Why did you wait this long? You could have built very snappy gui apps for windows in VB or Delphi and yes even C++ for a long time. You still can you know. I fyou like jave great, if you like C# great but let's get real there are a lot of languages which let you use native gui apps in windows.
COM couldn't kill java, DCOM couldnt, VB could not, Delphi could not, ASP could not, IE could not. So far nothing MS has tried manged to kill java. I suspect this is because cross platform is actually a desirable thing for most corporations. As long as LInux continues to grow and corporations are using unix and mainframes java will be around and growing. The only way MS could kill java is to make the whole shebang cross platform and they will never do that.
I think the the trolltech guys ever attempted to do such a thing they would get their asses sued off. the last thing MS wants is a cross platform language.
Actually that suit is over. Ms decided to settle that suit and a few others by giving Borland a shitload of money. This was probably a good thing becasue they not only stole programmers but the tabbed interface from quatro pro too. I think they knew they were going to lose.
"Btw, I always find it ironic how those that claim to be interested in the masses show such utter lack of respect for them."
I have no interest in the masses. I have an interest in myself. In many many ways I am a minority in the united states. When the time comes that the US govt does not like me anymore they will use the gullable masses to round me up. Don't mistake my critisim of the US govt as some sort of a fondness for the brainless dupes who gather in front of the TV every night.
Did you follow the election? Do you remember the NY republican primary? That was a tough one for Bush because McCain was actually running ahead in many part of NY. Bush knew that if he lost NY his chance at the presidency was over. So they tried all kinds of nasty tricks like trying to get McCain off the ballots in some places and such. Well towards the end McCain was starting to pull ahead when a texas businessman spent a tens of thousands dollars (out of the goodness of his heart of course) and bought a bunch of advertising claiming that McCain was in favor of giving women breast cancer. It was done in a very sleazy way but that's not really surprising.
What is suprising was the the people of NY actually believed this. They not only thought that McCain was in favor of giving women breast cancer but that George Bush had nothing to do with these ads. Bush won by a slim margin.
If that is not evidence of the stupidity of the american public I don't know what is (well that and the WB network but I digress).
" Look. You didn't mention IE in your original post at all. You mentioned the server product"
Maybe you should have read the entire thread before you jumped in. the thread was about netscape failing because MS decided to cut off their air supply. Again go back and read the thread and while you are at it go read some transcripts.
"Netscape never got to be evil in the sense you claim MS is because they were too busy not having a money-making business"
maybe they were just ethical people who had a sincere desire to make the world a better place. Maybe you have to be evil to succeed and they weren't evil enough.
"Long explanation, short: It's all just software and business, buddy. If you think the success of one product or vender over the other is really going to change your life, you're likely in for a letdown."
Yes it's all business and no not all businesses and business people are evil. But in this case I get severely impacted. The fact that an MS monopoly means I pay more for software I have to use is significant. So is the fact that MS is choking off innovation by destroying companies which innovate. As soon as an innovative product comes out MS jumps in and destroys them by dumping free software and shoving their competing product everybodies throat.
MS will very soon control all information and all communication on the internet and beyond. Considering that the only thing that separates us from animals is the ability to communicate I would say this has a huge impact in my life.
Somewhere there is a planet full of people who think that the acts of the richest most powerful person on the planet and his corporation have zero impact on the population at large. I would urge you to buy a ticket there. Over there people may take you seriously.
"I'm sort of amused by this, I bet it cost them at least $100 to have thier lawyers tell me off."
If everybody did what you did it might cost them some real money. Especially if you replied and argued your case. You could have argued that the spam you got was not covered by your agreement and that they indeed owed you money. Imagine if a thousand people did this?
"Name me one nation the United States has annexed"
The US has learned it's lessons from the experience of nations like Israel and russia. Namely that pysically occupying people who don't want to be occupied is a painful and expensive endevor. Look at palestine. To this day palestenians would rather die then live under Israeli rule. We are much more sophisticated then that.
