SCO, Open-Source Leaders Trade Barbs

gtghmgtghm New
edited September 2003 in Science & Tech
SCO CEO Darl McBride took a swing at the open-source community this week, Linux & Open-Source Editor Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols reports, and Linux luminaries Eric Raymond and Bruce Perens weren't slow to respond.


http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,4149,1261526,00.asp


Ummm, funny... I thougt that the open source community was supposed to sooo much superier to everyone else...

Looks like they are just like everyone else except they haven't limited their fight just aginst MS but also with in their own community...

I guess it really is all about the money...

Comments

  • kanezfankanezfan sunny south florida Icrontian
    edited September 2003
    what are you talking about? What in that article gave you that idea? SCO is counting on lawsuit revenues to stay alive, none of the things they've said have been proven true, and they've yet to show any evidence to back their claims up. Perens and Raymond, what do you expect them to do, take it on the chin and do nothing?
  • gtghmgtghm New
    edited September 2003
    Well I was comming from the point of view that its "Open Source"... its free... that was the idea behind it wasn't it...? Sorta like communisim share and share a like?
    But now there is squabling going on over who owns or has the rights to the code, at least thats how I read it... Maybe my coment was a bit of a reach but I still think it funny and a irontic thing that the "open source" community is fighting about who has the rights to the "open source" code...
    I dunn no maybe I mis-read the article... :rolleyes2

    "g"
  • kanezfankanezfan sunny south florida Icrontian
    edited September 2003
    you don't understand the whole point of open-source, that's the problem. the point is that it is free not as in free, you don't pay for it. it's free as in you develop it, you can sell it or give it away, but you also inlcude the source code of it, that way others can learn from and/or fix your software. if you download anyhitng that is GPL'd (the general public license) you always get the source code of the program. if you download a linux distribution, the source code is included in your download. you can then alter the OS to suit your needs, re-sell it, package it as GTGHM linux, but you must in turn GPL it and provide your source code. You can right now go out and download Red-Hat Linux, rename it GTGHM linux and go and sell it. Of course, you'd have to remove Red Hat intelectual property such as their logo, but do you understand what I'm saying here?

    imagine had win95 been open source, then a few million people would have been able to look at the source code and make it a much more stable, secure OS. do you understand the power of open source now? it's not about gettings things for free, it's about sharing your work with others to educate and enlighten.
  • gtghmgtghm New
    edited September 2003
    I will admit that it probably goes over my head, I probably shouldn't have comented initialy as you are right to point out my errent thought there... :grin
    But... I really fail to see the big grand thing about open source...
    Sure I think that its great and all that some feel that this world should be a place of shareing intelectual ideas and stuff... I don't necessarly disagree on the theroy of it and all, but, I think that its pie in the sky stuff and that the real world is not a place where a free exchange of ideas works well.
    Eventually some one poors their heart and sole into an indea and wants to be reimbursed for it yet at the same time protect their investment by patents and copy rights so that no one else can steal their hard work... (something that I don't disagree with by the way...) I think that its kinda like the music industry sueing the people that are freely sharing their hard work and not getting paid for it....

    To me the open source community is made up of a lot of folks that feel like stuff in life should be free and freely shared... Dosen't necessarly mean that they are lazy but that they have a weird sence that their hard work is paid back in some other way other than money or other corperate compensation... the problem with that generaly is the socioety that we all or most live in collides with those principles, its not real world ideas... The very nature in mankind is that mankind will undoubtly want proper compensation for hard work, its not the norm for mankind to submit to idealogical thinking of share and share alike....

    Sorry, I don't mean to be confrontational its just the way I see it...

    "g"
Sign In or Register to comment.