The GNU-Darwin project comes off rather hypocritical. Their project page contains a great deal of anti-Apple diatribe:“Apple continues the wall-of-silence with respect to their repugnant DMCA-based legal action, and there is no reason whatsoever for us to think that they will not undertake similar action in the future. It is regrettable that the DMCA was Apple-sponsored legislation, and it is now time for them to disavow it and promise never to employ it.Second, APSL is languishing, and it is unacceptable to the free software community. It is now time for an APSL revision, which brings the license in line with the free software definition in accordance with the expectations of GNU Project.I think their attitude is along the lines of “Apple, we don’t really like you but we’ll use your software anyway.”. You can’t play pool on yahoo?
Have you notified the press? Pool on Yahoo is the life blood of the computing industry. Any OS that fails that test is doomed, doomed I say!! Ok, here’s what we’ll do (don’t worry, I’m here to help): you format your drive and get yourself a functional OS on there (and a cup of hot cocoa while you’re at it, you’ve had a hard day) and I’ll notify the trade press that Linux is incapable of pool on Yahoo. I was afraid that the commies were winning but thanks to you, we’ve found the silver bullet to pierce their Red armor! THANK YOU JEFFERFY! YOU’VE SAVED CAPITALISM!PS- Way to go Darwin team (sorry, i’m a little cranky).
Current screenshots. Proclus: Old screenshots: Download (This page has been superceded. Darwin download and installation information, including GNU-Darwin GUI screenshots, iso images and package information, scientific software, and more is available on our future new website, which is under construction. Help and FAQ info are also available. Binary package instructions are provided for x86. Bootable Installer CD. Beta 2 of the installer released. There is now a x86 CD, although it is not as tested as the PowerPC version.
Darwin is the BSD layer of Apple’s Mac OS X UNIX based operating system. Darwin is available for both PowerPC and x86 architectures.GNU Darwin is a distribitution which includes Apple’s Darwin distribution (which you can download direct from Apple in the form of ISO images).I think that GNU Darwin includes some addition software as well as a broader set of drivers for better hardware support than Apple’s core distribution.It’s actually a pretty fun OS to play with if you’re a OS enthusiast.
The NetInfo database structure for user, privileges, etc. Management is kind of confusing at first, but once you get the hang of it, it’s really very flexible and powerful. It’s really something I wish more UNIX and UNIX-like OS’s would adopt as an option if not a standard. Darwin also makes a good platform to run a Quicktime Streaming Server from for free.-Nathan. As it’s says one reply above you should have to read the posts because you misunderstood it completely.Apple may keep something innovative to attract potential customers from the UNIX world.
So they have Quartz and Acqua, and now they provide X11 which is a good movement (specially due to the Fink guys) so they have the only “one boot” system that can run let’s say Gimp and Photoshop in an cool environment with a good response. If this was available in Linux for free why should someone switch to a proprietary hardware company? That would make Apple a Software company doing another unix distro. GNU Darwin is junk, the guy is a stallmanite and it has infected the rest of the project. He has more ” Free Dmitry and Elcomsoft” crap on his site, he says he participated in the Adobe Boycott like anyone cares and like the Boycott really hurt Adobe. The DMCA is there to protect the people from guys like himself and Richard Stallman so that they will not steal intellectual property.
He has more Apple flames than I care to talk about on his site. The guy cant play nice well Im not going to use his junk. I will stick with OpenDarwin, which is more helpful in the ways of support then the GNU Darwin project is. I used to think very highly of that guy until the GPL preaching came into play. I have talked to many open source enthusiasts who have read the APSL line to line who say there is nothing wrong with it. The license is basically the BSD License.
The GPL is like a virus it will take good software like Linux and make it unusable for commercial use. No companies program for Linux because that means they will have to open up some parts of intellectual property where the BSD License does not require it. Micheal Love you can keep the OS. No I do not think so. They would do it. Stallman and Love are totally aginst the DMCA, what has the DMCA done to them?
I am glad it is there, as a software developer I like the idea of being able to protect myself from leeches like those 2. It is not the ” Freedom killer ” they make it out to be. It does not matter who steals IP or P the point is that it is there and without it there would be no innovation. If the DMCA was in effect when the Microsoft vs.
Apple case came into play, the one where Apple accuses Microsoft of stealing their interface, Microsoft would have lost and would have had to come up with a more original idea. It is guys like Love that make it out to be so bad because now they have to come up with original ideas and not be able to hack and patch all day long. No I do not think so.
They would do it. Stallman and Love are totally aginst the DMCA, what has the DMCA done to them? I am glad it is there, as a software developer I like the idea of being able to protect myself from leeches like those 2. It is not the ” Freedom killer ” they make it out to be. It does not matter who steals IP or P the point is that it is there and without it there would be no innovation.
If the DMCA was in effect when the Microsoft vs. Apple case came into play, the one where Apple accuses Microsoft of stealing their interface, Microsoft would have lost and would have had to come up with a more original idea.
It is guys like Love that make it out to be so bad because now they have to come up with original ideas and not be able to hack and patch all day long. GNU Darwin is junk, the guy is a stallmanite and it has infected the rest of the project.So what you are saying is that you haven’t actually tried the OS and are basing your entire judgement of this OS on your distaste for RMS?
Kind of a weak stance don’t you think?The DMCA is there to protect the people from guys like himself and Richard Stallman so that they will not steal intellectual property.Ha ha ha ha Yes RMS is against the DMCA, but that doesn’t mean he ever stole anything. Why don’t you actually listen to what RMS is preaching? He actually has some excellent points.The GPL is like a virus it will take good software like Linux and make it unusable for commercial use.How so? You can run non-GPL applications and create non-GPL applications on Linux without violating the GPL.
What you cannot do is steal GPL code and place it into your own product and sell that product for a profit to somebody else. The BSD license is considered friendly to companies because companies like Microsoft can dip into BSD code, put it into Windows, and then charge you a bundle for it. As a developer, if I want to donate code to the community, I will definitely donate it via the GPL. If I’m giving a gift away to the world, then I don’t want anybody else dipping into the IP I have generously donated, placing it in a proprietary product and then charging people a lot for it.No companies program for Linux because that means they will have to open up some parts of intellectual propertyYou are very uninformed about the GPL. My company writes several software application on Linux, for Linux.
We do not GPL any of it. You are only obligated to GPL code that you acquire from other GPL’ed code. If you write all your code yourself, as we have done, then you don’t have to worry about it.I suggest you actually learn what the GPL is and about the ideas behind it.Without the GPL, Linux would not be where it is today and it wouldn’t be a small threat to Microsoft since they would be able to hijack Linux code for use in Windows; just as they have done with BSD code. There’s 2 versions of the license. The standard GPL, and the lesser (Used to be library) GPL.The GPL and LGPL have been discussed to death all over the place so I’ll just sum up in this “viral” context.
(That term really sucks, who came up with it?).Here’s the gist of the standard GPL:Using any part of the code indicates your acceptance of the standard GPL. Should you wish modify the code, include any part of it within your own code, or utilise its functions then your code must also take up the terms of the GPL.Now the LGPL is much more complex, but basically it’s this:So long as your executable contains no part or derivative part of the actual library it can be distributed under your own terms. However, and it’s a big however, if you combine or link to a library which is released under the terms of the LGPL this little sentence comes into effect. What you cannot do is steal GPL code and place it into your own product and sell that product for a profit to somebody elseActually, you can take GPl code and sell a product for a profit. What you are restricted from doing is denying people open access and reproduction to said code.
In fact, I think RMS encourages people to make a profit from GNU code. He simply believes that people should have rights to copy and modify it without restriction.Regarding the hostility some have towards the GPL, sometimes I’m surprised. It’s a community effort to have an intellectual commons. If you don’t believe in it, then innovate on your own! Go ahead, while others will build and share with a community. Yes i have used the OS I used to be a GNU Darwin developer before Love ruined it. I suggest you read the GPL again because you are WRONG.
If you use any part of GPL software you have to release certain parts of the code like I said previously. I have listened to RMS preach and I disagree with all of his points why do you think I do not contribute to GPL software anymore. There are several problems with the GPL and yes it is 99.9% of the reason companies do not write programs for Linux the other.1% is because not enough user base. The APSL is fine, Stallmanites need to revise their mode of thinking on the GPL andrevise it for more companies to actually accept it, otherwise Linux will be stuck in limbo and if it ever becomes mainstream RMS will find some way to mess everything up. No I am not an Apple user, no I do not use OS X, my experience comes with GNU Darwin, Linux and FreeBSD. The DMCA is one of the few laws that the US has ever come up with that actually protects the citizens of this nation.
Loves website has this little excerpt on it that says ” Why are foreign scientists afraid to come to the United StatesThey fear being prosecuted”. Well guys I have news for you, if foreign scientists decide to come to the United States and steal Intellectual Property then yes they do need to be prosecuted. No one gave Elcomsoft permission to hack Adobe Software. Point Blank, Period. They broke the law, yes they need to go to jail. The DMCA doesnt fit Stallmans tastes because he puts Freedom ahead of functionality, he thinks all software needs to be open.
Proprietary software has its place, Open Source software has its place. If Adobe, Apple, Microsoft and IBM do not want to give away their ideas or their software they shouldnt be forced to. The Adobe Boycott that RMS and Love so gallantly and waving their flags of the righteous supported, didnt even make the news, I heard nothing about it until I saw GNU Darwins site and it mentioned it. The Boycott wasnt very widely accepted peole still used Adobe Products.
FreeBSD gives code away, MS uses their TCP/IP stacks I do not see FreeBSD complaining. Not everyone will agree all the time. But you can keep the GPL, I would much rather use the APSL and the BSD License ahead of the GPL.
I think you completely miss the point of why he was mad at Adobe for using the DMCA. The elcomsoft developer made a program that’s only violation was is that it circumvented a copy protection, and he released the code to it and told people how to do it. No IP was stolen.Now, I think you have some major misconceptions about the GPL, and GNU. The GPL was made to protect intellectual property, actually. It was made to protect open source developers who wanted their code to be safe from companies that would steal it. I think you are the one with misconceptions. The GPL doesnt protect anyone, all it does is fuel more nonsense from RMS and others like him, commonly referred to as stallmanites, the GPL wasnt created to make something great.
The GPL was created out of spite because Microsoft refused to hire Stallman, if Stallman had gotten the job with Microsoft there would be no GPL, no FSF nothing. As for Elcomsoft they broke the law, you cant turn an Apple into an orange. POINT BLANK PERIOD, they broke the law. When you break the law there is no grey area, you either broke the law or you did not break the law.
Comments are closed.
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
March 2023
Categories |