Y'know, he starts of sorta lucid, and then....
on Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 05:57:45PM -0800, Michael Dean (michaelldean@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
>
>
> cdmiller wrote:
>
>>Michael Dean wrote:
>>
>>> I think that it is a major blunder to view any rational thrust into
>>> the schools adaptation of Open Source as a Linux initiative.
>>> Especially when schools, who are goal and objective driven, must
>>> sift through thousands of duplicatory packages, many of dubious
>>> quality, that comprise what I call the "kitchen sink" distros such
>>> as Redhat, Suse, Mandrake and Debian. We must, instead look at open
>>> source as a collection of tools to bbe selected from the perspective
>>> of the teachers and admins. We must produce an Educational System
>>> which is based on a minimalist, goal driven philosophy. FreeBSD
>>> would work equally well in schools, and it has a more rational
>>> license. I am collecting papers for an edited books on Transforming
>>> Schools Through Goal Driven Open Source Software. Any educator, or
>>> professional who can produce any contribution to this title would be
>>> welcome to submit.
>>> Thanks you.
>>> --
>>
>>
>> I fail to see how an honest discussion of "goal driven open source
>> software" would not include Linux.
>>
>> You may just as well have stated: I think that it is a major blunder
>> to view any rational thrust into the schools adaptation of Open Source
>> as a BSD initiative. Especially when schools, who are goal and
>> objective driven, must sift through thousands of duplicatory packages,
>> many of dubious quality, that comprise what I call the "kitchen sink"
>> distros such as FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD. We must, instead look
>> at open source as a collection of tools to bbe selected from the
>> perspective of the teachers and admins. We must produce an
>> Educational System which is based on a minimalist, goal driven
>> philosophy. Ubuntu Linux would work equally well in schools, and it
>> has a more rational license...
> I am grateful that my short note announcing my request for conceptual
> and implementation assistance in a book deal already bought by a major
> publisher (not your average linux publisher) generated such passion.
Um. Speaking for myself, I was responding to unsubstantiated, and
largely incomprensible logorrhea. But that's just me.
> And I started a new strand. How is that top posting? Pretty soon, I'll
> be told to point upwind when I take a leak in the forest!
In my own experience, downwind is markedly preferable, but, well, I
wouldn't want to rain on your parade....
> Which in my opinion, many so-called open source consultants are doing
> now when it comes to their potential customer base.
> My main point was NOT Linux versus BSD versus osx versus Dos for that
> matter. My point is that educators, and nonprofits, and small
> businesses are forced to deal with a lot of garbage tacked on to the
> Great Promised God Linux, in the form of mindless, purposeless unplanned
> distributions that just throw everything in there.
Take a step back and realize that most educational institutions have
been sold a bill of goods when it comes to technology, for *decades*.
Sure, some valuable stuff has snuck in inadvertantly, but most of it's
pretty much dreck. Add to that the boom/bust cycle of corporate
sponsorship, and the fact that everyone (Free Software advocates and
present company included) would love the best and brightest of the next
generation of adults to be gee-golly-willickers about
$INSERT_TECHNOLOGY_PRODUCT_HERE.
And given that: yes, it's about marketing, and yes, it's something that
a lot of technologists (and not just the Free Software / GNU/Linux
crowd) aren't particularly good at.
> Ubantu
FYI, it's "Ubuntu". Three consonants. One vowel. "You" got it.
> happens to be politically correct at the moment.
Um. Please take a few minutes to read the link I included in my prior
post. It's something under development, but I think the basics are
spelled out pretty well.
- Distros serve specific interests.
- Corporate-sponsored distros serve their corporate masters'
interests. Sometimes to the advantage of their clients, sometimes
not.
- Debian's markedly easier to administer and maintain, over the long
haul, and doesn't have a track record of leaving its userbase high
and dry. Waiting with bated breath for the next release, sure, but
that's a different story, and actually one which might sit pretty
well with an understaffed school tech team.
- Ubuntu adds polish where Debian lacks it, and does, on balance, a
pretty decent job of it.
In short: Ubuntu addresses both technical and user-friendly issues WRT
GNU/Linux, and seems to do a pretty good job of it.
Mind, I've got my reservations too:
- I'm highly partial to Debian. Particularly given my exposure over
the years to: BSD 3.4, SunOS, Solaris, HPUX, NCR SysV4, Irix, VMS,
OpenVMS, MVS, Win3x/9x/ME/NT/2K/XP, Red Hat (4.2 - 9), SuSE (5.x,
7.x 9.x), Mandrake (various), OpenBSD, FreeBSD. Or to summarize:
by over two decades' comparative experience and exposure.
