Velocity Reviews

Velocity Reviews (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/index.php)
-   NZ Computing (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/f47-nz-computing.html)
-   -   Every Proprietary Company Goes Bad Eventually (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t706517-every-proprietary-company-goes-bad-eventually.html)

Lawrence D'Oliveiro 11-25-2009 10:01 AM

Every Proprietary Company Goes Bad Eventually
 
This time it’s the turn of Opera
<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/24/opera_mini_and_china/>, to plug a
“hole” that allowed its Chinese customers to evade Government censorship of
the Internet.

Every company, at some point, is going to be tempted to prioritize its own
interests over those of its customers. When this happens with proprietary
software, you’re screwed. Free Software is your defence.

peterwn 11-25-2009 08:23 PM

Re: Every Proprietary Company Goes Bad Eventually
 
On Nov 25, 11:01*pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
> This time its the turn of Opera
> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/24/opera_mini_and_china/>, to plug a
> hole that allowed its Chinese customers to evade Government censorship of
> the Internet.
>
> Every company, at some point, is going to be tempted to prioritize its own
> interests over those of its customers. When this happens with proprietary
> software, youre screwed. Free Software is your defence.


Opera no doubt faced having its compression servers outside China
firewalled.

There is going to be increasing political pressure to regulate
internet access. Stopping kiddie porn provides a very plausible excuse
for this.

victor 11-25-2009 08:44 PM

Re: Every Proprietary Company Goes Bad Eventually
 
peterwn wrote:
> On Nov 25, 11:01 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek-
> central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
>> This time its the turn of Opera
>> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/24/opera_mini_and_china/>, to plug a
>> hole that allowed its Chinese customers to evade Government censorship of
>> the Internet.
>>
>> Every company, at some point, is going to be tempted to prioritize its own
>> interests over those of its customers. When this happens with proprietary
>> software, youre screwed. Free Software is your defence.

>
> Opera no doubt faced having its compression servers outside China
> firewalled.
>
> There is going to be increasing political pressure to regulate
> internet access. Stopping kiddie porn provides a very plausible excuse
> for this.


So its a service issue on mobile phone browsers, nothing to do with
proprietary vs free software at all.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro 11-26-2009 01:01 AM

Re: Every Proprietary Company Goes Bad Eventually
 
In message <hek505$k6r$1@news.eternal-september.org>, victor wrote:

> So its a service issue on mobile phone browsers, nothing to do with
> proprietary vs free software at all.


Their browser doesn’t seem to support the use of alternative compression
servers. And customers in China were forced to upgrade to the new version
that used Chinese-based servers.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro 11-26-2009 01:45 AM

Re: Every Proprietary Company Goes Bad Eventually
 
In message <z-WdnYxZRpjdR5DWnZ2dnUVZ_rBi4p2d@giganews.com>, Allistar wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> In message <hek505$k6r$1@news.eternal-september.org>, victor wrote:
>>
>>> So its a service issue on mobile phone browsers, nothing to do with
>>> proprietary vs free software at all.

>>
>> Their browser doesn’t seem to support the use of alternative compression
>> servers. And customers in China were forced to upgrade to the new version
>> that used Chinese-based servers.

>
> What has that got to do with proprietary vs. open source though? The exact
> same issue could happen with an open source browser.


No it couldn’t.

Sailor Sam 11-26-2009 02:10 AM

Re: Every Proprietary Company Goes Bad Eventually
 
Allistar wrote:
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> In message <hek505$k6r$1@news.eternal-september.org>, victor wrote:
>>
>>> So its a service issue on mobile phone browsers, nothing to do with
>>> proprietary vs free software at all.

>> Their browser doesn’t seem to support the use of alternative compression
>> servers. And customers in China were forced to upgrade to the new version
>> that used Chinese-based servers.

>
> What has that got to do with proprietary vs. open source though? The exact
> same issue could happen with an open source browser.


Dear Usenet, I have no idea how someone could change the code of an open
source application to suit their needs.

Sailor Sam 11-26-2009 03:36 AM

Re: Every Proprietary Company Goes Bad Eventually
 
whoisthis wrote:
> In article <heko1o$mlm$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Sailor Sam <hihothe@merry.oh> wrote:
>
>> Allistar wrote:
>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>>> In message <hek505$k6r$1@news.eternal-september.org>, victor wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> So its a service issue on mobile phone browsers, nothing to do with
>>>>> proprietary vs free software at all.
>>>> Their browser doesn’t seem to support the use of alternative compression
>>>> servers. And customers in China were forced to upgrade to the new version
>>>> that used Chinese-based servers.
>>> What has that got to do with proprietary vs. open source though? The exact
>>> same issue could happen with an open source browser.

>> Dear Usenet, I have no idea how someone could change the code of an open
>> source application to suit their needs.

>
> Dear Usenet, I failed to recognise that better than 95% of people who
> own a computer are incapable of writing any code at all, thus making
> open source no better than closed source.You may as well have given them
> a bicycle pump, more people would have a use for it.


And I forget that it only takes one person to change the code, and then
distribute it to the rest of the 95%.
(Esp. in china where there is an organised network that distributes this
type of 'subversive' material)

Sailor Sam 11-26-2009 04:40 AM

Re: Every Proprietary Company Goes Bad Eventually
 
whoisthis wrote:
> In article <hekt3q$nqq$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Sailor Sam <hihothe@merry.oh> wrote:
>
>> whoisthis wrote:
>>> In article <heko1o$mlm$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>> Sailor Sam <hihothe@merry.oh> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Allistar wrote:
>>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <hek505$k6r$1@news.eternal-september.org>, victor wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So its a service issue on mobile phone browsers, nothing to do with
>>>>>>> proprietary vs free software at all.
>>>>>> Their browser doesn⤁t seem to support the use of alternative
>>>>>> compression
>>>>>> servers. And customers in China were forced to upgrade to the new
>>>>>> version
>>>>>> that used Chinese-based servers.
>>>>> What has that got to do with proprietary vs. open source though? The
>>>>> exact
>>>>> same issue could happen with an open source browser.
>>>> Dear Usenet, I have no idea how someone could change the code of an open
>>>> source application to suit their needs.
>>> Dear Usenet, I failed to recognise that better than 95% of people who
>>> own a computer are incapable of writing any code at all, thus making
>>> open source no better than closed source.You may as well have given them
>>> a bicycle pump, more people would have a use for it.

>> And I forget that it only takes one person to change the code, and then
>> distribute it to the rest of the 95%.
>> (Esp. in china where there is an organised network that distributes this
>> type of 'subversive' material)

>
> Which is still irrelevant as that same 95% would not know how to report
> a bug or ask for changes.



Um, from the network they received it from???

> Therefore for 95% of people there is no
> discernible difference between open and closed source.



??????
Pray tell, how do they ask for the illicit copy from the closed source
vendor?

> Equally ignored
> is the fact that the Major developers (Redhat, Google,Novell,Intel,
> IBM,Apple,etc) have their own agenda,



???????

> and that these companies primary
> agenda is to make money. Open source is NOT free, someone is paying for
> it.


?????
What ****ing planet are you on????

victor 11-26-2009 08:51 AM

Re: Every Proprietary Company Goes Bad Eventually
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> In message <hek505$k6r$1@news.eternal-september.org>, victor wrote:
>
>> So its a service issue on mobile phone browsers, nothing to do with
>> proprietary vs free software at all.

>
> Their browser doesn’t seem to support the use of alternative compression
> servers. And customers in China were forced to upgrade to the new version
> that used Chinese-based servers.

Then the users should change to an open source browser which supports
the "alternative compression servers" of which you speak.
I expect that whatever they do they are at the mercy of their mobile
phone company, not Opera.

victor 11-26-2009 09:48 AM

Re: Every Proprietary Company Goes Bad Eventually
 
whoisthis wrote:
> In article <hekt3q$nqq$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Sailor Sam <hihothe@merry.oh> wrote:
>
>> whoisthis wrote:
>>> In article <heko1o$mlm$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>> Sailor Sam <hihothe@merry.oh> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Allistar wrote:
>>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <hek505$k6r$1@news.eternal-september.org>, victor wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So its a service issue on mobile phone browsers, nothing to do with
>>>>>>> proprietary vs free software at all.
>>>>>> Their browser doesn⤁t seem to support the use of alternative
>>>>>> compression
>>>>>> servers. And customers in China were forced to upgrade to the new
>>>>>> version
>>>>>> that used Chinese-based servers.
>>>>> What has that got to do with proprietary vs. open source though? The
>>>>> exact
>>>>> same issue could happen with an open source browser.
>>>> Dear Usenet, I have no idea how someone could change the code of an open
>>>> source application to suit their needs.
>>> Dear Usenet, I failed to recognise that better than 95% of people who
>>> own a computer are incapable of writing any code at all, thus making
>>> open source no better than closed source.You may as well have given them
>>> a bicycle pump, more people would have a use for it.

>> And I forget that it only takes one person to change the code, and then
>> distribute it to the rest of the 95%.
>> (Esp. in china where there is an organised network that distributes this
>> type of 'subversive' material)

>
> Which is still irrelevant as that same 95% would not know how to report
> a bug or ask for changes. Therefore for 95% of people there is no
> discernible difference between open and closed source. Equally ignored
> is the fact that the Major developers (Redhat, Google,Novell,Intel,
> IBM,Apple,etc) have their own agenda, and that these companies primary
> agenda is to make money. Open source is NOT free, someone is paying for
> it.




There are other browsers available, the Nokia Web Browser is open source.
http://opensource.nokia.com/projects/S60browser/
Built on open source WebKit like the Apple Safari browser.
That still doesn't help access Opera's compression servers, and they are
quite entitled to control subscription services in any way they like,
Its got nothing to do with their software licensing.


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:30 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.