Miscellaneous > Applications
Why not open source old stuff?
preacher:
quote:Originally posted by flap:
If you didn't mean "proprietary" then what difference between "open source" and "closed source" programs do you think makes closed source software more suitable for making money?
Such as?
--- End quote ---
Zeus Webserver for one. It is an enteprise level webserver that sells for thousands of dollars. It is not propritary because it can run on multiple different types of hardware and software, yet it is closed source. Also look at Unreal Tournament 2003-4 it is not proprietary either, it will run on macs, linux, and windows pc's, yet you don't see the software makers handing out the source code now do you? I am beginning to see why Jimmy was so angry in this thread. Use some logic and you could have figured that out on your own.
I'd like to see how the makers of games could make money with the source code open. You explain that to me genius.
[ March 23, 2004: Message edited by: ThePreacher ]
flap:
quote:It is not propritary because it can run on multiple different types of hardware and software, yet it is closed source. Also look at Unreal Tournament 2003-4 it is not proprietary either, it will run on macs, linux, and windows pc's, yet you don't see the software makers handing out the source code now do you? I am beginning to see why Jimmy was so angry in this thread. Use some logic and you could have figured that out on your own.
--- End quote ---
I don't know where you got your definition of proprietary (or "logic", for that matter), but the number of platforms a piece of software runs on has absolutely nothing to do with its being proprietary or not. Plenty of free software runs on only one platform, and there is plenty of multi-platform software that is proprietary; Unreal and zeus included. Software being proprietary or free is a question of copyright, not of how many hardware/software platforms it runs on. Where did you get that idea?
[ March 23, 2004: Message edited by: flap ]
flap:
quote:I'd like to see how the makers of games could make money with the source code open. You explain that to me genius.
--- End quote ---
I never specifically asserted that the free software business model could be applied to games (though I never said it couldn't, either), all I said was that software in general doesn't have to be proprietary (and bear in mind what proprietary actually means, as opposed to the random meaning you seem to have assigned to it) in order to make money. Which is true, as is evidenced by the existence of free software businesses such as mysql, red hat etc.
preacher:
The random meaning I have given to it? Here is a dictionary definition
quote:
one that possesses, owns, or holds exclusive right to something
--- End quote ---
When it comes to software, it is considered proprietary if it is exclusive to a single operating system or hardware type. Since you are too ignorant to know this, I thought I would explain that it has absolutely nothing to do with being open, or closed source.
flap:
I can't tell if you're joking or not. Surely as a Linux user you must have heard/read a whole host of arguments and discussions about proprietary vs free software; and you thought it was about the number of platforms the software ran on? Are you shitting me? Is iptables proprietary because it only works with Linux? Is Linux proprietary because it exclusively only runs on non-Quantum computers?
Search Google for "proprietary software".
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version