Let's just wait until he has 100 million customers (98% of which will be totally clueless if the Windows user base is any indication) and we'll see if it's such a good idea.
However, if the situation ever changes and they start to have disappointing quarterly earnings reports, then you can expect to see them trying new methods to keep the revenue flowing.
The general confusion comes from ESR's text, The Cathedral and the Bazaar.
No, trust me. It doesn't.
Free software is nothing new or surprising for a catholic. You have a short life here on earth and you must do your best to contribute to god's creation.
That's a... nice way to see it. I don't know that it makes me feel any better.
If you'd like to show us an example of Microsoft using patents this way *against* other companies, I'm all ears (or eyes).
Much like IBM, Microsoft's patent portfolio is supposed to be defensive in nature. Again, if you have proof to the contrary I'd like to see it.
OTOH, if these people's claims are truthful and this is another STAC case, then Microsoft should definitely be shafted, as I would expect anyone else to be.
Not France? Surely you don't mean France, as in Europe? Unpossible!
I mean, not France! Not ze warmongering imperialistic decadent amerikans with ze dumb govermnet and evil degradation of liberties we thumb our collective noses at you! France!!??
That's nice, but you're conveniently ignoring what brought on McVoy's actions. The product was being made available under a specific license, which was then violated by someone who is well-known for thinking that all non-free software is "evil".
McVoy went ahead and trusted the community while asking for some trust in return. He got neither trust nor respect.
I don't believe that McVoy was out to screw people under some convoluted plot. You can point to this and scream to the top of your lungs that commercial software is evil and see what happens when you trust bad people? But you cannot ignore the fact that there was a sort of informal "status quo" that was breached by one of you because of that "OMFG we absolutely cannot have this commercial shit" attitude.
McVoy worked his ass off to give Linus a good tool and get some good PR in return - that would help him sell more commercial copies of the product. This is and example of the feedback cycle that you folks espouse as the way to make money with stuff that's supposed to be free. But the tragedy of the commons caught up with you. Too bad.
Whether it was a good idea to use this license from the begginning is debatable in light of what has happened, of course. Now everyone knows what doesn't work when trying to work with people who must have everything for free.
If we were talking about religions, closed source is Chrisianity, with missionaries, and wars and such.
Your analogy is terrible, but alas, I've always considered open source to be more like the catholic church than anything else.
You have a pope, prophets, apostles, cardinals, bishops and priests. Then you have a flock of sheep. Unflinching ideology based on tenuous principles. Inability to compromise or accept criticism. Absolutism. All wrapped in a "join us or die" extremist mantra.
Whenever I see these stories about Debian I remember that skit on Ice Age that features a bunch of dodos chanting "survival of the dodos is the most important thing!!" "we will survive!!" while hoarding three watermelons for the upcoming 2,000 year glacier funfest.
"Oops, there goes our last female".
Debian needs to get with the program and work with Ubuntu. Otherwise... well, we all know what happened to the dodos. It would take a lot of work to replace the Debian infrastructure, but it's not impossible to do.
Your initial assertion was that "anyone" that disagrees with "me" is a zealot. I missed the part where I sadi that. Go read my post again. I was theorizing that the "zealots" who are now cheering and offering their "told you so" blabber will spin this as yet more "proof" that any type of commercial software is "evil".
I was hardly the one to pioneer this concept, BTW. According to Richard Stallman, I am immoral and should find another job. Perhaps things like these are where the term "zealot" applies. There's also an interesting definition over at Wikipedia, if you need further information.
It's a little disingenious to demonize McVoy (as he has and will be forever, now) because he was trying his best to develop a useful product while keeping just enough IP closed to make a (limited) buck.
I'm not going to make a judgement as to whether or not the approach was sound because I still don't see how someone is supposed to make money off software that's supposed to be given away. He squeezed the kernel PR as much as he was able to, so good for him. Torvalds got a good tool that enabled him to manage development for a while. It was a win-win situation, at least for a while.
Unfortunately the zealots will point to this and gargle the "U S33!!1!! THE SOFTWAREZ iT W^S NOT TEH FREE!!!!1!! HAHAHAH!!!!" and send McVoy and his company down the same creek as SCO, Microsoft and anyone else they think is evil.
I think McVoy's approach was flawed, but I don't think he was trying to screw anyone. It was a good experiment on what does not work with open source though.
40 -- still more extra than I'm willing to pay for something I won't use
I understand that, but computer manufacturers don't cater to you. They cater to people who want their computers to work out of the box.
What is your source for knowing this cost?
Fairly common knowledge if you've ever talked to an OEM or Microsoft.
didn't know how much.... figured at 50%, PRO would be around $100
This is a *massive* volume discount, not a "buy 9000 get the 10000th free!" deal.
shouldn't have to pay if I'm not going to use it
I don't contest that, and unfortunately in the case of laptops you still don't have a choice.
Is this REALLY an unreasonable expectation?
My comment was really aimed at your mistaken assumption that because some guy at a retailer wanted (stupidly) to charge you $100 for removing Windows then that must be the cost of the OS. That's not the case.
Of course people like you conveniently ignore the fact that PC manufacturers operate tight ships with razor-thin margins aimed at the retail consumer market. The "options" that you get when you buy a computer have already been integrated into their assembly/config process and a cost and supply/inventory solution factored for each one.
Even asking them *not* to do something is disruptive to their business chain. That's why they don't do it. It's not like they don't want the extra business, small as it might be. It would simply cost them more to cater to you.
$200? ROFL. You think Dell would be selling $450 computers if that was the case? Please don't be stupid. A single XP Pro OEM license goes for about $40 or so - a bit less if you are Dell/IBM/Gateway/HP.
Google has been doing something like this for a while, with their "web definitions" entries. When you ask What is a monitor? for example, you get display consisting of a device that takes signals from a computer and displays them on a CRT screen and a link to the definition in context.
I don't know that "factual" is a good term for a lot of the stuff on Wikipedia, especially "contested" articles that tend to go through revert wars and lots of vandalism.
It's interesting that when Peter Torr brought up the issue of Mozilla not signing their packages he was massively flamed by all the retard fanboys, who of course got wind of his "criticism" from the ever-helpful Slashbork.
Shortly thereafter, Mozilla mysteriously started signing their packages.
I wonder who would have gottern flamed if someone had trojaned a few million Firefox users using this method. Ah well, we all know open source is perfect, so this type of speculation is pointless.
If it's being used for this then I guess I can finally take the plunge and get it off my machine completely. I guess I'll be missing all that "cool" stuff on "teh interweb" but I'm sure I'll survive.
A tweaked XP install with unnecessary services turned off and no eye candy is faster than 2000, in my experience. Disk I/O is faster, applications load faster, there is less swapping and if you turn off QoSvc networking is also faster.
On the same hardware. A PIII/700 384MB RAM, a single PIII/1GHz with 512MB RAM and a dual PIII/1GHz (Abit mobo) with 1GB of RAM.
Yes, "Micro$oft" Windows XP runs faster on most hardware than Windows 2000 did. In most cases. On my two PIII/700 boxes, at least.
Server 2003 runs faster than Server 2000 in some configurations, especially if you have SCSI on the box instead of IDE.
Perhaps your experience is due to the fact that previous versions of OS X were so terribly slow. Certainly didn't impress me the first time I saw a Powerbook with 512MB of RAM.
Those are my thoughts on your witty "Micro$oft" comment. You're welcome.
Only in some states like Florida, I think. In others they can still repo your house and auction it.
I was hearing something on the OJ Simpson trial the other day which was being rehashed now that the lawyer died. AFAICT OJ "Magic Gloves" Simpson moved to Florida after the $30M civil suit he lost to avoid having his NFL pension garnished to pay for the judgement, and I think that Florida law also forbids your "primary residence" from being r00ted.
Slashdot Mirror
Let's just wait until he has 100 million customers (98% of which will be totally clueless if the Windows user base is any indication) and we'll see if it's such a good idea.
I was looking for the "take me to your leader" line towards the end of your post and I couldn't find it. Phew!
1997 called. He wants his argument back.
No, trust me. It doesn't.
Free software is nothing new or surprising for a catholic. You have a short life here on earth and you must do your best to contribute to god's creation.
That's a... nice way to see it. I don't know that it makes me feel any better.
If you'd like to show us an example of Microsoft using patents this way *against* other companies, I'm all ears (or eyes).
Much like IBM, Microsoft's patent portfolio is supposed to be defensive in nature. Again, if you have proof to the contrary I'd like to see it.
OTOH, if these people's claims are truthful and this is another STAC case, then Microsoft should definitely be shafted, as I would expect anyone else to be.
I mean, not France! Not ze warmongering imperialistic decadent amerikans with ze dumb govermnet and evil degradation of liberties we thumb our collective noses at you! France!!??
That cannot be. I'm shocked.
McVoy went ahead and trusted the community while asking for some trust in return. He got neither trust nor respect.
I don't believe that McVoy was out to screw people under some convoluted plot. You can point to this and scream to the top of your lungs that commercial software is evil and see what happens when you trust bad people? But you cannot ignore the fact that there was a sort of informal "status quo" that was breached by one of you because of that "OMFG we absolutely cannot have this commercial shit" attitude.
McVoy worked his ass off to give Linus a good tool and get some good PR in return - that would help him sell more commercial copies of the product. This is and example of the feedback cycle that you folks espouse as the way to make money with stuff that's supposed to be free. But the tragedy of the commons caught up with you. Too bad.
Whether it was a good idea to use this license from the begginning is debatable in light of what has happened, of course. Now everyone knows what doesn't work when trying to work with people who must have everything for free.
Your analogy is terrible, but alas, I've always considered open source to be more like the catholic church than anything else.
