Linked by diodesign on Mon 21st Jan 2013 22:57 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 550116
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
They could have easily become the kings of the professional operating systems that are both legendary, fast, well-thought and extensible ... BUT ... they're not open source, and this will make their life miserable at best. At worse they can just dissapear, like BeOS. Then we will get some rewrite of the RISCOS code after several years of unnessesarily doubled work.
Come on people, wake up. Open source your stuff. It's not 1980s. The model has changed. Open source works and closed source doesn't work. And that won't change, because if you get a taste of the freedom once, you won't give it away anymore.
You can be either loved by the small group of enthusiasts with big wallets, or by the huge group of enthusiasts willing to pay for support and help. Don't be a prick, for f#@#$'s sake.
Come on people, wake up. Open source your stuff. It's not 1980s. The model has changed. Open source works and closed source doesn't work. And that won't change, because if you get a taste of the freedom once, you won't give it away anymore.
You can be either loved by the small group of enthusiasts with big wallets, or by the huge group of enthusiasts willing to pay for support and help. Don't be a prick, for f#@#$'s sake.
Open source wouldn't have paid the bills, for me, and closed source barely did - closed source being a requirement of the license. There are those who have a great regard for open source, and honour the agreements that are in place. There are others who don't, and have to be put in their place. But whatever the ideologies, I still try to keep from being insulting to others that have a different viewpoint.
Sorry if that insults you. I admit I went a little bit too far. I'm kinda grumpy in the morning hours
Anyway, I do think that FLOSS is the presence and the future, but I accept the ones that are willing to stay with the closed source model. It's their choice [with their profit or loss].
Best regards
Another lineage of RISC OS is moderately ~open: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_RISC_OS#Post-Acorn_developm... (even if apparently messy at times http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RISCOS_Ltd#License_dispute )
...which doesn't mean "the kings of the professional operating systems that are both legendary, fast, well-thought and extensible" - RISC OS just isn't that good, it seems.




Member since:
2007-11-23
They could have easily become the kings of the professional operating systems that are both legendary, fast, well-thought and extensible ... BUT ... they're not open source, and this will make their life miserable at best. At worse they can just dissapear, like BeOS. Then we will get some rewrite of the RISCOS code after several years of unnessesarily doubled work.
Come on people, wake up. Open source your stuff. It's not 1980s. The model has changed. Open source works and closed source doesn't work. And that won't change, because if you get a taste of the freedom once, you won't give it away anymore.
You can be either loved by the small group of enthusiasts with big wallets, or by the huge group of enthusiasts willing to pay for support and help. Don't be a prick, for f#@#$'s sake.