Open Source Amiga OS

[slaapliedje]

See thats the Linux mantra.  

Linux users are happy to tell people how much "better" their platform is but when users tell them "You know there is stuff here that from a users point of view is actually ****.." the response is:

"well fix it yourself, you have all the tools, all the source, to make it work exactly how you want it, for free that's the really good thing about open source"

To which the user thinks:" I'm not a ****ing programmer, I just want to use the damned thing without tearing my hair out...how do I remove this **** off my hard drive."

BTW people don't RUN operating systems, they run applications.  And any free app on Linux usually has good or better app on Windows, for free as well if you want it.

If you're not a programmer, pay one to fix it for you.  Companies do it all the time.  Most of the people will work off of donations.  The fact is, open source software is usually written to scratch an itch, and if that itch is scratched for the writer and not for all the people that complain about usability, than what should the actual answer be?  "Sure, I'll completely redo my program for free even though it works fine for me...."  People have to eat and all that.

Usually these free applications on Windows are the same ones on Linux.  The big difference is you can get them from a trusted repository most of the time on Linux (or even compile from source) whereas in the Windows world, you'll be lucky if you can download a free program without Yahoo toolbar or some extra crap that you don't want.

slaapliedje

[slaapliedje]

What is anfs?

anfs is a newer version of NFS (Network File System) for the Amiga.  http://sourceforge.net/projects/anfs/

slaapliedje

[slaapliedje]

Definitely past time to close this thread.

Is it weird, or what, that a simple question on using open source to further a dead or dying operating system could cause so much grief between people.

Seriously, if you have such a hatred toward open source software, stop using the Internet, in fact stop using Windows, because we all know some BSD licensed code got in there.  

I like Open Source for two things, 1) you can see what the code is doing (even from a non-programmer like me, this is useful).  2) they don't bundle extra crap in it if you get it from the original creator.  (this BS that CNet started doing and adding crap like the yahoo toolbar and other retarded stuff for Windows downloads is absolutely horrible!  Not to mention how they make the actual DOWNLOAD button tiny, but have a huge DOWNLOAD NOW! for whatever advertisement they are currently pushing.)

The fact that they're usually free only helps my pocket book.  There are commercial distributions of Linux, and there are completely free ones.

For those that complain of breakage, use a mainstream and tested STABLE version.  I use Arch Linux, because I know what I'm doing and I expect breakages.  If you need stable, use CentOS or Debian.  Pretty simple, really.  I can guarantee you that both of them test packages before uploading them.

slaapliedje

[commodorejohn]

If you're not a programmer, pay one to fix it for you.  Companies do it all the time.  Most of the people will work off of donations.  The fact is, open source software is usually written to scratch an itch, and if that itch is scratched for the writer and not for all the people that complain about usability, than what should the actual answer be?  "Sure, I'll completely redo my program for free even though it works fine for me...."  People have to eat and all that.

My beef isn't as much with the programmers who can't be assed to write a halfway decent interface (though seriously: come on, guys, if you're going to do GUI at least do it well,) and I'm not going to demand that they spend all of their free time fixing it. My beef is much more with the zealots who try to sell an OS and software ecosystem written by Unix nerds, for Unix nerds as being all Love, Freedom, and Rainbows and The Future of Computing when it has UI that in the best circumstances is still not as good as that of most Windows or Mac software and in worse cases is actually more of a pain than just using the command line.

These are the people who brag on their blogs about how Granny needed a new computer because her Windows 98 box "can't do the Facebook" and so they totally got a new computer for her and installed Linux on it, so now she has to acclimate to a different environment, but hey, at least she'll be completely free of crashes forever, until someone in upstream testing misses a bug report and she updates anyway because they turned on auto-update because you can trust the repository! And let's not forget FREEDOM! And then they pat themselves on the back for advancing The Cause and move on to imagining that they're Woody friggin' Guthrie.

[ElPolloDiabl]

This has gone bad because of the personal attacks against the people who use the above mentioned operating system.

You should have a debate without making personal attacks.

If someone has a complete loathing of Linux because it wouldn't install, I will leave that be.

It's like: Windows is buggy, I think I will try Linux.
 Linux wouldn't install, I will go back to Windows.

[nicholas]

This has gone bad because of the personal attacks against the people who use the above mentioned operating system.

You should have a debate without making personal attacks.

If someone has a complete loathing of Linux because it wouldn't install, I will leave that be.

