De Tar</i> thats french for Blow of state it is a flash/java [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > -- > LTP it's April 1st remember  SignatureNewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth >>> Programing Languiges Are Ment to be free. That is why i am starting The >>> <i>Coo De Tar</i> thats french for Blow of state it is a flash/java [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > it's April 1st remember Ah! Thank you -- LTP :) >Programing Languiges Are Ment to be free. That is why i am starting The ><i>Coo De Tar</i> thats french for Blow of state it is a flash/java [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >NOT FREE. I AM A GNU GUY I BELEVE THAT SOFTWARE MUST AND SHALL BE >FREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! do not use java because it is an oxymoron If you can't even spell, how do you hope to create a language better than Java? Oxymoron? Look that up in the dictionary. Why NOT open source? Check how many upturned turtle icons there are in the Java glossary next to free software. Without money coming in to support it, the project dies when the original author gets bored. Java has a standard, see the JLS see http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jls.html What it lacks is an INDEPENDENT standards body. However Java is in much tighter shape than C++, SQL or any of the languages that DO have a standards body. SignatureCanadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching. > Why NOT open source? Check how many upturned turtle icons there are > in the Java glossary next to free software. Without money coming in > to support it, the project dies when the original author gets bored. If it's open source, the source can only die when no one wants to maintain the code. It's nice if that's the original author, but projects can be taken over by anyone. Signaturemonique Ask smart questions, get good answers: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 13:33:17 -0600, "Monique Y. Mudama" <spam@bounceswoosh.org> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said : >> Why NOT open source? Check how many upturned turtle icons there are >> in the Java glossary next to free software. Without money coming in [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >maintain the code. It's nice if that's the original author, but >projects can be taken over by anyone. True. but that is the fate of most of these projects. Without money coming in, it requires altruistic people to maintain them. They are in short supply given how many interesting projects there are. I don't mean to trash open source. Everything I write is. The main thing you get is the ability to pick up the project yourself if everyone else drops the ball. But even that in not guaranteed if you did not keep a fresh copy of the source. Ideally all opens source would be posted independently of the author so it would live on even if their own website shut down. SignatureCanadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching. > On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 13:33:17 -0600, "Monique Y. Mudama" ><spam@bounceswoosh.org> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > coming in, it requires altruistic people to maintain them. They are > in short supply given how many interesting projects there are. The fate of most coding projects is to die. The difference is, if you like an open source project, you can keep it going, even if that means paying someone else to do so. If you like a commercial product that's been EOL'd, you're screwed. Actually, commercial vs. open source is a false dichotomy. Some commercial products are open source. Many free products are closed source. It's so frustrating for me to hear people say that open source projects are "risky" when, overall, I've been far better served by open source than by closed source projects. I've been running debian linux for, jeez, I don't know how many years now, without ever needing to do a full reinstall. I read news via slrn, mail via mutt, irc via irssi. My editor of choice is vim. I don't see any of these tools disappearing any time soon. How many of us use open source tools like grep and find on a daily basis? Many people who've never never even heard the term "open source" still happily use gcc. Heck, VxWorks ships with it! I think it's healthy to be skeptical about any software. I don't think that open source is any more risky, in general, than closed source. Signaturemonique Ask smart questions, get good answers: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html > How many of us use open source tools > like grep and find on a daily basis? Not me. Maybe more like on a yearly basis, on the odd couple of times I feel like giving the Linux another shot. For the "average desktop user", you might have better luck getting an emotional reaction from a name with "FireFox", "ThunderBird", "Azureus", "eMule", "Bittorrent", "phpBB", "VirtualDub", "gAim", "ffdshow", "AC3Filter", "ZSnes" etc. Maybe "Apache httpd", "Hibernate", "phpMyAdmin", etc. in an enterprise environment. > Many people who've never never even heard the term "open source" still > happily use gcc. Heck, VxWorks ships with it! Never heard of VxWorks before either. I've heard of gcc, but haven't used it much. Eclipse is pretty popular on this newsgroup, and it's open source. > I think it's healthy to be skeptical about any software. I don't > think that open source is any more risky, in general, than closed > source. The concept that open source software is risker is unintuitive to me. To me, it's exactly the opposite: Closed source software is "riskier" than open source software. When I download an .exe, I don't know that it'll actually do what it claims to do. I don't know if the programmer(s) who worked on it are competent or not. I don't know what kind of assumptions were made by the developers (strings must always be shorter than 1024 characters? ASCII characters only? Windows is guaranteed to be located in C:\Windows? etc.) With open source programs, I can in theory actually look at the source code and check that it does what it claims, was well designed, and makes reasonable assumptions. With open source programs written in Java (and to some degree, PHP), I can actually do this in practice. I have friends whose "mother programming toungue" is C++. If they tell me "Yeah, this program is well written; I know because I've actually seen the source code", I'm much more likely to trust them than if a sales representative from Microsoft said the same thing, for example. I guess for "the rest of the world", the impression that open source software is riskier comes from the adage "you get what you pay for" and perhaps the belief in security through obscurity. Against both these (mis?)conceptions, I can't think of a concise argument that could address all the relevant concerns while still be approachable to the average layperson (i.e. a non-programmer). Sure, I could tell the naysayers to go read Bruce Schneider's various essays on obscurity, but how many of them are going to actually do that? - Oliver > The concept that open source software is risker is unintuitive to me. To >me, it's exactly the opposite: Closed source software is "riskier" than open >source software. It can cut both ways. With open software you have to option of picking up the ball yourself or somebody else doing so. With commercial software (not the direct antonym) you have some money and seriousness behind the project. There is thus money, not just altruism, to motivate programmers to continue to support the project. There is no guarantee. Even big companies drop products without a word, or get bought out just to reduce competition. SignatureCanadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching. > > How many of us use open source tools > > like grep and find on a daily basis? [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > read Bruce Schneider's various essays on obscurity, but how many of them are > going to actually do that? In theory, closed source software could guarantee performance. (If our software does not perform as promised we will pay you for your damages.) In practice, Bill and Friends explicitly do not guarantee the suitability of their software for any purpose. Since they are afraid to stand behind their software financially, I don't see any reason to give them any money. > - Oliver > In theory, closed source software could guarantee performance. (If our > software does not perform as promised we will pay you for your > damages.) In practice, Bill and Friends explicitly do not guarantee > the suitability of their software for any purpose. Since they are > afraid to stand behind their software financially, I don't see any > reason to give them any money. If the concern is "maybe the software won't do what it claims to do", wouldn't it be much safer to download a free copy, and use it, and just throw it away if it doesn't work? This is in contrast to buying the software, use it, and if it doesn't work, trying to contact the company requesting a refund? What if the company goes out of business? What if you keep getting redirected through customer service, each representative telling you you've contacted the wrong department? What if there are certain conditions which apply to the refund, and you don't meet them? etc. I recently stumbled into open source project "Lilypond", a music notation software, whose business model I found interesting. They let you download the program for free, and use it for free. If you want a new feature, you put out a bounty for it (e.g. I wish I could export to PDF, and I'm willing to pay $5 for this feature). If someone has already put a bounty, you can add to it (e.g. I'd also like to export to PDF; I'll add $10 to this bounty). At any time, a programmer can come along, look at all the open bounties, write code for the feature, submit it, and collect the bounty. - Oliver > I recently stumbled into open source project "Lilypond", a music > notation software, whose business model I found interesting. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > bounties, write code for the feature, submit it, and collect the > bounty. There used to be a website that attempted to organize this system for any arbitrary open source project, including ones not yet developed. IE "I will pay $100 for a tool that does X" ... The Gnome desktop environment has also been offering bounties for a while. I don't think just anyone can put a bounty on anything, though: http://www.gnome.org/bounties/ Signaturemonique Ask smart questions, get good answers: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html > I recently stumbled into open source project "Lilypond", a music > notation software, whose business model I found interesting. They let you [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > bounty, you can add to it (e.g. I'd also like to export to PDF; I'll add > $10 to this bounty). Interesting system. As long as the bounties are small I think it could work well. The money earned would then be acting as brownie points (quantifiable tokens recognising contribution). It's easy to imagine it breaking down horribly if the bounties are large enough to act as a genuine economic incentive. All it takes is for less skilled and knowledgeable programmers to price themselves cheaper than the better programmers[*]. They then undercut the good programmers. The code-base goes downhill. The good programmers are then faced with the choice between working on the cheap, working for free to fix the code (while /other/ people are getting paid!), or doing something else entirely. I know which I'd choose... ([*] Note that this does not require any dishonesty on their part -- quite the opposite in fact.) -- chris > Interesting system. As long as the bounties are small I think it could work > well. The money earned would then be acting as brownie points (quantifiable > tokens recognising contribution). It's easy to imagine it breaking down > horribly if the bounties are large enough to act as a genuine economic > incentive. Commercial software can also have what amounts to large value bounties. Many companies are more likely to fix bugs if they have a paid for escalation. I have worked on a (large) feature that a company paid the equivalent of half my years salary for. Tom Hawtin SignatureUnemployed English Java programmer http://jroller.com/page/tackline/ >> I recently stumbled into open source project "Lilypond", a music >> notation software, whose business model I found interesting. They let you [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > entirely. I > know which I'd choose... Actually another problem is actually specifying the bounty to ensure you're actually getting what you're paying for. If you want the code to actually end up a specific way, that may mean writing a requirement document, a design document, and unit tests. That's a lot of work. Once that's in place, coding is (relatively) easy. - Oliver > All it takes is for less skilled and knowledgeable programmers to > price themselves cheaper than the better programmers[*]. They then [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > are getting paid!), or doing something else entirely. I know which > I'd choose... I don't know how Lilypond works, but as long as there's a gatekeeper to the source code who has veto power over patches, this is less likely to happen. Signaturemonique Ask smart questions, get good answers: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html Monique Y. Mudama schreef: >> All it takes is for less skilled and knowledgeable programmers to >> price themselves cheaper than the better programmers[*]. They then [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > to the source code who has veto power over patches, this is less > likely to happen. Well, in practice, there are the two initial developers, who still do about all the work, but give priority to sponsored features. Only very few have been interested enough to learn the whole Scheme background and do some real hacking, that were not there from the very start. So basically, the veto is there. But that doesn?t make the system less interesting. H. - -- Hendrik Maryns ================== www.lieverleven.be http://aouw.org > > In theory, closed source software could guarantee performance. (If our > > software does not perform as promised we will pay you for your [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > wouldn't it be much safer to download a free copy, and use it, and just > throw it away if it doesn't work? I was thinking more along the lines of what if the software screws up big time. A good example would be tax preparation software. If the software prepares a very bad return, then the cost would be much higher than the purchase price of the software. Of course with most open source software, the developers assume no liability. In practice, the developers of closed source, proprietary software also assume no liability. In theory, the closed source developers could assume the liability. If you prepare a return using their software, then they will pay your IRS fees, interest, and penalties (if any). > This is in contrast to buying the > software, use it, and if it doesn't work, trying to contact the company > requesting a refund? What if the company goes out of business? What if you > keep getting redirected through customer service, each representative > telling you you've contacted the wrong department? What if there are certain > conditions which apply to the refund, and you don't meet them? etc. That is true. > I recently stumbled into open source project "Lilypond", a music > notation software, whose business model I found interesting. They let you [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > At any time, a programmer can come along, look at all the open bounties, > write code for the feature, submit it, and collect the bounty. That would be the tricky part. > - Oliver > Programing Languiges Are Ment to be free. That is why i am starting The > <i>Coo De Tar</i> > thats french for Blow of state No, "Coup d'état" is French. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup > it is a flash/java > alternative and if you are going to use a server side languige use [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > NOT FREE. I AM A GNU GUY I BELEVE THAT SOFTWARE MUST AND SHALL BE > FREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! do not use java because it is an oxymoron Your AOL is showing. Badly. I love messages like this! Just when I think I'm about the dumbest person in the World, someone comes in and sets a brand new all-time low. Good Job, Dude. But call your kickin' ~ditrabation~, "Cooty Tar", or something. That will insulate all newbies to this list from a lifetime of idiocy. You have done us all a great service. Watch out for alcohol poisoning. It affects the <i>speling senters</i> of your brain. I sure <b>hope</b> Google doesn't escape <i>HTML</i> tags. <stupid>This could be important</stupid>. > Programing Languiges Are Ment to be free. That is why i am starting The > <i>Coo De Tar</i> thats french for Blow of state it is a flash/java [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > NOT FREE. I AM A GNU GUY I BELEVE THAT SOFTWARE MUST AND SHALL BE > FREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! do not use java because it is an oxymoron Bravo, yoo r write, a propriatary languish is an oxy-moron. I have a rekwest zou: witch languish do yoo rekomend, bikoos yoo seem so a grate programor, at list zis is wat eye beleve, judging by yoo spelling. Alain > Programing Languiges Are Ment to be free. That is why i am starting The > <i>Coo De Tar</i> thats french for Blow of state it is a flash/java [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > NOT FREE. I AM A GNU GUY I BELEVE THAT SOFTWARE MUST AND SHALL BE > FREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! do not use java because it is an oxymoron Aside from that your spelling and attitudes are typical of a grade schooler, you should be aware that provocative trolling expressions of opinion belong in *.advocacy newsgroups, not in main hierarchy technical newsgroups. xanthian. > Aside from that your spelling and attitudes are typical > of a grade schooler, you should be aware that provocative > trolling expressions of opinion belong in *.advocacy > newsgroups, not in main hierarchy technical newsgroups. > > xanthian. tsk, tsk, will the young never learn? MONEY MAKES THE WORLD GO ROUND. Ok, maybe it's the gravitational pull of the sun, but you know what i mean... > tsk, tsk, will the young never learn? Thanks for that, my snow white hair and face full of wrinkles rarely rate _that_ adjective. xanthian, how old's the geezer, momma? 62 and aging! > Programing Languiges Are Ment to be free. That is why i am starting The > <i>Coo De Tar</i> thats french for Blow of state it is a flash/java [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > NOT FREE. I AM A GNU GUY I BELEVE THAT SOFTWARE MUST AND SHALL BE > FREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! do not use java because it is an oxymoron Wait, you aren't going far enough. All intellectual property is an afont. You must stop using all patented devices, all copyrighted materials, and all tradmarked names. Also, if you know any trade secrets, you must stop using and condoning them as well. Of course this means you must stop driving cars, for every car has patented devices. Even many bicycles are so encumbered, so you might need to walk. But be careful, many shoes are also patented and trademarked. God only knows if they also use trade secrets as well, but ignorance is bliss. You will also find that such devices as microwaves are truely evil. Not only are they patented, but they also use closed source software to operate the device. The chips that run this code are very likely patented as well. Finally, the manual may be copyrighted. No honorable human being could even consider using such a device as they offend every ideal we stand for. While I am typing this, I realised that my computer uses a patented CPU, and the BIOS itself is not open source. I will need to switch to an open CPU design, and find an open source BIOS. I will need to be very careful not to utilize an evil closed source driver for any of my peripherals, and be certain that none of the devices are patented. This means I will need to use technology that is 17 years old or more, so I expect to be back online soo with a 300 baud modem. I'm not sure if Fast Page Mode memory is free yet, so I will use an iron core memory just to be sure. I will need to solder together my own devices, as even though the patents have expired, the old devices are still encumbered by trademarks. I'll get back to you in 20 years after I have removed the last traces of evil intellectual property from my life. So long commrad, Dean G. Nobody has mentioned that c was proprietary until richard stallman wrote gcc in 1987, c is a great for system programming. Just because something is originally proprietary does not mean its technically rubbish, there are plenty of merits in java escially for new programmers or anyone who wants to get a program going very quickly. Gcj at the moment can do most tasks apart from swing gui, i believe Awt is well supported. To further my position, without the proprietary(it was licenced on a liberal account at the time) UNIX created in bell labs, they would possibly not be linux. Miguel de Icaza started implemening mono as he too saw technical advantages in .net, he is freeing the language in my opinion. Technology is just as important as polictics, hopefully i am well understood > Nobody has mentioned that c was proprietary until richard stallman > wrote gcc in 1987, c is a great for system programming. Just because [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Technology is just as important as polictics, hopefully i am well > understood With or without licensing issues, Java causes technical heartburn to those accustomed to Python. Adding to that the fact that OSS developers are sceptical of Sun's strategies (the message changes as Java's fortunes rise and fall), and you get a significant pushback. I read Mono as a challenge to Microsoft: You claim this is open? Ok, we'll implement it and then see where the submarine patents pop up. Why would I want to let one company's abstract model sit between my code and every piece of hardware I wish to touch? SignatureHarry George PLM Engineering Architecture Free MagazinesGet these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...
|
Reply to this Message
|
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.