Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX
gnu=borg - discuss
Orethrius:
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---How would we be better of with Apple in a monopoly position, another company out to make money and doesn't just own the OS but also the hardware?
--- End quote ---
They did that once, and I'd *KILL* to get back to the IIe days with AppleBASIC. Screw Vis. :cool:
--- Quote ---Thank you, you've just explained for me why it's bad for most companies to release their code under the GPL, they've made the same business mistake as I have in the hypothetical senario I was talking about earlier on.
--- End quote ---
I understand where you're coming from - in fact, I'd surmise that we all do - but you're neglecting a very important point that rises not out of hatred for the product, but its contempt for the law. I don't know about England, but here in the United States we have the Sherman and Clayton Antitrust Acts which are *supposed* to preclude businesses from "anti-competitive behaviour" - as which, closed source technically qualifies. If our attornies cared enough about the finer points of law, what you say would be a non-issue here. Besides, I think you overestimate the marketing prowess of RedHat, Inc. ;)
You may not like competition from other companies using your GPL code - which you didn't have to licence under in the first place - but here, competition is the law. You keep speaking of a hypothetical "business mistake": life's a bitch, and so's the free market economy. :D
piratePenguin:
--- Quote from: worker201 ---What the fuck does that mean?
--- End quote ---
It means that I don't like non-free software.
--- Quote ---How about for just a moment we assume that there are 2 types of computer programs out there. Commodity programs and generaladvancementofcomputerscience programs. Commodity programs are no different than cars or forks - the creator sells them in order to recapture the investment in production. If you want to use commodity software, you pay cash and agree to their license. Assuming that you buy the whole capitalism/technocracy thing, there is absolutely nothing wrong with this. That other type, which needs a better name, is GNU/GPL/etc stuff, which is not produced for sale. I don't know what it's produced for, but it usually has something to do with ego, community, and practicality. The only reason there is even a license is to protect the code from being stolen by commodity software writers.
And let me tell you, Linus, RMS, ESR, Larry Wall, and all the others, are not poor. They get plenty of money from their day jobs. This whole Linux thing, if you boil it down to bare nothingness, is nothing more than a huge hobby, or kernel fanclub. Nothing wrong with that.
Personally, one of the main reasons I started using Linux was anti-capitalistic. A box of SuSE is only $30, after all. Now that I have the experience, I can see the quality difference and appreciate what the developers are trying to do. Of course somebody who uses Windows probably can't see that in the same way I do. And that's fine, whatever.
So sorry to be offtopic - this thread is really for Aloone_Jonez and Pirate Penguin to sling insults and try to outquote each other. I apologize for getting in the way.
--- End quote ---
Whenever I say free/non-free I'm not talking about price at all.... And I know Linus et al. make money...
solo:
I quit this one about when Jenda left
Aloone_Jonez:
--- Quote from: Orethrius ---They did that once, and I'd *KILL* to get back to the IIe days with AppleBASIC. Screw Vis. :cool:
--- End quote ---
Yea I know but I preferred Acorn computers anyway.
--- Quote from: Orethrius ---I understand where you're coming from - in fact, I'd surmise that we all do - but you're neglecting a very important point that rises not out of hatred for the product, but its contempt for the law. I don't know about England, but here in the United States we have the Sherman and Clayton Antitrust Acts which are *supposed* to preclude businesses from "anti-competitive behaviour" - as which, closed source technically qualifies. If our attornies cared enough about the finer points of law, what you say would be a non-issue here. Besides, I think you overestimate the marketing prowess of RedHat, Inc. ;)
--- End quote ---
I also understand the anti-competitive argument too and yes the GPL would solve this as it doesn't allow for competition to exist in the first place.
--- Quote from: Orethrius ---You may not like competition from other companies using your GPL code - which you didn't have to licence under in the first place - but here, competition is the law. You keep speaking of a hypothetical "business mistake": life's a bitch, and so's the free market economy. :D
--- End quote ---
Proprietary licenses aren't the cause of the mess we're currently in even though they help keep things the way they are. Competition could still exist if Apple, Microsoft and GNU/Linux had equal market share even though 60% is proprietary (I'll asume the remaining 10% is BeOS, BSD and other stuff very few people use) the market would still remain competitive. Apple and Microsoft would both keep their data structures and APIs open and software development tools free (as in beer) as it would allow them to gain customers from the opposition.
Hardware is similar, companies release their hardware but they keep the blue prints secret, in some cases this can keep away competition, (look at waht Microsoft's doing with the Xbox 360 and the controlers), drug and food companies also keep their recipes secret. Companies have being keeping things from us for the last 100 years or more the main differance with software is the law has allowed companies to inforce restrictions on decompilation, but this has been solved in the EU as it's permitted as long as it's for compatability purposes only.
My last question about whether anybody uses proprietary software was a trick question, in fact I hazzard a guess you all do, the BIOS in your computer probably isn't free software and the same goes for the software in your TV, microwave and car, proprietary software is everywhere there is nothing you can do about it!
Nowadays the gap between software and hardware is virtually non-existent, even things without microcontrollers have PLAs (programmable logic arrays). These allow circuits that would've previously been built from gates on many separate chips be custom programmed onto one chip by the user, by connecting up gates on a single chip with a (E)(E)PROM or flash memory to store the connections. Love it or hate it proprietary software is here to say and there's no way to get away from it!
piratePenguin:
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---My last question about whether anybody uses proprietary software was a trick question, in fact I hazzard a guess you all do, the BIOS in your computer probably isn't free software and the same goes for the software in your TV, microwave and car, proprietary software is everywhere there is nothing you can do about it!
Nowadays the gap between software and hardware is virtually non-existent, even things without microcontrollers have PLAs (programmable logic arrays). These allow circuits that would've previously been built from gates on many separate chips be custom programmed onto one chip by the user, by connecting up gates on a single chip with a (E)(E)PROM or flash memory to store the connections. Love it or hate it proprietary software is here to say and there's no way to get away from it!
--- End quote ---
We don't get to chose what software goes in them places.
As for BIOSes, well, there's linuxbios. I'd be using it myself only my motherboard isn't supported.
So there's no non-free software on my harddrive then.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version