You have a good point there, but I must add the following consequences.
If a software product cannot be limited in its freedom by nature and only by law, then the value of the software to its developer can only be determined by the amount of work he put into it.
Let me clarify this. In your opinion, I'm writing Free software as higly paid freelance software developer, because I'm ceasing all rights to it. I'm paid by the hour, and what I write is not mine anymore. But my client is going to divide this cost over all the customers he's going to sell it to. They're all licensing just a little piece of it, not the entire product that I've developed, or that I've helped in developing.
If Microsoft were to apply this strategy, then they'd sell you a copy of Microsoft Word at the price that they paid for it during development, and a little bit more to keep the stock holders happy. However, they would only be able to sell you one copy, since then you can distribute it to everyone else in the world.
In other words, if software was not licenseable (as in EULA) then we'd all pay a lot more for USING someone else's work.
You have given me a clear view of the difference between Free and free, but the rest of the world is happily going to apply whatever suits them. In fact, Free software is only popular because it's free, not because it's Free.
I'd like to stress this point, because Free software benefits the developers, and free software benefits the users. Ok, Free software also benefits the users, but only if there's enough volunteers willing to do work on something that will only return them a bit of credit, a bit of wisdom or a bit of celebrity in the Open Source community.
I bet that only 1% of this world's population really knows what Free software is all about, and the rest just buys a copy of Red Hat and assumes everything is free.
Hey I've been bugged by this auto-update notifier for long enough to install it myself even though i'm just running a non-public server for development. So there's really *no* excuse.
Yeah well but, what is Java then, if not just a programming language?
Java promised us platform independence. If we have a new version of a JVM every half year, then how much do we control the user platform? We don't, which is what Java is made for: target as many platforms as possible.
There are still some notorious problems with solid state memory.
1- It's expensive, and the price per MB difference must be like x500.
2- Solid State memory is essentially Flash memory, and is not that easy to manufacture and has a very limited lifecycle (about 1000 writes or something.) EEPROM has a longer lifecycle, but is vastly more expensive.
Some say solid state is catching up, but I find it hard to call 256MB of Flash at the same price of an 80gig harddrive "catching up".
Solid state has its uses, but it won't replace hard drives anytime soon.
I don't think this is a fair discussion. Craig has to defend his company's position, and that's to make money, while all the other panel members have something to benefit from the growth of Linux and other free OSes.
Also, I don't think it's fair it's just Craig Mundie against the rest of the world. If this is really a debate about the benefits of Open Source vs Corporate software, why is everything biased towards attacking Microsoft? There's more than operating systems, you know.
I don't see anyone objecting to Oracle for not opening the source to their RDBMS and tools. And I don't see anyone attacking their license policies either.
Call me a troll, but I call this lots of blah blah about nothing but a peculiar detail in the GPL that is being dragged out so much that the world is thinking Microsoft is in trouble again.
The only way for some artists to actually sell some CDs is by shooting themselves in the head. Do we then still have to pay for the CDs or do you think that music belongs to "history" and everyone then?
I'm still thinking about the consequences. A few years ago every idiot i ran into tried to convince me of disabling Cookies while I still think it's a great idea.
Now I find myself left wondering wether it's ok for one website to transmit this sort of information to another website. I'm even wondering why they try to sneek it into the client like this instead of just sending each other grepped weblogs.
I think the price tag on fuel has something to do with this. Oil prices have been high ever since the oil crisises in the '70s and '80s, and I think that in Europe a lot of folks started to choose diesel has a cheap alternative. Granted, the engine is more expensive, but in those days the fuel was so much more cheaper. These days, the diesel is a bit more expensive, but engine performance has gone up quite well.
Slashdot Mirror
Silly.
A string of 1 1's is located at position 1.
Let's get ourselves a new kernel update!
You have a good point there, but I must add the following consequences.
If a software product cannot be limited in its freedom by nature and only by law, then the value of the software to its developer can only be determined by the amount of work he put into it.
Let me clarify this. In your opinion, I'm writing Free software as higly paid freelance software developer, because I'm ceasing all rights to it. I'm paid by the hour, and what I write is not mine anymore. But my client is going to divide this cost over all the customers he's going to sell it to. They're all licensing just a little piece of it, not the entire product that I've developed, or that I've helped in developing.
If Microsoft were to apply this strategy, then they'd sell you a copy of Microsoft Word at the price that they paid for it during development, and a little bit more to keep the stock holders happy. However, they would only be able to sell you one copy, since then you can distribute it to everyone else in the world.
