Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 5th Dec 2005 21:04 UTC
IBM IBM is adopting OpenDocument Format for the first generally available release of its network-based collaboration and office productivity suite. IBM said Sunday its Workplace Managed Client 2.6, due in early 2006, would adopt ODF so users could easily share files and information. The Workplace Managed Client is currently available on a limited capacity, with more than one million deployed seats.
Thread beginning with comment 69715
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[12]: Code?
by shotsman on Wed 7th Dec 2005 16:48 UTC in reply to "RE[11]: Code?"
shotsman
Member since:
2005-07-22

So Mr Anonymous,
Please explain without going into a rant exactly how the Developers Sun employes to work on Open Office are from the Developers RedHat employ to work on parts of the Linux Kernel?
Both are contribting to OSS software.

You do seem to have a big hang up over RedHat. Please sit down, take a vallium and try to get over your addiction unless of course you happen to work for a company with a big vested interest in slagging off RedHat.
They( RedHat) only make money from selling support & training related to code which is OSS. Please explain why that is such a bad business model. All the code they cotribute to OSS IS FREE to one and all. It costs me nothing, zilch, nowt, nada, nil. Please tell me what is wrong with that?
Finally, please explain what is wrong with RedHat buying some close source application and then making it OSS as they have done with the former Netscape Directory Server.
Before you start pointing a finger, I don't work for RedHat so don't ask. I work for myself. I am the CEO of a Software Consultancy who promotes OSS Software wherever possible and charges for my services. Oh Darn it, I have just realised that I sort of follow the same business model as RedHat. I suppose I'm now cursed forever in your eyes.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[13]: Code?
by on Thu 8th Dec 2005 15:22 in reply to "RE[12]: Code?"
Member since:

"Please explain without going into a rant exactly how the Developers Sun employes to work on Open Office are from the Developers RedHat employ to work on parts of the Linux Kernel?"

Simple. Sun gave you OpenOffice. Red Hat did not give you Linux. Linux existed for quite a while before Red Hat came along and decided to serve their own self interests by monetizing it.

"They( RedHat) only make money from selling support & training related to code which is OSS. Please explain why that is such a bad business model."

This is how they justify it. I don't buy it. What they make money off of, is selling Linux using a loophole that allows them to say "Well, we aren't really selling Linux. We are selling support for Linux." It's a loophole in my mind.

And no, I don't work for a company that has a vested interest in slagging of Red Hat. I am just someone who has been hacking on Linux virtually since the pre Slackware days. And I am someone who enjoyed the community is used to have back when everyone truely was in it for the good of the community. That largely disappeared when Red Hat came along since they were not, and are not in it for the good of the community. They are in it for their own financial self interests, and the financial self interests of their shareholders.

If I sound bitter, it is because I am. I am bitter that a wonderful community project where everyone worked for the good of the community was hijacked by corporate, commercial monetary interests. Because basically, that is what happened.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[14]: Code?
by on Fri 9th Dec 2005 02:16 in reply to "RE[13]: Code?"
Member since:

"That largely disappeared when Red Hat came along".

Say what?

I call BS.

I for one don't give one whit what RedHat do or don't do. I am a Linux user and I incorporate Linux into products - and what RedHat does or does not do has absolutely no impact on that.

I use Debian. Huge community. Nothing to do with RedHat.

Now as for Sun - what is all this twaddle called "CCDL"? This License is indeed an OpenSource license (because the code is indeed open) - but it is like BSD in one way (companies may take the code and use it in a closed application) and like a proprietary license in another way - Sun retain control of the code.

It therefore is closest to the Microsoft's "shared source" - except that Microsoft at least don't expect a community to work on their shared source code for free.

Reply Parent Score: 0