Open source vs non-open source?

[carlosponti]

One thing that has always bothered me is that people that write software seem to follow and perpetuate the myth that if linux is GPL that any software you write for it has to be GPL as well. that simply is not true. it just bothers me they put all the blame on linux like linux is the uncooperative one who tries to stop anyone from releasing code that is not open source that goes on linux platform. look at all the non open source there is for linux. Oracle is a good example they port thier database to linux unix and windows and not one is open source. they even have a way to obsure an interpreted language so that it runs but is closed source. for those of you who dont know what i am talking about in Oracle PL/SQL you can leave your code open or run it though an oracle procedure that obscures the code so that no one can look at the bare code but it still runs interpreted like all PL/SQL

[DThor]

Absolutely no doubt about it, if certain closed source commercial products hadn't ported to Linux, we wouldn't be using it here.

DT

[carlosponti]

the article was laughable because he mentioned Outlook and why couldnt there be a linux version. I some how doubt that would ever happen. if you write an OS why would you port your support applications to the rivals OS. thats just common sense. However with Balmer running things, a guy who wont lets his own kids use non microsoft products(iTunes and iPod), i doubt there would be ever cooperation with linux and open source in general. I bet however that if most people here were to take a count of all the closed source software they use on thier own linux pc they would be shocked. i use flash player 7 and UT 2004 for starters. isnt QT installed with KDE? thats proprietary software. I use oracle at work which at this time isnt on linux but we have plans to do so. I can see that supporting software on linux can be difficult because of the different flavors doing some things differently but that is the only point he makes that is valid.

[techieMoe]

isnt QT installed with KDE? thats proprietary software.

I don't believe that's correct. QT used to be proprietary, IIRC. Now it's GPLed.

[carlosponti]

I don't believe that's correct. QT used to be proprietary, IIRC. Now it's GPLed.

did not know that, plus it moves against my point so you could have kept that your little secret lol