You have a pope, prophets, apostles, cardinals, bishops and priests. Then you have a flock of sheep. Unflinching ideology based on tenuous principles. Inability to compromise or accept criticism. Absolutism. All wrapped in a "join us or die" extremist mantra.
But maybe that's just me.
Fair and balanced as always!
"Oops, there goes our last female".
Debian needs to get with the program and work with Ubuntu. Otherwise... well, we all know what happened to the dodos. It would take a lot of work to replace the Debian infrastructure, but it's not impossible to do.
Your initial assertion was that "anyone" that disagrees with "me" is a zealot. I missed the part where I sadi that. Go read my post again. I was theorizing that the "zealots" who are now cheering and offering their "told you so" blabber will spin this as yet more "proof" that any type of commercial software is "evil".
I was hardly the one to pioneer this concept, BTW. According to Richard Stallman, I am immoral and should find another job. Perhaps things like these are where the term "zealot" applies. There's also an interesting definition over at Wikipedia, if you need further information.
I guess I'm just being a "The Bungi" Zealot
Take a number and get in line.
-- - It's not the Macs I hate. It's the Mac users. -
I see.
I'm not going to make a judgement as to whether or not the approach was sound because I still don't see how someone is supposed to make money off software that's supposed to be given away. He squeezed the kernel PR as much as he was able to, so good for him. Torvalds got a good tool that enabled him to manage development for a while. It was a win-win situation, at least for a while.
Unfortunately the zealots will point to this and gargle the "U S33!!1!! THE SOFTWAREZ iT W^S NOT TEH FREE!!!!1!! HAHAHAH!!!!" and send McVoy and his company down the same creek as SCO, Microsoft and anyone else they think is evil.
I think McVoy's approach was flawed, but I don't think he was trying to screw anyone. It was a good experiment on what does not work with open source though.
You're absolutely right! I cannot fathom why you're not getting the same prices as Michael Dell. It's just not fair!
Ridiculous punk.
I understand that, but computer manufacturers don't cater to you. They cater to people who want their computers to work out of the box.
What is your source for knowing this cost?
Fairly common knowledge if you've ever talked to an OEM or Microsoft.
didn't know how much.... figured at 50%, PRO would be around $100
This is a *massive* volume discount, not a "buy 9000 get the 10000th free!" deal.
shouldn't have to pay if I'm not going to use it
I don't contest that, and unfortunately in the case of laptops you still don't have a choice.
Is this REALLY an unreasonable expectation?
My comment was really aimed at your mistaken assumption that because some guy at a retailer wanted (stupidly) to charge you $100 for removing Windows then that must be the cost of the OS. That's not the case.
Of course people like you conveniently ignore the fact that PC manufacturers operate tight ships with razor-thin margins aimed at the retail consumer market. The "options" that you get when you buy a computer have already been integrated into their assembly/config process and a cost and supply/inventory solution factored for each one.
Even asking them *not* to do something is disruptive to their business chain. That's why they don't do it. It's not like they don't want the extra business, small as it might be. It would simply cost them more to cater to you.
Hope that helps.
I don't know that "factual" is a good term for a lot of the stuff on Wikipedia, especially "contested" articles that tend to go through revert wars and lots of vandalism.
Shortly thereafter, Mozilla mysteriously started signing their packages.
I wonder who would have gottern flamed if someone had trojaned a few million Firefox users using this method. Ah well, we all know open source is perfect, so this type of speculation is pointless.
Or maybe they all died from some sort of transmitted disease. We can only hope.
I get enough of this avant garde techno "green is the new black" cyber bullshit from people who fellate their iPods in public, thankyouverymuch.
No, I'm having a great day. Really.
Unfortunately a lot of people tend to abuse it, like any other technology out there. Flash is just more "in your face" than most other things.
If it's being used for this then I guess I can finally take the plunge and get it off my machine completely. I guess I'll be missing all that "cool" stuff on "teh interweb" but I'm sure I'll survive.
I bet Macromedia is thinking the same thing.
On the same hardware. A PIII/700 384MB RAM, a single PIII/1GHz with 512MB RAM and a dual PIII/1GHz (Abit mobo) with 1GB of RAM.
Hope that helps.
ROFL. Let me guess, they didn't change the calculator, so it must be the same, right?
Uncanny.
Server 2003 runs faster than Server 2000 in some configurations, especially if you have SCSI on the box instead of IDE.
Perhaps your experience is due to the fact that previous versions of OS X were so terribly slow. Certainly didn't impress me the first time I saw a Powerbook with 512MB of RAM.
Those are my thoughts on your witty "Micro$oft" comment. You're welcome.
Only in some states like Florida, I think. In others they can still repo your house and auction it.
I was hearing something on the OJ Simpson trial the other day which was being rehashed now that the lawyer died. AFAICT OJ "Magic Gloves" Simpson moved to Florida after the $30M civil suit he lost to avoid having his NFL pension garnished to pay for the judgement, and I think that Florida law also forbids your "primary residence" from being r00ted.
I might be wrong though.