Cedega 6.0 here!

If you want to talk about your personal paperweight, you've found the right place!

Moderator: Moderators

Postby brunschvicg » Tue Jun 12, 2007 18:10

mbuel wrote:are they trying to emulate microsoft? I have no problem with a company making money, but this BS, is ridiculous.

The license echoes the one SuSE used to use, in that while the source code's at least partially open for inspection and can be redistributed without payment, it can't be commercially exploited by anyone else.

Of course, SuSE eventually dumped this license when they realized they couldn't compete with Fedora/Red Hat and Debian/Ubuntu, community-driven efforts based on the GPL.
brunschvicg
Baby Hen
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun May 20, 2007 20:24

Postby mbuel » Fri Jun 15, 2007 20:13

brunschvicg wrote:
mbuel wrote:are they trying to emulate microsoft? I have no problem with a company making money, but this BS, is ridiculous.

The license echoes the one SuSE used to use, in that while the source code's at least partially open for inspection and can be redistributed without payment, it can't be commercially exploited by anyone else.

Of course, SuSE eventually dumped this license when they realized they couldn't compete with Fedora/Red Hat and Debian/Ubuntu, community-driven efforts based on the GPL.


maybe there's hope that cedega will eventually dump the license, especially considering how well wine runs(not perfectly, but it's serviceable).
"Democracy means government by the uneducated, while aristocracy means government by the badly educated."
GK Chesterton
mbuel
Simple Hen
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 17:03

Postby davemc » Sun Jun 17, 2007 7:40

But isnt that the whole point of Open Source? Choice and multiple options. One can indeed get 99% of the stuff to work that runs nicely on Cedega, and you always have the choice to take that route. Nobody on the Transgaming team is twisting your arms or holding knives to throats. They simply provide a service to those who want to use it. Whats the issue with that? I see people attacking them as some kind of bad guy, when in fact they are just a business, and a Linux based one at that. If you hate them or the things they do so much, then simply use wine and have fun with that. I have gone both routes in the past and gotten most of the things I do to run just fine in wine, but its just so much easier to use Cedega, and reliable, and reliability and functionality are all important for the games that I play. I simply dont have the time to waste on countless hours trying to get my stuff to work in wine, as it wont work with just the simple "wine blah blah blah" routine. With Cedega, I click on "Install" and everything installs and works perfectly, every time, with 100% functionality on a 3.4 loop 2 Sabayon install (note that the same cannot be said for any other distro I have tried). So again, I find it hard to see any connection whatever to Transgaming business practices and M$, who is quite famous for thier shady ways of forcing people to use thier crappy products.

Heres something else to chew on --

I find it quite petty and unfortunate that some in the Open Source world openly seek to subvert Linux Businesses. This is not only counter productive to the Open Source movement, but subverts the success of Linux itself when it comes to market share vs. M$. Transgaming, CVS, Novell, Red Hat, and others, are in fact businesses which have in some way (some more than others obviously) ties to the Open Source world. Fact is, like it or not it matters not at all, Linux MUST find a way to succeed in the business world for the Open Source movement to succeed overall. If Linux and Free Software truly are your creed, then I suggest you look for ways to support these companies rather than subvert them.
davemc
Sharecropper
 
Posts: 680
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 17:08
Location: Virginia, usa

Postby brunschvicg » Sun Jun 17, 2007 13:50

davemc wrote:Nobody on the Transgaming team is twisting your arms or holding knives to throats.

The only knife that I can see is the one Transgaming's drawing across its own throat, as it adjusts to irrelevance in the face of WINE/Crossover's more open development model and licensing policy. No-one here is attacking Transgaming for having a business model, just for having a myopically obtuse one.

davemc wrote:I find it quite petty and unfortunate that some in the Open Source world openly seek to subvert Linux Businesses.

It's unfortunate that a growing number of Linux businesses (Xandros, Linspire, Novell...) collaborate with the world's largest convicted monopolist to subvert the most successful Linux (and unambiguously FOSS) business of them all -- Red Hat. Hopefully, the GPLv3 will see an end to that.
brunschvicg
Baby Hen
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun May 20, 2007 20:24

Postby davemc » Sun Jun 17, 2007 20:00

brunschvicg wrote:
davemc wrote:I find it quite petty and unfortunate that some in the Open Source world openly seek to subvert Linux Businesses.