We control people via puppets and proxies. We overthrow democratically elected governments to install our own despots (shah of iran). We fund and arm lunatics like pinochet, we train death squads in central america, we fincacially support countries like israel who routinely torture prisoners and kill civilians and of course we routinely kill via bombardment and sanctions. I think it was a former secy of state who said that the deaths of 1.2 million people including over 500,000 thousand children in iraq was a "inevatable but aceptable consequence" of our sanctions in Iraq. That is not a actual quote but it was the jist of the comment.
Why would we actually occupy a country when we can install a puppet govt and make sure the people are killed, tortured, enslaved or simply made to work prividing us with coffee and sugar. It's cheaper and easier and allows us pretend that we are somehow more moral then the roman empire.
"Look at the US's "peers" in the world scene: Russia, China, India, Japan,"
Moral relativism at it's best. You see we are not the only ones evil!. Why not pick the best examples and strive to be like them? Better yet why not decide what is moral and right and do that.
"We're talking about very specific and detailed information that a very small part of the population can even claim to have the most remote of interest in."
Defending the rights of minorities is the hallmark of a republic. When I was in school my professor explained the difference between a democracy and a republic this way. A democracy is a lynching of a black man by ten white men. Ten votes for, one vote against. In a republic lynching is not acceptable because the right of minories are not up for vote.
"Oh please. Why? Justify your belief in reasoning that US policymakers are out to shaft its own people"
you are kidding me right? Is it your position that the US policymakers never shaft their own people? How many examples of this would it take to convince you that the US policymakers reoutinely shaft their own people?
"Gimme a break. These people need to get re-elected."
All they need to get elected is a bunch of money. Most americans are sheep and will vote for whoever the TV says to.
There may be a few but most would simply obey their superiors like they were trained to do.
I spent my time in the military and my observation was that most people would most like go awol if they could or just do what they are told. You and your buddies may try and do something but let's face it you are no match against the combined armament of the entire US military infrastructure. you would be killed like the tens of thousands of taliban or the hundreds of thousands of iraquis.
You could not be more wrong. The goal of a terrorist is to cause discontent, panic, and unease in the populace. As the US govt clamps down on dissent, free press, freedom of expression, freedom of association etc it will cause increased agitation in an already agitated public. I know most americans have a critically short memory span but if you remember a while back an American hated the govt so much they blew up a federal building. All those people who ran the shovel brigade in jarbirdge, who opened up the water mains in oregon, who phoned in death threats to govt employees all over america are not going to be happier as a result of a government crackdown on freedoms.
Those people are already armed and organized. They already hate the govt and now any act of terrorism they may commit will be automatically blamed on arabs. They have a free ride for the forseeable future to do whatever kind of mayhem they want. All these laws will simply encourage them to go ahead.
"My point was that if the threat of a widely available and free webserver was what killed Netscape, "
That may be your point but it's not mine. I will say it again. Whatever Netscape made MS also made and gave it away for free and shoved it down people's throats. You could not install service pack three to NT4.0 without installing IE. Many Ms programs all of sudden demanded the IE be installed. That's just one example there are others.
"Yeah yeah, MS is evil. Boo hoo. Netscape would have been evil too if the free-market would have allowed it to."
I am glad you agree that MS is evil. I think it's obvious to most people. But you have no evidence that other business people are as unethical and immoral as Bill Gates and his mafia are. A lot of companies have dominant positions in other industries yet they have not resorted to the tactics that MS has. If you have some evidence of the evil nature of Netscape executives please provide some links I would love to hear about them.
BTW saying it's OK for Bill Gates to be evil because other people are evil is no defense. That's like saying Bill gates is evil but that's ok because Jeffrey Dahmer is evil too.
If you are getting paid to defend Bill Gates and his company you need to start doing a better job of it. If you are not getting paid to do this then you need to re-evaluate your own ethical and moral grounds and perhaps ask yourself why you feel the need to defend a corporation. When I was in HIgh school there were a lot of idiots who would rage about ford or chevy or nike or addidas (I am dating myself I know). I never figures out why these people would be boosters for some corporation perhaps it made them feel more powerful to be rooting for a big corporation or perhaps it made them feel significant in some way. The poor slobs never considered that they may simply be brainwashed by advertising. Either way I figure these people got over it eventually because as I got older fewer people were engaged in that kind of nonsense.
