Re: [tlug] TRON / Ken Sakamura in 2003.07.17 Japan Times

[Charles Muller <acmuller@example.com>]

Patrick wrote:

> Do you ever talk about Windows? No. All you ever talk about is LINUX, LINUX,
> LINUX, and how everything else is totally useless;-) 

Aw, c'mon! Did I say that??

Seriously, when I am asked to write articles on the state of computing and
so forth for the general public (and I am occasionally), I focus on the
concept of collaboration through an Open Source type of model, and don't
even mention Linux. Of course I do here, but what the heck...it's a LUG, right?

> > Sakamura is treading in a funny area when he makes the kinds 
> > of statements that he does in that article, especially when 
> > he mentions that he could have been rich. This is related to 
> > the point about immense national funding that I mentioned in 
> > my prior post. Whatever we might say about Gates, at least 
> > his initial success was due to his own cleverness and savvy. 
> 
> I think that the reporter said that he could have been rich if TRON would
> charge license fees.  According to the article I read today, he is happy
> with his current income.  

So I am saying that if TRON *did* charge license fees, it would be
unethical, if it is not presented as the government-funded project that it
is. Then again, the Japanese government supports Japan Tobacco, so maybe
it's not out the question here. In any case, the comments reflect the fact
that the reporter doesn't know TRON's history--which is usually the case. My
point is that it shouldn't even come up as a topic. Sakamura knows it, and
to be honest, he should point out the fact that his project has been built
on public money. He *never* mentions this.

> Bill Gates never actually created anything himself.  Most MS history is of
> buying things from other people and then repackaging the stuff and selling
> it more expensive.  He is arguably a clever marketeer / sales person.

I thought I had gotten around this by saying "in the beginning," but I
must admit, when you think about it, it *is* hard to pick an event in Gates'
career where has hasn't been taking clever advantage of someone else's
work. My point was that he didn't start out with a government grant (even if
he *did* have one from IBM!).

> > As far as the figure of "%60 share of microprocessors" is 
> > concerned: this is misleading, because it gives people the 
> > impression that 60% of actual computing is done on TRON. The 
> > fact that tiny microprocessors in dumb little devices are 
> > using bits of TRON code does not it any way bring it to a 
> > level of comparability to the major operating systems.
> 
> Maybe so, and maybe the development was inefficient and wasteful but the
> point should be: Is TRON any good now?  I think there is the right tool for
> each job. 

Of course. I am not criticizing any aspect of TRON's functionality or saying
that its code is garbage (I wouldn't know anyhow). What is distasteful about
TRON and Sakamura is the hold that they still maintain on the uncritical
Japanese media and funding bodies, despite the paucity of what they have
actually produced.

What has bothered me most about TRON in recent times is their claim to be
something like an Open Code project (there is an article on Slashdot today
where this is inferred). 

Like all other Monbusho-funded projects in Japan, TRON was completely
secretive during most of their existence. When you tread in the area of
government funding for research projects in Japan, it is amazing how closed
off and guarded every little project is from every other project. TRON, for
most of its early existence, worked completely in this model, bringing
programmers into their secret little cult. It was not like Linux where the
code was shared and developed by programmers around the world.

Given this attitude, and the power of Unix, NEC, Apple, and DOS/Windows
OS's, how could they actually ever succeed in the market? AFAICT, it was
only after Linux and Open Code (in Lessig's sense) began to show their
impact that the TRON people figured it was time to announce their
"openness." So everywhere along the way, they keep changing their story. And
are they really open in the way that Linux is? I wonder.

Chuck


 --------------------------- 

Charles Muller
<acmuller@example.com> Faculty of Humanities, Toyo Gakuen University Digital
Dictionary of Buddhism and CJKV-English Dictionary [http://www.acmuller.net]
H-Buddhism List Editor [http://www.h-net.org/~buddhism/] Mobile Phone:
090-9310-1787