So QT just needs to add a native GTK feel to that list?
Maybe GTK could just add native QT support, too.;)
Regardless, it would be nice if someone came up with an API that any GUI could use. If GTK cannot provide several things in the API, then it has to figure out what to do in these cases when it can't provide feature X, or even better, if the program wants to use things that GTK doesn't provide, it could default to QT?
Dunno just some ideas.:)
I think standardizing desktop settings so that you can use both KDE and Gnome apps to set certain things is a bit more important than trying to come up with an API to deal with GTK and QT differences.
That's true, it is a hard situation to deal with, but you have to take into account that you don't have to standardize on the lowest common denominator. If done properly, the API should be able to compensate for the places in which there are differences. For example, QT does this here on this program, but when run on GTK, it can't do it, so it instead has to do this and this. Or, if there is no way to replace the feature, leave it blank until it gets adopted perhaps?
Compare it to graphics card APIs, because it's a similar concept, these APIs. A new capability comes out, the API gets extended, and eventually nvidia and ati start to support the new graphics call. If one lags far behind and refuses to add support for popular API feature X, then it will get used less and less. In the same regard, if Gnome and KDE were set up this way from the beginning, perhaps GTK would start to get used less because it may not have all the features that QT has.
In other words, it would turn things into a feature competition among other things instead of a supported application competition. Applications should be more modular so that the real competition can happen more easily where it needs to: features, ease of programming, and speed. If everyone found QT to be faster and nicer looking, and they weren't locked into a bunch of programs, everyone might switch in droves because they'd be free to do so.:)
So, more desktop APIs will serve to make things more modular and free up programs.
I'm sure both are very capable libraries. All I want to see is wxWidgets being used for all GUI frontends so that they have a native feel whether you're in Gnome, KDE, Elightenment, XFCE, OS X, Windows, etc. That is, as soon as wxWidgets has KDE support.
I agree, however I think that eventually any ways in which freedom is stifled is "revealed" to be bad. The ultimate goal of open source software is to allow anyone to use it. The problem is proprietary software is usually always eventually limiting, in some way. Costing money is one reason. If it's freeware, suddenly having it disappear on the user is one reason not to use it. "Oh, this software is open source and popular so it will most likely last for a very very long time? I'll use it instead then." My point is that every way in which open source vs. closed source software effects freedom eventually effects the end users, too. Sometimes the reasons can be harder to see, but they're there. A printer not working with one OS while it worked on another because the driver was proprietary, etc etc. They are hidden "gotchas", like the gotchas that are embedded in any contracts or licenses or in consumer products. "This game is great, and I enjoy playing it, but I'd really like to support this open game development too because then I'll be able to modify it and make my own game." Eventually, consumers find out, and they get upset and fight back unless they are perfectly happy paying money for those things, and some are. Some people are happy being in bondage and having no freedom. There will always be someone out there, though, that has a need that cannot be accomplished by the closed source software, or wants to do it in their own way, or without being charged for it, and they'll do it.
I guess I'm saying that everything that effects developers also effects end users somehow. Developers and users are in the same boat, whether they all know it or not. Their access to software is taken away and given, synchronously, in the long run. Open source helps everyone, closed source just temporarily helps a few.
Eventually open source will catch up, and while rejecting closed source completely may help out open source a bit, it's still going to come down to users wishing for an open solution, and that will never go away. Everyone wants freedom, just some to a greater extent than others, but no one can argue that they would hate using free software.
Linux should be about choice, and giving users who'd like to use closed source is just fine and means more users on Linux. Ultimately, that's what matters, and in doing so brings more software, closed and open, to those who prefer open source.
You're mostly right, because the uninformed will never be informed unless they are advertised to, it's promoted in some way, or they hear about it. At least there's a lot of the latter going around, the more the better, and because of this it will only continue to rise. Eventually, companies will start taking a liking to it, start giving into the demand, and start promoting the features about it as a perk that they offer, instead of hiding it on the bottom shelf. More commercial games and programs being released for it will really help, too.
You should keep pushing back, too, but regardless, the RIAA has lost the war. Online music is bigger and better than they are, they're hosed. Their only hope for staying alive is by making their own stores and actually competing with other websites and private artists. They'll actually have to face their competition instead of trying to help craft and have enforced laws which aren't right, nor enforceable, and perpetuate this concept that ideas are to be owned and controlled instead of shared, which is an idea that I believe has set many countries in this world back a few decades in technological advancements. There is some proof of it. Read Against Intellectual Monopoly sometime, a good read.:)
It's shocking, I know, and AC may have just been joking, but I'll explain it any way in case someone out there doesn't know.
That's normally the way it's always been, the Windows version gets some kind of perk(s) which ultimately makes it the cheaper version, even though because of the cost of the license it should of course be more expensive. Like on Dell's sit for example, somehow they end up giving these amazing perks to the Windows versions like a bigger hard drive, making the Windows one the better/cheaper deal.
For the EEE, for once, the Linux version is always either cheaper ($50 cheaper in one scenario on New Egg, which means they were charging $50 for the Vista license), or if it's the same price, the Linux version has better hardware. ACTUAL FAIR COMPETITION! Check it out yourself if you don't believe me!:)
"Marketing" implies making money. Normally non-profits use phrases like "spread the word" and call for campaigns to "get the word out", but they usually don't call it marketing, so, that'd be why. It is of course marketing though since spreading Linux means the gaming and software industries as well as the hardware industry can get more money from selling Linux-compatible stuff, but if it's something more "grass roots" instead of company-funded, it's usually not called "marketing", at least from what I've ever heard.
Canonical has been promoting campaigns to "get the word out" for quite some time now via grass roots teams which do several different things, one of which is to pass around fliers and copies of Ubuntu, and in general spread knowledge of the existence of Linux. In Lawrence, Kansas, of all places, I actually came across a copy of Windows Vista in a Walmart that had a long Ubuntu sticker wrapped around the top of it.
Though now that I think about it, spreading knowledge about Linux in the middle of the Bible Belt might be a good place to start. After all, it's "middle America" which is probably the least informed about the existence of Linux. Now if it starts being sold in actual stores, then they can actually get a hold of it. I hope the "put flat circular object in CD tray (or cup holder) with label facing up and close tray, then turn off then on 'puter, then double-click 'install' then 'next' every time it appears" won't be too difficult for them to follow.
Actually, I knew all that but was avoiding saying SIP to not confusing anyone, haha.;) I hope it's not too long before you don't need your analogue gateway services anymore. Since most phone companies are on VoIP any way it should be pretty simple to convert over. So how much do you pay per month for your PSTN gateway, is it cheaper than Skype's pricing? Thanks.:)
I'm pretty sure the phone they are selling works fine for making calls, adding contacts, the basic stuff. So, supposedly it works fine now for use as a phone, and as more software gets put onto it, the experience will only improve.
I don't think you'd be buying a broken phone by buying this phone, just not a feature-rich phone, there's a difference.
Anyone know of an actual review of the phone yet to see just where the software is at right now?
Oh, sorry about that, I thought you were being all flamey. =P
That's great then that there's some hooking into package managers that's being done. Eventually, hopefully, either all package formats will be able to hook into any package manager, and/or new formats that hook in better will replace the current, static, unmodular, abhorrent situation that is Linux packaging.;)
If you can't use Skype without their own software and nothing else though, that's like using Yahoo and being forced to run the Yahoo client instead of Gaim, Kopete, or any of the others. Obviously you should run what you'd like though, but for myself I'd like to help steer others to completely neutral solutions, but of course since Skype is free you just have to make sure you know what you're getting into. For example buying an "unlocked" VoIP phone/system that isn't locked into Skype or any specific system, but which is open to any VoIP server.
Then, there's the VoIP-to-PSTN part of it that you'll be tied to if you use Skype. Anyone know of any good VoIP-to-PSTN services that are cheaper/better than SkypeOut/In or whatever it's being called now? Skype charges $35.40 a year for unlimited US and Canada calls, and $119.40 per year for worldwide unlimited. Again, if you make sure that the phones you buy aren't locked into one particular carrier (which is really lame), you have more freedom to use alternatives.
Regardless of the platform, I'm pretty sure you can include and link to your own libraries if you think the targeted platform may not have them.
What's really needed is for the LSB to finish ironing out a point of standardization for Linux packages so that all package managers can easily install software packages so that you'll have smaller downloads and better installation management when installing out-of-the-repo software. For Windows users though, it's highly unlikely that they will have any of the required libraries installed, so the Windows installer should be bigger and come with all the libraries.
