@keisangi

I agree in that OSS is good, but I also think that it can't solve every problem like some GPL fanatics think. I also think that GPL licence works like a virus and that LGPL is much more friendly with commercial OSes.

GPL may work well in the server market where you pay for the support because linux is complex, but do you really think that if let's say ArtEffect5 was released as GPL many people would buy it? I seriously doubt that the authors would get many sales because most of people would create a new version changing a little the sources and the authors wouldn't get new sales... remember we are in a small market and although people won't live thanks to a program sales it makes the coder slightly more happy and motivates him a little to keep on coding.

I don't think that changing GPL software and trying to sell it is a good idea.

[ Edited by Crumb on 2006/8/9 7:23 ]

@keisangi

Yes, we do love this system, closed source or not.

In my opinion you have trouble with it.

A simple question. What are you doing here? You know, its a fanatic forum, for us, fanatic users, fanatics of a system done for fanatics. (Did i mentioned fanatic?)

And, yes, like it or not, its closed source.

Please, close the door when lefting ( to complain at slashdot, prolly )

@crumb

how do you think gnu/linux made it this way?
it's simple: ppl that code application do know their own baby the most.
so ppl pay for them to maintain/develop further their app..on a contract basis..
like bounties..

you like arteffect? you want more feature? you contract the author to make it happen..or open bounties..

sur open source also mean your code can be copied and someone could make a clone of arteffect and call it hurteffect-or-idunnowhat_v6beta2

but that's where gpl is good: if u use gpl code you must release your copy/clone as gpl too, so other could benefit from your work too..

gpl if something that do make ppl to work together .. hand in hand ..
it's great..

GPL has to protect itself from plain code steal and relabel.
so if you admit you use gpl code to create you own app, it men GPL helped you to do so.. so you must help gpl by giving your code too so it could benefit someone else too..

it's very plain simple and logic ..
the only thing is: ppl want to take, but aren't willing to give ;)
so all they find to say is: gpl is bad, gpl is a virus ..
just because they want to take without giving anythink.
if i would say something i would it's thoses ppl which are no good ..
it's not gpl the virus, but maybe those ppl's behavior ..

well it's so obvious ..
do all yourself a favor go there and read:
http://www.gnu.org/gnu/thegnuproject.html



i did read that ..did you?
if you want to criticize, know what you're talking about first..

@frankbrana

what am i doing here?
do i need to explain myself?
maybe you wanna look at my id paper? or verify some tatoo codebar on my neck?

i go where i choose to go obviously ;)
just be happy i have enough time or interest to speak here , or even consult the site time to time ..

you're right tho, it's a closed source system, beside i like it or not ..
we'll see if it does it any good ..
my best guess would say that amiga should have gone opensource long ago, if that were possible .. (think not, but, i'm speaking in an ideal and hypothetic way)

so far i see thing that are moving the most are opensourced stuffs, such as ambient or the tcp stack mosnet/eztcp
mplayer, blender, aweb..maybe, sputnik, i can't list em all but ..
most of the project that look alive are opensource..
morphos on the other hand..well you know .. ;)
when it's done ;)

ok i'm off, i said what i had to.. eat it or refuse it i don't care.
i said what i thought that ought to be said.

i'm off.. 'later folks :)

Crumb:
"..but do you really think that if let's say ArtEffect5 was released as
GPL many people would buy it?"

What's the difference since it was pirated long ago?

To All,

To the discussion concerning open source vs closed source.

I do personally believe that stating that open source is some kind of _guarantee_ for a particulary software to be continued developed further is a completely false understanding.

I see this 'argument' is popping up in all kind of places, and nothing can be more wrong then stating a such thing.

Perhaps as an example I could point to is the OpenDarwin project which recently got closed. Im quoting from their website:

Quote:

Please read and consider.

I also do not believe anyone from the MorphOS-team (if anyone maybe are thinking so) or anyone else in this community have anything against software being open source. Its not the impression I got anyway.

And to keisangi,

Quote:

Sure, such thing are great - when it works that way.

@keisangi

Still up to your old spamming antics I see...

Anyway, you really need to work on that crush you have on RMS, I'm not sure he appreciates the attention (or maybe he doesn't care what kind of attention he gets, as long as he gets it, what do I know?).

