Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 14th Jun 2007 16:04 UTC, submitted by davidiwharper
Linspire Linspire has announced an agreement to license voice-enabled instant messaging, Windows Media 10 codecs, and TrueType font technologies from Microsoft for its Linux distribution. Additionally, Microsoft will offer protection to Linspire customers against possible violations of Microsoft patents by Linux.
Thread beginning with comment 247974
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Too Suspicious
by twenex on Thu 14th Jun 2007 20:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Too Suspicious "
twenex
Member since:
2006-04-21

But you still have your original code and may do whatever you wish with it and have full control on it.

AT&T (or whoever *really* owns UNIX) still has its original UNIX code. NetBSD still has its original BSD code. Did that prevent the splintering of UNIX into AIX, AUX, Solaris, DG-UX, or of BSD into Net-, Free-, Open-, DragonFly-, PC-, Desktop-, Tomorrow-, DayAfter-, and OhNoNotAnotherBSD?

No?

QED.

I guess we are lucky that no one of BSD software developers are so greedy about their code like you are.

Actually, you're unlucky on that point. If it hadn't been for the fundamental splintering of the BSD's, they might have given Linux a run for its money even without being a possible refuge for people scared that Linux will disappear.

Or maybe you do not code and just like to spread false claims every time anyone mentions BSD?

Actually, no. I like to point out that the BSD people, not Linux people, are the *real* idealists. This isn't FUD. It's a fact of life.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: Too Suspicious
by BluenoseJake on Fri 15th Jun 2007 02:56 in reply to "RE[3]: Too Suspicious "
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

"AT&T (or whoever *really* owns UNIX) still has its original UNIX code. NetBSD still has its original BSD code. Did that prevent the splintering of UNIX into AIX, AUX, Solaris, DG-UX, or of BSD into Net-, Free-, Open-, DragonFly-, PC-, Desktop-, Tomorrow-, DayAfter-, and OhNoNotAnotherBSD? "

There are far less BSD derivatives than Linux derivatives, and they all tend to be much more compatible then the differences in say Red Hat and Debian, They all support the ports system and cvsup, and they are all derived from BSD386. Most of the new BSD distros are based on FreeBSD, and most are close enough to FreeBSD to use the FreeBSD ports and package systems directly. Therefore, I see alot less splintering in the BSD world than the Linux world.

"Actually, no. I like to point out that the BSD people, not Linux people, are the *real* idealists. This isn't FUD. It's a fact of life."

I wouldn't call it FUD, but I wouldn't call it a false idealism either. That BSD idealism that you speak of lead to TCP/IP becoming the standard of the internet, because everyone had access to a set of free, high quality networking utilities and stack. The reason that the number of BSD distros are increasing is because that idealism is paying off, as the BSD license allows for a clean, robust OS, as free (I think more free, but that's MHO) as Linux.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Too Suspicious
by cyclops on Fri 15th Jun 2007 05:43 in reply to "RE[4]: Too Suspicious "
cyclops Member since:
2006-03-12

"I wouldn't call it FUD, but I wouldn't call it a false idealism either. That BSD idealism that you speak of lead to TCP/IP becoming the standard of the internet, because everyone had access to a set of free, high quality networking utilities and stack. The reason that the number of BSD distros are increasing is because that idealism is paying off, as the BSD license allows for a clean, robust OS, as free (I think more free, but that's MHO) as Linux."

Just talking about licenses. Nobody is denying that BSD is an excellent license for getting a *standard* across proprietary software. Although you have to remember that even with BSD without copyleft the concept of sharing is behind the license. You also have to remember that an awful lot of what makes up these *BSD Distributions is made up by GLP or other copyleft licenses and would not operate without them. Your posts are off-topic.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[5]: Too Suspicious
by Silent_Seer on Fri 15th Jun 2007 17:00 in reply to "RE[4]: Too Suspicious "
Silent_Seer Member since:
2007-04-06

There are far less BSD derivatives than Linux derivatives, and they all tend to be much more compatible then the differences in say Red Hat and Debian, They all support the ports system and cvsup, and they are all derived from BSD386. Most of the new BSD distros are based on FreeBSD, and most are close enough to FreeBSD to use the FreeBSD ports and package systems directly. Therefore, I see alot less splintering in the BSD world than the Linux world.


Sorry but that statement is completely wrong. The various Linux distros are not forks. They are just like the distributions of FreeBSD. They are all binary compatible, they just differ in the libraries and set of drivers (and package management systems). You can easily create a linux program with it's own installer and include all the libraries it needs. This kind of a program will run on all the linux distros. There are many commercial programs that are released this way. You can create a driver for linux and it will work in all the distributions because they all use the same kernel. Not so in the BSD world. Free, Net, Open, DragonFly BSD are forks, i.e their kernel are different. They are still similar (you can port drivers easily) but are not the same.

The BSDs are responsible for a lot of innovation in the OS and the software world in general and I do not mean to degrade them in any way but unfortunately they are a lot more fragmented than you realize. They would have been a lot more successful if there had just one of them with the distros based on that one OS.

And let's not argue about licenses. The BSD and GPL serve their own purposes and there are lot of other licenses out there. It's upto the developers what they license their code under and what base of code they contribute to.


P.S. There are a lot of embedded linux distros out there that are forks but you would not run those in your PC. You would not even know they even exist unless you actually use them in your product.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Too Suspicious
by sbergman27 on Fri 15th Jun 2007 03:33 in reply to "RE[3]: Too Suspicious "
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

"""
Actually, no. I like to point out that the BSD people, not Linux people, are the *real* idealists. This isn't FUD. It's a fact of life.
"""

I think that we all tend to focus too much upon licensing.

Has GPLv2 been responsible for Linux's success? Well, Apache has done better with a very different one. So has perl. And Python, et al.

I like copyleft. But I'm not sure that it actually deserves as much credit as it is given.

And copyleft licenses *are* greedy licenses. By that, I mean that "compatibility" often means that we can take code from you. You can't take code from us? Well, it's still "compatible".

And sharing code is hard. Licensing aside, it's hard. And if the licensing does throw up extra hurdles... well, maybe that can sometimes do more harm than good.

We're a diverse group of fellows who can never seem to agree upon *anything* except that we all somehow seem to agree on *something* except that no one seems to be sure of just what that something is.

Perhaps we should simply accept that we're just a sort of strange amalgum who have somehow accomplished some amazing things, against all odds, and don't really know exactly how, and just give everyone credit for... whatever it is that they have done. ;-)

-Steve

Edited 2007-06-15 03:35

Reply Parent Score: 3