On 8/31/2014 5:37 AM, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Sun, 31 Aug 2014 09:23:24 +0000
Joakim via Digitalmars-d <[email protected]> wrote:
As such, his GPL, which doesn't allow such
pragmatic mixing of open and closed source, is
...a great thing to stop invasion of proprietary software. hey, i'm not
*renting* my smartphone, i'm *buying* it! and i want to be able to
change it's software as i like. yet what i got is a bunch of blobs and
a locked loader. i don't want to pay my money for jailing me: the ones
who want to put me in a jail should pay to me to compensate my
inconvience.
I *completely* agree. Very, VERY strongly.
i don't care about what is good for some corporation out here. what i
really care about is what is good for *me*. GPLv3 makes me happy.
GPL forces companies to open-source (some of) their software...but
*ONLY* if the company willingly uses the GPL software in the first place.
So what do they do? Not use the GPL software in the first place. So we
end up with second-rate crap (like Bionic) or worse - closed source
proprietary - just because GPL scared them away.
BSDL
makes corporations happy. so it's obvious choice.
Hah. BSD/etc is NOT what corporations typically like - they like
proprietary closed source. BSD gives them incentive to at least *use*
OSS software. GPL gives them incentive to stay away from OSS software.
