Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re: The problem with GPL (Score 1) 219

Technically if I sold my company that is a redistribution according to the GPL. The buyer would be forced to give away the asset for free which is why the lawyers I met do not like it.

I am not saying I like EULa's from MS but I was making a point. I can link to com objects in a crappy VB written program but still can sell it. MS has no problem with this at all as long as I paid for their software properly to make it.

What if for example I use a GPL api call for printf (making this one up) but make everything else in house and spent millions. I want to sell my company. Am I freeloading as now the whole product goes GPL as it counts as a redistribution? I know viral sounds offensive, but it is what RMS wanted to end proprietary software.

I think Apache, Xorg, FreeBSD, Samba, node.js, and others do well for BSD/MIT licenses. We got PF sense, Juniper, Early Cisco IOS, MacOSX, Windows share and printer support for mac/linux users, and can now use Visual Studio community edition for odd things like Android and node.js development. No you did not misread that as MS code editor is cross platform and even runs on Linux thanks to BSD licensed code.

I think everyone wins and yes some capitalism is nice for progress in addition of academia and community.

Comment Re:if nobody enforced the GPL by litigation (Score 1) 219

You mean those greedy capitalists that employee and make products like Cisco, Juniper, PF Sense, MacOSX? All were based on BSD because it was more free and have contributed to everyone both users, venture capitalists, and customers who want to buy. Everyone won.

Apache and XORG are BSD/MIT and so is Samba. They make great free software you use reading this. I have no problem with Apple, Google, and even MS using these. Visual Studio 2015 community edition has node.js support and so does the MS code editor which has a linux version by the way. Thanks to a BSD license it was possible.

If you do not want to use it then great. But some of us have no quarrel and even encourage those who want to make money. I think both free, academia, and capitalism can all work hand and hand.

But yes GPL is a problem if you want to sell your assets and they are GPL licensed. Technically that is another party and your buyer has to give out their product for free. This is not about stealing someone's elses work. This is about just freaking using a GPL api and have the rest of the code in house?!

Comment Re:I like GPLv2 too, but there's just one thing (Score 1) 219

The problem is just that. Geeks do not know the difference between LGPL and GPL. Yes you can not link under GPL without your program being GPL. Go read the license? The game is in violation of the GPL which I assume was RMS point to get rid of proprietary software.

Most think they can write an api and GPL and it can be used for all. Not true.

Comment Re: The problem with GPL (Score 1) 219

Who the hell would buy my asset if they had to give it away to competitors for free?

Sure the code is free for the user but not for the developers or owner which is my point. BSD is free for both as tax payers came from both. Everyone wins. I think it's immoral to force people to do things they don't want to do.

I am also capitalistic. If someone wants to make money and needs resources from people full time and not volunteers they should do just that. BSD allows this

Comment Re:Not sure it's worth living that long (Score 2) 162

My point is those who say the times today are the worst ever and spew some right wing stuff do not know their history. Times were bad in the 19th century. Awesome too if you are educated and middle class (even more so than today) but very tough and brutal. Factories, 18 hour shifts, no EPA laws, children working, people being shot out west looking to escape the missery of the east and fed to pigs, corruption, and crazy dictators and radical ideologies were the norm.

People think Victorian era paradise and Jane Austin, and wonderful class. Not the above

Comment Re:The problem with GPL (Score 1) 219

No the GPL takes away my freedom to develop software the way I like and use. The BSD license gives me freedom to do whatever I want like making a firewall product or a cloud app without having to give out my investor funded work away and I can sell my company as it's assets have value because they are not free.

A license should never telll you what to do. Even a MS EULA doesn't tell me what I can do with the software I use or create. Only how much I need to pay for extra usage or features.

In this way the GPL is the most restrictive license out there.

Comment Re:We love you, mr. Torvalds (Score 2) 219

If I was building a Tivo today I'd probably start with a BSD license. It's what Sony did with the PlayStation 4.

Having actually seen that done, both with Linux and FreeBSD (as operating systems in routers), I can tell you a) that I would choose Linux every time and that b) the reason is the license and the lawyers.

For the first year or so you will be concentrating on adding features. Making things you probably benefit from keeping private. With Linux you make these in user space which might occasionally make things more difficult. You will eventually want to add some low level functionality and add it to the kernel.

At the point you start low level work, if you used a BSD licensed kernel, there will be a discussion between lawyers and management and likely you end up keeping your functionality private a) because you can and b) because your competition might use it otherwise. If you have a GPL licensed kernel, you will likely decide to publish and push upstream a) because the license pushes you to and b) because even if your competition uses it you will get the benefit back.

After some time, if you don't contribute upstream, you will find that you have incompatibilities with new software versions and you will stick to a stable version. Eventually you will stop benefiting from the evolution of the upstream software. Long term this is a nightmare for the developers. You lose a tiny bit by being "forced" to contribute back. You actually gain a huge amount back from the community because they continue working on your software.

This has happened often; commercial derivatives of BSD operating systems either fork completely or die. 386BSD, JunOS, OSX, IPSO etc. etc. It's very hard to do long term commercial contributions into a complex BSD environment because technically you are giving away shareholder value with no visible recompense.

Um yeah a competitor won't use it? bahaha. They rip off Linux code all the time which is why the point of lawyers are brought up. Shoot some companies like banks have ANTI GNU policies to protect themselves. Linux can not be used as a simple link to GPL infects the whole program making it viral. Look it up? I am not a troll here. PRoblem is most GNU geeks do not know the difference between GPL and LGPL and assume anyone can use their API. It is not true and it pisses me off.

Sorry the BSD/MIT license is the only free one that is business friendly. One is ideal the other is based on reality. Unless you have big pockets you can not guarantee someone won't steal your work.

Now add in licensing agreements and contracts with vendors and customers and it is a can of worms. Look at Java before Oracle bought it? Xerox were assholes and prevented AWT and SWING to be GPL. IcedTea had missing functionality for years.

Under a BSD/MIT license I can write code and do not have to share it. Investors agree and so the lawyers that this is the best option

Comment Re:Not sure it's worth living that long (Score 0) 162

Ignorant of the robber barrons of the 19th century which make modern corruption pale in comparison. Rockafeller, Carnagie, Tammy Hall, and others. Oh and since your post is right wing I will say Obama is not a socialist compared to the real communists like Karl Marx and Lennin who came from the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The time we live in today is a lite version of what life was like 130 years earlier on a massive scale.

Comment Re:Skyrim video is fake (Score 1) 140

The is shit in crowd need to have their balls stomped on after being set on fire.

Most OS are designed to run on actual hardware. Virtualization is great for servers where the primary focus is the NIC(s) and not the GPU(s).

ie : Stop trying to expect great performance when you are trying to fit a square cube through a small round hole.

Yes ... BUT ONLY for type 2 hypervisors. VirtualBox, VMWare Player/Workstation are both crappy and horrible hypervisors which do not access hardware directly and use buggy drivers on the guest OSes and then use a bugger host wrapper to communicate with the host drivers and OS.

Type 1 hypervisors such as KVM support gaming with full hardware access.Shoot Linus went crazy and got 7 freaking +90 FPS battle going with 7 AMD video cards with full native performance!

So yes with a right hypervisor such as Hyper-V Win10 pro anniversary edition, VMWare ESX, and KVM you can use the OS very close to the bare metal as a type 1 hypervisor goes underneath the os at ring -1 inside the CPU.

KVM is free and so are some tools and Hyper-V is there for cheap if you use Windows Home or free if you have Windows 10 pro to run ReactOS.

Comment Re:LOOKS good, but what can it do? (Score 1) 140

I would be so very grateful to the ReactOS community if I could run Office (2007 is fine), Zotero and some version of SolidWorks on it. I don't even dare to install ReactOS to try, as the disappointment would be crushing. Basically, I hope to not be forced to install Windows 10.

I think a VM would be better suited. Unfortunately Virtualbox maybe but it is a shitty type2 hypervisor and so is the now no longer developered VMWare workstation.

I seen a commercial version of KVM on linustechtips where he ran up to 7 virtual machines with full GPU access on a monster Xeon box running Windows 10 guests with some AMD Nano's all running with the native win64 Crimson drivers too!

KVM lacks a gui, but if it supports direct access to the hardware you can run your Windows OS as a guest with all it's drivers. The commerical KVM package had a tool to make an image off a hard disk and turn it into a VM too under Linux.

Perhaps this would be your best bet in a couple years once KVM and more gui tools come out if you want to continue to use your Windows 7 setup (with internet now turned off) as a guest inside a Linux OS host. Ram is cheap and another SSD is cheap these days too so you can keep your existing disk?

Comment Re:NTFS (Score 1) 140

And why should they? What is so great about NTFS apart from it being ancient and slow? Even Microsoft was hoping to abandon it in Vista, but the replacement fell victim to the scaling down of the (overly ambitious) objectives.

Gee I don't know. Perhaps people may want to read their data they created from Windows.

Comment Re:I'm getting old. (Score 1) 139

But once you go SSD you do not go back.

I have a raid 0 SSD with samsung pros and a regular samsung pro. Besides benchmarks there is no noticable difference unless you sping up 4 VM's at the same time :-) Even then it is only a few seconds.

It is IOPS and not how many megs per second for the user. Speed in bandwidth is irrelevant as a PC needs lots and lots of read dependent on data from other reads in tiny small batches like reading hte registry, loading daemons/services, etc.

Slashdot Top Deals

To do nothing is to be nothing.