Microsoft would like to buy Linux

[Joel Kolstad]

People
think that "free software" means "costs no money" but that just isn't
true - it may, but it doesn't have to.

Yes, but you can't restrict someone who has a GPL'd piece of software from
going out and making it free to everyone, so any "successful" GPL'd piece of
software will eventually end up in the "costs no money" camp.

Realistically I think it's much harder for someone writing GPL code to make a
living (writing that code) than it is for someone writing commercial software
to do so.

 

[DJ Delorie]

Realistically I think it's much harder for someone writing GPL code
to make a living (writing that code) than it is for someone writing
commercial software to do so.

Well, I work for Red Hat, so I'm kinda biased ;-)

 

[Rich Grise]

If two works are mere aggregates, like two independent programs on one
cd-rom, the licenses are independent - the fact that one is GPL
doesn't mean that they both have to be GPL.

If two works are combined into one work, like linking a library into
an application, if either is GPL the combined work as a whole must be
distributed under GPL-compatible terms.

However, my original post was to clarify that the GPL says nothing
about *commercial* distribution - it certainly allows you to charge a
fee for the GPL'd programs you distribute, provided you do so under
the GPL's terms (minimal fees for source distribution, etc). People
think that "free software" means "costs no money" but that just isn't
true - it may, but it doesn't have to.

I really like the saying, "Free software isn't like free beers, it's more
like free speech." ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

Yes, but you can't restrict someone who has a GPL'd piece of software from
going out and making it free to everyone, so any "successful" GPL'd piece of
software will eventually end up in the "costs no money" camp.

Realistically I think it's much harder for someone writing GPL code to make a
living (writing that code) than it is for someone writing commercial software
to do so.

I think Slackware (and probably most other Linux distros) has it right -
you can download the whole thing for free, or you can buy a 4-CD set that
includes the source code and comes with an instruction manual on the CD.
About the only difference is the boot disk, which comes with the CD set,
but you have to make your own if you D/L it.

I paid $40.00 once for Slackware and two Linux books, but was kind of
disappointed that the books were merely a dead-tree copy of the HOWTOs.
(which come with the distro anyway.)

I wonder if we can talk Win Hill and Mr. Horowitz into putting AoE
on-line, but set it up where they can get paid for the answers to the
exercises. ;-)

Win? What do you think?

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

Well, I work for Red Hat, so I'm kinda biased ;-)

I bought a copy of Redmond^H^H^H^Hhat a couple of years ago, and it
gave me the creeps.

When I ran the install, it didn't even offer me the choice of what
partition I wanted to install it on, let alone fdisk!

I didn't install it - I got out my old Slack 3.3 and installed it instead.
I let the Redmond^H^H^H^Hnay sit on the shelf for awhile, then gave it
away.

Howcome it's so microsoftish? Going for Aunt Tillie-friendly? ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

 

[John E. Perry]

Well, ummm....

NT did not start out as Unix. NT started out as OS/2; until XP there
was an 'os2krnl.exe', which was an RMX scheduler.
Microsoft did buy an AT&T source license for Unix, which they sold as
Xenix.

Well, no; NT came from DEC's VMS operating system:

http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/docs/Windows-NT_is_VMS_re-implemented.html

Here's the history of OS/2:

http://www.os2bbs.com/os2news/OS2History.html

Finally, RMX was a real-time executive written by Intel, not intended at
all for the PC at any time, and completely unrelated to either NT or OS/2.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMX

I know nothing about Windows internals (been on linux for several
years), but even google couldn't help with 'os2krnl.exe'.

John Perry

 

[Eeyore]

I think Slackware (and probably most other Linux distros) has it right -
you can download the whole thing for free, or you can buy a 4-CD set that
includes the source code and comes with an instruction manual on the CD.
About the only difference is the boot disk, which comes with the CD set,
but you have to make your own if you D/L it.

What is it about Slackware you prefer over other distros ?

Graham

 

[Rich Grise]

What is it about Slackware you prefer over other distros ?

When I was first considering Linux, about 10 years ago, I looked at
several different distros and essentially decided to D/L Slackware
because I like(d) the name, being a professional Slacker and all. ;-)

This was back in the days of dialup where it took about 3 days to
D/L the whole thing, and it all got put on about two dozen diskettes.

I installed it, it worked, the console interface when it first booted
almost brought tears to my eyes, because it was like the really old days
of CP/M and stuff where programs would "sign on" - while booting,
everything reported on its progress. I LOVE that in S/W.

(this was my first W95 box, and in fact my first doze box at all - all
I had had before was DOS.)

Cheers!
Rich