In an effort to expand its Linux offerings, Dell is researching new netbook-type devices and will soon offer netbook Linux OS upgrades, a company official said on Wednesday.
It ends with
The company is also researching Google's Chrome for use in netbooks.
Makes netbooks-are-atom-and-smartbooks-are-ARM distinction.
Dell couldn't say whether it would ultimately offer a smartbook.
Maybe just floating of test baloons.
Before deciding to pull away from GPL, Haynie says Appcelerator surveyed some two dozen software vendors working within the same general market space. To his surprise, Haynie saw that only one was using a GPL variant. "Everybody else, hands down, was MIT, Apache, or New BSD," he says.
Adopting any of the existing licenses may be the only practical option. Writing your own license (you know what you'd like the terms to be) should have been tried.
"The proponents of GPL like to tell people that the world only needs one open source license, and I think that's actually, frankly, just a flat-out dumb position," says Mike Milinkovich, executive director of the Eclipse Foundation, one of the many organizations now offering an open source license with more generous commercial terms than GPL.
Never heard any of the GPL proponents say such a thing. BTW, GPL is not about Open Source. It is about Free Software.
Alternative licenses offer liberal code distribution terms (which means more revenue potential) and more clearly written licenses -- and they have eager and qualified developer communities, advocates say.
GPL does not stop you from making revenues. It just is more careful about freedom. It will be a good idea to write a more clearly written license taking care of revenue potential
The ghostwritten papers were typically review articles, in which an author weighs a large body of medical research and offers a bottom-line judgment about how to treat a particular ailment. The articles appeared in 18 medical journals, including The American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and The International Journal of Cardiology.
This did not happen at the level research reported in journals. This was at another level where a doctor not reading the original articles would look at the state-of-the-art and the friendly pharma company's medical communication guys interpret it for you. Surely a case of biased/selective reporting of happenings in the field. I have myself often wondered at (seemingly) contradictory results getting reported in newspapers. Things like "wine found good for heart patients" and "wine linked to complications in heart conditions" at an interval of a few months or a year. The reporters in this case would perhaps be reading summaries of some kind or getting briefed by the researchers of the study being reported which IS news.
Research by different groups can lead to different conlusions and this fact was perhaps being used by these guys.