Slashdot Mirror
New Sidekick Will Run NetBSD, Not Windows CE
jschauma writes "Many sites are reporting that the next Sidekick LX 2009/Blade, from Danger (acquired by Microsoft early in 2008), is going to run NetBSD as their operating system, causing Microsoft's recruiters to look for NetBSD developers."
C'mon, Taco, leave him alone.
So submit a patch.
How many people are going to be developing on non-x86 systems anyway?
cat
No, the derivative works from the original BSD-licensed code are "less free". The original BSD licensed code the work was based off is more free.
This is the distinction, GPL places greater emphasis on ensuring that derivative works from the original codebase remain free, BSD doesn't.
The end result is GPL is ideologically less free, but perhaps, more free practically due to the fairly solid guarantee provided that the code and future changes to it will remain free.
Hotmail has never run on Linux. It USED to run on Solaris (which was the platform it was originally developed on before Microsoft purchased it). It was then converted to IIS over Windows Server for the front-end and Solaris for the Backend mail storage, and is now fully Windows Server based.
I've been called a "Fucking Dick" by better people than you.
Some people just completely reject the idea of closed source software. Since BSD allows open source software to be modified into closed source software, they view it as a bad thing.
The GPL forces everyone to make their contributions open, which does have some nice benefits when it comes to encouraging improvement of software... However, it's often incompatible with the way many companies develop software.
Many large software development companies would never want to open source their software. They believe it would allow people to steal their trade secrets. To these companies, the BSD license is a viable option, but not the GPL.
I personally think it would be nice if everything was completely open, but I think that's the kind of utopic vision the world is not ready for.
you can take a GPL product, modify the hell out of it and if you only distribute it internally amongst your company the community will never see it. granted BSD doesn't improve on this situation, but atleast you don't waste energy worrying about licensing issues.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
Actually, both licenses are as free for the end user of the code as they could possibly get. The point is that for BSD, "end user of the code" == "a developer using *the code* as in getting the source into his work", whereas for GPL "end user of the code" == "a computer user running the code in an executable form". See? That's what most people bashing themselves up over this can't (or don't want to) realize. And it seems that having both kinds of "end user" granted maximum freedoms by a single license is impossible because those freedoms conflict - certainly, no license like that exists right now. Now, it's up to you to decide which kind of the "end user" you like more and want to give more freedoms to.
This is Slashdot. Common sense is futile. You will be modded down.