----- Original Message -----
From: "Phill Hugo"
To: "John Gildred"
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 10:05 AM
Subject: Software Licensing
> What do you require of the software to sign it? Binary only or source
> also?
>
> Phill
John Gildred wrote:
Binary only.
John T. Gildred
CEO, Indrema
Entertainment Systems
www.indrema.com
--
Hello John,
Thankyou for your prompt reply, however I am curious as to how this will stop people adding program loaders into their games and using them to bypass the install/load process completely. This happened a number of times with the Atari Jaguar even though Atari licensed machines able to run unsigned code to devlopers. If what I know of Indrema is correct (that there will be no development variant save for a normal PC and SDK) how is it possible to run code on the Indrema to test it without reverting to such back door and further, surely you have to agree that the temptation to sneak such a process in will be quite high.
I'm sure I'm not alone in finding the whole "restricted access" to a platform slightly in the face of what Open Source is about, perhaps to the point of it being potentially insulting.
I am not looking for a long drawn out arguement on the merits of your approach but would like to hear your views of the more technical points above and also whether Indrema may consider adopting a different approach to licensing for the platform.
One immediate idea that comes to mind is the utilisation of a 30 second or so pause with an explanation that the program being run is unlicensed; or perhaps offering open use as long as your proprietary libraries are unused.
Don't buy these hyped up toasters. Wait for games at the least. Two people in this office got one and why? By their accounts "because of DVD". Well great, a region 2 crappy DVD player with 2 goodish games that Dreamcast still ecplipses. Wait 6 months, pay 99ukp and have good games. In the mean time use DeCSS to watch their output if you must or just stick to learning iptables. "Yeah, like ipchains is soooo yesterday.. What? You use ipfwadm".
ZSQL Methods are completely independant of your actual database and you can change your external database with a couple of clicks (if you need an external one in the first place. Zope has a long running persistant object system of its own which keeps instances of things alive along with their data until you specifcally delete them - even between reboots!
The underlying Python DB access is specific to whatever database you use but in Zope Land it is wrappered around Zope DB drivers which the ZSQL Methods talk to. Similar to what the DB.php stuff in PHP4 does but with a more compelling reason to use it.
They also encourage code resuse as you can template your queries just like your HTML..
SELECT * FROM users
<dtml-if username>
WHERE user=<dtml-var username>
</dtml-if>
Then when you call them, their magic happens and out pops the results in a python list.
Made me wonder if they included Zope in this round up if Zope would have A or D for tools, its web interface being its own tool really.
Apache.org probably gets more than 20k-100k hits per day. Slashdot CERTAINLY does.
I've built 2 sites running Apache which eclipse 1M hits per day (one uses Zope behind it for the dynamic layer (with PCGI). That copes with 1.5M per day without coughing.
I'm very skeptical of the claim and would love to see some data.
Secondly, apache sites don't show ANY source code when you add "+.htr" to the URL.
Take your pick but let your manager make it HIS job on the line if its the wrong way to go!
The "Free but for a price you can have non Free" isn't quite on the money, don't you think. If it were 100% GPL and nothing else, that'd be another matter.
Not _JUST_ GPL. LGPL still prefered
on
Qt Going GPL
·
· Score: 1
People still stand in having to pay royalties to Troll to use Qt in a non GPL application. Not necessarily a bad thing. That comes later...
Gnome's libraries are mainly under the LGPL allowing royalty free use which is really why its been blessed so.
Its a risky, but perhaps rewarding move for Troll. On the bad side (from their view) the GPL base would permit a better, seperately maintained
variant with GPL code they cannot add to their commercial option - it wouldn't be all their code at that point.
On the good side from their view, it may mean more people use KDE/Qt. Thus developers wishing to support it end up paying Troll in the
process.
This isn't bad though. The problem (as I see it) is this....
Companies who wish to use Qt commercially can do so (at a price) without giving their improvements to Qt back. While GTK+ can be used without
royalty, its LGPL status means any improvments made that a non Free product uses must be distributed back out under LGPL or GPL. Nothing
else. No bribe accepted. (Yes, they may go elsewhere but the real issue here isn't about being popular, its about being Free. Ideally both, but not simply popular. Windows has that).
In the absense of an "only GPL" library suite in popular use (meaning GPL applications all round from everyone who uses it), the LGPL option
with no alternatives is better than the GPL with a (regardless of price) non Free alternative. At least we get the improvements.
Its a fair swap. More use of Qt to Troll's benefit for the option to merge Qt/Gtk under GPL. That would be the Free softy utopia but for not the GTK is still probably going to be prefered until an "only GPL" Qt vriant becomes widely used without a commercial option.
Back at University, we had a very hacked up Slackware distribution which did nothing special, expect on bootup where it would download and install any packages that sat on the upgrade server.
The same principle is absolutely essential for anything more than 100 or so machines (even if upgrades aren't a priority, bug fixes and security fixes will be).
In truth, I can't imagine any distribution would be better suited than any another here, especially if you are willing to write a boot up script which can download any new RPMs or DEBs and install them. The only problem is making sure they are not "interactively installed". Lots of Debian packages are but this is easily remedied. In fact, if you used Debian, adding apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade to your boot script and setting up your own packages repository (a simple FTP folder) would do that for you. You may need to tweak the odd package to force some settings but that's what your network of 5 machines reserved for testing are for right...
I'd also go with Sawfish/Sawmill instead of Window Maker. While I'm a huge fan of WM, I think sawfish has a much more desktop friendly future ahead. It can also look pretty identical to WM, and some of the other themes are very practical for desktop use. Its memory footprint on my machine is just under 4MB with half of that as shared libs which lots of other programs are using. Perhaps a choice at login would be useful, especially if offered with something pretty like GDM.
The major issue will probably be support, although that's more likely to be for specific applications than the whole system. I take it that to be entrusted to install 2500 desktops, you know your greps from your seds and are pretty capable of writing some scripts to manage upgrades. If not, find someone who is and pick their brains.
> First, there is a difference between free and open source software. You are talking about > free software. The problem here is that in the scientific and mathematical communities it is > not companies that are doing work but individuals, who cannot profit from their work.
This is wrong. Many scientific companies openly publish findings and many fund open research in Universities building themselves good names amongst graduates who may eventually join them.
> Companies are also into scientific research beacause they can make profit from patents.
Some are yes. Some are not and simply fund open research. The Human Genome project is a notable case of this funded by many companies who wish to openly share the findings.
> It is the same with software. Companies are in it because they can make a profit.
Some are. Many simply have tasks to solve.
> With this profit thousands of programmers feed their children.
Many many programers are paid for the job of solving a problem than of writing "Another Wordprocessor". Those are paid wether the software is Free or Closed. Programmers will never starve. They will simply not be reinventing wheel over again - instead their skills will be needed for specific tasks.
> Those same programmers maybe write free software in their free time. Now the problem is that non-software companies would use free software and make a profit of their own. Now why are you willing to help a large corporation by reducing their cost on software expenditure.
Nobody writes free software so companies spend less. They do it becuase they want to write the software. If others benefit (whoever that is) fair play. Why would I not write a peice of software I wanted just becuase someone I don't like MIGHT use it?
If a specific company wanted something specific for them written (such as a web application) then they will always have to employ someone to work for them since no one is likely to find the project worth doing for nothing simply for the fun of it.
> Besides, software is not a mathematical truth or a scientific discovery. It is more like a machine. All machines cost money.
Software is 100% mathematical. It is the epitome of Logic. Machines are PHYSICAL objects. If we could copy machines at no cost, then I think I'd find it fair play to "copy" a sports car and lots of petrol with it. We are already allowed to tweak our cars AND RESELL THEM. Why not software?
> Writing software involves a lot of creativity. Why don't artists give away their paintings for free? Because they have to eat maybe?
Being paid to work does not in many cases revolve around the closed source SELLING of the final product. In the case of software, most programmers are paid per contract or per hour to deliver working solutions. No amount of free software will stop those eating. In fact it makes them able to work faster and share problems.
> Imagine a large and sophisticated CAD package. Say 100 programmers spent a year developing it. Why should it be free?
Publicity, support contracts, "to beat others who will do it eventually". Lots of reasons. Matra just did that with a million dollar CAD system. When NASA or some other agency looks at their Free OS in 3 years and sees the extremely cool CAD sub system provided by X company, who do you think they'll want to work with when they need something extra developing.
