Developers cooling on Windows desktop, study finds

[mediator]

@Arun : Thats dissapointing that u aren't quoting me anymore! I hope in ur next post u'll continue to quote me from previous post of mine!

In GPL, you can only make open source software, whearas with VS (and any programming language, without invoking GPL), you can program open as well as closed source. Some people prefer open source, some prefer closed source. I pointed it out because the choice is available. And many programmers want to have the choice to make their software closed source.

And its the right of the user to have or atleast ackowledge the the code of what he is using. I dunno why u r even discussing abt closed source when u don't want to debate on it. Yea the choice is available but again its 'restricted'!! Read the EULA again! Is it hard to understand!

If you add DRM functionality, you CANNOT distribute it under GPL. If you distribute it under GPL, you will be violating GPL which bans DRM. And why are you talking about Windows Media Player? I was talking about generic open source media player.

Naturally thats how the GPL works! If everybody is providing the source code under GPL, then wud it be equal and justified if some start making closed source advocate for proprietary mix? How wud the author be protected under such circumstances if someone else makes a closed source product? How wud the source be verified? You urself posted that GLP stands to protect the author and now u r talking so silly? If everybody is getting the same freedom and equality then u cannot grant something special to someone so as to code some closed source and bring proprietary mix in it!!
This is called ethics so that every body shud respect another's work and to have freedom. Thats how the community works! Its not the same as MS monopoly/business profits as we discussed in detail previously!

There is no doubt that EULAs are in general much more elaborate and complicated to understand than GPL. Most people dont read it however, and it doesnt affect them usually.

Yes we have seen how it affects "only" the MVPs may be? YEs most people don't read it and the EULA points to incorrect sites. I guess its time everyone shud start reading the MS-EULA, not to forget about the VISTA EULA!!

No, I am not brainwashed by MS fanboys. And you should know that it is not only MS that has complicated EULAs. Most large-scale commercial software are like this. Since you are picking on MS only, I am asking why pick on one company instead of ranting about closed-source in general? It appears more like you are Linux Fanboy...

Oh please, people will laugh on u if u say I'm a Linux fanboy coz I have myself stated infinte times where Linux stands backwards contradicting to the definition of a fanboy!! Is it ur habit to keep posting wateva comes to ur mind randomly?

Its like I'm talking abt Alqaeda and u r continously requesting to talk abt more terrorist groups! If u think u can't keep up with the debate then please stop whining and telling me what to debate! Its pityful that u don't even have ur concepts cleared that u whined abt ur limited knowledge before!!

You want freedom to do something illegal? Again, you are talking from open-source mind, so there is no sense in getting you to look at it from closed-source mentality.

@Arun.....Please chose whether u want to debate on closed source Vs open source or not first! Please dont whine that u dont want to debate on closed cource Vs open source and then keep talking about it where ever u feel like! Its so silly that u keep jumping the sides of fences as u like! Take ur pick and may be then u can entertain me!

And yeah, you can develop and market software developed in Visual Studio Express Edition. I have already mentioned it in an earlier post...

How about developing and marketing the extensions? And u say u have read the debate! How dissapointing!

Whos talking about fervent belief in MS? It seems you label someone a MS fanboy if someone appears to question you. I just asked a question. You stated just one point and I asked you to give some more examples...

Don't u read the hot debates in tech. section? I guess u r new!! I please request u to open another thread in FIGHT CLUB asking some examples where MS was wrong! Oh please do that! I guess ur in search of some enlightenment!!

Cross-platform compatibility is an important issue. While many programmers still code for just one platform, there is a considerable amount of developpers who create the software with cross-platform compatibility in mind. But you dont need it to be GPL or open-source to work in cross-platform. For those programmers who are just coding for Windows, they are not going to worry about cross-platform compatibility. For those who want to code in cross-platform, they can look to JAVA or C++... We all know this. What is the issue you are trying to raise?

Man do u even know what we r debating about that u keep asking randomly like a child whats 'the point I'm trying to raise'?? It seems u r sufferng from alzheimers! When did I say it needs to be under GPL? Crossplatform compatibilty is a big thing in the software industry! We r talking about freedom under VS-EULA and u ask to use Java,c++! I dunno why r u even debating with me when u urself are supporting what I'm trying to say!! Whats the issue, lets get settled and bring peace to this thread! How cute!

Regarding bencharking of .NET component, they are talking about benchmarking their component, not your software. So, yeah, the developer can have his program fully closed...

Is this what the Ms-fanboy told u to post here whose quotes u stole? And when did I say something as bolded? Guess u really haven't read the EULA.

you must disclose all the information necessary for replication of the tests, including complete and accurate details of your benchmark testing methodology, the test scripts/cases, tuning parameters applied, hardware and software platforms tested, the name and version number of any third party testing tool used to conduct the testing, and complete source code for the benchmark suite/harness that is developed by or for you and used to test both the .NET Component and the competing implementation(s);

MS-monopoly!? Now tell me what u understood by it! Is that called ethics and equal freedom to all? Why shud an end-user shud also have the code (or shud have atleast seen it thoroughly) of what he is using? Ever pondered on that? Ah, I forgot u already stated EULA is to protect MS and GPL to protect the author!

Wow, you are comparing terrorism with closed-source software... Nice!!!

And u whining to talk abt more companies....Nice! BTW, I'm not comparing terrorism with closed source. Just relating and showing what YOU ARE whining about!!

I told you there are a few things I dont understand it the EULA and still I am confident that I can work with it... You on the other hand have half-understood the EULA and are confident no one can work with it... Guess thats difference of perception...

Few things? I guess u haven't even read it and just consulted ur priest i.e the MS fanboy and now whining all around! And I 'm talking about freedom to work, and not that anyone can work with it! It seems u entered here just to increase the strength of grp of musketeers! A new recruit! How cute!

Whats so hard to understand that providing Professional Edition level features to Express Edition user is wrong? Perhaps how it was handled by MS was wrong, I dont know... I will go through those links and post my comments on it later since I have to go to work now..

Whats so hard to understand that we were NOT debating on Express edition now, but professional edition! How it was handled by MS was wrong. May be u shud know that and yea read the links wheneva u have the time!!

Whining to use c++, java instead...man u r amusing!

 

[sakumar79]

Sorry for not quoting you in my last post, but as I mentioned at the end, I was in a bit of a hurry...

And its the right of the user to have or atleast ackowledge the the code of what he is using. I dunno why u r even discussing abt closed source when u don't want to debate on it. Yea the choice is available but again its 'restricted'!! Read the EULA again! Is it hard to understand!

I have read the EULA. But as I have mentioned in my last few posts, the "restrictions" imposed by the EULA are not applicable for most of the cases. Sure a few parts are hard to understand, but the grey area occurs only when you tinker with the functionality of the software or try to do something illegal...

Naturally thats how the GPL works! If everybody is providing the source code under GPL, then wud it be equal and justified if some start making closed source advocate for proprietary mix? How wud the author be protected under such circumstances if someone else makes a closed source product? How wud the source be verified? You urself posted that GLP stands to protect the author and now u r talking so silly? If everybody is getting the same freedom and equality then u cannot grant something special to someone so as to code some closed source and bring proprietary mix in it!!
This is called ethics so that every body shud respect another's work and to have freedom. Thats how the community works! Its not the same as MS monopoly/business profits as we discussed in detail previously!

So, you are saying that because GPL wants to protect the author from his code being misused, everybody should make their code open source? Dont you find that absurd? Sure it would be a wonderful world if everybody respects others works. But since that is not the reality, many people choose to protect the integrity of their work by keeping it closed source...

Yes we have seen how it affects "only" the MVPs may be? YEs most people don't read it and the EULA points to incorrect sites. I guess its time everyone shud start reading the MS-EULA, not to forget about the VISTA EULA!!

No, you have seen how it affects "only" ONE MVP. (Sarcastic tone, for your clarification)

Oh please, people will laugh on u if u say I'm a Linux fanboy coz I have myself stated infinte times where Linux stands backwards contradicting to the definition of a fanboy!! Is it ur habit to keep posting wateva comes to ur mind randomly?

Ah, so, now you know how I laughed when you called me a Windows fanboy... I thought it was YOUR habit to post whatever came to your mind... If you had looked at MY posts, you will know I am not your fanboy type either... I could have very well posted this first, but I wanted to judge your reaction... Sorry for pulling your leg, but you did it first...

Its like I'm talking abt Alqaeda and u r continously requesting to talk abt more terrorist groups! If u think u can't keep up with the debate then please stop whining and telling me what to debate! Its pityful that u don't even have ur concepts cleared that u whined abt ur limited knowledge before!!

Its because you are talking about something in general but you are using only one particular example to illustrate... You are talking about problem with EULA in general (as against GPL), but you are sticking with MS EULA only... If you are either talking about the disadvantages of EULAs in general, or if you were indicating how MS EULA is bad in specific cases where other EULAs are okay, I am fine with it. If not, this appears to be MS bashing. You are talking about the disadvantages of EULAs of closed-source software, but bashing one particular company for it.

@Arun.....Please chose whether u want to debate on closed source Vs open source or not first! Please dont whine that u dont want to debate on closed cource Vs open source and then keep talking about it where ever u feel like! Its so silly that u keep jumping the sides of fences as u like! Take ur pick and may be then u can entertain me!

My philosophy is that each developper or the company that he/she works for has the right to choose between closed source and open source. If you talk about making open source compulsory, you are basically depriving the developper of their freedom. If a developper is working for a company that prefers one method while he/she prefers the other, that person has the freedom to stop working for the company and choose another that suits their preference... I am not debating on which is better. Both have their strong points and their weak points... All I am saying is that the choice should be there... However, if YOU are interested in a debate, by all means take the first shot

How about developing and marketing the extensions? And u say u have read the debate! How dissapointing!

You can market the extensions, even develop them with Express Editions, but you should not MARKET it for the Express Edition. You can make it available for the Standard and Professional editions, but not for the Express Edition. That is the point that I am trying to say...

Don't u read the hot debates in tech. section? I guess u r new!! I please request u to open another thread in FIGHT CLUB asking some examples where MS was wrong! Oh please do that! I guess ur in search of some enlightenment!!

You GUESS I am new? Have you seen the date I joined? Have you seen the number of posts I have made? And here you were, asking me if I was writing whatever occured to me!!! Nowhere am I making a statement that MS is always right... You were giving one instance of where you think MS is wrong, and I am answering for that one instance.... Earlier, I have done this a couple of times before - for example, where I clarified to Aryayush about how to drag-and-drop in Explorer with only one explrorer window, and also, when Praka123 was talking about DRM in a Vista thread.

Man do u even know what we r debating about that u keep asking randomly like a child whats 'the point I'm trying to raise'?? It seems u r sufferng from alzheimers! When did I say it needs to be under GPL? Crossplatform compatibilty is a big thing in the software industry! We r talking about freedom under VS-EULA and u ask to use Java,c++! I dunno why r u even debating with me when u urself are supporting what I'm trying to say!! Whats the issue, lets get settled and bring peace to this thread! How cute!

No, it is more the case of you being unclear in your ramblings... Your ramblings seem to take YOU to cross-platform compatibility so, I talked about it... I said if you want to program in cross-platform, go for Java or C++... Why do you assume that everything I say is a debate? I am not always debating the point... Sometimes, it is just as important to expand on some statments..

Is this what the Ms-fanboy told u to post here whose quotes u stole? And when did I say something as bolded? Guess u really haven't read the EULA.

Please enlighten me on the quotes I "stole"... To the best of my knowledge, I have tried to word my statements my own way, with my own thoughts... So, I would be highly obliged if you pointed out where I quoted something someone else said... Is it your policy that when you dont have something better to say that you throw slur on the opponent... I know this happens all the time in Indian politics, but could we keep the mudslinging out of this forum, or at least this thread?

MS-monopoly!? Now tell me what u understood by it! Is that called ethics and equal freedom to all? Why shud an end-user shud also have the code (or shud have atleast seen it thoroughly) of what he is using? Ever pondered on that? Ah, I forgot u already stated EULA is to protect MS and GPL to protect the author!

Microsoft is a business. As a business corporation, it is in its best interests to wipe out its competition and to make as much profit as possible. In theory, this is achieved by cutting as close to business ethics as possible. In reality, since some of the business ethics lines are blurred in capitalism, there are cases where MS gets away with methods that may be against business ethics. Have I understood MS monopoly correctly? Sure I know all this.
Why should the end user have to see the source code? It is not his work... It is the intellectual property of the developper. Therefore, it is the developpers right to dictate whether the end user can see the source code or not... If you think end users have the right to see the source code of any software they obtain/purchase, by analogy, you will want to throw away copyrights/patents too...
The EULA protects MS while GPL protects the authors, correct. Oh wait, MS are the authors of the software for which they give the EULA!!! It is the philosophy of the EULA that is different from the GPL. That is because EULAs are created to protect capitalistic corporations, whereas GPL is created for a more generic audience.

And u whining to talk abt more companies....Nice! BTW, I'm not comparing terrorism with closed source. Just relating and showing what YOU ARE whining about!!

Hmm, I guess the points I am trying to raise about being generic in your post instead of being particular has gone past you... I am not whining about anything... So, please keep your 'whining' comments to yourself... (Pun intended)

Few things? I guess u haven't even read it and just consulted ur priest i.e the MS fanboy and now whining all around! And I 'm talking about freedom to work, and not that anyone can work with it! It seems u entered here just to increase the strength of grp of musketeers! A new recruit! How cute!

Like I said earlier, stop making accusations just because you have nothing better to say...

Whats so hard to understand that we were NOT debating on Express edition now, but professional edition! How it was handled by MS was wrong. May be u shud know that and yea read the links wheneva u have the time!!
Whining to use c++, java instead...man u r amusing!

Oh, you are talking about professional edition? I thought we were discussing whether the MVP marketing extension for use in Express Edition was right or wrong...
The handling by MS may have been wrong... I have gone through the emails posted, but since there are some missing gaps (phone conversations in between), it is hard to be completely conclusive. There are a few things about the MVPs conduct also that are not clear (for example, he said he removed Express Edition support on May 6th email and clarified later when asked specifically that there was a registry hack possible. Whatever the justification might be, he should have been clear in the first mail.)

As a final note, I think you are unable to get any of my sarcasms... Unfortunately, this is my style of writing. If you think I am whining or that I am a fanboy, I cannot change your mind... If you can throw away those incorrect thoughts and answer my posts without trying to sling mud, we can have a productive discussion. Otherwise, you will be repeating your words, and I will be repeating mine...

Arun

PS: Just so you know, it has taken me about an hour or so to compile this post... I had to read your post, read the two mail links you gave me and then word my thoughts... If you continue to insist on calling me a fanboy or a whiner or make allegations of stealing someone elses quote, I cant stop you... But I wont sling back mud... As Brutus said to Cassius (in the play Julius Caesar by Shakespeare), "There is no terror, Cassius, in your threats,/
For I am arm'd so strong in honesty/That they pass by me as the idle wind,/
Which I respect not". You are no Cassius, and you are merely slinging mud.

 

[mediator]

I have read the EULA. But as I have mentioned in my last few posts, the "restrictions" imposed by the EULA are not applicable for most of the cases. Sure a few parts are hard to understand, but the grey area occurs only when you tinker with the functionality of the software or try to do something illegal...

And u call that freedom? Is ur life so restrictive that u really don't know what fredom is?

So, you are saying that because GPL wants to protect the author from his code being misused, everybody should make their code open source? Dont you find that absurd? Sure it would be a wonderful world if everybody respects others works. But since that is not the reality, many people choose to protect the integrity of their work by keeping it closed source...

Please don't make me laugh. Ur not finding that absurd seems absurd to me! How will u know that the back-end code of Norton and Mcafee isn't the same and same case for many closed source software? How do u know MS has not stolen the code from OSS and implemented it into its own code and spying on u by stealing ur personal info?

The code in OSS is there for everybody to see and verify, both for authenticity and reliabilty! If someone exceptional steals closed source and makes an open source software of it, then he is very well likely to get caught. But how will u catch someone who steals from OSS and makes closed source from it?

Why isn't MS continuing with it FUDs with its recent one that OSS infringes 230+ patents?

No, you have seen how it affects "only" ONE MVP

Oh yes, we can see what MS can do to save its profits! May be u too shud become an MVP and code freely and then may be we'll see 'two'!

Ah, so, now you know how I laughed when you called me a Windows fanboy... I thought it was YOUR habit to post whatever came to your mind... If you had looked at MY posts, you will know I am not your fanboy type either... I could have very well posted this first, but I wanted to judge your reaction... Sorry for pulling your leg, but you did it first...

Yeah, I know ur daily routine of laughing at ur own ignorance! Calling MS as ethical even after seeing its practises and then defending it after that is nuthing but fanboyism! May be u can tell how the term fanboy is attached to me! And u pulling my leg? Oh please! Have mercy!

