IANAL, but I would say that any and every contributor to the Linux kernel would have a valid complaint since he is including all of their code in a propriotary form. --
Isn't that the complete opposite of the ideals behind open source (and the scientific community in general)?
Yes it is. This is in the same spirit as when a person quotes someone like Adolf Hitler. The reasoning is that Aleister Crowley was a complete lunatic, therefore you should not subscribe to this idea. --
I'm really glad to see hardware vendors providing support for their own hardware. When linux was more of a fringe OS, hardware vendors basically got a free ride. Now that it's coming in to the mainstream, We can expect to see this kind of thing more and more. The free software culture is invading corperate Culture. I think this kicks ass. When people start realizing that this kind of thing can increase sales of your product, more companies will begin to comply. I haven't seen any hard figures, but it may be that not doing it will lose significant revenue for a hardware manufacturer. --
Why is RMS always left out? I think it's simply because many perceive Linus as being more charasmatic, but I do think not mentioning GNU was a big screw up. Now the GNU Project has contributed more to the overall development of Free software, but It's not so bad having a poster child like Linus is a positive thing. If they show RMS on the screen raving about how it's immoral to use propriotary software, I think it's going to turn alot of people off. Now I know that RMS doesn't get all the credit he deserves, but if giving Linus more credit than he deserves in turn gives the public at large a positive view of Linux, then the net benefit to the free software community will be greater. The more Linux is pushed in to the mainstream, the more people it will bring in to the free software community, and the more cool toys we will have to play with:) --
I don't understand why people are so bothered by this. Now I would rather people know the truth as well, but I don't think it's as big of a deal as people make it out to be. Redhat does a pretty good job of marketing. I've NEVER heard anyone from Redhat claim that Redhat IS Linux, and I've read many of the Bob Young interviews. If anyone want's to contradict that point, I'd suggest that you provide links to back up the point.
I've heard people make this complaint before and they sometimes seem to imply that Redhat is under some obligation to plug other distributions besides their own. I'm not accusing jerodd of this because it looks like he blames society for this misnomer over Redhat. I think what tends to happen is that outsiders who don't know any better, assume that Redhat is the producer of Linux because it is the most visable distribution. I don't think this is through any fault of Redhat. I think that people who get serious about installing Linux generally find out about other distributions early on before they develop any brand loyalty. Personally, I'm a big supporter of diversity, so I think it's great that other distros are out there, and I would dread the day that any single distro completely dominates the market. By that same token, while I'm a KDE user, I highly respect Redhat's decision to support GNOME development. As long as there is choice, we're never gonna be as limited as a windows user. --
I think that is completely innacurate. We are not penny pinchers. If anything, our wallets are fatter because we didn't have to pay for the majority of our software. More money to buy fun games:) --
Those people probably think they're one year old once they're born (read: have come into their first year of living), too.
Incidentally, there are some cultures that do count age in this fashion. Chinese culture is this way, but it's changing due to western influence.
Actually, had we started the calender at the year 0, the same way we normally count our age, then it would in fact be the new millenium on 1-1-2000. Does anyone know if that's the case? Or did the year number start at 1? --
I'd imagine that the vast majority of these people already tried contacting their vendors. If the vendor won't do it, then it's only logical to go one step above the ladder. What you're saying is that the salesperson who sold you the product won't help you, so now you're SOL. No point in trying to go to his superior. Since this seems to be a problem that spans companies who are all selling MS OSs, I'd say a class action lawsuit is well founded. But then again, IANAL... but I'd also bet that YANALE. Here's my view of the situation. MS wrote the license, the EULA is an agreement between the user and MS.
It would seem to me that MS would be able to handle some freaking frefunds. I mean what percentage of people will actually want a refund? 1 or 2% maybe? Hell it would be virtually 0 if their contracts with OEM's weren't so restrictive.
As far as the licensing goes, MS already licenses their code, the DOJ would just set a price.
As for the API, it would be possible to verify that the API is accurate if the source didn't cost an arm and a leg to license.
Read my split up scenario a little bit more carefully. I think you misinterpreted it. The split that I called for was inbetween logical divisions, not necessarily along logical divisions. With this type of split, you wouldn't have to determine what came with the OS and what didn't, since everybody would get everything. It's trivial to make copies of the source. --
1) Force them to License source code. Not a free source license or public domain, but a commercial license, and with no NDA's.
2) Publish the Win32 API.
3) Break them up inbetween logical divisions. For example, Instead of a single OS division, you'd have 3 or 4 OS divisions, all starting out with the same source code. That way, no IP is lost, but competition is created, and there is a big incentive to conform to a standard, since no one company will be able to "embrace and extend". --
This guy is rediculous. He talks about Linux's reliability being suspect? I don't care what his reasons or arguments are. The proof is in the pudding. Linux development/quality is not slowing down, and it's not going to. OTOH, I can think of one megacorp who's software is gonna be way late:) --
Hey genius... In case you didn't notice, this article's topic is on the MS vs DOJ case, and the video screw up. Not Linux, not FreeBSD, not BeOS. Microsoft. Natrually people are gonna express their feelings on MS. It's not as if they're offering unsolicited or off-topic comments.
Leave MS alone, if you hate them so much, ignore them.
If you hate the bashing comments on MS stories on slashdot, ignore them. --
you know, that 28.8 "purely academic" difference could be alot difference if the modem was the old style VFC protocol, the pre-V.34 standard protocol. I had one of these modems, and it was completely unreliable. It never connected at 28.8. On the average it connected at 19.2 and it was not rare to get 14.4. Not to mention, that when these things got errors, the modem would lock up for a few seconds, until it could renegotiate the connection with the other end. Basically this "academic" difference, could have resulted in the difference shown by the video. In fact, even if there was nothing fishy about the modems themselves, they could have used telephone lines that differed significantly in quality. While the modems may have been nearly the same, the actual connection speeds could be far different, thus accounting for the big difference. --
Damn... the stupidity of people never ceases to amazes me. What the hell benefit does this provide for owners of a copyright? Cacheing should be considered fair use. I mean, hell, you can mark your pages as non-cacheable can't you? If you don't want your page cached, just mark it as non-cacheable. --
I have despised this sorry excuse for a man ever since I can remember hearing about him. After watching all these kids' shows, he still hasn't figured out that barney is a child molester. --
I think that some organization such as RedHat or some organization that has it's reputation on the line, should take this funding. They could assemble teams of programmers who are interested in taking on this, and once the product is deliverd, they get the paycheck. --
I doubt it. the OEM version probably just means "preinstalled". They may include some propriotary software like on the official redhat cd's, but I would be pretty sure that you can download any Free software package included on that machine from the Redhat ftp site. I would be very surprised to find otherwise. Besides, even if it wasn't, nothing could stop you if you wanted to upload such a package to a website, so I don't see how this is a violation of the GPL. I think that statement is more or less trying to make Dell look distinguished (if that's possible). --
Another question is if RedHat will start making two different kernel RPMs (one with SMP, one without), or just compile the default with SMP enabled for their next release, since an SMP kernel shouldn't be a big performance hit to those without SMP machines.
I think that's a good idea. I've brewed my own kernel RPM's to build my stripped down kernel before, and it's a pretty trivial task, so there is nothing stopping them from doing so. --
That's a BIG IF. Remember the quote that went around a few years back that said "If they were selling a computer for $500, with a 1GHz processor, 2GB of ram and a TB of drive space, the first question people would as is, "does it run windows?"." The sad thing is, that this is nothing short of the truth, and the only "merit" that hardware/software products are based on is windows compatibility. If that could be changed, the world would be a better place. Obviously MS wants that changed. If it was that way, we wouldn't have any need for judicial intervention. --
So... NT was "renamed" windows 2000. Then they said that win98 will not be "NT" based for a while, which implies to me that windows 2000 is actually gonna be a bugfix for 98, cuz they're having so many difficulties with NT, they think that it's gonna be about 2001 or 2002 before version 5 (or whatever they're calling it now) gets out the door. Damn... I don't mean to criticize MS for being slow, cuz in the past they always released stuff too early and it sucked. Now they're gonna release stuff really late. I get the strong impression that it's gonna suck no matter how late it is, but I guess we'll find out eveeeeeeeeeeeentually. --
Slashdot Mirror
IANAL, but I would say that any and every contributor to the Linux kernel would have a valid complaint since he is including all of their code in a propriotary form.
--
isn't "blind windows user" a bit redundant?
--
--
It's great to see governments of the world supporting terrorist activities... Makes me feel all warm and giggly inside.
--
I'm really glad to see hardware vendors providing support for their own hardware. When linux was more of a fringe OS, hardware vendors basically got a free ride. Now that it's coming in to the mainstream, We can expect to see this kind of thing more and more. The free software culture is invading corperate Culture. I think this kicks ass. When people start realizing that this kind of thing can increase sales of your product, more companies will begin to comply. I haven't seen any hard figures, but it may be that not doing it will lose significant revenue for a hardware manufacturer.
--
Why is RMS always left out? I think it's simply because many perceive Linus as being more charasmatic, but I do think not mentioning GNU was a big screw up. Now the GNU Project has contributed more to the overall development of Free software, but It's not so bad having a poster child like Linus is a positive thing. If they show RMS on the screen raving about how it's immoral to use propriotary software, I think it's going to turn alot of people off. Now I know that RMS doesn't get all the credit he deserves, but if giving Linus more credit than he deserves in turn gives the public at large a positive view of Linux, then the net benefit to the free software community will be greater. The more Linux is pushed in to the mainstream, the more people it will bring in to the free software community, and the more cool toys we will have to play with :)
--
I don't understand why people are so bothered by this. Now I would rather people know the truth as well, but I don't think it's as big of a deal as people make it out to be. Redhat does a pretty good job of marketing. I've NEVER heard anyone from Redhat claim that Redhat IS Linux, and I've read many of the Bob Young interviews. If anyone want's to contradict that point, I'd suggest that you provide links to back up the point.
I've heard people make this complaint before and they sometimes seem to imply that Redhat is under some obligation to plug other distributions besides their own. I'm not accusing jerodd of this because it looks like he blames society for this misnomer over Redhat. I think what tends to happen is that outsiders who don't know any better, assume that Redhat is the producer of Linux because it is the most visable distribution. I don't think this is through any fault of Redhat. I think that people who get serious about installing Linux generally find out about other distributions early on before they develop any brand loyalty. Personally, I'm a big supporter of diversity, so I think it's great that other distros are out there, and I would dread the day that any single distro completely dominates the market. By that same token, while I'm a KDE user, I highly respect Redhat's decision to support GNOME development. As long as there is choice, we're never gonna be as limited as a windows user.
--
I think that is completely innacurate. We are not penny pinchers. If anything, our wallets are fatter because we didn't have to pay for the majority of our software. More money to buy fun games :)
--
Actually, had we started the calender at the year 0, the same way we normally count our age, then it would in fact be the new millenium on 1-1-2000. Does anyone know if that's the case? Or did the year number start at 1?
--
I'd imagine that the vast majority of these people already tried contacting their vendors. If the vendor won't do it, then it's only logical to go one step above the ladder. What you're saying is that the salesperson who sold you the product won't help you, so now you're SOL. No point in trying to go to his superior. Since this seems to be a problem that spans companies who are all selling MS OSs, I'd say a class action lawsuit is well founded. But then again, IANAL... but I'd also bet that YANALE. Here's my view of the situation. MS wrote the license, the EULA is an agreement between the user and MS.
It would seem to me that MS would be able to handle some freaking frefunds. I mean what percentage of people will actually want a refund? 1 or 2% maybe? Hell it would be virtually 0 if their contracts with OEM's weren't so restrictive.
--
Yeah.. Billy and all his cronies the chair! Fry his sorry ass! Make him suffer!!!!
