gdp's Comments

The Source.com : Review: TeamViewer

Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:16:00 +0000

Dude001, Thanks for the comments! That is exciting news, I appreciate you bringing it up! File transfer is probably the one feature I'm really missing out on right now in the FreeNX / NoMachineNX situation.

The Source.com : Review: TeamViewer

Tue, 20 Apr 2010 22:51:58 +0000

swifttech, $30/month and a non-cross platform solution that requires ActiveX? Not exactly in the same game space.

The Source.com : Meyer Sound Joins Linux Foundation

Tue, 20 Apr 2010 03:52:43 +0000

Beuser, Thank you for the comments! This is the exact sort of thing I was hoping to see - but was simply unaware of!

The Source.com : KDE 4.4 Positive Spin

Sat, 17 Apr 2010 08:45:54 +0000

Lex, I tried Arch back in Dec. of 2008 and liked what I saw then. I will keep it in mind!

The Source.com : A Deep Divide

Fri, 16 Apr 2010 23:33:31 +0000

saul, An excellent point, one studiously ignored by Team Apologista as they choose instead to ride the coattails of popular distros, often conflating distro success with Mono success!

The Source.com : The Future of KDE

Wed, 14 Apr 2010 21:51:44 +0000

Jose_X, I have about the same level of understand that you do .. I think the concept is to tag, cross-reference, and otherwise organize and present metadata, but I have no concrete picture of how it works.

The Source.com : More on GPL and derivatives

Tue, 13 Apr 2010 22:04:37 +0000

saul, Thank you for the comments! This is an area of the GPL that I wish I had a more complete understanding of - complicated by the fact that the legal interpretation may differ from the developer's intention. Part of the problem here is (I think) copyright isn't such a great match for software. Also, I am troubled when two honest parties are unable to agree on the meaning and scope of the license. That is, I fully expect corporations to play legal trickeries and look for loopholes (a la Novell), but I don't expect two developers to have to worry if they are in compliance or not. That's not to say that I expect all developers to agree on the merits of a license, but I would like everyone to be able to agree on what it means and how to comply with it. I wonder what the ratio of confusion over the GPL is when broken down something like: "legal gobbledygook" : "loophole hunting" : "complex concept"

The Source.com : More on GPL and derivatives

Tue, 13 Apr 2010 11:11:56 +0000

Greg, Thank you for the comments! On point 2: See saulgoode's comment here, but this the crux of (one of) the legal argument for derived works. My counter-point (with no legal cite) is the example of an GPL-licensed OS. It provides a "clean" API for applications to run on. Yet no one (that I am aware of) has made the argument that all programs running on Linux must in turn be GPL. That is why I am currently of the opinion that the "clean-ness" of the interface is what matters. If the original work provides a "clean" API / interface then the work is less likely to be considered derivative in my mind. This also helps explain why answers differ and is in line (I think) with Mr. Van Lindberg's analysis. (Assuming I understand his analysis, I tend to agree with his argument). On point 3: The funny point to me is that people want to benefit from the mores that created the code without following them in turn. It's understandable, just amusing.

The Source.com : Celebrating Apple's Rules?

Tue, 13 Apr 2010 01:16:58 +0000

Brandon, Thanks for the comments! I think Apple would have little problem arguing they are not a monopoly or even close to one in the mobile smartphone market. In fact, as near as I can tell - Apple has never aimed to be the mass-market choice (like Microsoft). I'm pretty sure Jobs prefers 90% control over 20% of the market than the other way around. (There's an interesting tanget here on the old point that just because something is the most popular doesn't mean it's the best.)

The Source.com : Celebrating Apple's Rules?

Tue, 13 Apr 2010 01:14:09 +0000

Saul, Thank you for the comments! Another angle of interest might be to compare Apple's restrictions to those of consoles like the Playstation, Wii, and so forth. Haven't those platforms always been severly restricted and controlled by the manufacturer? And even then, is Apple obligated to carry applications in its own App Store?

