Microsoft is serious about getting Windows XP to work on OLPC's low-cost laptop, but the company still isn't sure it will be able to make a go of it. In an interview, James Utzschneider, the general manager of Microsoft's emerging market unit, says Microsoft has devoted about 40 employees and contractors to work on its effort. However, there are plenty of technical hurdles, he said. One of the biggest is the fact that the XO has no hard drive and only 1GB of built-in memory. The company concluded it needed at least 2GB of memory just for Windows and Office, so it convinced the OLPC folks to include an SD slot on the laptop's motherboard.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-08-28
The GPLv2
From Section 0:
...
Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running the Program is not restricted, and the output from the Program is covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the Program (independent of having been made by running the Program) Whether that is true depends on what the Program does.
...
From Section 2:
2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
...
b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License.
...
Thus, it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or contest your rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent is to exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative or collective works based on the Program.
-------------------
Emphases mine. Actually, just read that entire last snippet there.
I think that rather explicitly ties up the GPLv2. I don't see anything requiring any of the kids to give up their pictures they drew, unless you want to disregard the parts about what constitutes a derived work.
Feel free to check my quotations here:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.txt
----------------
The GPLv3
Section 0:
...
To "modify" a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of the work in a fashion requiring copyright permission, other than the making of an exact copy. The resulting work is called a "modified version" of the earlier work or a work "based on" the earlier work.
A "covered work" means either the unmodified Program or a work based on the Program.
...
--------------
And the rest of the license talks about covered works. Somehow I doubt keeping a diary would be considered modifying a GPL'd work.
GPLv3: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.txt
Edited 2007-12-07 04:55
Member since:2006-06-03
Member since:2006-12-28
Utter rubbish. If you don't actually understand the GPL, and are unwilling to learn about it, please refrain from commenting on it.
I have had to read your anti GPL tripe in the past and every time you come out with a new line of attack, you end up showing just how ignorant you are about it.
Not liking the GPL, even for your seemingly irrational reasons, is your own business but if your going to attack it, at least do the rest of us a favor and actually try and understand the license so that we don't have to waste time pointing out your inaccuracies.
Something to keep in mind, know your enemy.
Member since:2007-02-17
Utterly incorrect. 100% wrong.
The license says this:
"the output from the Program is covered (by the GPL) only if its contents constitute a work based on the Program".
If I write a romance novel using openoffice.org ... clearly the romance novel text has absolutely nothing to do with the source code of openoffice.org.
The GPL license covers ONLY the source code of "the Program" (in this case, the source code of openoffice.org). If you use any of that openoffice.org source code in another program, then (as required by law) you must have permission from the copyright holders. The GPL is your permission ... provided that you stick to its terms.
Anything that you write yourself ... then you are the copyright holder to that work (even if you used openoffice.org to write it), and you decide how (or even if) you want to license it or distribute your work.
It is very simple, even schoolkids get this.
Edited 2007-12-07 11:35
Member since:
2007-02-22
Not into the public domain; the GPL requies any data or documents that are contacted by it to be released under the GPL, just like it explicitly says in the license (versions 2 and 3).