It's unfortunate that a growing number of Linux businesses (Xandros, Linspire, Novell...) collaborate with the world's largest convicted monopolist to subvert the most successful Linux (and unambiguously FOSS) business of them all -- Red Hat. Hopefully, the GPLv3 will see an end to that.


This is not likely because kernel devs wont move to it. What we will have in the end is a ton of cross licensing and probably the subversion of the GPL itself due to splintering. It all boils down to a complete lack of unity within the Linux world itself which will ultimately be its death knell. Because we are seeing the bastardization of Linux Businesses with the M$ racketeering deal, and an inability of those within the Linux world to take M$ to task for it, we could eventually be seeing the end of the end.
davemc
Sharecropper
 
Posts: 680
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 17:08
Location: Virginia, usa

Postby mbuel » Tue Jun 19, 2007 15:43

davemc wrote:Heres something else to chew on --

I find it quite petty and unfortunate that some in the Open Source world openly seek to subvert Linux Businesses. This is not only counter productive to the Open Source movement, but subverts the success of Linux itself when it comes to market share vs. M$. Transgaming, CVS, Novell, Red Hat, and others, are in fact businesses which have in some way (some more than others obviously) ties to the Open Source world. Fact is, like it or not it matters not at all, Linux MUST find a way to succeed in the business world for the Open Source movement to succeed overall. If Linux and Free Software truly are your creed, then I suggest you look for ways to support these companies rather than subvert them.


I agree. I saw an article in "Linux Format", about how Novell recently scored a _HUGE_ deal with Peugot. They are eventually going to switch _all_ of their desktop and server computers over to Novell linux and save a bundle of money. Money that would've gone to microsoft is now going to the linux community.

I can also understand why people don't like "open source" companies like cedega. There's a difference between Novell, Red Hat, and Cedega. When you give a company like Novell or Red Hat money, that money goes _back into_ the open source community. Novell is paying programmers to work on Sun's Open Office.

paying for cedega though... will get nothing back to wine.

Cedega provides a great service, that is the ability to vote with your dollars on what you want to have worked on next. They should share their work with the programmers they based their work off of.

cedega could still be cutting edge, work with all the latest games, and when they release a new version with better compatibility they could share their previous generation code with wine to help them out.

In terms of "unethical" companies, Cedega is still WAY the hell lower than Apple or Microsoft. But they could go alot further to helping the community that allowed them to make money.

This is not likely because kernel devs wont move to it. What we will have in the end is a ton of cross licensing and probably the subversion of the GPL itself due to splintering. It all boils down to a complete lack of unity within the Linux world itself which will ultimately be its death knell. Because we are seeing the bastardization of Linux Businesses with the M$ racketeering deal, and an inability of those within the Linux world to take M$ to task for it, we could eventually be seeing the end of the end.


I think the MS deal is a good idea. It gets linux out there to companies who may have not heard of it. It says to alot of those companies, "hey my stuff will work with linux, I can do what I want under it.."

Sure, MS has made threats of patent violations, but if it ever went to court it would hurt them more than the open source community. When asked to _show_ their patent violations, they sheepishly replied, "We can't produce them as there's too much paperwork to go through."

As for GPL v3? I think Linus said it best.

http://trends.newsforge.com/article.pl? ... 02/1636216

GPL v3 will scare businesses away from using linux. A company should still be allowed to keep secrets so that they can make a profit on something they spent R & D dollars on.

Take the palm pilot that's using the GPL v2 kernel. Under v2, everything else about the palm pilot can be kept business secret. Under v3 they'd have to release ALL of their research and work into the product to the public domain. There's no way, Palm or any other company would agree to such terms.

that's my 3 1/2 cents on the subject.
"Democracy means government by the uneducated, while aristocracy means government by the badly educated."
GK Chesterton
mbuel
Simple Hen
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 17:03

Postby davemc » Tue Jun 19, 2007 16:06

mbuel wrote:I think the MS deal is a good idea. It gets linux out there to companies who may have not heard of it. It says to alot of those companies, "hey my stuff will work with linux, I can do what I want under it.."


It is Racketeering, plain and simple. See Mark Shuttleworths recent comments on the subject. There is nothing good about illegal business practices. Condoning them do not make them right either.
davemc
Sharecropper
 
Posts: 680
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 17:08
Location: Virginia, usa

Postby brunschvicg » Tue Jun 19, 2007 20:08

mbuel wrote:I think the MS deal is a good idea. It gets linux out there to companies who may have not heard of it. It says to alot of those companies, "hey my stuff will work with linux, I can do what I want under it.."

Is there a CIO anywhere who hasn't heard of Linux and its involvement in innumerable businesses' IT strategies?

mbuel wrote:GPL v3 will scare businesses away from using linux. A company should still be allowed to keep secrets so that they can make a profit on something they spent R & D dollars on.

Take the palm pilot that's using the GPL v2 kernel. Under v2, everything else about the palm pilot can be kept business secret. Under v3 they'd have to release ALL of their research and work into the product to the public domain. There's no way, Palm or any other company would agree to such terms.


How does that work out, exactly? The GPLv3 has new clauses to work against the use of patent provisions to frustrate the free redistribution of GPL'd code, but
(i) the version 3 draft does nothing to oblige corporations to disclose details of their R&D, and in any case
(ii) patents, of their very nature, can't include NDAs and other secret provisions.

Hell, even Novell now supports version 3... :wink:
brunschvicg
Baby Hen
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun May 20, 2007 20:24

Postby mbuel » Tue Jun 19, 2007 23:47

brunschvicg wrote:
mbuel wrote:I think the MS deal is a good idea. It gets linux out there to companies who may have not heard of it. It says to alot of those companies, "hey my stuff will work with linux, I can do what I want under it.."

Is there a CIO anywhere who hasn't heard of Linux and its involvement in innumerable businesses' IT strategies?


actually yes. And there are CIO's that will not touch linux because they are afraid of interoperability problems with the windoze machines. That's where this deal helps.

mbuel wrote:GPL v3 will scare businesses away from using linux. A company should still be allowed to keep secrets so that they can make a profit on something they spent R & D dollars on.

Take the palm pilot that's using the GPL v2 kernel. Under v2, everything else about the palm pilot can be kept business secret. Under v3 they'd have to release ALL of their research and work into the product to the public domain. There's no way, Palm or any other company would agree to such terms.


How does that work out, exactly? The GPLv3 has new clauses to work against the use of patent provisions to frustrate the free redistribution of GPL'd code, but
(i) the version 3 draft does nothing to oblige corporations to disclose details of their R&D, and in any case
(ii) patents, of their very nature, can't include NDAs and other secret provisions.

Hell, even Novell now supports version 3... :wink:


the version 3 draft does not permit a corporation to use version 3 code in "DRM".

I didn't know novell was behind gpl 3... interesting.

It is Racketeering, plain and simple. See Mark Shuttleworths recent comments on the subject. There is nothing good about illegal business practices. Condoning them do not make them right either.


Dave,

I've read Mark's comments and I don't agree. I don't think Microsoft could shut down linux:

mark shuttleworth wrote:it’s entirely obvious that MS is working to establish an IP framework that limits the spread of free Linux.


Yeah and they tried it with SCO group in Utah. They purchased a unix license worth an obscene amount of money to help their fight against IBM. If you remember they lost that badly, and if they ever tried bringing this to court:

Mark Shuttleworth wrote:Ballmer came out with the statement that “anybody running any Linux other than SUSE has an undisclosed balance sheet liability.”


It would go down in flames just as badly. I see a different side to this coin, and I certainly don't agree with Mark's (he has helped the community alot, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with him.) comments about boycotting Novell, do not help the community it further divides it.

The way I see this, is that Novell will gain more Linux licenses and other companies will get pulled up by the ripple. Red Hat, Ubuntu server, etc. Anything that garners more attention for linux is a good thing. Let Ballmer (aka monkey boy) beat his chest, it's meaningless and the sounds of a dying empire.
"Democracy means government by the uneducated, while aristocracy means government by the badly educated."
GK Chesterton
mbuel
Simple Hen
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 17:03

Postby brunschvicg » Wed Jun 20, 2007 11:57

mbuel wrote:I didn't know novell was behind gpl 3... interesting.


http://www.novell.com/prblogs/?p=345

mbuel wrote:the version 3 draft does not permit a corporation to use version 3 code in "DRM".


But how does the anti-DRM clause impinge on Palm, Inc.'s ability to retain business secrets? (Similar insinuations were made about the GPLv2 imperiling businesses' ability to retain IP rights, IIRC.)

mbuel wrote:And there are CIO's that will not touch linux because they are afraid of interoperability problems with the windoze machines. That's where this deal helps.


If they're that stupid, presumably they'll go for the "cheaper" option anyway: http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39286295,00.htm
brunschvicg
Baby Hen
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun May 20, 2007 20:24

PreviousNext

Return to Off Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest