Re: SFLC is succeeding.

[Alan Mackenzie]

In gnu.misc.discuss RJack <user@example.net> wrote:
> Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>> In gnu.misc.discuss RJack <user@example.net> wrote:
>>> Hyman Rosen wrote:
>>>> On 1/11/2010 11:34 AM, RJack wrote:
>>>>> UHHHH..... Doesn't look like Google embraced the GPL to me

>> "Embrace" is a silly word here.  Firms don't wrap their arms round
>> software to give it hugs.  "Embrace" is one of these well-nigh
>> meaningless words loved by market droids, one which sound really
>> positive and friendly, yet can be used when the user is anxious to
>> avoid being pinned down to any precise meaning.  It looks like that's
>> how you've used the word above.

> "Embrace" and extend is one of the most infamous business strategy
> known to the Software World. You may not like it but it's reality.

"Embrace, extend and extinguish" has a well recognised meaning.
"Embrace" on its own, in the context of doing business, doesn't.  Note in
this context that the GPL provides an effective counter to "embrace,
extend and extinguish".

>>> Android is NOT Linux, no matter how you spin it Hyman

>> RJack, "is" isn't a helpful word, here.  Android contains Linux, and
>> includes other software too.  You may be getting confused between
>> Linux the kernel and the multitude of "Linux"es which, along with the
>> kernel, include GNU system software and tools, BSD licensed networking
>> stuff and MIT licensed X11.  In that sense, Android "is" just as much
>> a "Linux" as Red Hat, or SuSE, or Debian, or Gentoo, or ......

> I'm not confused about anything at all. Android is Android as in
> "Google" and Linux is Linux as in "Linus Torvalds".

And Android is based on Linux as in "Linus Torvalds", just like Red Hat
is based on Linux.  This is what free software is all about - using and
re-using without encumbrance.  If you want to go on believing that
Android "is"n't Linux, then carry on.  In a sense it's true, but it's not
a useful way of thinking.

> I know that you GNU fanatics believe all software is "Free Software"
> but strength of belief doesn't make it true.

Don't be silly.  Nowhere near all software is free.  Vast swathes of it
are proprietary.  If all software were free, the FSF would shut up shop,
it's purpose having been achieved.

> Sincerely,
> RJack :)

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).