On Jan 5, 2007, at 11:03 PM, Daniel L. Taylor wrote:
Or with the improvements in AJAX techniques, programs such as http://
www.gliffy.com/ replace offline apps altogether.
Yeah...I've heard that one before. In the late 90's I believe. I
didn't buy it then either ;-)
A completely online architecture might at least have a shot if app
sizes, I/O, and CPU requirements were the same as in, oh, 1990. But
they're not even close. I don't ever see Internet bandwidth
reaching the point of truly allowing a "thin-client" PC model to
work for consumers. Every time the Internet gets faster, apps get
bigger. And the apps seem to be getting bigger faster.
And that's to say nothing of the security issues....
The big danger is that a vendor like RS find themselves with too
small a market for the development tool to be able to make a living
from it and go out of business without open sourcing the tool.
Been there, done that, didn't even get a lousy T-shirt. But in all
honesty, the tools made by the "big boys" aren't safe either. Just
look at MPW, or VB and Visual Studio pre-NET.
I would consider it a major advantage if RS had some form of legal
agreement or escrow whereby if the company ever went under, RB
would be open sourced automatically.
Hell, I think that should be the default (in the law) for ANY
intellectual property, regardless of vendor. It would (and should)
also apply if an IP is bought by a company just so they can 'kill'
support for it; (MS and Bungie come to mind...) then the original IP
would revert to public domain for all platforms it was originally
released in before the buyout - though the company would hold patents/
copyrights for a new platform (XBox, say, or Nintendo Wii, or whatever.)
It should also apply if a company develops a piece of software for
platform A, later develops the same software for platform B, then
drops support for platform A because B is more profitable/larger
market share - the IP for platform A would then revert to P.D, (with
the exception that the parts of the code that are in common between
all the platforms would be covered by a special variation of the GPL
that grants the current IP holder the right to continue making money
from the other platforms without tying the whole thing to GPL.)
This should mitigate some nasty 'let's screw the users' scenarios
that tend to crop up every now and then.
I would also consider it a major advantage to be able to purchase a
license whereby I not only got RB, but the source to RB, even under
NDA and even if I had to submit all improvements back to RS.
(Naturally I would expect that to be the most expensive purchase
option.)
It would not only increase the situations where I would recommend
RB over some other tool, but would help me pitch RB to clients in
those situations.
However, from RS side hammering out such things would be a
nightmare. What would the triggers and safeguards be? How do you PR
it without starting rumors that the company is in trouble? In the
case of a source-license, what's to really prevent the source from
ending up on BitTorrent?
But if they could hammer something out, I guarantee it would look
good to potential customers.
Daniel L. Taylor
Taylor Design
Computer Consulting & Software Development
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.taylor-design.com
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
