Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] Mark Shuttleworth Spills Money to Increase Linux Adoption

amicus_curious <ACDC@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Apparently you didn't have some 60 billion dollars worth of cash reserves 
> and did have the same sort of situation that Microsoft was facing.  If you 
> had, you might have spent some of them on tuition at a better business 
> school where you might have found a better strategy.

And of course you probably have sixty billion in loose change in your 
sofa cushions, which makes you vastly more qualified on these issues.
That is no doubt why you feel it unnecessary to actually address the
facts being discussed.

>
> You are a hoot.

Glad I could amuse, though I still don't see you addressing the point
under discussion (that decreasing cash reserves are not a good thing).
Of course the way you go on, I expect that if MS went bankrupt and
Bill Gates was indicted for fraud, you would still try to spin it as 
some grand strategic victory.

> Spin it your way, but without IBM, Linus is on the soup line.  Now they are 
> establisheq in the server area squarely in fourth place behind Window, Unix, 
> and IBM Mainframe servers in that order.  They have some 7% of the overall 
> server market.  They have next to no presence in the desktop market.

Fourth place in revenue perhaps, but second place in deployment volume,
and since Linux revenue is more often generated around support, those
our the numbers that matter.  Linus has nothing to worry about.  I
expect you are at higher risk of ending up on the soup line.

> You could go on and on and get nowhere.  MOSAIC was not OSS. And you fail to 
> describe any product that qualifies under the definition.  You make 
> statements about what was in ancient times, but lets focus on the past 20 
> years or so where all the action is/was.

The original versions of Mosaic were developed by NCSA and distributed
for free with source code (at least the Unix version I used back in the
early 90's included it).  The license may not have been as permissive
as the GPL, so you can quibble about whether it was Open Source in the
modern sense, but it certainly was not a counter-example of commercial
development.  Spyglass did eventually license the Mosiac name, but they
developed a completely new browser which shared no code with the
original.

Furthermore, all the other software I mentioned meets the Open Source
Definition and was developed in the last 20 years, so I don't know
what you are blathering about.

Thad
-- 
Yeah, I drank the Open Source cool-aid... Unlike the other brand, it had
all the ingredients on the label.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index