[K12OSN] needed: recommendations for Linux flavor with ongoing support

Robert Arkiletian robark at gmail.com
Fri Jan 5 19:28:48 UTC 2007


On 1/4/07, Les Mikesell <les at futuresource.com> wrote:
> Robert Arkiletian wrote:
>
>
> >> I'm not sure anyone can say that with any confidence, given the
> >> state of US patent law and the number of patents held by MS.  And
> >> no amount of brilliance can work around a patent - that's the point
> >> of having them.
> >>
> >
> > That is true but I was referring to the method by which Samba was
> > developed. As far as I understand Tridgell simply (or not so simply)
> > looked at packets on the wire. He had no M$ protocol specs or docs.
> > IANAL but as far as I understand Samba development model was legal. In
> > any case, I think if it did infringe M$ would have already taken Samba
> > to court.
>
> Ensuring that the development was done independently and no code
> was copied is enough to avoid problems with copyright violations
> but patents are different.  They cover the process whether you
> copy it or re-invent it with no knowledge of the covered version.
>


Can't argue with that. Unfortunately, I think software patents have
become the opposite of what they were initially intended to do, which
was to foster innovation.


> >> I think you missed the other half of the arrangement. Novell still
> >> claims rights to the original UNIX code (in spite of SCO's claims)
> >> and MS now includes Services-For-Unix and other things that might
> >> possibly infringe.  It's better for everyone for MS to be able to
> >> use good, well tested designs instead of inventing something worse
> >> and putting it on our networks.
> >
> > If M$ wants to truly create interoperability they can, easily. Pretty
> > much all the standards in the FOSS world are open from a specification
> > and legal sense. They don't need Novells blessing.
>
> They might: Novell has its own patent portfolio that may include
> what came with its purchase of AT&T UNIX.  It is common for large
> companies to make broad cross-licensing agreements just because
> it is cheaper than having to worry about problems and raises the
> bar to competition from smaller startups.  I think this one has
> just been overblown in the news.


Maybe it has been overhyped. I still don't think M$ was ever worried
about infringing Novell Unix patents. I believe the main reason M$ did
this deal was to try to reduce Redhat sales by creating FUD that only
SuSE is safe. It's simple divide and conquer. Time will tell if it was
a good move for Novell.


>
> >> Samba is really only interesting to someone running Windows anyway.
> >> If the GPL didn't prevent people from distributing all the components
> >> you need together, we might have had some real competition to
> >> windows by now and made it irrelevant.
> >
> > I can see your point of view Les. Shuttleworth, I'm sure, sees it also
> > as he has decided to ship binary video drivers with the next version
> > of Ubuntu. However, this is a very controversial topic as some feel
> > that in the end it hurts us more than it helps us.
>
> And some don't care how much it hurts because they are fanatics and
> it's not their problem.  Meanwhile, everyone keeps using Windows.
>


Yes, some can get very passionate about FOSS/GPL and that has probably
hurt us. I speak from experience. I totally see your point though. In
order to gain critical mass we need to bend the rules a bit, but does
that put us on a slippery slope? I don't know. Hopefully not. The
first thing I do when I install a new Linux distro at home is download
binary multimedia codecs. So I can't really disagree and it looks like
things are changing at least with Ubuntu.


> > However, if we look
> > at FreeBSD/OpenBSD they have basically no restrictions. They haven't
> > attained the support that Linux has.  I think that's because of the
> > the GPL. The GPL keeps a fair playing field and thus encourages
> > contribution.
>
> I'll agree partly in that IBM and a few other large companies might
> not have invested so much in Linux if the GPL did not restrict how
> that work might be distributed.  However, my take on Linux vs. *BSD
> is that the popularity (and thus the subsequent development effort)
> was established much more by the timing of the RH 4.x release which
> was the first thing you could count on to install by dropping a CD
> into about 90% of the PCs around at the time, and also by the effect
> of the AT&T vs. Regents of California lawsuit regarding the *BSD code
> instead of the license terms.  What happened was that vast numbers
> of people tried that RH CD and got something working before they
> realized just how bad the code was - and then some of them started
> fixing it...  If you don't agree with that point of view, just wade
> back though the source changes on some of the programs like bind
> and sendmail to see how much was really wrong back then - or try
> installing one of those on an internet-connected box and see how
> quickly it gets hacked.
>
> > In any case, I don't think the GPL is standing in the
> > way of beating Windows. Apple has been trying for some time with a
> > superior product and they haven't made much of a dent either.
>
> Apple sells hardware and isn't really interested in selling an
> unbundled OS so it isn't a good indication of what someone could
> do in that market with an equivalent product.  Even at that, I
> maintain the logs for some large web sites used by stock and
> commodity traders and I see 2 to 3x the hits from Macs as all
> the other unix/linux versions identified in the logs combined,
> so I don't think you can use Apple or its bsd base as an example
> of doing something wrong compared to Linux.
>


Okay maybe it's not an apples to apples comparison. ;)
In any case, I too am seeing more and more Apple notebooks around. I
hope Apple keeps gaining market share. I wonder, now that MacOSX runs
on x86 arch, if Apple will ever sell their OS to someone like say
Dell?
This thread has become completely off topic for k12osn but it is very
interesting. Nice debate Les.

> --
>    Les Mikesell
>     les at futuresource.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> K12OSN mailing list
> K12OSN at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn
> For more info see <http://www.k12os.org>
>


-- 
Robert Arkiletian
Eric Hamber Secondary, Vancouver, Canada
Fl_TeacherTool http://www3.telus.net/public/robark/Fl_TeacherTool/
C++ GUI tutorial http://www3.telus.net/public/robark/




More information about the K12OSN mailing list