Yes you can. You can charge in the same way as shareware developers can charge for fully-working copies of their software.
You say, "You may distribute this software freely under the terms of the GPL. I would appreciate $20, as this is how I make my living and it would encourage me to do more of this work."
Maybe 99% of the people don't pay, but you'll get some.
Alternatively, you can charge whatever you want for GPL'd software and not give it to them until they pay. They can then go distribute it if they want, but they'd have to be motivated enough to do so. The only difference with commercial software in this regard is that it's not legal when they redistribute commercial software.
No, I was talking/complaining about the lack of rights children have. I'd much rather kids were assumed to have rights unless their parents took them away. I don't like the in loco parentis (sp?) decision where the courts ruled that schools were acting as children's parents and therefore could abuse their privacy and liberty. I don't like the government restricting my child's rights. That's my job!
I give my 2 year old son lots of love, kindness, and entertainment. He's not old enough for me to worry about many other rights right now, but that will come soon enough.
Sorry if my tone didn't come through clearly in the first attempt.
I believe kids have about only 1 right... the right to go to school. With the exception of the Amish (sp?), any kid who wants to go to school can whether his parents want him to or not.
Incidently, the school is then considered their parent while they're there and can do anything they want including drug testing and locker searches.
IANAL, Your Mileage May Vary, I Could Be Wrong, etc.
Actual quote from the CEO of a company I used to work for...
"Enterprise software is sold 100% on how well the Powerpoint presentation looks....and *NEVER* mention that it's written in perl. If they ask what it's written in, just say, 'The next version will be written in Java.'"
They also played nice little games like "Sales people are not allowed to say 'no' in response to 'Do you support X'" and "If they've given us a single penny, even if they bought a soda out of our vending machine while they were watching a demo, then they're a customer so we can use their icon on our website."
It's a (relatively) recent, um, innovation by unethical PR departments. Put up a falsely-fronted and supposedly independent "activist" organization to spin things the way you want them spun, while giving the oh-so-wholesome appearance that "concerned citizens" approve of various corporatist policies.
Actually, it's been done for a while. The only difference is that modern companies are so lowsy at it that they get caught. Well, the internet and the easier spread of information may have something to do with it.
CD-R and CD-Rewriteable is very good for backing up your linux system (if you don't have a tape drive). There are many other reasons you might want to make your own CDs (like a cheap, nigh-unhackable webserver).
1) Apple actually innovates 2) Apple has consistantly shown that it will always shoot itself in the foot any time it actually has an opportunity for world/marketplace domination. (Take firewire for instance. They started charging before everyone started using it. If they hadn't, everyone would've called it Firewire. What consumer wants to say, "Eye Tripple Eee Thirteen Ninety-Four".)
Okay, some people pointed out the obvious down-sides of a low-power SMP box. Point taken. I already knew most of the downsides. I was just dreaming.
What I'd like is SMP to come to a more sensible level. Yes, there's not much point in SMP on the average to low end right now, but it's a self perpetuating cycle. The common software doesn't do SMP well and therefore SMP is rare, therefore the common software developer doesn't worry about SMP, etc.
I'd like SMP on the consumer end so that starting Netscape doesn't make my MP3 skip. I'd like SMP on the consumer end so that slocated doesn't kill performance while I'm actively doing something else. Can't a properly threaded OS use one processor for the high-priority process and use the others for background?
I'd also like my SMP box to have consumer-level power requirements. A 500Mhz PIII is fine for 99.999% of consumer requirements. Therefore, 4 CPUs as powerful as a PIII 500 but having very low power requirements would be good.
As someone pointed out, SMP would probably add a lot of complexity and power requirements of its own though.
I have no idea if it's possible with Crusoe, but I would love an SMP box based on Transmeta chips.
Think about it. TM chips are tiny, cheap, and low-power. You could cram a bunch of them into a case and motherboard that are within reach of common people. So a Crusoe 700Mhz = PIII 500 Mhz. I guarantee 8 or 16 Crusoe 700s will beat any two PIII 8xxs (1GHz PIII is not certified for SMP).
Of course, for various reasons, the consumer market is anti-smp. Intel would rather sell you one super-expensive chip than two cheap chips. OEMs would rather you buy a whole new system than simply add another processor. etc.
That's really the best of both worlds. Since the motherboard can read what the processor wants, you still can't sell overclocked processors as the real thing, but people can stil overclock their processor all they want.
AMD and Intel have always justified clock-locking by saying it's for protecting consumers from aftermarking.
The price you pay for a newspaper pays for only the cost of getting it from the press to you (delivery boy/truck, vending machine) and possibly the media.
The rest of the cost of production like paying the writers all comes from ads.
At least, this is what a friend at the San Jose Mercury told me.
Furthermore, Intel is practically forcing serious celeron owners to overclock by still putting Celerons on the 66Mhz FSB. You buy a celeron, you set the bus to standard 100Mhz, all your peripherals are running standard and you have a nice fast stable system. Often, you don't even need cooling.
At the rate CPUs become obsolete, CPU longevity lost to overclocking is not important. 7 years down to 5 years. Big deal.
Actually, I heard that the multiplier is locked on Durons*, so the only option is to overclock the FSB. Therefore, it is valid for Sharky Extreme to do their overclocking tests in the way normal people will have access to.
Review sites often get engineering samples, which are not clock-locked, which is probably how Dr Tom Pabst got his Duron to 950. Also, Dr Tom pulls more weight than Sharky in OEM and IT circles, so if I were AMD and I had two engineering samples, I'd probably send the better one to Dr Tom too.
*OCI claims to be releasing a Socket A motherboard that lets you change the CPU multiplier on any Duron/Thunderbird, but most won't be able to. With Athlon Classics and Slot A Thunderbirds, you have to use a GoldFingers device to change the multiplier (or a saudering(sp?) iron). It's kinda hard to stick a GoldFingers onto a socketed CPU.
Everyone always says that speculation isn't worth shit, but I'd really rather someone gave me their speculation than their shit.
So I would expect that in a few years, Intuit will be saying, "Well, it's not GNU Cash, but it's still pretty good, and if you buy it, we make money because we're such nice people..."
What's so great about that scenario? The goal of open source is not to put commercial software out of business. It's to insure high quality in critical software.
I see the purpose of projects like this as knocking on the commercial developers heads and saying, "Hello! Anyone in there? There's a good market out here that you're going to completely miss." If Quicken had already been ported to Linux, then GnuCash wouldn't be very important at all. Quicken is not like a web browser or a word processor, where the file formats it uses determine what all the other software on all other OS's must conform too. QIF is simple anyways. Quicken does not hold the key to some important internet or multimedia protocol. It's just a program a lot of people use.
The important thing about GnuCash is that now more people can abandon Windows (or Mac) and move to Linux/BSD/anything that can binary emulate Linux.
There is no need for all software in the world to become open source. Open Source has its advantages, to be sure, but if a commercial product can maintain high-quality without it, then what's the problem?
Slashdot Mirror
You simply cannot charge for a GPL'ed program.
Yes you can. You can charge in the same way as shareware developers can charge for fully-working copies of their software.
You say, "You may distribute this software freely under the terms of the GPL. I would appreciate $20, as this is how I make my living and it would encourage me to do more of this work."
Maybe 99% of the people don't pay, but you'll get some.
Alternatively, you can charge whatever you want for GPL'd software and not give it to them until they pay. They can then go distribute it if they want, but they'd have to be motivated enough to do so. The only difference with commercial software in this regard is that it's not legal when they redistribute commercial software.
Would we get any benefits moving it into the kernel?
;)
No, I was talking/complaining about the lack of rights children have. I'd much rather kids were assumed to have rights unless their parents took them away. I don't like the in loco parentis (sp?) decision where the courts ruled that schools were acting as children's parents and therefore could abuse their privacy and liberty. I don't like the government restricting my child's rights. That's my job!
I give my 2 year old son lots of love, kindness, and entertainment. He's not old enough for me to worry about many other rights right now, but that will come soon enough.
Sorry if my tone didn't come through clearly in the first attempt.
We have? Where?
I played lots of violent video games. Can you tell me where I am?
I believe kids have about only 1 right... the right to go to school. With the exception of the Amish (sp?), any kid who wants to go to school can whether his parents want him to or not.
Incidently, the school is then considered their parent while they're there and can do anything they want including drug testing and locker searches.
IANAL, Your Mileage May Vary, I Could Be Wrong, etc.
AFAIK, there is no law that says you have to be 17 to see an R-rated movie. That's a theater self-regulated rule.
I could be wrong.
I mean, it's not like anyone would be hippocritical enough to claim that American Football isn't violent.
Oh wait, it's US custom to shove football down the throats of all males. Nevermind.
no text
Actual quote from the CEO of a company I used to work for ...
...and *NEVER* mention that it's written in perl. If they ask what it's written in, just say, 'The next version will be written in Java.'"
"Enterprise software is sold 100% on how well the Powerpoint presentation looks.
They also played nice little games like "Sales people are not allowed to say 'no' in response to 'Do you support X'" and "If they've given us a single penny, even if they bought a soda out of our vending machine while they were watching a demo, then they're a customer so we can use their icon on our website."
[nitpicking on] /. free of grammatical errors for 3 years.
/. free of grammatical errors? The error is still there. ;)
Keeping
How does pointing out an error after the fact keep
SpeedStep is a hack. All it does is make the CPU run slower when running on batteries.
A Transmeta CPU will alter speeds and power consumption as it's running depending on the job at hand.
IMHO it would be PR suicide for Intel to start comparing SpeedStep to Crusoe's power management.
Actually, it's been done for a while. The only difference is that modern companies are so lowsy at it that they get caught. Well, the internet and the easier spread of information may have something to do with it.
CD-R and CD-Rewriteable is very good for backing up your linux system (if you don't have a tape drive). There are many other reasons you might want to make your own CDs (like a cheap, nigh-unhackable webserver).
Apple would never be Microsoft.
1) Apple actually innovates
2) Apple has consistantly shown that it will always shoot itself in the foot any time it actually has an opportunity for world/marketplace domination. (Take firewire for instance. They started charging before everyone started using it. If they hadn't, everyone would've called it Firewire. What consumer wants to say, "Eye Tripple Eee Thirteen Ninety-Four".)
Okay, some people pointed out the obvious down-sides of a low-power SMP box. Point taken. I already knew most of the downsides. I was just dreaming.
What I'd like is SMP to come to a more sensible level. Yes, there's not much point in SMP on the average to low end right now, but it's a self perpetuating cycle. The common software doesn't do SMP well and therefore SMP is rare, therefore the common software developer doesn't worry about SMP, etc.
I'd like SMP on the consumer end so that starting Netscape doesn't make my MP3 skip. I'd like SMP on the consumer end so that slocated doesn't kill performance while I'm actively doing something else. Can't a properly threaded OS use one processor for the high-priority process and use the others for background?
I'd also like my SMP box to have consumer-level power requirements. A 500Mhz PIII is fine for 99.999% of consumer requirements. Therefore, 4 CPUs as powerful as a PIII 500 but having very low power requirements would be good.
As someone pointed out, SMP would probably add a lot of complexity and power requirements of its own though.
I have no idea if it's possible with Crusoe, but I would love an SMP box based on Transmeta chips.
Think about it. TM chips are tiny, cheap, and low-power. You could cram a bunch of them into a case and motherboard that are within reach of common people. So a Crusoe 700Mhz = PIII 500 Mhz. I guarantee 8 or 16 Crusoe 700s will beat any two PIII 8xxs (1GHz PIII is not certified for SMP).
Of course, for various reasons, the consumer market is anti-smp. Intel would rather sell you one super-expensive chip than two cheap chips. OEMs would rather you buy a whole new system than simply add another processor. etc.
Delphi?
Though I have to admit I never programmed much COM with Delphi while I was doing windows programming. But it is touted as a feature.
That's really the best of both worlds. Since the motherboard can read what the processor wants, you still can't sell overclocked processors as the real thing, but people can stil overclock their processor all they want.
AMD and Intel have always justified clock-locking by saying it's for protecting consumers from aftermarking.
'Verson X or later' means "You may use this version of the GPL, or any later version at your discretion".
Clauses which say, "We reserve the right to change this agreement at any time without notice" probably are not legal.
Not true.
You can change the GPL all you want. You can then distribute your own software (that you have copyright on) under your MyGPL.
What you cannot do is change it and claim that your version is the license under which the software was distributed.
IANAL.
The price you pay for a newspaper pays for only the cost of getting it from the press to you (delivery boy/truck, vending machine) and possibly the media.
The rest of the cost of production like paying the writers all comes from ads.
At least, this is what a friend at the San Jose Mercury told me.
Furthermore, Intel is practically forcing serious celeron owners to overclock by still putting Celerons on the 66Mhz FSB. You buy a celeron, you set the bus to standard 100Mhz, all your peripherals are running standard and you have a nice fast stable system. Often, you don't even need cooling.
At the rate CPUs become obsolete, CPU longevity lost to overclocking is not important. 7 years down to 5 years. Big deal.
Actually, I heard that the multiplier is locked on Durons*, so the only option is to overclock the FSB. Therefore, it is valid for Sharky Extreme to do their overclocking tests in the way normal people will have access to.
Review sites often get engineering samples, which are not clock-locked, which is probably how Dr Tom Pabst got his Duron to 950. Also, Dr Tom pulls more weight than Sharky in OEM and IT circles, so if I were AMD and I had two engineering samples, I'd probably send the better one to Dr Tom too.
*OCI claims to be releasing a Socket A motherboard that lets you change the CPU multiplier on any Duron/Thunderbird, but most won't be able to. With Athlon Classics and Slot A Thunderbirds, you have to use a GoldFingers device to change the multiplier (or a saudering(sp?) iron). It's kinda hard to stick a GoldFingers onto a socketed CPU.
Everyone always says that speculation isn't worth shit, but I'd really rather someone gave me their speculation than their shit.
Journalists (often) have to fill up space, whereas an artist is focused on content.
Tip of the day for good writing: If you have a point to make, stay concise. Using too many words just waters down your content.
So I would expect that in a few years, Intuit will be saying, "Well, it's not GNU Cash, but it's still pretty good, and if you buy it, we
make money because we're such nice people..."
What's so great about that scenario? The goal of open source is not to put commercial software out of business. It's to insure high quality in critical software.
I see the purpose of projects like this as knocking on the commercial developers heads and saying, "Hello! Anyone in there? There's a good market out here that you're going to completely miss." If Quicken had already been ported to Linux, then GnuCash wouldn't be very important at all. Quicken is not like a web browser or a word processor, where the file formats it uses determine what all the other software on all other OS's must conform too. QIF is simple anyways. Quicken does not hold the key to some important internet or multimedia protocol. It's just a program a lot of people use.
The important thing about GnuCash is that now more people can abandon Windows (or Mac) and move to Linux/BSD/anything that can binary emulate Linux.
There is no need for all software in the world to become open source. Open Source has its advantages, to be sure, but if a commercial product can maintain high-quality without it, then what's the problem?