[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Wed, 18 May 2011 21:36:02 +0100 Paul Sutton wrote: > On 18/05/11 21:29, JOHN DAVEY wrote: > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > From: Grant Sewell <dcglug@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > To: list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Sent: Wednesday, 18 May, 2011 20:50:47 > > Subject: Re: [LUG] MS Giving stuff away. > > > > On Wed, 18 May 2011 20:43:43 +0100 > > tom wrote: > > > >> On 18/05/11 19:46, Simon Waters wrote: > >>> On 18/05/11 13:57, JOHN DAVEY wrote: > >>>> It didn't sound like something Microsoft would do. > >>> Why not? I know we complain about their business practices a lot, > >>> but they do do corporate giving. > >>> > >>> Often it is software they donate which costs them nothing to give > >>> except potential lost revenue. > >> I'm not sure about that: I have a relative who runs a charity that > >> has received what appeared to be a massive donation in terms of > >> free software from MS. But it looks like they will have to pay to > >> 'upgrade'. So no lost revenue there - in fact a few thousand sales > >> when one considers they were considering going FLOSS. > >> Tom te tom te tom > > > > Are the upgrades mandatory? Surely there is still plenty of > > opportunity for them to pursue the FLOSS route? > > > > Grant. > > > > Yes Adrian, they are fully licenced. > > ...to everyone who suggested the FLOSS route I am now going to find > > out what FLOSS is now... > > I don't know why this is comming up underlined...nevermind. > > Jon Davey. > > > > > FLOSS > > Free libre open source software, I guess this is a banner to describe > software that is both free as in freedom (gnu,org) and open source > where the source code is also available) > > or did i mis interpret something > > Paul That is largely the FLOSS that I was talking about, yeah. The term "free software" can be confusing as in English we use the same word for two very different meanings. The term "open source" can be confusing and misleading as there is some software where the source code is deemed "open", but you're not allowed to use/modify/share it. The phrase "libre software" doesn't work very well in English. The phrase "software released under an OSI and/or GNU compatible license" is cumbersome. So we have "FLOSS" - Free, Libre & Open Source Software. A bit of a catch-all, really. Grant. -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq