If you knew what a democracy was, and that it is supposed to serve humans, and humans like open-source better, and it stimulates the most intelligent, who in turn are the ones most fit to run a system, to everyones benefit.
What is the problem?
Do you particulary like Microsofts own corporate advertising where old versions of microsoft give headache, and the new are a headache pill?
Have you seen that? So the Microsoft fanbois (and those are truly bois) have to deal with that Microsoft admits their favorite os being shit. But ofcourse the new ones are much better. Well according to the marketing guys atleast. What real people see, are thousands of tweak-apps online. What that means is that no-one is particulary happy with windows, and want to change it.
With open-source you can pretty much put togheter components to form your own entire OS. Scaling from phone, to 1000 cpus.
Microsoft is a joke. Why do people abuse themselves like that? That is because they are IGNORANT. High intelligence is above the general population. SO when are people going to stop thinking running after a ball, or boozing or whoring is better than high intelligence? I mean I guess that is why YOU have microsoft. A constant whine of idiocy, since CP/M. That is what MS sells and is still selling. What advanced users, find to be garbage. And the less advanced lack the mind to listen.
So your rants on windows what is that? Did you think you were going to convince anyone of intelligence? That is again where you fail. You have no clue. It is like playmo-boy criticises austronaut-man of not liking his playmo.
A bit how gays defend cottaging, to a Buddha I guess.
Not only are companies often paying for Linux support (Red Hat has made it's fortune through this) but they often invest money into further development of Linux so it's seldom a zero-cost option, hence that is hardly Linux main attraction. If it was then they might aswell choose BSD which is also free, however as we see not only is Linux largely the number one choice in the aforementioned sectors, but as mentioned it's also where lots of companies choose to invest in development.
Linux is the world largest collaborative open source project bar none, with Linus and other key kernel maintainers having the 'problem/priviledge' of sifting through tons of code submitted by companies and individuals who are hoping it will make it into the kernel.
Obviously the GPL has had a great part in this success, as in practice it means that if company A wants to enhance Linux so that it works better for their needs, everyone else is legally entitled to enjoy the fruits of their labour, of course the benefit for company A is that it will also be able to enjoy the enhancements made to Linux by company B, etc
If there is no legal 'incitament' for companies to release their enhancements, history shows us that they very seldom will, in particular if there is a competitive advantage to those enhancements. This is not surprising as a company is generally the equivalent of the most selfish and greedy person you can imagine.
Of course in a perfect world there would be no need for licences at all, not even something as permissive as BSD/MIT, but this is not a perfect world, and companies (and not so seldom individuals) won't play fair unless they have to.
This is what is 'sad but true'.
By the way the biggest part of linux kernel is driver code. If I had to guess I'd say over 70 percent. It is nvidia who don't want to play by the rules here. Go and bitch at them.
When you do, we'll revisit the subject.
I do agree that their method was impolite.... But they sneaked it in? Using a high profile DRI ML message? You kidding me?Nice? Are you on crack? They tried to SNEAK IT IN rather than what they SHOULD have done (to be nice), which is to ASK.
Nothing wrong with ASKING POLITELY, however, even if they did, it should STILL be declined. Closed drivers have no business interacting with open drivers.
Last edited by gilboa; 10-13-2012 at 07:34 AM.
No sure what you mean.
As someone that have to run circles around stupid, generalized software patents I couldn't agree more.2. software patents are stupid and should be removed anyway. If one person had an idea there is sure as hell another person that has the same idea. tbh, the whole patent thing is just considered the "2nd most stupid thing ever 'invented'" by me. Right after weapons.
.... But on the other hand, as long as they exist, unless you plan to face bankruptcy, you have to leave by the law of the land.
Not sure what you mean.3. recursive to my arguments
... You're being very naive.4. in case you really signed a contract about something like that, you should be abandoned in the desert and even if you manage to get out alive, you should be banned from using a computer EVER again. There is not a single good reason why something should be kept secret. If something needs to be kept secret, it's something that shouldn't be done in the first place, since you don't want the public to know about it and if you don't want the public to know about something it must be considered 'bad' by moral implications of society, thus it must not be done.
Obviously you never worked in the company remotely related to the security world or any type of governmental world.
There is no such thing as "playing fair". There is winning and losing. Collaboration is only done when it suits you to win.