Bullshit argument. There is no correlation between wanting the GPL to be enforced and wanting music, movies, and games copyrights to be obliterated. You are doing undue pregidious to to honest copyright respecting slashdot readers. If you want to attack those that pirate games/etc, do so, you do not need to drag innocent people through the mud for it.
He's a fascist and he won't be happy until everyone is doing it "his" way. Although I may be inclined to suggest that he not accuse a successful corporation of "not getting it" when they are doing what they sought out to do, make money.
I really hate these GNU trolls that despise anything that isn't GPLed. I find them more annoying than the door to door religions.
I don't understand why you people are pulling a bitch fight here.
You like Linux, use Linux. He likes BSD, he should use BSD. No need to slap each other and try to drag both OSes in the mud during the process. That's immature.
Just two points:
1. I wouldn't call the FreeBSD Linux "emulation" dodgy. It works very, very well.
2. Personally, I prefer softupdates to filesystem journals, although NetBSD has a journaled filesystem (not production ready) and the major players in both the Net and FreeBSD camps are very interested in getting one. I believe the intent is to have choice, because we all know choice is a good thing. This is why multiple OSes exist.... Linux wouldn't exist if someone didn't find it useful, same goes for BSD.
Personally, I as a FreeBSD user find this place to be hopelessly annoying. Every time I come here and BSD is mentioned I have to shift through wars of people claiming that BSD sucks, doesn't work, blah blah. I might be inclined to believe them, if my personal experience with FreeBSD hasn't been so beautiful.
I just wish people would stop bitching and just use what works for them. There is no need to make it a political issue.
"Note that only the CD layout is copyrighted, OpenBSD itself is free. Nothing precludes someone else from downloading OpenBSD and making their own CD."
You are greatly exagerating an otherwise small deal. It takes a small amount of time to make your own ISO. There is nothing complicated about it. If this bothers you that much, well, I don't know what to say. Sorry. I don't find anything hypocritical about it. To me it's like calling a fisher a hypocrite because he also lobbies against the death penalty.
Isn't the point of the BSD licence to encourage code sharing?
It is, but it isn't the developers you see whining, it's the users with a bone to pick. OpenBSD takes NetBSD's SMP implementation, NetBSD takes PF, FreeBSD takes PF, NetBSD takes UFS2, etc, etc.
I don't even understand why you're fighting with this guy. I use OpenBSD, you use OpenBSD, we both think it's great. If they want to troll in OpenBSD related slashdot threads that's their social problem, not ours. I'd prefer if the trolling/negative crap went ignored and got modded into oblivion.
GEOM is a FreeBSD 5.x advancement. It is therefore necessary for FreeBSD trolls (who want to make people believe that FreeBSD is going in the absolutely wrong direction) to claim that anything new in FreeBSD 5.x sucks.
Such as GEOM, which I personally find to be great.
I disagree that it is as misleading as you think, but you do bring up a good argument, the only problem is, how many OSS software companies can be compared to Microsoft? IBM is a stretch, but I'd accept it, (The don't really do a whole lot of developing these days, from what I understand) but who else?
Actually, I'm not anti-OSS at all. I believe there is a lot of Value in Open Source software, and I use it almost exclusively.
You are (and I don't believe this to be deliberate at all) dragging the argument outside of its bounds. This is purely about whether or not OSS is more profitable than Propritary software.
What makes Microsoft so profitable? That they jumped the industry and then locked everyone into their garbage? Quite possible, and that is a trait of proprietary software. It may not be respectable, it may not be honest, but it is more profitable (in my opinion).
In fact, the only segment of Open Source Software that I have a problem with is the zealots who run around nay-saying everything that isn't GPLed (and it can be anything, Microsoft, BSD, Sun). I say, if Open Source software is truly better than Propritary software (and in most cases I believe that to be true) then prove it. Stop the bickering, start coding.
Uh, IBM makes most of its money off hardware. The fact that it uses Open Source software to leverage that hardware is quite irrelevant. Your point is misleading.
How about we compare corporations like Red Hat to Microsoft. I think that argument is much more compelling.
Actually, he said he wanted something for cutting his teeth on it. OS X doesn't fit, it hides the complexity of BSD under a very thick GUI layer. Aside from the extremely high price factor (PPC + OS fees) it just doesn't seem like a good "Learn BSD" OS to me.
Slashdot Mirror
I've got a clue for you... Stallman's a facist jackass.
Do you want me to post a screenshot of me using XComposite to play back a PrBoom demo (partially transparent, with drop shadows enabled)?
PrBoom is an SDL application.
I'd like to point out that XMMS didn't drop mp3 support. Distributions like RedHat and Fedora strip the mp3 support out.
I'll install xmms from source, and the latest versions are of great use to me.
Bullshit argument. There is no correlation between wanting the GPL to be enforced and wanting music, movies, and games copyrights to be obliterated. You are doing undue pregidious to to honest copyright respecting slashdot readers. If you want to attack those that pirate games/etc, do so, you do not need to drag innocent people through the mud for it.
d actually represented the whole FreeBSD slice, not the disk.
You don't understand, dude.
He's a fascist and he won't be happy until everyone is doing it "his" way. Although I may be inclined to suggest that he not accuse a successful corporation of "not getting it" when they are doing what they sought out to do, make money.
I really hate these GNU trolls that despise anything that isn't GPLed. I find them more annoying than the door to door religions.
It should be considered improper to the point of being anti-social to not use encryption.
:P
I get it. It's like GNU, if someone is doing something you don't like, they're anti-social.
I don't understand why you people are pulling a bitch fight here.
You like Linux, use Linux. He likes BSD, he should use BSD. No need to slap each other and try to drag both OSes in the mud during the process. That's immature.
Just two points:
1. I wouldn't call the FreeBSD Linux "emulation" dodgy. It works very, very well.
2. Personally, I prefer softupdates to filesystem journals, although NetBSD has a journaled filesystem (not production ready) and the major players in both the Net and FreeBSD camps are very interested in getting one. I believe the intent is to have choice, because we all know choice is a good thing. This is why multiple OSes exist.... Linux wouldn't exist if someone didn't find it useful, same goes for BSD.
Personally, I as a FreeBSD user find this place to be hopelessly annoying. Every time I come here and BSD is mentioned I have to shift through wars of people claiming that BSD sucks, doesn't work, blah blah. I might be inclined to believe them, if my personal experience with FreeBSD hasn't been so beautiful.
I just wish people would stop bitching and just use what works for them. There is no need to make it a political issue.
I also hate you for knowing that.
;)
Now THAT is thinking different!
Didn't crash me. OpenBSD/Firefox
I disagree. Linux is malware.
Whether or not it is hypocritical...
"Note that only the CD layout is copyrighted, OpenBSD itself is free. Nothing precludes someone else from downloading OpenBSD and making their own CD."
You are greatly exagerating an otherwise small deal. It takes a small amount of time to make your own ISO. There is nothing complicated about it. If this bothers you that much, well, I don't know what to say. Sorry. I don't find anything hypocritical about it. To me it's like calling a fisher a hypocrite because he also lobbies against the death penalty.
OpenBSD turns up in Netcraft as "Unknown OS". Not that OpenBSD is a big contender for webservers, but... just a point.
OpenBSD 3.7 on i386 uses GCC 3.3.
Isn't the point of the BSD licence to encourage code sharing?
It is, but it isn't the developers you see whining, it's the users with a bone to pick. OpenBSD takes NetBSD's SMP implementation, NetBSD takes PF, FreeBSD takes PF, NetBSD takes UFS2, etc, etc.
I don't even understand why you're fighting with this guy. I use OpenBSD, you use OpenBSD, we both think it's great. If they want to troll in OpenBSD related slashdot threads that's their social problem, not ours. I'd prefer if the trolling/negative crap went ignored and got modded into oblivion.
GEOM is a FreeBSD 5.x advancement. It is therefore necessary for FreeBSD trolls (who want to make people believe that FreeBSD is going in the absolutely wrong direction) to claim that anything new in FreeBSD 5.x sucks.
Such as GEOM, which I personally find to be great.
The argument was clearly about it being profitable to the developer.
I disagree that it is as misleading as you think, but you do bring up a good argument, the only problem is, how many OSS software companies can be compared to Microsoft? IBM is a stretch, but I'd accept it, (The don't really do a whole lot of developing these days, from what I understand) but who else?
Actually, I'm not anti-OSS at all. I believe there is a lot of Value in Open Source software, and I use it almost exclusively.
You are (and I don't believe this to be deliberate at all) dragging the argument outside of its bounds. This is purely about whether or not OSS is more profitable than Propritary software.
What makes Microsoft so profitable? That they jumped the industry and then locked everyone into their garbage? Quite possible, and that is a trait of proprietary software. It may not be respectable, it may not be honest, but it is more profitable (in my opinion).
In fact, the only segment of Open Source Software that I have a problem with is the zealots who run around nay-saying everything that isn't GPLed (and it can be anything, Microsoft, BSD, Sun). I say, if Open Source software is truly better than Propritary software (and in most cases I believe that to be true) then prove it. Stop the bickering, start coding.
Uh, IBM makes most of its money off hardware. The fact that it uses Open Source software to leverage that hardware is quite irrelevant. Your point is misleading.
How about we compare corporations like Red Hat to Microsoft. I think that argument is much more compelling.
Actually, he said he wanted something for cutting his teeth on it. OS X doesn't fit, it hides the complexity of BSD under a very thick GUI layer. Aside from the extremely high price factor (PPC + OS fees) it just doesn't seem like a good "Learn BSD" OS to me.
Plus XCOMPOSITE isn't nearly as harsh performance wise if you have your nVidia drivers set in xorg.conf to accelerate RENDER.
Not since you guys elected Bush twice. :p