For those of you who have digital cameras, I'm pretty sure that www.gphoto.org has become quite a useful site. We support more cameras than any other software on any platform (at least I've seen no others anywhere close) and considering the whole thing started relatively recently, I'd say that's quite an improvement.
The project is also actively involved in encouraging camera companies to play nicely and one or two have opened their specifications as a result. The most remarkable being Konica who not only did that but supplied a GPLd driver for us to extend to our hearts content.
As to whether we deserve that 30K. Well, probably not but if you really think we should then give it to the FSF/GNU instead since they'd do better things with it than spend it on beer.
I care little what religion people subscribe to when I use their software. Would you feel happy if your comments here were removed simply becuase you were [insert discriminatory reason]?
I am not a Microsoft apologist, nor do I think scientology anything other than complete junk but I do think it stupid to cheer on these sorts of things just becuase it suits one specific purpose. Should that purpose ever be joined by less popular ones (such as the Pope asking that Catholics don't use GNU becuase Stallman is atheist) I'm you'd get the point.
Choas in the street! [Country] has BANNED [Vendor's] [OS] distribution. Slashdot erupts with rasied voises calling for immediate revokation of the ruling and flames the entire nation.
[Spokesman] said "this is a direct attack on the freedom of the people to choose what they wish, we should fight this at all costs".
When [OS] contains GNU/Linux, this would be the story. The Spokeman would no doubt be Eric, Bruce or Richard and we'd all be telling each other to hold back the mindless mail bombings to whoever's government is offending.
But this times its Microsoft, so it doesn't matter. Good on [Country]!
Surely there is something wrong here. Yes, I know its MS. Yes, I know its scientology but this a stupid reason to suggest not using something, let alone banning it.
We'd not let anyone suggest not using GNU/Linux just because Linus and the TLA crew[*] converted to some minority, much less becuase line 5329 of Perl was bug fixed by a [cult minority of the week] member.
Choas in the street! has BANNED distribution. Slashdot erupts with rasied voises calling for immediate revokation of the ruling and flames the entire nation.
said "this is a direct attack on the freedom of the people to choose what they wish, we should fight this at all costs".
When contains GNU/Linux, this would be the story. The Spokeman would no doubt be Eric, Bruce or Richard and we'd all be telling each other to hold back the mindless mail bombings to whoever's government is offending.
But this times its Microsoft, so it doesn't matter. Good on !
Surely there is something wrong here. Yes, I know its MS. Yes, I know its scientology but this a stupid reason to suggest not using something, let alone banning it.
We'd not let anyone suggest not using GNU/Linux just because Linus and the TLA crew[*] converted to some minority, much less becuase line 5329 of Perl was bug fixed by a member.
Idiot. If you are going to tell people not to flame then at least make some sense.
Stallman has nothing to do with Linux. HURD is the GNU kernel. Since Amiga is unlikely to bundle GNU as the base OS system (libs and apps) then it needn't really include GNU in the name like Linux should. If the Linux kernel is used with other lib sets and apps then it needn't include GNU.
If the new Amiga is to be a GLIBC system with GNU apps as standard and the Amiga bit being tantamount to an E theme then yes, it should pay homage.
Phill
Re:Honest questions...
on
RMS Responds
·
· Score: 2
Personal, physical property is something that doesn't have such a buzz of restriction attached to it (patents aside). You can build a copy of a car and noone will really care. You can even improve your own. Avoiding the odd patent and you'll be fine.
Software is a different matter. And for that matter so is Music for the most part (there is an open music movement about too which is facing that issue).
When the day comes where matter can be copied easily then we'll face the same problems there. Would you want to be arrested and charged for copying someone's new car or house? What about food or clothes?
There are two ways to change the way these things work.
The first is to complain and do nothing about it. By and large you will be ignored and people will like the fact you are doing nothing. They won't give you any column space and the company directors won't loose any sleep. I say this is a way to change things becuase it does change things. It makes the "idealists" look stupid and people ignore them even more.
The other is to get on with getting on. Make your own rules, stick to them and eventually in certain areas you'll become the choice. The FSF has done this very well. This way your opponents will mock you (witness the "they don't even have their own kernel" rubbish as if the column writer knows the first thing about writing one, also note that all too common phrase "Stallman wrote the text editor Emacs" as if that's all he ever did).
Anyway, those opposing you will mock you since you are really threatening their 'world'. If you didn't threaten them, they'd ignore you and attack the next biggest threat instead.
So they devote column space to you but palm you off as a passing fad. Behind that they'll be those who use your stuff and love it. Eventually the tables turn and the established norm becomes the use of free software in certain, ever increasing areas. Today that may be web servers, ftp sites, cheap clustered supercomputers etc. Tomorrow its likely to be practically everywhere. It might not be GNU/Linux but so what. The FSF isn't fighting an OS war.
When the day of real phyical property copying arrives (if ever), then I'm sure we'll see someone set up the "Free Design Foundation" or something consisting of people producing free designs for people to copy. While the rest of the world may ban copying with some twist of the copyright system, we'll just make our own rules and soon enough who's going to want to pay so much for their products when the Free ones are perhaps better and certainly much much cheaper.
I'm sure they'll get the same mockery abounding but at the end of it all, that author will be writing his article with some Free Software and that new car of his will be the last one that costs so much.
SANE support would be kludgy. www.gphoto.org is a better place for the driver (if not both) since it was designed for digital cameras in the first place.
I have spoken to Nikon as part of gPhoto and have a few leads on developing a driver for them. Please mention gPhoto if you mail then.
I have been sent a form to fill in to get the full details of the Nikon cameras by their European technical office manager. It claims that it'll take 4-6 week for Nikon Japan to review it and release details so we at gPhoto can write the driver fully (Apparently gPhoto will already do some of the stuff needed).
On a related note Konica are already writing a GPL driver for Linux based on some of the work included in gPhoto for the Q-MX00 series. They are currently the most Linux friendly company (at present only my gPhoto code is available, theirs will replace it in due course).
The Xerox copier/fax/print stations had PowerPC CPUs inside, large Hard drives and ran a modified Linux kernel with some apps on top.
Still, Xerox were responsible for the start of the FSF, GPL and GNU. (They refused RMS the source for their printer drivers causing him to consider the implications and safe guard against them).
The internet was designed solely as a network that will continue to work when single links (even many) drop. The suggestion that the US can pull a satellite link and *.yu is net silenced is a little hasty. They may block yu traffic on *their* own satellites but that is not the only link in and out of the former Yugoslavia.
A www.Netcraft.com search for co.yu sites lists many, most still just as live as last week. If the US has changed their TCP/IP routing, that's up to them. Thankfully they also designed the net to make their action largly futile.
Traceroute shows a few places happy to route to Yugoslavia. I can't imagine them all turning off the routers or filtering YU traffic.
It doesn't matter who has the idea for a project. So what is a company did. They made the mistake of keeping it closed. If they opened it in the first place your comment wouldn't be made.
Your should re-examine your point. I think you'll notice your problem isn't OSS having to trail CSS but that closed source exists at all.
Would you have a problem who came up with the idea if it was GPL? I wouldn't.
This is one of the good things about Free Software. You don't have mistakes that noone needs. The GIMP worked becuase Adobe already proved it would. VMWare and IBM have done the hard work with VM monitors and now the open source commty can invest programmers knowing that it is a fair cause.
Once the initial project is underway it doesn't take long before the open project excells the closed one.
Finally, stop complaining about this. If you think the free software world lags then shut up about that, learn to code and write some new programs. I think we'd all prefer that to a moaner who do little else?
Slashdot Mirror
----- Original Message -----
From: "Phill Hugo"
To: "John Gildred"
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 10:05 AM
Subject: Software Licensing
> What do you require of the software to sign it? Binary only or source
> also?
>
> Phill
John Gildred wrote:
Binary only.
John T. Gildred
CEO, Indrema
Entertainment Systems
www.indrema.com
--
Hello John,
Thankyou for your prompt reply, however I am curious as to how this will stop people adding program loaders into their games and using them to bypass the install/load process completely. This happened a number of times with the Atari Jaguar even though Atari licensed machines able to run unsigned code to devlopers. If what I know of Indrema is correct (that there will be no development variant save for a normal PC and SDK) how is it possible to run code on the Indrema to test it without reverting to such back door and further, surely you have to agree that the temptation to sneak such a process in will be quite high.
I'm sure I'm not alone in finding the whole "restricted access" to a platform slightly in the face of what Open Source is about, perhaps to the point of it being potentially insulting.
I am not looking for a long drawn out arguement on the merits of your approach but would like to hear your views of the more technical points above and also whether Indrema may consider adopting a different approach to licensing for the platform.
One immediate idea that comes to mind is the utilisation of a 30 second or so pause with an explanation that the program being run is unlicensed; or perhaps offering open use as long as your proprietary libraries are unused.
Regards,
Phill
Don't buy these hyped up toasters. Wait for games at the least. Two people in this office got one and why? By their accounts "because of DVD". Well great, a region 2 crappy DVD player with 2 goodish games that Dreamcast still ecplipses. Wait 6 months, pay 99ukp and have good games. In the mean time use DeCSS to watch their output if you must or just stick to learning iptables. "Yeah, like ipchains is soooo yesterday.. What? You use ipfwadm".
If this isn't +5 I'll eat my keyboard.
Phill
Try Zope. www.zope.org
ZSQL Methods are completely independant of your actual database and you can change your external database with a couple of clicks (if you need an external one in the first place. Zope has a long running persistant object system of its own which keeps instances of things alive along with their data until you specifcally delete them - even between reboots!
The underlying Python DB access is specific to whatever database you use but in Zope Land it is wrappered around Zope DB drivers which the ZSQL Methods talk to. Similar to what the DB.php stuff in PHP4 does but with a more compelling reason to use it.
They also encourage code resuse as you can template your queries just like your HTML..
SELECT * FROM users
<dtml-if username>
WHERE user=<dtml-var username>
</dtml-if>
Then when you call them, their magic happens and out pops the results in a python list.
Made me wonder if they included Zope in this round up if Zope would have A or D for tools, its web interface being its own tool really.
Phill
Apache.org probably gets more than 20k-100k hits per day. Slashdot CERTAINLY does.
I've built 2 sites running Apache which eclipse 1M hits per day (one uses Zope behind it for the dynamic layer (with PCGI). That copes with 1.5M per day without coughing.
I'm very skeptical of the claim and would love to see some data.
Secondly, apache sites don't show ANY source code when you add "+.htr" to the URL.
Take your pick but let your manager make it HIS job on the line if its the wrong way to go!
Its not Slashcode. Its Squishdot, a Zope product.
It even says it at the bottom.
www.zope.org
Phill
Not by halves. Free as is Free for everyone.
The "Free but for a price you can have non Free" isn't quite on the money, don't you think. If it were 100% GPL and nothing else, that'd be another matter.
People still stand in having to pay royalties to Troll to use Qt in a non GPL application. Not necessarily a bad thing. That comes later...
Gnome's libraries are mainly under the LGPL allowing royalty free use which is really why its been blessed so.
Its a risky, but perhaps rewarding move for Troll. On the bad side (from their view) the GPL base would permit a better, seperately maintained
variant with GPL code they cannot add to their commercial option - it wouldn't be all their code at that point.
On the good side from their view, it may mean more people use KDE/Qt. Thus developers wishing to support it end up paying Troll in the
process.
This isn't bad though. The problem (as I see it) is this....
Companies who wish to use Qt commercially can do so (at a price) without giving their improvements to Qt back. While GTK+ can be used without
royalty, its LGPL status means any improvments made that a non Free product uses must be distributed back out under LGPL or GPL. Nothing
else. No bribe accepted. (Yes, they may go elsewhere but the real issue here isn't about being popular, its about being Free. Ideally both, but not simply popular. Windows has that).
In the absense of an "only GPL" library suite in popular use (meaning GPL applications all round from everyone who uses it), the LGPL option
with no alternatives is better than the GPL with a (regardless of price) non Free alternative. At least we get the improvements.
Its a fair swap. More use of Qt to Troll's benefit for the option to merge Qt/Gtk under GPL. That would be the Free softy utopia but for not the GTK is still probably going to be prefered until an "only GPL" Qt vriant becomes widely used without a commercial option.
Phill
Back at University, we had a very hacked up Slackware distribution which did nothing special, expect on bootup where it would download and install any packages that sat on the upgrade server.
The same principle is absolutely essential for anything more than 100 or so machines (even if upgrades aren't a priority, bug fixes and security fixes will be).
In truth, I can't imagine any distribution would be better suited than any another here, especially if you are willing to write a boot up script which can download any new RPMs or DEBs and install them. The only problem is making sure they are not "interactively installed". Lots of Debian packages are but this is easily remedied. In fact, if you used Debian, adding apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade to your boot script and setting up your own packages repository (a simple FTP folder) would do that for you. You may need to tweak the odd package to force some settings but that's what your network of 5 machines reserved for testing are for right...
I'd also go with Sawfish/Sawmill instead of Window Maker. While I'm a huge fan of WM, I think sawfish has a much more desktop friendly future ahead. It can also look pretty identical to WM, and some of the other themes are very practical for desktop use. Its memory footprint on my machine is just under 4MB with half of that as shared libs which lots of other programs are using. Perhaps a choice at login would be useful, especially if offered with something pretty like GDM.
The major issue will probably be support, although that's more likely to be for specific applications than the whole system. I take it that to be entrusted to install 2500 desktops, you know your greps from your seds and are pretty capable of writing some scripts to manage upgrades. If not, find someone who is and pick their brains.
> First, there is a difference between free and open source software. You are talking about
> free software. The problem here is that in the scientific and mathematical communities it
is
> not companies that are doing work but individuals, who cannot profit from their work.
This is wrong. Many scientific companies openly publish
findings and many fund open research in Universities building themselves
good names amongst graduates who may eventually join them.
> Companies are also into scientific research beacause they can make profit from patents.
Some are yes. Some are not and simply fund open research. The Human
Genome project is a notable case of this funded by many companies who
wish to openly share the findings.
> It is the same with software. Companies are in it because they can make a profit.
Some are. Many simply have tasks to solve.
> With this profit thousands of programmers feed their children.
Many many programers are paid for the job of solving a problem than of
writing "Another Wordprocessor". Those are paid wether the software is
Free or Closed. Programmers will never starve. They will simply not be
reinventing wheel over again - instead their skills will be needed for
specific tasks.
> Those same programmers maybe write free software in their free time. Now the problem is
that non-software companies would use free software and make a profit of their own. Now why
are you willing to help a large corporation by reducing their cost on software expenditure.
Nobody writes free software so companies spend less. They do it becuase
they want to write the software. If others benefit (whoever that is)
fair play. Why would I not write a peice of software I wanted just
becuase someone I don't like MIGHT use it?
If a specific company wanted something specific for them written (such
as a web application) then they will always have to employ someone to
work for them since no one is likely to find the project worth doing for
nothing simply for the fun of it.
> Besides, software is not a mathematical truth or a scientific discovery. It is more like
a machine. All machines cost money.
Software is 100% mathematical. It is the epitome of Logic. Machines are
PHYSICAL objects. If we could copy machines at no cost, then I think
I'd find it fair play to "copy" a sports car and lots of petrol with
it. We are already allowed to tweak our cars AND RESELL THEM. Why not
software?
> Writing software involves a lot of creativity. Why don't artists give away their
paintings for free? Because they have to eat maybe?
Being paid to work does not in many cases revolve around the closed source SELLING of the final product. In the case of software, most
programmers are paid per contract or per hour to deliver working
solutions. No amount of free software will stop those eating. In fact it
makes them able to work faster and share problems.
> Imagine a large and sophisticated CAD package. Say 100 programmers spent a year
developing it. Why should it be free?
Publicity, support contracts, "to beat others who will do it
eventually". Lots of reasons. Matra just did that with a million dollar
CAD system. When NASA or some other agency looks at their Free OS in 3
years and sees the extremely cool CAD sub system provided by X company,
who do you think they'll want to work with when they need something
extra developing.
Regards,
Phill
For those of you who have digital cameras, I'm pretty sure that www.gphoto.org has become quite a useful site. We support more cameras than any other software on any platform (at least I've seen no others anywhere close) and considering the whole thing started relatively recently, I'd say that's quite an improvement.
