March 29, 2007
live from sf beta
Blogging from sf beta! It's like a frat party for web 2.0 types. Complete with groupies! @ 111 minna
March 20, 2007
Hyperic Giving Away $5,000 Scholarship
Hyperic is giving away $5,000 in scholarship money to the winner of an essay contest on the subject of "Managing the Next Generation Data Center". Open to all university students and employees (including faculty). If you're an employee, the money goes to your departmental budget. Details at hyperic.com/essaycontest/
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
February 27, 2007
Hey Donatella: Please Shut Up
I realize I'm late to this party, but I couldn't help myself. Hey Donatella, when you get to be a senator or hell can hold any kind of office, perhaps then you can tell Hillary Clinton what to wear. Until then, just STFU. Having just watched "The Devil Wears Prada" it brought this recent episode to mind. Remind me, why do we need people to tell us what's acceptable to wear? Can someone explain that one to me?
February 15, 2007
gpl3 panel
One panel i'm attending right now is on gpl3. One guy from dla piper, one from sun, and another from softwarefreedom.org - Eben's group. main idea - will have a limited impact... nothing earth-shattering but many attendees aren't very knowledgeable. sun guy mentions solaris - nervous about gpl2 but more comfortable with v3. doesn't say it, but looks like cddl is history in the future.
live from new york...
Blogging with my nokia 800... Ok, it's not really mine, but i'm using it while at linuxworld new york. but now i'm hooked, so i'll probably end up buying one. more on lw ny in a bit. the show has been toned down into a conference. frankly it's better now thaqn when it was an expo. lots of interesting people. more later.
February 05, 2007
Open Source is Now Boring
As seen on TINOSC: Regardless of what transpires, we don't get any more silly stories about whether Open Source will survive. Well, sometimes we do, but I don't think anyone actually takes them seriously. The market has matured to the point where many finally understand that any one company's failing is not representative of the entire Open Source community
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
November 03, 2006
Kung Fu Monkey
So I'm a little slow, but Kung Fu Monkey is freaking brilliant. In particular, I greatly enjoyed this gem.
November 02, 2006
Republicans are Pansies... Pass it on
Republicans are living in fear, and they're making policy inspired by this fear. They're dreadfully afraid of terrorists and extremists - so much so that they're willing to drop their freedoms in the hopes of saving their own skin. The Iraq war is a manifestation of this fear. The PATRIOT ACT is an expression of this fear. The willingness to subvert habeas corpus, detain *possible* terrorist group members indefinitely without criminal charges, enact broader search and seizure guidelines, and engage in torture all reflect a basic, inate fear of the enemy. The fear stems from the belief that keeping our freedom intact results in a higher risk of a terrorist strike.
Does this not strike anyone as hypocritical? Aren't republicans in this country fond of saying "freedom isn't free," "our troops are dying for our freedoms," and other similar phrases? If it is true that "freedom isn't free" and that it's worth dying for, then what gives with the cheap sellout of freedom in exchange for our collective safety? In short, shouldn't Republicans be willing to grow a pair and accept the risk that comes with freedom?
I'm tired of what is obvious (republicans' white-knuckle fear of terrorism) being passed over in favor of what is simply untrue - that they hold the roadmap for the most effective anti-terrorism policy. Maybe all Americans need to grow a pair and realize that taking the high road of morality and human rights means facing up to the inherent risk.
Given the choice between dying for our founding principles and living on in a pale imitation of said principles, I know what I'll choose.
If there are evil people in this world who will exploit our laws and governance to strike us, then may God have mercy on their souls. I'm not going to use that as an excuse to drop the very things that made us what we are today, and neither should you. When you vote on Tuesday, bear in mind that exactly one party has overwhelmingly ruled from a position of fear. You know which party that is, and now is the time to send them the message that you won't tolerate this shortchange of principles.
Republicans are pansies. Pass it on.
Does this not strike anyone as hypocritical? Aren't republicans in this country fond of saying "freedom isn't free," "our troops are dying for our freedoms," and other similar phrases? If it is true that "freedom isn't free" and that it's worth dying for, then what gives with the cheap sellout of freedom in exchange for our collective safety? In short, shouldn't Republicans be willing to grow a pair and accept the risk that comes with freedom?
I'm tired of what is obvious (republicans' white-knuckle fear of terrorism) being passed over in favor of what is simply untrue - that they hold the roadmap for the most effective anti-terrorism policy. Maybe all Americans need to grow a pair and realize that taking the high road of morality and human rights means facing up to the inherent risk.
Given the choice between dying for our founding principles and living on in a pale imitation of said principles, I know what I'll choose.
If there are evil people in this world who will exploit our laws and governance to strike us, then may God have mercy on their souls. I'm not going to use that as an excuse to drop the very things that made us what we are today, and neither should you. When you vote on Tuesday, bear in mind that exactly one party has overwhelmingly ruled from a position of fear. You know which party that is, and now is the time to send them the message that you won't tolerate this shortchange of principles.
Republicans are pansies. Pass it on.
October 16, 2006
Google Spam Recipes! Woohoo!
I've discovered an amazing new "feature" of GMail - whenever you go to your spam folder, look near the top of the page where Google normally inserts topic-related links, and you'll mostly likely see one of several recipes that make creative use of spam ©. Note here that I'm talking about the canned spicy ham - not the junk mail that gmail sorts into your "spam" folder. And now, so that you don't have to, I've collected a few of my personal favorites below:
Spam Primavera
Spam Breakfast Burritos
French Fry Spam Casserole
Spam Quiche
Add your favorite spam recipes below!
Spam Primavera
Spam Breakfast Burritos
French Fry Spam Casserole
Spam Quiche
Add your favorite spam recipes below!
September 19, 2006
John Mark's "There is no Open Source Community"
Hi there, dear readers (all 2 of you). I am putting all new posts on open source-releated topics in my new blog, John Mark's "There is no Open Source Community". Enjoy!
September 18, 2006
Talk Like a Pirate! Arrrr!
In commemoration of Talk Like a Pirate Day, I give you my 2-year-old talking like a pirate.
Pssst - I just found another TLAPD web site!
Pssst - I just found another TLAPD web site!
September 06, 2006
On Red Hat and Commercial Open Source
I recently had lunch with a friend from RedHat. Suffice it to say, it was rather revelatory. At some point, the conversation drifted to rPath and how they split off because Red Hat "couldn't afford to please the diehards" - they had to make money, and the only way to do this was by ignoring the "diehards". This Red Hatter then went on to talk about how they couldn't just continue to give stuff away, they had to charge for it, yadda yadda - pretty standard stuff we've heard from Red Hat for a while now. It then occurred to me how Red Hat continues to get it wrong in the marketplace - they still think it's about engaging in solid business practices in spite of the resistance of the GNU diehards.
This very premise is simply wrong. They seem to have neatly categorized criticism of its abandonment of the desktop as just noise from the "diehards" wanting Red Hat to serve the free software community and give stuff away for free. This line of thought ceased to be relevant about 6 years ago.
What Red Hat doesn't seem to understand is the effort that will be required to bring parity to the desktop landscape. The reason this is important is that Microsoft is continuing to use the leverage from its large desktop install base to build server-based technologies. While Red Hat is laser-focused on web servers and other back-office sales, Microsoft continues to bundle more services into its offerings, and for the most part, it just works - assuming, of course, that you use Microsoft on both ends of your transactions.
Red Hat does not now, nor has it ever, grasped how much leverage it would have with a ubiquitous, user-friendly desktop. They want so badly for everyone to equate Red Hat with Linux, and they have been very successful at this. However, Red Hat just isn't large enough to outflank, on its own, a company as large as Microsoft, and yet they continue with their market myopia. Witness their absence from LinuxWorld San Francisco. Witness the bad relationship between them and some of the larger commercial entities (there are several). They want to single-handedly drive Linux forward, and they do not have a great track record in terms of working with other companies. It's no secret that they have not been strong advocates of the LSB. One note of hope is their acquisition of JBoss, but there is a distinct lack of solid partnerships between Red Hat and other strong commercial open source players. They continue to strive for a Red Hat-only market, without engaging users on a large-enough scale to create new markets.
Given this view, a lack of engagement with the commercial open source ecosystem, and a bias towards its own technologies, it would seem that Red Hat is doomed - in terms of matching its ambitions to eventual success. Unfortunately, a doomed Red Hat spells a temporarily doomed commercial Linux space, and thus a temporarily doomed commercial open source space. Red Hat does not seem to recognize that a lot is riding on their success or failure - like, say, the entire commercial Linux ecosystem. And since Red Hat/Fedora Linux is the default development platform for open source ISV's, a lot of other software infrastructure would fail with it. Realistically, Red Hat can push out most of its competitors on the server landscape - Sun, Novell, et al. - and lose to Microsoft in the back office and the continuously growing web infrastructure. It would be a classic case of winning battles but losing the war.
The other strike against Red Hat is they seem to discount Microsoft's efforts in the commoditized web infrastructure area. They do this at their peril. Microsoft appears to be learning how to make its software cheap enough to make it compelling. Given their established user base and the fact that many admins feel at home with it, IT buyers are willing to pay more for it. Again, a ubiquitous desktop is largely responsible for this. It certainly doesn't hurt that a large amount of open source software runs really well under Windows. Conceivably, assuming Microsoft doesn't screw up and that open source .NET continues to flourish, one could imagine a day where Windows becomes the de facto open source development platform.
Enter Ubuntu/Canonical. If one takes the view that the desktop is vitally important *and* a market in need of a brash, ambitious upstart, then Ubuntu seems to be a Linux distribution that understands what is needed to clear the major hurdles. That is, many many more users (and eventually developers) are needed to bring the software market to parity and give leverage to the smaller software players. New markets need to be pushed wide open, and they need a compelling reason to use Linux. Yes, this means stuff needs to be given to them. Yes, Ubuntu is bleeding money at the moment. My point is that this is a necessary evil - for now. I don't think it's a coincidence that Red Hat is public and Canonical is not. Of these two companies, despite Red Hat's current market position, it would seem that Canonical/Ubuntu is best positioned to drive commercial open source in the future - only they seem to understand the scale of the task before them. "Community building" is not some touchie-feelie exercise in charity - it is shrewd business development.
Oh but wait, Ubuntu is just a free toy given away by a crazy South African spaceman to please the GNU/Linux diehards, right?
This very premise is simply wrong. They seem to have neatly categorized criticism of its abandonment of the desktop as just noise from the "diehards" wanting Red Hat to serve the free software community and give stuff away for free. This line of thought ceased to be relevant about 6 years ago.
What Red Hat doesn't seem to understand is the effort that will be required to bring parity to the desktop landscape. The reason this is important is that Microsoft is continuing to use the leverage from its large desktop install base to build server-based technologies. While Red Hat is laser-focused on web servers and other back-office sales, Microsoft continues to bundle more services into its offerings, and for the most part, it just works - assuming, of course, that you use Microsoft on both ends of your transactions.
Red Hat does not now, nor has it ever, grasped how much leverage it would have with a ubiquitous, user-friendly desktop. They want so badly for everyone to equate Red Hat with Linux, and they have been very successful at this. However, Red Hat just isn't large enough to outflank, on its own, a company as large as Microsoft, and yet they continue with their market myopia. Witness their absence from LinuxWorld San Francisco. Witness the bad relationship between them and some of the larger commercial entities (there are several). They want to single-handedly drive Linux forward, and they do not have a great track record in terms of working with other companies. It's no secret that they have not been strong advocates of the LSB. One note of hope is their acquisition of JBoss, but there is a distinct lack of solid partnerships between Red Hat and other strong commercial open source players. They continue to strive for a Red Hat-only market, without engaging users on a large-enough scale to create new markets.
Given this view, a lack of engagement with the commercial open source ecosystem, and a bias towards its own technologies, it would seem that Red Hat is doomed - in terms of matching its ambitions to eventual success. Unfortunately, a doomed Red Hat spells a temporarily doomed commercial Linux space, and thus a temporarily doomed commercial open source space. Red Hat does not seem to recognize that a lot is riding on their success or failure - like, say, the entire commercial Linux ecosystem. And since Red Hat/Fedora Linux is the default development platform for open source ISV's, a lot of other software infrastructure would fail with it. Realistically, Red Hat can push out most of its competitors on the server landscape - Sun, Novell, et al. - and lose to Microsoft in the back office and the continuously growing web infrastructure. It would be a classic case of winning battles but losing the war.
The other strike against Red Hat is they seem to discount Microsoft's efforts in the commoditized web infrastructure area. They do this at their peril. Microsoft appears to be learning how to make its software cheap enough to make it compelling. Given their established user base and the fact that many admins feel at home with it, IT buyers are willing to pay more for it. Again, a ubiquitous desktop is largely responsible for this. It certainly doesn't hurt that a large amount of open source software runs really well under Windows. Conceivably, assuming Microsoft doesn't screw up and that open source .NET continues to flourish, one could imagine a day where Windows becomes the de facto open source development platform.
Enter Ubuntu/Canonical. If one takes the view that the desktop is vitally important *and* a market in need of a brash, ambitious upstart, then Ubuntu seems to be a Linux distribution that understands what is needed to clear the major hurdles. That is, many many more users (and eventually developers) are needed to bring the software market to parity and give leverage to the smaller software players. New markets need to be pushed wide open, and they need a compelling reason to use Linux. Yes, this means stuff needs to be given to them. Yes, Ubuntu is bleeding money at the moment. My point is that this is a necessary evil - for now. I don't think it's a coincidence that Red Hat is public and Canonical is not. Of these two companies, despite Red Hat's current market position, it would seem that Canonical/Ubuntu is best positioned to drive commercial open source in the future - only they seem to understand the scale of the task before them. "Community building" is not some touchie-feelie exercise in charity - it is shrewd business development.
Oh but wait, Ubuntu is just a free toy given away by a crazy South African spaceman to please the GNU/Linux diehards, right?
August 22, 2006
July 31, 2006
The UbuCon: Full Steam Ahead
The UbuCon will indeed happen. The UbuCon will take place on August 18 and 19 at Google Headquarters in Mountain View, CA. Please RSVP if you plan to attend.
July 29, 2006
June 30, 2006
US National Anthem - USA vs. Italy (World Cup)
| Listen to the fans belt out the anthem and then erupt in spontaneous chants. There's just no substitute for world cup atmosphere. The US may have disappointed overall, but that night in Kaiserslautern was magic. | |
May 22, 2006
Lovely Susana Baca
Above is a very grainy and perhaps indecipherable picture of Susana Baca in concert. Man, what a graceful performer with commanding vocals.
May 21, 2006
Announcing: The Ubucon
I'm putting together a conference - The Ubucon (rhymes with Rubicon) - for Ubuntu users, developers and admins. Many many thanks to Google for letting me use their space. A huge debt of gratitude goes to Chris and Leslie over there for helping with this.
The Ubucon will be held August 18 and 19, the days immediately following LinuxWorld San Francisco.
Here's the conference wiki. As you can see, there's not much there yet. With your help, however, that will change RSN.
There is a mailing list - theubucon AT linuxpip, and you can subscribe at theubucon-request or go to the mailing list info page.
I'd love to get your feedback and ideas about what the conference should be.
Thanks!
The Ubucon will be held August 18 and 19, the days immediately following LinuxWorld San Francisco.
Here's the conference wiki. As you can see, there's not much there yet. With your help, however, that will change RSN.
There is a mailing list - theubucon AT linuxpip, and you can subscribe at theubucon-request or go to the mailing list info page.
I'd love to get your feedback and ideas about what the conference should be.
Thanks!
May 01, 2006
LinuxWorld Podcast: Jeremy Allison
Jeremy Allison is a household name among the open source-aware, having co-founded the SAMBA project, continuing his role as a lead developer there, and currently serving as one of several rock-star developers now employed by Novell.
In this podcast, Jeremy Allison explains why *all* software is going free and why it's all due to the GPL. You also get to listen in as a special guest drops by to visit.
Listen to the edited version (23 mins.):
linuxpip.org/jallison.mp3
OR get the raw, uncut, full version (50 mins.) with lots more on Microsoft, patents, and other goodies:
linuxpip.org/jallison full monty.mp3
As always, you can get the latest LinuxWorld podcasts at linuxpip.org/lwpodcast.rss
In this podcast, Jeremy Allison explains why *all* software is going free and why it's all due to the GPL. You also get to listen in as a special guest drops by to visit.
Listen to the edited version (23 mins.):
linuxpip.org/jallison.mp3
OR get the raw, uncut, full version (50 mins.) with lots more on Microsoft, patents, and other goodies:
linuxpip.org/jallison full monty.mp3
As always, you can get the latest LinuxWorld podcasts at linuxpip.org/lwpodcast.rss
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)