Les Mikesell wrote:
Jim Cornette wrote:
An attitude that can only be shared by people who think writing
software is an end in itself, as opposed to the people who try to use
it to do something useful or combine software from different sources
for new capabilities. And once again - that is exactly what is
keeping Microsoft rich.
It is simple to get those who do not release the source code to live
with a message that the kernel is tainted.
You seem to have confused the suppliers and consumers in this statement.
The users seeing the message have nothing to do with releasing source
code that they don't own.
The consumer should realize that any problems with the kernel might
relate to the module which is not open sourced. The message should give
them a reminder that something is out of tree on their system and may
substitute an OSS module for the same hardware before consuming
developers time with problems caused by the closed source kernel modules.
You have no idea what the dilution will do for stability of a system.
Please explain then. Keep in mind that I have windows machines that
haven't crashed in years with hardware that Linux doesn't support and
Macs with 3rd party drivers that are equally stable so I won't believe
it if you say that can't happen.
If the closed source provider keeps up with problems triggered by kernel
progressions, it is possible to combine both successfully. I ran items
that were in need of closed source items and realize some things will be
closed source with no hope for OSS components.
Linux and Microsoft are not close to their goals. Functionality is key
for hardware issues in Linux.
Except that it doesn't work with a lot of hardware. And the engineers
designing the hardware and writing the drivers for other OS versions are
probably the best qualified to write and maintain the Linux drivers too.
They probably would also be the most motivated if the driver interface
was stable so they didn't have to re-do it all the time.
I agree that the provider would be the best source for providing the
best driver for their product. I do think that input from actual users
and coders outside the provider could improve performance of drivers to
a greater degree than closing up the source since Linux changes so
frequently.
> DRM is key for Microsoft in my opinion.
Microsoft thinks there is a demand for DRM so they provide it - it isn't
something useful on its own. Personally I think that demand will go
away by itself except for rental-type distribution models when customers
realize how limiting it is and the content suppliers that thought it
would sell find out otherwise - and customers should ultimately decide
these things.
I hope your ideal that the consumer will prevail and Windows will back
off from such practices. A user should not be so limited in using their
own computers.
Functionality due to license restrictions and proprietary code exists
in Linux. This is not due to technical capabilities of the developers
though and is more for lawyers.
The practical issue is not the omission of the functional parts with
legal restrictions, it is the fact that the GPL prohibits others from
obtaining the legal rights to distribute these missing parts, combining
them and offering a fully functional product.
This probably needs addressed so the items would be more distributable
and less in need of legal council after some arbitrary solution is
reached. I see this battle going on for a long time and without
resolution though.
Why BG is so rich and I am not are different issues. I do not feel it
is because of technical innovation but due to strategies not
straightforward.
The GPL has the opposite strategy. It not only can't succeed in
providing anything that already has different distribution restrictions,
it prevents itself from being combined with such things. So Microsoft
wins by default.
I have no idea as to this issue. I just recall Netscape, WordPerfect,
Stacker, Apple, PC tools and a host of other providers where their
products were either absorbed or their market was eaten up Free
alternatives that were introduced onto the market.
Of course their practice did help out by pushing Netscape and StarOffice
into the open source market. Maybe the treats from greed will push more
projects toward open source.
Jim
--
Humor in the Court:
Q: ...any suggestions as to what prevented this from being a murder trial
instead of an attempted murder trial?
A: The victim lived.
