Tim Churches <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Andrew Ho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > For some reason, it appears that a support.microsoft.com URL was > > "censored" and did not reach Tim. Here it is again (repeated 3x): > > > > 1. > > > > 2. > > > > 3. > > > > Ah hah! The URLs have been mysteriously moved to the bottom of your > message - see below. I had a quick look at the firt of thoose URLs > and it is not > immediately apparent what its relevance is, but I don't have time to > read it right > through. Can you give us some hints?
OK, I see what you are referring to now - the licenses for BSD material from the Regents of the Uni of California etc at the end of the document. But surely that is an example of Microsoft making use of other party's open source code, and incorporating (as permitted by the BSD licenses) into their own closed source code. I don't see any evidence of Microsoft distributing their **own** code under an open source license, or even their modifications to other people's code in source code form. Or have I missed something? Tim C > > Tim C > > > > > On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Andrew Ho wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 24 Feb 2004, Tim Churches wrote: > > > ... > > > > matter of pure practicality - in order to undertake really > > complex > > > > projects, you need a team of people who can immerse themselves > in > > the > > > > project, > > > ... > > > > > > Tim, > > > There is no debate that people are needed. However, how the > team > > come > > > together and operate are quite different between free and > non-free > > > projects. > > > > > > ... > > > > > For example, both IBM and Microsoft are already open-source > > software > > > > > providers. > > > > > > > > Microsoft? > > > > > > Microsoft provides open-source software through Windows XP, for > > example: > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > There is no permanent division between "they" and "us". We > are > > all trying > > > > > to solve real world problems. Alliances and relationships > will > > change over > > > > > time. If Oracle employees know better how to deal with > certain > > tasks, then > > > > > they should do that part of the project. > > > > > > > > Quite so, and that's why implementations of an open source > > hospital > > > > system may still costs a substantial slice of that $450 > million, > > because > > > > those Oracle people generally don't work on a volunteer basis. > > > > > > Most of us do not work substantially on a volunteer (= not > > financially > > > compensated) basis either. > > > > > > This confusion between free/open-source methodology and > > "volunteerism" is > > > quite misleading and counter-productive. Unfortunately, many free > > software > > > developers are reluctant to refute this error. It is rather > > difficult to > > > expend effort insisting that you are not making a "donation" when > > you > > > contribute code to a free software project. > > > > > > Free/open-source solutions offer lower "Total Cost of Ownership" > > _NOT_ > > > because free software developers perform work for no pay. > Instead, > > free > > > (as in speech) solutions are less costly because > > > 1) less need for lawyers > > > 2) better communication between developers and users > > > 3) more code re-use > > > 4) easier to support and maintain > > > 5) potentially larger market penetration > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > Andrew > > > --- > > > Andrew P. Ho, M.D. > > > OIO: Open Infrastructure for Outcomes > > > www.TxOutcome.Org > > > > > > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=http://support.microso > > ft.com:80/support/kb/articles/Q306/8/19.ASP > > > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=http://support.microso > > ft.com:80/support/kb/articles/Q306/8/19.ASP > > > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=http://support.microso > > ft.com:80/support/kb/articles/Q306/8/19.ASP > > > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=http://support.microso > > ft.com:80/support/kb/articles/Q306/8/19.ASP >
