It was actually FederalEspresso. And the coffee shop folded and changed their name because they couldn't afford the legal fees, it never went to court.
It doesn't conflict. All of the software is GPL. There are two packages in Red Hat that you need to be careful of, redhat-artwork and redhat-logos. If you replace those two packages with equivalent packages which contain artwork and logos not trademarked by Red Hat, you can distribute the software all you want. You can also distribute the software by simply removing those two packages but as they point out, some software will break because it can't find the images it needs.
Has anyone else in this thread noticed that whenever someone backs this guy into a corner, he responds with "well, you aren't an open source developer anyways"?
Simple truth of it all is that to 99% of the world, software is an expense. If companies can find a way to employ software developers to work on OSS specific to that companies needs, not only will OSS developers remain employed, but there will be no need to pay for software, and companies will end up paying less for software. Kinda sucks for the commercial software houses, but no one is crying for the horse and buggy manufacturers.
Red Hat employs the maintainers or a subset of the development teams for the linux kernel, gcc, glibc, autoconf, automake, libtool, gdb, glib, gtk, gnome, and postgres. That is off the top of my head. That seems pretty significant to me.
When they did nothing more then change the splash screen, the nvidia card gave out different results. That seems to be detecting the benchmark and cheating.
Try reading the article.
Re:The situation's aren't comparable.
on
RIAA vs The Economy
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Stealing a physical item and copyright infringment are not the same (no matter how much the RIAA would like you to believe).
I think the problem is that the RIAA only know one business model. That business model is out dated and consumers don't seem to be buying into it. Consumers are saying quite loudly that they want to pick and choose music (even by the track) and they want it cheap. People will pay for it (see the Apple music store for proof) if it is packaged attractively. Capitalism doesn't make any promises that your business model will work, nor does it promise that it will continue to work later even if it works today. If the only way to get someone to buy a car was to deliver it your house full of fine-ass women and cases of Heineken, then you damn well better believe that car dealerships would be doing just that. And right now, the RIAA has the equivalent of a large segment of their consumers wanting their cars deliever, with women and beer.
X apps running on your local machine don't use TCP, they use shared memory just like Windows. If X is slow on your system it's the video driver, not X.
Once apon a time, the buyer did dictate all the terms of the deal and the price it would be sold at. It's an interesting concept called capitalism. Unfortunately, some big cartels managed to get a few laws passed which took the "free" out of the "free market". Now you get to buy things on their terms and at their price (something which used to be called "price fixing"). What's even more unfortunate is that now there are apologists saying that the cartels should have ever right to stomp on our rights.
I don't know anything about audio software, but even I was able to go to the features page and see that all they need is permission from Steinberg to release VST plugin support. There was also a good amount about hardware support (both sound input and controlling the software).
I know this whole reading thing is hard, but try it sometime.
I highly doubt that any of that money is going to the producers or distributors of anime, so why not head over to www.rightstuf.com and support getting more anime here.
The linux port was finished when IA64 was nothing more then a emulator. I'm pretty sure that didn't give them too much trouble. Linux is pretty easy to port since its already maintained on so many platforms, the developers are pretty wary about making things specific to a certain architecture.
The point was, ext3 was stable, Reiser and JFS weren't. Red Hat has no need to go and fund more filesystems, they need to ship something that works. Ext3 worked so they shipped with it.
1) ext3 passed Cerberus at that time. Reiser didn't and was known the nuke filesystems. JFS still isn't particularly stable today.
2) Perhaps that is true, I dont use IBM's JDK.
3) Linux is different. This isn't just an issue with inetd vs xinetd. Linux defaults to bash as a shell, Solaris to csh. People shouldn't encourage Red Hat to include the less capable, less secure piece of software to appease people who find other more glaring differences anyways. The admins will have to learn to cope. Or get some Linux admins, it's not like there aren't some out there looking.
Neither JFS or ReiserFS were stable enough to use when RHAS was released. I'm not even sure either of them has managed to pass Cerberus even today. Anything calling itself "Advanced Server" should provide high reliability, not come with you favorite pet filesystem.
Xinetd is more secure then inetd. It is also completely compatible with regular inetd (I'd like to see how you can write an inetd that isn't compatible). The configuration is different, but I don't see anyone advocating that Linux perfectly duplicate the configuration of AIX or Solaris (and then, which would you pick, they're both different as well).
Finally, IBMs JDK works on the pSeries and zSeries systems. I'm sure it supports SMP just fine.
As has been pointed out in other places in this thread, if it can be shown that the developers are making a binary and providing a way for users to make a bit by bit identical binary then its equivalent to distributing the binary. NeXT tried it with their Objective-C compiler (now you know why gcc has objective-c support). Either way, if the objective of the developer is to circumvent the license (and that most definitely was the objective of the mplayer developers) then finding an alternate way of providing the user with the binary is just as bad as sending the binary yourself.
Thats all fine and dandy except when you start including other peoples GPL code which is what the MPlayer people were doing. They were adding restrictions to third party code which they have no right to do.
If you really do pay several grand a year for your enterprise, you should probably already be using Advanced Server which is supported for several years. So, this article doesn't affect you at all.
Advanced Server is supported for three years. If you're a big company and need long term support, buy that. If you're not a big company that needs a lot of support, then you have to upgrade once a year. Considering that most OSS a year old isn't maintained by the original authors, I don't see why people would expect Red Hat to maintain it (unless you are paying them $2500 a server to do it, of course).
Umm, that is why they released Advanced Server and are releasing a Corporate Desktop and Advanced Workstation products. Those come with several years of support.
And their $150 box is probably going to go away, and there will just be the $40 box. You're better off paying $60 for a years worth of RHN and skipping the box set entirely anyways.
Anyways, I would doubt that someone who doesn't even follow the company, use their product, or "believe in their model" to care about any of this in the first place (of even do some research about what Red Hat *is* doing for big companies before spouting off).
Slashdot Mirror
It was actually FederalEspresso. And the coffee shop folded and changed their name because they couldn't afford the legal fees, it never went to court.
It doesn't conflict. All of the software is GPL. There are two packages in Red Hat that you need to be careful of, redhat-artwork and redhat-logos. If you replace those two packages with equivalent packages which contain artwork and logos not trademarked by Red Hat, you can distribute the software all you want. You can also distribute the software by simply removing those two packages but as they point out, some software will break because it can't find the images it needs.
Has anyone else in this thread noticed that whenever someone backs this guy into a corner, he responds with "well, you aren't an open source developer anyways"?
Simple truth of it all is that to 99% of the world, software is an expense. If companies can find a way to employ software developers to work on OSS specific to that companies needs, not only will OSS developers remain employed, but there will be no need to pay for software, and companies will end up paying less for software. Kinda sucks for the commercial software houses, but no one is crying for the horse and buggy manufacturers.
Red Hat employs the maintainers or a subset of the development teams for the linux kernel, gcc, glibc, autoconf, automake, libtool, gdb, glib, gtk, gnome, and postgres. That is off the top of my head. That seems pretty significant to me.
FYI, Linux's TCP/IP stack is not BSD based, it is, and always has been a completely new implementation.
The new threading system in Red Hat 9 is still a pthreads implementation. Java should automatically take advantage of it without any changes.
Read the article, they spell out very clearly how nvidia was cheating.
Wait, I'm sorry, this is slashdot. Go back to posting your off-base assumptions.
When they did nothing more then change the splash screen, the nvidia card gave out different results. That seems to be detecting the benchmark and cheating.
Try reading the article.
Stealing a physical item and copyright infringment are not the same (no matter how much the RIAA would like you to believe).
I think the problem is that the RIAA only know one business model. That business model is out dated and consumers don't seem to be buying into it. Consumers are saying quite loudly that they want to pick and choose music (even by the track) and they want it cheap. People will pay for it (see the Apple music store for proof) if it is packaged attractively. Capitalism doesn't make any promises that your business model will work, nor does it promise that it will continue to work later even if it works today. If the only way to get someone to buy a car was to deliver it your house full of fine-ass women and cases of Heineken, then you damn well better believe that car dealerships would be doing just that. And right now, the RIAA has the equivalent of a large segment of their consumers wanting their cars deliever, with women and beer.
Ok, then go to Applications->System Tools->Red Hat Network. Now you get a nice GUI and don't have to type anything at the command line.
X apps running on your local machine don't use TCP, they use shared memory just like Windows. If X is slow on your system it's the video driver, not X.
Once apon a time, the buyer did dictate all the terms of the deal and the price it would be sold at. It's an interesting concept called capitalism. Unfortunately, some big cartels managed to get a few laws passed which took the "free" out of the "free market". Now you get to buy things on their terms and at their price (something which used to be called "price fixing"). What's even more unfortunate is that now there are apologists saying that the cartels should have ever right to stomp on our rights.
I don't know anything about audio software, but even I was able to go to the features page and see that all they need is permission from Steinberg to release VST plugin support. There was also a good amount about hardware support (both sound input and controlling the software).
I know this whole reading thing is hard, but try it sometime.
I highly doubt that any of that money is going to the producers or distributors of anime, so why not head over to www.rightstuf.com and support getting more anime here.
Then why didn't he talk about KParts or Bonobo then instead of shared libs?
Big difference between the frame buffer and the entire GDI. We're talking about window management, widget painting ...
The linux port was finished when IA64 was nothing more then a emulator. I'm pretty sure that didn't give them too much trouble. Linux is pretty easy to port since its already maintained on so many platforms, the developers are pretty wary about making things specific to a certain architecture.
The point was, ext3 was stable, Reiser and JFS weren't. Red Hat has no need to go and fund more filesystems, they need to ship something that works. Ext3 worked so they shipped with it.
1) ext3 passed Cerberus at that time. Reiser didn't and was known the nuke filesystems. JFS still isn't particularly stable today.
2) Perhaps that is true, I dont use IBM's JDK.
3) Linux is different. This isn't just an issue with inetd vs xinetd. Linux defaults to bash as a shell, Solaris to csh. People shouldn't encourage Red Hat to include the less capable, less secure piece of software to appease people who find other more glaring differences anyways. The admins will have to learn to cope. Or get some Linux admins, it's not like there aren't some out there looking.
Neither JFS or ReiserFS were stable enough to use when RHAS was released. I'm not even sure either of them has managed to pass Cerberus even today. Anything calling itself "Advanced Server" should provide high reliability, not come with you favorite pet filesystem.
Xinetd is more secure then inetd. It is also completely compatible with regular inetd (I'd like to see how you can write an inetd that isn't compatible). The configuration is different, but I don't see anyone advocating that Linux perfectly duplicate the configuration of AIX or Solaris (and then, which would you pick, they're both different as well).
Finally, IBMs JDK works on the pSeries and zSeries systems. I'm sure it supports SMP just fine.
As has been pointed out in other places in this thread, if it can be shown that the developers are making a binary and providing a way for users to make a bit by bit identical binary then its equivalent to distributing the binary. NeXT tried it with their Objective-C compiler (now you know why gcc has objective-c support). Either way, if the objective of the developer is to circumvent the license (and that most definitely was the objective of the mplayer developers) then finding an alternate way of providing the user with the binary is just as bad as sending the binary yourself.
Thats all fine and dandy except when you start including other peoples GPL code which is what the MPlayer people were doing. They were adding restrictions to third party code which they have no right to do.
If you really do pay several grand a year for your enterprise, you should probably already be using Advanced Server which is supported for several years. So, this article doesn't affect you at all.
Advanced Server is supported for three years. If you're a big company and need long term support, buy that. If you're not a big company that needs a lot of support, then you have to upgrade once a year. Considering that most OSS a year old isn't maintained by the original authors, I don't see why people would expect Red Hat to maintain it (unless you are paying them $2500 a server to do it, of course).
Umm, that is why they released Advanced Server and are releasing a Corporate Desktop and Advanced Workstation products. Those come with several years of support.
And their $150 box is probably going to go away, and there will just be the $40 box. You're better off paying $60 for a years worth of RHN and skipping the box set entirely anyways.
Anyways, I would doubt that someone who doesn't even follow the company, use their product, or "believe in their model" to care about any of this in the first place (of even do some research about what Red Hat *is* doing for big companies before spouting off).