Its because you are talking about something in general but you are using only one particular example to illustrate... You are talking about problem with EULA in general (as against GPL), but you are sticking with MS EULA only... If you are either talking about the disadvantages of EULAs in general, or if you were indicating how MS EULA is bad in specific cases where other EULAs are okay, I am fine with it. If not, this appears to be MS bashing. You are talking about the disadvantages of EULAs of closed-source software, but bashing one particular company for it.

So u want me to give 10 examples to make u understand? Like a child it seems u like to 'learn by analogy' and have formed some habit of it! Neways, I thought we were talking about 'Visual studio' on which the whole debate is based! Now if MS-EULA isn't related to it and some other company is then I'm really sorry! Man get some grip, even participants of great Indian laughter challenge may fail in front of u!

My philosophy is that each developper or the company that he/she works for has the right to choose between closed source and open source. If you talk about making open source compulsory, you are basically depriving the developper of their freedom. If a developper is working for a company that prefers one method while he/she prefers the other, that person has the freedom to stop working for the company and choose another that suits their preference... I am not debating on which is better. Both have their strong points and their weak points... All I am saying is that the choice should be there... However, if YOU are interested in a debate, by all means take the first shot

I appreciate ur philosphy. But ur philosophy is just theoretical! Like debated and which can clearly be seen both i.e distribution of software 'source' and coding for closed source in VS have their own restrictions!
Its better to have something in which u can have much more freedom to code, where ur code is protected, can be verified and respected! So if a developer is just a beginner then I agree that ur philosophy may have a chance!
So u r finally interested in a debate on CSS VS OSS...change of mood! Please do me the favour of digging the old debates on such topics where I too debated and then quoting all such replies of mine there first...may be then ur wish to entertain me might get fulfilled!

You can market the extensions, even develop them with Express Editions, but you should not MARKET it for the Express Edition. You can make it available for the Standard and Professional editions, but not for the Express Edition. That is the point that I am trying to say...

Does the bolded part even make any sense to u? May be ur concepts aren't still clear! Did u even read the MS side of story?
And please tell where the VS Pro-EULA states that YOU CAN avail it for professional one? Most of the times it is telling what u can't do, so please tell where it tells what u can do with extension conforming with ur statement! Since u think the source code can me made open source with VS-EULA freely as we r discussing, then please show where the MS-PRO-EULA allows open source code of extensions to be publicly available?

May be its time that u quote the alphabet completely and then tell what YOU understood by it! It seems u have some natural problem in getting enlightened and learning by analogy being the only way u gather knowledge! How tragic!

You GUESS I am new? Have you seen the date I joined? Have you seen the number of posts I have made? And here you were, asking me if I was writing whatever occured to me!!! Nowhere am I making a statement that MS is always right... You were giving one instance of where you think MS is wrong, and I am answering for that one instance.... Earlier, I have done this a couple of times before - for example, where I clarified to Aryayush about how to drag-and-drop in Explorer with only one explrorer window, and also, when Praka123 was talking about DRM in a Vista thread.

Yes I bet u never read the hot debates in tech. section! Even a back bencher who skips classes in skools and uses proxy methods to get his attendence full can say that he attends classes regularly. But he doesn't know to the core of what others achieved in those classes! So showing me the date of ur join and ur post count doesn't mean anything here! We all know how flunkies spend their posts in chit-chat!

And please leave other members out of this thread and learn some ettiquetes! We all know that ur priest takes names too, but please don't be such a pityful follower by stealing his quotes and then showing the same traits as him of taking the names of other members!

No, it is more the case of you being unclear in your ramblings... Your ramblings seem to take YOU to cross-platform compatibility so, I talked about it... I said if you want to program in cross-platform, go for Java or C++... Why do you assume that everything I say is a debate? I am not always debating the point... Sometimes, it is just as important to expand on some statments..

Yea we can see who is rambling and whining at his peak! Telling others to use c++ and java becoz the developer can't have the choice of OS to code on and then defending MS's-VS somehow/anyhow....is fanboyism at its best!
Neways, yea u r not always debating the point, but like to reply from in between and randomly not reading the whole post from the start, not even the EULA, not even the both sides of stories and then u like to whine when ur being quoted and replied to continously!!

Please enlighten me on the quotes I "stole"... To the best of my knowledge, I have tried to word my statements my own way, with my own thoughts... So, I would be highly obliged if you pointed out where I quoted something someone else said... Is it your policy that when you dont have something better to say that you throw slur on the opponent... I know this happens all the time in Indian politics, but could we keep the mudslinging out of this forum, or at least this thread?

Wow, ur priest and u posting the same quotes and the same style of quoting other members? Either u 2 r the same person or twins/ the long lost brothers!

Damned if I do, damned I don't! Laughable indeed!

Microsoft is a business.

No, ur wrong! Microsoft is a company not a business! Shud I make u understand by analogy?

As a business corporation, it is in its best interests to wipe out its competition and to make as much profit as possible. In theory, this is achieved by cutting as close to business ethics as possible. In reality, since some of the business ethics lines are blurred in capitalism, there are cases where MS gets away with methods that may be against business ethics. Have I understood MS monopoly correctly? Sure I know all this.

Yea sure u know all of this, and sure ur talking about MS-EULA and developer's freedom in same context! Laughable indeed!
Yea its EULA, but u forgot its MS's EULA! Sure u know all this! U r just entertainimg me here, aren't u? Well done, keep going!!

The EULA protects MS while GPL protects the authors, correct. Oh wait, MS are the authors of the software for which they give the EULA!!! It is the philosophy of the EULA that is different from the GPL. That is because EULAs are created to protect capitalistic corporations, whereas GPL is created for a more generic audience.

Sure u know all of this!
On one side the preference is given to the company and one side preference is given to the developer. U decide wat ur instinct says who will be given more freedom to develop and test the software : an OSS developer or a developer using VS i.e MS-VS?

Like I said earlier, stop making accusations just because you have nothing better to say...

Funny indeed, u rn't even quoting me properly and asking to use java and c++ instead?

Oh, you are talking about professional edition? I thought we were discussing whether the MVP marketing extension for use in Express Edition was right or wrong...

Thats wat happens when u start posting randomly in between without even looking the source and then acknowledging what is being debated! Sure the debate matured from express to professional edition long ago!
I'm finding it diffucult how to make u understand by ANALOGY here! Neways yes we were discussing about professional one! I suare, u can ask ur priest if u can't read n understand!!

The handling by MS may have been wrong... I have gone through the emails posted, but since there are some missing gaps (phone conversations in between), it is hard to be completely conclusive. There are a few things about the MVPs conduct also that are not clear (for example, he said he removed Express Edition support on May 6th email and clarified later when asked specifically that there was a registry hack possible. Whatever the justification might be, he should have been clear in the first mail.)

Haven't u still read the mails, that u r saying that MS "may" have been wrong? It was wrong in its behaviour!!

And please learn to quote what he said! I didn't quote the little chats from the email for no reason! BTW, have u really read the mail that u r so keen to say "watever the justification might be" and then say "he shud have been clear in the first mail"? Ur too much!
He just asked the specifications and terms he violated if any! But was told that he violated the terms! Damn, wat terms?

As a final note, I think you are unable to get any of my sarcasms... Unfortunately, this is my style of writing. If you think I am whining or that I am a fanboy, I cannot change your mind... If you can throw away those incorrect thoughts and answer my posts without trying to sling mud, we can have a productive discussion. Otherwise, you will be repeating your words, and I will be repeating mine...

Arun

PS: Just so you know, it has taken me about an hour or so to compile this post... I had to read your post, read the two mail links you gave me and then word my thoughts... If you continue to insist on calling me a fanboy or a whiner or make allegations of stealing someone elses quote, I cant stop you... But I wont sling back mud... As Brutus said to Cassius (in the play Julius Caesar by Shakespeare), "There is no terror, Cassius, in your threats,/
For I am arm'd so strong in honesty/That they pass by me as the idle wind,/
Which I respect not". You are no Cassius, and you are merely slinging mud.

Please keep ur preachings to urself and u cud have helped urself save 15 minutes from that 1+ long hour that u dedicated to entertain me. Neways u r contradicting ur own little preachings quite well here! Well done!

So quote and reply and thats how u entertain me!! OR do u need to understand that by analogy too?

 

[Zeeshan Quireshi]

Debate when u r sure! Save my time and understand urself first! May be then u'll understand what freedom means!!

Well Mediator i would just like to say tat the GPL too does not give complete Freedom to the software developer as it makes it mandatory for him to make his code Open Source even if hey may not want to do so.

 

[mediator]

Have u even pondered what will happen if both closed and open source are supported? I gave the answer in my previous post itself! On one hand its the user who shud have the code of the product he uses or acknowledged it. Its his right! On the other, we have the developer who shud have the freedom to code. GPL isn't about monopoly, but giving proper credit to the original developer and verifying the authenticity and reliabilty of the code! Please ask MS to show us the code of their products and we may very well see how they stole the code from OSS and disrespecting the OSS developers work? May be thats why they r not continuing the path they took of FUDs telling that OSS infringed 230+ patents!!

Please do use ur brains a little more from now on and read my previous post! Giving a developer freedom to code as in GPL for both open source and close source is just theoretical. How will u really know if the closed source code isn't a copy from the open source work? Its either closed or open. Getting the 'same' freedom, as discussed, to code in 'either', where u have the other as an option, is just a theory!!

And Please don't quote randomly from where u like!

 

[Zeeshan Quireshi]

Have u even pondered what will happen if both closed and open source are supported? I gave the answer in my previous post itself! On one hand its the user who shud have the code of the product he uses or acknowledged it. Its his right! On the other, we have the developer who shud have the freedom to code. GPL isn't about monopoly, but giving proper credit to the original developer and verifying the authenticity and reliabilty of the code! Please ask MS to show us the code of their products and we may very well see how they stole the code from OSS and disrespecting the OSS developers work? May be thats why they r not continuing the path they took of FUDs telling that OSS infringed 230+ patents!!

Please do use ur brains a little more from now on and read my previous post! Giving a developer freedom to code as in GPL for both open source and close source is just theoretical. How will u really know if the closed source code isn't a copy from the open source work? Its either closed or open. Getting the 'same' freedom, as discussed, to code in 'either', where u have the other as an option, is just a theory!!

And Please don't quote randomly from where u like!

Well there are many other ways to find out whether a software is a copy of a Code(decompilation,reverse engineering,etc) .

Also , that's what Sakumar meant , if code is open source scruplous people can copy it and use it(in OS as well as non OS soft without giving credit) and thus putting the developer's hard work in vain .

Also , if 'not being able to bypass technical limitations" is a limitation accoding to you in MS EULA, then 'always making your code Open source' is a limitation according to me in GPL .

thus , u can use whatever license u like , but in acordance with the limitations put by that license.

 

[mediator]

Well there are many other ways to find out whether a software is a copy of a Code(decompilation,reverse engineering,etc) .

Sure, and thats prohibited by VS-EULA. BTW, man if life were to be so easy, then why wud crackers create cracks? They wud have decompiled the whole of windows source code and availed it on net to be compiled from source just like GNU/Linux!

The whole of windows source code wud then be available on the net and we wud have seen by now if OSS violated any of those 230+ patents! Please name me some decompiler for VB6 that gives accurate source code and not garbage code that is impossible to understand! Be practical and be real, don't get overjoyed by learning a few computer terms like decompiler and reverse engineering!

Since u think u know about decompilers, then please let me have the source code of yahoo messenger so that I can compile it on Linux!!

Also , that's what Sakumar meant , if code is open source scruplous people can copy it and use it(in OS as well as non OS soft without giving credit) and thus putting the developer's hard work in vain .

Why wud scrupulous people copy it?
Ah, what can anybody do if unscrupulous people are out there? They can even give cracks for closed source and ruin ur work and money! Likewise there can be unscrupulous people in MS centre too leaking out the source code for other closed source developers! How will u protect ur code in such cases? How will u verify the authenticity of the code? By decompiling the compiled software? Please dont make me laugh!

BTW, it seems by ur statements that MS is unscrupulous coz it might have stolen a lotta code in path past and in present too!! How'll u verify? By decompiling?

Also , if 'not being able to bypass technical limitations" is a limitation accoding to you in MS EULA, then 'always making your code Open source' is a limitation according to me in GPL .

And being both closed source and open source at the same time and getting the same freedom as in GPL is just too theoretical! May be kids and beginners may whine that they can code freely in MS-VS writing simple programs like "hello world"!!
U can whine about ur limitation, but its nice to be practical sometimes where both the end-user and developer feel satisfied and code be verified for authenticity and reliabilty!! Its much better to code under a license that gives u much more freedom to code i.e in open source instead of coding under a license where u have restrictions, exceptions, 'not to do' thing list and freedom snatched in coding for both open source and closed source!! Take ur pick which one wud be better!

And please learn to quote appropriately and not randomly!

 

[sakumar79]

And u call that freedom? Is ur life so restrictive that u really don't know what fredom is?

Yes. I call that freedom... Why, do you include the choice to do something wrong as freedom?

Please don't make me laugh. Ur not finding that absurd seems absurd to me! How will u know that the back-end code of Norton and Mcafee isn't the same and same case for many closed source software? How do u know MS has not stolen the code from OSS and implemented it into its own code and spying on u by stealing ur personal info?

Hey, if you want to protect YOUR code, make it closed source. Just because you want to make yours open source, dont inflict your choice on me just so that you can be sure I dont copy from you... I dont know if MS has stolen OSS code or not, and I dont know if MS is spying on me... In both cases, I dont care... If you think MS is spying on you, use OSS... If you think MS has stolen the code from OSS, prove it... As per law, everybody is presumed innocent until proven guilty. And guilty of one thing does not imply guilty of another either. But just because YOU or the Open Source community want to make sure MS did not steal OSS code, and without any specific evidence, if you expect any court to force MS to show its code, youre dreaming...

The code in OSS is there for everybody to see and verify, both for authenticity and reliabilty! If someone exceptional steals closed source and makes an open source software of it, then he is very well likely to get caught. But how will u catch someone who steals from OSS and makes closed source from it?

Ok, is it not possible for two developpers working independently to write similar code? Even if one did it 10 years after the other, there is every chance that he did not steal the code. How are you going to differentiate between that... Instead, if we forced everything into closed source, we will be more likely to have very little source code plagiarism... Even that would be a wrong concept because you are taking away the developpers freedom of choice...

Why isn't MS continuing with it FUDs with its recent one that OSS infringes 230+ patents?

How do I know? You may think you know, but that would just be your biased opinion... Unless you are the decision maker in MS, you cannot be 100% sure you know the right reason.

Oh yes, we can see what MS can do to save its profits! May be u too shud become an MVP and code freely and then may be we'll see 'two'!

No, we are seeing what MS appears to believe a matter of principle... No, even if I were to become an MVP and code freely, I would not be a second, because I respect MS EULA... On the other hand, if by some chance YOU were to get to MVP status, there is a good possibility of seeing the second.

Yeah, I know ur daily routine of laughing at ur own ignorance! Calling MS as ethical even after seeing its practises and then defending it after that is nuthing but fanboyism! May be u can tell how the term fanboy is attached to me! And u pulling my leg? Oh please! Have mercy!

Who said I am defending all of MS's actions? All I said was that in this particular case, it appears that MS is on the right side... How on earth do you equate that to fanboyism? Well, may be calling you a Linux fanboy may not be right, but I guess "MS basher" would be more appropriate...

So u want me to give 10 examples to make u understand? Like a child it seems u like to 'learn by analogy' and have formed some habit of it! Neways, I thought we were talking about 'Visual studio' on which the whole debate is based! Now if MS-EULA isn't related to it and some other company is then I'm really sorry! Man get some grip, even participants of great Indian laughter challenge may fail in front of u!

No, I am saying that most of the issues you are raising with Visual Studio's EULA is present in the EULAs of most big corporate closed-source software products... So, be clear when you are bashing an issue of the EULAs to indicate that you are bashing closed-source companies in general... I am asking you to be fair...

I appreciate ur philosphy. But ur philosophy is just theoretical! Like debated and which can clearly be seen both i.e distribution of software 'source' and coding for closed source in VS have their own restrictions!
Its better to have something in which u can have much more freedom to code, where ur code is protected, can be verified and respected! So if a developer is just a beginner then I agree that ur philosophy may have a chance!

And you think your ideology of an only-open source world is practical? I am laughing at you and pitying your naivity...

So u r finally interested in a debate on CSS VS OSS...change of mood! Please do me the favour of digging the old debates on such topics where I too debated and then quoting all such replies of mine there first...may be then ur wish to entertain me might get fulfilled!

No, you are the one who seems to be interested in the debate... You kept digging it up in every response of yours...

Does the bolded part even make any sense to u? May be ur concepts aren't still clear! Did u even read the MS side of story?
And please tell where the VS Pro-EULA states that YOU CAN avail it for professional one? Most of the times it is telling what u can't do, so please tell where it tells what u can do with extension conforming with ur statement! Since u think the source code can me made open source with VS-EULA freely as we r discussing, then please show where the MS-PRO-EULA allows open source code of extensions to be publicly available?

Why, what part of it is hard to understand? The part where you can develop extensions using any version of Visual Studio, or the part where you should not market extensions in VS Express Edition?

