Trojan horse
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| r_a_trip Oct 14, 2008 3:59 AM EDT |
So it begins. MS is trying to DotNet the web and with some beads and mirrors is trying to lead FOSS into a second Java trap. Nice of them to fund an Open Source Eclipse plugin for Silverlight. Nice of them to Open Source a smidge of Silverlight itself. Also nice that they will document parts of XAML under the OSP. The end result is still the same. Under all the Open Source sugar coating, there still is MS' proprietary Silverlight. Write Silverlight dependent web-applications with Open Source tools and you end up closing the web under Microsofts IPR. MS is not trying to kill FOSS. They know they can't. They are trying to get into the plumbing. Once your "free" system can't function without proprietary infrastructure, the owner of that infrastructure can start extracting its toll. Undoubtedly I'll be told that I'm paranoid... |
| bigg Oct 14, 2008 10:04 AM EDT |
It's a matter of Free vs non-free IMO. Flash is not any better. My guess is that Silverlight is part of the reason Linux has better Flash support. I'm neutral on Microsoft because they have no effect on me, and their actions can be explained by the fact that they are a rival. On the other hand, I hate Adobe. There's no justification for what they do, and no company makes Linux less of an option for the general public than Adobe. > Once your "free" system can't function without proprietary infrastructure, the owner of that infrastructure can start extracting its toll. Actually, if you need proprietary infrastructure, the owner has already extracted its toll. |
| gus3 Oct 14, 2008 11:52 AM EDT |
An old joke I heard recently seems apropos here: A man asks a woman, "Would you sleep with me for a million dollars?" She thinks about it briefly, then says, "Yes, I suppose I could." The man pulls out $50 and holds it out to her. She is offended and asks, "What kind of woman do you think I am?" The man replies, "We've already established that. Now we're just negotiating the price." |
| herzeleid Oct 14, 2008 12:46 PM EDT |
> It's a matter of Free vs non-free IMO. Flash is not any better. IMO it's a matter of strategic importance for linux long term viability. Flash is a much better deal than sliverlight, from the perspective of linux. On the one hand, silverlight is microsoft centered, while on the other hand, flash is cross platform. Clearly, microsoft wants to neutralize linux, adobe does not. What good is "free" if your "freedom" depends on microsoft, who can revoke the "freedom" any time they like? |
| tuxchick Oct 14, 2008 1:16 PM EDT |
lol gus3, and every time I hear that one I think "yeah, and there's a special name for the customer in that scenario too." |
| gus3 Oct 14, 2008 1:25 PM EDT |
@TC: "Inmate 479237" |
| tuxchick Oct 14, 2008 1:31 PM EDT |
Good grief, what kind of weird discussion is this? "Which one is better, Adobe or Microsoft?" Which one is better, burning coals or broken glass? Which one is better, stabbing or shooting? Which beverage is better, drain cleaner or muriatic acid? |
| dinotrac Oct 14, 2008 1:41 PM EDT |
TC - I much prefer drain cleaner because you can get it in a thick gel formulation. Coats the throat. Mmmmmm. |
| bigg Oct 14, 2008 1:51 PM EDT |
> On the one hand, silverlight is microsoft centered, while on the other hand, flash is cross platform. Clearly, microsoft wants to neutralize linux, adobe does not. Neither is completely open and neither company likes Linux. Get rid of Silverlight and there's a good chance of losing Flash on Linux. Free is a guarantee, depending on Adobe is hardly freedom. > Good grief, what kind of weird discussion is this? "Which one is better, Adobe or Microsoft?" You missed cow manure vs bull manure. |
| herzeleid Oct 14, 2008 1:52 PM EDT |
> Which one is better, burning coals or broken glass? Unfortunately, at this point we are talking about the lesser of two evils. It happens. |
| happyfeet Oct 14, 2008 2:57 PM EDT |
@dino: Ewwwwwww.... |
| herzeleid Oct 14, 2008 3:11 PM EDT |
> Neither is completely open and neither company likes Linux But you are missing a key point: With microsoft, neutralizing "the linux threat" is a major goal, while adobe simply doesn't want to have to work on supporting any additional platforms. Obviously adobe is not a benefactor to linux, but they aren't strategically committed to killing it either. Like most companies, adobe are just lazy and greedy, and when they are convinced that they can make money from linux with little effort, they will play ball. OTOH microsoft will never tolerate a growing linux market share, and will work against it with all tools available to them. I think it's a really bad idea to grant them any more power or influence to do so. |
| bigg Oct 14, 2008 3:32 PM EDT |
> I think it's a really bad idea to grant them any more power or influence to do so. Maybe my point was not clear: I think it's bad to grant influence to either company. And I don't, because I don't have Flash on all my computers, and don't miss it. It's only a choice of the lesser of two evils if you have to pick one. I choose none of the above. Linux is harmed when the community goes with either silverlight or flash. |
| herzeleid Oct 14, 2008 4:35 PM EDT |
