Does SEIV run on XP???? - Page 7

Mephisto · #61 May 24th, 2004, 10:41 PM

I did not say that you had to release Linux source code. But under the GPL/GNU you have to release the source code of programs you base on open source software itself under the GPL/GNU. You can not make it closed code.
The case with SCO may be a sham but oif your company stands in the line with millions and billions of dollars you might have another few on the issue but to take any risks. Trust me on this one, I work for one of the biggest computer companies on this planet as a lawyer.
And the point is not how fast Microsoft will fix a bug but that they have the money to compensate you and your customer if they screw up big times. If you screw up your customer with open source software you have no one ti mitigate the damage. See my point?

Fyron · #62 May 25th, 2004, 04:57 AM

You only have to release the code of the parts that are open sourced. You can still keep parts of programs entirely written by you closed source.

Mephisto · #63 May 25th, 2004, 06:38 AM

No, you can not. If you base your work on a piece of software that it GPL/GNU you have to release everything you base on this code to the public as well.

Please note: I'm talking about source code, not about work you create with a GPL/GNU piece of software (like a picture with an OS graphic program). You don't have to make the resulting work of an OS product OS, that's correct.

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
You only have to release the code of the parts that are open sourced. You can still keep parts of programs entirely written by you closed source.

Gandalf Parker · #64 May 25th, 2004, 03:39 PM

Keep in mind that even with the open source, it does not mean you cant charge for it. Some are making a good buisness out of selling GNU/GPL projects. Here is a good link discussing that with the subject of GIMP http://www.gimp.org/about/selling.html

[ May 25, 2004, 14:42: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Mephisto · #65 May 25th, 2004, 03:55 PM

Charging for it works on the mass market quite fine but not if you produce a piece of software for your customer alone (like a piece of finance software for a bank). Your customer wants to have this software so he is ahead of his competitors and he demands all IP rights of this work so only he can use it and decide what to do with it. And that you cannot do with software based on a GPL/GNU license as you have to make the software OS too. The demans of the OS and your customer are head on in this one.

Having said this, just to be clear, I'm a fan of the OS idead and OSS software. I just want to point out that there are some finer points to closed and open software in a business environment to be considered.

Fyron · #66 May 25th, 2004, 09:04 PM

If you write your own software designed to be used on Linux, you do not have to make it open sourced. Look at Quake 3 for an example. You think they are going to release the source code for that game? Not likely. If you write software that consists primarily of open source code but with a few modifications, that is when you have to release it with GPL/GNU. But you can just as well write closed source software designed to run on Linux as you can on Windows. It is not as if you have the source code to use on Windows when writing software for it.

Mephisto · #67 May 25th, 2004, 09:59 PM

Mmm, maybe I'm not that clear in what I want to say. There are two things I talk about here - Linux and OSS under the GPL/GNU.

What you have to do if you take a GPL/GNU OSS as a base from where you start programming I said in several Posts already. You have to make it OSS as well.

If you use Linux and sell it to customers you have to give them a warranty that the software has a) no issues and b) is free from third party rights on it.
If you find errors or you violate third party rights you have to fix the problem/indemnify your customers. Therefore you have to either invest money or have some programmers to fix problems. In the end you become your own OS seller (like Microsoft).
If you hire Microsoft or Sun directly and there are errors in their software they will fix it for you and your customer. And yes, they really do this because you can easily sue them and win.

You can program software for Linux all day long and keep it closed source. No problem at all. But from a business point of view it is often just more profitable to hire an OS seller and get rid of all you warranty problems or to become a OS seller yourself.

[ May 26, 2004, 05:18: Message edited by: Mephisto ]

Solymr · #68 June 1st, 2004, 07:25 AM

Going back to the previous discussion about product stability and perfection, I doubt most major software products are ever bug free, no matter who the creator is. As for the whole 2K vs. XP debate, I choose XP due to game stability. Anything else doesn't really fuss me, I don't care if 2K can stay stable for longer then 2 weeks without rebooting, I just know that 2K doesn't run the games I like very well and thats what makes me choose what OS I use. If 2K ran games better I know I'd stick by it, but I just feel its better suited for a buisness rather then a gamer like myself.

As for Linux, I'm not that much of a fan myself mostly because of the whole game thing. Yeah its probably overall a better product depending what distro you use, but in the end games decide what I use. Sure, I'd love it if gaming on linux was easier, I'd switch right over.

Sure, some guy can get into my system if he's bored enough and he can look at what sites I go to, the personal information I have on this computer (or lack of) and if he rarely cared to, do something nasty like screw up XP. It just means I have to reinstall my OS and games, but in the end I'd rather be able to use all my games and be at a small risk then feel secure but also not able to run software I've payed good money for.

Just my 2 grand worth.

Gandalf Parker · #69 June 1st, 2004, 04:49 PM

Everything has its Pros and Cons. I love WinXp for my desktop and playing games on. I would use Win2000 or MAC as a single-purpose server for its nice menu admining. I would use unix for stability. I use Linux as my multipurpose server because it will take care of everything and the software plays well together (I dont rely on ISPs for any services).

only old geezers need to read this
By the way one of the things that linux does excell is "emulators". They have one for nearly every console or old computer system people remember fondly so if you ever watned to go back and play your commodore, trs80, amiga games then look into pulling that old computer out of the closet and loading linux on it. Thats another big point for linux, being able to get a free software and turn the old computer into a server or router or firewall.

[ June 01, 2004, 15:51: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

David E. Gervais · #70 June 1st, 2004, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:
only old geezers need to read this
By the way one of the things that linux does excell is "emulators". They have one for nearly every console or old computer system people remember fondly so if you ever watned to go back and play your commodore, trs80, amiga games then look into pulling that old computer out of the closet and loading linux on it. Thats another big point for linux, being able to get a free software and turn the old computer into a server or router or firewall.

Thanks alot Gandalf, now my eyes are glazed over and I'm caught in a retro daydream... Star Raiders, Pac Man, Miner2049'er, Loadrunner, David's Midnight Magic, M.U.L.E., etc, etc, etc,.. Atari 800 with 16k RAM and a 410 program recorder whooohooo! I soon upgraded to 48k with a Targa 32k RAM board..... then I got my Supra 300 baud modem with outragously high phone bills attached, aaaaaah, the good old days.

..David! wake up!

wha? where? why? Oh, I'm still typing on the forums,.. oops sorry. (your fault Gandalf)

Thanks, I always love a good walk down memory lane.

Cheers!

[ June 01, 2004, 17:52: Message edited by: David E. Gervais ]