[News] The Big Difference Between Sun and Microsoft - Linux

This is a discussion on [News] The Big Difference Between Sun and Microsoft - Linux ; The Engadget Mobile Interview: Jonathan Schwartz, CEO of Sun ,----[ Quote ] | Unlike Microsoft and others, we actually view the success of the free | software as a good thing, we are enormously pro-GPL, enormously pro free | software, ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: [News] The Big Difference Between Sun and Microsoft

  1. [News] The Big Difference Between Sun and Microsoft

    The Engadget Mobile Interview: Jonathan Schwartz, CEO of Sun

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Unlike Microsoft and others, we actually view the success of the free
    | software as a good thing, we are enormously pro-GPL, enormously pro free
    | software, enormously pro the Mozilla license, the BSD license.
    `----

    http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2008/0...tz-ceo-of-sun/


    Recent (a week or so ago):

    Bill Gates’ Disdain for Open Source Even in Retirement

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Without compromise there is no progress. In the software world Gates was the
    | Godfather he didn’t need to work with anyone until the Justice Department
    | ruled against him. Even as the richest man in the world he’s got to work
    | together with researchers and others if he wants to be successful. Too bad he
    | didn’t learn anything about open source’s collaborative values it might have
    | served him well as he tries to help cure disease and improve world health
    | standards. * * *
    |
    | I have to wonder if he will be able to make the transition from dictator to
    | do-gooder or if he will just write checks?
    `----

    http://socializedsoftware.com/2008/0...in-retirement/


    Bill Gates, which we disagree with

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | As but one more piece of testamentary evidence that the old guard at
    | Microsoft needs to be shown the door, Bill Gates has demonstrated
    | conclusively that he has exactly zero understanding of open source, or at
    | least zero desire to have an intelligent discussion about it.
    |
    | [...]
    |
    | Open source insists upon leaving software open to further improvement. And if
    | you were to read the European Union's report on open source, you'd see that
    | it's actually a massive opportunity for improved GDP growth.
    |
    | What open source does is ensure that customers share equally in the economic
    | benefits of software, rather than having profits hoarded by one company
    | (i.e., Microsoft's model). The GPL does this perhaps best of all. In another
    | age, Mr. Gates would have found the GPL to be a dear friend to his better
    | capitalist instincts. It's actually a close cousin to a proprietary license
    | in some ways, except that it protects through openness, not closed source.
    `----

    http://www.cnet.com/8301-13505_1-992...bj=TheOpenRoad


    Bill Gates Claims Open Source Means Nobody Can Improve Software

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | His complaint is that open source creates a license "so that nobody can ever
    | improve the software." It's hard to figure out how to respond to that
    | statement since it's the exact opposite of how open source software works.
    | The exact point is that anyone can improve the software. It's proprietary
    | software like Microsoft's that's limited such that only Microsoft is allowed
    | to improve it. It's no secret that Gates isn't a fan of open source software,
    | but it still seems odd that he would make a statement that is so obviously
    | false, both in theory and in practice. Perhaps old FUD habits die hard, but
    | one would hope that as he enters "retirement" he'll have a more open mind on
    | such things.
    `----

    http://techdirt.com/articles/20080423/004519925.shtml


    Bill Gates on Pharmaceuticals: The System Isn't Working

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | One thing Gates won't be leaving behind in retirement is his distaste for
    | open source software. After one scientist asked if Gates would consider open
    | source uses in health research, the man who built his $280 billion company on
    | the power of intellectual property bristled.
    |
    | "There's free software and then there’s open source," he suggested, noting
    | that Microsoft gives away its software in developing countries. With open
    | source software, on the other hand, "there is this thing called the GPL,
    | which we disagree with."
    |
    | Open source, he said, creates a license "so that nobody can ever improve the
    | software," he claimed, bemoaning the squandered opportunity for jobs and
    | business. (Yes, Linux fans, we're aware of how distorted this definition is.)
    | He went back to the analogy of pharmaceuticals: "I think if you invent drugs,
    | you should be able to charge for them," he said, adding with a shrug: "That
    | may seem radical."
    `----

    http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2...ates-what.html

  2. Re: The Big Difference Between Sun and Microsoft

    On May 4, 12:52 am, Roy Schestowitz
    wrote:
    > The Engadget Mobile Interview: Jonathan Schwartz, CEO of Sun
    >
    > ,----[ Quote ]
    > | Unlike Microsoft and others, we actually view the success of the free
    > | software as a good thing, we are enormously pro-GPL, enormously pro free
    > | software, enormously pro the Mozilla license, the BSD license.
    > `----
    >
    > http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2008/0...obile-intervie...
    >


    If anybody who knows anything about the history of contemporaneous
    technology is asked to identify a single company as responsible for
    open source since its inception, it would have to be Sun.

    At Sun the open source type had support all the way to the board room,
    unlike Digital -a company that contributed some stuff, but it was some
    rogue folks, from the Unix side, who had to work on a skunkworks type
    of operation against the wishes and policies.

    Then there's the old AT&T, of course. The Unix source was widely
    available early on. I remember when I called from MIT to Berkeley to
    ask for the tape (I was told: "you guys already have it").

    IBM has given some nice contributions, such as Athena and Eclipse, but
    they arrived much later.

    -Ramon


  3. Re: The Big Difference Between Sun and Microsoft

    On Sat, 3 May 2008 22:18:15 -0700 (PDT), Ramon F Herrera
    wrote:

    >On May 4, 12:52 am, Roy Schestowitz
    >wrote:
    >> The Engadget Mobile Interview: Jonathan Schwartz, CEO of Sun
    >>
    >> ,----[ Quote ]
    >> | Unlike Microsoft and others, we actually view the success of the free
    >> | software as a good thing, we are enormously pro-GPL, enormously pro free
    >> | software, enormously pro the Mozilla license, the BSD license.


    ...and enormously broke. What a clown.

  4. Re: The Big Difference Between Sun and Microsoft

    ____/ Ramon F Herrera on Sunday 04 May 2008 06:18 : \____

    > On May 4, 12:52 am, Roy Schestowitz
    > wrote:
    >> The Engadget Mobile Interview: Jonathan Schwartz, CEO of Sun
    >>
    >> ,----[ Quote ]
    >> | Unlike Microsoft and others, we actually view the success of the free
    >> | software as a good thing, we are enormously pro-GPL, enormously pro free
    >> | software, enormously pro the Mozilla license, the BSD license.
    >> `----
    >>
    >> http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2008/0...obile-intervie...
    >>

    >
    > If anybody who knows anything about the history of contemporaneous
    > technology is asked to identify a single company as responsible for
    > open source since its inception, it would have to be Sun.
    >
    > At Sun the open source type had support all the way to the board room,
    > unlike Digital -a company that contributed some stuff, but it was some
    > rogue folks, from the Unix side, who had to work on a skunkworks type
    > of operation against the wishes and policies.
    >
    > Then there's the old AT&T, of course. The Unix source was widely
    > available early on. I remember when I called from MIT to Berkeley to
    > ask for the tape (I was told: "you guys already have it").
    >
    > IBM has given some nice contributions, such as Athena and Eclipse, but
    > they arrived much later.


    The remarks from McNealy about SCO come to mind though and open source isn't
    Free Software. Still, Sun seems very willing to change. It tries to steal Red
    Hat's thunder.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Fetch SPAM quicker than you can type 'crond start'
    http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    Swap: 1510068k total, 392344k used, 1117724k free, 80672k cached
    http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms

+ Reply to Thread