We can argue symantecs till the end of time but isn't a patented, open-source piece of software an oxymoron? I mean I am not exactly jumping for joy and screaming yay that I can use it because I might have the patent trolls jump all over me.
No, it's not even remotely an "oxymoron"; open source isn't about giving up your property rights. It's about _respecting_ property rights. This is why open source projects _include a license_, and that license stipulates how people may use the project in detail. How is me requiring people open source projects that use my property any different than me requesting they pay me to use my property? In either scenario, I am putting forth the stipulations for use. If you're against paying to use property, so be it, but don't make the mistake of thinking open source code is devoid of property rights.
While I can certainly see where they're coming from, I think it's much more productive to see examples of software that can make use of dual cores this very instant. A few examples perhaps beyond what people may be envisioning:
This came as little surprise to me; however, the reasoning behind all of this had to do with the recent reviews of Intel dual core chips.
The article in question:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=22332
I currently work for a company that is designing and implementing an IP-based security system. As such, we stream video over an IP based network using an RTP library that I adopted and implemented. I have extensive experience with video compression technology and streaming media over IP networks--especially lossy, erratic networks--from a programmatic perspective.
Old programmers never die, they just become managers.