In other words, if software was not licenseable (as in EULA) then we'd all pay a lot more for USING someone else's work.
You have given me a clear view of the difference between Free and free, but the rest of the world is happily going to apply whatever suits them. In fact, Free software is only popular because it's free, not because it's Free.
I'd like to stress this point, because Free software benefits the developers, and free software benefits the users. Ok, Free software also benefits the users, but only if there's enough volunteers willing to do work on something that will only return them a bit of credit, a bit of wisdom or a bit of celebrity in the Open Source community.
I bet that only 1% of this world's population really knows what Free software is all about, and the rest just buys a copy of Red Hat and assumes everything is free.
Dave
He painted ceilings and walls! And not like Michelangelo either..
Perhaps the board of Eidos had their head stuck between Lara's ...polygons.
They want you to use their operating system.
It's understandable. Sun wants you to use their hardware. They're businesses and require some green for their work.
Hey I wasn't saying everything should be an ISO standard.
I was referring to that attempt to make Java an ISO standard, after which the ISO committee dropped it because Sun didn't want to give it up.
Hey I've been bugged by this auto-update notifier for long enough to install it myself even though i'm just running a non-public server for development. So there's really *no* excuse.
net admins are just lazy.
or overworked.
Dave
I'll bring the spam.
Oh, as if Java isn't proprietary. I'm not seeing any ISOfication coming soon.. Dave
Yeah well but, what is Java then, if not just a programming language?
Java promised us platform independence. If we have a new version of a JVM every half year, then how much do we control the user platform? We don't, which is what Java is made for: target as many platforms as possible.
Dave
Everyone who's been a kid knows this is from Mary Poppins!
You're right. I can almost hear the hard drive by only reading about it.
Or is that cuz of Windows' swapping policies?
There are still some notorious problems with solid state memory.
1- It's expensive, and the price per MB difference must be like x500.
2- Solid State memory is essentially Flash memory, and is not that easy to manufacture and has a very limited lifecycle (about 1000 writes or something.) EEPROM has a longer lifecycle, but is vastly more expensive.
Some say solid state is catching up, but I find it hard to call 256MB of Flash at the same price of an 80gig harddrive "catching up".
Solid state has its uses, but it won't replace hard drives anytime soon.
Didya forget to log in, or are you just 'fraid of the microsoft bashers?
I don't think this is a fair discussion. Craig has to defend his company's position, and that's to make money, while all the other panel members have something to benefit from the growth of Linux and other free OSes.
Also, I don't think it's fair it's just Craig Mundie against the rest of the world. If this is really a debate about the benefits of Open Source vs Corporate software, why is everything biased towards attacking Microsoft? There's more than operating systems, you know.
I don't see anyone objecting to Oracle for not opening the source to their RDBMS and tools. And I don't see anyone attacking their license policies either.
Call me a troll, but I call this lots of blah blah about nothing but a peculiar detail in the GPL that is being dragged out so much that the world is thinking Microsoft is in trouble again.
from the article:
"The bottom line is: we are creating great customer value,"I hate it when they say that. It'll probably mean we can all dive into our pockets again.
The only way for some artists to actually sell some CDs is by shooting themselves in the head. Do we then still have to pay for the CDs or do you think that music belongs to "history" and everyone then?
If you don't think he's funny then you just don't get him.
Neither do I, BTW.
Windows was never about portability in the first place.
Stick to the priorities.
I'm still thinking about the consequences. A few years ago every idiot i ran into tried to convince me of disabling Cookies while I still think it's a great idea.
Now I find myself left wondering wether it's ok for one website to transmit this sort of information to another website. I'm even wondering why they try to sneek it into the client like this instead of just sending each other grepped weblogs.
What's useful about this?
And what are the privacy implications?
>So does this mean all the folks who claimed they were going to go out to buy a copy should now burn/sledgehammer their CD?
Isn't that what all the rich geeks do these days?
I think the price tag on fuel has something to do with this. Oil prices have been high ever since the oil crisises in the '70s and '80s, and I think that in Europe a lot of folks started to choose diesel has a cheap alternative. Granted, the engine is more expensive, but in those days the fuel was so much more cheaper. These days, the diesel is a bit more expensive, but engine performance has gone up quite well.
Dave
I don't believe anything with moving parts is maintenance free. And I don't trust any flying wheel with an operating system.
Operating systems crash. Well, some of them, at least.
Dave
get with the program, man!