[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wouldn't be so quick to paint a picture of Sun as a champion of all
that is good. Sun is a company - a commercial entity - and as such,
thinks in the same terms as all other companies, eg "How do I make more
money? How do I destroy the competition? How do I create a need for my
products?"
All companies are made up of people - and as such, can have their own motivations, goals, and internal dialogs. Don't assume to be able to read people's minds and tell us what they were thinking when they Open Sourced OOo.
They might have seen the open source thing as a PR stunt. They might have seen it as an experiment into how to get free programmers. They might have thought "why did we buy this - we can't even give it away.... Wait a second!! That's it!" They might have come to work drunk that day. There's really no way of knowing *why* Sun freely gave away StarOffice's code, and continues to do so with each new release of OOo. But the simple fact is - they did it, and they still do it.
There are *individuals* in companies that would argue for doing something good simply for the sake of being a good citizen, but this nobility does not apply to corporations. Period.
You are so prejudgous! Just because a group of people has a Co. at the end of their name does not mean they are incapable of atruism! Get a clue! What are you, some sort of Communist? Corporations have every capablity of being giving as an individual does. Becuase, as you pointed out, Corporations are made up of individuals - from the CEO to the stockholders to the guy who mops the floors. They are not some huge, unfeeling, soulless *thing* - they are groups of people - just like OpenOffice.org is a group of people. Sure, the primary goal of most corporations is to make money - that doesn't mean that everything they do is wrapped around that.
I work for a small Company. It's basically a small family-based business that grow beyond the family. My boss is a very generous man, who does a lot of things that aren't wrapped up in making money. I know this is "adentiodal evidence" - but it's one where I am pretty close to the source, so I have a much clearer insight into the motivites. If the company that I worked for grow to have 10,000 employees instead of 10 - would my boss's generousity suddenly disappear? Would the extra week of paid vacations spend to help those in need disappear? Would the free subscriptions to those in the ministry stop? Would the birthday parties go away? Not if my boss was still in charge.
And before you say "he wouldn't be - the shareholders would be" need I remind you that shareholders are people too - people with hearts and souls and concisiouses. There are some individuals who invest with *those* motivations, and not just pure greed. And those are the type of shareholders a generous company should work to attract.
Sun have betrayed the open source community at many critical points.That is pure FUD - and BS. If you don't like Sun - then stop using their gift. If you don't trust them, then stop using their code. Use KOffice or AbiWord, and shut the FUD up.
Oh dear God. It's been discussed to death. Try to be a little more creative in your tin-foil-hat nonesense. That's like a year old! And it's been completely explained. You are an idiot.Sun and Microsoft have been in bed for quite a while. I remember not long ago a story on Slashdot on a deal between Sun and Microsoft that they would not sue each other into oblivion over patent infringments.
I also remember that Sun bought into SCO's Linux licensing scam. Surely
they could have at least sat on the fence with everyone else? But no,
they start making public statements designed specifically to attract
companies scared by the SCO licensing scam away from Linux and towards
their own offerings. That's a little unethical.
WHat the FUD? Telling people that they are SCO safe is unethical? You truly are a moron.
Unfortunately there is no such thing as 'pure enough'. You're eitherFor the love of Tux. Get off this mailing list you Free Software Freak. Open Source is *NOT* a religion. It's not a test of purity. You know what - there is no such thing as *pure* open source. Not even GNU or the FSF. Do you know why they aren't "pure" - because nobody can tell you what *pure* open source is! It's a made up word. It's just a way of describing the acts of individuals. It's not something ordained by a deity or even set forth by example in nature. It's not scientifically provable either. Therefore, it can be described in absolute terms like "pure or not". It is *NOT* a fact. These *rules* you speak of were made up by a bunch of people. They do not exist outside of there heads. Get *your* head out of your butt and look around. It's just software, people. IT IS JUST SOFTWARE. IT IS JUST A BUNCH OF 1s AND 0s!!! It does not deserve your worship or your loyality. If it's free and you want it - use it. If it's not free and you want it - pay for it. If it's free or not and you don't want it - leave it alone.
pure or you're not. While that might seem elitist, it's simply fact. The
'rules' are clear and if you don't follow them, then you're not open source.
Honestly. Everyone needs to go outside and play. Get a life. Stop discussing how free or non-free this program is and that program isn't, and go to a movie. Read a book - a *REAL* book, not an ebook. Watch a play - in real life, with real people on a real stage, and not a webcast of one. Listen to music that doesn't have .mp3 or .ogg attached to it. IT IS A PROGRAM, A *FREE* PROGRAM. If you like it - it's yours. If you don't - go away.
I can't tell you how physically *ILL* it makes me to see people BITCHING because the program that somebody *GAVE TO THEM FREE OF CHARGE* didn't do it the right way. "Don't look a gift horse in the mouth" - does that mean anything to you people?
I think my already trunctated interaction with this mailing list may need to end. I have wasted too much of my own life on something that in all honesty doesn't matter one little bit.
-Chad Smith
