Many sites reported on the Desktop Linux Consortium Conference that took place yesterday and here is a round up: NewsForge article, Dot.KDE.org‘s and Infoworld‘s. In the context of Linux on the desktop, SuSE CEO Richard Seibt confirms ongoing support for KDE.
Desktop Linux Consortium Conference debuts
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
It’s only important that the roots are open and accessable, not the whole tree of software because in a capitalist economy the GPL restricts the freedom of vendors to compete in the market with a product line based on open source software.
The roots are the factors of production for system implementation and they should not be controlled by one organization, instead their control should be organically distributed to individuals who choose to learn and engineer the new ideas that are later possibly used by vendors to create a commercial market out of, in the form of a product that supports a strategy for a product line.
It’s only the roots that are important to preserve as open and accessible, nothing more.
Let me put it this way, the commercial environment fosters competition and specialization, it’s important to preserve that state of order.
When there is a monopoly than there will be a need for revolution, an overthrow, and that has occured. Can’t you see it? It is natural, it is the law of nature in human society.
It is actually very important to promote competition and specialization through commercial interest, and on Linux there is an opportunity to preserve that state, because control over the raw factors of production are distributed.
Linux does not need to overthow the vendors, it only needs to be ‘true’ to it’s nature. It can find the answers it needs to survive by making the factors of production (the generalized system) open and accessible AND finding a way to attract commercial interest so that specialization can occur.
I personally think that a software layer is the answer for commercial interst in Linux. A commerical layer of software that is decoupled from the operating system layer.
…and it’s the drive to specialize, and to compete that made most of us in this society who we are today. So why over react and change the world when in the 2000 years that we began to specialize we made a computer. If we had never specialized and formed commercial competition through a market than we would probably never have a computer in the first place.
I don’t see anyone comming out with the ‘true’ answer yet.
Don’t get out much, do ya?
The founders of open source should never prepare a distribution unless it is a scaled down research skeleton disribution. In other words they should focus on making the foundational technology more powerful so that it is able to foster more commercial interest. That money should go to the development of an open source knowledge base. It should not be applied to deploying Linux to businesses, that is not the job of the open source project.
Man, just mention “Linux” and “desktop” in the same breath and all of a sudden the most ridiculous trolls come out of the woodwork!
Are they as in love with the sound of their voices as they are in love with the sight of their text? For the sake of those around them, I hope not.
“…and it’s the drive to specialize, and to compete that made most of us in this society who we are today. So why over react and change the world when in the 2000 years that we began to specialize we made a computer. If we had never specialized and formed commercial competition through a market than we would probably never have a computer in the first place.”
O, if you want to go in that way, i have another one. If we’d never had these people in 60’s, 70’s and 80’s who shared their information and source, we wouldn’t have had this commercial market either. Competition also exists on a non-commercial basis… but you already knew all this, ofcourse…
Richard Seibt says:
“Together, we might even think about new opportunities to leverage the usage of Linux on the desktop. E.g. why do we not open Linux for Apple’s Mac OS desktop.”
Any idea of what he means ?
Run the the OS X desktop on top of the Linux kernel instead of Darwin. Why change one free kernel for another ?
Any other combination such as (a) running a Linux distro on Mac hardware. (b) running Linux applications under OS X or even (c) running a Linux/Unix desktop such as KDE on Darwin on a Mac has all long been done.
What is he wittering on about does it have any deep significance I have missed ?
Perplexed
Competition for food did not exist in hunter gatherer societies. The competition in open source exists because of commercial software products.