Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The thing is, apart from the obvious weaknesses about making a lot > of ballyhoo about a clanking Unix clone, it's a complete work of > hypocrisy. Lots of huge corporations pour fortunes into OSS > development like Oracle and HP into software like Apache and > Linux. They get their development done at bargain basement prices > and OSS gets a fat subsidy from select sugar daddies. Together your > moral foundations are being built on quicksand. You can't fight your > number one enemy (Microsoft as has been clearly stated) without > making its competitors fatter in the process.
Uh, you are being confused. If you want to talk about the GNU project, RMS has never been much interested in Microsoft in particular and has stated repeatedly that the business practices of Microsoft and its competitors are to be judged by the same standards. The proprietary business practices are the enemy, and free software does not suffer when those who support it gain by doing so. > [...] > > I think I also get a sense of impending failure: as Linux matures > there is really a creeping sense of failure around the project. It > hasn't blew Windows off the desktop, has made modest gains into > servers Uh, as compared to Windows? Modest? > and commercially has only really blossomed where cheapest is > key. Like in the list of the top 500 supercomputers where it is the major player. > Much of its surrounding software is either poor quality, arcane in > design and administration, outdated or a weak imitation of something > commercial. Well, that pretty accurately describes the status of most proprietary software, too. That's not particular to free software. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
