|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Hi Kent,
I think you entirely miss the intention of my previous post. I am
very gung ho about a public domain project and think it can work.
See below for response to your post.
>
> >First, GNU/Linux was designed by programmers for programmers.
>
> Agree 100%. Linux was software for software's sake. Linux succeeded
> because of sheer passion on the part of developers.
>
Agreed, for FreeMarket to succeed we need more passion or more
money, preferably both. My initial position is that money is more
likely in this case.
> >Third, the technology, Python, being used for this project is a
> >bad choice. Java should be used instead.
>
> I agree that Python is a bad choice, but I disagree that Java is the best
> choice. True, Java has more developers, but Java has a) performance issues
> and b) platform compatibility issues. B won't be an issue if you only
> intend to run on one platform, assuming that Java has the depth to do what
> the application requires.
This are the standard arguments against Java...
I know a company using Java for an application as demanding as
FreeMarket would be. Initially the app was a dog. They sat down
and spent the time learning what needed done and now it runs very
well. So there do seem to be answers to the speed problem if you
are motivated.
In my experience Java portability issues mostly stem from lack of
proper JRE configuration, JRE versioning and not programming to
the Java standard. Such issues have always plagued software
development. Java would let the app run on a variety of
platforms. I fully expect some volunteer to address platform
specific issues when he wants the product on his computer. This
is exactly what has happened to ALL the other open software over
the last 10 years.
>
> In connection with tech support on TraderWare, I spoke several times with
> Steve Yates who I understand was the primary developer of TraderWare. He
> seemed to be a fairly capable programmer. He told me that he had originally
> developed the code that eventually became TraderWare in Java but that
> because of language limitations with respect to some operating systems and
> because he ran into platform compatibility issues, he was forced to abandon
> Java.
I don't know how to respond to the vague negative vibe you are
putting forward here. Java is a real language. It can do anything
real languages do. There is a Java standard which must be met
before a vendor's implementation is certified by Sun. If you
program within the standard you should avoid compatibility and
capability issues.
I'm not a Java fanatic. If it is proved unfit for the job then
something else should be used. But it is impossible to overstate
the benefits of having a large pool of potential contributors to
draw on.
>
> >Fourth, Linux hit critical mass at some point and commercial
> >ventures started investing in it. I personally know several
> >companies in silicon valley that paid contractors to work on this
> >code full time. I believe this was a crucial aspect of the
> >product's eventual move into wider use by the public.
>
> Yep, and that could not happen in a case like this. If a company produces
> trading software, why would it want to finance a public domain contributor?
It is true that companies currently selling trading software will
not want to participate INITIALLY. FreeMarket threatens them. You
can see this from earlier posts where people with products to
sell spoke against it. If FreeMarket becomes widespread they
become avid supporters, as soon as they can profit from it.
> And if a trading company or an individual decides to pay someone to take
> some public domain code and extend it, why would they make that code public
> as well?
If this argument is true then why have all the big UNIX vendors
put money into the Linux project. The answer is that they gain
more than they lose.
There are hundreds of trading companies that could profit from
helping finance this. I was professionally involved with open
software initiatives for years and understand the mindset and
economics. It seems well within the bounds of probability that
these guys can be convinced to contribute.
As the last, please let me make an appeal to y'all to stop
confusing Mark Brown's past business ventures with this one. It
doesn't sound like he defrauded anyone. If so then you should
prosecute him. Sounds like he tried something that failed. He was
probably less happy than you.
Just because someone fails once does not mean they will fail
again. The strong learn from their mistakes and do better in the
future. These are the people that make America strong (wave flag
here 8-)
I don't know Mark, but I have seen his posts for many, many
years. He never seemed less than earnest.
regards,
tbr
|