Re: Closed Source Packages in Maemo
 

No. Regulations change, and vary by region. Such limitations must clearly only be in software. However, that is not a valid excuse to keep the source hidden. Modifying the source is not "tuning" a radio any more than hex editing a binary blob is. If it is illegal to distribute the source that could be hacked, it is also illegal to distribute a blob that could be hacked. The only advantage someone has with source is that they're less likely to do damage *accidentally*. Someone who intentionally wants to violate the regulations won't be stopped.

Re: Closed Source Packages in Maemo
 

Exclusivity can be kept for a longer time when not sharing your code.

Your elaborations are unrelated... Nokia works together with a variety of other companies - in software and hardware. It's often not Nokia only who can decide here. And even if some partial decisions are in Nokia's hands only, it still takes a while for lawyers to check code and potential issues before making it public. If you are a lawyer who's specialized in international law and covers several countries you will know.

In general there are different concepts for everything - open source vs commercial software, capitalistic democracy vs communism, mixtures of them (e.g. freeware).
It's the right and freedom of every company and individual to choose what they think is right for them.
I hope you agree with this.

In general "Open everything now!" talk is easy if you're not in a position that makes you responsible for the jobs of thousands of people if your company suddenly goes bankrupt because you gave away all your competitive advantage.

And still, Maemo5/Fremantle DOES have way more open source components than Maemo4/Diablo had. Nokia is on the right way, though it could sometimes really be a bit faster, but I guess that's normal with bigger companies.


"All opinions in this post are my personal opinions only, blah..." :-P

Re: Closed Source Packages in Maemo
 

@Andre Klapper:

We can't use commercial models created for proprietary software with Free (as free speach) Software.

When doing and/or distributes Free (as free speach) Software, must conceive things differently.

Currently, Nokia distributes Maemo, OS containing a large number of Free (as free speach) Software, as a proprietary OS.

It's not a good sollution.

Re: Closed Source Packages in Maemo
 

Good or not, it is the best solution available as of yet.

Re: Closed Source Packages in Maemo
 

No, and I've proven several times.
Than it like or not to Fanboys

Re: Closed Source Packages in Maemo
 

I can. So I hope your "We" does not also include me.

Re: Closed Source Packages in Maemo
 

There's a difference between objective evidence and emphatic opinion.

Re: Closed Source Packages in Maemo
 

In general, this is correct and understandable. But for software that is EOL, maybe not so clear. There's a difference between keeping EOL software locked in a room so that no one can use it, and letting others use it at their own risk. And an even bigger difference when the software is developed with the assistance of a community that deserves to at least be in the room.

This is not just my comment:
https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3845#c11

Re: Closed Source Packages in Maemo
 

Free software and proprietary software do not make the same ways, it don't distribute the same manner and, therefore, it is not profitable in the same way.
It's simple.

The use of 'WE' is owed to a bad translation from French into English. Excuse me.

Re: Closed Source Packages in Maemo
 

In that point I totally agree. However both can learn from each other. It's not that closed source is always something evil.

:-) Not a problem.