I think the software so far is pretty basic on the OpenMoko but the main stuff is there. Comparing it to Android for example, I think Android has more software right now due to the emulator and SDK Google pushed out. Android has a much bigger base of course, but then again, OpenMoko will have more apps too once Android phones finally come out. I'd like to know in what ways if any Android is more locked down than the OpenMoko software, and you also have to keep in mind that the Neo Freerunner itself is built as an open hardware device, while the phones that Android will come on will be less geared towards openness I'd assume, but since times are changing, who knows for sure.
With so many open mobile groups gearing up for action aside from Android and OpenMoko, like LiMo and Moblin and others, the future will be an interesting and good one.
That's part of the point of a wifi/GSM phone. The only question I have is if the Freerunner can do this right now with the software it has or not, but even if it doesn't, since it's just a software deal, it's only a matter of time until it has it.
I said something normal non-command-line-savvy users can use to easily install packages (not just simple binaries) that are cross-distro. I know very well that you can compile programs. Programs need to be easily installable cross-distro, I wasn't at all talking about within the same distro. Basically, you completely missed the point of my post, so nvm.
Unfortunately, there isn't yet a choice to (insert Linux complaint here).:)
Time to get completely off-topic (well, almost, this IS the Linux section). Lets see, at the top of my list would be interoperability between Linux distros. I'd like a distro that was very compatible with cross-distro software package formats, so no matter what version I went to, I could always install the package, and so could others, even if they weren't using the same distro/version! Non-package-manager-hooking binaries don't count, I'm talking about packages which the manager recognizes, so I can easily remove the software later via the manager. Imagine having either a package format or a package container format standardized at some level or made compatible with managers, so you could actually share packages across the net, with OTHER distro users, and actually could install them, and Linux software could much more easily be shared! Mind-blowing, I know.
The most promising candidate for doing this so far seems to be Zero Install, so I hope it or a better solution is adopted.
P.S. Alien doesn't count either until it's capabilities are merged with existing package managers for easy one-click installation across any distro that uses that manager. I'm talking about a solution for those without CLI knowledge that want an easy one-click solution like Windows and Mac have. While I don't fall into this category, most others do, and that in turn effects me by effecting Linux adoption and thus developers who give a damn about penguins.:)
I'm OK with companies not open sourcing things actually, I didn't mean to give that impression. It's the licensing and all the legal moves and exclusive deals they pull that you have to be careful of from them. The decision to go open source certainly could be considered a moral choice though, since an open source company is capable of helping everyone more than a closed one, so the poor will have more software that way, not that they don't simply copy closed source any way, but this way it'll be legal among other things. But, you could argue any decision at all is a moral one, it just depends where and how strong your morals are. I'm OK with closed source companies because open source ones can and will compete with them.
Oh, MS has done a lot of things recently that were wrong, I'm not talking about ten years ago, but you're right, those things were also wrong. I don't like them as a company, and thus I do not and will not support them. Their empire is built on things I disagree with. It's important to not forget.
Companies do change, you're right. There are some companies now that ppl would praise because perhaps they have changed and are doing good things while before they weren't. Or, perhaps they just have discovered an effective way to keep secrets, and distance themselves from the bad while their PR department displays all smiles.
Some choose to hold accountable those who have done wrong the best way they know how, which is to protest those companies. Sometimes labeled zelots by those who live the "forgive and forget" or "don't give a damn about anyone" philosophies, they deserve credit for sticking to their opinion of things that are wrong and denouncing support for them. At some point, it is justifiable to forgive and forget as long as those they want to forgive have changed for the better.
I'm waiting on you, Microsoft. Less talk, more proof. How about start with helping strike down software patent laws, and publicly apologize for your earlier patent threat among other things.
Get rid of your copper phoneline and just use VoIP calling with your internet line that you DO apparently want. Skype plans are around $3 per month I think.
Why does it matter if they use GPL software but don't themselves give out the source code when it's available elsewhere? As long as the source code exists someplace, like Sourceforge, why not get it from there like they probably did? I can see the risk of this attitude since it may risk the source becoming scarce, but this article just seems a little bit anal. I'd only really care if they made some fixes without offering them back, since that'd be just silly and dumb.
Slashdot Mirror
So QT just needs to add a native GTK feel to that list?
;)
:)
Maybe GTK could just add native QT support, too.
