Just read the text on gnu.org…
You even can use it in commercial projects… and you can sell it…
but I don’t understand it. Can WhatEver make his work a gift to me, and I can sell it then? Certainly not. Can he sell it to me, and I have to make a gift to others? Huh? I simply don’t see a possibility to connect commercial with free.
Originally posted by Michael Steinberg:
Well, I think the idea of the GNU license, … as long as he … doesn’t use it commercially. Wasn’t it like that?
Nope. That’s not correct at all. Here is some suggested reading:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html
and anything else on the http://www.gnu.org/ website.
Originally posted by rts:
You may want to read confusing words first. I didn’t say “give it away free”… I said “put it under the GPL”. There’s a difference.
You said:
Free Software is the way. Yes, I’m one of those kinds of guys. The GPL is the best way of protecting your work on all kinds of levels (from the practical to the moral).
He was wanting to know what to do with his work, and you told him “Free Software is the way”.
As far as that confusing words page:
Free software is a matter of freedom, not price
And several other references like that. Saying “free software” isnt about price but about freedom just sounds plain stupid to me. It makes it sound like your software has a will to be free, or like you are being oppressed by a government that wont allow you to give your software away for free if you want.
Originally posted by Michael Steinberg:
I don’t think that free software applies well to a world where having the computer switched on costs money for power… where one has to buy food, houses, cars.
Thank you, exactly how I feel. I think when I start to see some success in the free Lamborghini movement, maybe then I will start believing in the free software movement.
I find these both texts are too general (it’s probably my english)
But they don’t make any difference between the one who sells and the one who buys.
Now, the idea is
- you have the binaries
- you have the code
- you have the right to change the thing
- you can give it to others
And the last point I don’t understand. When you bought it under the gnu license from another one, are YOU allowed to sell it or even to give it to others???
That are actually the worst text I ever read, as they cover the topic like it would be a roman, being very nonspecific.
He was wanting to know what to do with his work, and you told him “Free Software is the way”.
Right. Which doesn’t mean “give it away”.
And several other references like that. Saying “free software” isnt about price but about freedom just sounds plain stupid to me. It makes it sound like your software has a will to be free,
Well, it does. “Information wants to be free” (libre). I suggest doing a websearch on the subject of “memes”, or try this:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/shouldbefree.html
or like you are being oppressed by a government that wont allow you to give your software away for free if you want.
Again, nobody is talking about “giving away for free”. And what you describe isn’t a reality, but could be if certain people get their way… read :
http://news.cnet.com/investor/news/newsitem/0-9900-1028-4825719-RHAT.html
http://www.salon.com/tech/log/2001/02/15/unamerican/index.html
http://onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2001/03/08/unamerican.html
Originally posted by LordKronos:
Thank you, exactly how I feel. I think when I start to see some success in the free Lamborghini movement, maybe then I will start believing in the free software movement.
Heh. You’re too late. The Free software movement is already an unmitigated success.
Do you work on the PS2? More than likely, you’re using Free Software.
Never heard of GNU/Linux? *BSD? How about the Internet? Yup… all built on Free Software.
The most popular web server (Apache) on the Internet is you guessed it… Free.
You should get out more often 
I find these both texts are too general (it’s probably my english)
You read all that already? Wow. Anyway, you may want to try the German version at http://www.gnu.org/home.de.html
And the last point I don’t understand. When you bought it under the gnu license from another one, are YOU allowed to sell it or even to give it to others???
Yes. That’s part of the freedom the GPL confers to you, the user.
That are actually the worst text I ever read, as they cover the topic like it would be a roman, being very nonspecific.
I don’t know what you mean by “like it would be a roman”.
With like a roman, I meant that they’re written like a letter to a best friend… don’t know how to express…
When you, the user, can sell it again, what stops you from selling exactly the same version for a smaller price?
Only the home page is german in your link…
Originally posted by Michael Steinberg:
With like a roman, I meant that they’re written like a letter to a best friend… don’t know how to express…
Say it in German then. I have access to two Germans in this office who will translate for me
When you, the user, can sell it again, what stops you from selling exactly the same version for a smaller price?
Nothing at all. Your price can even be $0.
I respect that the guy would like to get something from his work (I also respect open source). Quite frankly, if he GPL’ed it, and gave it away for free, but asked for donations, I would donate (as I probably will buy it if you do sell it with source).
My brain!!! It’s going to explode!!!
I’m not sure what to do any more.
Most of the sourcecode/libs that are free aren’t really free. You bought the code when you bought the hardware to use the code on…ie DirectX and OpenGL. Everyone has bought these libs. Every time you buy the hardware I might add.
When people give away their code, it’s a donation. It’s yours to do whatever you want with.
I don’t think I’m being paranoid either. Source code is like the blueprints to a product…except source code can be easily copied unlike a normal product. A normal product would cost time and money to copy.
I think the free source code movement started when individuals like myself wanted to get credit for their work, hoping a game developer might come across it.
I think we’ve found the downside to free source code. There are so many free libs and source code out there that everyone thinks it should all be free.
If you think that all source code should be free, then all software developers should give you their source code. If you think about it, they would lose money if they did that. It would be like undermining your own hardwork.
Software is a tricky buisness. It’s so easy to just copy and paste. If someone puts 1000 hours into developing a lib, then someone who obtains the source code without permision could easily add it to their program without a trace.
I’ve decided to sell it without source. This should actually be no problem simply because everything is contained in a class. You can use inheretence to add your own stuff to it. I think that’s fair. The only reason you would even need the source code is if you wanted to optomize what’s already coded…but if you wanted to, you can just add your own optomized code. You’re happy, I’m happy, and I can continue to make the library better with the money I make. The more money I make, the more time I can spend on the library.
Anyway, here’s another demo that I made using my library. It can detect point collision.
Bounce Demo
My brain!!! It’s going to explode!!!
I’ll stand back then
I’m not sure what to do any more.
mmmm… indecision.
Most of the sourcecode/libs that are free aren’t really free. You bought the code when you bought the hardware to use the code on…ie DirectX and OpenGL. Everyone has bought these libs. Every time you buy the hardware I might add.
?
I bought a dual PIII 800 recently with absolutely no software. Then I installed Mandrake (http://www.linuxmandrake.com/) from a CD I had previously downloaded.
It gave me a compiler (gcc) and OpenGL libs (Mesa3D), and didn’t cost me anything.
But again I stresss the point is not price… it’s freedom. Free-as-in-speech versus free-as-in-beer.
When people give away their code, it’s a donation. It’s yours to do whatever you want with.
Again (and again and again…) I never said give away your code.
I think the free source code movement started when individuals like myself wanted to get credit for their work, hoping a game developer might come across it.
Nope. See http://www.gnu.org/ for a history of the Free Software Movement.
I think we’ve found the downside to free source code. There are so many free libs and source code out there that everyone thinks it should all be free.
If you mean free-as-in-speech then I agree.
I think all software should be Free (libre).
If you mean free-as-in-beer, then you’re talking about something different.
If you think that all source code should be free, then all software developers should give you their source code. If you think about it, they would lose money if they did that. It would be like undermining your own hardwork.
Not at all. You would just need to find a different means of making money. Some companies (like http://www.cygwin.com/)) do very well making money with Free Software.
Software is a tricky buisness. It’s so easy to just copy and paste. If someone puts 1000 hours into developing a lib, then someone who obtains the source code without permision could easily add it to their program without a trace.
Sure. What’s your point?
I’ve decided to sell it without source.
Entirely your perogative (sp?).
The only reason you would even need the source code is if you wanted to optomize what’s already coded…but if you wanted to, you can just add your own optomized code.
Maybe I want to learn how you did something? Maybe I want to port your stuff to some new platform? Maybe I want to make sure you didn’t put in any backdoors that are going to fux04 my computer? Maybe…
So many reasons for wanting source
You’re happy, I’m happy, and I can continue to make the library better with the money I make. The more money I make, the more time I can spend on the library.
Money is a poor motivator. I used to have a link to various psychological studies that show this… maybe somewhere at home.
Anyways… if you’re happy with your decision, so be it. You asked for advice, I gave mine, and you’re free to ignore it
Cheers.
I don’t know about others, but the only reason I would buy the software is that I’m interested in learning how you did things. Anyway, still hope you make at least $25 off of it…
rts, you’re gonna have to change your wording for the meaning of free. I’ve read all your examples, and I still don’t understand your meaning of free. Explain your meaning as a dictionary would.
