Rick Moen wrote:
>Quoting Martin List-Petersen (martin at list-petersen.net):
>>>>>I do fully agree. People should realise, that this not is a war
>>against Microsoft, but it is about the freedom of having access to the
>>source, modifying it if you wish and having more to choose from than
>>one company (on every part of the operating system).
>>>>>>Access to source is important, and permission to modify it, but neither
>is the key attribute of open source. Ever heard of Microsoft
>Corporation's "Shared Source Initiative"? It's a programme to give
>selected customers and business partners access to Microsoft source code
>under tight legal restrictions.
>>I'm not sure if anyone has picked up on this yet, or even if I'm reading
it wrong myself, but it seems to me that Microsoft's "Shared Source
Initiative" allows people to /view/ the source, but says nothing about
changing any glaring errors in the source that are spotted by the viewee.
i.e.: It seems to me that a major difference between OS and Closed
Source (CS?) is not just in being able to view the source, but also
being able to recompile with a modified source. Microsoft does not allow
that as far as I know.
Kae
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!
