Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Open Source And The Obligation To Recycle

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the making-the-world-a-better-place dept.

Lisa writes "Tim O'Reilly has a piece called "Open Source and the Obligation to Recycle" in his weblog, where he urges every company whose products are "obsolete" to consider making them available under an open source license, or putting them in the public domain, thereby enriching the soil of our collective commons. (Interestingly, the first posting on the weblog disagrees, saying "...Giving away the software of failed companies could turn every corporate failure into a disaster for everyone else.)""

2 of 312 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Silly counter-argument by bteeter · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Its been VERY good. I now have an excellent, stable and fast browser on my desktop. Internet Explorer.

    Netscape's failure had much more to do with their product being lousy than it did with Microsoft giving theirs away.

    Take care,

    Brian
    --
    Last 2 Days to get a Free Palm m100...
    --

  2. Re:Silly counter-argument by mike_the_kid · · Score: 1, Flamebait
    ie: If Microsoft were to cut loose SQL server, and published the full and complete source code under a completely free and open license (Quit laughing! It's just an example!) would Oracle maintain their current sales volume?

    Not likely.


    Compare the cost of licensing SQL Server vs. Oracle. If you are going to buy a license from Oracle, its because SQL Server is not a viable option, regardless of its price. SQL Server and Oracle are just in different leagues, capabilities and price wise. In other words, if Micros~1 paid people $5 to use SQL Server, the people who buy Oracle would still buy.

    Or do you think that Open Sourcing SQL Server is going to change it somehow into a more robust database than Oracle?

    Mike
    --
    Troll Like a Champion Today