[Mon Nov 30 13:57:23 CET 2009]

I find it amazing that, so many years after Linux sort of became mainstream it is still so difficult to find a decent WYSIWYG HTML editor. Sure, most people will answer right away that I shouldn't be surprised. They'd remind me that most Linux users are technically able and not scared by dealing directly with the code (or, as other people might put it: "be a real man!"). Except that I don't think this is true anymore. I don't think most Linux users nowadays are programmers or write a script to speedy things up every other day. I just don't think that is the case anymore. Yes, it may have reflected the state of affairs 8 or 10 years ago, but not anymore. Not only that, but the above argument is, in and by itself, quite silly. A computer is a tool, and not a weapon to show how macho you are. We'd better make sure that Linux is useful to accomplish things. Besides, can I deal directly with HTML? Of course I can. But that's beyond the point. I needed a WYSIWYG editor because I like to save interesting articles and pieces I see on the web to my own thumb drive, and I also like to highlight the parts of the text that I consider more relevant, mark it and even comment on it so I can use it later for whichever research I may be doing. Now, why should I waste my time dealing directly with HTML in order to do something like this when all I want to do is mark up some text for further use? It's not a technical activity and I am not interesting in programming at that point. I am treating the text as text, and not as HTML code. Why should I be forced to deal with the underlying HTML markup language when that is completely irrelevant to my purpose?

Now, to be clear, there is Nvu, which was based on the old Mozilla Composer. However, development on Nvu has stopped. So, there is Kompozer, but its development also seems to be slowing down. Finally, there is Blue Griffon, but it's not finished yet. Other than that, I haven't been able to find much. In conclusion, a sad state of affairs. Something needs to be done on this front. {link to this story}

[Mon Nov 16 13:38:19 CET 2009]

There are times when one finds it quite difficult to see if top execs are truly that brainwashed by their companies that they mean what they say or, perhaps (just perhaps), they are about to laugh out loud when uttering certain words. For instance, Computer World tells us that Microsoft is about to sign an agreement with several top companies to sell Windows 7 desktop "real estate" to advertisers, and the news starts with the following statements:

Microsoft today announced that it would sell Windows 7 desktop real estate to advertisers and launched a pilot program that includes Coke, Infinity and Porsche.

Using windows 7 themes —collections of backgrounds, borders and audio elements— advertisers will be able to brand the desktop, Microsoft said.

Microsoft pitched the pilot as a way for international advertisers to connect to consumers. "The new Windows 7 Theme Experience and Windows Personalization Gallery in Windows 7 allow consumers to customize their technology to reflect the things in life they are most passionate about," said Darren Huston, corporate vice president of the company's consumer and online group, in a statement Friday. "These are great examples of Microsoft innovation and technology coming together to enable top global brands to reach audiences in new and interesting ways."

Am I reading right? New and "innovative"? Let's set aside the very sad fact that they may consider ads for well known products as "the things in life [customers] are most passionate about". If true, it definitely is a sad state of affairs. But, in any case, only a madman or a true corporate minion can come up with those statements. So, adding ads to the desktop is now "innovation". Sheesh! {link to this story}

[Wed Nov 11 16:12:46 CET 2009]

We read on The Register that Microsoft yanked Windows code on GPL violation claim. Apparently, a windows 7 media and administration tool uploaded to their CodePlex website may have been written in violation of the GPL. But, leaving all details about this particular incident aside, what I truly found interesting was the following information including towards the bottom of the piece:

This summer, Microsoft apparently violated the GPL in Linux drivers for its Hyper-V code that it released under the GPL with a splash. The driver had been statically linked to binary parts, which was a problem because the GPL does not permit the mixing of closed and open source elements.

Microsoft denied it had violated the GPL and released the drivers to remain in compliance.

Prior to that, a year ago, Microsoft was caught posting code to its CodePlex open-source project-hosting site under licenses that went against the principle of open-source.

The company posted projects under Microsoft licenses that stopped you from running CodePlex projects on non-Windows platforms or restrict access to code. CodePlex, though, was described by Microsoft as an open-source project community, meaning there should be no platform code-access restrictions.

Microsoft never fully explained why this happened, but promised changes to add "clarity" around what projects are hosted on CodePlex. Since then, Microsoft announced the CodePlex Foundation that it said would help open source work with commercial software organizations.

To me, the key in all this is how, in spite of the fact that the company has been making efforts to be friendly towards the open source community, it is just finding it extremely difficult, no matter what. It's an issue of mentality, after all. Old habits don't die easily. {link to this story}