Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apache Incorporates

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the non-profit dept.

Progman writes "The Apache Group today announced the creation of the Apache Software Foundation (ASF), read their press release. " It seems as though Apache is formally incorporated now, and the ASF will be a legal umbrella for Apache and other projects. Congrats to Brian and all the others!

61 comments

  1. Just another 'club' to pound you-know-who with. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like it's really just another lame excuse of a company (like Caldera) created to club Microsoft with.

    Will they do anything more than fund legal "initiatives"?

  2. Apache "customers" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The Apache Software Foundation will protect
    the efforts of the community of developers working on our open-source projects, while providing a
    pillar of strength and stability for our customers."

    I love Apache server and the whole idea, but now it makes me wonder if they are up to something to fit their new "Incorporated" status, like IPO *yucks*. Although after prisons started considering their prisoners as customers, I am no longer surprised to read about these things.

    1. Re:Apache "customers" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can you IPO a membership organisation (i.e. one that has no stock to start with) and that has in its certificate of incorporation a requirement to not issue any future stock?

    2. Re:Apache "customers" by signe · · Score: 4

      I love Apache server and the whole idea, but now it makes me wonder if they are up to something to fit their new "Incorporated" status, like IPO *yucks*. Although after prisons started considering their prisoners as customers, I am no longer surprised to read about these things.

      Calm down. Everyone has customers, and it's very nice to see that the Apache folks realize who their customers are despite the fact that we don't give them any money. It's always good to see a group like this, that has given so much to the community and not asked for anything in return, and see that they understand that once you start a project like this (Apache) it takes on a life of its own and you need to keep supporting it, not drop it on the floor because it's not making you any money.

      Who are your customers? Everyone's got 'em. It's obvious if you're selling something, but that doesn't mean that just because you're not taking someone's money, that you don't have customers. If you're working on a help desk in a large organization, it might be the people that you support. If you maintain a web site (even a small one), it might be the people who view it.

      Know who your customers are. It lets you do your job better.

      ---

      --
      "The details of my life are quite inconsequential..."
  3. Will apache still be free for all eternity? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember when the latest versions (and international versions) of MacOS could be downloaded for FREE and anonymously from Apple's ftp site. @#$%! Apple shareholders put an end to this. So I switched to a PC and now run Linux (and apache) and want to know that it is and forever shall remain free for all to download and use.

  4. Good and Bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apache can get a real foothold now that they are a legal corportion.

    Business' might find it easier using a free (or perhaps later, a modestly priced) piece of software, that comes for a company (rather than open source group) instead of investing in Microsoft.

    It also gives them a legal stance against Microsoft, like a previous post said.

    MS could pull another Netscape, but this one would be harder to explain to the DOJ.

    This also could mean a lot of bad things. A company could take Apache over, and make the server a regular piece of software... with no source, but a nice price. But it's very unlikely.

    I'm not sure about the IPO though. Buying that stock would be weird...

    1. Re:Good and Bad by Natedog · · Score: 1

      However, since Apache is privately owned (ie has not stock to sell) a takeover is not possible (of course, Apache could sell out, but I doubt it).

      Also, I beleive that if Apache started charging for its software anyone could take the existing code base (BSD isn't it?) and redistribute it for free (much like a Linux distro). Then again, I'm not really familiar with the BSD - I'm more of a GPL person. Anyone care to confirm this?

      --
      \forall code \in C, \frac{\Delta readability(code)}{\Delta t} < 0
  5. Re:This changes the game - somewhat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree whole-heartedly. Apache knew that they could not fight Microsoft on any sort of legal ground without being a legal entity. Now they have that legal enitity with which to combat the forces of FUD.

  6. Re:This changes the game - somewhat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    does this mean they can be bought?

  7. Re:This changes the game - somewhat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    does this mean they can be bought? (hostile take over)

  8. Re:This changes the game - somewhat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not directly, I'm sure they are still privately owned (by the employees). I work in a privatly owned corp. right now. Only employees own stock and can't sell it to non-employees. If we all got togehter and decided to, we could go public . . . not likely.

  9. Re:Slashdot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's because they use IIS (j/k, they really use NCSA httpd)

  10. Re:What will remain anarchic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's still vi.

    Thank god for that.

    Or whatever.

  11. Re:What will remain anarchic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    mv is still OpenSource too.

  12. Re:Mixed feelings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Praise Father, Son, and Holy Ghost"


    "Amen"

  13. Re:take on redmond now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    huff huff
    wheeze wheeze

  14. Heh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Man, how so totally are people far from the primal clue?

    AG rules because it didn't care about weenies who wanted penguins on their laptop.

    AG rules because all the other stuff available is too damned slow.

    AG rules because they all have jobs already.

    AG rules because, even if some of them want to build empires, the others will let them.

    AG rules because if Bill Gates walked into the bar tonight they'd buy him a drink and giggle.

    (actually, the directive-set is close to clusterfuck right now. perhaps someone will pause for a single MOMENT'S thought and do it properly...)

    flap, flap, oink!

    also.. lashedup.org is such a cool site, congrats.

  15. Re:Corporate acceptance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, but please rememer... the article on the MS strategy is purely speculation. It may sound all nice and good (well, not good... but "makes sense") to us, but who are we? We don't work at MS. We aren't the upper exec's who are steering the project.

  16. http://home.cnet.com/category/0-3721-7-290058.html by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html


    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

    http://home.cnet.com/category/0- 3721-7-290058.html

  17. Re:This changes the game - somewhat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, the ASF does not have any stock to be bought or sold. It is a corporation owned by a 'membership'. Additional members can be added by a vote of the current membership.

    Item 5 of the certificate of incorporation specifically prevents ASF from issuing any stock.

  18. Re:This may not actually be good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, hypothetically, someone wanting to take over Apache would read the corporation's bylaws and certificate of incorporation, and come to the conclusion that it has no stock to buy, nor any authority to issue new stock.

  19. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What makes you think that the ASF is heavily funded by IBM?

    To date, IBM's support has come in the form of providing communication resources and legal counsel to allow the ASF to become a reality. Not to mention a great deal of programming resources for work on the Apache HTTP server. IBM's contribution can only be charaterized as an honest embrace of the the open-source model.

    Spreading rumors as you have above does nothing to help open-source relationships with corporate software vendors. Please reconsider.

    No, I don't work for IBM.

    randy@covalent.net

  20. Re:Mixed feelings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What in this press release gives you the idea that the ASF will sell Apache?

    A non-profit corporation that has no stock means that there is no goal to sell a product or do an IPO as I read over and over in this thread.

    As stated very clearly in the press release and the corporate bylaws for the ASF, this move is intended to assure that the Apache source will continue to be freely available while providing the same benefits of the corporate structure to other open-source software projects who have the same goals.

  21. Re:what did that Lotus guy told me ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps you should point the Lotus guy to a copy of the Apache license. The license clearly makes the use of the Apache code free to IBM or anyone else who wishes to use it. The ASF does not hold a patent, nor restrict the use of the Apache software for commercial applications.

  22. Corporate acceptance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I wonder how this will affect corporate acceptance of Apache? Also, it's pretty ironic that the announcement came on the same day as the FreshMeat article on Microsoft's web server strategy.

    I'm all for this. I will do everything I can to interject Apache (and Linux) everywhere I can...


    Sorry, too lazy to log in...

    ten.knilrevlis@wkcuhc

  23. Re:Microsoft is a member... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It says he works for Microsoft. But he previously worked for C2NET. He's working on Windows Scripting Host for Windows 2000.

  24. Nonprofit, remember? by cduffy · · Score: 2

    I would be shocked if anything of the sort occured. Can a nonprofit even go public? (What's the point? Who would be interested in the stock of a company not wanting to make money?)

