The Anonymous Poster above was me. Sorry, forgot to login.

Quote: Original post by Trap
People have every right to say "I don't want non-free/non-GPL software".

Yes, and he has a right not to be condemned for offering non-GPL software, which is the point here. I mean, if you're going to leave out the whole argument, then leave out your retort!

Quote: Perhaps they have spend lots of hours understanding and customizing the usual GNU tools and have no interest in switching to another IDE because the tools already do what they want them to do.

I had this wonderful word processor in 1989 called WordStar 5.1. Really fast, even on a 33MHz CPU with 4K RAM and 20 MB HDD. It consistently produced high-quality documents and just about never crashed. It had a little bit of a learning curve, because it was a text UI (pre-WYSIWYG) and required Ctrl+key combinations to launch various functionality, but it was capable. In terms of output, it's competitive with many of today's word processors.

I don't use it anymore. Why? Because it's usage model has been eclipsed by something more efficient and easier to get into and out of. Your argument is curious, considering that the reason autotools exists is to automate the use of other tools. If that purpose has been eclipsed by more effective methods, then isn't it the duty of a software developer to evaluate those?

I'm sorry, I forgot how provincial we are as software developers, how we cling to bad tools and bad paradigms because that's what we know, and how sad that is. That we then try to paint that as a rationale, or as a virtue is probably the only sadder thing.

Quote: Original post by CoffeeMug
MinGW is such a pain I am seriously considering using xterm and a text editor.

Sorry Mug, I think you're either confising MinGW with MinGW Studio (Parinya) or you don't quite get what MinGW is. MinGW is:

"A collection of freely available and freely distributable Windows specific header files and import libraries combined with GNU toolsets that allow one to produce native Windows programs that do not rely on any 3rd-party C runtime DLLs."
-The MinGW Website

Which pretty much is fancy wording for "A Windows port of GCC, binutils and some related GNU utilities".

In and off itself you would have to use windows command line or MSYS and a text editor to use MinGW (which is what I do), which is why some of your statements got me confused as to what exactly you refer to as MinGW.

Quote: Original post by Kwizatz
Sorry Mug, I think you're either confising MinGW with MinGW Studio (Parinya) or you don't quite get what MinGW is.

Ah, sorry, I was referring to MinGW Studio. The abbreviation is a bit confusing because of MinGW libraries but I'm referring specifically to the IDE.

Quote: Original post by Oluseyi
I had this wonderful word processor in 1989 called WordStar 5.1.

Your analogy doesn't account for all involved factors. In particular, if the cost of moving to new tools is estimated to be far larger than the savings produced by new tools, there is no compelling reason for a business to move. That being said, it would still be nice if the GNU and FSF people *pushed* for a move to better tools (which they clearly are not interested in doing). If they spent as much time contributing to boost as they do arguing in favor of autotools, the need for autotools would disappear a long time ago.

On a different note, I don't see Richard and Linus as visionaries or leaders. They're just reasonably intelligent hackers (no better than thousands of others) that happened to be in the right place at the right time. The rest is inertia. The fact that linux is still stuck with crappy GUI (from user experience as well as development perspective), obsolete development tools and lack of any coherent API standards where they're necessary speaks for itself.

I definitely hope this becomes a reality.. I think I might actually do the work and make my projects work on linux as well. The point is, I am already using cross-platform libraries so the transition shouldn't be too difficult, but as I am not that familiar with autotools, it never seemed worth the trouble. Obviously, it'd be nice if there was an export-function into a format that anyone can build from, maybe a jam-file or something.

And yes, GPL-Zealots freak me out as well, most of the time I just stop reading when I read things of the kind that Stallman stated in that interview. Yeah, programmers who develop non-free software should get a new job, right. I have to agree with Oluseyi there, for me it won't make a difference whether it is closed-source or open-source anyway as I am not likely to work on something like this even if development stopped and the source was available.

Quote: Original post by Wuntvor
I think I might actually do the work and make my projects work on linux as well.

It isn't *that* much work. If you're writing a game then may be 1% of your code will be platform specific. It's only a lot of work at the beginning but once you get your software up and running on both platforms, it doesn't really involve very much extra work.

Quote: Original post by Wuntvor
but as I am not that familiar with autotools, it never seemed worth the trouble.

You don't need to use autotools. The idea behind them is that different unix variants may or may not implement particular system calls. The autotools check at compile time whether a particular system call you're using in your code exists and take corrective action if it doesn't. You can use MinGW Studio that doesn't make you use autotools or you can compile from a terminal (not very pleasant, but...)

Yann L

I'm not an open source yealot (I work writing C# .NET applications for a financial services company these days), and I can feel your pain.

But

I want to point out one reason why anyone in any niche market is and should be predisposed against closed source software (not unwillling to use it, just waiting for the proof that it is actually safe and stable before investing much time and energy in it).

Safety (related to support, but distinct).

If a company releases a piece of software that is not yielding them significant revenue, then it is highly likely that they will not proactively maintain the quality and competitiveness of that software. If this software is open source, most likely it will still die in the marketplace unmaintained, BUT if your company has a significant enough stake in using it, you can personally invest time or money in adding to it the most important missing pieces, or fixing the most critical bugs. If it is closed source software and you use it for 6-12 months fairly happily, and build your development process around it, what are you to do when it no longer runs on the next version of windows, or cannot import/export the new file format you desire to use? These are the types of issues that keep sane managers and planners awake at night ... not the issues you hear on slashdot. The people on slashdot that derided your offer are idiots, plain and simple. While I am an idealist who believe all information should be free, this is the real world, and a real benifit in living a full and happy life (including having advanced tools to code the next killer game) is far more valuable than a dogmatic attitude.

Good luck in your project, and I hope you do release it. I long for the day when companies can actually make a living selling software for platforms other than windows (because competition is ALWAYS good, not just because large corperations are bad - look at how AMD has raised the prices on their Althon XP line artificially because intel does not compete as strongly in the sub $200 price arena). The future of linux and all alternative platforms is to have all market segments represented and welcome their, closed source free applications are a step in that direction. Until there is freeware, open source, closed source, shareware, trialware, etc ... all on linux, it is not a real platform.

Hi,

I don't dislike closed source, in fact im using it (nvidia drivers, flash ...).
But when things are closed source and precompiled I can not use them on may iBook (which runs linux as well as Mac OS X).
But if your IDE is good I give it a try on my "normal" computer which is an AMD.

Hello again,

Quote: Original post by Shadowdancer
It all depends on the amount of zeal. If a Linux user walks up to a Windows user, sees that said Windows user is doing nothing but writing letters and playing solitaire and has the Windows user try Linux for a while, that's all right. What's not all right is walking up to a Windows user, hitting him/her over the head and dragging him/her to a Linux box without knowing what programs are needed or what other potential pitfalls there are.

Agreed, though there are also valid reasons to do so. For example when someone keeps complaining about her pirated Windows but yet refuses to try something else. Note that I'm not saying this is the norm, just that it happens.

Quote:
In the same way, it is bad to bash a closed source developer just for developing closed source. Of course, there might be a gain for the community if the programmer can be "converted" or at least talked into contributing something to an existing project, but it is definitely wrong to do reasoning in the style of "Me no like M$ Windowse. Windowse is teh closed soorce. Therefore, closed soorce is teh devihl!!!1", which I fear we will see much more frequently in the future.

Agreed again, which is why I think that calling free software advocates "GPL zealots" wasn't any brighter. At best it's going to radicalize said zealots. Generalizations always suck (that was a generalization).

Quote: Original post by Oluseyi
Yes, and he has a right not to be condemned for offering non-GPL software, which is the point here. I mean, if you're going to leave out the whole argument, then leave out your retort!

Following that logic, someone offering free meat to a known vegan has the right not to be flamed by said vegan. I'm not saying that Yann L should be bashed and hacked in little pieces, but IMHO he targeted the wrong people and such answers were to be expected. I suspect that most Christians from the US biblical belt would be quite offended if you offered them to try out your new condom for free. The analogy is extreme, but all analogies are fundamentally broken... :-)


Yann L: you'd probably have more luck trying to get Windows users to try it with Knoppix or another live CD. I think that a lot of people here also have a spare, dusty Linux box hidden in their room. They would probably be more open to a proprietary solution and more attracted by the zero cost argument. This is from a free software, GPL-believing zealot. :-)


Hope this helps.