"linux devs are unoriginal"

[dbbolton]

that was what SOMEONE told me. so, i would like to ask the community:

do you agree or disagree with this statement? if you agree, what examples of un-originality support your stance? if you disagree, what developments/innovations support your stance?

[RussianVodka]

that was what an elitist mac user told me. so, i would like to ask the community:

do you agree or disagree with this statement? if you agree, what examples of un-originality support your stance? if you disagree, what developments/innovations support your stance?

Just tell him that Apples stole their base system from Unix (or BSD), and their GDE from Xerox.

Also, when talking to Mac fan boys, it grinds their gears when you tell them that OSX's interface isn't intuitive.

[IYY]

It's not that Linux devs are unoriginal, it's that most users don't want originality. If you give them a new way of interacting with the system, they complain about not being used to it. Anyway, I am starting a fairly original Linux project next fall that will basically be a graphical way of writing shell scripts. It will start as a university project for credit, but once I am done a working prototype I'll GPL it.

[dbbolton]

i wasn't really looking to start some sort of war. i think the question of originality is a tough one to answer- especially in the computing world.

[dbbolton]

It's not that Linux devs are unoriginal, it's that most users don't want originality. If you give them a new way of interacting with the system, they complain about not being used to it. Anyway, I am starting a fairly original Linux project next fall that will basically be a graphical way of writing shell scripts. It will start as a university project for credit, but once I am done a working prototype I'll GPL it.

that's a really good point, and i'm inclined to agree. i think a lot of users would initially be turned off by true originality: "this isn't the OS i'm used to. i don't have time to start from the ground up."

[IYY]

The thing is that in the software world, originality does not equal success. In fact, 99% of original projects are highly unsuccessful, whereas the ones that just rip off ideas prosper. Look at Microsoft: they haven't invented anything new. Everything they have done they directly stole from Apple. And Apple also isn't the great innovator the fanboys believe it to be: it stole its interface ideas from Xerox, uses the FreeBSD kernel, etc.

[stokedfish]

Amarok is the most innovative audioplayer on the market.

And being original and innovative are kind of the same.

[dbbolton]

being original and innovative are kind of the same.
agreed.

there was some thread about new types of window management. does anyone know where it is? i can't find it.

[insane_alien]

a good argument to prove that they are origion al is that everything they produce works better than anything else out there.

[ComplexNumber]

that was what SOMEONE told me. so, i would like to ask the community:

do you agree or disagree with this statement? if you agree, what examples of un-originality support your stance? if you disagree, what developments/innovations support your stance?
i don't think i entirely agree. i remember reading about some ex-microsoft employee who was describing some of the problems with microsoft. he described microsoft programmers as "day coders". that is, the go into work, do their job, and then leave. same thing the next day and the day after, ad nauseum.
apple programmers are like that too, to a greater or lesser degree.
where i think linux devs are different is that they tend to have more of a passion for programming, and they tend to be more involved in both the coding and the design, rather than is the case at microsoft and apple. to a certain extent, there is a correlation between passion and creativity.



i think IYY is correct. originality does not ensure or equate with success. most of it is down to marketing and money.
and yes, apple are bigger thieves than microsoft is. its just that microsoft steal from everybody and anybody. apple tends to steal from unknown software houses, so the original idea that they ripped off is much less likely to be known.

[dbbolton]

where i think linux devs are different is that they tend to have more of a passion for programming, and they tend to be more involved in both the coding and the design, rather than is the case at microsoft and apple. to a certain extent, there is a correlation between passion and creativity.

passion is definitely a factor. i think the idea of not charging an arm and a leg for something that you worked on out of pure passion is a pretty original idea as well.

[DoctorMO]

As a programmer myself I find it rather an insult to say that linux developers arn't original. most of the tools a user sees do look unoriginal but that is because users have no idea what it takes to build some of these tools.

Do you think the first computer languages came from nowhere? things like python, perl, ruby are development tools. you'll see a whole brace of originality that makes a developers life better in the gnu world thats because you tend to program for other programmers first and users second. such is the nature of things.

But then again, who had tabbed browsing first? who had the first xml parsers, who indeed had the first skinable os and configurable schemes? It's not that we lack originality is that users never get to see most of the real work and thus most of the real ingenuity.

[IYY]

But then again, who had tabbed browsing first?

Actually, I think that was the closed-source Opera.

[saulgoode]

As a programmer myself I find it rather an insult to say that linux developers arn't original. most of the tools a user sees do look unoriginal but that is because users have no idea what it takes to build some of these tools.

100% agree. The greatest innovations are under the hood: X11's network transparency, the Linux kernel's optimizations, the scripting abilities of VI and EMACS, the language agnostic Procedural Data Base of the GIMP, as well as hundreds of other innovations which permit developers scattered to the four ends of the Earth to combine their efforts -- these are all things of which many users remain unaware and that have no commercial counterparts (or the commercial versions have only recently appeared and remain more restrictive owing to "intellectual property" concerns).

[dbbolton]

100% agree. The greatest innovations are under the hood: X11's network transparency, the Linux kernel's optimizations, the scripting abilities of VI and EMACS, the language agnostic Procedural Data Base of the GIMP, as well as hundreds of other innovations which permit developers scattered to the four ends of the Earth to combine their efforts -- these are all things of which many users remain unaware and that have no commercial counterparts (or the commercial versions have only recently appeared and remain more restrictive owing to "intellectual property" concerns).
the kind of things that people who only see a few generic screenshots of linux-based systems would not understand.

[stokedfish]

Just to name a few apps that are - in my eyes - very original and innovative.

1. Amarok

You can like or dislike Amarok, but there's not much doubt that they *are* an innovative bunch of devs. For example, Amarok was the first music app that used the power of Wikipedia right inside the player. I remember someone on the IRC suggesting the feature, less than 24 hours later it was already added. At the beginning it was just a simple tab, now it's more advanced and a very cool feature. Often, the most simple and obvious ideas are also the innovative ones and the wiki tab is a great example for this. Also, there's no other player with a better last.fm integration than Amarok. They were the first to really *use* the last.fm data and integrate it right into the player in an attractive and eye-pleasing way. And no other player has a better contextual view of your music than Amarok, at least in my eyes. You can see lots of players that copy all those features now, such as Exaile, BMPx and others but imho overall none of them comes close to Amarok. And last but not least it's all the little and very well-thought things that make this player top-notch, like the artist-sorting (The Beatles are shown as Beatles) or the nifty task-bar icon that is so much more than just a simple icon or the Amarok integration in Konqueror or the brilliant magnatune tab. Combining drm-free music and free software in this way is a brilliant move and another thing I'd call innovative for a unix-based music player. I think you can't really see why Amarok is better than the others at first sight, but if you use Exaile, Listen or any other player for a month and then do the same with Amarok you'll notice all the little things that just make it a cut above all the others.

(btw, ever used Katapult in combination with Amarok? you can play any song in your database almost instantly! brilliant!) <3

http://www.kde-apps.org/CONTENT/content-pre3/33985-3.jpg

2. Basket

I don't know of any other app that is comparable to Basket - http://basket.kde.org/ - seriously, this is a great and innovative tool and it acquired a big fanbase in very little time. I just love this app and simply can't find anything that comes close to it for this task. Give it a try!

3. Digikam

Digikam is one of the *best* photo management tool on any OS. Take a look at http://www.digikam.org/?q=about/features09x and you'll see why. Also, it's beautifully integrated into the KDE desktop and will be even better once it's ported to KDE4/QT4!

Those are just 3 apps I consider innovative and original, I could name others, such as Kalzium, Konsole, Beryl, Oxygen, Katapult, Virtual Desktops, and so on...

[stokedfish]

agreed.

there was some thread about new types of window management. does anyone know where it is? i can't find it.
No idea, but take a look at http://symphonyos.com/cms/?page_id=2 ;)

[Lord Illidan]

I'd call him on this one. Ask him why does he think linux devs are unoriginative. If it is because some code is shared, then big deal, people do it all the time. If it is because Linux was based on minix, then wake up, smell the coffee...that was a long long time ago.

[dbbolton]

I'd call him on this one. Ask him why does he think linux devs are unoriginative. If it is because some code is shared, then big deal, people do it all the time. If it is because Linux was based on minix, then wake up, smell the coffee...that was a long long time ago.
i would love to call him on this one. BUT:

a) i generally try to avoid arguments (especially computer-related)
b) i especially avoid arguments with elitists who are "never wrong"


I am curious if linux devs ever had ideas of their own.

i then gave my opinion, and expressed that OS X isn't 100% original.


well if you bring up xerox and bsd you are only kidding yourself.

where did linux spawn from? unix.
where did linux gui spawn from? xerox/mac os

at that point, i posted this image (http://mywebpages.comcast.net/rcmerritt/images/web/captain-obvious.jpg) because he clearly wasn't getting something that should be apparent..

[Lord Illidan]

i would love to call him on this one. BUT:

a) i generally try to avoid arguments (especially computer-related)
b) i especially avoid arguments with elitists who are "never wrong"

Probably a good idea.

[aysiu]

I'm also going to agree with IYY. I myself don't like originality, only functionality.

The Mezzo desktop of Symphony OS is a good example. It's innovative. It's even intuitive in theory. Should be easy to use. I found it difficult to use and annoying... simply because I wasn't used to an interface that obeys Fitt's Law.

Regardless of the fact that originality is overrated, I would also contend the charge is not true. These are things that I was wowed by when I first started using Linux (and wowed in the sense of "I never saw that in Windows or Mac before"):
1. A live CD of an actual operating system
2. Queueing of songs, global shortcuts, and lyrics fetching in a music player
3. Centralized package management for applications--awesome! I don't have to keep doing Google searches for software and wondering if the sources are trustworthy or not
4. Multiple window managers/desktop environments
5. Easily skinnable login screens
6. Multiple workspaces (personally, though, sounds cool like the Mezzo desktop, but I have a hard time actually using them)

I'm sure there's more, but I still question what the point of originality is to an end-user.