I’m not motivated by money at all. I’m motivated by my drive to learn programming and OpenGL, and to share my hard work with someone. Money would help me buy the things I need to further my knowege…like buying books, schooling, 3D software…anything that could help me make a better model library for you. It’s all for you. You pay me for the service of creating a model library, and you get a model library in return. That’s the way buisness works.
I respect all opinions in here. They will not go unnoticed.
Thank you for your encouragment HFAFiend =D.
rts, I’d like a few examples where a developer has released source code without the intent to boost their popularity. I can’t think of any that are open-source. MODs don’t count because they’re intended to advertise a product and company.
sorry to sound like a pesamist but,
Whatever, would you buy my model lib for $25 ?
It supports ase, obj, rtg, 3ds, blend shapes, vertex weighting, deformers, nurbs, bezier patches, shadows, all motion capture data files, gif, tga,tif,bmp texture files and a few other things besides.
Sounds great in theory, but I found that it was all fairly useless in practice. For the example of games, the chances are that you will only be wanting a very specific set of data so as to limit the processing to be exactly what is necassary, and no more than that. For example, what the point of implimenting a mesh structure that can deal with vertex weighting if you are programming a car racing game? Whats the point of implimenting blend shapes if memory requirements are going to be an issue? If you need further proof, open up Maya or Max, notice how much slower they go because they try to do everything for everyone?
All in all, if a programmer needs to do something in real time, they will investigate it themselves because it is partiacular for their needs. That code could easily be incorporated into future code, and the programmer would have a firm understanding of how it functions and how to impliment it in a way that is fast as possible.
I gave up on file formats quite a while ago and wrote my own plugins to export data from Maya & Max in my own format. My old lib was used to write a program to convert those files into files of my own format. Not that I ever use it, at the end of the day, what was inportant in the code was not the formats it supported, but the actual core data structure’s and functions that allowed me to have vertex weighting etc. Once that core is in place, writing a file translator to get data into it isn’t going to take me more that a few hours…
In my opinion, the most useful thing for a lib of that kind is as the basis to an app that would be of much use to the average programmer. Why not add extra code to turn it into a modelling & animation package? £3000 is a lot to pay for MAX (£20000 for Maya isn’t any better)
[This message has been edited by Rob The Bloke (edited 04-17-2001).]
Originally posted by rts:
Money is a poor motivator
But its a good provider. On the other hand, there are plenty of good motivators:
food, house payment, car payment, medical insurance, clothing, family, entertainment. They make me pretty motivated to get money. The point is that if you can get money for what you want, its a double win. Then you dont have to do something you dont like just to pay for things.
On another note, I am sick to death of hearing “free as in speech/free as in beer”, probably as sick to death as I am with the whole free software thing (esp. linux).
How ironic that the GPL is all about “freedom”, yet the one thing you arent free to do is use it in ANY way you want (including a closed source program).
And essentially, despite its claim of “free as in speech”, it essentially comes down to “free as in beer”, because you can take the code and do whatever you want, including give it away. And you know darn well that if a program is legally available for cheaper/free, most people are going to take up that offer. The only time this is generally not true is if they want the support of the developer, which brings this back to my original statement about making money via support/merchandising (likely doesnt apply to his scenario).
I dont mean to be insulting (though its probably going to come across that way, so oh well), but you almost sound brainwashed by the whole thing, as do most (not all) people I hear advocating the free software movement. They use the same catch phrases over-and-over (free speech/beer). Post links to the gnu site over and over and over and over and over and… And they generally have this fanaticism that you generally find in religious cults (thats what I call them) and other groups that try to force their beliefs upon you (I dont believe in abortion, but I dont think I have the right to tell other people not to believe in it).
You said “Free Software is the way”. Is it the way to support my family? Is it the way to ensure I have control over who has legal access to my MANY YEARS OF EFFORT? I think its a way to share knowledge. Heck, I even give away stuff for free every now and then (I came up with a few rather unique ideas that I shared on my web site), and I do it all without the need to advocate anything. Heck, I even give TRUE FREEDOM that you dont get from the GPL. My code is free to be used in any way you want. No stipulations. I ask for credit if you use my ideas, but I dont require it.
Good Lord, look how far off topic you have made me go.