I agree. And the really big customers go for IBM, who has a really good support aparatus in place (especially if you have more than one type of hardware).
Maybe because x86 has a bigger foothold on the desktop marked than the other platforms.
If you need quality, you go for Alpha and Sparc on the server. But on the server, you don't really need RealAudio etc.
Just a thought, not an excuse.
Re:Money isn't everything.
on
Giving Back
·
· Score: 1
The thing is, you asked "who needs money". I just pointed out that money is not the root of all evil. It is actually useful.
And remember, RMS didn't say that just because the software is free, you shouldn't be compensated (sp?). Why shouldn't companies, after making millions off of your software, send some your way?
You can't force them, but I would think decency would dictate that the companies spread the money as thanks for the value you give their products.
And don't tell me the companies are adding value by selling support. RedHat is still making most of its money from sale of the CDs.
Re:This article makes me sick!
on
Giving Back
·
· Score: 1
You're missing the point of the objective. It's about enlightened self-interests. It's in your interests to support free software, because in the long run, it will be cheaper than paying site license.
Re:Free speech, not free beer!
on
Giving Back
·
· Score: 1
I guess it's OK for FSF to encourage people to use your software then slapp hand cuffs on them when they try release their own application under a different license that the FSF approved one.
Yup, FSF uber alles
Re:Free speech, not free beer!
on
Giving Back
·
· Score: 1
Thank you!
Re:Donate money: the OS you save may be your own.
on
Giving Back
·
· Score: 1
Last time I checked, I couldn't get free medicine when I had a cold. The museum in SF has financial problems, and can't afford to fix the building to make it earthquake safe. I think they closed a wing or two.
Apparently some people aren't donating as much money as the free software movement thinks.
Are you willing to work for free?
Re:Money isn't everything.
on
Giving Back
·
· Score: 1
Will fun put food on the table? Will fun pay for the hospital bills when your kids need surgery and you don't have insurance?
Just wondering... I mean, who cares about money...
When was competition ever about fairness? Who wins by being fair?
Slashdotters are all behind Netscape, who was just as bad about changing standards as they saw fit.
The truth is, being against M$ is not because they are proprietary or because we have to pay money (who have ever paid for IE?), but because it's M$. MicroSoft could release all their software under the GPL, and they would still be accused of dumping and killing the competition and unfairness.
Lets be a little honest here. Having a devil is great for the movement. If M$ hadn't been there, OpenSourcers would have to invent one.
>> It has been proved that a company can survive, not off of the revenues of its software sales, but off of other services such as support or advertising.
Really? My understanding is that RedHat and the other distributions are making most of their revenues from CD sales, *not* support and advertising. Yes, RedHat is saying that their primary revenue *will* be support and services, but right now it's not.
Also, RedHat and the other distributions aren't actually paying for development of the majority of the software they are selling. It's easy to give away something you haven't paid for.
Lets see 5 years down the line how many distributions/Linux companies will survive.
Since you are set to compete against companies like DELL, IBM, and COMPAQ, what are your plans for managing your devices in the enterprise? Especially, what is VALinux' plans regarding industry standards like SNMP? And what about new proposed standards like CIMOM, and WBEM? Or are you going against the industry by supporting Open Source alternatives like Big Brother?
Why don't anyone do a story about the "good" intruders? The one that breaks into your house, but only leaves a note on your bed, telling you how they got in?
I know I would feel so much safer, when I see a note on my bed, telling me someone has been in my house without my permission.
Re:could it be they like the BSD license better?
on
Intel using FreeBSD
·
· Score: 1
After reading the hoopla about how other people money are making money on free software, I doubt 95% of Slashdot readers fully understand the GPL.
I would say it is closer 45%, and that is being optimistic.
Note: I don't like BSD license because other people can take my code and make it properiatery. I don't like GPL because it forces other people to choose my license if they want to link to my program (think CORBA, COM).
A compromise license should be created (similar to LGPL).
>>It is in things like this that we see the true genius of the GPL. This should finally shut up those people who keep critisizing the GPL. Does anyone really think these companies would release the source coed to these apps if they weren't forced too?
The true genius of GPL is to force other people to use this license?
What happened to choice?
Far being for me to look at a BSD license that says, you can link to my program, and my choice of license won't affect your choice of license. Oh, no. Sure my license is open and anyone can contribute and change and do whatever they want, BUT the moral thing is to force you to use my license when you want to use any of my program's features, even if you don't want to take my program and make it propriatery, just by linking to it.
>>I'm starting to hate Red Hat more than MS. RH makes money purely on other peoples work.
Oh, please! How is this different from all other distributions (with the exception of Debian)?
Besides, isn't this what the GPL allows them to do? Where in the GPL does it say that you can only use the code as long as you don't make money on it?
If you don't like that RedHat and other companies make money on your hard work (are you actually developing anything or are you just the normal non-developing RedHat basher?), don't release it under the GPL. Put it under QPL or NPL or SCPL or whatever. But don't complain about it!!!
Maybe not on Monday morning, but I figured by Tuesday, it probably hit its low. With Win2000 out in February, I will bet with anyone here that the MS stock will jump back up no matter the ruling.
In Norway, you can own a gun, but you have to have a license, and to get a license, you have to join a gunclub.
That said, if you seriously think that an armed populace is the only thing that keeps a government at bay, you have to check your head. This might have been true when the constitution was framed, but the modern army could whip any populace into submittion. Even a modern police force could do that. If you want the keep a modern government at bay, you better make sure the army is loyal to the country, and the people, and not the government (unlike Nazi-Germany, where the army swore loyalty to Hitler personally).
That said, the reasons to own a gun seems to be, to protect your family, it makes you feel big about yourself, and you get a chance to blow away the neighbour when he look at you funny.
Isn't question rather, should Red Hat care? Do they have to?
Where in the GPL license does it say that Red Hat has to care about the community?
If you don't like Red Hat, don't buy their product, don't buy their support. And if you really hate them, use another license which explicitly forbid them to use your app.
Freedom is not just about behaviour you like. Freedom is also tolerating behaviour you don't like. Don't like it? Don't make it free.
A feature I would love to see is a callback feature. Some times I click on the submit button, and nothing happens, and I reclick on it. Then it turns out I submitted the same comment twice. Would be nice to be able to callback one of the submittions
Like you, I'm thinking about writing this app. And I would like to encourage plugins (don't care if the plugins are properiatery or OSS). Don't see why the developer should have to GPL their software, just because I choose to do it for mine.
A compromise between GPL and BSD style license, is that we need. As long as my base code is free, I don't care what your license you use for your code. Does artistic license cover this?
Slashdot Mirror
Linus made special exception to binary modules.
So, Linux is closer to LGPL license than GPL.
I agree. And the really big customers go for IBM, who has a really good support aparatus in place (especially if you have more than one type of hardware).
Maybe because x86 has a bigger foothold on the desktop marked than the other platforms.
If you need quality, you go for Alpha and Sparc on the server. But on the server, you don't really need RealAudio etc.
Just a thought, not an excuse.
The thing is, you asked "who needs money". I just pointed out that money is not the root of all evil. It is actually useful.
And remember, RMS didn't say that just because the software is free, you shouldn't be compensated (sp?). Why shouldn't companies, after making millions off of your software, send some your way?
You can't force them, but I would think decency would dictate that the companies spread the money as thanks for the value you give their products.
And don't tell me the companies are adding value by selling support. RedHat is still making most of its money from sale of the CDs.
You're missing the point of the objective. It's about enlightened self-interests. It's in your interests to support free software, because in the long run, it will be cheaper than paying site license.
I guess it's OK for FSF to encourage people to use your software then slapp hand cuffs on them when they try release their own application under a different license that the FSF approved one.
Yup, FSF uber alles
Thank you!
Last time I checked, I couldn't get free medicine when I had a cold. The museum in SF has financial problems, and can't afford to fix the building to make it earthquake safe. I think they closed a wing or two.
Apparently some people aren't donating as much money as the free software movement thinks.
Are you willing to work for free?
Will fun put food on the table? Will fun pay for the hospital bills when your kids need surgery and you don't have insurance?
Just wondering... I mean, who cares about money...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but somebody installing AOL on their system won't affect my system performance, right?
Why should I mind if they want to run AOL software, as long as it doesn't affect me? Isn't it their choice? Shouldn't Linux be about choice?
Hold on while I tell my friend to stop using xemacs. Who knows, when xemacs has sucked up all his resources, it might go after my system.
When was competition ever about fairness? Who wins by being fair?
Slashdotters are all behind Netscape, who was just as bad about changing standards as they saw fit.
The truth is, being against M$ is not because they are proprietary or because we have to pay money (who have ever paid for IE?), but because it's M$. MicroSoft could release all their software under the GPL, and they would still be accused of dumping and killing the competition and unfairness.
Lets be a little honest here. Having a devil is great for the movement. If M$ hadn't been there, OpenSourcers would have to invent one.
>> It has been proved that a company can survive, not off of the revenues of its software sales, but off of other services such as support or advertising.
Really? My understanding is that RedHat and the other distributions are making most of their revenues from CD sales, *not* support and advertising. Yes, RedHat is saying that their primary revenue *will* be support and services, but right now it's not.
Also, RedHat and the other distributions aren't actually paying for development of the majority of the software they are selling. It's easy to give away something you haven't paid for.
Lets see 5 years down the line how many distributions/Linux companies will survive.
Since you are set to compete against companies like DELL, IBM, and COMPAQ, what are your plans for managing your devices in the enterprise? Especially, what is VALinux' plans regarding industry standards like SNMP? And what about new proposed standards like CIMOM, and WBEM? Or are you going against the industry by supporting Open Source alternatives like Big Brother?
Why don't anyone do a story about the "good" intruders? The one that breaks into your house, but only leaves a note on your bed, telling you how they got in?
I know I would feel so much safer, when I see a note on my bed, telling me someone has been in my house without my permission.
After reading the hoopla about how other people money are making money on free software, I doubt 95% of Slashdot readers fully understand the GPL.
I would say it is closer 45%, and that is being optimistic.
Note: I don't like BSD license because other people can take my code and make it properiatery. I don't like GPL because it forces other people to choose my license if they want to link to my program (think CORBA, COM).
A compromise license should be created (similar to LGPL).
>>It is in things like this that we see the true genius of the GPL. This should finally shut up those people who keep critisizing the GPL. Does
anyone really think these companies would release the source coed to these apps if they weren't forced too?
The true genius of GPL is to force other people to use this license?
What happened to choice?
Far being for me to look at a BSD license that says, you can link to my program, and my choice of license won't affect your choice of license. Oh, no. Sure my license is open and anyone can contribute and change and do whatever they want, BUT the moral thing is to force you to use my license when you want to use any of my program's features, even if you don't want to take my program and make it propriatery, just by linking to it.
Yup, the RMS is a moral genius.
>>I'm starting to hate Red Hat more than MS. RH makes money purely on other peoples work.
Oh, please! How is this different from all other distributions (with the exception of Debian)?
Besides, isn't this what the GPL allows them to do? Where in the GPL does it say that you can only use the code as long as you don't make money on it?
If you don't like that RedHat and other companies make money on your hard work (are you actually developing anything or are you just the normal non-developing RedHat basher?), don't release it under the GPL. Put it under QPL or NPL or SCPL or whatever. But don't complain about it!!!
It really makes even less sense to put Sun on the desktop than Linux. Unless you are an engineer.'
Maybe not on Monday morning, but I figured by Tuesday, it probably hit its low. With Win2000 out in February, I will bet with anyone here that the MS stock will jump back up no matter the ruling.
In Norway, you can own a gun, but you have to have a license, and to get a license, you have to join a gunclub.
That said, if you seriously think that an armed populace is the only thing that keeps a government at bay, you have to check your head. This might have been true when the constitution was framed, but the modern army could whip any populace into submittion. Even a modern police force could do that. If you want the keep a modern government at bay, you better make sure the army is loyal to the country, and the people, and not the government (unlike Nazi-Germany, where the army swore loyalty to Hitler personally).
That said, the reasons to own a gun seems to be, to protect your family, it makes you feel big about yourself, and you get a chance to blow away the neighbour when he look at you funny.
Don't know about Denmark, but Norway has about the same voter turn-up as the US (CA at least) governor election.
Does Red Hat care if SuSE dies? No.
Does Red Hat care if Debian dies? No.
Does Red Hat care if the FSF dies? No.
Does it matter?
Isn't question rather, should Red Hat care? Do they have to?
Where in the GPL license does it say that Red Hat has to care about the community?
If you don't like Red Hat, don't buy their product, don't buy their support. And if you really hate them, use another license which explicitly forbid them to use your app.
Freedom is not just about behaviour you like. Freedom is also tolerating behaviour you don't like. Don't like it? Don't make it free.
A feature I would love to see is a callback feature. Some times I click on the submit button, and nothing happens, and I reclick on it. Then it turns out I submitted the same comment twice. Would be nice to be able to callback one of the submittions
I agree with you.
Like you, I'm thinking about writing this app. And I would like to encourage plugins (don't care if the plugins are properiatery or OSS). Don't see why the developer should have to GPL their software, just because I choose to do it for mine.
A compromise between GPL and BSD style license, is that we need. As long as my base code is free, I don't care what your license you use for your code. Does artistic license cover this?