Universal Videogame List - www.uvlist.net

Even formally released code can be legally 'closed' but as a practical matter, only subsequent releases can be effectively closed (those that have it can keep it, but technically no ’new holders' are allowed). This does not necessarily mean the original copyright holder has the choice. Sun, for whatever reason, retained the copyrights of all of their OpenSource projects rather than transferring rights to an outside organization to ensure their protection (as FSF recommends). In this case, Oracle bought Sun and their copyrights. Adding Sun's properties to their own, Oracle became master over the copyrights of more OpenSource projects than any other entity in the world. Initially after the Sun takeover, Oracle made a [http://www.oracle.com/us/technologies/open-source/index.html]short list[/url] of OpenSource projects and Open standards they were 'committed to'. But so far, this seems to be all words and no action. Development of this list is slowing or it is disappearing behind closed source licenses. But regardless, their letter concerning Solaris indicted they are completely ignorant to the advantages of OpenSource. They don't want millions of volunteers spotting bugs in their best product, FOR FREE, and occasionally fixing them. They do not want their competitors taking time off from their own products to devote their best programmers, FOR FREE, to improving a product that helps them keep their own customers. They think 350,000 customers are some great number, they risk not only offending 30 million potential customers (guesstimated current number of Linux users), but offending their existing OpenSolaris customers. How have they missed the fact, Sun knew this, that those 30 million are not just potential customers, _they_are_using_a_competing_product_. Up till now, OpenSolaris customers could hire anyone to look at OpenSolaris and make improvements on their behalf. Now, they're forced to restrict things to their own employees or get help from Oracle. Does Oracle think they will _like_ this? Do they not realize some will resent it? They lump source code in with content, binaries, business models, web sites, community, patents, and trademarks. They are not going to make any profit from open source no matter what they do unless they learn the difference. Frighteningly, they name everything they own and include the Solaris "community" in that list. Do they not realize that the companies using Solaris are part of that community? Maybe they do. "We have a brand that stands for innovation, quality, security, and trust" And OpenSource, they forgot the origins of Solaris are in a community that once freely shared code (before code was copyrighted)! Even when it was proprietary, major portions of a complete Solaris based OS where non-proprietary. Additionally, since 2008-05-05, Solaris innovations have been rapidly driven by OpenSource. Strangely, they talk about "our investment" in Solaris as if their money somehow exceeds the investment of the community they are taking Solaris away from. They are limiting the very "significant growth potential" they have. Solaris _is_ the assembly of someone else’s technology. Quite beautifully assembled under Sun's management without any help from Oracle. Exchanging free outsourcing for new paid personal. I guess they feel the need to make a sacrifice to earn the ownership of someone else’s technology. "all of you" they tell Sun's devs in the same breath, as if they are not going to quit or be layed off as Oracle hires their replacements. Telling their customers what to think after taking so much from them. How do they not realize those qualities of Solaris 10 they praise are due in a major way to it’s Open Source? They think closing an OS with marginal market share is going to encourage independent software developers? Have they completely missed Google Android? "The limiting factor is our engineering bandwidth measured in people and time" and by the fact that they just barred an entire community of people with time and vastly out number what they an hope to provide. Sun's model for this was "We recognize that some people have more time than money and other have more money than time". Sun relied on this to exploit the time or money of their customers to simultaneously make profit and improve their open source products. People _purchased_ OpenSource products from Sun that they knew they could have gotten for free, because they didn’t have the time to do otherwise. Gamers may note that [gameid#178001]Sleep is Death[/game] has earned $43,000 so far by using a similar model. In abandoning this model for Solaris, Oracle is abandoning all those people with more money than time and will gain no benefit from those with more time than money. Why pay devs to port Solaris to other platforms when this FREELY done so often among the OpenSource community. How is it they think OpenSource gives their competitors an advantage. Their competitors must share any advantages they gain. I was under the impression that Oracle was run by capitalists. Quick lesson on why Capitalism is win-win (when everyone obeys the law). When I get a haircut, I'm not being exploited by my barber who's using 'fashion' to trick me into getting a haircut. The fact is, I want a hair cut and don't have the time nor inclination to learn to give myself one or exploit anyone into giving me one for free. Neither am I exploiting my barber. He enjoys the line of work he chose, trained for, and gets paid also. WE BOTH _GAIN_. I gain a haircut, he gains cash, we both gain satisfaction. This has similarity to Free Software. Companies make money a variety of ways (support, pre-packaged distros, and more), pay developers, distribute software to users, some user donate time, the product is improved, competitors also provide devs and improvements, ALL PARTIES GAIN. Oracle seems to believe the world is a zero-sum game where someone has to lose in order for them to gain. Shockingly, it seems Oracle is run by Marxists. They devote nearly half of their letter careful explaining how they intend to exploit the OpenSource community and not contribute anything in return and finish off by asking their OpenSource advocating engineers to help them.