Listen, you'd have to be a moron not to be able to make some economic gain on a resource that you get for free. Apple make their money from their slick closed source GUI built on top of freely available software (in large part) developed by others.
The question is asking (stupidly IMHO) how can you provide that resource for free and still make money from producing it. I say the two are mutually exclusive. If you are making money, it's not from something you are providing for free.
Exactly. So if you want to make money from writing open source software, find a company that wants to pay you (hopefully handsomely) to do so. Don't set up your own project on sourceforge, and wonder why the money doesn't start rolling in.
Jeezum Crow, even Billy hasn't figured a way around that one yet, it keeps him up nights working on it, but he still hasn't found the answer.
The difference being that Bill Gates is still making money from the sale of his software, whereas Open source developers are not. So while Bill Gates may lose a few seconds sleep about people providing Windows consulting he is still the richest man on earth. Open source developers potentially lose all their revenue to others providing consulting. Can you provide the same level of service as IBM?
That's all fine and dandy, but why would you write your own software, when you can offer the exact same services for other peoples Open Source software?
This is true, but it's going to be just another level of OK's for the user to click through. I presume some operators will have the sense to disable the user override feature on their subsidised phones, (to loud complaints no doubt).
The US is the one insisting they take IP rights seriously. So some company takes it seriously, and suddenly everyone is up in arms. Rather than "double standard", I'd call it "deliciously ironic".
Just wait until China starts enforcing patents it decides to grant to it's own companies on any foreign company that wants to operate there. The fun'll really start then.
Because big bad Apple stole their idea and potential revenue. But look, patent system to the rescue of the small inventor!
I don't believe the above by the way, I think that patents are the enemy of the free market. However any pro-patent company gets what it deserves when sued like this. I have no sympathy for Apple (or Microsoft as regards Eolas) at all.
I agree you see the XP desktop faster, that's my point. The thing is, though that it hasn't finished booting when it shows you the desktop. It continues for quite some time afterwards, whereas linux doesn't show you the desktop until all the other stuff is basically done. So this quick desktop falls into the category of "trick".
The "complete" XP boot may or may not be overall faster, but you can't tell anything about it from how fast it shows you the desktop, other than the microsoft people are smart enough to know that we don't like to wait around for 40 seconds to use the desktop.
You'll be waiting a long time before Y-Windows delivers anything useful to you. The project, while not entirely dead, is hardly the picture of health either. Check out their mail list archives for how not to run an open source project, and how to scare away users and potential developers.
"Seems fast" is all people want for a desktop environment. It can still be "actually slow", so long as it uses some psychological trick to "seem fast".
They and any big employer don't need to buy anybody. They have already gotten gift wrapped any government in whose territory they employ significant numbers of people.
For example, Microsoft has a big office in Dublin. They employ over 1200 people there, and have no doubt a bunch of dependant supplier companies, all in all contributing hugely to the local economy. You think that doesn't automatically get you an awful lot of influence over a national government? Hell, who is that guy in the middle of the picture on the Microsoft Ireland website? Unless there is a similarly sized competing interest with an opposite viewpoint, they will fight your corner just to stay on your good side.
And who is it that makes up the European Commission? Oh look, it's national government representatives.
Microsoft are certainly not the only big pro-patent company in Europe, and that is why the commission is trying to railroad this thing through. They think it's good for a bunch of big local employers. If it is to be opposed, and defeated, it is going to be a very hard and long fight.
Humans and bananas are complex multicellular organisms, why wouldn't they share a bunch of DNA (I have no idea if the 60% is accurate)? They have a commonancestor after all.
Well, it's debatable. There have been fixes put to firefox to fix it (though it doens't seem to have worked. Gotten worse if anything). That said, slashdot's html doesn't validate against any standard whatsoever (particularly not the one it actually claims to be), so agruably there is no "correct" way to render it.
They are not complaining because AOL had the nerve to touch their precious open source firefox. They are complaining because AOL took a pretty much excellent product and crappified it. Their sense of aesthetics is offended.
But we might not have known that Paterson was the person responsible until now. So his previously (neutral/unknown) reputation with me has gone down as a result of this book (appearing on slashdot in connection with his case).
Slashdot Mirror
Open source drinks, hamburgers, ... Yeah, and if you sell a PC with Linux installed on it you'll make money too, from the PC hardware.
