PDA

View Full Version : Reinventing the wheel..



Lexicon101
July 30th, 2008, 09:52 AM
My question is, why do people need to ask why? If they'd stopped doing so with the horse-drawn carriage ("It's good enough now."), would a car be possible or practical? The wheel is constantly being re-invented (most recently (AFAIK) the tweel..), and as a result, we have a stronger wheel, capable of running at crazy speeds, while at the same time making the ride amazingly smooth. A wheel that had stopped at a rubber tube couldn't handle a wet road, and a wheel that had stopped with the first treads would tear itself up at current speeds.

So to me, when windows users claim that linux is just "reinventing the wheel" I tell them, "Yes it is, but would you run a car on a stone block?"

Linux may not be quite as point-and-clickable, but when you do point and click, you get the options of doing much more interesting, fun, and useful things with what you click on.

kitili
July 30th, 2008, 10:53 AM
if windows is a wheel, then linux is a sphere.

beercz
July 30th, 2008, 11:09 AM
So to me, when windows users claim that linux is just "reinventing the wheel" I tell them, "Yes it is, but would you run a car on a stone block?".
When windows users claim that linux is just "reinventing the wheel" I would simply reply "linux is progress"

hyper_ch
July 30th, 2008, 11:24 AM
Point, click and grunt is caveman style.

The modern human uses brain and language ;)

Lexicon101
July 30th, 2008, 01:17 PM
Point, click and grunt is caveman style.

The modern human uses brain and language ;)

You haven't met the modern human, have you? Go to Costco and tell me the modern human uses language. And then tell me they use their brain.
EDIT: and.. beercz.. My way was the same response, but I put it better.

madjr
July 30th, 2008, 04:07 PM
Open source can make freeware projects unite under 1.

if any company encourages developers to re-invent the wheel over and over that is M$.


mindless competition = reinventing the wheel:(


collaboration and community (FOSS) = making a better wheel :)


of course this is a developer choice, stubborn devs can also re-invent the wheel in linux all they want. That's freedom of choice

Lexicon101
July 30th, 2008, 09:31 PM
Interestingly enough, I'm a shining champion of commercialism.
It isn't doing things just for yourself that I'm against. (That's the highest virtue in my mind..)
It's not trying to do things for yourself. "If your operating system pisses you off, why don't you get a new one?" "Well.. it's always been like that."
I would most definitely pay for this. Although.. ATM, I'm broke because I just moved into a new place, and I'm still trying to keep up with bills..
Still, I'll be making a donation once I can..

bks
July 30th, 2008, 09:48 PM
beercz, I love your signature!

aysiu
July 30th, 2008, 10:50 PM
I think you misunderstand the phrase reinventing the wheel. It doesn't mean improving the wheel or changing from one type of wheel to another type of wheel. It means actually reinventing the concept of the wheel, when that concept has already been invented.

The critics of Linux who say Linux developers are constantly "reinventing the wheel" mean that efforts are duplicated and not just improved upon.

So there'd be nothing wrong with their using the expression "reinventing the wheel" if their understanding of open source were correct.

There is, however, something wrong with their understanding of open source. While it is possible Linux developers occasionally reinvent the wheel (Ubuntu's Ubiquity installer, which really could have just been a fork of Red Hat's Anaconda installer, for example), most of the work done in open source is building off what is already done. Very little is built from scratch. That's what's beautiful about open source. You can take the work someone has already done, tweak it a little, and have a new piece of work. You don't have to reinvent the wheel.

With proprietary or closed source software, you always have the reinvent the wheel. The source is closed, either physically or legally, to you, so if you want to improve the program, you have to write your own program from scratch.

LaRoza
July 30th, 2008, 11:04 PM
So to me, when windows users claim that linux is just "reinventing the wheel" I tell them, "Yes it is, but would you run a car on a stone block?"

Windows reinvents the wheel. It redoes (often poorly) what is already well done in the Open Source world.

MS-DOS. The OS that got MS in all its power, was just a rip off of QDOS (which was a rip off of CP/M).

Windows was a copy of OS/2, then Mac OS.

NT? By that time, copy Unix because DOS was woefully incapable.

A standard document XML based format well supported (ODF), and MS tries to get its own OOXML standard in. (Its software doesn't even use the standard!).

They bought their IE (Spyglass) and tried to implement their own web standards.

Video and Audio formats as well.

Lexicon101
July 30th, 2008, 11:04 PM
If you take the phrase as it's meant to be taken, then you're right, but I think something like the tweel is a completely different invention than the radial tire paired with a chromium alloy rim.. Just as the radial tire was a new invention based upon, but not the same as, a simple rubber tube. It's not just improvement, it's reinvention. It's a whole new idea meant to accomplish the same thing, and using the same principals, but doing so in a different way.
You're not wrong in anything you're saying. But I'm pretty sure their thought is more along the lines of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." That's an expression I'm not fond of.
I was mostly saying that their use of "reinventing the wheel" is obviously meant to be taken badly, but in my opinion, it is most certainly not a bad thing.
I wouldn't want to run a Dodge Viper on wooden cartwheels. (Which is definitely a different concept from radial tires..)

EDIT: Sorry, forgot to mention who I was responding to.. This one's to Aysiu.

Lostincyberspace
July 30th, 2008, 11:08 PM
MS-DOS. The OS that got MS in all its power, was just a rip off of QDOS (which was a rip off of CP/M).

Actualy it was a buy off, they bought the rights to qdos for I think 20 dollars or so(practically nothing even back then).

Lexicon101
July 30th, 2008, 11:10 PM
Windows reinvents the wheel. It redoes (often poorly) what is already well done in the Open Source world.

MS-DOS. The OS that got MS in all its power, was just a rip off of QDOS (which was a rip off of CP/M).

Windows was a copy of OS/2, then Mac OS.

NT? By that time, copy Unix because DOS was woefully incapable.

A standard document XML based format well supported (ODF), and MS tries to get its own OOXML standard in. (Its software doesn't even use the standard!).

Video and Audio formats as well.

Honestly.. I know next to nothing about windows. The way I see it, though.. windows doesn't want me to know anything about it. Which I'm fine with.

Lexicon101
July 30th, 2008, 11:14 PM
Actualy it was a buy off, they bought the rights to qdos for I think 20 dollars or so(practically nothing even back then).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/86-DOS
(It was $25k. And they didn't buy it. It was a non-exclusive license.)

(... cause now I'm looking into the dark and murky waters that are m$'s history.)

LaRoza
July 30th, 2008, 11:17 PM
Actualy it was a buy off, they bought the rights to qdos for I think 20 dollars or so(practically nothing even back then).

It was more, but they bought it relabled it and shipped it, a ripoff. They didn't do anything original.

Microsoft thrives on the success of others.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_companies_acquired_by_Microsoft_Corporatio n

Lexicon101
July 30th, 2008, 11:19 PM
It was more, but they bought it relabled it and shipped it, a ripoff. They didn't do anything original.

Microsoft thrives on the success of others.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_companies_acquired_by_Microsoft_Corporatio n

The only difference between that and opensource is that the opensource people don't take credit for it.
EDIT: Not about the originality part, about thriving off the success of others.. opensource people always put in their input, but they give credit where credit is due.

rune0077
July 30th, 2008, 11:30 PM
You're not wrong in anything you're saying. But I'm pretty sure their thought is more along the lines of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." That's an expression I'm not fond of.
I was mostly saying that their use of "reinventing the wheel" is obviously meant to be taken badly, but in my opinion, it is most certainly not a bad thing.


It can be a bad thing. I mean really, do we need 58 different apps for notetaking? 19 different apps to read our e-mail? etc, etc. Even though choice is a good thing, we could probably have managed with just half of those.

I don't think the phrase is used to refer to not fixing what isn't broke, I think it refers to the fact that in Linux there's a lot of software that does virtually the same thing, while Windows usually only has one app for each task. One app, if you ask me, is to little and don't allow choice, but to much choice can also be overwhelming, or seem like a waste of the developers time.

Lexicon101
July 30th, 2008, 11:37 PM
It can be a bad thing. I mean really, do we need 58 different apps for notetaking? 19 different apps to read our e-mail? etc, etc. Even though choice is a good thing, we could probably have managed with just half of those.

I don't think the phrase is used to refer to not fixing what isn't broke, I think it refers to the fact that in Linux there's a lot of software that does virtually the same thing, while Windows usually only has one app for each task. One app, if you ask me, is to little and don't allow choice, but to much choice can also be overwhelming, or seem like a waste of the developers time.

You know how many different tires are currently in production? not like.. something they used to make, but nobody uses it any more... how many different tires are essential to the running of different vehicles?
(It's a lot.)
People want their text editor to behave in different ways. Some people want a very basic interface, some want an advanced interface that highlights code as they type. Some people want a whole word-processing unit with lots of fonts and fun extras. And within each of these, there are many ways to accomplish different feels. This means there will always be one somebody likes.

EDIT: And.. rune.. the only way to accomplish anarchy is to act in the government.

rune0077
July 30th, 2008, 11:43 PM
You know how many different tires are currently in production? not like.. something they used to make, but nobody uses it any more... how many different tires are essential to the running of different vehicles?
(It's a lot.)
People want their text editor to behave in different ways. Some people want a very basic interface, some want an advanced interface that highlights code as they type. Some people want a whole word-processing unit with lots of fonts and fun extras. And within each of these, there are many ways to accomplish different feels. This means there will always be one somebody likes.

Yeah, but I still think this is the meaning of the phrase "reinventing the wheel". I understand the benefit of choice, but I think it's also one of the major hindrances for spreading Linux. People who don't know what Linux is, don't want to have to choose between all those distros and apps. That's why Windows is so popular - it already comes pre-installed, they don't have to choose. It's also why advertisement is so successful and coca-cola and pepsi sells so much better than the cheap counterparts in the local supermarket. Because your average consumer doesn't like to choose between all of them, they just want some celebrity to come on their tv and tell them what they should buy.

Lexicon101
July 30th, 2008, 11:48 PM
Yeah, but I still think this is the meaning of the phrase "reinventing the wheel". I understand the benefit of choice, but I think it's also one of the major hindrances for spreading Linux. People who don't know what Linux is, don't want to have to choose between all those distros and apps. That's why Windows is so popular - it already comes pre-installed, they don't have to choose. It's also why advertisement is so successful and coca-cola and pepsi sells so much better than the cheap counterparts in the local supermarket. Because your average consumer doesn't like to choose between all of them, they just want some celebrity to come on their tv and tell them what they should buy.

From what I've seen, quite an astute observation. But all progress is good except forgotten progress. (Which, thankfully, doesn't happen nearly as much in this community, because there's always someone who remembers and is willing to drag up old bits of code and deprecated concepts in order to re-mobilize them..)

rune0077
July 30th, 2008, 11:56 PM
From what I've seen, quite an astute observation. But all progress is good except forgotten progress. (Which, thankfully, doesn't happen nearly as much in this community, because there's always someone who remembers and is willing to drag up old bits of code and deprecated concepts in order to re-mobilize them..)

I personally agree entirely with you. Having a lot of apps with a few different features can be very rewarding, especially when they're open source, which means new developers can easily make a new app that combines features and codes from all the previous ones. I just think there's a lot of people out there, who don't feel the same way, and that's probably why they talk about reinventing the wheel all the time.

Lexicon101
July 30th, 2008, 11:58 PM
Now I think it's just us, and 2 people agreeing repeatedly never makes for an interesting conversation..

beercz
July 31st, 2008, 09:51 AM
beercz, I love your signature!
Thanks :-)

Delever
July 31st, 2008, 12:31 PM
Ton of note taking applications make good source of example code in different languages for new note taking application, better than them all! Muhahagaga :D

Lexicon101
August 2nd, 2008, 06:11 AM
Ton of note taking applications make good source of example code in different languages for new note taking application, better than them all! Muhahagaga :D

Thank you for that constructive post. ):P

DeadSuperHero
August 2nd, 2008, 07:37 PM
On a more literal note, why not reinvent the wheel? For ages, humans have relied on both foot and wheel, why not another common means of locomotion?
Heck, if someone gave the effort, we could have hovercars. There may be problems in the beginning. Heck, look at cars. It took 100+ years of development across cars just to make them convenient for the average person to buy and drive. And yet, they STILL mess up.

Sometimes, you don't need to "Reinvent" the wheel, so much as to "Replace" the wheel. After all, the wheel "Replaced" the foot in traveling, for the most part.

Lexicon101
August 5th, 2008, 12:53 AM
I think the wheel is a much more constructive, and really, more efficient means of momentum maintenance, as well as a more suitable means of translating energy, seeing that you only need one wheel to keep going and to push forward instead of a hover pod type of thing holding you up, and a fan or something pushing you forward. A wheel's energy translation is instant, whereas a fan will take time building momentum, and stopping. Now, a hover-board, in the fashion of a skateboard (probably with 4 points of pressure, not just 2... for stability.) would likely be much of an improvement. Try busting your *** hitting a pebble on a hover-board. The only problem is, how do you get it to turn? Even if you turned the board, you'd keep going the same way. I guess if you tilted it hard, it'd apply some pressure, but.. I'm not sure that application is feasible either.

It's a nice idea, and I love thinking it could work, but I can't make myself think it's useful.


(Oh, and try teaching a teenager to drive a hover-car that floats past turns. Not gonna be pretty. Really.)