It seems u have some natural problem in getting enlightened and learning by analogy being the only way u gather knowledge! How tragic!

Why do you assume that learning by analogy is the only way I gather knowledge... Again with the mud slinging...

Yes I bet u never read the hot debates in tech. section! Even a back bencher who skips classes in skools and uses proxy methods to get his attendence full can say that he attends classes regularly. But he doesn't know to the core of what others achieved in those classes! So showing me the date of ur join and ur post count doesn't mean anything here! We all know how flunkies spend their posts in chit-chat!

I thought you being a veteran member of the forum would have some etiquette when talking with someone else... So, you are implying that I am a flunkie... How mature...

And please leave other members out of this thread and learn some ettiquetes! We all know that ur priest takes names too, but please don't be such a pityful follower by stealing his quotes and then showing the same traits as him of taking the names of other members!

Look whos talking about etiquette... Without knowing anything about me, you call me a MS fanboy, call me a flunkie, etc... What is wrong in my referring to other discussions I have made and the people I have discussed it with? It was just a passing reference, and was neither meant to insult them or to praise them... Whats your problem?

Yea we can see who is rambling and whining at his peak! Telling others to use c++ and java becoz the developer can't have the choice of OS to code on and then defending MS's-VS somehow/anyhow....is fanboyism at its best!
Neways, yea u r not always debating the point, but like to reply from in between and randomly not reading the whole post from the start, not even the EULA, not even the both sides of stories and then u like to whine when ur being quoted and replied to continously!!

YOU rambled about cross-platform, I replied on the topic by mentioning C++ and Java... And if you really read my post, you would know that I did read both sides of the story...

Wow, ur priest and u posting the same quotes and the same style of quoting other members? Either u 2 r the same person or twins/ the long lost brothers!

Damned if I do, damned I don't! Laughable indeed!

Dude, I seriously suggest you to take up reading more literature... "Damned if you do, damned if you dont" is an expression that has been in use for quite some time... Just because you havent heard it before, dont assume that I am quoting someone else in the forum... Is that the only quote that I "copied" from someone else in the forum? You make it sound like I continuously repeat others quotes... Stop making silly mud-slinging accusations...

No, ur wrong! Microsoft is a company not a business! Shud I make u understand by analogy?

Well, actually the word business means 1. occupation, 2. a person, partnership, or corporation engaged in commerce, manufacturing, or a service; profit-seeking enterprise or concern. and there are other related meanings as well... So, saying MS is a business is not wrong... However, I do think you made a honest mistake here, so I will let it slide...

Yea sure u know all of this, and sure ur talking about MS-EULA and developer's freedom in same context! Laughable indeed!
Yea its EULA, but u forgot its MS's EULA! Sure u know all this! U r just entertainimg me here, aren't u? Well done, keep going!!

Yeah, I am talking of MS EULA and developpers freedom in the same context... Go and laugh about it... We will see who has the last laugh...

Sure u know all of this!
On one side the preference is given to the company and one side preference is given to the developer. U decide wat ur instinct says who will be given more freedom to develop and test the software : an OSS developer or a developer using VS i.e MS-VS?

In most cases, both... In some cases, OSS developper will have more freedom, and in a very few cases, VS developper will have more freedom (at least with respect to GPL)

Funny indeed, u rn't even quoting me properly and asking to use java and c++ instead?

If I havent quoted you properly, please accept my apologies... Please point out where I have quoted you incorrectly, and I shall try to make corrections... But that doesnt change the fact that you are slinging mud and here, you are deviating from the point raised...

Thats wat happens when u start posting randomly in between without even looking the source and then acknowledging what is being debated! Sure the debate matured from express to professional edition long ago!
I'm finding it diffucult how to make u understand by ANALOGY here! Neways yes we were discussing about professional one! I suare, u can ask ur priest if u can't read n understand!!

Well, we are talking about both right? We are discussing both the MS vs MVP case (which involves the Express Edition), as well as the Professional Edition EULA...

Haven't u still read the mails, that u r saying that MS "may" have been wrong? It was wrong in its behaviour!!
And please learn to quote what he said! I didn't quote the little chats from the email for no reason! BTW, have u really read the mail that u r so keen to say "watever the justification might be" and then say "he shud have been clear in the first mail"? Ur too much!
He just asked the specifications and terms he violated if any! But was told that he violated the terms! Damn, wat terms?

How do you know for sure when you dont know the entire story? You have no records of the phone conversations and the conference discussions (at least the two links you gave me did not have them). Sure, MS did not handle the situation well at some parts, but his conduct itself was not above reproach... (bargaining with MS to reinstate his MVP status and then he would remove the Express Edition part, hiding a workaround in the release and telling MS that he has removed the "hack").

Please keep ur preachings to urself and u cud have helped urself save 15 minutes from that 1+ long hour that u dedicated to entertain me. Neways u r contradicting ur own little preachings quite well here! Well done!

So quote and reply and thats how u entertain me!! OR do u need to understand that by analogy too?

What, it would take you 15 minutes to write those few words? That took me 5 minutes or less... I thought it would help in the long run if I pointed out a few issues I had with your posts, but apparently, it doesnt...

So, quote and reply and sling mud when you dont have a reply... Its seems thats how you entertain yourself...

Arun

 

[gxsaurav]

While Linux users are trying hard to integrate features in Linux which came on Windows & Mac long ago, & trying to make some money & posting useless cr*p in internet forums, Microsoft Windows is enjoying the maximum number of 3rd party, consumer, software, developer support.

Now, thats called business.

 

[Zeeshan Quireshi]

Since u think u know about decompilers, then please let me have the source code of yahoo messenger so that I can compile it on Linux!!

Well decompires can give you *exact* assembly language code , not the code of languages like c++ or the language in which the software was programmed .

but still the decompiled assembly language can be potentially used to identify the source .

Hey, if you want to protect YOUR code, make it closed source. Just because you want to make yours open source, dont inflict your choice on me just so that you can be sure I dont copy from you... I dont know if MS has stolen OSS code or not, and I dont know if MS is spying on me... In both cases, I dont care... If you think MS is spying on you, use OSS... If you think MS has stolen the code from OSS, prove it... As per law, everybody is presumed innocent until proven guilty. And guilty of one thing does not imply guilty of another either. But just because YOU or the Open Source community want to make sure MS did not steal OSS code, and without any specific evidence, if you expect any court to force MS to show its code, youre dreaming...

exactly .

@Mediator , the MS EULA prevents you to reverse Engineer the visual studio software.

It does not stop you from reverse engineering(or decompiling) software made using VS , that depends on the license under which the created software is distributed .

No, we are seeing what MS appears to believe a matter of principle... No, even if I were to become an MVP and code freely, I would not be a second, because I respect MS EULA... On the other hand, if by some chance YOU were to get to MVP status, there is a good possibility of seeing the second.

 

[mediator]

Hey, if you want to protect YOUR code, make it closed source. Just because you want to make yours open source, dont inflict your choice on me just so that you can be sure I dont copy from you... I dont know if MS has stolen OSS code or not, and I dont know if MS is spying on me... In both cases, I dont care... If you think MS is spying on you, use OSS... If you think MS has stolen the code from OSS, prove it... As per law, everybody is presumed innocent until proven guilty. And guilty of one thing does not imply guilty of another either. But just because YOU or the Open Source community want to make sure MS did not steal OSS code, and without any specific evidence, if you expect any court to force MS to show its code, youre dreaming...

Typical rants of an MS-Fanboy=> dont use it, use OSS! Like I said, ur life has been so restrictive that u dont really know what freedom is and now dont seem to bother if MS is spying on u!! And when did I say that MS really stole the code? I just stated the proababilty as MS seems to shy walking the road of FUDs that OSS infringed 230+ Linux patents. U seem to be more of a lawyer than a developer discussing about crime of copying than freedom of developing software!

And yes MS might never show its code and thats why an end user may never be aware if he is being spyed on or the world be acknowledged that MS is a thief to be copying from OSS!! Do u really think a typical average Joe has a frivolous attitude like u who does not seems to care? U need to snap out of ur fanboyism!

Ok, is it not possible for two developpers working independently to write similar code? Even if one did it 10 years after the other, there is every chance that he did not steal the code. How are you going to differentiate between that... Instead, if we forced everything into closed source, we will be more likely to have very little source code plagiarism... Even that would be a wrong concept because you are taking away the developpers freedom of choice...

May be u shud have told that to MS which said OSS infringed 230+ patents! Yes its quite possible for people to develop 'similar' code and rare to develop the 'same' yieling the same MD5. I say rare, becoz I haven't heard of any such case!! But even though its similar its still authentic. Anybody can see the style of coding, the structure etc. Its like in exams that a teacher can check if the 2 students have cheated or not just from seeing their answer sheets!! So be practical instead of giving ur expert opinions!

