Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 11th Jul 2005 08:43 UTC, submitted by OS2World News Master
OS/2 and eComStation Many OS/2-eCS users knows that we are currently requesting signatures to ask IBM to open source OS/2 (or at least the OS/2 components that are possible to be opened). We are getting close to send the petition, so if you haven't sign yet, go ahead!
Thread beginning with comment 2361
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
IBM isn't a charity
by on Mon 11th Jul 2005 09:33 UTC

Member since:

They only support OSS if it's profitable for them. There is no profit to be made by open-sourcing OS/2 and open-sourcing a big closed-source commercial piece of software isn't trivial (many licensed parts, needed clean-ups to protect the corporate image, etc.) either. Also most people who actually know their way around the OS/2 source base no longer work at IBM / have retired.
I think there's no hope.

Reply Score: 0

RE: IBM isn't a charity
by Qetzlcoatl on Mon 11th Jul 2005 10:00 in reply to "IBM isn't a charity"
Qetzlcoatl Member since:

You are misguided if You think about profit in aspect of direct sales only. ;)
As of IBM, most significant part of its profit came from services not from hardware or software sales, IMHO.
Anyway, not only sales and services affect profit. Do You hear about advertisement, marketing or PR? ;)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: IBM isn't a charity
by lord-storm on Tue 12th Jul 2005 14:04 in reply to "RE: IBM isn't a charity"
lord-storm Member since:

I agree with this statement mainly in full. Profit is in many ways directly contributed by sales and service that IBM have become almost bleading edge.

Microsoft products are not the reason IBM are rich they just help contribute. IBM can sell their hardware at a good price because they do so much with Open Source. Sun on the otherhand have just got into the market with open solaris.

Hardware is always going to be needed with bloat of todays software.

What could be enhanced by open source WARP.
*-Linux wine project maybe
*-FreeDos based projects maybe?

Maybe a fully GPL based licence is required but one with flexabillity. I personaly dont want to see thousands of WARPOS with mainly non existent changes to underlying code structure this wont promote growth.

Reply Parent Score: 1