Reply
Thread Tools
Posts: 92 | Thanked: 12 times | Joined on Nov 2009 @ leicester UK
#1
I feel the n900 is the cutting edge of an evolution.

Before chemistry we had alchemy, Issac Newton gave up math and physics and took up alchemy, as a world changing study looking for how to turn base metals into gold and the elixir of life ie immortality.

When he was a mathematician and astronomer he stated that "he stood on the shoulders of giants" but when he became an 'alchemist' he wanted no one to stand on his shoulders, because he kept his research a secret.

So in a nutshell we have the difference between open source and closed source.

When alchemy actually became chemistry, people could start standing on each others shoulders again, scientists shared the results of their research, people built on each others experience.

Why is computer science any different in terms of OS source code?

When B Gates came up with win 95, if he had released the source code, after a suitable lag so as to recover expenses and make a fair profit, no he choose to milk the fat cow to death, if he had of released the source code to win 95, many more eyeballs would have crushed many more bugs.

Yeah well done.

In terms of software its a case of 'get yours in first' runs the bigger game which to my analysis, is leading the push to turn the earth into a parking lot, by always applying the elitist cement head notion, of change nothing, because it might change the status quo.

Instead of applying the golden rule 'do as you would be done by'
 
Posts: 336 | Thanked: 606 times | Joined on Apr 2008 @ France
#2
When B Gates came up with win 95, if he had released the source code, after a suitable lag so as to recover expenses and make a fair profit, no he choose to milk the fat cow to death, if he had of released the source code to win 95, many more eyeballs would have crushed many more bugs.
Open Source doesn't mean free. You can have Open Source that is commercial as well, and for which you need to pay a fee to get a licence. There are many Linux distributions that were or are commercial and require to purchase a licence to use them. Many corporations have provided very valuable code to Linux and other Open Source projects, and probably now even more than what individuals are able to provide.

What corporations are afraid of is that their Intellectual Property will be stolen. If they have a way to ensure that their IP would not be stolen, most companies would endorse Open Source without a problem -- Microsoft included.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to CrashandDie For This Useful Post:
Reply

Thread Tools

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:18 AM.