How do I know? You may think you know, but that would just be your biased opinion... Unless you are the decision maker in MS, you cannot be 100% sure you know the right reason.

Oh yes, we have seen that u know nuthing, your concepts aren't cleared and ur not sure. You confessed that many times!!......and still showing ur fanboyism!

No, we are seeing what MS appears to believe a matter of principle... No, even if I were to become an MVP and code freely, I would not be a second, because I respect MS EULA... On the other hand, if by some chance YOU were to get to MVP status, there is a good possibility of seeing the second.

Yea quite a matter of principle when they have spreading FUDs as their hobby!! Yea respect the EULA and make the 'hello world' programs!

Who said I am defending all of MS's actions? All I said was that in this particular case, it appears that MS is on the right side... How on earth do you equate that to fanboyism? Well, may be calling you a Linux fanboy may not be right, but I guess "MS basher" would be more appropriate...

Nooo, no body said that. But u r posts are giving a full fledged show of ur fanboyism. Yea MS is on the right side by spreading FUDs!! We all know that! Neways yea, calling me a Linux fanboy was indeed silly and amusing and may be the show of ur MS-fanboyism here is toooo!!

BTW, I'm not an MS-basher either! Ur priest and musketeers keep on taking sides with me when I talk FOR MS and bill gates and seem to entertain me and ask me to stop when I talk against it! That is called fanboyism getting joyed and calling someone sensible when somebody is speaking for ur beloved company and getting aggravated and then calling the same person as insensible when he crticises it. So there is no such reality that I always talk against MS!! May be u shud read my posts more often from now on!!

No, I am saying that most of the issues you are raising with Visual Studio's EULA is present in the EULAs of most big corporate closed-source software products... So, be clear when you are bashing an issue of the EULAs to indicate that you are bashing closed-source companies in general... I am asking you to be fair...

And I'm asking to u be specific to the debate! The issue with Alquaeda/Let/Jaish is also present with Maoists etc. So shud I link Maoists with 9/11 attack and talk of them when the news is all about America and Alqueda?? Please grow up!! BTW, 'Fair' is an unfair term to be used when we r dealing with a business minded and monopolistic company!!

And you think your ideology of an only-open source world is practical? I am laughing at you and pitying your naivity...

Yea keep laughing! This ideology that u 'think' is mine has been the source becoz of which the world is witnessing the rise of OSS community and Linux, and business on Linux!! Yes, u might be laughing, but it seems that ur used to laughing at ur own ignorance! U have my pity. U need to read the previous debates concerning OSS and windows where u'll know more about practicality of the ideology!!

No, you are the one who seems to be interested in the debate... You kept digging it up in every response of yours...

Not me! First u posted bt it, then kept talking about it and whining that udont wanna 'debate' on it and then came to ur sense to debate on it! So please dig out the old threads! Lets see what u have to say!!

Does the bolded part even make any sense to u? May be ur concepts aren't still clear! Did u even read the MS side of story?
And please tell where the VS Pro-EULA states that YOU CAN avail it for professional one? Most of the times it is telling what u can't do, so please tell where it tells what u can do with extension conforming with ur statement! Since u think the source code can me made open source with VS-EULA freely as we r discussing, then please show where the MS-PRO-EULA allows open source code of extensions to be publicly available?

Why, what part of it is hard to understand? The part where you can develop extensions using any version of Visual Studio, or the part where you should not market extensions in VS Express Edition?

Is it ur habit to reply to the stuff u can 'opine' about?? Can u please tell as bolded that I asked that u missed...deliberately?

You can market the extensions, even develop them with Express Editions, but you should not MARKET it for the Express Edition. You can make it available for the Standard and Professional editions, but not for the Express Edition. That is the point that I am trying to say...

Why can't I avail it for express edition, just becoz it will compete with that of pro one? There r so many restrictions even with pro one that I ELABORATED previously! May be its ur habit not to understand EULa, then writing absurdly and then asking others 'whats so hard to understand in it'!! If u shud code and develop then u shud do it freely respecting others work!! But MS doesn't wants u to be developing extensions and products that "compete" with its own!! It will shed its imaginary morale to such an extent that it will even start spreading FUDs. Its all business practises. Preference given to the company and not developer!!

Why do you assume that learning by analogy is the only way I gather knowledge... Again with the mud slinging...

Not any assumptions, but ur posts r clearly telling me that!!

I thought you being a veteran member of the forum would have some etiquette when talking with someone else... So, you are implying that I am a flunkie... How mature...

When did I say "Arun" is a flunky? Again I was giving only an analogy since I thought u seem to understand by analogies only!! But its a pity that u have a hard time understanding even the analogies!
Neways, ur whining about the number of posts and date of ur join was immature indeed! And then u say I'm being unethical!! Grow up!!

Look whos talking about etiquette... Without knowing anything about me, you call me a MS fanboy, call me a flunkie, etc... What is wrong in my referring to other discussions I have made and the people I have discussed it with? It was just a passing reference, and was neither meant to insult them or to praise them... Whats your problem?

Man u r talking like a kid now! Why shud I have to know about u and ur personal details to brand u as MS-fanboy? Ur posts here are shouting and begging to brand u as an MS-fanboy!! The problem is that u aren't being specific and to the point to the debate. What do other members and ur chats with them have to do with this debate? Please learn not to troll around!!

YOU rambled about cross-platform, I replied on the topic by mentioning C++ and Java... And if you really read my post, you would know that I did read both sides of the story...

Oh yes, we have seen if u really read about both sides of stories! Whining to read it after u 'come back from work', stating about "watever" the MVP said and acknowledging us if how much u read about him was indeed mature of u! I wonder if its ur habit to jump into a debate having half knowledge and then reading the stuff afterwords!! BTW, u call cross platform compatibilty and its advocation as rambling? You have the pity of all the developers of the world!!

Dude, I seriously suggest you to take up reading more literature... "Damned if you do, damned if you dont" is an expression that has been in use for quite some time... Just because you havent heard it before, dont assume that I am quoting someone else in the forum... Is that the only quote that I "copied" from someone else in the forum? You make it sound like I continuously repeat others quotes... Stop making silly mud-slinging accusations...

yes we all can see who needs to improve his comprehensionl,literate etc. U can't even learn by analogies now! Its a basic thing how a child starts learning.

Well, actually the word business means 1. occupation, 2. a person, partnership, or corporation engaged in commerce, manufacturing, or a service; profit-seeking enterprise or concern. and there are other related meanings as well... So, saying MS is a business is not wrong... However, I do think you made a honest mistake here, so I will let it slide...

When did u started being so practical? Were u just showing how immature u were? Just like u googled for the term and read in what context the term business can be used, please read the full EULA and both the mails completely!!

In most cases, both... In some cases, OSS developper will have more freedom, and in a very few cases, VS developper will have more freedom (at least with respect to GPL)

So now u r acknowledging it as 'very few cases'? Please tell what those cases are! And please don't talk about the 'hello world' programs!

If I havent quoted you properly, please accept my apologies... Please point out where I have quoted you incorrectly, and I shall try to make corrections... But that doesnt change the fact that you are slinging mud and here, you are deviating from the point raised...

Now thats more kiddish asking me to tell as bolded. From the start I have been requesting u to quote me completely and now u r whining! Even in this post I have asked u reply to the unreplied parts!! How demoralising!!

Well, we are talking about both right? We are discussing both the MS vs MVP case (which involves the Express Edition), as well as the Professional Edition EULA...

NO, we were talking about professional and only professional one afterwards and how u get restrictions in developing with that too before u jumped in between and started whining about express edition. If u wanted to whine about that then u shud have quoted that post of mine where I was talking about express edition!! Since it seems trolling is natural with u, u need analogies to learn how not to troll!! So I request u to read the debate again and find out with ur eyes stuck into the monitor about what we were discussing!

How do you know for sure when you dont know the entire story? You have no records of the phone conversations and the conference discussions (at least the two links you gave me did not have them). Sure, MS did not handle the situation well at some parts, but his conduct itself was not above reproach... (bargaining with MS to reinstate his MVP status and then he would remove the Express Edition part, hiding a workaround in the release and telling MS that he has removed the "hack").

He called his creation a "hack"? Are u out of ur mind?

