[REBOL] Re: /View as a Product
From: dvydra2:y:ahoo at: 18-Feb-2001 21:07
Karl,
You make a very convincing argument for REBOL to go
open source. They should adopt a licence where
corporations will have to pay, but individuls will
not.
Lets hope for the best.
Regards,
David
--- Karl Robillard <[karlr20--home--com]> wrote:
> Heh heh, I was wondering when Mark's OSCAR posts
> would provoke a response
> from people at REBOL Technologies (RT). As a
> suggestion, perhaps Mark could
> limit his OSCAR recruiting efforts to a monthly
> status report on this list.
>
> For the past four years I've been using Trolltech's
> Qt GUI toolkit
> (http://www.trolltech.com) for my user interfaces.
> Even though it was not
> open source when I started using it, all source code
> was provided and it was
> free for free products. If either of those
> conditions had not existed I
> would not have used it. Since then I have had the
> companies I have worked
> for purchase multiple licenses. Trolltech is a
> successful company (they've
> just opened a new office in the states and raised
> the price for a Windows
> license to almost 2 grand!) and now their products
> are open source.
>
> I hope RT will pursue a similar course of action.
>
> Thanks for your post Scott (Jones?). The interview
> with Larry Wall is a good
> read. As a Linux user for the past five years I
> know the value and security
> of open source.
>
> REBOL, to be fully realized, will become a
> foundation technology
> (infrastructure) for larger systems. In the
> interview Scott mentioned, Larry
> Wall says "What I do see is a growing recognition
> that anything resembling
> large-scale infrastructure ought to be open source".
> I agree that
> infrastructure is best when it is 'owned' by
> everyone. There is little worse
> than being forced to use inadequate tools (Microsoft
> anyone?) or seeing
> valuable tools die (the sad fate of the Amiga).
> Open source insures us
> against both of these extreme technological maladies
> (did I make that up or
> did I read that somewhere?).
>
> Hi Volker Nitsch. You seem to be a little confused
> as to what open source
> means. Where is the audio in REBOL? Where are the
> fast vector-graphics
> (Flash)? Where is the fast GUI with clipboard/DND?
> Where is 3D?
> If I had the source code to REBOL, I could probably
> add audio for OSS (unix)
> in a few hours. In a few weeks I could add model!
> and animation! datatypes.
> If I don't have the source and the ability to add
> datatypes to REBOL I'm SOL
> and I wait with everyone else for RT to implement
> it. I am frustrated about
> not being able to use REBOL where I would like to
> because of the restrictions
> (e.g. no system calls!) RT places on it.
>
> Before RT had funding, I recall they were asking for
> donations.
> I would never give money to someone so they can
> develop *their* product. If
> it had been an open source venture where they were
> developing a product to be
> released to *me*, I would have gladly given upwards
> of $1000.
>
> And now for some less focused thought.
>
> Open source is very zen. Everyone owns it yet no
> one controls it. It can be
> nurtured and harvested to provide income for the
> care-givers. It can be
> focused and shaped to arcane purposes. It can be
> viciously hacked!
>
> REBOL hints at truth
> sequestered on its island
> openness awaits
>
> Cheers,
> -Karl
>
> P.S. At work I'm writing a REBOL-like scripting
> language for video games. My
> company is very pro open source. Keep your fingers
> crossed!
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email
> to
> [rebol-request--rebol--com] with "unsubscribe" in the
> subject, without the quotes.
>
=====
please reply to: [david--vydra--net]
