[linux-elitists] FAT is the new GIF?

Dave Crossland dave@lab6.com
Thu Feb 26 19:44:35 PST 2009

2009/2/27 Jim Thompson <jim@netgate.com>:
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Dave Crossland <dave@lab6.com> wrote:
>> 2009/2/27 Jim Thompson <jim@netgate.com>:
>> > On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 4:38 PM, Dave Crossland <dave@lab6.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I don't know anything about TomTom's GUI stack, but I assume that
>> >> alll GNU/Linux embedded device developers are either directly or
>> >> indirectly
>> >> vulnerable to this patent in the same way.
>> >
>> > TomTom was staring into the abyss anyway.  Standalone GPS devices are a
>> > dead-end, subsummed by... everything. (Phones, PDAs, netbooks, etc.
>> > They'll all have GPS devices embedded soon.)
>> > Given the Android stack, I doubt most companies would go down the road
>> > followed by TomTom, were they to start today.
>> Maybe, maybe not. Seems to me, the point of software freedom is, who can
>> tell?
> I don't think that "let 1K flowers bloom" was the point of software freedom.
>  It occurs nowhere in the "4 freedoms".
> it *is* an interesting side-effect.
> Anyway, the point was that stand-alone GPS is a passing fad.

GPS is, but some new CE startup might not want to use the large,
single-corp-gatekeeper'd distro, as TomTom chose to in the past. I
agree that most will choose that (I'm developing free fonts and
targetting Android myself) but I think its important not to shift from
most to all.

> Five years from now, Android will equate to "Google" for many, if not most.

Five years from now, Android might be only available on tivoised devices.

>> So startups get choice between Windows Mobile, Google Android, or (say) a
>> Novell-Microsoft blessed/branded derivative of GNOME Mobile, but not
>> actually software freedom?
> Many (perhaps most) startups don't care as much about software freedom as
> they do getting to the market with a solution that meets some (set of)
> need(s) quickly, with minimal cash burn, in a way that doesn't complicate
> things down the road.
> I'm not saying thats right, I'm saying its reality.

I'm saying that "in a way that doesn't complicate things down the
road" collides with this patent attack :-)

More information about the linux-elitists mailing list