The project is also actively involved in encouraging camera companies to play nicely and one or two have opened their specifications as a result. The most remarkable being Konica who not only did that but supplied a GPLd driver for us to extend to our hearts content.
As to whether we deserve that 30K. Well, probably not but if you really think we should then give it to the FSF/GNU instead since they'd do better things with it than spend it on beer.
Phill
I care little what religion people subscribe to when I use their software. Would you feel happy if your comments here were removed simply becuase you were [insert discriminatory reason]?
I am not a Microsoft apologist, nor do I think scientology anything other than complete junk but I do think it stupid to cheer on these sorts of things just becuase it suits one specific purpose. Should that purpose ever be joined by less popular ones (such as the Pope asking that Catholics don't use GNU becuase Stallman is atheist) I'm you'd get the point.
Phill
Choas in the street! [Country] has BANNED [Vendor's] [OS] distribution. Slashdot erupts with rasied voises calling for immediate revokation of the ruling and flames the entire nation.
[Spokesman] said "this is a direct attack on the freedom of the people to choose what they wish, we should fight this at all costs".
When [OS] contains GNU/Linux, this would be the story. The Spokeman would no doubt be Eric, Bruce or Richard and we'd all be telling each other to hold back the mindless mail bombings to whoever's government is offending.
But this times its Microsoft, so it doesn't matter. Good on [Country]!
Surely there is something wrong here. Yes, I know its MS. Yes, I know its scientology but this a stupid reason to suggest not using something, let alone banning it.
We'd not let anyone suggest not using GNU/Linux just because Linus and the TLA crew[*] converted to some minority, much less becuase line 5329 of Perl was bug fixed by a [cult minority of the week] member.
Phill
* ESR, RMS, ETC.
Choas in the street! has BANNED distribution. Slashdot erupts with rasied voises calling for immediate revokation of the ruling and flames the entire nation.
said "this is a direct attack on the freedom of the people to choose what they wish, we should fight this at all costs".
When contains GNU/Linux, this would be the story. The Spokeman would no doubt be Eric, Bruce or Richard and we'd all be telling each other to hold back the mindless mail bombings to whoever's government is offending.
But this times its Microsoft, so it doesn't matter. Good on !
Surely there is something wrong here. Yes, I know its MS. Yes, I know its scientology but this a stupid reason to suggest not using something, let alone banning it.
We'd not let anyone suggest not using GNU/Linux just because Linus and the TLA crew[*] converted to some minority, much less becuase line 5329 of Perl was bug fixed by a member.
Phill
* ESR, RMS, ETC.
Go here...
e rop.htm
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/interopmigrate/int
Click this...
"Why is Interoperability Important?" White Paper
Learn about why the need for interoperability across mixed platforms has never been greater.
See this...
Sorry, there is no microsoft.com Web page matching your request.
It's possible you typed the address incorrectly, or that the page no longer exists.
Enough said.
Idiot. If you are going to tell people not to flame then at least make some sense.
Stallman has nothing to do with Linux. HURD is the GNU kernel. Since Amiga is unlikely to bundle GNU as the base OS system (libs and apps) then it needn't really include GNU in the name like Linux should. If the Linux kernel is used with other lib sets and apps then it needn't include GNU.
If the new Amiga is to be a GLIBC system with GNU apps as standard and the Amiga bit being tantamount to an E theme then yes, it should pay homage.
Phill
Personal, physical property is something that doesn't have such a buzz of restriction attached to it (patents aside). You can build a copy of a car and noone will really care. You can even improve your own. Avoiding the odd patent and you'll be fine.
Software is a different matter. And for that matter so is Music for the most part (there is an open music movement about too which is facing that issue).
When the day comes where matter can be copied easily then we'll face the same problems there. Would you want to be arrested and charged for copying someone's new car or house? What about food or clothes?
There are two ways to change the way these things work.
The first is to complain and do nothing about it. By and large you will be ignored and people will like the fact you are doing nothing. They won't give you any column space and the company directors won't loose any sleep. I say this is a way to change things becuase it does change things. It makes the "idealists" look stupid and people ignore them even more.