Regardless, it would be nice if someone came up with an API that any GUI could use. If GTK cannot provide several things in the API, then it has to figure out what to do in these cases when it can't provide feature X, or even better, if the program wants to use things that GTK doesn't provide, it could default to QT?
Dunno just some ideas.
I think standardizing desktop settings so that you can use both KDE and Gnome apps to set certain things is a bit more important than trying to come up with an API to deal with GTK and QT differences.
That's true, it is a hard situation to deal with, but you have to take into account that you don't have to standardize on the lowest common denominator. If done properly, the API should be able to compensate for the places in which there are differences. For example, QT does this here on this program, but when run on GTK, it can't do it, so it instead has to do this and this. Or, if there is no way to replace the feature, leave it blank until it gets adopted perhaps?
:)
Compare it to graphics card APIs, because it's a similar concept, these APIs. A new capability comes out, the API gets extended, and eventually nvidia and ati start to support the new graphics call. If one lags far behind and refuses to add support for popular API feature X, then it will get used less and less. In the same regard, if Gnome and KDE were set up this way from the beginning, perhaps GTK would start to get used less because it may not have all the features that QT has.
In other words, it would turn things into a feature competition among other things instead of a supported application competition. Applications should be more modular so that the real competition can happen more easily where it needs to: features, ease of programming, and speed. If everyone found QT to be faster and nicer looking, and they weren't locked into a bunch of programs, everyone might switch in droves because they'd be free to do so.
So, more desktop APIs will serve to make things more modular and free up programs.
I'm sure both are very capable libraries. All I want to see is wxWidgets being used for all GUI frontends so that they have a native feel whether you're in Gnome, KDE, Elightenment, XFCE, OS X, Windows, etc. That is, as soon as wxWidgets has KDE support.
I agree, however I think that eventually any ways in which freedom is stifled is "revealed" to be bad. The ultimate goal of open source software is to allow anyone to use it. The problem is proprietary software is usually always eventually limiting, in some way. Costing money is one reason. If it's freeware, suddenly having it disappear on the user is one reason not to use it. "Oh, this software is open source and popular so it will most likely last for a very very long time? I'll use it instead then." My point is that every way in which open source vs. closed source software effects freedom eventually effects the end users, too. Sometimes the reasons can be harder to see, but they're there. A printer not working with one OS while it worked on another because the driver was proprietary, etc etc. They are hidden "gotchas", like the gotchas that are embedded in any contracts or licenses or in consumer products. "This game is great, and I enjoy playing it, but I'd really like to support this open game development too because then I'll be able to modify it and make my own game." Eventually, consumers find out, and they get upset and fight back unless they are perfectly happy paying money for those things, and some are. Some people are happy being in bondage and having no freedom. There will always be someone out there, though, that has a need that cannot be accomplished by the closed source software, or wants to do it in their own way, or without being charged for it, and they'll do it.
I guess I'm saying that everything that effects developers also effects end users somehow. Developers and users are in the same boat, whether they all know it or not. Their access to software is taken away and given, synchronously, in the long run. Open source helps everyone, closed source just temporarily helps a few.
Eventually open source will catch up, and while rejecting closed source completely may help out open source a bit, it's still going to come down to users wishing for an open solution, and that will never go away. Everyone wants freedom, just some to a greater extent than others, but no one can argue that they would hate using free software.
Linux should be about choice, and giving users who'd like to use closed source is just fine and means more users on Linux. Ultimately, that's what matters, and in doing so brings more software, closed and open, to those who prefer open source.
You're mostly right, because the uninformed will never be informed unless they are advertised to, it's promoted in some way, or they hear about it. At least there's a lot of the latter going around, the more the better, and because of this it will only continue to rise. Eventually, companies will start taking a liking to it, start giving into the demand, and start promoting the features about it as a perk that they offer, instead of hiding it on the bottom shelf. More commercial games and programs being released for it will really help, too.
You should keep pushing back, too, but regardless, the RIAA has lost the war. Online music is bigger and better than they are, they're hosed. Their only hope for staying alive is by making their own stores and actually competing with other websites and private artists. They'll actually have to face their competition instead of trying to help craft and have enforced laws which aren't right, nor enforceable, and perpetuate this concept that ideas are to be owned and controlled instead of shared, which is an idea that I believe has set many countries in this world back a few decades in technological advancements. There is some proof of it. Read Against Intellectual Monopoly sometime, a good read. :)
It's shocking, I know, and AC may have just been joking, but I'll explain it any way in case someone out there doesn't know.
