The problem with public domain is that the concept is not available all over the world, which can make it a bit cumbersume. Just look at the procedure for contributing to SQLite.
The IT department where I work migrated the security system for our buildings to XP... last year! I don't expect them to switch to something newer any time soon.:-\
Good to see that they are still doing it. But they still have to go through the certification process with every new version and/or architecture. Just pointing at 10.5/x86 says absolutely nothing about further versions.
Which is sort of the same issue but inside-out. It's not called OS X Mach, for the same reason that ChromeOS is not called ChromeOS Linux or Ubuntu isn't Ubuntu Linux.
The kernel is not a very exciting thing. It's exciting for some people, but not that many.
GNOME 3 is probably going to be great one day, but the problem is that some of us has to deploy new systems now. If you install Debian 7.0 you will get GNOME 3.4, if you install Ubuntu 12.04 you will get GNOME 3.2 and so on. It doesn't matter that GNOME 3.10 will be great, when the version we get is ready as a replacement for GNOME 2. This is a serious problem for organizations which have been able to deploy Linux desktops in large part due to the effort of the GNOME community, and especially GNOME 2. Until GNOME 3 is ready for mass adoption we have to offer GNOME 2 as well. There's many ways to do that, but none of them are great.
Most software I've seen at that type of scale that is written in C usually invents their own object-like system, so if you're going to use something like that anyway then why not use something standardized?
It's worth pointing out that GCC has been under GPLv3 since version 4.2.2 back in 2007. If it's a problem for anyone then it has been a problem for over five years now.
It's the compiler that usually ships with distributions, but it's far from being the only compiler used on Linux. Many companies uses for example the Intel or PathScale compiler suites. Both commercial, although PathScale actually went open source a couple of years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
That depends on your definition of free. Some consider GPL to be a very restrictive and/or unethical license.
The problem with public domain is that the concept is not available all over the world, which can make it a bit cumbersume. Just look at the procedure for contributing to SQLite.
The web world evolves. That's a good thing.
The IT department where I work migrated the security system for our buildings to XP... last year! I don't expect them to switch to something newer any time soon. :-\
Good to see that they are still doing it. But they still have to go through the certification process with every new version and/or architecture. Just pointing at 10.5/x86 says absolutely nothing about further versions.
NT was far more than just a kernel.
They had to say that 2000 was based on NT, so that people would otherwise confuse it as based on Win98. 95, 98, 2000; there must be a pattern.
A good example of Microsoft's weird naming strategy in the late 90's.
Which is sort of the same issue but inside-out. It's not called OS X Mach, for the same reason that ChromeOS is not called ChromeOS Linux or Ubuntu isn't Ubuntu Linux.
The kernel is not a very exciting thing.
It's exciting for some people, but not that many.
That's for 10.5 only. The certification does not cover succeeding versions.
Well, don't bring it with you if it's not allowed.
Linux has the same confusion. Ubuntu to Android, all labeled as Linux.
GNOME 3 is probably going to be great one day, but the problem is that some of us has to deploy new systems now. If you install Debian 7.0 you will get GNOME 3.4, if you install Ubuntu 12.04 you will get GNOME 3.2 and so on. It doesn't matter that GNOME 3.10 will be great, when the version we get is ready as a replacement for GNOME 2. This is a serious problem for organizations which have been able to deploy Linux desktops in large part due to the effort of the GNOME community, and especially GNOME 2. Until GNOME 3 is ready for mass adoption we have to offer GNOME 2 as well. There's many ways to do that, but none of them are great.
Maybe you want something that uses less power. Speed is not the only factor.
So you're only doing FOSS if you're the originator of a project?
Mutt for command line, Mulberry for GUI.
ZFS runs great on FreeBSD as well.
I still use fvwm and it still has a great pager. :-)
Probably won't happen since Wheezy has been in the fridge for almost nine months now.
I think the idea was that minimize buttons were not logical and intuitive, and thus had to be removed.
WebKit is open source and developed by Apple.
Put at least Stallman, ESR and Torvalds on that plane.
Sounds like a big opportunity for Linux and FVWM95!
CentOS is great if you want something that just works.
Most software I've seen at that type of scale that is written in C usually invents their own object-like system, so if you're going to use something like that anyway then why not use something standardized?
It's worth pointing out that GCC has been under GPLv3 since version 4.2.2 back in 2007. If it's a problem for anyone then it has been a problem for over five years now.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-announce/2007/msg00004.html
It's the compiler that usually ships with distributions, but it's far from being the only compiler used on Linux. Many companies uses for example the Intel or PathScale compiler suites. Both commercial, although PathScale actually went open source a couple of years ago.