Quote: Original post by Yann L

Quote: Original post by Bregma
How many GPL-only kernel APIs are there?

On my current kernel, 2.6.22, over 560 symbols are exported as GPL-only.

Which doesn't actually matter, since distributing a non-GPL kernel module puts you into gray legal ground regardless of whether you use GPL-only exports (the "derivative work" debate).

As far as kernel developers are concerned, closed-source stuff belongs to the userspace.

Quote: Amongst them, the entire lowlevel USB subsystem, the ATA and SCSI subsystems, ACPI, I2C bus, IEEE1394, part of the PCI and video subsystems, and many more.

So you cannot develop closed-source USB, ATA and motherboard drivers. This might inconvenience you if you wished to, for instance, enforce DRM via a USB dongle, but as an end-user I can only see this as a good thing.

Call me a zealot if you will but I'd take that over Intel's closed-source IGP drivers *any* day of the week.

If we can divert from Yann making fools of the RMS fanclub for a moment, my $0.02 is that the only way *nix will take over the desktop is when the desktop becomes irrelevant. If Google get their way and everything ends up running through the browser, the OS becomes less important. BUT, I think/hope this isn't going to happen.

I'll let you return to trading insults now.

honestly though, i write server based apps for a living at work ( for managing entire departments, like sales, operation etc...) and we write all web based apps. I don't see much of a reason not to. Who knows if some manager is going to come in with a Mac laptop or some sales guy etc.. We use linux as a back end for this kind of thing. I could care less what the users actually use (as long as they use a sane browser).

- Many apps aren't suited for web-apps (on a games site, that should be obvious)
- Apps that rely on web connection are useless to many
- Apps that rely on cloud storage raise many security/backup concerns

Although the word app (or application for that matter) doesn't have a very strict definition, I would argue that the opposite it true for most cases.

Quote: Original post by d000hg
- Many apps aren't suited for web-apps (on a games site, that should be obvious)

Most applications only require a thin client. And browsers, their plugins and the hardware they run on get more powerful by the day. Even games isn't a very good example as the web-based game industry is huge.

Quote: - Apps that rely on web connection are useless to many

In this day and age, I would argue that not being connected is becoming an exception.

Quote: - Apps that rely on cloud storage raise many security/backup concerns

Security is always an issue when it comes to software, no matter where or on what the application runs.

Cloud storage might actually have less back up concerns if you compare it to local storage. How many people do you know that back up their hard disk on a regular basis? I think few (if any) of my friends do.

Quote: Original post by Wan
Although the word app (or application for that matter) doesn't have a very strict definition, I would argue that the opposite it true for most cases.

Quote: Original post by d000hg
- Many apps aren't suited for web-apps (on a games site, that should be obvious)

Most applications only require a thin client. And browsers, their plugins and the hardware they run on get more powerful by the day. Even games isn't a very good example as the web-based game industry is huge.

I mean 3D games with rich graphics. The only way you play these on a browser is by requiring a plugin which basically means it's not a web-game at all, but a local install which renders inside the browser. It's a cheat and the plugins have to be written per-platform, I don't really consider these web-apps at all and am growing tired of telling my client that having 3D apps in a browser plugin is not some magic cure-all for a cross-platform app that will magically run on iPhones.

Quote:

Quote: - Apps that rely on web connection are useless to many

In this day and age, I would argue that not being connected is becoming an exception.

You can argue it, but you're wrong. Your home or office might be always online but my train, bus and even hotel room isn't, let alone plane. Even conference facilities often have very poor WiFi. In real life, WiFi is not ubiquitous outside some modern cities, certainly not free WiFi.

Quote:

Quote: - Apps that rely on cloud storage raise many security/backup concerns

Security is always an issue when it comes to software, no matter where or on what the application runs.

Cloud storage might actually have less back up concerns if you compare it to local storage. How many people do you know that back up their hard disk on a regular basis? I think few (if any) of my friends do.

This is more a corporate issue than personal. A big company might have to spend months vetting any cloud-based solution to be sure their data is safe. A simple SLA isn't enough, they not only need to be sure it's secure from theft but also is absolutely not going to get wiped... and that if anything does go wrong, that they won't get their asses kicked for allowing a 3rd party to manage it. Google and MS are both fighting this exact battle right now, and it's taking them a lot of effort.

For an app which basically is a database with a front-end, sure it can be a web-app. But even Google haven't made gdocs as good as 10-year-old desktop competitors. Forcing things into web-apps "just because" is dumb.

Quote: Original post by Fiddler
Which doesn't actually matter, since distributing a non-GPL kernel module puts you into gray legal ground regardless of whether you use GPL-only exports (the "derivative work" debate).

As far as kernel developers are concerned, closed-source stuff belongs to the userspace.

That's basically my point. For me as a developer, both Windows and OSX are considerable less restrictive, more free and open than Linux. On the former two I am essentially free do what I want, while on the latter I am constantly in a legal gray zone created from the political delusions of a long-bearded weirdo.

Quote: Original post by Fiddler
So you cannot develop closed-source USB, ATA and motherboard drivers. This might inconvenience you if you wished to, for instance, enforce DRM via a USB dongle, but as an end-user I can only see this as a good thing.

Call me a zealot if you will but I'd take that over Intel's closed-source IGP drivers *any* day of the week.

And Intel would pretty much be all that would be left. No closed source drivers = the end of highend 3D on Linux (even AMD needs closed source drivers to access all the latest 3D features on >= R7xx GPUs). Not sure if that would be such a good thing for end-users.

Quote: Original post by d000hg
If we can divert from Yann making fools of the RMS fanclub for a moment,

Okay, okay, I'll stop... :)

Quote: Original post by Yann L

Quote: Original post by Fiddler
Which doesn't actually matter, since distributing a non-GPL kernel module puts you into gray legal ground regardless of whether you use GPL-only exports (the "derivative work" debate).

As far as kernel developers are concerned, closed-source stuff belongs to the userspace.

That's basically my point. For me as a developer, both Windows and OSX are considerable less restrictive, more free and open than Linux. On the former two I am essentially free do what I want, while on the latter I am constantly in a legal gray zone created from the political delusions of a long-bearded weirdo.

Yet I, as a user, feel safer knowing that you won't be able to take control of my computer (e.g. by developing a closed-source DRM module that degrades video signal when not connected to an approved display device - like HDCP on Windows/Mac).

Quote:

Quote: Original post by Fiddler
So you cannot develop closed-source USB, ATA and motherboard drivers. This might inconvenience you if you wished to, for instance, enforce DRM via a USB dongle, but as an end-user I can only see this as a good thing.

Call me a zealot if you will but I'd take that over Intel's closed-source IGP drivers *any* day of the week.

And Intel would pretty much be all that would be left. No closed source drivers = the end of highend 3D on Linux (even AMD needs closed source drivers to access all the latest 3D features on >= R7xx GPUs). Not sure if that would be such a good thing for end-users.

Actually, I was comparing Intel's closed-source Windows drivers (which suck) with their open-source Linux drivers (which are pretty solid).

That said, Mesa now covers 100% of GL 2.1, many GL3.x extensions and supports all Intel GPUs >=i915, AMD R200-R800 and most Nvidia cards. Performance is relatively low but improving constantly (and older parts, like R300/R400, actually outperform the closed-source drivers in some tests). The biggest losses are S3TC (patented) and floating-point textures (also patented) - workarounds are being developed for both.

Certainly good enough for mainstream users. It's not as if any GL 3.x or 4.x games exist anyway.

Quote: I mean 3D games with rich graphics. The only way you play these on a browser is by requiring a plugin which basically means it's not a web-game at all, but a local install which renders inside the browser

I take it you havent heard of html5 + webgl.
no plugin required
Fair enuf, most ppl havent heard of it as its not yet mainstream, next year though it should get some more press, so keep your eye out

although as someone pointed out, I willing to bet the top10 biggest desktop games (as in number of users) are webgames

Quote: Original post by zedz

Quote: I mean 3D games with rich graphics. The only way you play these on a browser is by requiring a plugin which basically means it's not a web-game at all, but a local install which renders inside the browser

I take it you havent heard of html5 + webgl.
no plugin required
Fair enuf, most ppl havent heard of it as its not yet mainstream, next year though it should get some more press, so keep your eye out

although as someone pointed out, I willing to bet the top10 biggest desktop games (as in number of users) are webgames

The single biggest game of all time is Farmville: browser-based, with more than 80 million users. Second Life (21 million accounts) and World of Warcraft (12 million accounts) pale in front of this - and the difference is likely to go up.

Edit: meant to say "more than 80 million users" not "games".

[Edited by - Fiddler on December 30, 2010 12:09:28 PM]