OS/2 Open Source January 22, 2008Posted by rjdohnert in 1.
add a comment
One article over on OS/2 World.com caught my attention. It was a letter from IBM regarding a possible open sourcing of OS/2. The short version being that its not going to happen. While many on OS News are quick to contribute the reasons to Microsoft and blame Microsoft, as always seems to be the case in the Open Source world, Microsoft has nothing if anything to do with IBM’s position.
I wrote on OSNews that I challenge IBM’s sincerity to their commitment to Open Source since they are unwilling to even work on this. If Sun can open source Solaris after years of work, IBM can open source OS/2.
To have a successful Open Source project you have to look at several factors the most important being; Is there a need? With OpenSolaris, Linux, BSD and at least 2 more than capable proprietary offerings is there really a need for this technology? MacOS/Windows/Linux/BSD/Solaris are already light years ahead of OS/2 at this point. An open source OS/2 project would take a while toeven bring OS/2 up to par of where it needs to bee.
What are the advantages of making this technology open source? Is there a competitive edge to be achieved by making the technology open source.
Third an final criteria, will open sourcing this technology interfere with my investments in other technologies? When you invest over a billion dollars in competing technologies you have to evaluate what your priorities are. IBM’s commitment is to Linux and UNIX technologies now and have invested a ton of cash into Linux why compete with itself?
I think IBM will be happy to let father time come and swoop up OS/2 and to just let OS/2 die already.
KDE 4: Good, bad, ugly.. mostly bad January 13, 2008Posted by rjdohnert in Opinions.
After all the work that went into developing KDE 4, Im just pissed they didnt produce anything even resembling useful or user friendly.
This is a very short list, visually KDE 4 is beautiful. Its got some drop dead GORGEOUS wallpaper and themes and the color arrangement is one of the best. The desktop blends together and doesnt have any aspect where it doesnt look like it fits. This is the biggest and really only improvement.
It doesnt compensate for GTK themes and GTK apps dont look like a first class citizen, they look like a “go away I dont want you here citizen”, before someone pipes up and says configure the gtkrc file, I didnt have to do that in KDE 3 and i shouldnt have to do it in KDE 4. Sorry. There is no way to configure the panel size or location so Im stuck with this monsterous blob at the bottom of the screen, There is also no way thats user friendly to add applets to the panel. The desktop icon system looks like something that came from Irix or CDE. The default filemanger is good but for some reason when I mount removable media there is a delay in the opening of any readable data.
Not so much ugly as there is bad. One thing I noticed and from reading forums is that to do anything really useful, you must edit configuration files in “.kde” in your home directory. KDE Team, 1995 called and they want their text configuration files back.
Well, thats mostly it. In this release the KDE team shows clear lack of respect for screen real estate. I was supposed to go to the release party but I dont feel like being celebrating this release as for me its been a huge disappointment. I cannot in good regards suggest this desktop to anyone. Stick with KDE 3 or GNOME and let them fix the train wrecked plane crash that is KDE 4.