Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu's Unity Desktop Can Now Run Natively On Windows

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #71
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    Choosing and implementing CLA is an action. A deliberate action to leave the door open to that kind of trickery. Most other projects don't do that.

    The code of most projects remains owned by each individual contributor, and this makes changing the licensing a major pain in the ass as you need to track down everyone and have his approval to do so. Or rewrite that code.

    It's not fear-mongering, it's an explanation to why most open projects and contributors (paid or not) stay away from Canonical's stuff. Which is a fact.

    Go back using Win10 then, since you are already doomed there is no reason to use a crappier OS.
    Then i read What’s the difference between the new agreement and the old one?

    One difference between the two is that the old agreement was a copyright assignment agreement (where the contributor granted ownership of the contribution to Canonical), while the new one is a copyright licence agreement (where the contributor grants permission for Canonical to distribute the contribution). One new element is a promise back to you to release your contribution under the licence in place when they made the contribution. The new agreement also features some refinements in the language around software patents and how you disclaim warranties. Who owns the copyright?

    You do. Section 2.1(a) states the following:

    “You retain ownership of the Copyright in Your Contribution and have the same rights to use or license the Contribution which You would have had without entering into the Agreement.”

    So yeah clearly fear mongering. Ill send the armed police around to arrest you for your future crimes

    Comment


    • #72
      Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
      Choosing and implementing CLA is an action. A deliberate action to leave the door open to that kind of trickery. Most other projects don't do that.

      The code of most projects remains owned by each individual contributor, and this makes changing the licensing a major pain in the ass as you need to track down everyone and have his approval to do so. Or rewrite that code.

      It's not fear-mongering, it's an explanation to why most open projects and contributors (paid or not) stay away from Canonical's stuff. Which is a fact.

      Go back using Win10 then, since you are already doomed there is no reason to use a crappier OS.
      I used Win10 for 2 month on a laptop and prefer Mint, Ubuntu and Opensuse. Win10 was ugly and complicated IMO.

      So what is your point? I use the system I like more, with best graphic performance, like a vast majority of Linux users...

      Comment


      • #73
        DDF420: So what if you retain copyright to your contribution? Canonical can *still* anyway use your contribution in a closed source derivative. This argument is often used (because it's more or less the only one available) when people try to defend the Canonical CLA - "but you retain copyright!!!". As if that negates the actual issue of the CLA - the asymmetry of power where Canonical, and only Canonical, can make closed source derivatives of the code. Canonical made that change basically as a PR thing, but no one except Ubuntu fans trying to defend Canonical is buying it. Rightfully so.

        As to your quip about "future crimes"... if Canonical never intends to make closed source derivatives (another argument used to try to diffuse the CLA), then why such a CLA in the first place? Why not remove the CLA and with that remove all uncertainty?
        Last edited by Gusar; 12 July 2016, 09:12 AM.

        Comment


        • #74
          Originally posted by DDF420 View Post
          Then i read What’s the difference between the new agreement and the old one?
          This changes the fact that Canonical can close the source of shit I contributed without asking my opinion on that in what way exactly?

          Comment


          • #75
            Originally posted by Passso View Post
            So what is your point? I use the system I like more, with best graphic performance, like a vast majority of Linux users...
            My point is and has always been that using closedsource drivers on linux is at best a stopgap, at worst it is nonsense.
            The whole point of linux is being opensource and reaping the fruits of that.
            If you need performance you're on the wrong OS (with NVIDIA drivers it's mostly because linux games are ports, not because of the driver itself, that is 99% the same as the one on windows).

            Comment


            • #76
              Originally posted by duby229 View Post
              No, Only Windows 10 with the linux compatibility layer, not all windows 10 installs have it though.
              Well, on Win10, Unity would be improvement over windows 10's own default GUI. Unity I could use as it is, Win "tiles" are disgusting..

              I usually spend odd hour or two after fresh Win10 install, killing off ALL the "windows apps" via PowerShell, installing ClassicShell, removing services I dislike using "sc delete", chasing down drvivers etc. But it's still not quite Win7. Maybe Unity would help, just drastic shell replacement..

              Comment


              • #77
                Originally posted by aht0 View Post
                Well, on Win10, Unity would be improvement over windows 10's own default GUI. Unity I could use as it is, Win "tiles" are disgusting..

                I usually spend odd hour or two after fresh Win10 install, killing off ALL the "windows apps" via PowerShell, installing ClassicShell, removing services I dislike using "sc delete", chasing down drvivers etc. But it's still not quite Win7. Maybe Unity would help, just drastic shell replacement..
                I approve all the content of this post.

                Comment


                • #78
                  http://www.wsj.com/articles/microsof...eal-1446642000

                  So much FUD, hatred and venom for Canonical and Unity, don't like Canonical, don't use em, let those who find it good use with peace. http://www.infoworld.com/article/262...help-rhel.html

                  http://techrights.org/2014/01/17/rhel-security/

                  Comment


                  • #79
                    Originally posted by linuxforall View Post
                    http://www.wsj.com/articles/microsof...eal-1446642000

                    So much FUD, hatred and venom for Red Hat and RHEL, don't understand the difference between Red Hat's actions and Canonical's, don't just whiteknight for lulz, let those that understand it is good use with peace. http://www.infoworld.com/article/262...help-rhel.html

                    http://techrights.org/2014/01/17/rhel-security/
                    fixed.

                    Comment


                    • #80
                      The real problem is that a bunch of traditional linux developers hate the guts of a company trying to standout promoting their Linux Desktop product on a larger scale than any of the other Linux Distributions out there.

                      Canonical might not be the best upstream contributor and might not even care about giving anything back but it still is the sole distribution with its derivatives (Mint, Kubuntu, Xubuntu etc) pulling in market share for Linux on the Desktop with its forward thinking approach. It is one of the only company within the Linux Community trying to actually achieve the Year of the Linux Desktop Dream.

                      Canonical does not even force the use of Unity/Mir as the users have a choice of KDE/Gnome/Xfce/Lxde/Cinnamon with etc. Unlike RHEL based distributions which are solely focused around Gnome.

                      Additionally Canonical is doing a great job at slamming the traditional Linux mindset of
                      If You Wish To Use Closed Source / Proprietary Drivers You Should Be On Another OS Linux Is Not For You
                      . It does not like traditional "RHEL STANDARD FOLLOWING" linux companies and supporters limit users from utilizing any closed source or proprietary software stack to enhance their user experience that to with the ease of a few clicks.


                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X