nd writes "Kevin Lawton, author of the popular x86
emulator Bochs, has
launched an open source project to create an application
with functionality similar to that of VMware.
Of course, he will need some help to get freemware (the
title of this project) going. "
Always seem to be catching up
by
Skyshadow
·
· Score: 3
This is kind of an unfortunate thing we have going on here.
I mean, I've started to notice that OSS projects always seem to be trailing boldly behind closed source stuff. It's not that I don't see the value of an open source vmware-type project, but it's sort of upsetting that (lately, at least) we're always playing catch-up to ideas that companies have had.
I wonder if open source somehow doesn't foster originality...
----
-- Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
What license and how "free"
by
HoserHead
·
· Score: 3
technology will be carried over from the bochs project to the freemware project. I am currently exploring what needs to be done license-wise to bring the device emulation from bochs to the open source freemware project.
Well, everywhere he says "open source." I hope he goes BSD-esque or GPL, but I'm afraid that it'll be something incompatible with GPL (and thus making it difficult for other authors to use it, seeing as GPL is by far the most popular license for new Free Software.)
Obviously the author of bochs can do whatever he sees fit with his code, include licensing it as part of freemware under whatever license it uses, and we hope he goes with a Good choice (even if it is incompatible with GPL or the vast majority of other licenses (ie, if it's not GPL or BSD/X type license), if it's Free Software it will be ok).
VMware should have been Open Source
by
David+Jao
·
· Score: 4
Some people here say that since VMware is a good product, the authors are justified in keeping their software proprietary. Some even go so far as to say that a free VMware clone would be stealing well-deserved money from the authors of VMware.
I could not disagree more. Furthermore, I will be the first to way that I would pay the $99 student price for a GPL'd VMware. I am not against selling software. I am against the common practice whereby companies withhold (i.e. steal) millions of dollars of value from society by keeping their software proprietary.
I will not buy VMware, even though the product is worth more to me than the asking price. It seems obvious to me that if everyone who wants VMware puts their money into freemware instead, there would be ample money to fund a superior Open Source replacement. If you think VMware is a valuable contribution to society, then how much would an Open Source replacement be worth? Answer: much, much more.
Since I emphasize societal benefit so much in this post, a lot of you out there might accuse me of being socialist, and, by hidden implication, anti-capitalist. Well, I've got news for you: Capitalism is socialism, and socialism is capitalism. Folks, that isn't ideology, that's a proven mathematical theorem. Specifically, the first and second welfare theorems of microeconomics state that:
A free market always maximizes net societal welfare,
Any state of maximalization of net societal welfare is achievable through a free market.
I know that socialism/capitalism is not directly on topic but I just wanted to pre-emptively fend off the knee-jerk attack that since I'm against proprietary software I must be against entrepreneurism, capitalism, and the American dream.
By the way, in case you haven't figured it out, the proprietary software market is based on a copyright monopoly, hence is not a free market economy, and that's why this market sucks from both a capitalist and socialist standpoint.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean, I've started to notice that OSS projects always seem to be trailing boldly behind closed source stuff. It's not that I don't see the value of an open source vmware-type project, but it's sort of upsetting that (lately, at least) we're always playing catch-up to ideas that companies have had.
I wonder if open source somehow doesn't foster originality...
----
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
Obviously the author of bochs can do whatever he sees fit with his code, include licensing it as part of freemware under whatever license it uses, and we hope he goes with a Good choice (even if it is incompatible with GPL or the vast majority of other licenses (ie, if it's not GPL or BSD/X type license), if it's Free Software it will be ok).
I could not disagree more. Furthermore, I will be the first to way that I would pay the $99 student price for a GPL'd VMware. I am not against selling software. I am against the common practice whereby companies withhold (i.e. steal) millions of dollars of value from society by keeping their software proprietary.
I will not buy VMware, even though the product is worth more to me than the asking price. It seems obvious to me that if everyone who wants VMware puts their money into freemware instead, there would be ample money to fund a superior Open Source replacement. If you think VMware is a valuable contribution to society, then how much would an Open Source replacement be worth? Answer: much, much more.
Since I emphasize societal benefit so much in this post, a lot of you out there might accuse me of being socialist, and, by hidden implication, anti-capitalist. Well, I've got news for you: Capitalism is socialism, and socialism is capitalism. Folks, that isn't ideology, that's a proven mathematical theorem. Specifically, the first and second welfare theorems of microeconomics state that:
- A free market always maximizes net societal welfare,
- Any state of maximalization of net societal welfare is achievable through a free market.
I know that socialism/capitalism is not directly on topic but I just wanted to pre-emptively fend off the knee-jerk attack that since I'm against proprietary software I must be against entrepreneurism, capitalism, and the American dream.By the way, in case you haven't figured it out, the proprietary software market is based on a copyright monopoly, hence is not a free market economy, and that's why this market sucks from both a capitalist and socialist standpoint.