It could be perfectly legal. He could break the GNU GPL, however it doesn't he mean he has to.
No more legal than me deconstructing Windows and handing out its source code. Of course, I'd probably be sued far more than Linus would, because Microsoft is clearly willing to spend more on lawyers, but they're still just as illegal as each other.
The only subscription fee's i've seen Microsoft ever hand out are Live and a MSDN Subscriptions. I don't see how it fits there business style.
Do you remember the days when you bought software, and you actually owned it? You could install it wherever you wanted, and even sell it when you're done with it. I'm not sure about NT or 2000, but when you purchase XP, or Word, or any other Microsoft program now, you don't get a program/operating system, you get a license for it. They've also been testing subscriptions in South Africa to see how people react. I don't think them bringing subscription based systems to the rest of the world is too far out of the question. Microsoft will do anything to abuse their semi-monopoly for money. They've probably got this all thought out to maximise income and minimize lost customers. I don't think they'll stop now for no reason whatsoever.
However, I hope if they do this, people wake up before blindly entering their credit card numbers.
None.
The whole software license is falling apart. A man recently won a case in which he resold software on ebay. He was sued for breaching the license. Psystar is selling OS X on non-Apple hardware, which is specifically forbidden by the license. Why hasn't Apple shut them down? Because they have very little legal standing.
tits
No more legal than me deconstructing Windows and handing out its source code. Of course, I'd probably be sued far more than Linus would, because Microsoft is clearly willing to spend more on lawyers, but they're still just as illegal as each other.
You're thinking in the wrong direction. It would be perfectly legal for Linus to release a new Linux version that is closed-source and licensed.
Do you remember the days when you bought software, and you actually owned it? You could install it wherever you wanted, and even sell it when you're done with it. I'm not sure about NT or 2000, but when you purchase XP, or Word, or any other Microsoft program now, you don't get a program/operating system, you get a license for it. They've also been testing subscriptions in South Africa to see how people react. I don't think them bringing subscription based systems to the rest of the world is too far out of the question. Microsoft will do anything to abuse their semi-monopoly for money. They've probably got this all thought out to maximise income and minimize lost customers. I don't think they'll stop now for no reason whatsoever.
You're right. You don't really own any software you get from Microsoft. Can I ask you why you are only targeting Microsoft about licensing? Furthermore, that subscription based program was for Microsoft Office. Microsoft decided to attempt a subscription based program in South Africa because the economy is low and they wanted to provide an alternative licensing method for people to use Microsoft Office that people in South Africa could afford.
While yes Microsoft does abuse its monopoly powers, what monopoly doesn't? If Apple was in Microsoft position we'd be a lot worse off.
None.
I personally think that everyone should say with Windows and not switch to Linux. Overall Windows is better for people with less experience (and that can live with the cost).
The main reason is that if everyone used Linux, I wouldn't feel as cool using it.
None.
I personally think that everyone should say with Windows and not switch to Linux. Overall Windows is better for people with less experience (and that can live with the cost).
The main reason is that if everyone used Linux, I wouldn't feel as cool using it.
Your not cool if you use Linux heck we just know you like to explore.Plus if all you are using is Ubuntu for a Linux distro please stop right there ok?Hard Linux distros are Linux from scratch,Arch,And Gentoo.Really though Linux can be used by anyone who wants to try something new and isn't some with a 5th grade average.
Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Jun 18 2008, 4:03 pm by Twitch.
None.
I personally think that everyone should say with Windows and not switch to Linux. Overall Windows is better for people with less experience (and that can live with the cost).
The main reason is that if everyone used Linux, I wouldn't feel as cool using it.
You not cool if you use Linux heck we just know you like to explore.Plus if all you are using is Ubuntu for a Linux distro please stop right there ok?Hard Linux distros are Linux from scratch,Arch,And Gentoo.Really though Linux can be used by anyone who wants to try something new and isn't some with a 5th grade average.
I was kidding. And yes Ubuntu is probably the easiest distro
None.
I just use Ubuntu 4.10 and Windows XP, although I like XP better for the fact that it has a better driver support.
None.
I just use Ubuntu 4.10 and Windows XP, although I like XP better for the fact that it has a better driver support.
4.10?!? Time for an apt-get dist-upgrade, dude
None.
4.10. I use a really old PC, so 4.10 works better. GO LEGACY HARDWARE!
None.
4.10. I use a really old PC, so 4.10 works better. GO LEGACY HARDWARE!
If the PC can run windows XP it can at least run 6.06.
None.
I don't want 6.06. I like 4.10 better.
Anyway, why should I switch to 6.06? It took 3 hours to install 4.10!
None.
I don't want 6.06. I like 4.10 better.
Anyway, why should I switch to 6.06? It took 3 hours to install 4.10!
I would rather use DSL for a old machine instead of ubuntu..
Really though if it can handle xp I would atleast suggest 6.06 for more support....
None.
