On 7/17/06, Cocoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
its not about making software a free commodity. thats called "Free Software"
a different animal all together. Open source doesn't just mean access to
the source code. The distribution terms of open-source software must comply
with the following criteria:
a. freely redistributable
b. source code is included even if the program is compiled
c. it must allow derived works
d. it ensures the integrity of the author(s)
e. no discrimination on persons and groups, and even endeavors
f. it must have a license that is applied to all, to whom the program is
redistributed to
g. it doesn't have a product limiting license.
h. it doesn't restrict other software that goes along with the software
being distributed
i. the license must be technology neutral
you can refer to www.opensource.org for the definition
LOL. The "Open Source" definition by the way is taken almost in its
entirety from the Debian "Free Software" Guidelines. Notice that in
Debian it is still referred to as Free Software.
no one can make writing software for free, its not a very good business
model. linux isn't "free". you me and billions of people can certainly
download it. we can maintain our own versions of linux. certainly but you
me and members of plug have one advantage: we know linux so our cost of
acquistion isn't as high. people--- normal people will need training to use
even the simplest thing, although in my opinon they just need to read to
figure things out... that a different thing all together. training will
cost money. the cost of installing across multiple networks cost money.
the cost of defending and maintaining a network of computers whether they
are linux or not is high. heheh. so its not "free" it can never be free.
Free as in freedom. The issue of total cost of ownership is another
matter which by all reputable accounts are tremendously in favor of
FOSS.
and for you and me, we have the skills and inclination to prefer to tweak
the system and make it work for us. thats engineer talk and its fine with us
right? but you know what? normal people don't care about such things. they
just need the thing to work.
Things work in free software because enough people contribute to make
it work. Normal people are not stupid. If something doesn't work they
would try to find out why and how to make it work. The complaint I do
hear about most often is where to find that information.
> > c) for all the good things open source method can do, it is not the
answer
It is part of the answer.
> > for every software development there is and that said,
> > d) it should be market forces that must determine the tools of the
trade.
M$ thinking.
those things are normal everyday stuff. but there are some apps out there
that the commercial versions are much better. photoshop over gimp?
photoshop. linux cluster? well we probabaly can write our own for that.
GIMP.
climate modeling software? tall order, it would be nice to have an open
source software out there but i guess the climate modeling community have
their own internal stuff for that that they write.
http://climate.uvic.ca/climate-lab/computers.html
code to launch say... a long range missile or to destroy one or to intercept
one.... would you want that open sourced? i'd feel safe knowing people who
really know that kind of stuff and who will use it for the right thing have
it.
LOL. This is ridiculous. Anyone smart enough to make missiles is smart
enough to write their own code.
> > 2. a "resolution"--- may be of greater use: Congress recognizes that
> > Software, created on a level playing field such as what "Open Source"
offers
> > many great benefits to the Filipino people and advocates its use. And
what
> > great proof than a move by Congress to use Open Source software in its
daily
> > affairs? The PR value would be huge--- a blow to M$ and a big win for
OSS.
> > heck, it might just work in a land of pirated software to go open. just
be
> > prepared for a pissed off microsoft.
Free software is not about pissing off Big Evil (aka M$). Its about
empowering/enabling users.
i know this is PLUG, my apologies to the members, but maybe he should have
considered a Mac? i use my mac with open source tools--- open office, gimp,
Why GIMP? Didn't you say you like Photoshop better?
programming tools (python ruby gcc etc) and etc. heck i have a webserver
running off it. i have parallels that runs gentoo and ubuntu linux on os x.
and i love my mac. its unix. or may be one of the good user friendly linux
Its a FreeBSD variant AFAIK. BSD-style licenses are different from the
GPL in that sources can be modified but the modifications need not be
disclosed. So someone can take BSD code and as long as they display
the proper acknowledgements distribute it as closed source.
distros like OpenSuse. a Mac equiped the way a poweruser in the PC world
would want is only 10% to 15% higher than a PC of roughly the same make and
its totally worth it for the craftmanship that goes into the product. and he
Maximum vendor-independence.
--
RAGE CALLAO
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bayanihan GNU/Linux 4 beta 2
Amor patriae
_________________________________________________
Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List
plug@lists.linux.org.ph (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph)
Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists
Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