    1. Re:Nonprofit, remember? by jlv · · Score: 1

      Yes, a nonprofit can go public. An interesting side-effect is that to accomplish this, a (sometimes new) comercial entity has to purchase the assests of the nonprofit. The comercial entity raises capital and buys out the nonprofit. The money paid to the nonprofit has to be disbursed in a fashion appropriate for a nonprofit; it cannot be turned over to the comercial entity.

      This is how UUNET was started oh-so-long-ago. The money paid to the nonprofit UUNET by the for-profit UUNET was used to fund various free/open software efforts a 8-10 years ago (such as "nvi").

  25. Schwingin' by mholve · · Score: 0

    Good deal, good luck!

  26. Microsoft is a member... by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 2
    See members.

    Actually this is not true, only individuals can be members, and if you follow the link to the particular individuals home page, it claim that he works for c2net. Maybe it is a joke.

    1. Re:Microsoft is a member... by Thomas+Charron · · Score: 1

      GOTTA be a joke..

      --
      -- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
    2. Re:Microsoft is a member... by Jim+Winstead · · Score: 1
      Huh? c2net makes Stronghold. They aren't Microsoft, to the best of my knowledge. Paul publishes ApacheWeek.

      What's your point?

  27. Re:DOJ and MS and a new suit by Thomas+Charron · · Score: 1

    Be a whole lot easier this time, as there would be a presedent set..

    --
    -- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
  28. An age in the history of Open Source... by Coppit · · Score: 1

    It seems like every open source project is going commercial or incorporating. Witness Sendmail, Inc., Artifex (Ghostscript), Red Hat (sort of), our beloved Slashdot, and now Apache.

    I wonder if this won't later be considered a milestone in the development of Open Source as a threat to proprietary software.

    David

  29. Re:Congragulation by GrenDel+Fuego · · Score: 1

    I guess you weren't around yesterday?
    Slashdot was acquired by andover.net

  30. Does Non-Profit Corporation == No IPO ? by smithdog · · Score: 1

    Since they have incorporated as a non-profit orgainization does that mean they cannot take the company public with an IPO? Anyone who really knows the answer please reply.

    1. Re:Does Non-Profit Corporation == No IPO ? by SandHawk · · Score: 1

      Right, Non-Profit == No Owners / No Stock == No IPO. Where normal corporations are controlled by a board elected by stockholders, non-profit boards are usually either elected by the organization's members or by themselves.

  31. Re:This may not actually be good. by Ares · · Score: 1

    But hypothetically, if the investors wanted to stifle competition (something I'm sure a certain company in Redmond would like to do but at present wouldn't dare), buying the non-profit organization could be a very good thing. Of course, M$ buying Apache would do absolutely no good as we already have existing copies of it laying around.

  32. Re:Slashdot... by Sesse · · Score: 1

    Yes, looks like everybody is getting acquired now :-) Well, did anybody notice that Apache's site was NOT Slashdotted?

    /* Steinar */

    --
    (This comment is of course GPLed.)
  33. Interesting by KlomDark · · Score: 1

    Looks heavily funded by IBM? Their non-so-secret strategy against Microsoft? Of course, eventually someone will not like the direction that the Apache group is going and will create a new distribution (ala Linux) with a different aim. Not that is bad, it will be interesting to see where it goes...

    1. Re:Interesting by bergie · · Score: 2

      Of course, eventually someone will not like the direction that the Apache group is going and will create a new distribution (ala Linux) with a different aim.

      I don't think that this will actually affect Apache development in any way, the code will remain under the BSD license.

      Rather, the ASF was obviously formed to create a supporting organization for Apache and its sister projects (mod_perl, PHP, ...)

      So in effect it is much like the Free Software Foundation and Software in the Public Interest. It just hasn't got its nonprofit status yet.

      --

      --
      Midgard Project - Open Source CMS
  34. Congragulation by siva06 · · Score: 1

    well a structure was defenitely needs. somewhere we needs to have business structural pillars, ASF could be considered as one of those.

    i guess only time will tell how many more will crop up.

    slashdot could be next - ??????

