They made millions from their Windows games and then later used a fraction of those millions to port to OSX. So that is a model that should be avoided?
Most software has to be sold directly, it's a fraction of software that can be sold along with the source. For most software the value is in the code, not in services or hardware sold with it.
Gimp supposedly has 2.5 people working on it. How many people do you think work on Photoshop? Face the facts, Stallman didn't get the economic side figured out. He just declared open source to be a right and in response to difficult economic questions he merely reiterates the rights he has declared.
remember the $150 usb hacks? It had nothing to do with OtherOS and in fact crackers had been unsuccessfully trying to break out of the hypervisor through Linux.
Depends on the laws that dictate just what you can do with those things.
You cannot do as you please with those things. There are endless restrictions on how you can modify houses, businesses and property. Cars cannot be modified endlessly either. Catalytic converter modifications for example must be done by a shop and have to meet regulations.
Why not expect the minority of paying pc customers to pony up for an xbox if they really want to play it? I bet at least half of paying pc gamers have a ps3 or 360.
Slashdot Mirror
Would you rather I have said stuck on the desktop? Or is 1% the goal?
They made millions from their Windows games and then later used a fraction of those millions to port to OSX. So that is a model that should be avoided?
It's time to question the unstable abi and corresponding GPL religion. Linux is stuck in a rut.
He just drapes his open source goals in "freedom" rhetoric to make it sound more important.
Freedom as described in Richard Stallman's political dictionary for his followers.
Most software has to be sold directly, it's a fraction of software that can be sold along with the source. For most software the value is in the code, not in services or hardware sold with it.
The model doesn't work for most software since most software doesn't require support and is not sold in a package with hardware.
Gimp supposedly has 2.5 people working on it. How many people do you think work on Photoshop? Face the facts, Stallman didn't get the economic side figured out. He just declared open source to be a right and in response to difficult economic questions he merely reiterates the rights he has declared.
There is no problem with Stallman's free software religion.
The real problem is that money can be used to purchase working software. All we have to do is get rid of money and we will have a utopia.
Sold to them by who? And it doesn't use the hypervisor.
Google doesn't open source the core components of their business. His comment was coherent and correct.
What about 90% piracy rates of indy games? Are those good guys too?
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2008/11/acrying-shame-world-of-goo-piracy-rate-near-90.ars
remember the $150 usb hacks? It had nothing to do with OtherOS and in fact crackers had been unsuccessfully trying to break out of the hypervisor through Linux.
It's the day that you celebrate the past Year of the Desktop Linux.
December 20th
Why couldn't WinArm run Gimp, GNUCash and OpenOffice?
The lack of a stable ABI keeps Linux as a geek toy on the desktop.
so not really a fair comparison.
Try burning the bill and getting money from the government then. Burn one hundred pounds and then demand the value in gold.
Depends on the laws that dictate just what you can do with those things.
You cannot do as you please with those things. There are endless restrictions on how you can modify houses, businesses and property. Cars cannot be modified endlessly either. Catalytic converter modifications for example must be done by a shop and have to meet regulations.
Well according to your law no one owns businesses, property, houses, cars or money.
But given how much multiplats are pirated by pc gamers I'd say a few million at least will be upset.
So I don't own my console because I haven't modded it to play pirated games? That's a strange definition of ownership.
I actually like supporting game developers, too bad the majority of pc gamers don't feel the same way.
Why not expect the minority of paying pc customers to pony up for an xbox if they really want to play it? I bet at least half of paying pc gamers have a ps3 or 360.
Given how badly the pc version of Black Ops was pirated I don't see much of a future for pc games with single player campaigns.
http://warfaceaps.wordpress.com/2010/12/03/call-of-duty-black-ops-breaks-even-the-illegal-download-record/