[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Does KDE want to limit or destroy its commercial acceptance?
From:       "Paul Hampson" <phampson () linuxmail ! org>
Date:       2003-12-30 8:14:14
Message-ID: 20031230081414.14013.qmail () linuxmail ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

Thanks for you comments. I was not looking to start a debate on the quality of the software. Lets put this debate in a bubble that says the both Qt and GTK are equal. Indeed LGPL may have issues, but would you not agree that linux needs proprietary apps to pull them out of the shadows? LGPL seems to encourage this. What KDE says on its site [see my previous email regarding the limiting of liscensing (the quote at the top of it)] seems to shun this. Is this actually the case?

Regards,
Paul

----- Original Message -----
From: Emiel Kollof <coolvibe@hackerheaven.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 03:41:31 +0100
To: kde-devel@mail.kde.org
Subject: Re: Does KDE want to limit or destroy its commercial acceptance?

> On Tuesday 30 December 2003 00:38, Guillaume Laurent wrote:
> 
> > On Monday 29 December 2003 22:49, Paul Hampson wrote:
> > > however i am sure
> > > if we did a survey of several companies and told them that if they had
> > > the choice between free, powerful development software that would allow
> > > them to port to many types of systems with little engineering and gave
> > > them the ability to choose their liscense (as GTK+ is LGPL'd) over one
> > > that is very similar yet they have to pay for they would choose the free
> > > one.
> >
> > On what are you basing this intuition ? Working in the software
> > industry, I find that :
> >
> > - Qt's price is irrelevant. This argument is often being brought up, but
> > has really no ground. Qt is cheap compared to most development products
> > available.
> 
> Amen to that.
> 
> > - the LGPL is *NOT* considered to be without issues, be they real or not.
> > Most companies will very much prefer purchasing licenses rather than
> > running any legal risk.
> 
> *nod*
> 
> > - what matters in development is time. This is by far the most costly
> > resource. Any comparison of Qt and GTK+, as is routinely the case prior to
> > a purchase, will be in favor of Qt.
> 
> *halleluja*
> 
> > As has been recently discussed on dot.kde.org, the only serious advantage
> > Gnome has to offer to a proprietary company compared to KDE is Ximian, that
> > is, an entity they can talk to. That KDE lacks such a corpora        y is
> > the only real problem we have, not Qt's License.
> 
> What about KDE e.V.?
> 
> Cheers,
> Emiel
> -- 
> "I am the mother of all things, and all things should wear a sweater."
> 
>  
> >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<

-- 
______________________________________________
Check out the latest SMS services @ http://www.linuxmail.org 
This allows you to send and receive SMS through your mailbox.


Powered by Outblaze
 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]