[i]Much like Y2K, I don't remember anyone talking about it afterwords as having caused real problems.[/i]
Much like you didn't hear about people talking about their Y2K problems...because those that did have problems were [i]killed by the apocolyptic consequences[/i]! Their bodies are hidden in Roswell.
It isn't about shooting yourself in the foot, it is about not giving your money to people who wish to damage GNU/Linux.
While Trolltech does not fall into that category (I am sure that not many of the Canopy companies do), the fact is that when they profit, Canopy profits. Canopy uses those profits to launch spurious lawsuits against other companies. That is their business model - IP patent warfare and abuse.
Trolltech isn't required to obtain financing via Canopy. They are perfectly capable of obtaining financing through other VC firms or other means completely.
The fact is, would you give money to Canopy directly? Then why would you do so indirectly?
That must be why Apache has so many more security problems than IIS, since it is twice as widely used.
Re:business vs tech presss
on
SCO Roundup
·
· Score: 1
That's correct. Trolltech will be on there when I get to T.:)
Re:Who cares???
on
SCO Roundup
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
If you don't fight back against them, who is there to counter their FUD? It is bad enough the "trade media" isn't giving their claims a critical look, you want the people (us geeks) to shut up and ignore them too?
Then nobody will be speaking out against their frivilous claims. Surely that is a Bad Thing (tm).
Re:business vs tech presss
on
SCO Roundup
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Speaking of going on the offensive, I am trying to put together a list of alternatives for each company that is a member of Canopy Group. Hit them in the pocketbook, as that is all they understand.
I need your help idientifying alternative companies for each of them. If you know alternatives to them, please contact me with the information, or reply to this thread.:)
Please. Every company I have ever worked in is "out of compliance" by some amount. I am talking big firms, small firms and everything in between.
The fact is, if you read the article, that he was most upset by how he was treated by the BSA and Microfoft. Which I am guessing you have never had the pleasure of sitting through, either.
let's drop the persecution complex, for crissakes- companies do things for one reason, and one reason only- to MAKE MONEY, not join The Man in fucking open source over.
That's an odd statement since the company we are speaking about makes most of their money by fucking over the competition, including closed and open source products, as often as possible.
You can learn the difference between source code and compiled code and then come back when you learn how to troll better.
Of course you have valuable high-availability enterprise features compiled into your NT kernel that you are using on your single CPU P4 that you play doom on, that you can't do anything about, but don't let that stop you.
Those are all paraphrases as I am not a stenographer, but that is essentially waht they said. It was along the lines of "two years ago we had this great Unixware product with 250 million (or 150 million, i forget which) in sales, and growing. Then IBM came along and scaled up this Linux thing and it took off and that is how Unixware was damaged. It is because of Linux newfound scalibility in the 2.4 series, contributed by IBM and others that caused damage to our product".
That is still paraphrased, but with more detail.:)
I see that you still have not worked on the reasoning skills. Or perhaps it is the reading comprehension that is causing you difficulty. In reality you opened your mouth and promptly inserted your foot and now resort to boring and childish diversionary tactics in the sad hope that will somehow distract from your untenable claims.
So once again, explain how the freedom to choose whatever license a person wants is not freedom? Defend your position if you can.
Oh, I forogot - you can't as there is no defense for it.
Their conclusion is that while the INITITAL defect rate of Apache is roughly equivalent to a closed source product (since they are testing a development release), the Open Source methodology reduces the defects to a greater extent and results in code with fewer defects over time.
They are saying that Open Source coding methods are producing _better_ code in the long run.
Slashdot Mirror
[i]Much like Y2K, I don't remember anyone talking about it afterwords as having caused real problems.[/i]
Much like you didn't hear about people talking about their Y2K problems...because those that did have problems were [i]killed by the apocolyptic consequences[/i]! Their bodies are hidden in Roswell.
IDG is not ZD.
It isn't about shooting yourself in the foot, it is about not giving your money to people who wish to damage GNU/Linux.
While Trolltech does not fall into that category (I am sure that not many of the Canopy companies do), the fact is that when they profit, Canopy profits. Canopy uses those profits to launch spurious lawsuits against other companies. That is their business model - IP patent warfare and abuse.
