But my main point is that from reading through their material,
especially the question and answer section
(http://www.i2osig.org/QandA.html), the main thrust of the i2o
spec is aimed at your big massive "enterprise" servers, not
desktop computers or workstations. While a significant threat
to the idea of free software, it isn't exactly a direct threat to
the average Joe computer user as many here seem to be making it
out to be. Two specific facts from the Q and A that are giving
me this idea:
a) one question relates to what software is planning to support
it in the near future. And the answer: NT and Novell. And
_just_ NT. Not Win95, Win97, etc.
b) one of the questions is
"Is I2O applicable to the desktop PC? What about workstations?"
and the answer:
"The SIG anticipates that initial target for products will be those
for enterprise computing, which currently faces the largest I/O
bottleneck. It's certainly possible to use I2O in desktop and
workstation designs. For example, there has been interest from
WS vendors who need system throughput to accommodate graphics
and other applications."
while not ruling out PCs, this doesn't exactly give me the
impression that they intend to transform all PCs to conform
to this spec in the near future.
I'm not trying to say that i2o is a good thing at all...I totally
agree that I would be a much happier person if it ceased to exist.
However, I was just worried about some of the claims flying around
this list (especially the bit about setting up an anti-i2o web page
and talking to journalists) were led more by impulse reaction than
by actually researching what exactly this i2o thing is.
If we go out proclaiming that i2o is evil, spewing a well-spun
conspiracy tale saying that it's only true purpose is to personally
screw over the free software community, then most of the rest of the
world is going to see us the same way most view UFO fanatics, etc:
as complete and utter, extremely bitter, fools with nothing better
to do with our time than make headaches for everyone. If nothing else,
we definitely wouldn't be taken seriously if we took that approach.
Think and research before you act. If you think I've misinterpreted
the information, don't hesitate to correct me. But don't make
facts up out of your opinions either.
(side note: I'm not making any proclamations about the sanity of
UFO fanatics or whatever, for all you know I may very well be an
alien :)
-- Andy Berkheimer andy@tho.org