I know alot about freedom and GPL and I'm merely calling the GPL bluff, I'm sorry if that offends you .. I have nothing against OSS or people who choose the GPL (or any other) license knowing full well what the consequences are, however quite often people choose a license without even having read it, much less understood what it means, and in the case of GPL that's often because of bullshit propaganda by the likes of RMS and the hype surrounding it. (L)GPL is totally fine for many projects (I have even been involved in a few (although I prefer MIT/BSD/PD myself as they not only are more free than (L)GPL, but also much easier for people without (para)legal skills to understand)), but you should never pick a license for your software without knowing exactly what that would entail, and neither should you use functionality/code from such software without knowing the impact for the very same reason. GPL gets alot more trickier in the latter area (even LGPL to some extent), and you really need to be careful before picking this license and/or using binaries/code from such software, there is plenty of evidence that people don't understand/don't want to understand/ignore the license and a great big mess usually ensues...


- CISC

Gunne:
"I do personally believe that stating that open source is some kind
of _guarantee_ for a particulary software to be continued developed
further is a completely false understanding."

How come "your" project Ambient continued beeing developed after Zapek
released it as open source? Without him releasing it, it would be completely,
100% dead today. Thanks to open source it is not.

There are numerous examples where open source was the savior
of abandoned software.

OK, you used the word guarantee and sure, there are no guarantees
in life besides taxes and your death. But the chances of software
living on after the original author got tired are a hell of a lot higher
if he releases it as open source than if it sits on a backup CD
somewhere..

Quote:
Now that is a particulary bad example. The Darwin source code was always controlled by Apple. OpenDarwin was always fully dependant on Apple and when they stopped releasing parts of their source recently it was only natural that the project would have serious problems keeping up. The alternative would be to fork but I don't see a point in that.
Besides, several parts of the system, most notably some of the drivers, were only provided as binary blobs and when Apple stopped providing these it would be a major wrench in OpenDarwin's machinery.
Mac OS Forge is supposed to be Apple's replacement for OpenDarwin.

ironfist,

Quote:

First, Ambient isn't _mine_ project. Its a group-project.

When David decided to leave the MorphOS arena, and to not develop Ambient further, my guess is he had three choices to do.

# Put it into the garbage bin, which should mean it had become a forgotten project left in the far history.

# Let someone else to take it over.

# Make it public in some open source form.

Maybe he also had other options/considerations, I dont know.

From my understanding he choosed the third alternative of the three above.

Why Ambient is developed further is only because there are people who do, and do like to do what they do. Simple ?

Quote:

Of course, as there also are not.

Quote:

My death is not guaranteed, but your is...

Edit: Typing mistake

[ Edited by gunne on 2006/8/9 17:29 ]

Hi dholm,

Welcome to MorphZone

@Gunne:
I have been a member for almost three years and posted nearly 300 times..

[ Edited by dholm on 2006/8/9 20:45 ]

Woah,
We're going on 10,000 views on this thread! Even the Gentoo trolls got their cages rattled (just kidding guys)
After the Zapek fallout, I was hoping we wouldnt see any GPL wars (err.. discussions) on MZ or elsewhere. But, they are interesting nevertheless.

What interests me the most about this discussion is the right of the "artist" - in this case the programmer. When a man creates something he owns it, and he chooses what to do with it. This is irrefutable, anything else is toliterianism. He can destroy it, give it freely, sell or barter it, hide it under the bed, whatever.

Now the Eithics of it is a different matter. Alot is riding on this particular outcome for the MZ bounty program imo. I'm sure Marcik will do the right thing and do things in a way that suites everyone - including himself!

We here should all be grateful for his work and hope he accomplishes his objectives. If that happens, only good can come of it, whatever the release status.

magnetic

Quote:
Who are us, and from what have it saved 'us' from exactly in the first place?
I would advise you to check your paranoid levels before posting... Linux isn't the 'be all and end all' of IT world, not even close...

[ Edited by pixie on 2006/8/9 19:51 ]

[ Edited by pixie on 2006/8/9 19:52 ]

Quote:

He can, as long as it doesn' take out of his realm... as long as it don't interact with others...

GPL is a moralist quest to bring all software under the GPL. Some people want that, which is fine with me. But Open Source != GPL.

Some people may say that a world where (nearly) all software is GPL is better than one where (nearly) all software is MS. But I never liked this kind of menu with only two choices.

Personally I think Open Source is great for copying already known ideas and implementing them a little bit better. All the great Open Source software I know of copies something else. That's very good, because it ensures progress. But I never heard of anything really innovative that is Open Source. I think that's because innovation usually comes from a very small team (often just one person) who will spend lots and lots of time on a project, and who wants to (and has the chance to) get something back, financially. Then the Open Source community will copy it and probably improve it a bit, after a few years or so depending on how complex it is. Which is once again great.

To me, Open Source is a good tool. I like soldering irons too, but I wouldn't use a soldering iron for cutting a paper.

As for Sputnik, what I would personally like to see are a few things:
1. A release that can be included free of charge with future MorphOS versions (we can argue whether a browser is a necessity, but I think it would be very nice).
2. Continued development including the browser part. For this, I think charging for a future improved version might be better than going Open Source. It's all about getting the person who is likely to do the work motivated, and somehow I doubt a lot of people would suddenly appear out of nowhere if Sputnik just turned GPL. An alternative could be to set up another bounty at some point with some "wishlist" for improvements.
3. And of course all the licenses and agreements involved must be respected 100%, including LGPL and the bounty rules.


[ Edited by merko on 2006/8/10 18:15 ]

Wiser words have being wrote lately... but I can help it... GPL talibans are quite ridiculous... I love to hear them bray about Bill Gates' Dark and Evil Crusade.

@Tronman
Quote:

No, it's a Blizzard 2060 "only", DCE version.

Signed,
King of Delayed offtopic replies

dholm,

Quote:

Reply to this one, and you will have only one left to 300

Aaah.

I had the privilege of working with Dean Brown at Amiga in Snoqualmie. A total genius, and a heckuva nice guy

The DKB Wildfire 68060 accelerator was arguably the finest Amiga accelerator product ever made. EVen with crappy SIMM modules, the memory access speed of the Wildfire was faster than the most optimized settings, on fast SIMMs, for the Cyberstorm PPC. Its' onboard SCSI and ethernet were also the fastest such implementations in any Amiga product-faster even than a ZIII SCSI or ethernet card. It used Dean's own self-made glue/control logic, and a DEC Tulip ethernet chip.

The SCSI chip could, till its buffer ran out, DMA into RAM at 70Mbytes/sec, and the DEC ethernet chip could approach the theoretical 10Mbps ethernet limit easily, getting over 900K/sec throughput consistently. And, it would correctly boot up in 060 mode with no external software-Dean got all that into the firmware of the card-making setup the 'plug and play' arrangement Amigans were used to in the 80's as opposed to 'after XP SP 2'.

It also had working PCI expansion in the shape of the two custom connectors on it, one of which could be populated with a graphics card, the Inferno. There were only three of those made, and approximately a thousand Wildfire boards. Just a fantastic bit of hardware.

Dean's stories of the unfortunate Amiga politics which prevented his getting 060 CPU chips at a doable price also sheds much light on, uhh, why not everyone loves Petro and Escom, but that's a subject even more off-topic than this..

But it has alot to do with why the Wildfire was about $1500, $400 more than the Blizzard

I've only ever seen two of these, and one in operation. It was fantastic, rivaling MorphOS on a Pegasos for snappiness and that overall, not clogged-up-with-crap (a technical description ) OS feel that we here all enjoy. My Mac sure doesn't have it

If I ever wanted to back any Amiga hardware expansion device, I'd sure do my best to get DKB on as its designer. Yeah, I'll admit to being a fanboy..

Soo.. how about some screenshot of a somewhat more "normal" web page?

Why not? http://khtml.ppa.pl/index_en.php

Rules!

Rocks! Hope the summer will offer more rain and less friends to you, so you enjoy more time in front of the console...

From the Sputnik website:

Quote:

Marcik, you are my hero again! ;)

I am going to go donate $49.95 to the bounty now just to show how much I appreciate it. That was the price I heard somebody talking about.

Really happy about this, and those screenshots are looking sharper each time!