Since I'm not a lawyer I shouldn't comment on the license. However if
you read the Express SKU EULA you'll see verbiage around reverse
engineering, and if you read the VS SDK license (the license that covers
all native API's that you're accessing when you QueryService from your
add-in) you'll see additional terms that are relevant to your hack.
Sorry that I can't be more specific, but I'm just a developer

n the long sequence of emails that followed, Weber treated Cansdale with immense condescension:
"Craig Symonds is a busy Microsoft executive. We're fortunate that we could get 30 minutes with him for a conference call"; consistently evasive when asked to identify the specific legal problem, meanwhile trying to bully Cansdale to withdraw Visual Studio Express support and remove his "hack"

*www.thinkdigit.com/forum/showthread.php?p=519562#post519562

What, it would take you 15 minutes to write those few words? That took me 5 minutes or less... I thought it would help in the long run if I pointed out a few issues I had with your posts, but apparently, it doesnt...

So, quote and reply and sling mud when you dont have a reply... Its seems thats how you entertain yourself...

Ur posts are too entertaining to be mud slinging! Have ur concepts cleared, be sure, read the stories, source, EULA, learn to learn by analogies first correctly and then debate!

Well decompires can give you *exact* assembly language code , not the code of languages like c++ or the language in which the software was programmed .

but still the decompiled assembly language can be potentially used to identify the source .

Ah, ur so predictable! So u finally googled around to be telling urself that its the 'assembly code' that gets generated and not the accurate source code of languages "like c++"? Seems to me like a change of ur tone when first u were telling something different!

Well there are many other ways to find out whether a software is a copy of a Code(decompilation,reverse engineering,etc) .

Assembly code? Please dont make laugh!! Did u forget again what we were discussing about i.e authenticity n reliabilty of the source code? Man I don't even feel like debating with u now!

but still the decompiled assembly language can be potentially used to identify the source .

Oh, so besides doing a law degree now u want the developers to learn assembly level programming too? U want them to do do a full fledge research just to identify the source? Man have mercy on the developers!!

 

[rocket357]

Just a few random thoughts:

Closed source does NOT protect the "integrity" of your code..."Hot patching", as Microsoft puts it, is a technique that has been in use for a while to modify binary code on the fly, and is the basis for quite a few rootkits today. Even Windows NT (the entire line) uses it (to an extent) as I understand.

Assembly gathered from decompilation can lead to source code, yes. But with "hot patching" available, why bother? Find the functions you want to alter, hot patch the entry point with a jump to your code, and finish up by inserting the instructions that got overwritten. You can alter quite a bit of the logic of a program this way (for instance, removing copy protection).

 

[sakumar79]

Ok, there is no point in me continuing to post on this thread, at least in reply to mediator... Even if I try to be civil, all he can do is insult me... When someone clearly wont change their line of thinking or admit they are wrong, it is useless...

For what its worth, my post in reply to a few points. I would have gone to the trouble of quoting and replying, but for someone unwilling to learn, I am not willing to take the additional trouble.
1. Typical Rants of a MS basher->MS is closed source - they MAY be spying on you, they may have taken OSS code, dont trust it. Do you think the average Joe has a skewed mentality like yours?
2. When I have an opinion, I state that it is my opinion. When I know something as a fact, I state it as a fact... You on the other hand, try often to pass off your opinion as a fact... You tell me to be practical and then talk about making all software open-source... Please explain how that is practical
3. If you consider the limitations of the VS EULA are so restrictive that you can write hello world programs only, you are either paranoid or an MS basher. Either way, I cant help you...
4. If you dont read my posts to see that I am not a MS fanboy, why should I take the time to see if you are not a MS basher? Besides, please point out where in any of my posts have I said that MS's FUDs against Linux is okay? Dont talk nonsense.
5. Just because we are talking about MS, if I ask you to be fair, you say dont ask me to be fair... Seems like a MS bashers POV to me...
6. Are you talking about the extensions you make or the extensions of MS? The built in extensions of VS are the Intellectual property of MS, and are therefore governed by MS EULA. The extensions you make are your IP, and therefore, you are free to distribute the source code... Distribution of your source code will not lead to problem. If the extensions you make violate EULA though, you will have legal problems. Since the MS VS EULA is clearly beyond your comprehension, I am putting the basic concept for you in a nutshell...
7. When I ask you to show what I have not quoted, you talk about the one point I missed in my previous post. I hope I have answered it in my above point 6. Now, will you stop acting like a kid and stop slinging mud just because you have nothing else to say?
8. No, I am not saying that talking about crossplatform is rambling... I just said that you wandered into crossplatform talk and I also talked about it...
9. He didnt call his creation a hack... The MS guy Jason Weber did... And my post does not indicate that he called his creation a "hack" either... And you are avoiding answering the main issues of the statement... At least this time, you did not sling mud. What happened? Lapse of concentration?
10. You wanted to know where VS gives more freedom to the developper than OSS/GPL - (a). VS allows the developper to keep his project closed source or open. OSS and GPL dont. (b). VS allows a developper to integrate DRM into their software. GPL doesnt.

Arun

 

[Zeeshan Quireshi]

Ah, ur so predictable! So u finally googled around to be telling urself that its the 'assembly code' that gets generated and not the accurate source code of languages "like c++"? Seems to me like a change of ur tone when first u were telling something different!

Assembly code? Please dont make laugh!! Did u forget again what we were discussing about i.e authenticity n reliabilty of the source code? Man I don't even feel like debating with u now!

Oh, so besides doing a law degree now u want the developers to learn assembly level programming too? U want them to do do a full fledge research just to identify the source? Man have mercy on the developers!!

now when did i say that u get the Full source code in the language the soft was programmed , i only said decompiled and assumed that people would understand what i meant .

Ok, there is no point in me continuing to post on this thread, at least in reply to mediator... Even if I try to be civil, all he can do is insult me... When someone clearly wont change their line of thinking or admit they are wrong, it is useless...

Same here , i can't make this person understand and think in a logical way . Even if i try to be logical and explain to him every liitle thing bit by bit he's not ready to understand .

 

[mediator]

Ok, there is no point in me continuing to post on this thread, at least in reply to mediator... Even if I try to be civil, all he can do is insult me... When someone clearly wont change their line of thinking or admit they are wrong, it is useless..

Still u didn't reply to what I asked in both of the last 2 posts of mine! Please don't make me repeat!

1. Typical Rants of a MS basher->MS is closed source - they MAY be spying on you, they may have taken OSS code, dont trust it. Do you think the average Joe has a skewed mentality like yours?

U r talking about mentality when u have made lying,trolling,showing ignorance, not reading whats being debated as ur habit now?

2. When I have an opinion, I state that it is my opinion. When I know something as a fact, I state it as a fact... You on the other hand, try often to pass off your opinion as a fact... You tell me to be practical and then talk about making all software open-source... Please explain how that is practical

Man u don't cease to demoralise me further! Now I have to explaing how its practical too? :Shock: and then u say u have been here, showing kiddishly ur date of join and no. of ur posts!
I see when u know something, u tell others to use something else like c++,java? Well done!

3. If you consider the limitations of the VS EULA are so restrictive that you can write hello world programs only, you are either paranoid or an MS basher. Either way, I cant help you...
4. If you dont read my posts to see that I am not a MS fanboy, why should I take the time to see if you are not a MS basher? Besides, please point out where in any of my posts have I said that MS's FUDs against Linux is okay? Dont talk nonsense.

Just more of ur whinings! When did I say that u said its Okay? I just showed the practises of MS and where MS has been wrong often!!

5. Just because we are talking about MS, if I ask you to be fair, you say dont ask me to be fair... Seems like a MS bashers POV to me...

Awwww, y r u crying? Don't let the discussion where u show ur ignorance all the time take a toll on ur mind that u start posting absurdly now!! Where did I say "dont ask me to be fair"? Please quote that line!! Amusing indeed! Line by line ur whinings r increasing! How demoralising!

6. Are you talking about the extensions you make or the extensions of MS? The built in extensions of VS are the Intellectual property of MS, and are therefore governed by MS EULA. The extensions you make are your IP, and therefore, you are free to distribute the source code... Distribution of your source code will not lead to problem. If the extensions you make violate EULA though, you will have legal problems. Since the MS VS EULA is clearly beyond your comprehension, I am putting the basic concept for you in a nutshell...

U seem to be an MS lawyer talking about intellectual property!! Now where's ur whining where u said that the code can be similar. U r talking about 'restrictions' in MS-EULA where u "may not do that" and telling a programmer about freedom at the same time? How gullible do u think the crowd is? Don't think they r at ur level of gullibility!!

So keep ur nutshell with u coz it will help u understand where u flawed in pondering when u grow up!

When I ask you to show what I have not quoted, you talk about the one point I missed in my previous post. I hope I have answered it in my above point 6. Now, will you stop acting like a kid and stop slinging mud just because you have nothing else to say?

U showed? In ur dreams?

Does the bolded part even make any sense to u? May be ur concepts aren't still clear! Did u even read the MS side of story?
d please tell where the VS Pro-EULA states that YOU CAN avail it for professional one? Most of the times it is telling what u can't do, so please tell where it tells what u can do with extension conforming with ur statement! Since u think the source code can me made open source with VS-EULA freely as we r discussing, then please show where the MS-PRO-EULA allows open source code of extensions to be publicly available?

So please show me! U made me repeat a lot! Please tell where the MVP called his build a 'hack' just like that or naturally? Do u only kow how to whine and tell other to use OSS,java,c++ instead?

8. No, I am not saying that talking about crossplatform is rambling... I just said that you wandered into crossplatform talk and I also talked about it...

Y shudn't I, when its also a part of freedom?
U talked? Its better to say that u whined to use Java,c++ instead!!

He didnt call his creation a hack... The MS guy Jason Weber did... And my post does not indicate that he called his creation a "hack" either... And you are avoiding answering the main issues of the statement... At least this time, you did not sling mud. What happened? Lapse of concentration?

How do you know for sure when you dont know the entire story? You have no records of the phone conversations and the conference discussions (at least the two links you gave me did not have them). Sure, MS did not handle the situation well at some parts, but his conduct itself was not above reproach... (bargaining with MS to reinstate his MVP status and then he would remove the Express Edition part, hiding a workaround in the release and telling MS that he has removed the "hack").

Why wud he call his build a 'hack' when from the very start he has been referring to it as somethng else? Read it!! Or is it u who want to call it as a hack like the MS guy and want me too to call it a "hack" instead of a build/extensions/extension project "to make u understand"??

And main issues in ur statment, u mean conversations? How come u and ur musketeers conclude then that the Guy was wrong initially just by reading the MS-side of story?
OR u mean his bargain as u "thought" or that "his conduct itself was not above reproach"? May be u can let me see by quoting where he bargained!
Neways instead it was the MS side that seemed to be missing his emails and not giving priority to form a solution in a humane way!

I think you may have missed my email. I remain totally committed to
reaching an amicable solution. I'm sure we could move forward in a way
that is constructive for everyone. Please can we start building
bridges and move on!

read the mails. I dunno why is it taking a toll on ur mind!

Let me post for ur convenience!

Jamie,

I would much prefer that we reached an amicable solution, but I don't
feel that we're trending in that direction. I had already replied to
this email. To ensure that we're on the same page let me explicitly
answer your requests:

1.) We will not allow you to redistribute VSTS unit testing components
with your product for use in Standard/Pro SKU's.

2.) We will not allow you to redistribute Visual Studio below Select B
pricing (our standard pricing model).

3.) We are not offering you a free VSIP Premier, Open Tools and/or IDE
redistribution partnership.

4.) We will not allow you to extend the Visual Studio Express SKU's
under any conditions.

5.) You will not be accepted into the VSIP program until you conform to
our license agreements.


To be clear Microsoft is not going to compensate you for discontinuing
your Express extensions. We are willing to work with you through the
VSIP program once you are in conformance with our license terms. That
said we are willing to entertain any other suggestions you might have.

Thanks - jason

lease read it carefully!!

Hi Jason,

Thank you for spelling out Microsoft's position so clearly. I find
this directness constructive and feel that we're moving forwards. In
this same spirit I would like to lay out my position:

1.) All of the interfaces and methods I used to extend the Express SKU
are public and documented on the MSDN website.

2.) I have sought legal advice on the Express SKU EULA and as far as
my lawyer is aware I am not in breach of the licence.

In our second teleconference Ben Miller told me this issue would not
impact my MVP status or prospects for renewal (baring Microsoft taking
legal action). I feel a constructive way forward would be if Microsoft
were to make a gesture of good faith by renewing my MVP award for this
season. I would then be happy to remove Express SKU integration from
my website and engage with Microsoft through the VSIP program as you
have suggested.

To be clear I am not asking to be made a VSIP MVP as compensation for
discontinuing my Express SKU extensions. I am simply asking not to be
punished over an issue that everyone would like to move away from.
Assuming we can agree upon this as an amicable way forward, I will
publish the following installer on my website:
*www.mutantdesign.co.uk/downloads/TestDriven.NET-2.1.1586_Basic.zip

Regards, Jamie.

@Arun : and u say u have read the emails? Do u even feel any shame while lying?

10. You wanted to know where VS gives more freedom to the developper than OSS/GPL - (a). VS allows the developper to keep his project closed source or open. OSS and GPL dont. (b). VS allows a developper to integrate DRM into their software. GPL doesnt

Haha I thought that was a topic that was being debated. How come u made it a point? VS allows developer to keep his project closed or open...yea u said that zillion times now...but is it hard to get it into ur brains that restriction is on both of them that both combined also can't give u much freedom like in GPL?....GPL alone offers much more freedom than that as already debated!! and then u say u quoted and replied my posts correctly! I asked that just to minimise the repeations. But I guess I shud have made u understand that by analogies again!

Ur musketeer friend said something about decompilation when code authenticity and rekaibility was discussed! Did u read that or u feel like reading the replies "only" meant for u? This is a debate! Not personal chit-chat!!


This post of urs is filled with whinings, instead u cud have done better in quoting/replying correctly! So if u feel like debating further then please quote from my previous post and the posts that u missed, the ones that I have been continously requesting u to quote from the start and do read the emails from the start this time, the source of this thread, MS-side of the story, EULA, GPL etc instead of whining and asking others to use c++,java and lying that the MVP bargained!!

I am sorry if u 'thought' that I was mud slinging, but I was just showing u the reality while u were lying and showing ur ignorance and inabilty to read things!

now when did i say that u get the Full source code in the language the soft was programmed , i only said decompiled and assumed that people would understand what i meant .

What else did u mean by verifying the code? Please don't tell u wanted the assembly code of both as it wud be quite laughable! Be real!!
Neways, java compiler also decompiles and u know what code we get!!

Same here , i can't make this person understand and think in a logical way . Even if i try to be logical and explain to him every liitle thing bit by bit he's not ready to understand

Nice to see liars forming up gangs here!

 

[gxsaurav]

mediator cannot be told what reality is. Just like Eddie, they both don't want to understand & accept the facts. You have your own opinion & u think it is the best which u don't want to change.

Sorry, no matter how much we try to polish a Turd, it will still remain a turd.

 

[rocket357]

Sorry, no matter how much we try to polish a Turd, it will still remain a turd.

hahaha

Indeed.

 

[praka123]

reality is,people fail to acknowledge why GPL exists.GPL is relevent only when you believe in Open Source movement.so there is no question like GPL is not allowing me to release my s/w as closed source.but at any time EULA is a pain.M$ fanboys(not casual user) as usual are backing EULA.EULA is venomous even for a user-if he ever read EULA of window$ OS.
In 2007,VS is not the final answer.there are better free ones.even Windows platform is not the final answer for a PC user.
Now Qt4 is on to windows platform.wait and watch

 

[gxsaurav]

but at any time EULA is a pain.M$ fanboys(not casual user) as usual are backing EULA.EULA is venomous even for a user-if he ever read EULA of window$ OS.

Yeah, & we tried in the last 5 pages to tell you why it is not bad but still you do not understand. Prakash, I really doubt the understanding capability of you, mediator & eddie now in this forum.

In 2007,VS is not the final answer.there are better free ones

You mean Eclipse IDE for Windows, yeah, i installed that Joke to compile KeypassX once . Lolz....you really don't know what an IDE is

.even Windows platform is not the final answer for a PC user.

Nope, but it is the best answer.

Now Qt4 is on to windows platform.wait and watch

Linux user in 1998 : Hey, Wait & watch, Linux will take over the world

Linux user in 2001: Hey, Wait & watch, Linux will take over the world

Linux user in 2003 : Hey, Wait & watch, Linux will take over the world

Linux user in 2007 : Hey, Wait & watch, Linux will take over the world

Linux user in 2012 : Hey, Wait & watch, Linux will take over the world

The world ends according to Maya calender.

 

[rocket357]

Linux user in 1998 : Hey, Wait & watch, Linux will take over the world
Linux user in 2001: Hey, Wait & watch, Linux will take over the world
Linux user in 2003 : Hey, Wait & watch, Linux will take over the world
Linux user in 2007 : Hey, Wait & watch, Linux will take over the world
Linux user in 2012 : Hey, Wait & watch, Linux will take over the world

Sigh...there's certainly truth to this...Linux has been "poised to take over the world" for as long as I've been using it.

I'm not saying it will never happen, mind you...I'm just saying it's getting old waiting for it haha.