- Ubuntu has yet to demonstrate staying power. They're off to a great
start. Then again, so was a little company called Caldera, up until
they started demonstrating wanton carelessness with loaded lawyers a
couple years back.
- Damnit, Ubuntu's dropped $FOO favorite package of mine! I'll get
over it. Oh, and I pretty much despise GNOME, but I'll get over
that too. Because, see: I know that it mostly works for the
average user, and if I need to work around it, I can.
Despite the reservations, the nice thing about Ubuntu (and most of the
other Debian-based distros) is that at heart, they're Debian, and can be
brought back into the fold if needs be. That to me is a for of project
escrow that says: if _this_ particular branch or enterprise fails, I
can still offer a reasonable assurance that you'll have a working, live,
and supported distro n years down the line.
> Ain't that grand!
Michael: If you're going to support an argument, please make a more
substantive contribution than "ain't that grand".
> Do you think any educator wants to forego his sanity by being on the
> ubantu discussion lists? If you don't have anything else to do in the
> day maybe.
Thought experiment:
for TECH in WinNT RedHat SuSE BeOS OpenBSD Debian Ubuntu
do
cat <<-EOF
Do you think any educator wants to forego his sanity by being on
the $TECH discussion lists? If you don't have anything else to
do in the day maybe.
EOF
echo
done
Conclusion: representative overharried educators probably don't want to
spend a hell of a lot of their time in _any_ discussion list. However,
it turns out that:
- Most school districts have a technical staff. Small, overworked,
and perhaps with inclinations to pick up new technologies varying
from nil to gonzo. But it's those folks who are already dealing
with their existing legacy MS Windows systems, and trust me, that's
no cake walk either.
- You may find yourself with the outlier faculty who *really* digs
this stuff. That's been my find at a number of districts I've
worked and helped out with. Oh, and it's *tons* easier to make the
pitch to someone who's already leaning your way. Cost of sale comes
way down. Such folk may even be bizarre enough to actually _want_
to seek out further information.
- Ubuntu wins, too, by offering paid professional support. If you
don't want to suffer the pain and humiliation of posting crack to
schoolforge lists, you can pay someone to do it for you. Hrm.
Michael, might want to consider that.
Assuming an educator has sanity is probably your fourth error.
> Also, I have found that you bring 10 open source consultants in and
> each one has a preferred ready made solution.
Spaghetti test.
Toss 'em against the wall. The one that sticks, wins.
In the current context: the guy who:
- Is willing to work with what the district's already doing.
- Is willing to explain what might be a preferred alternative, and
why.
- Actually commits to the work.
- Demonstrates results
...makes a pretty convincing argument.
> The only business process management stuff is BSD licensed Java.
Pardon? Put down the crack pipe, Michael. Java is licensed under a
proprietary Sun screed. If you're referring to FreeBSD's JDK
distribution, it's a specially negotiated licence w/ Sun. It's *not*
BSD-licensed Java.
> In fact, almost all the hot Java based stuff is now BSD/MIT licensed,
> simply because big corporations are scrared of the GNU provisions.
Um. Y'know, much as I respect and admire the GPL, turns out that
BSD/MIT licensing is really cool too. Particularly in the role of
establishing standards. In fact, Sun would've saved themselves a world
of hurt if they'd BSD (or equivalent)-licensed Java in the first place.
But fear of losing control apparently got the better of 'em. And it
appears they're losing control regardless. Pity.
> Large school organization should equally be cautious.!!
Having met and spoken on multiple occasions directly with corporate
counsel at Sun, Apple, Novell, Mozilla/Netscape, Red Hat, Intel, IBM,
and other companies, I can assure you that:
- Fear of the GNU GPL v2 is at a very manageable level.
- There's a significant respect for the license and its power. I'd
refer you, for sake of brevity on my part, some of the excellent
legal analysis at Groklaw concerning the Caldera/SCO vs. IBM
lawsuit, particularly as regards invalidation of much of
Caldera/SCO's complaint on account of GPL conditions. I've a slight
familiarity with the case myself, as maintainer of a related site,
http://sco.iwethey.org/ . I defer to the work PJ's done, however,
in following and analysing development far more rigorously than I've
been able to.
- There's a lot to like about the GPL.
By the way, the gnu.misc.discuss trolls are *that* way.
> My perspective goes beyond the sharp snipes about the ports updating of
> freebsd (Gentoo certainly liked it enough to refine it).
Parse error. Who's sniping at what? Certainly no recent list history
of same.
> I merely offered up BSD because it is competent stuff, and you don't
> have the GNU police (translate unemployed consultants) staring down
> your throat, and which really covers the ass of the major distros
> standing in line with their hands out, waiting for someone else to
> refine something for them.
OK. So this Michael Dean character is a troll out to destroy _any_
remaining credibility or standing he has? Fine by me. Looks like
you're running low on ammo, here's another clip, no charge, just keep
the aim at your _own_ feet, thanks.
Turns out that licensing is by and large entirely orthogonal to any
points about presenting GNU/Linux (or other Free Software technologies)
to school districts, so long as you're within FSF Free Software / OSI
Open Source guidelines. Not that we'd expect you to notice this.
> That sure is pragmatic. As we all realize, a lot of BSD stuff was
> good enough to be pirated by Redhat.
Gee. BSD, the license that doesn't care who uses it for what. But
apparently RH are "pirates".
My clue-vendor's running a bit short at the momemnt, but I've ordered a
double-shipment, Michael, should be arriving shortly. _Please_ accept
delivery, thanks.
OTOH, if you're aware of any unlicensed utilization of BSD code by Red
Hat, I'm sure the UC Regents would love to hear from you. Drop 'em a
line, why don't you?
> Another example of pragmatic.
...is there a word missing? Socks? Washing machines? Blenders?
Stovepipes? Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's stovepipes.
> This is not innovation, this is not revolution, this is just business
> as usual. There is no real difference today between Microsoft and
> Redhat, except size. Suse is now Novell's savior? And we are all for
> the underdog, right?
No, I'm for the underwear. All cotton. Briefs or boxers, depending on
the occasion. Satin's right out.
> I honestly feel sometimes that the GNU license is really fascist,
I honestly feel sometimes that chocolate covered raspberries ARE
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VOICES IN MY HEAD. But I try to avoid repeating
this in public. More than four times. Especially while cackling. That
gets 'em every time.
> because if you fall for the little red sucker, and then try to build
> on it, for your own little playground, you are forced to give these
> dumn guys behind these kitchen sink distros your stuff.
Um. No. That's flat wrong. And a _really_ pathetic troll.
The GPL doesn't and cannot trigger disclosure of your own code. If you
violate its terms (and you're a law-abiding, God (or at least Ray
Charles)-fearing citizen), you're now violating copyright. You can
either stop violating by not insisting on making unlicensed copies of
someone else's work without agreeing to their terms, or come into
compliance. But the choice is yours.
> IBM, CA, HP and all the so-called corporate contributors to open
> source know better, and get around the rules easily.
Eben Moglen, counsel for the FSF, can be reached at:
eben@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Please email him the particulars. Tell him I sent you. He'll recognize
my name. (He sings in harmony with the VOICES IN MY HEAD on Thursday
evenings, 6:30-7pm).
> It's like going to Sears and having to buy this 2300 pound tool chest,
> complete with contents when you only wanted a wrench, because Sears
> thinks this is best for you. And then there are these guys who tell you
> that sure there are literally thousands of pieces of undocumented stuff
> in this kitchen sink distros and this is best for you? How!? Instead
> of the space wasted with Sears, we have our precious TIME wasted with
> kitchen sink distros. This is far worse. I can always buy space, buy
> buying time is harder. I believe these distros are obtuse and
> obfuscated solely to drive business in the direction of hacks who failed
> to complete their college education. And because no one is invested
> enough to put some common sense to work and look at purpose first, not
> their purpose, but the purpose of the customer. Unless of course you
> don't want customers, only consumers, like the phone companies.
Oh geez, where to start.
Zeroth: CHOICE IS BAD. EVIL. AXIS OF CHOICE. DESTROY! Pardon, let
me mix another scotch'n'soda....
First: yes, RH and SuSE do play to what they see as their corporate
interest. RH, incidentally, are doing a somewhat amusing dance for
those of us who've watched for a while, as they first burned their SOHO
and enthusiast customers, and are now comin' a'courtin' again.
Too: RPM-managed systems have always been a bitch to upgrade and
customize with a given package load. Improving some over time, but
still not there yet. Google "why debian rocks" to save me some typing
here. Oh, I'm feeling generous, here's a link. And a _bonus_ one, no
charge. (The VOICES IN MY HEAD told me to do it).
http://twiki.iwethey.org/Main/WhyDebianRocks
http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/talks/why_debian/talk.html
There's a tiny germ of sense in here, and that's what I pointed you at
the last time: there's offering tools, and there's offering guidance.
There's a distinction between the two, and your role. Hold that. The
role of the _rational_ participants in this discussion is to provide
informed guidance as to what tools are recommended, and a curriculum in
which to apply same.
Or you can reduce the library holdings to a single book. Wouldn't want
to *confuse* the poor little dears....
And, you know, this is where Ubuntu's actually attempted to do a lot of
the work you're talking about. While offering most of Debian's 17.5k
packages, they offer a set of predefined "seeds" (package lists) aimed
at standard tasks. For stock deployment, this provides a good starting
point:
http://www.ubuntulinux.org/wiki/SeedManagement
> And how is this different from Microsoft's paternalistic stuff?
How is day different from night?
Q: How is a double-scoop chocolate ice-cream in a waffle cone with hot
fudge sauce different from the CURSE OF THE PHAROHS?
A: 42.
> It is still this pre-conceived product, produced supposedly for the
> greater good of the many and then sold in computer stores? No wonder
> Suse, Mandrake and Redhat failed at retail, they weren't giving
> customers the value customers wanted, just what these guys thought the
> customer wanted, without doing any market research at all.
Y'know, the story of retail GNU/Linux is an interesting one, with varied
and multiple facets, but I dare say you're not even within ICBM range of
the neighborhood. We'll give it a pass for the evening.
However, competing with your own free downloads and legacy MS Windows
preinstalls is a tad challenging. We'll just note that in passing. Or
not, as we've already established we're not in the neighborhood.
My own experience, mingling with the hoi polloi for the past few years
(you know, the usual: legacy MS Windows PC user groups, Boys & Girls
Clubs, chance encounters at the grocery store, crackhouses), shows the
natives are restless. There's a huge amount of dissatisfaction with The
Officially Condoned Product, at present. The New York Times running
front page articles on therapeutic hard-drive wipe-n-reinstall is pretty
pathetic if you ask me.
> Boy were they all wrong. Novell's offering is no improvement either.
> Linux on the desktop is still far away from what the common man wants
> or needs, and the zealots out there need to understand that, and
> provide an iterative solution, which they are just not doing.
Um. And your POSITIVE, HELPFUL, and SUCCESSFUL solution is _what_
exactly? More crack?
Um. Um. Um. No, mentioning OS X as a usable Unix-based desktop
couldn't *possible* be relevant here. Fuggeddabouddit.
> Proliferation of features, rather than refinement of usage are two
> separate dogs. Educators want one good work dog that provides
> growling competence, not a dozen toy dogs that yips at your heals.
>
> In the public's eye, not rabid fanatical programmers with a mafioso set
> of axes to grind, "linux" is not Linus Torvalds 2.6.11 kernel, which
> they don't even see, linux is all the crap added onto it -- the more
> crap the merrier. I honestly feel sometimes that the GNU license is
> really fascist, because if you fall for the little red sucker, and then
Woah, deja vu.
Is that like some sort of automated phrase in your editor, or is there a
disturbance in The Matrix?
> try to build on it, for your own little playground, you are forced to
> give these dumn guys behind these kitchen sink distros your stuff. IBM,
> CA, HP and all the so-called corporate contributors to open source know
> better, and get around the rules easily. But schools?
> In my mind,
...a truely frightening place to contemplate.
> it is wrong to have a closed perspective, where every idea is
> piecemealed out and subjected to a nasty ideologically based diatribe.
Um. Yeah. Wait, what was that *really* open, non-ideological,
un-diatribe I remember from way back when? Oh yeah:
I honestly feel sometimes that the GNU license is really fascist,
because if you fall for the little red sucker, and then try to build
on it, for your own little playground, you are forced to give these
dumn guys behind these kitchen sink distros your stuff.
My friend Rick wins again: Dollar for dollar, irony is *still* your
best entertainment value.
> My main point
What? You had a POINT? And I missed it?
Damn, and I thought it was Blunt Force Trauma, straight out of
Snowcrash. Dude! I'm like *so* bummed!
> which I probably didn't communicate well enoughi
What you've communicated has been *absolutely* crystal.
> is that the real battle is NOT at the device level, the operating
> system level, not even at the middleware level, but at the user
> application level.
People use computers for the applications. That's...*profound*.
Folks stay tuned for these future *stunning* Michal Dean[tm] Cert-E-Fide
pronouncements:
- Water is wet.
- Entertainment is fun.
- Food is the best eating.
- Losing weight is the best way to weigh less.
> And here, the Linux/BSD GUI is still nothing more than a poor copy of
> other's. And it is here where the IBM's of the world are having a
> field day. And it is at this level where purpose-drive, objective
> driven well document software needs to be provided to educators.
And THE VOICES are TELLING ME that I LEFT MY SOCKS in THE DRYER!
Cheerio.
Peace.
--
Karsten M. Self <kmself@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
Arachnophobia: actively obstructing search-engine spiders:
http://zgp.org/pipermail/linux-elitists/2002-January/003898.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature