On Sat, Jul 15, 2000 at 01:29:46PM +0100, Richard Stearn wrote:
> I suspect the answer lies in the OS used. Linux users are exposed to the
> Open Source ethos and given time to absorb the ethos will probably release
> the source. Those who are MicroSoft Windows tend (I regret to say) to
> adhere to the Shareware ethos and release only executables and ask for
> money.
IMO, I think the reason most WinDOS software is shareware/closed/binary
only stuff has much to do with what you mentioned above. I believe it
also has a more basic reason. To do any serious development on a WinDOS
platform requires a commitment of a substantial amount of money for
compiler, IDE, and developer's kit. After making this purchase most
software authors would like to recoup at least part of the investment.
> This (probably biased) view is based on my observation of the Open Source
> & Shareware communities over the last few years. There is a spectrum in
> both communities.
We in the Free Software community do get spoiled after a while with all
the fantastic development tools available to us for just a bit of study.
I thoroughly enjoy exploring this system and the more I do the more awe-
struck I am. All the pieces fit together so well I just can't imagine
anybody who wants to tinker with computers choosing something else.
But then, I imagine others feel locked into their current systems and
are reluctant to change.
> Is the answer to why circuits are in QST because the creator has got paid
> for them?
Perhaps this, but circuits have been shared for as long as there has been
a ham community, thus there is a history of sharing. The software side of
ham radio has grown up around closed systems and reflects that heritage.
Right now ARRL is pushing Software Defined Radios, SDR. It is imperitive
that our voice be heard and that the protocols and implementations these
devices will use are Free Software. We cannot afford to allow this
technology to become the proprietary goods of a handful of manufacturers
while amateurs are locked out of defining what these devices will do.
We need to educate our fellow hams, especially those in positions to
implement these kinds of policy as to the benefits and importance of
Free/open protocols and implementations.
Fortunately, I have hope that the ham community will come around. Just
look at the embrace and explosion of PSK31. Meanwhile proprietary digital
modes such as Clover and PacTOR II have become nothing more than curious
footnotes in ham digital history.
73, de Nate >>
--
Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | "None can love freedom
Internet | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | heartily, but good
Location | Wichita, Kansas USA EM17hs | men; the rest love not
Wichita area exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | freedom, but license."
http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | -- John Milton
