From: karel Jansens (kareljansens_at_tiscalinet.be)
Date: Mon Aug 16 2004 - 01:06:22 PDT
Martin Joseph wrote:
> On Aug 15, 2004, at 2:15 PM, karel Jansens wrote:
>
>
>>Andrew Beals wrote:
>>
>>>kareljansens_at_tiscalinet.be said:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Go's PenPoint wasn't bad. It's a shame it can't be open-sourced.
>>>
>>>
>>>The problem is that the ownership is somewhat cloudy after many
>>>acquisitions
>>>and sales. Who's holding the source? Who is going to sue if it gets
>>>released?
>>
>>As I understand it, bankrupt Go's creditors are a bunch of tight-arsed
>>misers, who still expect someone to pay them for the sources.
>
>
> Do you think they got them for free?
I don't care. It's not because they paid money for something that it
also is worth something.
>>Does it show that, not even knowing them, I don't like them a lot?
>
>
> Rather presumptuous of you to feel entitled to get for free what
> someone else paid for.
Rather presumptuous of /you/ to assume I feel entitled to anything.
> Of course it's true value is probably approaching nil at this point,
> but that is another story.
It's been made clear to them several times over in the past decade
that the intrinsic commercial value of that particular code is almost
exactly zero, what with Microsoft's "interesting" business tactics
vis-à-vis other pen-centric operating systems that focused on Intel
hardware. OTOH, the code would have been (and still is) greatly
appreciated by the open source community.
So the situation is this: either they sit on some code that they can
never ever expect to sell, or they release that very same code to the
community. What exactly was there to like about these people again?
Karel Jansens
-- This is the NewtonTalk list - http://www.newtontalk.net/ for all inquiries Official Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/ WikiWikiNewt for all kinds of articles: http://tools.unna.org/wikiwikinewt/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Aug 16 2004 - 11:00:01 PDT