On 11/9/2015 8:40 AM, Thompson, David wrote:
Lots of reasons that I've previously enumerated but here's another one: you
can't turn a profit trying to sell GPL software.
The level of dishonest anti-GPL rhetoric in this thread is very surprising.
I'll bite: what's dishonest about my statement?
I've heard that for years from 'consultants' and small software companies.
The idea to make money is to sell equipment and services, not the software.
The marketing problem I have seen is people 'want' to buy software,
and bosses/lawyers
have trouble with 'software anyone could download'. Where t
On 11/9/2015 11:56 AM, Jack Coats wrote:
Selling solutions using OSS software is not easy. It can be done but
it seems to take extra effort.
All true, but I didn't say you can't try sell GPL software or try to
sell services built on GPL software. I said you can't make a profit from
trying to
On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 12:29:36 -0500, Rich Pieri wrote:
> On 11/9/2015 11:56 AM, Jack Coats wrote:
>> Selling solutions using OSS software is not easy. It can be done but
>> it seems to take extra effort.
>
> All true, but I didn't say you can't try sell GPL software or try to
> sell services built o
On 11/9/2015 1:07 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote:
Red Hat, for example, sold boxed CD's/DVD's for quite a while,
presumably at at least a small profit. If you want to argue that the
real value was in the support, whatever, but the fact remains that you
could go into a store and buy Red Hat boxed distr
While writing the third edition of my book, "Linux Pocket Guide"
(O'Reilly), which focuses on Linux commands that are the most useful
to know, I am considering dropping some topics that were in the
previous edition. I welcome any opinions on whether the following
commands are still widely useful e
On 11/09/2015 05:19 PM, Daniel Barrett wrote:
>
> While writing the third edition of my book, "Linux Pocket Guide"
> (O'Reilly), which focuses on Linux commands that are the most useful
> to know, I am considering dropping some topics that were in the
> previous edition. I welcome any opinions on
> On Nov 9, 2015, at 5:19 PM, Daniel Barrett wrote:
>
> 3. telnet
>
> I'm planning to mention telnet only for its utility in hitting
> arbitrary ports (telnet myhost 80), and to drop all discussion of
> remote logins with telnet, since it's largely been replaced by
> ssh. (And maybe have a foot
> From: Discuss [mailto:discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On
> Behalf Of Daniel Barrett
>
>
> 1. dump and restore
>
> I grew up with these commands, but personally haven't used them in
> well over a decade. What do you think?
If you want to backup your filesystem and preserve every lit
On 11/9/2015 5:19 PM, Daniel Barrett wrote:
1. dump and restore
dump and restore (and their XFS equivalents for RHEL7) are still the
only guaranteed ways to get a 100% accurate replica of a file system.
Definitely worth keeping around.
2. finger and chfn
Definitely not finger. It's a gap
On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 14:40:52 -0500, Rich Pieri wrote:
> On 11/9/2015 1:07 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote:
>> Nothing in the GPL restricts what you can charge for selling the
>> software in the first place. It's only the accompanying source code
>> that you have to provide for no more than the actual cost
On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 17:19:42 -0500
Daniel Barrett wrote:
>
> While writing the third edition of my book, "Linux Pocket Guide"
> (O'Reilly), which focuses on Linux commands that are the most useful
> to know, I am considering dropping some topics that were in the
> previous edition. I welcome any
On 11/9/2015 8:27 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote:
But if you count support contracts bundled with the software, it's a
very different picture. And since the support contract wouldn't exist
without the underlying software, I think it's nitpicking to not count
that.
It's not a nit-pick. It's the very
On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 21:58:46 -0500, Rich Pieri wrote:
> On 11/9/2015 8:27 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote:
>> But if you count support contracts bundled with the software, it's a
>> very different picture. And since the support contract wouldn't exist
>> without the underlying software, I think it's nitpi
On 11/9/2015 10:02 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote:
But in this case, the service is very tightly coupled with the
software. I just don't see why the distinction matters.
It matters because consumers as a rule don't buy annual support
contracts on commodity home routers.
--
Rich P.
___
On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 22:41:13 -0500, Rich Pieri wrote:
> On 11/9/2015 10:02 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote:
>> But in this case, the service is very tightly coupled with the
>> software. I just don't see why the distinction matters.
>
> It matters because consumers as a rule don't buy annual support
> con
On 11/9/2015 10:46 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote:
No, but they buy commodity home routers, so loading them with GPL
software is another way to "sell" the software.
It's selling a product that has GPL software in it.
--
Rich P.
___
Discuss mailing list
Dis
Or selling 'configuration and installation services' related to the
GPL software (even if it is just putting it on a USB stick).
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 10:26 PM, Rich Pieri wrote:
> On 11/9/2015 10:46 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote:
>>
>> No, but they buy commodity home routers, so loading them with GP
18 matches
Mail list logo
