on Sat, Nov 08, 2003 at 04:27:42PM +1300, cr (cr@orcon.net.nz) wrote:
> On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 07:27, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2003-11-07 at 11:45, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 11:01:58AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > > > As in "proprietary, closed-source apps"?
> > > >
> > > > Well, that depends on if you see them as a "problem", or something
> > > > that you prefer not to use.
> > > >
> > > > I prefer not to use proprietary, closed-source apps, but, when
> > > > necessary, will pay for them, and use them, even on Debian.
> > >
> > > Personally I haven't really made my mind up about prioprietry apps, and
> > > whether RMS is right or not. However, the success of Linux is widely
> > > attributed to the open-source development model, so I can't really see
> > > the future of Linux throwing it away.
> >
> > I'm all for the open-source development model. However, we must
> > respect that some companies want to keep their source closed, and
> > still sell to the Linux market.
>
> (snip)
>
> Personally, I think the battle should be about open *standards*. I think
> Open Source is good, but I quite happily use as my preferred browser, Opera
> (which I'm pretty sure isn't Open Source), in preference to Konq or Galeon.
> Just a matter of personal preference.
>
> What I won't tolerate (when I have any say in the matter) is proprietary
> standards whereby one company tries to establish a monopoly (and yes I do
> mean Microsoft). Anybody sends me a Word doc is likely to be asked to send
> it again in some open format. I don't care that Open Office can read it
> (though I rather welcome the existence of OO - anything that helps to
> undermine the Evil Empire can't be bad :)
See:
http://twiki.iwethey.org/Main/FreeSoftwarePrimer
Both standards *and* free software matter. Without open standards, it's
very difficult to write good code. Case in point: WINE, which is
attempting to implemement a "standard" that's both closed and constantly
in flux.
Contrast to the webserver space in which the standard is not only open,
but overwhelmingly dominated by free software.
Without free software, open standards drift over time (are "embraced and
extended"), and become fragmented and non-free. Witness the UNIX wars
and various SQL implementations. (little known fact: "Project ORACLE"
was a defense data management project in the 1970s which grew into a
largish proprietary enterprise applications vendor headquartered at
Redwood Shores. If I've got my stories straight.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/05/20/MN209661.DTL
http://www.kean.edu/~rpadua/WEBPOSTER.HTML
http://dc.internet.com/news/article.php/996741
http://www.orafaq.org/faqora.htm
Peace.
--
Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
Backgrounder on the Caldera/SCO vs. IBM and Linux dispute.
http://sco.iwethey.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature