The Tech Journal

GPL v3 vs BSD Licensing March 18, 2007

Over on InfoWorld they have an article on Eben Moglens recent keynote at the OSBC on GPL and BSD differences.  Basically they tear down the BSD style and proprietary licensing models.  Do I think that BSD and proprietary license development is done?  Hell no.  The only license I do not like is the GPLv3.  While its meant to help I dont think it will.  The GPLv3 is perhaps more restrictive than any proprietary license on the market.  I hear too much of what I cant do more than I hear what I can do.  I have to give up my patent rights (if I had any patents that is) I cant use DRM in my projects and according to Moglen, I wont be able to work out any deals to offer patent protection to my customers from other companies should I decide to.

The BSD license on the other hand lets me decide what I wish to do with code that I create.  Its less intrusive and its less than a page long unlike the GPLv3 which is 9 pages long and the GPLv2 which is six pages long and the GPL is so filled with legalese that I could swear there is a clause in there that says I have to donate a kidney to Stallman at some point.  While the GPLv3 will undoubtedly be used by many of Stallmas devout followers I dont think its the best license.

So on one hand you have the GPL with its 9 pages of restrictions and legalese and on the other hand you have a truly open license that gives control to the developer to do as he/she pleases with less than a handful of restrictions and doesnt force said developer to abandon his/her property rights.

OS Zealots and the stupidity March 18, 2007

Im tired of em.  You know who I mean.  The guys that aggravate the forums with their choice is better than yours.  They often revert to lying, spreading misinformation and just being dicks.  Take for instance the zealots that go to Channel 9.  Who can appreciate those guys.  Yes I know there are people out there who love Linux.  Yes I know there are people out there who love Mac OS X.  And yes, I know there are people out there who love Windows.  My only question is do some of you need to be so hard headed about it.  Some say I flip flop.  I go from one camp to another.  I dont consider myself a flip flopper.  Im one who is willing to concede that yes, Apple does a good job sometime.  Im willing to concede I like UNIX and Linux flavors when they are packaged together right and work flawlessly.  Of course I do like Windows.

What I dont like is when my technological prowess is questioned because I complain ndiswrapper doesnt work right or my display flickers like a 70’s disco ball because X didnt configure it properly.  Its not that I dont know how to fix it because I do.  But if the zealots of the world are willing to climb to the highest available mountain and proclaim Linux and/or Solaris or BSD are fit for use by the non-technical you better be willing to back up your claims.  If I install Linux and or any UNIX flavor and nothing works right its frustrating.  Can you therefore appreciate how frustrating it will be for someone who doesnt know how to use the systems.  Its definately more frustrating for them because everything worked in **GASP** Windows **GASP** or Mac OS X.  So when I complain its not because I lack technological mojo, its because Im coming at you with something you will hear from Aunt Suzie who barely knows how to turn on the freaking machine.  Would it be nice for Dell and other hardware OEM’s to bundle Linux?  Of course it would be.  It would put Microsoft on its toes and probably motivate the hell out of em.  But until something as usable to newcomers as Windows, BeOS or Mac OS X comes out of the Linux camp Windows will be the number 1 pick.  I like Linux.  I have tons of experience with it.  I dont wish death upon it but if zealots are considering themselves representatives of a community please make some fricking sense and be civillized otherwise you look childish, retarded and make the entire community look bad as a whole.  On the other hand, dont consider all users of alternative systems as the bad guys.  They arent.  As with any industry you have people who are genuine and know what they are doing and can be a great resource.  I have friends in those camps.  Some are really great friends but often times they get drowned out by the zealots who proclaim Linux or Mac OS X to be the best thing next to the second coming.

If you cant find flaws in your favorite product who are you to tell me the flaws in mine?

Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5: Why Bother? March 16, 2007

Steven J Vaughn-Nichols has posted a ” Four good reasons to switch to RHEL 5” editorial.  In this editorial he cites his own opinion piece “Vista:  Why bother?”  Talk about credibility.  Thats like asking a guy who has a traffic accident (or train wreck) to be his own witness.  But my only question to Steven is this:  Can you only pick 4 reasons to upgrade to RHEL 5?  4 reasons is like masturbation without the payoff.  Did he seriously use the product?  Did he even get the generated e-mail like I did that said that the images were available please download a copy for a review.  If four reasons are the only thing he can come up with I might consider cancelling my download.  I can think of four reasons to stick with RHEL 4 rather than upgrade.  Steven Im going to do you a favor, I know how great Vista is and even did my own opinion piece on it but Im not going to cite my own piece.  So, let me call your ” Four reasons to switch to RHEL 5″ and raise you ” 30 reasons to switch to Vista“