I think we all agree that MySQL is a limited RDBMS. In many settings, like the one I mentioned earlier, it's great (and it's free). But I did not mean to imply that it's "the best" RDBMS. I did mean to imply that the president of the company didn't know much about what software his company used. He certainly didn't know anything about what our database requirements were. He was just nervous because we were using free software.
One day in a meeting, the president of the company said he was concerned because we were using MySQL. He said something to the effect of "How good can it be if it's free?". I could barely keep from laughing at him as I thought about the free software (Linux, Apache, Perl, PHP, CVS, sendmail, etc) that our mission critical apps used. In fact, none of our critical software was proprietary.
Naturally, I didn't think it was necessary to tell him this.
I'd like to take another look at point (4) above. I'm not trying to be contrary, I'm trying to refine the argument.
Sometimes, open source projects arise out of this sort of situation. Suppose your company, and your competitor, find that this software you're making is unprofitable and you drop it. The public TV stations still need the software. Perhaps one of the stations contracts a developer to write it. Public TV stations aren't in the business of selling software. Rather than sell it, they may make it an open source project and allow other stations to use it. In return, those stations can make improvements and share them.
CDs are designed to store data, not to hide it, so this does interfere with uses for which CDs are designed.
I'll grant that most people don't rip tracks and keep them on their computers, but so what? The important point is that there is nothing wrong with copying tracks off of CDs. This is about employing a technical measure that prevents some people from making fair use of material they purchased. I'd say it's a clear-cut breach of rights. The point that many people may not exercise those rights is irrelevant.
If this is what Caldera want to do, that's fine. It places them at a real disadvatage compared to other distros that don't use per-seat licensing, so the burden is on Caldera to offer enough added value to justify the licensing scheme. What's more, Caldera now has the burden of enforcing their license. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes.
I'm not going to use Caldera, since one of the benefits of using Linux is not having to worry about silly per-seat licenses.
The SmartTags feature just makes it easy for Web Site Operator B, if he's running IIS/ASP or whatever, to easily insert a stock quote from A's site. That's all.
Which is a blessing, since before this we had to resort to such klugery as hyperlinking. It's a wonder the web is even usable at all.
After reading Mundie's statements, it's not obvious what his point is. First, who is Mundie talking to? He may be addressing software consumers or he may be addressing software producers. Since I'm in both camps, I'll consider each case.
Message to the consumer: You should buy closed software for two reasons. First, closed software companies contribute to the economy. When you choose open source software, you are hurting the economy. Second, closed source software is innovative. If you buy closed software, you encourage innovation.
So the first point is that, in effect, I should buy closed software as a way to subsidize an important industry. I don't buy it. Software's most important contribution to the economy is that it helps people do things. If open source software is better than closed software at this, then I may help the economy by going with the open option. At any rate, I can't conclude that closed software is inherently better for the economy than open source.
As for the second point, choosing innovative software is probably the best thing I can do to encourage innovation, regardless of whether it is open or closed. And there is a very good case that open source software is innovative.
Message to the software producer:Stay away from the GPL, it will wreck your business.
If my business is selling closed software, then I suppose Mundie is right. No problem, just don't include GPL'd code in my products. But if my business is not selling closed software, and if GPL'd code helps me at whatever my business is, why not use it?
So, Mr. Mundie, as a consumer I choose not to subsidize your business. I'd prefer to see you compete in an open market. And I'll decide what products are innovative on the basis of their functions and how well they perform them, rather than on the basis of license agreements. But I will look at license agreements to see if they advance, rather than detract from, my interests. And as a software producer whose business is not the selling of closed software, I'll continue to use the GPL. Maybe I am making a mistake, but I've thought about it and I think that GPL'd software offers good value for my clients, and that makes using it a good business decision for me..
I cash my paycheck too. I get paid for helping people use free software. I GPL the software I write and give it away. I wouldn't want to give users any less control over their software. If you don't like it - too frikin' bad.
Doom and similar games are violent and probably not appropriate for young children, but I don't buy the argument that playing these games conditions someone to violence. A normal child of high-school age should be able to tell the difference between the fantasy of these games and the real world. If Klebold and Harris could not do that, then the blame lies with someone other than John Carmack.
Kids who are routinely exposed to violence probably do become violent people more often than average. It does not follow a priori that kids who are exposed to fantasy violence become real-world violent people more often than average.
>So what, apart from about 4 seconds of potential
>amusement, makes this story newsworthy?
I'd say that 4 seconds of potential amusement is sufficient.
>I don't know anything about the ways of pollsters
>& statistics gathering companies. Does that give
>them the right to take the piss out of me?
It does if you go around trying to sell information about them. Your customers might appreciate you getting your facts straight.
I saw King on the Today show this morning, and his idea seemed OK until he started spouting off about how "hackers" stole his last online work. Didn't anybody tell him that hackers built the internet that he wants to use to make money? His language was really insulting, and turned me off on reading the story, much less sending him money.
I got a free win2k cd with my new box. If you put it in the microwave for about 10 seconds, it makes a groovy coaster....By the way, I recommend you use somebody else's microwave.
I still read the local paper almost every day. I live in a small town, and the local paper is the best source of local news. There is one local television station, but they don't have the time to cover very much material. There are no local radio staions that provide satisfactory news coverage. Our local paper, however, does a pretty fine job of covering local issues. I'd say that our paper's future is pretty secure, at least for the near-to-midrange future.
Slashdot Mirror
I think we all agree that MySQL is a limited RDBMS. In many settings, like the one I mentioned earlier, it's great (and it's free). But I did not mean to imply that it's "the best" RDBMS. I did mean to imply that the president of the company didn't know much about what software his company used. He certainly didn't know anything about what our database requirements were. He was just nervous because we were using free software.
And yet, it did the job really well.
One day in a meeting, the president of the company said he was concerned because we were using MySQL. He said something to the effect of "How good can it be if it's free?". I could barely keep from laughing at him as I thought about the free software (Linux, Apache, Perl, PHP, CVS, sendmail, etc) that our mission critical apps used. In fact, none of our critical software was proprietary.
Naturally, I didn't think it was necessary to tell him this.
I'd like to take another look at point (4) above. I'm not trying to be contrary, I'm trying to refine the argument.
Sometimes, open source projects arise out of this sort of situation. Suppose your company, and your competitor, find that this software you're making is unprofitable and you drop it. The public TV stations still need the software. Perhaps one of the stations contracts a developer to write it. Public TV stations aren't in the business of selling software. Rather than sell it, they may make it an open source project and allow other stations to use it. In return, those stations can make improvements and share them.
Relevant example: Apache
Drive forward? Is that MSpeak for "catch up to"?
On the other hand, that would drive the industry forward, since other developers don't want to produce code that is only as good as MS's.
CDs are designed to store data, not to hide it, so this does interfere with uses for which CDs are designed.
I'll grant that most people don't rip tracks and keep them on their computers, but so what? The important point is that there is nothing wrong with copying tracks off of CDs. This is about employing a technical measure that prevents some people from making fair use of material they purchased. I'd say it's a clear-cut breach of rights. The point that many people may not exercise those rights is irrelevant.
I work for the CS dept at a university. I work with cool stuff and cool people in a casual environment. And my job is secure.
Adobe should be paying his legal fees.
An eBook publisher who disagrees.
I'm not going to use Caldera, since one of the benefits of using Linux is not having to worry about silly per-seat licenses.
1. MS uses open source software. Why wouldn't they? It's good software that does the job.
2. MS attacks open source software, especially Linux. Why wouldn't they? OSS competes with MS products.
Are any of us going to behave any differently because of this article? Why would we?
Which is a blessing, since before this we had to resort to such klugery as hyperlinking. It's a wonder the web is even usable at all.
At least we've still got lynx to fall back on.
Message to the consumer: You should buy closed software for two reasons. First, closed software companies contribute to the economy. When you choose open source software, you are hurting the economy. Second, closed source software is innovative. If you buy closed software, you encourage innovation.
So the first point is that, in effect, I should buy closed software as a way to subsidize an important industry. I don't buy it. Software's most important contribution to the economy is that it helps people do things. If open source software is better than closed software at this, then I may help the economy by going with the open option. At any rate, I can't conclude that closed software is inherently better for the economy than open source.
As for the second point, choosing innovative software is probably the best thing I can do to encourage innovation, regardless of whether it is open or closed. And there is a very good case that open source software is innovative.
Message to the software producer:Stay away from the GPL, it will wreck your business.
If my business is selling closed software, then I suppose Mundie is right. No problem, just don't include GPL'd code in my products. But if my business is not selling closed software, and if GPL'd code helps me at whatever my business is, why not use it?
So, Mr. Mundie, as a consumer I choose not to subsidize your business. I'd prefer to see you compete in an open market. And I'll decide what products are innovative on the basis of their functions and how well they perform them, rather than on the basis of license agreements. But I will look at license agreements to see if they advance, rather than detract from, my interests. And as a software producer whose business is not the selling of closed software, I'll continue to use the GPL. Maybe I am making a mistake, but I've thought about it and I think that GPL'd software offers good value for my clients, and that makes using it a good business decision for me..
They looked in a book? That's just nutty. How is anybody getting to get a frivolous patent application by people who can read?
I cash my paycheck too. I get paid for helping people use free software. I GPL the software I write and give it away. I wouldn't want to give users any less control over their software. If you don't like it - too frikin' bad.
...open source is bad.
Doom and similar games are violent and probably not appropriate for young children, but I don't buy the argument that playing these games conditions someone to violence. A normal child of high-school age should be able to tell the difference between the fantasy of these games and the real world. If Klebold and Harris could not do that, then the blame lies with someone other than John Carmack. Kids who are routinely exposed to violence probably do become violent people more often than average. It does not follow a priori that kids who are exposed to fantasy violence become real-world violent people more often than average.
>So what, apart from about 4 seconds of potential >amusement, makes this story newsworthy? I'd say that 4 seconds of potential amusement is sufficient. >I don't know anything about the ways of pollsters >& statistics gathering companies. Does that give >them the right to take the piss out of me? It does if you go around trying to sell information about them. Your customers might appreciate you getting your facts straight.
I saw King on the Today show this morning, and his idea seemed OK until he started spouting off about how "hackers" stole his last online work. Didn't anybody tell him that hackers built the internet that he wants to use to make money? His language was really insulting, and turned me off on reading the story, much less sending him money.
Why do we need such a language again? What is wrong with C and C++ that C# could possibly do anything about?
Can you explain please
What was stolen? It's not clear.
You have confused me.
I don't remember which issue, but Sail magazine did a piece on this sometime within the last year.
I got a free win2k cd with my new box. If you put it in the microwave for about 10 seconds, it makes a groovy coaster. ...By the way, I recommend you use somebody else's microwave.
I still read the local paper almost every day. I live in a small town, and the local paper is the best source of local news. There is one local television station, but they don't have the time to cover very much material. There are no local radio staions that provide satisfactory news coverage. Our local paper, however, does a pretty fine job of covering local issues. I'd say that our paper's future is pretty secure, at least for the near-to-midrange future.