• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Open Source

When a program is written it's written in human readable (generally) source code. That code must then be translated into assembly (though some programs are written in assembly initially). After that it is translated into machine code that the computer can run. Now with-closed source software you just get that final machine code version and have know idea how a program actually works underneath. With open source you can download binaries (the machine code) but you can also download the uncompiled source code so that you can learn from it, modify it, or incorporate it into another project. There are different open sources liscneses (GPL, Alladin, BSD, etc.) which dictate the different ways that the code can be used, but that would take quite a while to explain thouroughly.
 
Here is some info...

I would suggest you chech out the opensource.org homepage..and maybe read:
The Case for Open Source: For Business
The Case for Open Source: For Customers

The importance of the GNU General Public License

Richard Stallman is a great hacker who wrote some really amazing software, but the contribution for which he will probably be remembered is not a piece of software but a legal document. He quickly realised that even if he wrote great software and gave it away, someone else could come along, make a few changes to the code and then copyright the whole lot by claiming it to be a differentiated product. Thus, the aim of sharing would be defeated and he would be foolishly giving away something which others could simply exploit.

He came to the conclusion that he had to design a special license to ensure that the software remained public and all modifications and improvements, no matter who made them, were made available to everyone. Ironically, as the legal system has no mechanism to protect publicly-owned intellectual work, Stallman had to rely on copyright law itself to design a license that was opposed to it in spirit! The way it works is very interesting, demonstrating that even Law can be a malleable medium to a creative mind. To protect his software for everyone, he first copyrights it, thereby preventing someone else from seizing control of it at a later date, then gives it away under controlled conditions that are essentially protected by Contract Law. The conditions are that anyone modifying the code for later redistribution has to make their source code public on the same terms. No proprietary modifications are allowed, except for private use. This license is known as the "GNU General Public License" or GPL. It's also called copyleft, because in a deep sense, it is the opposite of a copyright. It gives freedom instead of restricting it. (Stallman has often been accused of being a socialist or communist, an anti-commercial crusader, but the reality is probably simpler than that. He is an idealist who just believes very strongly in the "right" of programmers to share code without artificial restrictions. A naive philosophy, according to some, but one that is nonetheless shaking up the software industry.)

Many people think that free software, public domain software and shareware are the same thing, but this is not so. Shareware is commercial software. Authors of shareware programs expect to be paid, just like authors of any commercial software, but they are willing to allow free distribution of their software to popularise it. Upgrades and bug-fixes are available to those who pay for the copies they receive. The source code is typically not available. Shareware is more a marketing technique than a form of software freedom. Public domain software, while free, is not under copyright at all, which means that someone making modifications to it can claim copyright to the modified version and "take it out of circulation". GPL-ed software, on the other hand, is copyrighted by the original author and licensed to the public, albeit under very generous terms. It ensures that the software remains perpetually free. GPL could be thought of as Guaranteed Public for Life. There are other free licenses as well, the most famous of which is the BSD license, which has sometimes been called "copy-neutral", because it enforces no restrictions at all on copying and redistribution, not even the GPL's condition that changes should be made available to the public.

The GPL and other free software licenses must seem very quaint concepts to people from the commercial world of copyrights, patents and non-disclosure agreements, but increasing numbers of high-quality software products are given away every year under such licenses and are being used by increasing numbers of computer users, forming a credible threat to established vendors of commercial software, so they cannot be pooh-poohed as mere idealistic nonsense. You need to understand how they work, even if you don't agree with their philosophy.

 


<< RMS is Karl Marx incarnate. He looks like him too. >>



What a mean...hatefull thing to say about someone. :Q
 
Why is it mean? Marx was a smart visionary. Though he had an unworkable vision.

RMS is also a smart visionary. His vision is very much like Marx's, but operates in the realm of software as opposed to the realm of economy. It remains to be seen whether his vision will be workable in the long run.
 
If a person has an &quot;unworkable vision&quot; then how can that be smart? 🙂

As for opensource working or not? Well it seems to be working rather well for some businesses and individuals. That cannot be said for Marx's system though. 🙂


for opensource operating systems chack out:
www.linux.org
www.freebsd.org
www.openbsd.org
www.linuxnewbie.org (or .com)
www.xfree86.org (Opensource X-Windows)

These places can supply you to other sites dealing with opensource information.

 
[ It remains to be seen whether his vision will be workable in the long run.[/i] >>




Well... Open Source has been around alot longer than Windows... in fact if not for OpenSource (sendmail) we prob would not have internet email nearly as widespread as we do today.

Also if not for OpenSource, we would not have the WEB (first gopher, then NCSA, then APACHE Server) like we do today.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top