  35. If one David attacked one Goliath... by slambo · · Score: 2

    One David attacking one Goliath might be able to win with one stone, but several thousand Davids with several thousand stones against one Goliath presents much better odds in Davids' (the plural possessive...) favor.

    We've seen where Apache and Samba need to work to combat the recent series of benchmarks, now let's get to work.

  36. This changes the game - somewhat by jabber · · Score: 3

    In the previous 'full frontal assault on Apache' article, the current top posting (http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=99/06/30/1310 254&cid=26) makes some excellent points. One being that MS can try and squash Apache, as it is not a corp...

    Makes me wonder if this maneuver, then, is not intended to secure some legal protection against preditory behavior by M$...

    Anyone familiar enough with legalize to lend some creedence to this?

    --

    -- What you do today will cost you a day of your life.
  37. take on redmond now by josepha48 · · Score: 1

    now take redmond on.....

    --

    Only 'flamers' flame!

  38. Re:http://home.cnet.com/category/0-3721-7-290058.h by Tim+C · · Score: 1

    From the very brief look I had, it looks like it could be a usefull link. Thanks.

    Now, next time, just copy it once , will you?

    Tim

    --
    It's official. Most of you are morons.
  39. what did that Lotus guy told me ? by Atreide · · Score: 1

    A few weeks ago, a lotus guy told me that IBM had bought apache patents or something so that they can use the Apache server for some of their products.

    Well I just found it rather... hard to believe. But maybe there is some moves in the shadows ?

    Hey ! don't tell IBM bought Apache or something. I just repeat something that was told to me by someone who was told by someone... you know the story...

    So right now it is just a rumour, and anyone who propagate the rumour without any fact, so he be blamed ! (I do not want to see /. beeing accused of propagating *false* rumours... only *true* rumours must be told here ;-D)

    --
    The world belongs to those who get up early. - I'm far from being the king of Earth then :-(
    1. Re:what did that Lotus guy told me ? by ez8 · · Score: 1

      Hey now, on /. we don't start rumors... we spread 'em :)

  40. Please, please, get a clue. by Gumber · · Score: 2

    The level of paranoia here is amazing.

    Just because apache is incorporating doesn't mean they are on their path to becoming a big bad corporation. It doesn't mean an IPO is around the corner or any of that.

    They are incorporating as a non-profit. This is not necessarily a good or a bad thing, but it does mean that people are doing what it takes to get to the next level.

    Some of the outcomes I see.

    1. It becomes easier for commercial companies to contribute. They may be able to write their cash and in kind contributions off on their taxes. At the very least, it should make their accounting a bit more straightforward.

    2. It also makes it easier to take cash contributions. The ASF can take cash and do their own hiring, rather than working with donated time.

    There are bad things that can happen as well, but they could happen anyway, so I am not going to bother listing them.

  41. This may not actually be good. by Razorblade · · Score: 1

    If Apache is incorporating, it means that it can IPO at a later date. If Apache IPOs, it can be gobbled up by IBM or Microsoft or have itself controlled by its shareholders. Also, Apache incorporating hints to a future time at which Apache won't be free anymore. The Apache Group should be set up as an organization but not as a corporation.

    --
    DES Khaddafi KGB genetic jihad Uzi Rule Psix Qaddafi cryptographic Peking Mossad Legion of Doom Albanian Serbian Saddam
    1. Re:This may not actually be good. by Mr+Bill · · Score: 1

      It states that it is a non profit corporation. I don't think many inverstors would really want to buy a chunk of a non profit organization. It kind of goes against what investments are all about :)

  42. Re:http://home.cnet.com/category/0-3721-7-290058.h by Budgester · · Score: 1

    Was this really neccesary ??

  43. Mixed feelings by extrasolar · · Score: 1
    On one side: This sorta shows that Open Source projects like Apache and I might as well include Slashdot in this, are being taken more seriously with this kind of business backbone. Maybe opensource projects needs business to grow beyond hacker projects. Gee, there are many examples already: Debian and the SPI; Gnome and International Gnome Support; Linux and all them corporate big shots. Now apache and slashdot can be included in this.

    Then on the other: Kind of scary all these businesses looking to make money off of opensource projects. It has become known that makeing consumers happy is not as important as consumer lock in and incompatability in the software industry. While opensource software relies heavily on standards, I don't see it impossible that business makes Apache propietary (with no source) at some point in the future.


    I have no idea if this is necessary or not. Just seems to me a lot of people want to make money where it wasn't much of a factor before.

    (Yeah, I know this reply is unfocused. I am not really with it right now for some reason.)

    --

    1. Re:Mixed feelings by remande · · Score: 2
      Then on the other: Kind of scary all these businesses looking to make money off of opensource projects. It has become known that makeing consumers happy is not as important as consumer lock in and incompatability in the software industry. While opensource software relies heavily on standards, I don't see it impossible that business makes Apache propietary (with no source) at some point in the future.

      Open source changes the rules of software business. Specifically, it destroys software as a business. It promotes service as a business.

      When you guarantee to show your source, it is hard to make a proprietary protocol. Others can see it and reimplement it. The only lock in you will get is the lock in of having the plain old best product.

      --

      --The basis of all love is respect

  44. Re:What will remain anarchic? by PugMajere · · Score: 1

    By the way, BIND and INN (the main, open, news server) are supported by the same group of people, and yes, there is talk that they'll form a company to provide support for their free products (BIND and INN).

    I don't think you need to fear the lack of free development growing into something bigger, it will just acknowledge that there is money to be made supporting that free product, and move on to it.

    Isn't that the goal the open source movement has anyway? Free software, with development being supported by those using it, either through direct development, or by payment for support?

  45. ASF by dmachleid · · Score: 1

    Has anyone else noticed this acronym? This is the file extension/designation for M$ Advanced Streaming Format. I hope this doesn't give M$ a leg up to sue Apache into the ground.

    Of course, they could be big about it and let their competitors run free.....

    And Open Source Windows......

    And Open all document formats......

    --
    9:48pm up 426 day(s), 6:01, 16 users, load average: 220.60, 138.45, 63.50
  46. Slashdot... by Trojan · · Score: 1

    That's what you get when you neglect to check Slashdot every single day. Slashdot has already been acquired by Andover.net.

  47. What will remain anarchic? by Paradox+!-) · · Score: 2

    With Apache incorporating, Sendmail gone corp last year, Mozilla a flop, Linux splintering into different distributions catching up with Red Hat (yes yes, flame me for that...), what's left that is a major force on the 'Net, yet still run non-corporate? Elm? BIND? NNTP? How long until the NNTP folks form Usenet.com.corp?

    We are hitting the third generation of the 'Net here, folks. The game is no longer the garage. The new rule is to incorporate as a defensive, rather than offensive move, it seems. (I find it funny that on the same day /. reports MS will attack Apache, /. also reports that Apache is incorporating.) People are incorporating to establish their authority before Big Dogs can move in on it. I think these are just more and more ripples from the death of Netscape. That was truly a changing point in the history of the 'Net as we know it.

    [I fear this signals the end of kickass major infrastructure programs being developed mostly for free by mostly unpaid people.

    Not that I'm one to talk...]

    1. Re:What will remain anarchic? by Jim+Winstead · · Score: 1
      BIND and INN are developed by the Internet Software Consortium.

      Very few large projects are being "mostly developed for free by mostly unpaid people". In many cases (and a happily increasing number), someone is paying them to work on the projects.

  48. DOJ and MS and a new suit by Beached · · Score: 1

    IF MS includes a web browser in every Windows 2000, could this be a lead up to another antitrust suit? The US government loves to spend money, anyways.

    --
    ---- aut viam inveniam aut faciam
  49. Oops:DOJ and MS and a new suit by Beached · · Score: 1

    I meant web server, sorry :)

    --
    ---- aut viam inveniam aut faciam