/dev/random
First, let me start with: lol! Openoffice fork? Groklaw? I would like to see an operating system/distribution without 'forked' programs. Almost all distributions fork almost all programs. With Novell's statement about giving back the code (which is not something they could or could not do - they must do it if they want to distribute it), I don't see how much different is that comparing to Ubuntu/RedHat/X fork? Everybody forks. That's the beauty of open source. Everybody forks and contributes back - you get one program with thousands of ideas or implementations. One can even have same source with one binary supporting bluetooth and other not supporting it.
But, Groklaw does have a point on OpenXML. If you read Microsoft statement (http://www.microsoft.com/office/xml/covenant.mspx) about Office 2003 XML schemas, yes, 'Microsoft irrevocably covenants that it will not seek to enforce any of its patent claims necessary to conform to the technical specifications for the Microsoft Office 2003 XML Reference Schemas'... But, there is one more thing:
'This statement is not an assurance either (i) that any of Microsoft's issued patent claims cover a conforming implementation of the Specifications or are enforceable, or (ii) that such an implementation would not infringe patents or other intellectual property rights of any third party.'
let's try with bold chars:
...'that such an implementation would not infringe patents or other intellectual property rights of any third party.'
So, theoretically, Microsoft could have sister company which has some contract with Microsoft about patents (same one which Microsoft has with Novell). That company could have its patents in Office 2003 Schemas. Let's forget about Microsoft. It doesn't even have to be Microsoft. It could be some other SCO-like company. That company would have every right to enforce its patent claims.
So, accepting OpenXML in OO.org would be like a Trojan horse. If Novell wants to do it - fine. Don't bring it back in OO.org.
Proprietary drivers in Ubuntu by default? Don't. Just don't do that. I don't want them. If someone wants them (or must use them); great, make it as an installer option. 'Yes, I want fancy graphics, even if nobody could help me solve tons of bugs and even if that would break suspend and hibernate and even if that would maybe mean braking GPL' would be an OK option in installer :)
OTOH, both compiz and beryl have serious issues and they should stop working on creating newer, even more useless plug-ins and start fixing some usability bugs; 'java + beryl sometimes doesn't work', 'beryl crashes all the time', 'don't destroy my workspaces', 'F9 is fetch all in evolution; now it doesn't work', 'what's with the flickering in xmoto while running beryl and apt-get update', etc, etc...
But, Groklaw does have a point on OpenXML. If you read Microsoft statement (http://www.microsoft.com/office/xml/covenant.mspx) about Office 2003 XML schemas, yes, 'Microsoft irrevocably covenants that it will not seek to enforce any of its patent claims necessary to conform to the technical specifications for the Microsoft Office 2003 XML Reference Schemas'... But, there is one more thing:
'This statement is not an assurance either (i) that any of Microsoft's issued patent claims cover a conforming implementation of the Specifications or are enforceable, or (ii) that such an implementation would not infringe patents or other intellectual property rights of any third party.'
let's try with bold chars:
...'that such an implementation would not infringe patents or other intellectual property rights of any third party.'
So, theoretically, Microsoft could have sister company which has some contract with Microsoft about patents (same one which Microsoft has with Novell). That company could have its patents in Office 2003 Schemas. Let's forget about Microsoft. It doesn't even have to be Microsoft. It could be some other SCO-like company. That company would have every right to enforce its patent claims.
So, accepting OpenXML in OO.org would be like a Trojan horse. If Novell wants to do it - fine. Don't bring it back in OO.org.
Proprietary drivers in Ubuntu by default? Don't. Just don't do that. I don't want them. If someone wants them (or must use them); great, make it as an installer option. 'Yes, I want fancy graphics, even if nobody could help me solve tons of bugs and even if that would break suspend and hibernate and even if that would maybe mean braking GPL' would be an OK option in installer :)
OTOH, both compiz and beryl have serious issues and they should stop working on creating newer, even more useless plug-ins and start fixing some usability bugs; 'java + beryl sometimes doesn't work', 'beryl crashes all the time', 'don't destroy my workspaces', 'F9 is fetch all in evolution; now it doesn't work', 'what's with the flickering in xmoto while running beryl and apt-get update', etc, etc...
posted by ivoks at
09:28
