Lpc2000

derbaier wrote:

>--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, clemens fischer <ino-qc@s...> wrote:
>  
>
>>>derbaier:
>>>      
>>>
>>>"open" just means that access is available if you want it, IMHO.
>>>"closed" means no access at any price, also IMHO.
>>>      
>>>
>>then micro$ofts APIs would have to be considered "open", because they
>>supply specs and even source to people paying the $$.
>>
>>  clemens
>>    
>>
>
>Well, there you go then!   :-)
>If they were not open then there would be nobody providing software
>for their OSs except M$.  And, of course with M$, they certainly are
>not free.  So you are still making my point about there being some
>difference between 'open' and 'free'.
>
>BTW, WHG and the boys certainly have made a lot of money out of the
>business they started by using someone elses software for free, and
>then selling it! 
>
>  
>
You don't know your history!  There was a famous article which Bill 
Gates wrote in DDJ (Doctor Dobbs Journal) back around 1978, in which he 
lambasted people who were using his 4K Basic without paying for it.  
Bill Gates was one of the early people who started the, then, radical 
idea of paying for software.  Prior to that, we gave each other source 
code and helped each other out with their projects as it was fun to do.  
Apparently you've never heard of FidoNet?

TomW


-- 
Tom Walsh - WN3L - Embedded Systems Consultant
http://openhardware.net, http://cyberiansoftware.com
"Windows? No thanks, I have work to do..."
----------------------------------------------------