Re: [OS:N:] Developing for developers and users

I must respectively disagree with you Matt.

You use MS Office as an example likely thinking that OpenOffice simply
mimics it and that it was built from the ground up.  That is not the
case though.  OpenOffice was from an existing codebase that Sun
Microsystems aquired and open sourced.  Since the time that it was
opened it has had developers significantly improve it.  Features to
export as a pdf from the writer and export as flash from the
presentation piece, increased compatibility with Microsoft Office, XML
document formats (very nice and small).  

Programming and all human knowledge is evolutionary much more so than
revolutionary.  The purpose of word processors was to emulate what
people had been doing on paper and cave walls for thousands of years. 
Nothing revolutionary there.

Don't get me wrong, people developing open source are inventing.  There
are experts in pretty much any field of science the world has to offer
that are part of the open source movement.  Take the work on
cryptology.  Invariably open source software was the proving ground for
the inventions before they went mainstream.

While much spit and polish goes into closed source products to give the
external appearance of something new and revolutionary, often times it
existed in open source projects for years prior.  

The inventions of tomorrows businesses are happening with open source
today.  Look to the big businesses for spit and polish.

-Chris

On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 16:38, Matt Frye wrote:
> Your argument would make more sense if they were actually improving on
> something.  I don't remember Microsoft opening up any code so that OSS
> developers could improve on it.  They _are_ reinventing the wheel by
> writing applications that mimick MS Office, etc.
> 
> I think the point that Nielsen is making (and that Kim already made)
> is that there _are_ better methods out there, but developers aren't
> taking advantage of them.
> 
> "Open source software offers an excellent and underutilized avenue for
> disseminating innovations in user interface." from Kim's Manifesto
> 
> Why imitate Microsoft's wheel when you can create a better one?  
> 
> MPF
> 
> 
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:49:39 -0400, Etienne Goyer
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Matt Frye wrote:
> > >  - when they (open source developers) turn to the general tools they
> > > tend to be in the line of "let's implement what we already know" so they
> > > will take Microsoft Office and they will clone it.
> > 
> > I don't really understand the stigma associated with that.  Why reinvent
> > the wheel when you can improve it ?
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Subscription and Archive: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/open-source-now-list/
> > -
> > For K12OS technical help join K12OSN:
> > <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Subscription and Archive: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/open-source-now-list/
> -
> For K12OS technical help join K12OSN:
> <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn>
"There is a lot of speculation and I guess there is going to continue to
be a lot of speculation until the speculation ends." - George W. Bush on
October 18, 1998


_______________________________________________
Subscription and Archive: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/open-source-now-list/
-
For K12OS technical help join K12OSN:
<https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn>