Linux and Philosophy
bryan.sant at gmail.com
Mon Jul 18 17:18:49 MDT 2005
On 7/18/05, Levi Pearson <levi at cold.org> 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?
> 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.
More information about the PLUG