Ok, I've not read the article (too tired to understand it probably anyway), but I have read a lot of the comments above.
The author is not advocating all software should be given away - he's saying that when software is sold, the package should include source code as well as binary.
As a counter-example to the parent, I would like to present vBulletin. The only (real) way of distributing PHP scripts is to distribute the source. vBulletin sells the source code, and this money pays for ongoing development and support costs. Customers can modify the code, but it is not supported if they do that.
And since people pay up front for the (unlimited) support as part of the whole package, it is a good reason for us to write quality software - to keep support costs down.
So yes, the method of software distribution advocated by the author of the article can and does work and there is money in it.
AOL is about to switch to a Mozilla based client in their next version of their software, so that is huge numbers of people switching from IE to Mozilla. I am a staunch IE supporter, mainly because of bad tables, Javascript and CSS run-ins with Netscape in the past, and never being able to get over our differences. If Netscape/Mozilla has CSS/JS support on par with IE, I would be happy, but when designing a website, Mozilla is just a right pain. So although many people seem to be running IE, things may start to head back the other way with the advent of the next AOL.
Our host, Verio has several large blocks of IP addresses, and they allocate a few within that range to each customer. Say we are on 111.222.111.222 and a spammer decides to start sending spam from 111.222.111.1 , then in several cases I have seen the whole IP block 111.222.111.* being added to a blocking list. This practice is ridiculous. We get no notification, and because we send out a lot of automated emails (receipts, password requests), we never get to see the bounce until we investigate manually.
We have never been an open relay, never will be and yet we still get listed, and on lists that it is practically impossible to get off. This has provided us with several very annoyed customers, telling us that they have purchased, but that they have not received notification or login details.
Sounds to me like you are describing the iMac. While I'm not familiar with it's design or expandability (does that word exist?), I know that it all comes in one box to sit on the desk.
I am not sure of how useful this would be for all windows, but Textpad has had this functionality for a while now.
When using one of the search(&replace) tools, when the dialog box loses focus, the box becomes partially transparent, so that you can read the text behind it. Then when focus returns to the dialog box, it becomes opaque again. This is pretty useful, as previously I would end up dragging the box around the screen trying to find the text hiding under it.
What I see here is a guy asking a simple question about licensing issues and a thoroughly unhelpful set of answers getting thrown back in his face. Mr Stallman seems totally incapable of actually answering what appears to me a simple question, but instead feels obligated to 'convert' Mr Tyberghein to his Free Software way of thinking. Is the Free Software Movement some sort of religion/cult?
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, I've not read the article (too tired to understand it probably anyway), but I have read a lot of the comments above.
The author is not advocating all software should be given away - he's saying that when software is sold, the package should include source code as well as binary.
As a counter-example to the parent, I would like to present vBulletin. The only (real) way of distributing PHP scripts is to distribute the source. vBulletin sells the source code, and this money pays for ongoing development and support costs. Customers can modify the code, but it is not supported if they do that.
And since people pay up front for the (unlimited) support as part of the whole package, it is a good reason for us to write quality software - to keep support costs down.
So yes, the method of software distribution advocated by the author of the article can and does work and there is money in it.
I'll second that too. I just installed spambayes painlessly and it works great!
Microsoft said it plans to disclose 385 bits of computer code and internal operating rules
;-)
That would be approximately 48 bytes . . . is this really front page news?
I tend to write XHTML-compliant code, and Netscape baulks over that many more times than IE.
But that was not the point of my post: my point was that AOL was switching, which would bring lots more Mozilla users potentially.
AOL is about to switch to a Mozilla based client in their next version of their software, so that is huge numbers of people switching from IE to Mozilla. I am a staunch IE supporter, mainly because of bad tables, Javascript and CSS run-ins with Netscape in the past, and never being able to get over our differences. If Netscape/Mozilla has CSS/JS support on par with IE, I would be happy, but when designing a website, Mozilla is just a right pain. So although many people seem to be running IE, things may start to head back the other way with the advent of the next AOL.
Our host, Verio has several large blocks of IP addresses, and they allocate a few within that range to each customer. Say we are on 111.222.111.222 and a spammer decides to start sending spam from 111.222.111.1 , then in several cases I have seen the whole IP block 111.222.111.* being added to a blocking list. This practice is ridiculous. We get no notification, and because we send out a lot of automated emails (receipts, password requests), we never get to see the bounce until we investigate manually.
:)
We have never been an open relay, never will be and yet we still get listed, and on lists that it is practically impossible to get off. This has provided us with several very annoyed customers, telling us that they have purchased, but that they have not received notification or login details.
</rant>
So I don't like spam blacklists
John
Sounds to me like you are describing the iMac. While I'm not familiar with it's design or expandability (does that word exist?), I know that it all comes in one box to sit on the desk.
John
I am not sure of how useful this would be for all windows, but Textpad has had this functionality for a while now.
When using one of the search(&replace) tools, when the dialog box loses focus, the box becomes partially transparent, so that you can read the text behind it. Then when focus returns to the dialog box, it becomes opaque again. This is pretty useful, as previously I would end up dragging the box around the screen trying to find the text hiding under it.
John
Just my tuppence worth!