Trolltech isn't required to obtain financing via Canopy. They are perfectly capable of obtaining financing through other VC firms or other means completely.
The fact is, would you give money to Canopy directly? Then why would you do so indirectly?
That must be why Apache has so many more security problems than IIS, since it is twice as widely used.
That's correct. Trolltech will be on there when I get to T. :)
If you don't fight back against them, who is there to counter their FUD? It is bad enough the "trade media" isn't giving their claims a critical look, you want the people (us geeks) to shut up and ignore them too?
Then nobody will be speaking out against their frivilous claims. Surely that is a Bad Thing (tm).
Speaking of going on the offensive, I am trying to put together a list of alternatives for each company that is a member of Canopy Group. Hit them in the pocketbook, as that is all they understand.
:)
I need your help idientifying alternative companies for each of them. If you know alternatives to them, please contact me with the information, or reply to this thread.
I got the point quite well as I actually participated. Did you?
The article summary is WRONG as knoppix isn't closed.
Some people chose to close completey, others like myself, Apache and Knoppix chose to put up a prominent notice and still allow click-through access.
It just put up a new index page noting the protest. We did the same thing too on 8/27.
Just click the hyperlink that says Knoppix on the page and you are in.
You can find good hypertext rules here.
Please. Every company I have ever worked in is "out of compliance" by some amount. I am talking big firms, small firms and everything in between.
The fact is, if you read the article, that he was most upset by how he was treated by the BSA and Microfoft. Which I am guessing you have never had the pleasure of sitting through, either.
let's drop the persecution complex, for crissakes- companies do things for one reason, and one reason only- to MAKE MONEY, not join The Man in fucking open source over.
That's an odd statement since the company we are speaking about makes most of their money by fucking over the competition, including closed and open source products, as often as possible.
You can learn the difference between source code and compiled code and then come back when you learn how to troll better.
Of course you have valuable high-availability enterprise features compiled into your NT kernel that you are using on your single CPU P4 that you play doom on, that you can't do anything about, but don't let that stop you.
No it was NOT fixed months ago. It was fixed about 3 weeks before the worm came out.
I love how misinformation about this gets out, shifting the blame from MS to the sysadmins of the world.
Why does GNU/Linux need to "win soon" anywhere? It will continue to grow (faster on the server, slower on the dt) year after year.
There is no immediacy. Patience, grasshopper.
Oh, I am sure there are a few fellows over here that probably would. :-)
So no more sharing of my Linux ISOs?
Those are copyrighted too.
MS was notified by eEye on April 16th.
I guess you're right, that is pretty rapid for MS.
Follow the money is what I did...which led me to this article.
MS will Pay your legal fees if you are sued for using their software. My, what interesting timing.
Those are all paraphrases as I am not a stenographer, but that is essentially waht they said. It was along the lines of "two years ago we had this great Unixware product with 250 million (or 150 million, i forget which) in sales, and growing. Then IBM came along and scaled up this Linux thing and it took off and that is how Unixware was damaged. It is because of Linux newfound scalibility in the 2.4 series, contributed by IBM and others that caused damage to our product".
:)
That is still paraphrased, but with more detail.
They want all commercial customers to pay for a Unixware 7.1.3 license for EVERY copy of Linux they are running.
Here's my rundown of the call
Here's the info for the SCO conference call:
Where: US: 800-406-5356
Toll Call: 913-981-5572
Password: 464644
When: Monday, July 21, 2003
Noon EDT
Becasue they are stupid, probably.
Dude, they're running IIS 4.0, take that back.
I see that you still have not worked on the reasoning skills. Or perhaps it is the reading comprehension that is causing you difficulty. In reality you opened your mouth and promptly inserted your foot and now resort to boring and childish diversionary tactics in the sad hope that will somehow distract from your untenable claims.
So once again, explain how the freedom to choose whatever license a person wants is not freedom? Defend your position if you can.
Oh, I forogot - you can't as there is no defense for it.
Everybody take a deep breath.
Their conclusion is that while the INITITAL defect rate of Apache is roughly equivalent to a closed source product (since they are testing a development release), the Open Source methodology reduces the defects to a greater extent and results in code with fewer defects over time.
They are saying that Open Source coding methods are producing _better_ code in the long run.