Re: Jave1.1 released

Sniper zaps a wand of undead turning at the thread!--More--

[long lines wrapped]

Sniper <sni...@ukrmREMOVETOMAIL.net> wrote:

> Captains Log Star Date 16 Jul 2001 15:50:48 GMT,alien life
> enx...@unix.ccc.nottingham.ac.uk (ROBERT HART) contacted us and said:
[...]
> >I have not tried using Jave, simply because it is a closed-source
> >program.
> 
> Why, Closed source != Bad.

Your opinion. Some people *do* think closed source is bad.

> If you have no need for Jave, then why should it make a difference, if

See above.

> you have a need for it, but want one open source, write it. If not,

If I did, I would.

> >Seriously, unless you plan to release Jave as a commercial product,
> >you can only benefit by talking the Free Software route. You do not
> >lose anything by opening the source - you still own the copyright,
> >you still have control of the project, and you can still make jave
> >better.
> 
> ?????
> 
> How does one make profit from a free application?

    the point
        |
        v
______  .  _________. . . huh? why? what? eh?
      `---'
         ^
         |
        you

The point here is that Jave *isn't* commercial, and is already being
distributed in executable form for free. Now, reread the above in that
context.

> >outside help and advice. However, the linux kernel is independant
> >of Linus, and so is unlikely to ever dissapear.
> 
> Actually, this is not true. Linus still has copyright on the code, if
> he decided to start charging for it, then there would be problems.

Wrong. Linus does not hold copyright on the majority of the kernel
these days; he couldn't relicence it unilaterally. And *anyone* can
charge for Linux, you just can't stop other people giving it away.

> >Nobody can force you to Open Source Jave, and it's no skin off my
> >nose if you don't, sooner or later, somebody else will do something
> >similar, and Jave will die.
> 
> This is not the case I think, if Jave is better, then most people will
> use it.

This is naive IMHO. Most people will use what they're familiar with.

>         Hell why do you think more people use closed source software
> than open?

See above. And ad-numerum arguments are not especially convincing.

-Rus.