:)
That's normally the way it's always been, the Windows version gets some kind of perk(s) which ultimately makes it the cheaper version, even though because of the cost of the license it should of course be more expensive. Like on Dell's sit for example, somehow they end up giving these amazing perks to the Windows versions like a bigger hard drive, making the Windows one the better/cheaper deal.
For the EEE, for once, the Linux version is always either cheaper ($50 cheaper in one scenario on New Egg, which means they were charging $50 for the Vista license), or if it's the same price, the Linux version has better hardware. ACTUAL FAIR COMPETITION! Check it out yourself if you don't believe me!
"Marketing" implies making money. Normally non-profits use phrases like "spread the word" and call for campaigns to "get the word out", but they usually don't call it marketing, so, that'd be why. It is of course marketing though since spreading Linux means the gaming and software industries as well as the hardware industry can get more money from selling Linux-compatible stuff, but if it's something more "grass roots" instead of company-funded, it's usually not called "marketing", at least from what I've ever heard.
Canonical has been promoting campaigns to "get the word out" for quite some time now via grass roots teams which do several different things, one of which is to pass around fliers and copies of Ubuntu, and in general spread knowledge of the existence of Linux. In Lawrence, Kansas, of all places, I actually came across a copy of Windows Vista in a Walmart that had a long Ubuntu sticker wrapped around the top of it.
Though now that I think about it, spreading knowledge about Linux in the middle of the Bible Belt might be a good place to start. After all, it's "middle America" which is probably the least informed about the existence of Linux. Now if it starts being sold in actual stores, then they can actually get a hold of it. I hope the "put flat circular object in CD tray (or cup holder) with label facing up and close tray, then turn off then on 'puter, then double-click 'install' then 'next' every time it appears" won't be too difficult for them to follow.
Thanks a bunch for that info. :)
Actually, I knew all that but was avoiding saying SIP to not confusing anyone, haha. ;) I hope it's not too long before you don't need your analogue gateway services anymore. Since most phone companies are on VoIP any way it should be pretty simple to convert over. So how much do you pay per month for your PSTN gateway, is it cheaper than Skype's pricing? Thanks. :)
You have a point, but come on, this is Slashdot, geeks want to see their phones be able to do anything and everything.
If I can't play Quake Wars on my phone on a multiplayer map with 100 other online players, what good is it?? Wow...talk about eye and finger strain...
I'm pretty sure the phone they are selling works fine for making calls, adding contacts, the basic stuff. So, supposedly it works fine now for use as a phone, and as more software gets put onto it, the experience will only improve.
I don't think you'd be buying a broken phone by buying this phone, just not a feature-rich phone, there's a difference.
Anyone know of an actual review of the phone yet to see just where the software is at right now?
Oh, sorry about that, I thought you were being all flamey. =P
;)
That's great then that there's some hooking into package managers that's being done. Eventually, hopefully, either all package formats will be able to hook into any package manager, and/or new formats that hook in better will replace the current, static, unmodular, abhorrent situation that is Linux packaging.
I'll take a look at those programs, thanks.
If you can't use Skype without their own software and nothing else though, that's like using Yahoo and being forced to run the Yahoo client instead of Gaim, Kopete, or any of the others. Obviously you should run what you'd like though, but for myself I'd like to help steer others to completely neutral solutions, but of course since Skype is free you just have to make sure you know what you're getting into. For example buying an "unlocked" VoIP phone/system that isn't locked into Skype or any specific system, but which is open to any VoIP server.
Then, there's the VoIP-to-PSTN part of it that you'll be tied to if you use Skype. Anyone know of any good VoIP-to-PSTN services that are cheaper/better than SkypeOut/In or whatever it's being called now? Skype charges $35.40 a year for unlimited US and Canada calls, and $119.40 per year for worldwide unlimited. Again, if you make sure that the phones you buy aren't locked into one particular carrier (which is really lame), you have more freedom to use alternatives.
Regardless of the platform, I'm pretty sure you can include and link to your own libraries if you think the targeted platform may not have them.
What's really needed is for the LSB to finish ironing out a point of standardization for Linux packages so that all package managers can easily install software packages so that you'll have smaller downloads and better installation management when installing out-of-the-repo software. For Windows users though, it's highly unlikely that they will have any of the required libraries installed, so the Windows installer should be bigger and come with all the libraries.
I think the software so far is pretty basic on the OpenMoko but the main stuff is there. Comparing it to Android for example, I think Android has more software right now due to the emulator and SDK Google pushed out. Android has a much bigger base of course, but then again, OpenMoko will have more apps too once Android phones finally come out. I'd like to know in what ways if any Android is more locked down than the OpenMoko software, and you also have to keep in mind that the Neo Freerunner itself is built as an open hardware device, while the phones that Android will come on will be less geared towards openness I'd assume, but since times are changing, who knows for sure.
With so many open mobile groups gearing up for action aside from Android and OpenMoko, like LiMo and Moblin and others, the future will be an interesting and good one.
That's part of the point of a wifi/GSM phone. The only question I have is if the Freerunner can do this right now with the software it has or not, but even if it doesn't, since it's just a software deal, it's only a matter of time until it has it.
I said something normal non-command-line-savvy users can use to easily install packages (not just simple binaries) that are cross-distro. I know very well that you can compile programs. Programs need to be easily installable cross-distro, I wasn't at all talking about within the same distro. Basically, you completely missed the point of my post, so nvm.
Unfortunately, there isn't yet a choice to (insert Linux complaint here). :)
:)
Time to get completely off-topic (well, almost, this IS the Linux section). Lets see, at the top of my list would be interoperability between Linux distros. I'd like a distro that was very compatible with cross-distro software package formats, so no matter what version I went to, I could always install the package, and so could others, even if they weren't using the same distro/version! Non-package-manager-hooking binaries don't count, I'm talking about packages which the manager recognizes, so I can easily remove the software later via the manager. Imagine having either a package format or a package container format standardized at some level or made compatible with managers, so you could actually share packages across the net, with OTHER distro users, and actually could install them, and Linux software could much more easily be shared! Mind-blowing, I know.
The most promising candidate for doing this so far seems to be Zero Install, so I hope it or a better solution is adopted.
P.S. Alien doesn't count either until it's capabilities are merged with existing package managers for easy one-click installation across any distro that uses that manager. I'm talking about a solution for those without CLI knowledge that want an easy one-click solution like Windows and Mac have. While I don't fall into this category, most others do, and that in turn effects me by effecting Linux adoption and thus developers who give a damn about penguins.
I'm OK with companies not open sourcing things actually, I didn't mean to give that impression. It's the licensing and all the legal moves and exclusive deals they pull that you have to be careful of from them. The decision to go open source certainly could be considered a moral choice though, since an open source company is capable of helping everyone more than a closed one, so the poor will have more software that way, not that they don't simply copy closed source any way, but this way it'll be legal among other things. But, you could argue any decision at all is a moral one, it just depends where and how strong your morals are. I'm OK with closed source companies because open source ones can and will compete with them.
Oh, MS has done a lot of things recently that were wrong, I'm not talking about ten years ago, but you're right, those things were also wrong. I don't like them as a company, and thus I do not and will not support them. Their empire is built on things I disagree with. It's important to not forget.
Companies do change, you're right. There are some companies now that ppl would praise because perhaps they have changed and are doing good things while before they weren't. Or, perhaps they just have discovered an effective way to keep secrets, and distance themselves from the bad while their PR department displays all smiles.
Some choose to hold accountable those who have done wrong the best way they know how, which is to protest those companies. Sometimes labeled zelots by those who live the "forgive and forget" or "don't give a damn about anyone" philosophies, they deserve credit for sticking to their opinion of things that are wrong and denouncing support for them. At some point, it is justifiable to forgive and forget as long as those they want to forgive have changed for the better.
I'm waiting on you, Microsoft. Less talk, more proof. How about start with helping strike down software patent laws, and publicly apologize for your earlier patent threat among other things.
Get rid of your copper phoneline and just use VoIP calling with your internet line that you DO apparently want. Skype plans are around $3 per month I think.
Why does it matter if they use GPL software but don't themselves give out the source code when it's available elsewhere? As long as the source code exists someplace, like Sourceforge, why not get it from there like they probably did? I can see the risk of this attitude since it may risk the source becoming scarce, but this article just seems a little bit anal. I'd only really care if they made some fixes without offering them back, since that'd be just silly and dumb.