Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 13th Jul 2005 14:00 UTC, submitted by Timothy R. Butler
GNU, GPL, Open Source Tim Butler knew when he mentioned something negative about the GNU Project's General Public License (GPL), in his column on KDE last week, he would inevitably be accused of arguing the GPL was a bad license. What did not fit into that piece shall now be dealt with: is the GPL a bad license or is the issue he complained about something else?
Thread beginning with comment 3578
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
@Tim Butler
by on Wed 13th Jul 2005 15:04 UTC

Member since:

> Next week, after casting some doubt on KDE the past
> two weeks, I'll explain why I am not the GNOME user
> I have been presumed to be.

Tim, but you are. I had quite some conversation with Ed about you and heard that you became a total GNOME zealot. I don't understand you, you used to be a die hard KDE user and then turned your opinion and became a die hard GNOME user. You need to decide what you are. Do you want to use KDE because of the great technology it has or do you want to be our new george washington and start politics. I doubt anything for you as user will change be it that QT becomes fully LGPL or not, it won't affect you. All you do is hurting an adequate company in the EU who tries to establish themself in the IT sector. One company that hasn't decided to move away to India or China because it's cheaper there. How would you like it if we start attacking your OFB site until you resign because you can't stand all the complaints and personal attacks anymore. You do the same (or did the same) with your really offensive article last time.

Reply Score: 0

RE: @Tim Butler
by tbutler on Wed 13th Jul 2005 16:31 in reply to "@Tim Butler"
tbutler Member since:

No I'm not, and I'm quite sure Ed would never suggest I'm a zealot, he knows me too well. Now, I'll leave it to your imagination until next week what I'm really using, but I am not using GNOME.

First, though, let me say this: when I did switch to GNOME I did so for pragmatic reasons. I felt the interface was going in a better direction, that my earlier complaints about it had been solved, that the apps I wanted to use typically where GTK+ based and I was never fond of KDE's dependence on Trolltech. This is not because I do not like Trolltech, I think they are a fine company, but because I would rather see a desktop environment in a position where Trolltech was providing value added services on top of the basic development, rather than the whole stack of solutions. For example: if I am a Windows developer, I can develop perfectly integrated software without Trolltech's license (or without any development licenses at all -- if I do not mind doing more of the dirty work myself), but I can choose to purchase Qt if I want to take advantage of its power. I wish KDE was in the same position.

I have nothing against KDE. Since I left the KDE community, I've found there are some features I simply cannot replicate on other platforms that I miss. But, as a whole it is not the right desktop for me. It is a fine desktop though, and I still insist it has the finest underpinnings of any D.E. I've used.

Reply Parent Score: 1