|
|
|
| Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Thursday, November 08 2012 @ 07:22 PM EST |
It "cost" billions to develop GNU/Linux.
Have you noticed any of those contributors
suing Microsoft or Apple?
Just google "Linux worth billions".
Do you see why it is being attacked?
Those that are addicted to money do not like
competition that does not contribute to their pockets.
---
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Gringo_ on Thursday, November 08 2012 @ 07:39 PM EST |
I wish I could call you a troll, but instead, after only
very brief
reflection, I am forced to agree with you. It is
only due to consortia of
private companies taking the
initiative to come together to create standards
that we have
interoperability on thousands of important issues. Leaving
it to
governments to decide on standards would be about as
effective as the United
Nations is at world government -
that is to say, not at all.
Without
industrial initiative we would have fragmented
technologies and competing
networks and endless wars while
companies battle to lock you into to their way
of doing
things. We wouldn't have universal audio and video formats,
nor cell
phones that work just about anywhere in the world,
or even TVs and radios that
receive a broad range of
programming, just to mention a few things. Certainly
companies individually from time to time will try to lock us
in, but the
majority of companies see mutual benefit in
interoperability, and will in the
end overcome the minority
who don't.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 08 2012 @ 07:45 PM EST |
Think about what standards are for in the first place. When everyone is on the
same page in a particular area of technology (we'll use C++ code for example),
it makes it simple to deploy that standard in a manner in which everyone can use
it.
Think about HTML code (and IE's horrible idea of standards compliance).
If you want a certain technology to be a standard, then you obviously want
everyone to join in and share that technology in a way that it remains
compatible with everyone else that uses that standard.
Where would we be today if IBM had not allowed everyone to clone their PC
architecture? This was something that IBM wanted to get out there. Do we pay
IBM royalties for that? Not a dime.
Can you imagine having to pay a royalty in order to write your own program in
C/C++? It wouldn't be a very popular language if that were the case.
The Internet wouldn't exist if there were penalty charges for compliance to
RFCs. How much money was dumped into creating the technology that resulted in
the Internet?
The standards that we follow in my workplace are not vendor specific, and they
should never be. When a company expects you to pay a royalty for being
standards complaint, then that standard has become vendor specific.
Imagine building your dream home, and the inspector comes to check your frame
work. He tells you that it will not pass inspection because you have not used
wood from a specific mill. That is where standards are heading if these things
persist, and there will come a time when no one will take the standards bodies
seriously unless they stop this foolishness.
Companies that want their technology to become an official standard should NOT
punish people for trying to come into compliance with that standard. It's
counter-productive, counter-intuitive and absurd.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