The Source.com : Site News: Testing identi.ca

Mon, 12 Apr 2010 23:47:01 +0000

Am now trying Twitter Tools, which will supposedly cross-post to both Twitter and Identi.ca (with an additional plug-in).

The Source.com : Site News: Testing identi.ca

Mon, 12 Apr 2010 11:24:58 +0000

WP Status.Net is a fail as well.

The Source.com : Site News: Testing identi.ca

Mon, 12 Apr 2010 10:09:04 +0000

Hmm. So far I haven't been able to get the Network Publisher plug in working. Everything appears correct, but nothing is appearing on the identi.ca site. I will have to find another plug in.

The Source.com : KDE 4.4 Positive Spin

Mon, 12 Apr 2010 00:32:09 +0000

Andy, Thank you for your comments! I agree with you that most user perception is shaped by the distribution. I understand Kubuntu takes a lot of flak for what is perceived to be a less-than-optimal presentation of KDE to the end user. I don't really have a big complaint with KDE in Kubuntu - that is my main desktop set up in fact - but I am always interested in a better experience. If there is a distro that has a better KDE presentation, I'd certainly be glad to hear about it!

The Source.com : KDE 4.4 Positive Spin

Mon, 12 Apr 2010 00:29:44 +0000

Denis, Thank you for your comments! In my personal case, I was on GNOME attempting to switch to KDE - at the time I was more of the "get something besides GNOME" mentality than "get KDE" mentality. It would never have struck me to switch to an older version of a DE. So, at least in my case that's why KDE 3.5 didn't really enter into it - my first serious exposure to KDE was 4.0.

The Source.com : Apple puts the smackdown on MonoTouch

Fri, 9 Apr 2010 22:34:41 +0000

Leynos, Thank you for your comment! I don't see it as a trouble at all! I'm quite pleased that Apple is ever more forthcoming on how closed and restrictive their platform -- indeed, their vision of computing -- is, and delighted that it disturbs those who poo-poo the concept of Free Software! I can hardly think of a better example to make the value of Free Software concrete than Apple's recent actions, and so I strongly hope that they continue to restrict and diligently enforce such rules.

The Source.com : KDE 4.4 Positive Spin

Fri, 9 Apr 2010 22:18:03 +0000

Lex, Well I think it's wasted effort, but I do think KDE has a PR problem in general anyway. Which saddens me, as KDE is my preferred desktop! Instead of focusing on issues 2+ years ago, KDE supporters should be driving the discussion on the KDE of the present (and future). Sometimes I am in discussion with people that let slip a fallacy, but you have to just let it go or you look too defensive/combative AND you distract from the overall main point. Nerds are great at arguing out technicalities, not so great at PR. (Since one is primarily facts and one is primarily lies!) :)

The Source.com : Announcing Netrunner!

Fri, 9 Apr 2010 22:05:00 +0000

Goblin, Thanks for the comments! Of course I would be glad to answer any questions I can about Netrunner! Please don't hesitate to contact me via email / XMPP / smoke signals! (Usually email is best because of the time zone issues)

The Source.com : Apple puts the smackdown on MonoTouch

Fri, 9 Apr 2010 04:13:11 +0000

I'd say mono is a problem and just stop there.

The Source.com : Matt Asay On IBM Patents

Thu, 8 Apr 2010 22:13:52 +0000

Matt, Thank you for taking the time to comment. My main points were: 1. I disagree with your characterization of the IBM letter as a "cease-and-desist" letter. 2. I disagree with your portrayal of patent infringement as equivalent to trademark infringement or copyright violation. (You do this several times). 3. I disagree with your implication that a company using patents against an open-source project is something every open-source project developer or project would do. 4. I disagree with your implication that Open Source is a methodology-only approach to the writing of software. 5. I disagree that wielding patents against an Open Source project is a cause to be celebrated, whatever the circumstances. My main points were not: 1. To summarize the controversy beyond the context of your remarks. 2. To "feel better" "about something", although I appreciate the value of a good ad hominem.