It's like: Windows is buggy, I think I will try Linux.
 Linux wouldn't install, I will go back to Windows.

+1

[slaapliedje]

Yeah, personal attacks toward programmers, and people who use the software.  Pretty funny.  Personally, I like the GIMP's interface more than Photoshop's, but that's because I've used it on random occasions, and I think it's easy to find things.

Anyone who is used to Workbench should be able to pick up any Linux stuff.  I like the Linux distributions because they allow me to choose how I use my computer, and not how Microsoft wants me to use my computer.

A great example of this are themes.  I was in a discussion last night with a friend of mine, we were talking about how awesome some of the themes for Gnome-Shell look, and I had to tell him that I wait for every release of Windows, hoping that they'll include some sort of ability to theme.  What do we get?  Colours...  Sure there is Window Blinds, but it costs money and doesn't fit very well with the OS and takes more resources than it probably should.  Even the Amiga, as old as it is, has great themes for it!

slaapliedje

[Iggy]

@ slaapliedje
I don't have any real animosity for open source software or it users and developers.
I've just never been completely satisfied with most of what I've used.
Most of it feels incomplete.
I did enjoy Ubuntu for awhile, and then they went out of their way to screw that project up.
As far as I'm concerned, use what works for you.
I'm seriously considering adopting Pascal's Aeros operating system (I've been exchanging some messages with him about what he wants to use as a base and what hardware might be supported).

So its not a completely open source Amiga like system, its close.

[slaapliedje]

I think one of the advantages of open source software is also a disadvantage, in that they are open about what development they are working on, in which case then you automatically think "that's an awesome feature, why isn't it already in there?"

This I think is one of the biggest reasons why people tend to think open source software is incomplete.  

I tend to be kind of the same way, where I'm always chasing that latest version, and it moves so fast, which is why I used Arch Linux.  Unfortunately some major design changes which Arch decided to adapt after Fedora has made me move away from it.  Namely the whole move toward 'let's throw everything under /usr/bin!'

slaapliedje

[OlafS3]

I only talk about open source and closed source in context of amiga

to use Microsoft and Windows 8 as a good example for the advantage of closed source is too strange to me.

open source and closed source both have advantages and disadvantages. The most obvious advantage of closed source have we all seen on a lots of times (abandoned software), that is of course the biggest advantage of opensource. Of course are most closed source projects partly or full commercial so the developer are perhaps more motivated to get a good package out. Opensource developer do the parts they like and it is more difficult to get a good package out. But generally I personal would say OS and basic applications like browser should be opensource.

when people here use Windows as example it is really not realistic.

[Iggy]

when people here use Windows as example it is really not realistic.

Hey, I bought a copy of Windows 7 and never installed it.
I still fall back to an XP system when I need to use Windows.
And frighteningly enough, Microsoft is still updating and supporting that OS (years after they said they were going to drop support).

At this point, instead of going to Win8, I might as well wait for ReactOS.

[OlafS3]

I use Windows too (both XP and 7) but this cannot be compared to the amiga market (if it is called so) with its "limited" developerbase behind the closed source projects (expecially the both OSs). But that is a matter of taste and personal preferences.

[Mrs Beanbag]

As someone who has worked on closed source software, I can tell you it is never complete either. The only difference is we have this thing called "release day" where it has to look complete to customers. There is a lot of code inside that is temporarily commented out because it didn't work well enough in time for the deadline. Also the marketing department keep moving the goalposts, and sometimes their non-technically informed requirements cause the code to get tied up in all kinds of horrible knots. Hacks and cludges get through to release because there isn't time to sort it out properly. But as long as it looks tidy on the outside, that's all that matters.

Code base is always full of "TODO" comments.

[Iggy]

I use Windows too (both XP and 7) but this cannot be compared to the amiga market (if it is called so) with its "limited" developerbase behind the closed source projects (expecially the both OSs). But that is a matter of taste and personal preferences.

Both?
I thought we had at least three.
I just picked to most polished one.
I could adopt one of the others if I saw a clear advantage.

[paolone]

@ommodorejohn

Without open source there would be no Gimp, no Open/Libre Office, no Firefox...

Yes, yes... but 2 out of 3 were born as commercial products (StarOffice and Netscape Navigator).

[slaapliedje]

Yes, yes... but 2 out of 3 were born as commercial products (StarOffice and Netscape Navigator).

True, just like some of us would like something open source to be born out of the Amiga OS product.  And as we can see, both of them have flourished a lot more than when they were commercial.

slaapliedje