login
Search
Hi.
Is there a (web)place or channel for relentless frustration with failed uninstallable lame distros and kernel nuissances.
Where you can publish ideas of beautiful future system design from the main user perspective without any heavy heaps of code?
A place that can be "googled" through and doesnt require filling out teedious membership forms that leaves you in a bottomless pit of poorly designed user hostile web interfaces...
I would very much like to find the right place to for instance leave advice for linux kernel development gurus about where you think the main development effort should be placed in order to close gaps between linux and other operating systems.
( Why for example use Linux at all, when all you want to do is go on the web using a wireless connection? or use your box to watch TV, play a CD etc... )
Or the proper place for publishing future (2 years or six monts ahead) visions of how you and I think most people will make use of their cpu-cans?
Where to compose a howto that describes the future function of my hotplugable personal wet dream file systems supreeme functionality?
Where is the "black list site" for poorly developed distros as well as software that doesnt get the intended job done?
I am very frustrated with all the wasted life hours spent in front of broken systems and poor designs My guess is : I'm not alone.
Daniel64
Is there a (web)place or
Is there a (web)place or channel for relentless frustration with failed uninstallable lame distros and kernel nuissances.
Where you can publish ideas of beautiful future system design from the main user perspective without any heavy heaps of code?
No there isn't. The reason being that opinions are like assholes - everyone's got one and most of them stink.
It's pretty clear from your comment that you don't code and probably don't have many insights into computer architecture. Therefore your ideas aren't going to take into account any real-world concerns and will be completely useless.
You remind me of the kind of person that reads a basic article about CPUs and then posts on comp.arch saying, "Hey! I've just had a fantastic idea! With modern process technology you could fit a thousand 486 cores onto a processor. It would be like having a super cluster on a chip. Why doesn't Intel do this? They must be stupid, LOL!". To which the proper reply is, "Sorry, but your lack of basic knowledge causes you to have ideas which are unfeasible to implement for reasons that you don't understand. Please learn something before you open your mouth again.".
My suggestion is to start a blog about your ideas. However, be prepared to delete a lot of comments like this one. Assuming anyone notices it in the first place.
» The features we want - Pronto! Yesterday! Is it that hard to d
You totally don't get it do you?
Try reading the content of what I wrote above once more and please please don't ask me to shut up.
A. I never talked about spreading my bad mouth opinions around in the first place.
B. I never mention "computer architecture" in my architecture because I'm not talking about such things.
C. I never mentioned any of the possible Ideas that I personally have or have had but dropped since somebody else is already on the track of making them a reality.
The point is precicely this:
If you want to make use of for example your VCR at home
you don't need to know the architecture of a VCR.
If you want to make use of your mp3 player you don't have to know how the things inside them tick.
Presentation of Design ideas is not so much about knowing primitive electronics as it is about making
future visions known to others that might say oh that sounds like a bright idea or this idea sucks pretty bad because of this or that.
Your attitude could need some improvement and I actually think that you might just be out trolling for some attention.
Actually a good subject
But you are too confrontational. There are certain OSS projects that are proceeding very slowly, and there should be a way to focus attention on that. Ideally, we would contribute (money, coding) to help them. Just at present, we have to fight off some useless Microsoft "patents" on stuff they stole from Xerox Parc, OS/2, etc.. (in theory it is easy to show the prior art, but the legal system is not logical, how many years has it taken to almost purge SCO from existence?), and also some new proposed legislation that could send someone to prison for life for breaking copyrights.
I do think there should be a moderated site with 1-paragraph reviews of the status of OSS projects. Let me give a few examples:
1) ReactOs: On the rare occasions when one can get it to install, it has a great potential to become a free replacement for Windows. Either due to lack of understanding of SW development process (freeze working code) or terror of MSFT, each nightly build breaks at a different place, although at one time or another it has all worked, showing great promise.
2) OpenOffice.org: Also appears to have no SW development process. For example, play a sound on slide transition in "Impress" (PowerPoint-like program), broken "release" after release. How long could this take to fix? Most stuff to do with databases either doesn't work or requires infinite patience and googling to get working. Just pop up "to be gotten working in future" rather than documenting partially implemented stuff that doesn't work. And yes, I'm using the latest of everything, oo.org 2.2, etc. My problem is when the same stuff is broken in 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, ...