--
As far as the licensing goes, MS already licenses their code, the DOJ would just set a price.
As for the API, it would be possible to verify that the API is accurate if the source didn't cost an arm and a leg to license.
Read my split up scenario a little bit more carefully. I think you misinterpreted it. The split that I called for was inbetween logical divisions, not necessarily along logical divisions. With this type of split, you wouldn't have to determine what came with the OS and what didn't, since everybody would get everything. It's trivial to make copies of the source.
--
1) Force them to License source code. Not a free source license or public domain, but a commercial license, and with no NDA's.
2) Publish the Win32 API.
3) Break them up inbetween logical divisions. For example, Instead of a single OS division, you'd have 3 or 4 OS divisions, all starting out with the same source code. That way, no IP is lost, but competition is created, and there is a big incentive to conform to a standard, since no one company will be able to "embrace and extend".
--
Did someone make sure and send a linke to the author of the original inflamatory article?
--
This guy is rediculous. He talks about Linux's reliability being suspect? I don't care what his reasons or arguments are. The proof is in the pudding. Linux development/quality is not slowing down, and it's not going to. OTOH, I can think of one megacorp who's software is gonna be way late :)
--
If you hate the bashing comments on MS stories on slashdot, ignore them.
--
you know, that 28.8 "purely academic" difference could be alot difference if the modem was the old style VFC protocol, the pre-V.34 standard protocol. I had one of these modems, and it was completely unreliable. It never connected at 28.8. On the average it connected at 19.2 and it was not rare to get 14.4. Not to mention, that when these things got errors, the modem would lock up for a few seconds, until it could renegotiate the connection with the other end. Basically this "academic" difference, could have resulted in the difference shown by the video. In fact, even if there was nothing fishy about the modems themselves, they could have used telephone lines that differed significantly in quality. While the modems may have been nearly the same, the actual connection speeds could be far different, thus accounting for the big difference.
--
Damn... the stupidity of people never ceases to amazes me. What the hell benefit does this provide for owners of a copyright? Cacheing should be considered fair use. I mean, hell, you can mark your pages as non-cacheable can't you? If you don't want your page cached, just mark it as non-cacheable.
--
If this thing is running IPV6, I'd be willing to bet that Linux is playing a front seat role in all of this.
--
I have despised this sorry excuse for a man ever since I can remember hearing about him. After watching all these kids' shows, he still hasn't figured out that barney is a child molester.
--
I think that some organization such as RedHat or some organization that has it's reputation on the line, should take this funding. They could assemble teams of programmers who are interested in taking on this, and once the product is deliverd, they get the paycheck.
--
I doubt it. the OEM version probably just means "preinstalled". They may include some propriotary software like on the official redhat cd's, but I would be pretty sure that you can download any Free software package included on that machine from the Redhat ftp site. I would be very surprised to find otherwise. Besides, even if it wasn't, nothing could stop you if you wanted to upload such a package to a website, so I don't see how this is a violation of the GPL. I think that statement is more or less trying to make Dell look distinguished (if that's possible).
--
--
That's a BIG IF. Remember the quote that went around a few years back that said "If they were selling a computer for $500, with a 1GHz processor, 2GB of ram and a TB of drive space, the first question people would as is, "does it run windows?"." The sad thing is, that this is nothing short of the truth, and the only "merit" that hardware/software products are based on is windows compatibility. If that could be changed, the world would be a better place. Obviously MS wants that changed. If it was that way, we wouldn't have any need for judicial intervention.
--
So... NT was "renamed" windows 2000. Then they said that win98 will not be "NT" based for a while, which implies to me that windows 2000 is actually gonna be a bugfix for 98, cuz they're having so many difficulties with NT, they think that it's gonna be about 2001 or 2002 before version 5 (or whatever they're calling it now) gets out the door. Damn... I don't mean to criticize MS for being slow, cuz in the past they always released stuff too early and it sucked. Now they're gonna release stuff really late. I get the strong impression that it's gonna suck no matter how late it is, but I guess we'll find out eveeeeeeeeeeeentually.
--