On Sunday 21 December 2003 10:43, Christopher Browne wrote:
> The point that KDE partisans bring to the fore is that there's quite a
> lot of third-party support for "business use" of use of Qt, whereas
> there isn't so rich a set of visible "business use" of GTK.
Hmm.. HP and SUN declaring GNOME their default desktop wouldn't count as
> Of course, that probably has a great deal to do with there being a
> company with a not-insignificant marketing budget pushing that usage
> of Qt, whereas there is no large company with a big marketing budget
> behind GTK. (Other than maybe Ximian...)
Again.. HP and Sun..
> What is entertaining is that one might also get a pretty accurate
> accounting (probably even in Slashdot discussion threads :-)) out of
> doing just three global searches and replaces:
> What is also interesting is that the objectors deliberately ignore
> that Perens' reasoning was based on _what licenses are used_, not on
> some choice of 'what software he thought was technically best.'
I find that confusing. Personally I think combination of LGPL+GPL is as
friendly as BSD to business.
Qt has no fee associated with usage of libraries in end products. KDE libraies
are LGPL'ed. The licensing requirement for Qt is only for development of
closed source applications and it is not that high for a business, counting
the value and support TrolTech provides..
> They are missing the entire point of why "UserLinux" was being created
> in the first place. It is being created because of _licensing_
> concerns, and with a specific need to reject things that "perpetuate
> the lock-in situations that exist today." Qt has that lock-in
> problem, as does MySQL.
I don't see a lock in problem with Qt. If TrollTech goes bust, they will
release the source code unde free license(IIRC GPL). That is a well known
documented policy for long time. And till it is in business it will provide
support to it's users.
MySQL could avoid the problems by licensing the client library under LGPL but
they revoked that term recently.
MySQL charges for using their product. TrollTech charges for developing using
their products. It makes a huge difference in amount of moeny goin in
respective company. IMO that makes them altogether different catagories..
Personally I like KDE/Qt and enjoy developing with it. I know projects which
have paid for Qt licenses and found it worth doing that.
If they want GNOME, they can choose, but I find the argument of licensing
little weak to reject KDE..
In response to
pgsql-advocacy by date
|Next:||From: Markus Bertheau||Date: 2003-12-22 13:18:51|
|Subject: Re: UserLinux with MySQL|
|Previous:||From: Adrian Maier||Date: 2003-12-22 07:35:03|
|Subject: Re: PostgreSQL services in Romania|