So... because you use a program for something it's neither intended nor designed for... it sucks? If that's the case, Quark is a shitty word processor, Emacs is a horrible SVG editor, and Frozen Bubble is the worst fucking database I've ever seen.
Incorrect. You are allowed to charge whatever you want, provided you supply the source code for whatever binaries you distribute. HOWEVER, by doing so they do one of two things. Either they validate the GPL at which point they lose the right to bitch about the code in the kernel (since they VOLUNTARILY have been distributing it under the GPL), or they INvalidate the GPL at which point all rights to all the software revert back to the original owners and SCO is left holding their balls as wave after wave of geeks sign up for the inevitable class-action copyright infringement suit.
The problem is, there will NEVER be a 'feasible OSS game engine'. The engines that are out there now are on Quake 3/Unreal Tournament graphical levels. The only OSS engine I know of that even uses DirectX 9 features is Tenebrae, and that's based on QUAKE code.
This is in no way offtopic and is in fact the entire crux of the argument AGAINST open source game development. You simply can't find good artists or musicians willing to work for free. On the rare occasion you do find a good artist working on a mod, he's typically one of the project heads. Getting someone to come into a project is almost impossible.
The parent is entirely right. You can't expect commercial quality games from OSS development. By the time the game is done, the bar for 'commercial quality' has risen two notches higher.
Incorrect. Open Source and Free Software are both methods of development that involve the use of permissive licenses to propagate community interest. GPL is a license, Free Software is not.
Please, if you're going to troll, at least be *slightly* factual about it.
The fact that Microsoft apologists are so axious to obfuscate the tie seems to actually strengthen the argument.
You make a careful, well-reasoned, an intelligent argument. THEN you proceed to ruin it with this statement. It's the backup parrot of ANY good conspiracy theorist. "Well, of course there's no evidence. That just PROVES there's a conspiracy!"
2. Was it a hope for IBM et al to buy them out and save a failing Company?
Doubtful. IBM is known as a company full of assholes when it comes to business. They'd rather stomp a company into the ground than bend over show their ass to the world. Personally, I respect that attitude.
3. Did M$ really engineer all this anyway?
Hell. No. This is a stupid fucking question. Just think about it for a second. Do you really think that MS would do something this incredibly incompetent? Please. If MS wanted a piece of this action, they would have fucking BOUGHT SCO and done it RIGHT.
SCO's situation is worse than that when it comes to the GPL. Either they say the GPL is invalid, at which point they lose any and all right to distribute the code in the Linux kernel (and other Linux software), or the GPL is valid and they have knowingly and willingly contributed their code to a GPL project (by releasing SCOSource and Caldera... and whatever other Linux-based projects they have). I don't even have an opinion on this case and I can see SCO is fucked.
Software cannot be simultaneously "shareware" and "GPL".
Absolutely, utterly, 100% INCORRECT. What the term IMPLIES and what it actually does are two different things. As long as the source is available (which it is), he is well within the word of the GPL. Learn more about something before talking about it.
Facts from someone that actuallys knows what they're talking about? That dog won't hunt, dude. Promptly hand in your Slashdot ID card and vacate the premises.
My statement is completely unrelated to what you personally use, and actually it's COMPLETELY unrelated to you. I'm referring to the people that see it as no big deal when an exploit is found in Mozilla because "Oh, it'll be patched soon." but still blame MS when a worm they had a patch for MONTHS AGO goes nuclear and takes out half the web.
AFAIK, they still own a chunk of Apple. Their ownership of part of Apple is not a prerequisite for the rest of my point (they develop for that platform) to be valid.
Eat your own dogfood man !
Hey, I've already been outside THREE TIMES today! And I TALKED TO PEOPLE while I was out there.
Yes, compiling stuff for Windows is a lot of work and I see nothing intrinsically wrong with charging for the Windows version of an program that is open source on Linux. But, sorry, if he uses other people's GPL'ed source code, he can't do that retroactively.
Yes he can. Ever heard of Redhat? Suse? Mandrake?
Those are not the terms under which people contributed code to XChat, and changing the license after the fact without consent from contributors is a violation of trust.
What license change? Everything I've read simply points to him selling the Windows version as shareware, which is ENTIRELY permissible under the GPL, even for other people's code.
When Linux users stop trying to sweep their problems under the rug while at the same time shouting out Windows problems, I'll agree with you. Until that time, STFU.
Yeah, I'm sick of hearing this whiny tit moronic shit. "AH-HAH! Someone at M$ uses Firefox! M$$ IS T3H DYING!!!!1" Ummm... no, retard, they just don't see software as a fucking religion. I worked for one guitar company and still was able to play other companies guitars. My hands didn't burn off due to the sacrilege. It's a fucking piece of software. Same with the dipshits that spooge their pants when someone mentions MS buying more Macs. "OMG! THEY BUY APPLES!" They own a large stake of the company, and develop software for their platform... gee, why would they want to use Macs?
Repeat after me: "I am a loser. I fill the void that social retardation has left in my personality with stupid shit that nobody else gives a flying fuck about. My opinion does not matter to anyone but me. My continued insistence on software-as-religion is fucking stupid, and I need to go out and get laid or at LEAST interact with other humans in some way."
Yeah, I can see why someone would get that idea. I like Maddox's stuff but I'm not trying to rip him off or anything. When I'm trying to rip someone off, I make sure you know it.;)
Slashdot Mirror
So... because you use a program for something it's neither intended nor designed for... it sucks? If that's the case, Quark is a shitty word processor, Emacs is a horrible SVG editor, and Frozen Bubble is the worst fucking database I've ever seen.
Incorrect. You are allowed to charge whatever you want, provided you supply the source code for whatever binaries you distribute. HOWEVER, by doing so they do one of two things. Either they validate the GPL at which point they lose the right to bitch about the code in the kernel (since they VOLUNTARILY have been distributing it under the GPL), or they INvalidate the GPL at which point all rights to all the software revert back to the original owners and SCO is left holding their balls as wave after wave of geeks sign up for the inevitable class-action copyright infringement suit.
SDL fucking sucks. It's slow and buggy as hell. Cross platform shit is still shit.
The problem is, there will NEVER be a 'feasible OSS game engine'. The engines that are out there now are on Quake 3/Unreal Tournament graphical levels. The only OSS engine I know of that even uses DirectX 9 features is Tenebrae, and that's based on QUAKE code.
This is in no way offtopic and is in fact the entire crux of the argument AGAINST open source game development. You simply can't find good artists or musicians willing to work for free. On the rare occasion you do find a good artist working on a mod, he's typically one of the project heads. Getting someone to come into a project is almost impossible.
The parent is entirely right. You can't expect commercial quality games from OSS development. By the time the game is done, the bar for 'commercial quality' has risen two notches higher.
Incorrect. Open Source and Free Software are both methods of development that involve the use of permissive licenses to propagate community interest. GPL is a license, Free Software is not.
Please, if you're going to troll, at least be *slightly* factual about it.
Name an OSS game that isn't derivative.
Given that the most successful mods are programmed, designed, and built by a small group of people I fail to see how this in any way relates to OSS.
And how is that in any way relevant to how their lawyers act? Shitty products != SCO-level incompetency.
Their stock price.
Every brings this up as if it's something astonishing. "OMG! MS INVESTED IN SCO! THEY'RE FUNDING THE FUD CAMPAIGN@!!!!!!"
Because, as wel all know, Microsoft has never invested in another company simply to make money.
SCO's situation is worse than that when it comes to the GPL. Either they say the GPL is invalid, at which point they lose any and all right to distribute the code in the Linux kernel (and other Linux software), or the GPL is valid and they have knowingly and willingly contributed their code to a GPL project (by releasing SCOSource and Caldera... and whatever other Linux-based projects they have). I don't even have an opinion on this case and I can see SCO is fucked.
Facts from someone that actuallys knows what they're talking about? That dog won't hunt, dude. Promptly hand in your Slashdot ID card and vacate the premises.
Thank you,
Management
My statement is completely unrelated to what you personally use, and actually it's COMPLETELY unrelated to you. I'm referring to the people that see it as no big deal when an exploit is found in Mozilla because "Oh, it'll be patched soon." but still blame MS when a worm they had a patch for MONTHS AGO goes nuclear and takes out half the web.
or like "Shitty, half-finished, open/free software"
Oh... wait...
Because I'm bored.
When Linux users stop trying to sweep their problems under the rug while at the same time shouting out Windows problems, I'll agree with you. Until that time, STFU.
Yeah, I'm sick of hearing this whiny tit moronic shit. "AH-HAH! Someone at M$ uses Firefox! M$$ IS T3H DYING!!!!1" Ummm... no, retard, they just don't see software as a fucking religion. I worked for one guitar company and still was able to play other companies guitars. My hands didn't burn off due to the sacrilege. It's a fucking piece of software. Same with the dipshits that spooge their pants when someone mentions MS buying more Macs. "OMG! THEY BUY APPLES!" They own a large stake of the company, and develop software for their platform... gee, why would they want to use Macs?
Repeat after me: "I am a loser. I fill the void that social retardation has left in my personality with stupid shit that nobody else gives a flying fuck about. My opinion does not matter to anyone but me. My continued insistence on software-as-religion is fucking stupid, and I need to go out and get laid or at LEAST interact with other humans in some way."
Ever heard of Direct3D?
Yeah, I can see why someone would get that idea. I like Maddox's stuff but I'm not trying to rip him off or anything. When I'm trying to rip someone off, I make sure you know it. ;)