You mean because someone (SunMink? who s/he?) writes a blog saying they promise to be nice the "FUD mongers are wrong". Comeon.
If Sun wants to extend it's sandpit alittle that's fine. Sun is not doing what they claimed they were doing. The are not making the largest number of patents available to the open source community evah!, they are not "releasing Solaris" to the community at large. End of story.
Today the news from Sun is all "oh, if you don't like our licence don't use it". Fine, but on flip side of that, Sun, is stop pretending to be doing something you are not.
Contrast this with Sun's supposed approach being trailed in January thusly - "Contrary to what some pundits expected, Sun will truly open source Solaris in a big way" (The register). This reportage was based on Sun's own press belly thumping press releases, crowing about being the biggest patent / code contributers to the open source community since Eve took a bite out of the apple. Only, that's not the case, is it.
*Obviously* Sun wants to prevent lawsuits against those good people that give them some code. But really, I found nothing in that blog to reassure me that Sun won't one day turn into another SCO - maybe once all the nice people that work there have gone or Microsoft proxies have bought the last of your $4 shares.
There are ways of doing this, Sun knows that, they are not stupid, but in this case they have been well and truely rumbled.
Well, at the risk of starting a flame war I'll bite:-)
I guarantee you the process of clearing the IP for OpenSolaris was a hell of a lot more complicated than for this project.
So what?
Having done all the hard work why throw it away in what appears to many of us to be a honeypot entrapment wheeze. Remember, we are still smarting from SCO's attacks which were well financed by MS and Sun, the latter has also reached a very lucrative settlement with MS. I think a little paranoia is justified. Just look through Sun's own press releases to see how this initiative was being spun verses reality. You said, "If you don't like the license or the software, don't use it.". I say, fine, but please don't expect people to come jumping to your defence when you misrepresent your actions or not be confused.
It's more annoying than anything else, as the collective business wisdom here on Slashdot over the years has been impressively wrong.
Oh God. Mod this reply up. Supposedly from the horses mouth (ok AC and all), an admission that changing the spec of your PC will affect your OS licences. New HDD, video card, for Christ's sake, what sort of drugs are you guys on?
Nice clarifying debate here:-) I think "the one which best sustains freedom" could be construed as "freest" in this context. Either way, I can I stand by my orginal point that IBM actually offer F/OSS developers much more with the way they are opening their patent portfolio than Sun are at present. Thanks.
No, I don't think IBM did just "get outdone". See those Sun patents are not "free". Can they be used in all accredited F/OSS licences as per the IBM "freeing" - not on your nelly.
This is the reason for the continuing criticism of Sun in the F/OSS community. They don't understand the meaning of "free" as in speach. Given this is the philosophy that underpins the entire movement it is hardly surprising Sun's moves are not as appreciated as they would like.
Very thoughtless dig in the article summary. Actually the community can do more (and as a whole probably donate huge amounts of $$s) through their opposition to the use of patents. The drugs industry is one of the biggest abusers of the patent system and much (very welcome) US / Gates aid goes into sustaining those monopoies. In other words it could and should go much further.
We are "incognita" but without us the Earth would be lopsided and totally out of balance leading to a serious slopping of drinks and other strange phenimona.
...which is why his emphasis on "GNU slash Linux" is a such loss of focus (IMHO). Far more valuable, I think, to insist on the name being GPL/Linux which is, after all, where the RMS contribution is so profound.
Give Linus some credit for picking that as the licence for the Linux kernel.
Understand the arguement, I just took it OT a little:-).
I think the parent poster was pointing out that people do switch off their machines so saying "i never need to reboot my Linux" was a pointless position - particualrly given it's success in the desktop arena (well, mine at least). My reason for switching off is puted power saving. There may be others.
What I'd like to see is a power usage chart during boot. I swicth my PC off for the 10 hours a day I'm not using it the hope that I'm saving power. There is a theory (urban myth) that the extra power used during a boot outweighs any savings. If someone can disprove that then I will persuade more work mates to follow my action.
Poorly presented article no doubt. But the kernel stability is critical when one starts considering use of OS for servers and enterprise application. Frankly, I don't want IE as part of my OS on my database servers, firewalls, web servers and the like.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean because someone (SunMink? who s/he?) writes a blog saying they promise to be nice the "FUD mongers are wrong". Comeon.
If Sun wants to extend it's sandpit alittle that's fine. Sun is not doing what they claimed they were doing. The are not making the largest number of patents available to the open source community evah!, they are not "releasing Solaris" to the community at large. End of story.
Today the news from Sun is all "oh, if you don't like our licence don't use it". Fine, but on flip side of that, Sun, is stop pretending to be doing something you are not.
Contrast this with Sun's supposed approach being trailed in January thusly - "Contrary to what some pundits expected, Sun will truly open source Solaris in a big way" (The register). This reportage was based on Sun's own press belly thumping press releases, crowing about being the biggest patent / code contributers to the open source community since Eve took a bite out of the apple. Only, that's not the case, is it.
*Obviously* Sun wants to prevent lawsuits against those good people that give them some code. But really, I found nothing in that blog to reassure me that Sun won't one day turn into another SCO - maybe once all the nice people that work there have gone or Microsoft proxies have bought the last of your $4 shares.
There are ways of doing this, Sun knows that, they are not stupid, but in this case they have been well and truely rumbled.
Well, at the risk of starting a flame war I'll bite :-)
I guarantee you the process of clearing the IP for OpenSolaris was a hell of a lot more complicated than for this project.
So what?
Having done all the hard work why throw it away in what appears to many of us to be a honeypot entrapment wheeze. Remember, we are still smarting from SCO's attacks which were well financed by MS and Sun, the latter has also reached a very lucrative settlement with MS. I think a little paranoia is justified. Just look through Sun's own press releases to see how this initiative was being spun verses reality. You said, "If you don't like the license or the software, don't use it.". I say, fine, but please don't expect people to come jumping to your defence when you misrepresent your actions or not be confused.
It's more annoying than anything else, as the collective business wisdom here on Slashdot over the years has been impressively wrong.
No doubt. But we are not alone there.
I don't speak for Sun in any way.
So I noticed.
They just seem to have other plans...
That's what I'm afraid of.
"Licensed as open source under the GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) and the Mozilla Public License (MPL)".
See, that's how it's done. Simple really and no need for weeks of backtracking, bullshit and misleading statements.
Microsoft have certainly done a first class job in creating a demand for these services. Kudos.
If you plugged the pins in out of line at the next power up they went BANG and dislodged your boss' toupee. Mind you, once bitten...
Oh God. Mod this reply up. Supposedly from the horses mouth (ok AC and all), an admission that changing the spec of your PC will affect your OS licences. New HDD, video card, for Christ's sake, what sort of drugs are you guys on?
Nice clarifying debate here :-) I think "the one which best sustains freedom" could be construed as "freest" in this context. Either way, I can I stand by my orginal point that IBM actually offer F/OSS developers much more with the way they are opening their patent portfolio than Sun are at present. Thanks.
Umm, whilst I personnally believe the GPL *is* the "freest" of F/OSS licences this has nothing to do with what I said in my orginal comment.
IBM let you use their 500 patents in *all* acredited F/OSS licences. Sun let you use it with one, theirs.
No, I don't think IBM did just "get outdone". See those Sun patents are not "free". Can they be used in all accredited F/OSS licences as per the IBM "freeing" - not on your nelly.
This is the reason for the continuing criticism of Sun in the F/OSS community. They don't understand the meaning of "free" as in speach. Given this is the philosophy that underpins the entire movement it is hardly surprising Sun's moves are not as appreciated as they would like.
Very thoughtless dig in the article summary. Actually the community can do more (and as a whole probably donate huge amounts of $$s) through their opposition to the use of patents. The drugs industry is one of the biggest abusers of the patent system and much (very welcome) US / Gates aid goes into sustaining those monopoies. In other words it could and should go much further.
We are "incognita" but without us the Earth would be lopsided and totally out of balance leading to a serious slopping of drinks and other strange phenimona.
ASDA boxer shorts are very similar to those sold in Tescos...
I mean, no shit, OSs doing similar things, what an insight.
Whale oil? Its organic and renewable.
I'll call bullshit. Here's the evidence. Nice troll though and "karma burning" comments seem to be loved by mods.
True. Also worth supporting long term initiatives like the this one proposed by Gordon Brown and Tony Blair to the G8.
...which is why his emphasis on "GNU slash Linux" is a such loss of focus (IMHO). Far more valuable, I think, to insist on the name being GPL/Linux which is, after all, where the RMS contribution is so profound.
Give Linus some credit for picking that as the licence for the Linux kernel.
Nice correction - shame you can't mod your origibnal comment down a bit :-)
well, that and the fact everyone in the USA spends too much time "remebering" these days.
the problem with irony is that when you have to explain it it's no longer irony. Ironic, huh...
...when communists go bad
Turn the computers off. Whoever pays the electric bill will thank you.
I pay the bills so I thank you. Whether my work colleagues offer similar thanks will remain to be seen.
Understand the arguement, I just took it OT a little :-).
I think the parent poster was pointing out that people do switch off their machines so saying "i never need to reboot my Linux" was a pointless position - particualrly given it's success in the desktop arena (well, mine at least). My reason for switching off is puted power saving. There may be others.
What I'd like to see is a power usage chart during boot. I swicth my PC off for the 10 hours a day I'm not using it the hope that I'm saving power. There is a theory (urban myth) that the extra power used during a boot outweighs any savings. If someone can disprove that then I will persuade more work mates to follow my action.
Poorly presented article no doubt. But the kernel stability is critical when one starts considering use of OS for servers and enterprise application. Frankly, I don't want IE as part of my OS on my database servers, firewalls, web servers and the like.