Comment 1192 for bug 1

Good morning, sir.

> What? Can you be more specific in how you come to this ramblings out of what i wrote? How would having a standard rather then (at least) two incompatible solutions create such a mess?

It wouldn't, but all sorts of idiots abusing it would. I guess we can
all agree that good open standards are good thing for everyone except
bastards using proprietary crap to create vendor lock-ins so that they
could keep their stranglehold on ICT industry. I just don't like the
whole embedding idea very much because "when you create something that
even an idiot can use, only idiots will use it". That's how I got to the
point where I started rambling about undesirable effects of these
technologies.

> So how do i use libmysql to connect to my postres database again? None of those are database libraries. They are database-specific client libraries. The only C database lib i know that is actively developed i libzdb (http://www.tildeslash.com/libzdb/documentation.html).

You don't. As you've said, libmysql is a client library for MySQL server
and libpq is it's PostgreSQL equivalent. I guess you're talking about
some wrapper library which serves as another abstraction layer built on
top of various database libraries, but I believe using this kind of
stuff is a very bad idea, because it only introduces more bugs and it's
definitely less efficient than using selected database directly, but if
you really need this then there's libdbi, libyada, UNIXODBC and others
so this shouldn't be a problem.

> In what way is it different? Most things i suggest are already in the programming model. The OLE/ActiveX-component type of component model for OO programming does exist. It exists in the form of beans, kpart and bonobo. The only difference with creating a standard is that kde objects would be usable in gnome and gnome objects in kde.

Again - cooperating to create a solid common open standard is good
because it removes a good deal of otherwise duplicated efforts (which is
very common across free software landscape). It's just that for example
Bonobo has been deprecated since GNOME 2.4 so it's not just me, but even
those brilliant guys programming the whole desktop environment thing
don't think it's such a good idea, you know…

As far as IDEs go, I've personally tried at least Eclipse and NetBeans
and they're definitely on the right track. Anyway - although I agree
that the lack of native applications for various purposes is one of the
main reasons why GNU/Linux has a significant disadvantage to Winblow$ in
terms of it's adoption by end users, I don't think this is the right
place to discuss software development topics and as far as attracting
more so called "software developers" who don't give a rat's ass about
free software, I think we're better off without them.