Re: Richard Stallman is responsible for the shrinking economy

Chris H wrote:
In message <paOdnXcqLp6qZ33UnZ2dnUVZ8t9i4p2d@xxxxxxxx>, David Brown
<david.brown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes
Chris H wrote:
In message <55fbc01e-7948-407b-81cc-118d30e0371b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
.com>, zwsdotcom@xxxxxxxxx writes
On Apr 9, 1:55 pm, Jim Stewart <grumpyoldg...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

And all First World proprietary software is
of high quality?
Since it's proprietary, who will ever know?
You are confusing proprietary and closed source.
I can supply you several commercial RTOS where the source is
available
but it is not Open Source.
A lot of the silicon companies supply source on their web site but
it is
not Open Source.

You do know the difference between having the source code available,
and having *usable* source code, don't you?

Yes.

Certainly there is some commercial software (RTOS's and libraries are
common examples) where you can make some use of the source code.

Yes.

But unless the license says you can take that code, modify it, re-
compile it, and use it in your systems, then the "available source
code" is at best a sort of documentation.

Well most that I know of let you modify it and recompile it.

I know there are commercial packages that have such licensing, but
there is a lot (such as Microsoft's "shared source" licenses) which
does not.

OK so one does not , many do.
Your point is?


Would you say that for many commercial RTOS's and compiler libraries, the standard prices include the right to modify and re-compile the source code and distribute it (subject to the same royalties and restrictions as using the unmodified supplied binaries, of course)?

Outside of these niches (this thread is about software in general), it's a different matter. For some commercial software you can get to view the source if you are big enough or rich enough, but you can't do anything with the code. In fact, if you have access to the code and you later write software yourself, you stand a good chance of being sued for copying the code (whether you did or not). Microsoft Windows is the best-known example of this, but it's not the only one.

There are also free programs available where the source is not.

And do you know that free-price closed source software is basically in
the same category as any other commercial closed source software, and
bears no relationship to free (as in "speech") or open source software?
Actually, I know that you *do* know this - you are trolling here.

No I did not know that YOU put it in the same category. Others do not.
Or are you trolling here?


In the population at large, most people simply look at the cost price for a piece of software and "free" means "gratis". But this is a technical newsgroup, and the people here have a better understanding of prices, licenses, and the different sorts of software. I don't think many people here would have trouble distinguishing between "free" software such as:

KiCad - free and open source

ExpressPCB - free cost, but restricted to ordering PCB's from the makers

Eagle Light Edition - free but limited version of the full package, for non-commercial use

Eagle and ExpressPCB are closed-source commercial programs that happen to have a zero purchase cost price, while KiCad is a free and open source program. I don't think many people in this thread or similar discussions have a problem with that - certainly not the FOSS supporters, nor the pragmatists (best tool for the job, and different licenses for different purposes), and not even the "open source is killing innovation" or "the GPL is a communist/viral/terrorist plot" crowd (not that I've seen such extreme fanaticism here yet).

If you genuinely have difficulty understanding this concept, let me know and I (or others here) will happily explain it to you in more detail. Until you *do* understand the difference, you can't contribute much useful information in discussions like this.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: What so special about PostgreSQL and other RDBMS?
    ... > Free, loaded with features, not particularly fast, some extras ... choice between closed and open source really means, ... backer, and with closed source, you can only chose the copyright ... Since you have no source code, no one knows but Microsoft (and the ...
    (comp.lang.php)
  • Re: Whats the story with the "end of XP"?
    ... You can't call yourself an expert in cryptography without a solid familiarity with some of the most used algorithms and implementations - programs like GPG, OpenSSH and OpenSSL are known to be among the most secure solutions precisely because there are so many interested and capable people who have studied their source code. ... There is overwhelming statistical evidence that serious flaws in major open source software projects are fixed quickly - generally far faster than in comparable closed source projects. ... And there are people who feel that anyone can use whatever license they want, but that they personally will only use FOSS. ...
    (comp.arch.embedded)
  • Re: Whats the story with the "end of XP"?
    ... understand much of the source code for GPG (an open source ... developers can't hide flaws in the same way closed source ... difference between closed source and open source programmers. ...
    (comp.arch.embedded)
  • Re: Linux Kernel Source
    ... buy source code of closed source application. ... open source to be closed source the same way doors that are not open are ... If knowing the source code opens system to serious security problems ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • FLOSS for e-learning
    ... participants as documentation on the issues and concerns related to the ... Free and Open Source Software for e-learning ... Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) has become an international ... Access to the source code is a precondition for this; ...
    (comp.os.linux.announce)