On 7/18/05, Levi Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Uh, I sort of agreed with you until this paragraph. Apple already > makes most of their profit from hardware sales, but why would they > want to get rid of the software revenue they currently have?
They wouldn't. > Besides which, they already open source some of their software, mostly that > which was open source to begin with. This is the most sane model, in > my opinion--you open source that which it makes sense to, and keep > the parts proprietary that give you a competitive advantage. I agree. However, most OSS is covered under the GPL which prevents co-existance between OSS and proprietery software at the source-code level. Apple is using code covered under the BSD license. > The silliest part, though, is asserting that libre software could be > forced to be non-gratis by a DRM scheme. An effective DRM scheme > kind of kills the libre aspect, doesn't it? I'm not advicating this position. I was just making a point that a service/support based revenue model isn't always the best model for a software business or the consumers of that product. -Bryan .===================================. | This has been a P.L.U.G. mailing. | | Don't Fear the Penguin. | | IRC: #utah at irc.freenode.net | `==================================='
