Re(2): Go-OO: The best office suite you never knew you used
Posted by: Anonymous
[ip: 190.79.40.125]
on December 13, 2008 05:33 PM
@Eric
"If MS is to go after Mono users it will be committing PR suicide, besides they have no right to sue others, read http://www.mono-project.com/FAQ:_Licensing. And yes you are right Silverlight is not Open Sourced, Moonlight is. AFAIK IBM and Sun also holds many patents. Many big companies collect patents and I was at a talk by SImon Phipps of Sun who said companies accumulate patents (by buy or resgistering them) all the time. This is done so that no single company can "out gun" the other; sort of like MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) during the Cold War."
Problem is, unlike Sun, IBM and others big players, MS has already threatened FOSS user by stating that their patents are being violated.
That is a precedent, and no one wants that to continue. The message is avoid MS IP at all cost.
"While it is true that Sun released OO.o and we in the Open Source community powe them much for it, do note that some of the assertions (http://derstandard.at/?url=/?id=1216917892794%26_artikelIndex=1) by Meeks & Co are valid. Why wouldn't they accept some of the improvements and patches? Did you know what triggered the go-oo split? Have at look at this, Sun Refuses LGPL for OpenOffice; Novell forks (http://slashdot.org/articles/07/10/03/1212234.shtml)"
While it is open source, rights must be assigned to an entity for it to be able to defend something. In the case that openoffice.org gets attacked by somebody, like MS, Sun CAN react and defend it with it's own portfolio. Otherwise, the lone creator of the infringing code is up against the possible demands. This is something that happens all the time... you also need to assign your rights to other bodies in the linux kernel development (FSF) and even on Go-oo (novell)... there's nothing wrong with that and if Meeks and the rest from novell don't want to assign their rights to Sun, they are free to do whatever they want... but they have no right to attack Sun and OO.o because they don't agree to it.
Novell's dubious deal with MS is what set the alerts on everything they do. Sun has been very pro-OSS since a long time ago and Novell people insist on attacking them, without taking care of their own problems first... that doesn't seem right.
"Attacking one another seems to be the norm in the Open Source world. KDE vs GNOME, vi vs emacs etc. Don't you already know that? Following your argument, all these attacks must be also be sponsored by MS correct? Don't blame others. The Open Source and Free Software world are peppered with opiniated and sometimes infantile people. Mr. OpenBSD himself, Theo de Raadt is an example."
Incorrect. I don't know what you smoke there, but you should share some...
What has Novell/MS to do in anything you mentioned there?
"The Free and Open Source worlds did not lose battles because of some nefarious schemes by MS or anyone. We did it to ourselves. If you are a total noob, how would you judge a bunch of guys who argues even on something as "trivial" as editors? I feel that go-oo is more open compared to OO.o from Sun."
FOSS has not lost battles, it is because there are different options that FOSS IS winning. If you are a total noob that doesn't see that, that is your business, not mine.
I'm not judging anyone, I'm just pointing out that this article sucks and is just FUD propaganda.
Again, if you feel that Go-oo is more open, that is your business... just remember that there wouldn't be Go-oo without OO.o... so, I think OO.o is pretty open...
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re(2): Go-OO: The best office suite you never knew you used
Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 190.79.40.125] on December 13, 2008 05:33 PM"If MS is to go after Mono users it will be committing PR suicide, besides they have no right to sue others, read http://www.mono-project.com/FAQ:_Licensing. And yes you are right Silverlight is not Open Sourced, Moonlight is. AFAIK IBM and Sun also holds many patents. Many big companies collect patents and I was at a talk by SImon Phipps of Sun who said companies accumulate patents (by buy or resgistering them) all the time. This is done so that no single company can "out gun" the other; sort of like MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) during the Cold War."
Problem is, unlike Sun, IBM and others big players, MS has already threatened FOSS user by stating that their patents are being violated.
That is a precedent, and no one wants that to continue. The message is avoid MS IP at all cost.
"While it is true that Sun released OO.o and we in the Open Source community powe them much for it, do note that some of the assertions (http://derstandard.at/?url=/?id=1216917892794%26_artikelIndex=1) by Meeks & Co are valid. Why wouldn't they accept some of the improvements and patches? Did you know what triggered the go-oo split? Have at look at this, Sun Refuses LGPL for OpenOffice; Novell forks (http://slashdot.org/articles/07/10/03/1212234.shtml)"
While it is open source, rights must be assigned to an entity for it to be able to defend something. In the case that openoffice.org gets attacked by somebody, like MS, Sun CAN react and defend it with it's own portfolio. Otherwise, the lone creator of the infringing code is up against the possible demands. This is something that happens all the time... you also need to assign your rights to other bodies in the linux kernel development (FSF) and even on Go-oo (novell)... there's nothing wrong with that and if Meeks and the rest from novell don't want to assign their rights to Sun, they are free to do whatever they want... but they have no right to attack Sun and OO.o because they don't agree to it.
Novell's dubious deal with MS is what set the alerts on everything they do. Sun has been very pro-OSS since a long time ago and Novell people insist on attacking them, without taking care of their own problems first... that doesn't seem right.
"Attacking one another seems to be the norm in the Open Source world. KDE vs GNOME, vi vs emacs etc. Don't you already know that? Following your argument, all these attacks must be also be sponsored by MS correct? Don't blame others. The Open Source and Free Software world are peppered with opiniated and sometimes infantile people. Mr. OpenBSD himself, Theo de Raadt is an example."
Incorrect. I don't know what you smoke there, but you should share some...
What has Novell/MS to do in anything you mentioned there?
"The Free and Open Source worlds did not lose battles because of some nefarious schemes by MS or anyone. We did it to ourselves. If you are a total noob, how would you judge a bunch of guys who argues even on something as "trivial" as editors? I feel that go-oo is more open compared to OO.o from Sun."
FOSS has not lost battles, it is because there are different options that FOSS IS winning. If you are a total noob that doesn't see that, that is your business, not mine.
I'm not judging anyone, I'm just pointing out that this article sucks and is just FUD propaganda.
Again, if you feel that Go-oo is more open, that is your business... just remember that there wouldn't be Go-oo without OO.o... so, I think OO.o is pretty open...
Goodbye
Victor
#