> I don't have Flash on all my computers, and don't miss it. The problem is that sort of isolationist attitude, if adopted by the linux community as a whole, will cause linux to be increasingly disconnected from web content, and that will make linux an increasingly unattractive proposition. It's fine for you, but for your teenage daughter, or Aunt Mildred, or Joe 6 pack, who want to watch a youtube video, play a flash game, or visit http://www.toyota.com it's a non starter. What's needed are platform neutral standards, not isolating linux from the rest of the world. |
| tracyanne Oct 14, 2008 4:53 PM EDT |
Quoting:What's needed are platform neutral standards, not isolating linux from the rest of the world. Yes. Until then lets encourage competition between the major players, so that Our platform doesn't lose out, and by that I mean so that Joe sixpack, aunt mildred and teenage daughter will see it as a viable choice. |
| bigg Oct 14, 2008 5:01 PM EDT |
@herzeleid There are two issues here. One is non-Free vs Free. The other is Adobe vs Microsoft. IMO it's the former that's relevant, not the latter. Your argument is that Adobe really isn't that bad but I disagree. I fail to see the difference between letting Adobe control my computing experience or letting Microsoft control my computing experience. |
| cjcox Oct 14, 2008 5:10 PM EDT |
Silverlight wants the Flash business. Both are proprietary, both come from very evil companies. I agree that there needs to be some really good FOSS solutions for multimedia content.... but even so (because there are some things out there), I don't expect any major conversion to happen. Just like with firefox and MSIE, firefox has captured a large marketshare, but it's not close to 50%... and probably never will be (oh... and without Flash, etc. firefox support usage would probably drop to less than 2%). What can we hope for? Adobe can utilize pull through and can scorch their proprietary earth by making Flash FOSS (to counter any Silverlight momentum), but that's VERY problematic because of all the greedy anti-FOSS hand prints that are all over Flash.... but we'll see. Long term, need a FOSS champion that is Flash-like and wait for slow adoption... But hard to compete with established plugins that are 'free"... and if worse came to worse, Adobe/Microsoft/whoever would cheapen their development platforms in order to maintain presence (removing any price benefits... which for many = who cares what I use). Lastly there's just ideology... it's slow moving, but does account for a lot of FOSS being utilized out there. |
| herzeleid Oct 14, 2008 6:05 PM EDT |
> Your argument is that Adobe really isn't that bad but I disagree. I fail to see the difference between letting Adobe control my computing experience or letting Microsoft control my computing experience. You've put words in my mouth here. What I said was that adobe is the lesser of two evils. You may or may not see the difference if you eschew flash and other browser enhancements, but the difference is major. adobe is apathetic towards linux but have grudgingly begun to support it. microsoft OTOH has a keen and malevolent interest in linux. IMHO it's no contest as to which is the bigger threat. |
| rijelkentaurus Oct 14, 2008 6:53 PM EDT |
Adobe confuses me. The market they occupy is clearly targeted by Microsoft (seems to me that Expression targets much of the bread and butter in the web development area). I don't know if Expression has anything about it to equal Photoshop in all its glory, but for those who use PS only to create images for the web (and there are a bunch of them), Expression would probably do just fine. Adobe needs to pull an Oracle. You can run Oracle on Windows, sure, but it's developed for Linux first and foremost, because Ellison didn't want to be tied up on a platform he had no control over, and slowly see his DB's performance slip in relation to MS SQL because Microsoft would have surely stacked the deck. It was a gamble that paid off huge, I think Adobe needs to do the same thing. Continue to offer their suite on Windows and Mac, but open up a huge potential market for use on Linux. They could even keep the activation crap in place while offering the program through repos of Ubuntu, Mandriva, etc, allowing for millions of people to try it out during the 30-60 day free trial. But, hey, what do I know? |
| techiem2 Oct 14, 2008 6:59 PM EDT |
rij: I've thought exactly the same thing many times. MS had FP, now Expression Web that competes against Adobe's web dev line. They have Windows Movie Maker to compete again Premier (hey, I didn't say it was competing WELL...). Now they have Silverlight competing against Flash.... Yet Adobe still insists on concentrating on Windows development and pretty much ignoring all the people who are ready, willing, and able to purchase a Linux version of their products. |
| jdixon Oct 14, 2008 9:09 PM EDT |
> You've put words in my mouth here. What I said was that adobe is the lesser of two evils. You know, it's almost a shame politics is anti-TOS. The parallels to the current election are remarkable, and would surely engender a lengthy discussion. But... |
| gus3 Oct 15, 2008 12:10 AM EDT |
@jdixon: Not the first time, won't be the last. People will still complain about their leaders even after our great-great-grandchildren are buried. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!