Listen, you'd have to be a moron not to be able to make some economic gain on a resource that you get for free. Apple make their money from their slick closed source GUI built on top of freely available software (in large part) developed by others.
The question is asking (stupidly IMHO) how can you provide that resource for free and still make money from producing it. I say the two are mutually exclusive. If you are making money, it's not from something you are providing for free.
Exactly. So if you want to make money from writing open source software, find a company that wants to pay you (hopefully handsomely) to do so. Don't set up your own project on sourceforge, and wonder why the money doesn't start rolling in.
That's all fine and dandy, but why would you write your own software, when you can offer the exact same services for other peoples Open Source software?
What makes you think it's not designed to be exactly that way?
This is true, but it's going to be just another level of OK's for the user to click through. I presume some operators will have the sense to disable the user override feature on their subsidised phones, (to loud complaints no doubt).
Same reason a PC can, because people want to run applications on them.
I wasn't copying their copyrighted music your honour, I was only receiving "digital data".
The US is the one insisting they take IP rights seriously. So some company takes it seriously, and suddenly everyone is up in arms. Rather than "double standard", I'd call it "deliciously ironic".
Just wait until China starts enforcing patents it decides to grant to it's own companies on any foreign company that wants to operate there. The fun'll really start then.
Because big bad Apple stole their idea and potential revenue. But look, patent system to the rescue of the small inventor!
I don't believe the above by the way, I think that patents are the enemy of the free market. However any pro-patent company gets what it deserves when sued like this. I have no sympathy for Apple (or Microsoft as regards Eolas) at all.
I agree you see the XP desktop faster, that's my point. The thing is, though that it hasn't finished booting when it shows you the desktop. It continues for quite some time afterwards, whereas linux doesn't show you the desktop until all the other stuff is basically done. So this quick desktop falls into the category of "trick".
The "complete" XP boot may or may not be overall faster, but you can't tell anything about it from how fast it shows you the desktop, other than the microsoft people are smart enough to know that we don't like to wait around for 40 seconds to use the desktop.
You'll be waiting a long time before Y-Windows delivers anything useful to you. The project, while not entirely dead, is hardly the picture of health either. Check out their mail list archives for how not to run an open source project, and how to scare away users and potential developers.
Piracy matters far more to a small company than a big one, so long as both are selling rather than giving away.
... in the same way as [gif rendering program] is affected by the Unisys patent...
No, in the same way as is affected by the Unisys patent.
It just happens to be lucky that you can render the fonts (in an inferior way) without infringing the patent.
"Seems fast" is all people want for a desktop environment. It can still be "actually slow", so long as it uses some psychological trick to "seem fast".
Specifically designed to aviod using a certain patented technique seems "affected" to me.
They and any big employer don't need to buy anybody. They have already gotten gift wrapped any government in whose territory they employ significant numbers of people.
For example, Microsoft has a big office in Dublin. They employ over 1200 people there, and have no doubt a bunch of dependant supplier companies, all in all contributing hugely to the local economy. You think that doesn't automatically get you an awful lot of influence over a national government? Hell, who is that guy in the middle of the picture on the Microsoft Ireland website? Unless there is a similarly sized competing interest with an opposite viewpoint, they will fight your corner just to stay on your good side.
And who is it that makes up the European Commission? Oh look, it's national government representatives.
Microsoft are certainly not the only big pro-patent company in Europe, and that is why the commission is trying to railroad this thing through. They think it's good for a bunch of big local employers. If it is to be opposed, and defeated, it is going to be a very hard and long fight.
Humans and bananas are complex multicellular organisms, why wouldn't they share a bunch of DNA (I have no idea if the 60% is accurate)? They have a commonancestor after all.
Well, it's debatable. There have been fixes put to firefox to fix it (though it doens't seem to have worked. Gotten worse if anything). That said, slashdot's html doesn't validate against any standard whatsoever (particularly not the one it actually claims to be), so agruably there is no "correct" way to render it.
They are not complaining because AOL had the nerve to touch their precious open source firefox. They are complaining because AOL took a pretty much excellent product and crappified it. Their sense of aesthetics is offended.
that it was a lousy rip.
But we might not have known that Paterson was the person responsible until now. So his previously (neutral/unknown) reputation with me has gone down as a result of this book (appearing on slashdot in connection with his case).