| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Mandriva to ship SkypeMandriva to ship SkypePosted Dec 21, 2005 20:19 UTC (Wed) by fergal (subscriber, #602)In reply to: Mandriva to ship Skype by xav Parent article: Mandriva to ship Skype
You totally fail to understand what is behind that word, sorry No, it is the other way around. There are many more meanings to the word "open" than source code availablility and since Skype is very much a closed source program I assumed it was clear that source code availablity was not the relevant meaning.
(Log in to post comments)
Mandriva to ship Skype Posted Dec 21, 2005 23:52 UTC (Wed) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] No, it is the original way around. "Open" in this context obviously means open to inspect and modify; you can construe it as "accessible", but you will not get far, specially if you compare it to GNU tar.Skype is only as "accessible" as the original makers want it to be: running on a specific number of combinations of hardware and operating system, and using its sanctioned interface. GNU tar, in contrast, is open for you to inspect and modify; you can use it from the command line, or from a speech recognition program, a graphical interface or a web application, as you like. You can compile it essentially for any machine for which there is an ANSI C compiler; but also inspect it to verify that it does what you want as you want it; modify it to suit your needs; and redistribute the modifications in case they suit other people too. You can also fork your own version if you don't like the direction of development; so you are not tied to a particular company. Data processed with GNU tar follows a public specification which is available to anyone interested. Even if the FSF goes out of business, your tarred data remains accessible for ever, so we might add accessibility over time. In contrast, if Skype goes out of business tomorrow, all of your voice mail and contacts may easily get lost (depending on who buys the remains); they (or their successors in interest) may change the rates so the service is not available for free any more; and unlike phone companies or other open networks, you are tied to a particular provider. Oh and one more thing, brought about by the mention of KaZaA in another point of the thread: you may lose service easily if it somehow becomes illegal. It may seem like a remote possibility, but notice how the RIAA and friends brought the KaZaA network down because it threatened their business model; and it was the most popular software program ever. With free software, however, you may not agree with a particular law; you can then exercise your protest just by accessing some other provider or even by becoming one yourself. Is it accessible if you have the sanctioned combination of hardware and software, you want to run it in the approved manner, are willing to give up your freedoms and even your resources, and only for as long as the company wants to provide the service? Yes, it is. Is that your point? Ok, point taken.
Mandriva to ship Skype Posted Dec 22, 2005 0:56 UTC (Thu) by fergal (subscriber, #602) [Link] No, it is the original way around. "Open" in this context obviously means open to inspect and modify; you can construe it as "accessible", but you will not get far, specially if you compare it to GNU tar. Go to full article and search for the word "open" and you'll see that I was the first person to use it with regard to Skype. That's the context, that is the original way around. I'm not construing anything. I should have said "accessible" (I wish I'd said "accessible") because that was the word used originally and is not so overloaded. You should read my comments with "open" replaced by "accessible". I still think it should be clear that when I said "open" I did not mean "having inspectable and modifiable source code". Why should it be clear? Firstly because evey occurrence of "open" in my reply was followed by "to" and a person - a pretty good indication of it's meaning but secondly, even if English isn't your first language, Skype is absolutely and positively not open in the "open source" sense, so why on earth would I be claiming that it is? If you think someone is basing an argument on something that is totally and obviously untrue then simply point out the incorrectness of their premise. Do not respond to the rest of their argument, there is no need to rebut: if you show their premise to be false, the rest of the argument crumbles automatically; if you have misunderstood their premise then you have also misunderstood the rest of their argument and any comments would probably be irrelevant. So, is Skype accessible to everyone meeting the minimum specs and capable of running Mandriva? I think so. Does that even include those who refuse to run it on principle? I think so. Is modern accessible to Jehovah's Witnesses? Is modern technology accessible to the Amish? Was food accessible to hunger-striking prisoners? Yes, yes and yes. Forget I ever mentioned the word "open", if you want to reply, talk about "accessible".
Mandriva to ship Skype Posted Dec 22, 2005 8:15 UTC (Thu) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] Only the first paragraph of my message refers to "open". The rest refers to "accessible". And I don't really care what you meant originally, but about the connotations behind your words.So, is Skype accessible to everyone meeting the minimum specs and capable of running Mandriva?Not even that. Mandriva 2006 can run on three architectures, x86, x86_64 and ppc; skype only runs on i586. As mentioned elsewhere, this limitation appears nowhere in the specs; it only says "400 MHz processor". So the answer is no. Also, as mentioned above (and ignored completely in your message), it is only accessible as long as the company is willing to give you service. Even if I'm willing to run non-free software, I may not be willing to trust a private company with my non-volatile data, not knowing what the program does with it. Or even trust a private company with my volatile data. Are my calls logged? Are they point to point only? Are they diverted to the CIA on demand? Who knows. Of course, these practical concers are only derivations of the theoretical concern expressed by Duncan, but they make the program less accessible to many users and in many situations.
Mandriva to ship Skype Posted Dec 22, 2005 11:51 UTC (Thu) by fergal (subscriber, #602) [Link] Not even that. Mandriva 2006 can run on three architectures, x86, x86_64 and ppc; skype only runs on i586. As mentioned elsewhere, this limitation appears nowhere in the specs; it only says "400 MHz processor". So the answer is no. The slightest bit of research would have shown you how completely wrong that is. Skype also runs on Mac (PPC) and Pocket PC (is that ARM? not sure. I suppose I could find out but you know, finding things out before writing about them is really going out of fashion). Assuming they have a good code base, it may be trivial to port it to PPC linux, so maybe all Mandriva 2006 editions will include it. That's a large but not unreasonable assumption. It might be competely wrong. Who knows? Not I and certainly not you. And I don't really care what you meant originally, but about the connotations behind your words. What connotations? Most words have multiple meanings but in this case, the connotation you're choosing makes no sense. It is a fact that Skype is not open source, it is a fact that GNU tar is open source. If you think I'm denying either of those two facts then congratulations, you're going to thrash me in that argument. I'm sure you'll go on to win more many more. Have you ever met the Red Queen?
Mandriva to ship Skype Posted Dec 22, 2005 12:12 UTC (Thu) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] I have in fact done that bit of research; even more, I have installed Skype on a PowerPC computer running Mac OS X. The fact remains that Skype only makes their product available for i586 on Linux. If you had actually visited the link and tried to download Skype for Mandriva (link called RPM for Mandriva 10.1 and newer), you would have noticed that you can only download an RPM for i586. We can only speculate about what Skype will do; today there is no version for those other architectures. If you want to make your point about "accessibility", please choose a different ground.I worry not about you or about this stupid argument you are carrying forward against the world; but about those users who may be fooled by the language in the press release. Skype has not "worked hard to ensure that our software is easy to use and accessible to everyone"; they have worked hard to create a captive market using proprietary protocols and software, and they worry only about having a mass of ignorant users locked into their software. They should have no place in a distribution of free software.
Mandriva to ship Skype Posted Dec 22, 2005 13:09 UTC (Thu) by fergal (subscriber, #602) [Link] If you want to make your point about "accessibility", please choose a different ground. What do you mean choose the ground? The word is in the press release and in the comment I replied to. I chose to reply but I had no choice about where I replied. And there is no argument I'm "carrying forward against the world". The number of replies I've posted may make it seem that way but that's far more to do with misinterpretation of my words than with any passion I feel for bringing my argument to the world. I'm just saying it's a choice, like for example vegetarianism. Just like vegetarianism people do it for different reasons. Some for moral reasons, some for health, some just because they like it. None of these vegetarians are being denied access to meat. When it comes to Free software I'm with the health and the liking it and I have sympathy for the moral reasons but I don't think morality will be a significant factor in the battle and I don't think it really helps to denounce a particular package on moral grounds. I think the battle will be won by the benefits of Free software and then, once people have become used used to this Freedom, non-free software will looked upon with suspicion and everyone will understand the risks involved in using it. I can see a day when goverments and large corporations will insist on Free software for everything except specialised tasks but I doubt anyone reading LWN today will live long enough to see a law banning non-free software (revolutions excluded). Finally, Mandriva is not a "distribution of free software" and has not been for quite some time.
Ethics in software Posted Dec 22, 2005 14:17 UTC (Thu) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] Morality has a reason to exist: theoretical principles bring about practical changes. Dumb people just have things happen to them and cannot understand the reasons; clever people can distill their experiences into general rules of behavior. Really clever people can listen to others and learn from their experiences, without the need of actually suffering damage.I am beginning to understand why Stallman always starts his speeches about free software with the famous printer-driver story. It is so that his audience can see that these principles have an actual applicability to the real world; it is not just an ethical problem. Free software solves real problems that people have all the time, like "why can't I run this software / hardware" or "how can I access my data". Many commentators have mentioned a bunch of actual, practical reasons for preferring free software within the specific field of internet telephony. They have been completely lost on you; you just see "moral reasons". Maybe other readers can extract some benefit from the thread.
Mandriva to ship Skype Posted Dec 22, 2005 17:15 UTC (Thu) by xav (subscriber, #18536) [Link] Assuming they have a good code base, it may be trivial to port it to PPC linuxThat's precisely the point. They haven't done it, for whatever reason (support costs, uninterested marketing dept ...) and nobody can do it for them. You have some code you *know* is portable to your platform but nobody can do the job. Welcome to CLOSED software.
|
|
||||||||||||