OSDev.org

There is nothing wrong about closed source in today world IMHO. Open source is bad because it allows people to copy paste instead of understanding.

How are we to understand without seeing the source and learning? That would be like understanding assembly language operating system programming by using Windows

All because some weasel had to rip it off (only by mouth, though) we get to stop learning. And they still don't have there fantasy BlueSkyOs even started and they lost the domain long ago.

Oh well, learn else where I guess, just won't be as good.

bontanu wrote:There is nothing wrong about closed source in today world IMHO. Open source is bad because it allows people to copy paste instead of understanding.

BillHudson wrote:How are we to understand without seeing the source and learning? That would be like understanding assembly language operating system programming by using Windows

All because some weasel had to rip it off (only by mouth, though) we get to stop learning. And they still don't have there fantasy BlueSkyOs even started and they lost the domain long ago.

Oh well, learn else where I guess, just won't be as good.

Some people use the sources of an OS for learning... Other people make copy & paste to their OS project.
I'm not against Open Source and GPL, but I agree with Bogdan.

There is nothing wrong about closed source in today world IMHO. Open source is bad because it allows people to copy paste instead of understanding.

I agree partially. I do think there is nothing wrong about closed-source. Some people just don't want other people to see and/or use their source (legally or illegally). I'm personally not in favor of making my projects all open-source either, I prefer to make them free and closed-source. For my OS, it's different, since it might teach other people things they don't know yet. I know how much help I had from looking into other people's kernels from time to time to see how they do it. I never plainly copy-paste anything (unless I want to quickly see if something would work). Even if I see something interesting, I try to understand it and write a completely own version of it and changing things, not making it a complete copy anymore.

Some people use the sources of an OS for learning... Other people make copy & paste to their OS project.
I'm not against Open Source and GPL, but I agree with Bogdan.

If someone does not understand a thing but copy your code, how are they going to make changes/maintain it? They will get fed up fast and leave the stuff in no time. Do you seriously think other people can claim they wrote your code, that's the easiest to disprove if you host your project in full public view.

Also the whole point of GPL is that I can take your code and do whatever I want with it as long as it remains under GPL. We all have the freedom. That does not take anything away from you. How many open source projects are out there that suffers from copy-paste? None.

Any serious software project requires a number of skills and anyone having those skills can easily write their own code/adapt ideas than copying.

raghuk wrote: If someone does not understand a thing but copy your code, how are they going to make changes/maintain it? They will get fed up fast and leave the stuff in no time. Do you seriously think other people can claim they wrote your code, that's the easiest to disprove if you host your project in full public view.

Also the whole point of GPL is that I can take your code and do whatever I want with it as long as it remains under GPL. We all have the freedom. That does not take anything away from you. How many open source projects are out there that suffers from copy-paste? None.

Any serious software project requires a number of skills and anyone having those skills can easily write their own code/adapt ideas than copying.

That's right! That's why I hesisate to keep my OS closed-source. But I share the same opinion of Bogdan. A fork based on the latest GPL version of Solar_OS was announced on his forum, while Solar_OS was closed-source. Bogdan had not really appreciated that. You can read the thread there.

@Moderators: There is an Open-Source/Closed-Source debate. It would be better to split this thread.

A fork based on the latest GPL version of Solar_OS was announced on his forum, while Solar_OS was closed-source. Bogdan had not really appreciated that. You can read the thread there.

Nice read although many of the opinions are factually incorrect. I don't want to get into a long debate and this is off-topic. But I must say that stimulating, nurturing, and rewarding your user community to develop a co-developer base is more of an art. That's essential for the success of an open-source project. See the famous writing: http://catb.org/esr/writings/cathedral- ... al-bazaar/

raghuk wrote: Nice read although many of the opinions are factually incorrect.

Mostly the opinions of the GPL people are incorrect.

And the fact that they claimed to fork and use Solar_OS for some obscure commercial reason was not really important in my use of closed source and stating clearly that GPL is very bad.

Yes, it might have been the last drop in a glass that was already full (I was already oscillating about this before).... but I have made my choice out of carefully observation and logic.

I don't want to get into a long debate and this is off-topic.

Neither do I.

I will say that IF you really intend to have a mature logical debate about this subject THEN I am open for a sane logical discussion and/or debate on my forums ... but not in here.

I will give you some hints here and that is all.

But I must say that stimulating, nurturing, and rewarding your user community to develop a co-developer base is more of an art. That's essential for the success of an open-source project.

IF you "must" say that THEN I must also note that YES it is an "art"... the "art" of manipulating a lot of slaves into making the work for you for free... out of idealism turned into slavery .... and yes you must "sell" carefully handcrafted dreams as reality while you rape the profits and smile about how they have no clue.

Basically GPL is convincing slaves to work for free ... the last and absolute insult one can make.

And the worst part is the the GPL crowd does work for free for killing the "other slaves" that have the decency to try and become "free" people.

See the famous writing: http://catb.org/esr/writings/cathedral- ... al-bazaar/

That would be like people applauding Hitler for his "famous" writings. Complete non sense but with a LOT of sugar added.

Bazaar is slavery and manipulation... cathedral is god like... choose carefully...

Please excuse if I have said too much in here.

If someone does not understand a thing but copy your code, how are they going to make changes/maintain it?

I have seen this done many many times in my long life as a pro programmer. It is not that the have "no clue"... just half baked clues. The do know how to copy paste and how to glue things a little but they can not create and no new algorithm or idea emerges... in time people become more and more dumb... administrators instead of creators.

The main idea is "not to re-invent the wheel"... just copy it (eventually the bad wheel) and this way each error gets multiplied and glued into thousands of projects and the everybody thinks this is the "right way" because "so many people could not be wrong"... Got it?

They will get fed up fast and leave the stuff in no time.

No kidding? When they have invoices and mortgages and child's tuition to pay for the next 20 years... you are dreaming. They will continue to glue and copy paste...

Do you seriously think other people can claim they wrote your code...

They do not have to claim that but that is easy if they change here and there. They do not want to claim ... they just want to use your work for free. Take your creativity and make money out of it. Make you give what you have for free while they sell what they have at highest price.

"Claim" is for kids. Bottom line matters.

... the easiest to disprove if you host your project in full public view.

What you say is like keeping your money in open view with no protection and everybody can steal and borrow from it IS the BEST method of protecting "your" money ... great joke.

Also the whole point of GPL is that I can take your code and do whatever I want with it as long as it remains under GPL.

Basically you rape or steal me of my work... and you can feel good about it IF you can also be stolen? and "impose" that stealing as the ethical norm?

We all have the freedom.

Where?

That does not take anything away from you.

Oh YES you do tale away my dearest work. My creativity and you give me nothing in exchange. You ask me to work for free in order for you to be able to steal from me.

And it makes you dumb and it also kills all other people that want to make a living from programming... do you realize what you are doing while being manipulated?

Do you realize that this was the dream of the corporations... That software values nothing and only big huge corporations that can "integrate" with hardware and other services should produce and "sell" software... not "lone individuals" ?

You are working to make their dreams come true. The dreams of the oppressors.

How many open source projects are out there that suffers from copy-paste? None.

Almost all of them. None wants to re-invent the wheel... they all copy from each other and the result is poor algorithms, fixed concepts, bugs spreading, no creation... stagnation and huge projects under the control of massive corporations...

Any serious software project requires a number of skills and anyone having those skills can easily write their own code/adapt ideas than copying.

Excuses... if you leave the money on the street with no key THEN even the more honest might be convinced that it is better to steal rather than to work...

Besides it is not exactly about hobby... it is WORK 8 hours per day... maybe you have the skills... BUT Firefox already has a solution... the deadline is coming... and the opens source has a solution... if you write your own you can be late... and not every body is an "hero" ... trust me I have seen it ... again and again and again...

I think the debate is closed.

Please lets keep this on topic

Yes, let us keep this on topic. This is not the right thread to discuss licensing issues. bontanu feels GPL is "slavery" and he's free to choose another license. I do feel GPL have benefits and choose to use it, we all have the freedom to do that.

BTW, bontanu, I saw the screenshots of Solar_OS and they look great. Good work!!!

There is nothing wrong about closed source in today world IMHO. Open source is bad because it allows people to copy paste instead of understanding.

I agree, but not because other people will copy and paste. If people choose to cheat themselves they're the only ones that lose. The thing that bothers me the most from experience is working hard at something and finding out that someone stole your work and put their name on it... I know it's unlikely, and I don't know anybody who'd actually want to read let alone steal my code, but having credit for hard work stolen stings. Other people can have what I make for free... I just want credit. When you close the source, you're allowing others to freely use your project, but not steal the credit for it, which would be very easy to do with an open source project. This might sound a little selfish, but I don't think it is at all,

Brodeur235

raghuk wrote:Yes, let us keep this on topic. This is not the right thread to discuss licensing issues.

Quoted for truth.

Tommy wrote:You can read the thread there.

That was me trolling, I really enjoyed ruffling bontanu's feathers.

I found it rather humorous to play the role of GPL evangelist.. but it hurt my pseudo-soul, so it won't happen again.

I had posted a full explanation on his forum, but something someone else said made me break into hysterical laughter.. so I decided to leave the discussion as-is.

What a wonderful feeling.. nostalgia.. 2007.. now.. more 'Screen Shots' please.