[Wolves] "Proprietary Linux will be king within a very short time" (was CACert)

[Peter Cannon]

On Monday 08 May 2006 13:11, Daniel Jones wrote:

> You've been to one talk (and I'm sure it /was/ interesting and
> informative, and I'm not knocking it; I wouldn't be able to even if I
> wanted to, I wasn't there) but that does not make you an expert on the
> GPL.  However good the talk was, it would have been a synopsis and it
> wouldn't have been possible to cover the whole document.

Whoa hold the phone!! I never ever said I was an expert on GPL in fact I 
haven't the foggiest about it.

Oh and my life does not just revolve around the Wolves-LUG I go to lots of 
Talks and seminars in conjunction with my job within the IT industry.

> Unfortunately, it usually takes more than a little while to get you to
> that point though.

OK you want a flame war you can have one.

Yes it may take me a while to get there but at least I do.

That is the art of discussion putting across your case in such a way as the 
individual sees the mistake and corrects their outlook you on the other hand 
have started some sort of vendetta and have used every non-connected argument 
to try and make out god knows what.

You slag me off regarding Open Source then tell Shane and Kevan that what I 
was saying was correct then you make out I said or gave an indication that I 
am the master of GPL which I didn't

You did not understand the original emails, you did not understand what was 
being discussed. What was being said was that wether you like it or not 
either way a financial body IS required for certification for gods sake even 
LPI charges.

> It is not the (frankly IMHO mistaken) remark about Ubuntu which provoked my
> ire.

That's OK I may well be mistaken but that does not entitle you to insult me 
with your loyalty to what is hobby, its a piece of software for gods sake if 
you get so upset just because someone suggests you might have to pay for it 
IMHO that's a bit worrying.

> What wound me up was summed up by:
> "Once you have them by the balls their hearts and minds will follow"

But hang on, isn't that what everyone says about MS? why is it OK to say that 
about Microsoft and not Ubuntu? there seems to be a bit of dual standards 
here.

> The idea that there's some inevitability that Linux is somehow doomed
> to be run by suits, even if that's true (and I don't think it is) is
> actually pretty offensive.  

Offensive?? I don't understand? how on earth is it Offensive?

> The impression that you were looking 
> forward to it (and I apologise if I read that wrong) just added to it.

You did read it wrong! if anything it was a very gentle warning. Take 10 
minutes to look at the Novell site they are buying up stuff left, right and 
centre everyone keeps screaming that they want Linux to be mainstream and 
that's whats happening with the likes of Novell and Red Hat.

I'm not bothered either way I pay for most of my software (apart for Fedora) I 
am now entitled to get every release of CrossOver for free but I still pay 
for my copies out of choice.

Just so that we understand each other;

I do not use Linux for some lofty ideals, or that I don't have to pay for most 
of it, I have no gripes with MS I use Linux because I prefer it that's it in 
a nutshell 

> If that ever happened, I'd run across to BSD quicker than you can say
> 'fast buck'.
>
> So would a lot of others, I'm sure.  Some of them might even be able to
> code!

Your at it again, did I say people can't code, where is that in any of my 
posts? If your going to argue with me that's fine but don't make out I have 
said stuff I haven't.
Oh and don't try and make out I'm looking for some sort of punch up either I 
found that Offensive!

-- 
Regards
Peter Cannon
FC5 & SuSE10
Jabber:highwayman.turpin at gmail.com
www.cannon-linux.co.uk

"There is every excuse for not knowing
 There is no excuse for not asking"