listeye geri dön| Gönderim Listesi os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com Ar?vli ?leti #5477 |
listeye geri dön |
|
|---|
On Thu, 6 Dec 2007 07:44:46 -0800, Neil Waldhauer wrote:Adrian's response to my original suggestion, forwarded to genmac-user by Christian on September 24, concerning GenMAC vs open source:
One of the strongest approaches we could take is to wait for GenMac source
code, and then fork the project.
Just a question on this assumption:
Maybe I've missed it, but virtually every response from Thorolf
on this subject has said, or at least strongly implied that the
source is not and never will be available.
And, to another thought that always seems to be ignored when suchIt seems that every time serenity gets involved with commissioning some form of development outside the basic OS itself, they are met with disappointment (and this is no slight against Bob, et al). They got royally burned with the SVISTA situation, and those guys are now the ones behind the very successful Parallels Desktop which runs on the Intel Macs, allowing them to install Windows in a VM. Now there's a kick in the pants...
discussions arise:
Why doesn't Serenity ever pick up some of these balls?
Aside from the ultimate users of the developed coded,
It seems they have the most to gain by every new device
or category of device that works with eCS.
Another significant advantage to SSI involvement would beAgreed. It would make for a more uniform installation and therefor, would be easier to troubleshoot, update, and to train users and administrators.
that tools, drivers, etc., that are part of the system will
be better tested, have a standard install approach, and would
make eCS look more like a finished, complete product instead
of "OS/2 with a different look and feel, plus a bunch of extras
that each user has to a) find, b) install, c) update,...
Yes, GenMac is part of the distribution for eCS 2.0 RC2/RC3.Yes, indeed. I like your mention of the "secret" test version, too. Shhhh!!! Nobody should know. We wouldn't want any "users" getting hold of it to test it!! :-) But hey, they've got a system - it's not our system, but they've got *a* system.
BUT, it installs in a different location than the stand-alone
distribution which creates confusion if you attempt to install
via eCS and then have to manually update with the 'secrete' test
distributions. Wouldn't it be nice if eCSMT handled that task.
As to financing, if SSI were doing it, an extra few bucksI think they have a problem with the pricing already. It's a tough sell for an alternative OS when it is immediately compared to pricing for Linux (i.e., anything other than Windows is an alternative, and end users purchasing new hardware are duped into believing that Windows "comes with it" "for free"). Note that M$ was disappointed by the slow adoption of XP in enterprises, mainly due to the cost of an upgrade which provided little additional features over W2K. New hardware, however, came bundled with XP - because M$ essentially told the builder channel that they could no longer bundle W2K with a system for the same price as pre-XP - and that's how many businesses made the move. I'm only now seeing apps which *require* XP SP2 and will actually refuse to install under W2K. <end of sidebar>
[generic for dollars, euros, et al ;-) ...] on every license
would surely be lost in the shuffle and would more than make
up for dependence on individual user contributions or fees
for each copy of add-on packages.
Maybe late to the party, but I just couldn't resist butting in...Glad you did. I'm thinking more and more that we should move this discussion to a Wiki or even to warptech.info (buy, do I need to update that site).
|
Abone ol: Bildirim,
Derleme,
Fihrist. Abonelikten ç?k Liste Sorumlusuna Postala |