So what is your execuse? Are you in high school or do you somehow feel empowered when you defend MS. DO you think that Bill Gates will one day notice your efforts on his behalf and reward you somehow? You admit that Bill is evil so why do you defend him or excuse his behaviour? really I want to know what makes someone like you tick.
Well that's a nice bit of revisionism. First of all we are not talking three years ago. We are talking about the days of windows for workgroups and trumpet winsock. That's when it all started. When Netscape saw that MS was giving away IE for free and shoving down people's throats they started a push into the server market. This was a smart thing to do because they knew they could not compete with free. When MS saw that they started giving away free web servers like IIS and free client stuff like netmeeting.
In those days linux was a gimpse in the eye of a few ubergeeks. Certainly no business had ever heard of it and they were the ones paying for web server.
MS said they were going to cut off netscapes air supply and they did it. They said they were going to knife apple in the back and they did it. It's all in the transcripts if you bother to read it. MS executives are some of the most ruthless, unethical, venegeful, evil people on the planet today. I bet Osama Bin Laden wishes he was that evil.
"Telling the truth is not a legal defence. If you have enough money - as McDonalds did - then you get to write your own laws."
Unfortunately you are right. This day and age a common person has no options other then violence. If the courts are corrupted, the politicians are corrupted, the media is corrupted what else is there to do except take arms (or chemicals or bacteria).
Netscape did try the server business but MS starting giving away IIS and bundled it NT. MS was determined to replicate every netscape product and give it away for free. Nobody can compete with that. Nobody.
As long as MS had monopoly profits from windows they could keep that up.
Of course part of this was a personal vendetta by Bill gates who felt snubbed by netscape.
MS will do this with any company which tries to make a living in the software business. There is no more software business. It's either MS or open source no room for anything else.
Althought not the ideal split it would still help a little. MS used it's monopoly profits to subsidize office. When office came out it also cost much less then competitive products because MS did not have to make money on office. Same with IE, money, etc. Now that monopolies have been built in office, browser, media player, operating system ms can subsidize things like passport and MSN. If any of these products had to live or die on their own merits they would cost much more. Can you imagine is passport was a company which had no other product but was trying to convince people to use it? Nobody would sign up and it would die. MS can force people to sigh up and feed money into it forever to keep it alive. Break up the monopoly and that money dries up.
Ideally they should be broken into a dozen or more companies.
" right, because nobody has the right to criticize in your wonderful utopia"
No just you. you don't have the right because you are an ignorant liar. I hope you see the difference between critism and lying.
BTW It's impossible to mock Jesus. Jesus does not exist. Some people think he exists even though there is no evidence for it. They claim that he is GOD ALMIGHTY ALL POWERFUL BEING THAT CREATED THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE. You think an entity like that cares about posts on slashdot? That's funny.
I too have been in your situation many times. Anybody who claims that the private industry is somehow more efficient or clueful then the govt needs to read your post.
1) You are a liar. Or maybe you are ignorant. Either way I don't think jesus would approve. The savannah project does not limit itself to GPLed products. They accept just about any open source licence. Your criticims are based on lies and ignorance.
2) If in reaction to the "stigma" of GPL or by your personal hatred of RMS (a man you probably have never met) you decide to write closed source software or software which does not somehow qualify for hosting on savanah keep this in mind. It's their fucking server, it's their fucking bandwith, it's their fucking software, it's their fucking labor and you are entitled to NONE of it. NONE. You hate them and yet you expect them to donate their money and time to you to make your life easier. I don't think so.
Here is my advice to you.
Get off your ass and build a server. Go write a great application which duplicated all or most of the sourceforge functions (sourceforge has the stigma of GPL remember). Then go buy some bandwidth and then invite people to host non GPLed software on it. Make sure RMS has never come close or breathed on any software hosted on your platform because you would not want that evil GPL mojo getting near your server. Then not only will jesus love you but you will have the right to point and crtitise the savannah project.
Until then shut up and sit down.
Does Jesus advise you to badmouth other peoples volunteer efforts instead of pitching in to help? Perhaps you can ask him for advice next time. Say to him. Jesus is it right to critize the savannah project? Is it better for me to say bad things about them even if they are not true or to help them? Jesus should I start my own project where people with other licenses can host their own projects?
I bet Jesus can give you some good advice about these things. I am sure he cares deeply about software licenses.
What open source does is to provide 80% of the functionality at 0% of the cost. This is a powerful force and will force commercial companies to make their product better and that's a good thing for everybody. Eventually just about any open source product will be "good enough" and free and at that point the cost benefit analysis will favor the open source project.
Of course MS knows this and is now trying new ways to lock in customers so that they can't switch. they are very good at this will succeed. They will also attack open source software developers with legal action and civil suits if the customers decide they don't like being locked in but it might not come to that.
What get's lost in this conversation is that there is only room for MS and open source. Everybody else will either be crushed by MS or crushed by Open source. It's only a matter of time. the days of making money off of selling software are gone only MS will make money selling software.
I thought the whole idea of BSD license was to let anybody use the code for whatever they want. Why would anybody who chose to release their code under BSD compalin about somebody taking their code and relisencing it? It seems awfully hypocritical to me.
You don't object to corporations taking your code, closing it off and then selling it for profit but you object to someone taking the same code and releasing it under GPL. That makes no sense. No wonder you posted as an AC I suspect even you know how stupid you sound.
Slashdot Mirror
Why did you wait this long? You could have built very snappy gui apps for windows in VB or Delphi and yes even C++ for a long time. You still can you know. I fyou like jave great, if you like C# great but let's get real there are a lot of languages which let you use native gui apps in windows.
COM couldn't kill java, DCOM couldnt, VB could not, Delphi could not, ASP could not, IE could not. So far nothing MS has tried manged to kill java. I suspect this is because cross platform is actually a desirable thing for most corporations. As long as LInux continues to grow and corporations are using unix and mainframes java will be around and growing. The only way MS could kill java is to make the whole shebang cross platform and they will never do that.
I think the the trolltech guys ever attempted to do such a thing they would get their asses sued off. the last thing MS wants is a cross platform language.
Actually that suit is over. Ms decided to settle that suit and a few others by giving Borland a shitload of money. This was probably a good thing becasue they not only stole programmers but the tabbed interface from quatro pro too. I think they knew they were going to lose.
"Btw, I always find it ironic how those that claim to be interested in the masses show such utter lack of respect for them."
I have no interest in the masses. I have an interest in myself. In many many ways I am a minority in the united states. When the time comes that the US govt does not like me anymore they will use the gullable masses to round me up. Don't mistake my critisim of the US govt as some sort of a fondness for the brainless dupes who gather in front of the TV every night.
Did you follow the election? Do you remember the NY republican primary? That was a tough one for Bush because McCain was actually running ahead in many part of NY. Bush knew that if he lost NY his chance at the presidency was over. So they tried all kinds of nasty tricks like trying to get McCain off the ballots in some places and such. Well towards the end McCain was starting to pull ahead when a texas businessman spent a tens of thousands dollars (out of the goodness of his heart of course) and bought a bunch of advertising claiming that McCain was in favor of giving women breast cancer. It was done in a very sleazy way but that's not really surprising.
What is suprising was the the people of NY actually believed this. They not only thought that McCain was in favor of giving women breast cancer but that George Bush had nothing to do with these ads. Bush won by a slim margin.
If that is not evidence of the stupidity of the american public I don't know what is (well that and the WB network but I digress).
" Look. You didn't mention IE in your original post at all. You mentioned the server product"
Maybe you should have read the entire thread before you jumped in. the thread was about netscape failing because MS decided to cut off their air supply. Again go back and read the thread and while you are at it go read some transcripts.
"Netscape never got to be evil in the sense you claim MS is because they were too busy not having a money-making business"
maybe they were just ethical people who had a sincere desire to make the world a better place. Maybe you have to be evil to succeed and they weren't evil enough.
"Long explanation, short: It's all just software and business, buddy. If you think the success of one product or vender over the other is really going to change your life, you're likely in for a letdown."
Yes it's all business and no not all businesses and business people are evil. But in this case I get severely impacted. The fact that an MS monopoly means I pay more for software I have to use is significant. So is the fact that MS is choking off innovation by destroying companies which innovate. As soon as an innovative product comes out MS jumps in and destroys them by dumping free software and shoving their competing product everybodies throat.
MS will very soon control all information and all communication on the internet and beyond. Considering that the only thing that separates us from animals is the ability to communicate I would say this has a huge impact in my life.
Somewhere there is a planet full of people who think that the acts of the richest most powerful person on the planet and his corporation have zero impact on the population at large. I would urge you to buy a ticket there. Over there people may take you seriously.
"I'm sort of amused by this, I bet it cost them at least $100 to have thier lawyers tell me off."
If everybody did what you did it might cost them some real money. Especially if you replied and argued your case. You could have argued that the spam you got was not covered by your agreement and that they indeed owed you money. Imagine if a thousand people did this?
"Name me one nation the United States has annexed"
The US has learned it's lessons from the experience of nations like Israel and russia. Namely that pysically occupying people who don't want to be occupied is a painful and expensive endevor. Look at palestine. To this day palestenians would rather die then live under Israeli rule. We are much more sophisticated then that.
We control people via puppets and proxies. We overthrow democratically elected governments to install our own despots (shah of iran). We fund and arm lunatics like pinochet, we train death squads in central america, we fincacially support countries like israel who routinely torture prisoners and kill civilians and of course we routinely kill via bombardment and sanctions. I think it was a former secy of state who said that the deaths of 1.2 million people including over 500,000 thousand children in iraq was a "inevatable but aceptable consequence" of our sanctions in Iraq. That is not a actual quote but it was the jist of the comment.
Why would we actually occupy a country when we can install a puppet govt and make sure the people are killed, tortured, enslaved or simply made to work prividing us with coffee and sugar. It's cheaper and easier and allows us pretend that we are somehow more moral then the roman empire.
"Look at the US's "peers" in the world scene: Russia, China, India, Japan,"
Moral relativism at it's best. You see we are not the only ones evil!. Why not pick the best examples and strive to be like them? Better yet why not decide what is moral and right and do that.
"We're talking about very specific and detailed information that a very small part of the population can even claim to have the most remote of interest in."
Defending the rights of minorities is the hallmark of a republic. When I was in school my professor explained the difference between a democracy and a republic this way. A democracy is a lynching of a black man by ten white men. Ten votes for, one vote against. In a republic lynching is not acceptable because the right of minories are not up for vote.
"Oh please. Why? Justify your belief in reasoning that US policymakers are out to shaft its own people"
you are kidding me right? Is it your position that the US policymakers never shaft their own people? How many examples of this would it take to convince you that the US policymakers reoutinely shaft their own people?
"Gimme a break. These people need to get re-elected."
All they need to get elected is a bunch of money. Most americans are sheep and will vote for whoever the TV says to.
There may be a few but most would simply obey their superiors like they were trained to do.
I spent my time in the military and my observation was that most people would most like go awol if they could or just do what they are told. You and your buddies may try and do something but let's face it you are no match against the combined armament of the entire US military infrastructure. you would be killed like the tens of thousands of taliban or the hundreds of thousands of iraquis.
You could not be more wrong. The goal of a terrorist is to cause discontent, panic, and unease in the populace. As the US govt clamps down on dissent, free press, freedom of expression, freedom of association etc it will cause increased agitation in an already agitated public. I know most americans have a critically short memory span but if you remember a while back an American hated the govt so much they blew up a federal building. All those people who ran the shovel brigade in jarbirdge, who opened up the water mains in oregon, who phoned in death threats to govt employees all over america are not going to be happier as a result of a government crackdown on freedoms.
Those people are already armed and organized. They already hate the govt and now any act of terrorism they may commit will be automatically blamed on arabs. They have a free ride for the forseeable future to do whatever kind of mayhem they want. All these laws will simply encourage them to go ahead.
"My point was that if the threat of a widely available and free webserver was what killed Netscape, "
That may be your point but it's not mine. I will say it again. Whatever Netscape made MS also made and gave it away for free and shoved it down people's throats. You could not install service pack three to NT4.0 without installing IE. Many Ms programs all of sudden demanded the IE be installed. That's just one example there are others.
"Yeah yeah, MS is evil. Boo hoo. Netscape would have been evil too if the free-market would have allowed it to."
I am glad you agree that MS is evil. I think it's obvious to most people. But you have no evidence that other business people are as unethical and immoral as Bill Gates and his mafia are. A lot of companies have dominant positions in other industries yet they have not resorted to the tactics that MS has. If you have some evidence of the evil nature of Netscape executives please provide some links I would love to hear about them.
BTW saying it's OK for Bill Gates to be evil because other people are evil is no defense. That's like saying Bill gates is evil but that's ok because Jeffrey Dahmer is evil too.
If you are getting paid to defend Bill Gates and his company you need to start doing a better job of it. If you are not getting paid to do this then you need to re-evaluate your own ethical and moral grounds and perhaps ask yourself why you feel the need to defend a corporation. When I was in HIgh school there were a lot of idiots who would rage about ford or chevy or nike or addidas (I am dating myself I know). I never figures out why these people would be boosters for some corporation perhaps it made them feel more powerful to be rooting for a big corporation or perhaps it made them feel significant in some way. The poor slobs never considered that they may simply be brainwashed by advertising. Either way I figure these people got over it eventually because as I got older fewer people were engaged in that kind of nonsense.
So what is your execuse? Are you in high school or do you somehow feel empowered when you defend MS. DO you think that Bill Gates will one day notice your efforts on his behalf and reward you somehow? You admit that Bill is evil so why do you defend him or excuse his behaviour? really I want to know what makes someone like you tick.
Well that's a nice bit of revisionism. First of all we are not talking three years ago. We are talking about the days of windows for workgroups and trumpet winsock. That's when it all started. When Netscape saw that MS was giving away IE for free and shoving down people's throats they started a push into the server market. This was a smart thing to do because they knew they could not compete with free. When MS saw that they started giving away free web servers like IIS and free client stuff like netmeeting.
In those days linux was a gimpse in the eye of a few ubergeeks. Certainly no business had ever heard of it and they were the ones paying for web server.
MS said they were going to cut off netscapes air supply and they did it. They said they were going to knife apple in the back and they did it. It's all in the transcripts if you bother to read it. MS executives are some of the most ruthless, unethical, venegeful, evil people on the planet today. I bet Osama Bin Laden wishes he was that evil.
"Telling the truth is not a legal defence. If you have enough money - as McDonalds did - then you get to write your own laws."
Unfortunately you are right. This day and age a common person has no options other then violence. If the courts are corrupted, the politicians are corrupted, the media is corrupted what else is there to do except take arms (or chemicals or bacteria).
I will reply to your sig.
"Can bin Laden get a fair trial?"
As fair as any black man accused of drug dealing, any arab accused of terrorism, any poor person occused of anything. Which is to say no.
Only the rich get fair trials in America.
Netscape did try the server business but MS starting giving away IIS and bundled it NT. MS was determined to replicate every netscape product and give it away for free. Nobody can compete with that. Nobody.
As long as MS had monopoly profits from windows they could keep that up.
Of course part of this was a personal vendetta by Bill gates who felt snubbed by netscape.
MS will do this with any company which tries to make a living in the software business. There is no more software business. It's either MS or open source no room for anything else.
Althought not the ideal split it would still help a little. MS used it's monopoly profits to subsidize office. When office came out it also cost much less then competitive products because MS did not have to make money on office. Same with IE, money, etc. Now that monopolies have been built in office, browser, media player, operating system ms can subsidize things like passport and MSN. If any of these products had to live or die on their own merits they would cost much more. Can you imagine is passport was a company which had no other product but was trying to convince people to use it? Nobody would sign up and it would die. MS can force people to sigh up and feed money into it forever to keep it alive. Break up the monopoly and that money dries up.
Ideally they should be broken into a dozen or more companies.
" right, because nobody has the right to criticize in your wonderful utopia"
No just you. you don't have the right because you are an ignorant liar. I hope you see the difference between critism and lying.
BTW It's impossible to mock Jesus. Jesus does not exist. Some people think he exists even though there is no evidence for it. They claim that he is GOD ALMIGHTY ALL POWERFUL BEING THAT CREATED THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE. You think an entity like that cares about posts on slashdot? That's funny.
I too have been in your situation many times. Anybody who claims that the private industry is somehow more efficient or clueful then the govt needs to read your post.
A couple of things.
1) You are a liar. Or maybe you are ignorant. Either way I don't think jesus would approve. The savannah project does not limit itself to GPLed products. They accept just about any open source licence. Your criticims are based on lies and ignorance.
2) If in reaction to the "stigma" of GPL or by your personal hatred of RMS (a man you probably have never met) you decide to write closed source software or software which does not somehow qualify for hosting on savanah keep this in mind. It's their fucking server, it's their fucking bandwith, it's their fucking software, it's their fucking labor and you are entitled to NONE of it. NONE. You hate them and yet you expect them to donate their money and time to you to make your life easier. I don't think so.
Here is my advice to you.
Get off your ass and build a server. Go write a great application which duplicated all or most of the sourceforge functions (sourceforge has the stigma of GPL remember). Then go buy some bandwidth and then invite people to host non GPLed software on it. Make sure RMS has never come close or breathed on any software hosted on your platform because you would not want that evil GPL mojo getting near your server. Then not only will jesus love you but you will have the right to point and crtitise the savannah project.
Until then shut up and sit down.
Does Jesus advise you to badmouth other peoples volunteer efforts instead of pitching in to help? Perhaps you can ask him for advice next time. Say to him. Jesus is it right to critize the savannah project? Is it better for me to say bad things about them even if they are not true or to help them? Jesus should I start my own project where people with other licenses can host their own projects?
I bet Jesus can give you some good advice about these things. I am sure he cares deeply about software licenses.
" Then the problem is not with you, it is with her"
Well of course it could never be a problem with her could it.
What open source does is to provide 80% of the functionality at 0% of the cost. This is a powerful force and will force commercial companies to make their product better and that's a good thing for everybody. Eventually just about any open source product will be "good enough" and free and at that point the cost benefit analysis will favor the open source project.
Of course MS knows this and is now trying new ways to lock in customers so that they can't switch. they are very good at this will succeed. They will also attack open source software developers with legal action and civil suits if the customers decide they don't like being locked in but it might not come to that.
What get's lost in this conversation is that there is only room for MS and open source. Everybody else will either be crushed by MS or crushed by Open source. It's only a matter of time. the days of making money off of selling software are gone only MS will make money selling software.
I thought the whole idea of BSD license was to let anybody use the code for whatever they want. Why would anybody who chose to release their code under BSD compalin about somebody taking their code and relisencing it? It seems awfully hypocritical to me.
You don't object to corporations taking your code, closing it off and then selling it for profit but you object to someone taking the same code and releasing it under GPL. That makes no sense. No wonder you posted as an AC I suspect even you know how stupid you sound.
In that case make your own site to howst your own projects. What's the big deal?
I know what the answers will be.
1) I don't know.
2) If you don't know then I can't explain it to you.
3) Nothing.