Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: Microsoft Surface =/= FOSS

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Australian in Germany
    Beans
    4,010
    Distro
    Ubuntu 10.10 Maverick Meerkat

    Re: Microsoft Surface =/= FOSS

    I am extremely skeptical about such things.
    One reason for this is a job I had about 2 years ago at a motor show. Someone had had the bright idea that the presenter could stand at a Plexiglass lectern which was the monitor of a computer. The screen on the lectern was also projected onto a big screen behind the presenter so that the people could see what was going on. The lectern was only one layer of plexiglass and see through. The navigation was hand gestures across the screen on the lectern, and all it really did was play films about the product.

    Great idea, super high tech image, super cool. They rehearsed with it for 3 days before they had the device sorted out so that it was half way reliable and the presenters knew which gestures would work and which wouldn't. My impression was that such things will probably work one day, but at the moment they are everything other than reliable and easy to use. And the question is, who needs it?
    Michael

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Beans
    Hidden!

    Re: Microsoft Surface =/= FOSS

    Yes, it is closed source. Microsoft has a tendency to create proprietary applications.

    Would I help make a Linux Distribution that would copy Surface's capabilities? Not for free.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Beans
    34

    Re: Microsoft Surface =/= FOSS

    Quote Originally Posted by Frak View Post
    Yes, it is closed source. Microsoft has a tendency to create proprietary applications.

    Would I help make a Linux Distribution that would copy Surface's capabilities? Not for free.
    But free is the entire idea of FOSS!

    Free Open Source Whodawhatsit.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    North Las Vegas, Nevada
    Beans
    743
    Distro
    Ubuntu

    Re: Microsoft Surface =/= FOSS

    Quote Originally Posted by Woolio1 View Post
    But free is the entire idea of FOSS!

    Free Open Source Whodawhatsit.
    The F in FOSS stands for free as in freedom, not free as in beer.
    Last edited by Giant Speck; February 19th, 2010 at 03:07 AM. Reason: I'm a retarded moose.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Beans
    34

    Re: Microsoft Surface =/= FOSS

    Quote Originally Posted by Giant Speck View Post
    The F in FOSS stands for free as in freedom, not free as in beer.
    Hmm... So why don't we pay for Ubuntu?

  6. #26
    -grubby is offline May the Ubuntu Be With You!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Beans
    Hidden!

    Re: Microsoft Surface =/= FOSS

    Quote Originally Posted by Woolio1 View Post
    Hmm... So why don't we pay for Ubuntu?
    That doesn't mean it's required to be sold for money, it just means that it can be. The great majority of FOSS software is free anyway.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Beans
    12,944

    Re: Microsoft Surface =/= FOSS

    Quote Originally Posted by Woolio1 View Post
    Hmm... So why don't we pay for Ubuntu?
    You can if you wish

    example

    http://www.dse.co.nz/dse.shop/4b7dfb...ct/View/XS8085
    This account is not active.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Where I am
    Beans
    807
    Distro
    Ubuntu 12.04 Precise Pangolin

    Re: Microsoft Surface =/= FOSS

    Mah boi. This source code is what all true warriors strive for!
    .i coi rodo

  9. #29
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Beans
    7,032
    Distro
    Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala

    Re: Microsoft Surface =/= FOSS

    Quote Originally Posted by Woolio1 View Post
    Hmm... So why don't we pay for Ubuntu?
    Because it's not in Canonical's business model to charge for the OS itself, and it's too reliant on the community-driven development model for that to be likely.

    I think Frak and Giant-Speck are saying, though, that something as revolutionary as a tabletop touch UI OS is in a completely different category than something like Ubuntu, which is a very nicely-done prepackaging of existing software based on tried-and-true interface concepts and computing principles. As nice as Ubuntu is, it's not a revolutionary step forward in terms of OSes, or even *nix distributions.

    Also: yes, the underlying philosophical justifications of F/LOSS have to do with the exchange of code, concepts and design strategies, as a way of speeding up innovation. Historically, it has very little to do with making binary copies of software available for free to the consumer. The fact that open code leads to the latter is a common side effect, but it was never the principle which led to the movement in the first place. And that's one of the limitations that many developers see in F/LOSS: it might benefit the world more if I released my source code to everyone for nothing in return, but how do I feed my kids if I do that?

    Look, it's turned out to be a valid and great business strategy for those who wish to provide software as a way of influencing the framework in which development takes place. This is Google's gambit with Android, for instance. But it's not the only business model, and I agree with those who say that the code for something as revolutionary as Surface might not be something you give up without getting something significant in return.
    I am aware of all internet traditions. | Getting the best help | Text formatting codes | My last.fm profile
    Should I PM support questions? NO!

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •