Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 36

Thread: Nokia Slams Office Working On Qt Components

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,093

    Default

    Another Qt thread, another funkSTAR trolling attempt. This is more predictable than btrfs or NVidia threads.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBlackCat View Post
    Another Qt thread, another funkSTAR trolling attempt. This is more predictable than btrfs or NVidia threads.
    Yeah thats nice mr kitty cat. Blame everyone for trolling while your beloved mr Meego&Meltemi killer is demanding control and complete licensing benefits on Qt.

    You dont care a whole lot about software freedom do you?
    Last edited by funkSTAR; 08-01-2012 at 03:34 AM.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    714

    Default

    What it all means ultimately is that the copyright for QT is controlled by a corporation who is now little more then a fiefdom for Microsoft.

    First things to take into account is:
    * Microsoft doesn't care about QT one bit.

    This wasn't 'Microsoft's whole plan the entire time' or any such BS. QT is not a threat and never will be a threat because writing 'cross platform software' is crap no matter how many layers of abstraction you throw at it and KDE will never take the steps necessary to be a mainstream desktop OS that could ever possibly threaten Microsoft.

    Microsoft needed lots of very good hardware design experience to spearhead Windows 7 platform and it was cheaper and faster to pay Nokia to do it rather then try to do it in-house. Despite all the fantasies and misunderstandings people have about 'cut throat competition' and corporate culture... as a business it's fundamentally stupid and self destructive to try to do it yourself when you get the same work done cheaper, faster, and better by a paying a different company to do it. This is simply a part of how the world functions. Elop is a tool and he will be remembered for the rest of history as the CEO that destroyed a fortune 500 company in the shortest amount of time possible. He literally destroyed the profitability of his corporation in less then a week by gambling on Microsoft. However, this is a problem for Nokia... not really Microsoft.

    What it means ultimately for QT and KDE is that Nokia has zero financial interest in developing QT further. It's a dead technology as far as they are concerned. KDE has always heavily depended on Trolltech's commercial interests to fund development on QT. Now this is gone. Probably gone forever. Now KDE and the 'open governance' folks have to depend on themselves to do development.

    This is a similar position that the OpenSolaris and ZFS folks have to contend with. Their source of code has gone back to being proprietary, rather then becoming abandonware, but the situation is ultimately very similar.

    Also this means that nobody can sell QT under any license other then GPL or LGPL.

    This means that now KDE folks are going to have to work much harder to get the same level of progress done now then they have had to do in the past.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,093

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    Yeah thats nice mr kitty cat. Blame everyone for trolling while your beloved mr Meego&Meltemi killer is demanding control and complete licensing benefits on Qt.

    You dont care a whole lot about software freedom do you?
    Right, you're not a troll. You are such a positive person, making so many posts about great software freedom projects It is not like you almost always post on threads about KDE or Qt, and take every opportunity to criticize either project in any way you can. "haha, KDE is having a meeting in a country that had financial problems after the fall of the Soviet Union, that shows how bad KDE is" (paraphrasing). Yeah, you aren't a troll at all.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    714

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    Yeah thats nice mr kitty cat. Blame everyone for trolling while your beloved mr Meego&Meltemi killer is demanding control and complete licensing benefits on Qt.

    You dont care a whole lot about software freedom do you?
    Control of "licensing benefits" (which is a terrible way to say 'copyrights') is completely and utterly irrelevant at this point.

    The reason it's irrelevant is because any work done to QT at this point is going to be a derivative of existing QT code. Existing QT code can only be obtained, as open source, under the LGPL license. Therefore any QT development outside of Nokia can only ever be LGPL.

    This is EXACTLY THE SAME as if Nokia did NOT demand developers to sign over their copyrights.

    Understand?

    So while what you are pointing out is a fact.. it has no point. Whether or not developers sign their rights away to Nokia it will have no impact on the licensing or freedom of QT or KDE as open source.

    The only possible damage that can occur is if Nokia decides to stop releasing LGPL versions of QT and developers had patches that they signed rights away, but never made it into a release. Those patches would be locked off for ever. But not only is this unlikely it is a very short time span and the damage would be minimal even if it did happen.

    If developers never signed their rights away then they would be in the same boat as the Linux kernel and would only ever be able to release their software under LGPL/GPL due to the huge amount of effort it would require to contact all the copyright holders and get them to agree collectively to new licensing change.

  6. #16

    Default

    Micro$hit wants to kill Qt and promote M$ mono. Boycott that crap.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    117

    Default Re

    People are just very dumb or they are just uninformed. Another thing could be that they hate Qt and KDE.

    No, they can't sell Qt. It's under Open Governance, rights are assigned to a lot of non-Nokia developers. They could change the license but they would need the approval of a few hundred developers. That won't happen, I assure you.
    "It's the death of Qt and KDE!" - that's so dumb. Until now all the developers that were fired by Nokia were employed by other companies to work further on Qt.
    Also, open governance improved the speed of development. So, no, this layoffs won't affect anything. Qt still is the best cross-platform application framework and it will continue to be...

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by drag View Post
    Control of "licensing benefits" (which is a terrible way to say 'copyrights') is completely and utterly irrelevant at this point.

    The reason it's irrelevant is because any work done to QT at this point is going to be a derivative of existing QT code. Existing QT code can only be obtained, as open source, under the LGPL license. Therefore any QT development outside of Nokia can only ever be LGPL.
    First: Nokia is demanding licensing benefits not copyright.
    Second: Qt is not open sourced under LGPL exclusively.
    Third: Nokia can relicense to another open source license or commercial license.

    Frankly they can do what they want because of the CLA. This seems like a great licensing benefit to me.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,093

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    Third: Nokia can relicense to another open source license or commercial license.
    They can add as many additional licenses as they want. They can relicense Qt under a more permissive open-source license like BSD. But they [b]cannot[/b remove the open-source license.

    In practical terms there are only two ways things can fundamentally change right now:
    1. they remove the closed-source license entirely
    2. they remove the LGPL and GPL licenses and relicense under a more permissive open-source license like BSD, MIT, or MPL.

    They could remove the GPL version, but this doesn't have much of a practical effect since any user of the GPL license could use it under LGPL instead (I think, IANAL). The commercial license can change somewhat in the details, but that really wouldn't have a huge impact. Or they could try removing the LGPL and GPL, which would have the same effect as 2 because of their deal with the KDE e.v. So these are the only major changes that would be possible.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    492

    Default

    Nokia bleeding money, burning bridges and turning into a(nother) chinese company. Nothing to see here, move along.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •