[openbeos] Re: Tracker icons

Thanks for all the "in-the-box" replies. I do appreciate your input,
but there are a few things you don't seem to be getting. Correct me
if I'm wrong, but:

        * by the time R1 as an R5 clone comes out, it will be outdated -
          glorious as the effort has been and will continue to be. You
          know that, I know that, everybody knows that. 
          
        * Consequently, to only _START_ coding R2 after an R1 release is
          stupid and short-sighted, because already being about 7 years
          behind, you don't really have a chance of ever catching up.
          The only upside here is that you have an opportunity to learn
          from the mistakes others have made. However, the "in-the-box"
          thinking and [insert popular OS of choice here]-copycat
          approach doesn't help at all in making Haiku stand out.
          
        * You know how long R1 has been in the making. Imagine R2 taking
          similarly long, especially as chances are that you cannot
          count on programmers who would love to do R2 stuff now, but
          who are discouraged by the 'talk-shop' nature of GE.
          
        * Every software company I have worked for works on several
          items in parallel, knowing full well that some won't make the
          cut for the next release, but by the time the next release is
          effected, they don't have to start from scratch but are
          probably already half-way there.
          
        * Michael wrote: "That decision is *far* better left deferred
          until it needs to be made, when all of the ideas are on the
          table in a clear and coherent fashion." 
          
          The issue I have is that there is no structure that actually
          leads to the group (or whoever) saying: "guys, by [insert date
          here] we need to cut of the talk, summarise the content,
          evaluate it, and then decide on the path forward for R2." The
          very last thing you would want is start that process only once
          R1 has been released.
          
         * He continues: "But in the same way, in a corporation, you
           wouldn't want the marketing people to start coding the
           application, it would be crazy to start pulling people off of
           coding R1 to play on R2." 
           
           This is a typical black-white 'in-the-box' reply. Remember,
           it's the marketing people who ensure that the product sells,
           that customers are kept happy even if bug fixes/new features
           aren't furnished in a timely fashion, that eventually pay
           YOUR (the developers') bills. So step outside the box and
           bring the two together. They can't do without each other, so
           why treat them separately?
           
           Also, it's in-the-box to consider your current universe
           static. Ever contemplated the notion that you may attract new
           developers if you took a different approach to GE/R2, and
           also if you added a bit of 'marketing flair' to Haiku? But it
           seems that developers love shooting down or ignoring the
           people who pay their bills. Trust me, been through that with
           Geoworks, Opera, Sonork and now Qunu. As Haiku falls into the
           same type of category (niche product up against major
           competition), your marketing has to be top notch, and so has
           your marketing-developer relations.
           
         * Czeslaw wrote: "An open discussion forum, or "talk shop" as
           you label it derisively, is a valuable thing in and of
           itself." 
           
           Well, not until it leads to something, unless decisions are
           made in a timeous fashion, and then acted upon. Otherwise
           you're just like politicians. 
           
           "The GE mailing list seems to be open, democratic, inclusive,
           and non-judgmental, which are precisely the characteristics
           that any successful "brainstorming" venue must possess."
           
           I never questioned that. But what you seem to miss here is
           that brainstorming sessions are of high-energy, everything
           allowed, and  __most importantly__ limited time. At the end
           of the brainstorming session you bring together all the ideas
           thrown out, prioritize them and then act on it. GE has been
           talking for years. It would be far more productive to have
           separate issues up for 'brainstorming', a deadline and then a
           democratic (if you like) decision as to how to implement or
           not the issue. The advantage is that over time you have
           closed units of 'tasks' that you can then evaluate and
           prioritize against each other when R1 is released. You would
           gain months with that - months that you cannot waste (at
           least not in a commmercial environment) especially if you
           just released a copy of a 7yr-old system.
           
         * "It is impossible for anyone who is not a seer or
           fortune-teller to possess conclusive evidence in support of
           the truth of this forward-looking claim. This must be either
           hyperbole or provocation, neither of which has much of a
           place in civil, rational discourse."
           
           Maybe I am a seer. Maybe I am not. 'Impossible' is a creation
           of your personal reality, which I don't subscribe to.
           Provocation, btw, does indeed have a place in civil, rational
           discourse, especially if those discussing seem to be doing it
           for the sake of it, and not because they want to complete
           certain items/topics/features.
           
           If GE is just meant to be a talk-shop, then so be it, but
           then a different entity needs to be set up that ensures that
           by the time R1 is released, not only does a plan of action
           exists for R2, but that that the development process is -to
           the best ability possible- already under way.
           
           "I think that it might be too soon to expect action on
           proposals advanced in GE." 
          
           Really? I don't know what kind of work you do, but I haven't
           come across one where you can talk for 2 years and not come
           to a conclusion on at least some items.
          
           "Again, unless you have privileged access to knowledge of the
           future that is not shared by any other human being, you are
           not in an epistemic position to make this claim with any
           degree of plausibility whatsoever. "
          
           Mind venturing back to ancient Egypt for a moment? What do
           you think the hairy barbarians who lived there at the time when
           the pyramids were built and when people far more advanced
           then them came and brought us all the knowledge about sacred
           geometry, the universe, technology, etc. etc. They probably
           said: "Unless you have privileged access to knowledge of the
           future that is not shared by any other human being, you are
           not in an epistemic position to make this claim with any
           degree of plausibility whatsoever." 
           
           And what happens if you continuously hit on ignorance and
           simple/closed-mindedness? You leave people to their own
           devices and move on. You cannot force anyone to change - that
           must come from inside. But if you (even if only
           subconsciously) refuse to get out of your box, how can you
           progress? How can you even entertain the thought of becoming
           successful in a market where nobody gives a rat's arse on the
           technical advantages of an operating system (see the success
           of MS Windows and even Linux), and where what you are working
           on is - at least on the surface (that the end user sees) - is
           just like Windows 95.
           
           
Long story short: I don't gain anything by posting here. I don't
claim to be able to predict the future - although in my incarnation
as the PalmTop Reader in Geoworks' days I was rather accurate. ;) Same
with Opera. Same with Sonork. So perhaps, even for a brief moment,
entertain the tought that I know something that you don't. Not only
because I have been in this business for a very long time, but
because I have a skillset different from yours. Feel free to read up
on it at http://www.helmar.org

And in case it still hasn't sunk in: keep GE a talk-shop and
postpone any kind of decision until the release of R1, and chances
are that there won't be an R2 - at least not one that matters and
that goes beyond an item of curiosity. 

Time has the funny habit of changing things - including people. It
would be foolish to believe that the people who currently work on R1
will also be available to work on R2. If you don't nurture a new
generation of programmers who can and will have to carry the R1 torch,
then you'll be dead in the water - at least in a commercial sense.

However, if you all do this to satisfy your own egotistical needs
and desires, then just go ahead. Maybe I was mistaken in the belief
that the Haiku project's long-term aim was to provide us with a more
efficient computing experience.

Helmar (completely unapologetic for being able to make use of both
parts of his brain :-) )

Other related posts: