[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: X11 non open-source? (a solution?)
On Mon, 6 Apr 1998, Erik Walthinsen wrote:
> Agreed. What bothers me almost as much as the license change is their
> audacity in keeping the "OpenGroup" name. Everything they do now is
> closed, limited to the select few organizations who are willing to pump
> tens of thousands of dollars into this (now) sorry organization.
Go to that website and look closely at that logo. "Open" is kind of a
play on words. Notice that the O is really two mirror-image C's. I think
the C stands for Closed. They make their living snapping up open software
and closing it.
> All in all, cleanrooming things may be the best solution from a limited
> solution-set. Unless something can be worked out allowing XFree to scrub
> the license (for a licensing fee or not), that's what's going to happen.
> Just like Linux (exactly like, in fact), XFree will become the dominant
> branch. Minix is basically dead. X11R6.4 will be as well.
Exactly, they will become insignificant in the mainstream of things.
I blame X.org for this. Rather than follow the Netscape model, they chose
to follow the Microsoft model. Ironic that Netscape relies on X yet when
Mozilla is made public, X is taken private.
I smell Gates somewhere in this.
Exactly who owns Open Group?
Just be thankful that Microsoft does not manufacture pharmaceuticals.
Debian/GNU Linux ... the maintainable operating system.
SEUL-Leaders list, email@example.com