3) Mozilla: Lots of potential here. Some were extremely slow starters, like the calendar stuff (Sunbird/Lightning), but after a few years of waiting it is starting to work. Xulrunner: The suite (Firefox, Thunderbird, etc.) needs to use Xulrunner (i.e. move the specific code to global code) in some set release, not always in "the next release". You really need a "hello world" program for Xulrunner illustrating XUL, CSS, SVG, JS, rather than "learn XUL by reading Firefox code". Also, latest tree of Xulrunner (1.9x) should be able to run Java/Flash applets, not force me to use older 1.8X tree.
The reason for having a OSS review site is, as the original poster stated, to help people not waste time on things that are broken and likely to remain broken for several years. Also, seeing a critical project that is stalled needing some help fixing a few simple bugs, maybe we could pitch in.
I think OSS community has grown complacent expecting IBM, etc. to have its employees/contractors fix these problems. But IBM is a very problematic helper for OSS. In return for its contributions, it wants to be able to sell/own Linux. We can only hope they treat Linux better than OS/2, where IBM dumped it and its customers so that it's PC division could get better pricing on Win 95. It has also made the private deal with Microsoft that only its Linux (Suse == Novell == IBM) is the only Linux. Just try selling your expertise in Linux in an IBM account -- you will be advised "homegrown" solutions (Redhat, Debian, Ubuntu) are NOT welcome.
Even the Linux kernel is subject to scrutiny. The design is a poor one in terms of drivers, even MSDOS had a generic "proprietary" driver model where drivers worked the same on DOS 3.3 - 8.0. Yet The Linux kernel is supposed to "force" hardware specs. out of vendors under GPL 2.0, yet has such a weak advocate of GPL as Linus himself, who apparently just wants to pay his mortgage. Kernel should be forked (in C++). Perhaps the devil (MSFT) will fund this?
Sorry to throw so many stones, you could certainly throw some at me. I spend much more time reviewing and criticizing than fixing OSS stuff.
The features we want - Pronto! Yesterday! Is it that hard to do
Dear cushioncritter.
I wrote a long article to answer you in this discussion.
Somehow it didnt publish it self. I have no idea why, but two hours in effort of writing as shortly and concisely as possible just vanished. into a binary limbo.(or do you say /dev/null)
I'm sure that my vanished text was of interest for a lot of people to read as I had some crucial ideas as to how to go about and why. I will try to answer you at a later point in time. Now I'm simply too uppset with how anybody can design a forum that allows such things to happen.
Thank you for not creating a flame around my subject.
A list as linux-kernel@vger.org 2 pinpoint kernel growth issues?
daneel.olivav@gmail.com
Dear cushioncritter and others with interest in this topic. .
Yes I am confrontational. Why?
I feel that discussion of this topic is crucial for a happy great future of both linux and OSS related issues.
A short, colorful and precise article will hopefully receive some attention from more hard working linux kernel development gurus
And Yes Some times a small but intense effort can solve a great problem. or at least pinpoint issues to reveal that the problem is there.
A new site with moderation of course is a possibility, but I think that strict regulations + intelligent filters and will do the same job as a moderator.
IMHO the best thing would be a list similar in shape to linux-kernel@vger.org. Web sites tend to get commercialized in the course of time.
I am writing about possible future improvement of _Linux_kernel_ design _specifically_ because:
a:
linux is a source to a lot of source code .( like the above mentioned open office and mozilla. ) improving linux will probably generate improvements elsewhere in the 'software chain'. In fact some sort of kernelbased classification and certification system under supervision from Linus himself would probably toss some non linuxish junk out of the distrotheques.
b:
The linux kernel development teams will need grass root input in order to generate more regular home and small office users whome in turn will generate increased funding to OSS projects and open patent pools, which will thus raise a common public interest in linux kernel maintainance , linux kernel development and linux kernel design _plus_related_ or dependant SW projects towards increased user happiness, or at least an over all never before seen user satisfaction.
Linus would maybe one day find himself _non_ dependent of IBM, and OSS software would no more simply be a mean to supply MS Windows or El Macos with out standing revolutionary, new, gratis software.
c.
Linux/unix has some beautiful semantics, and it (five years ago) has been an effort to create a powerful system with a strict but at the same time open and plain not too unlogical system hierarchy. I very much like this to be even more true in the future as my 'computer' heart is there, and I would some day like to toss the other operating system that I always seem to need to save time, away from my desktop...
Development in the past few years has taken the linux distros closer and closer towards a lame Windows lookalike interface. Why?
Feel free to post any comments, but please try to avoid causing flames.
daniel64