The other is to get on with getting on. Make your own rules, stick to them and eventually in certain areas you'll become the choice. The FSF has done this very well. This way your opponents will mock you (witness the "they don't even have their own kernel" rubbish as if the column writer knows the first thing about writing one, also note that all too common phrase "Stallman wrote the text editor Emacs" as if that's all he ever did).
Anyway, those opposing you will mock you since you are really threatening their 'world'. If you didn't threaten them, they'd ignore you and attack the next biggest threat instead.
So they devote column space to you but palm you off as a passing fad. Behind that they'll be those who use your stuff and love it. Eventually the tables turn and the established norm becomes the use of free software in certain, ever increasing areas. Today that may be web servers, ftp sites, cheap clustered supercomputers etc. Tomorrow its likely to be practically everywhere. It might not be GNU/Linux but so what. The FSF isn't fighting an OS war.
When the day of real phyical property copying arrives (if ever), then I'm sure we'll see someone set up the "Free Design Foundation" or something consisting of people producing free designs for people to copy. While the rest of the world may ban copying with some twist of the copyright system, we'll just make our own rules and soon enough who's going to want to pay so much for their products when the Free ones are perhaps better and certainly much much cheaper.
I'm sure they'll get the same mockery abounding but at the end of it all, that author will be writing his article with some Free Software and that new car of his will be the last one that costs so much.
Phill
SANE support would be kludgy. www.gphoto.org is a better place for the driver (if not both) since it was designed for digital cameras in the first place.
Phill
I have spoken to Nikon as part of gPhoto and have
a few leads on developing a driver for them. Please mention gPhoto if you mail then.
I have been sent a form to fill in to get the full details of the Nikon cameras by their European technical office manager. It claims that it'll take 4-6 week for Nikon Japan to review it and release details so we at gPhoto can write the driver fully (Apparently gPhoto will already do some of the stuff needed).
On a related note Konica are already writing a GPL driver for Linux based on some of the work included in gPhoto for the Q-MX00 series. They are currently the most Linux friendly company (at present only my gPhoto code is available, theirs will replace it in due course).
Phill
phill@gnu.org
The Xerox copier/fax/print stations had PowerPC CPUs inside, large Hard drives and ran a modified Linux kernel with some apps on top.
Still, Xerox were responsible for the start of the FSF, GPL and GNU. (They refused RMS the source for their printer drivers causing him to consider the implications and safe guard against them).
Phill
The internet was designed solely as a network that will continue to work when single links (even many) drop. The suggestion that the US can pull a satellite link and *.yu is net silenced is a little hasty. They may block yu traffic on *their* own satellites but that is not the only link in and out of the former Yugoslavia.
A www.Netcraft.com search for co.yu sites lists many, most still just as live as last week. If the US has changed their TCP/IP routing, that's up to them. Thankfully they also designed the net to make their action largly futile.
Traceroute shows a few places happy to route to Yugoslavia. I can't imagine them all turning off the routers or filtering YU traffic.
Phill
Microsoft is not the reason Linux is popular (no more than MacOS, BeOS, xBSD or any other OS about not from Microsoft).
The GPL is.
Phill
The OS is not the kernel. Or should Mac OS X, Digital UNIX (Sorry, Compaq TRU64) both be called Mach now?
Phill
It doesn't matter who has the idea for a project. So what is a company did. They made the mistake of keeping it closed. If they opened it in the first place your comment wouldn't be made.
Your should re-examine your point. I think you'll notice your problem isn't OSS having to trail CSS but that closed source exists at all.
Would you have a problem who came up with the idea if it was GPL? I wouldn't.
Phill
This is one of the good things about Free Software. You don't have mistakes that noone needs. The GIMP worked becuase Adobe already proved it would. VMWare and IBM have done the hard work with VM monitors and now the open source commty can invest programmers knowing that it is a fair cause.
Once the initial project is underway it doesn't take long before the open project excells the closed one.
Finally, stop complaining about this. If you think the free software world lags then shut up about that, learn to code and write some new programs. I think we'd all prefer that to a moaner who do little else?
Phill
Surely with Tom's pathetic arguement this means it should be called "The Uncredited OS".
Stick to Perl Tom. Politics is best left to those who do it well.
Richard Stallman has every right to want his team to get some credit. Its not like their in this for the money. (Unlike some...)
Phill