Linked by Kroc Camen on Thu 20th Aug 2009 09:43 UTC
Podcasts What else would we talk about other than the massively [popular|controversial] article about X.org last week. We try and address a number of concerns about the article and common lines of reasoning / misunderstanding. Lastly, we move onto something completely different with topics on Google Chrome on Linux, IE6 and the two details we know about RockMelt: Rock. Melt.
Thread beginning with comment 380115
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: X and Thom
by wfreund on Sun 23rd Aug 2009 02:58 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: X and Thom"
wfreund
Member since:
2009-08-17

I don't have the time to do such a detailed analysis. So I will do the honorable thing and withdraw my support of the claim on the basis of lack of evidence.
That cuts both ways, however. I consider the claim untested unless you provide the same measure of evidence to the refute the claim.

I will replace it, however, with the assertion that the vocal minority, majority or whatever you wish to call it, is creating this impression in the minds of at least some readers. As someone that wishes all of the success in the world to both Open Source software and Free Software, I detest the deplorable impression that these sophists are making.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[10]: X and Thom
by sbergman27 on Sun 23rd Aug 2009 07:10 in reply to "RE[9]: X and Thom"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

I don't have the time to do such a detailed analysis. So I will do the honorable thing and withdraw my support of the claim on the basis of lack of evidence.

And also, you know that no matter how much time you spent, you'd never come close to the numbers needed to justify the stereotype.

That cuts both ways, however. I consider the claim untested unless you provide the same measure of evidence to the refute the claim.

You have been claiming that most Linux advocates are making certain assertions. My position has been that your claim is unsupported by the evidence. The burden of proof has always been upon you.

I will replace it, however, with the assertion that the vocal minority, majority or whatever you wish to call it, is creating this impression in the minds of at least some readers.

Which is exactly the point I've been trying to get across. And I think I could count the major offenders here on OSNews on the fingers of one hand. Maybe two hands if I reviewed the history. But these people post so very often and so very loudly that one could easily *think* they were really speaking for the community. (And I don't fault anyone for doing so.)

I scold the offenders often. But they never ever listen. Because they think they are doing so much good for the OSS cause. Or I should probably say the "Free Software" cause, since these folks tend also to advocate creating a schism in the community, placing themselves on a "side" labeled "Free Software".

IMO, Linux has done well to get where is has despite their "help".

Edit:

Now that that is settled, I should probably weigh in on the original question of whether OSS results in better code. In general, I think that the openness, and public peer review is beneficial. But when it comes to code quality and design quality, there is no such thing as a magic bullet. Closed code can be good, and open code can be bad. Large, well known projects are probably in the best position to benefit.

Edited 2009-08-23 07:24 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2