__/ [rapskat] on Monday 12 September 2005 18:50 \__
> On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 18:09:46 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>> I know that they have contributed in some small degree to various OSS
>>> projects. However this doesn't change the fact that they are 100% M$
>>> only when it comes to their products and services for the desktop.
>>> Google Desktop...Windows only.
>>> Google Earth...Windows only.
>>> Google Picasa...Windows only.
>>> Google Talk...Windows only.
>>> Google Toolbar...Windows only.
>>> Google Send-to-Phone...Windows only.
>>> Google Web Accelerator...Windows only.
>>> Google Video Viewer...Windows only.
>>> Google Deskbar...Windows only.
>> Wrong. [sarcasm] The Google Toolbar for Firefox was made available a
>> month or two ago.
> Not from Google. That is an independent OSS project not in any way
> affiliated with Google.
I am not talking about GoogleBar or PRGoogleBar. Google released a homebred
toolbar. Have a quick look if you do not believe me.
>>> Whatever tiny contributions they've made to whatever projects are
>>> completely dwarfed by the amount that they've made and saved by using
>>> OSS products, and as well by the fact that they completely ignore the
>>> Linux desktop with their products and do nothing to add value to the end
>>> user Linux desktop as they do for Windows.
>> That is the nature of indulging on the audience that makes a majority.
> At the cost of alienating the source of your cash cow? Not sound
> There is nothing preventing them from offering equal and/or equivelant
> products and services for both platforms. For every thing they do for
> Windows, there should be an equivelant thing for the Linux.
I have received a message from DiBona minutes ago. It seems as if Linux
equivalents will follow. Let's just be patient.
>>> To add insult to injury, they don't even use their brand name
>>> to promote Linux and OSS technologies to the world! Even though they
>>> use it themselves, it's like something they're ashamed of and only
>>> have divulged that they use. There are no prominent pages or links on
>>> their site dedicated to Linux/OSS, telling people about it and what it
>>> is or what it can do.
>> In their defence, promoting an operating system, which is something
>> Google do not deal with directly, would appear like propaganda and become
>> a repellent.
> How so? All of the "<insert vendor here> recommends Microsoft Windows"
> banners I see all over the place are not repellent? Well, they are to me,
> but you get my meaning. :-)
This speaks of an actual fact. Hardware of a Dell machine, for example, is
designed for and tested on Windows platforms.
>>> For what Linux/OSS has done for Google, they should be much more
>>> and giving back alot more than what they are. Not because they have to,
>>> but out of sheer appreciation for everything that Linux/OSS has done for
>>> them. My little shop donates a portion of the profits that we make
>>> using Linux/OSS to various OSS projects on a regular basis, in addition
>>> to promoting it to various businesses, organizations and individuals in
>>> the local and surrounding areas. We proudly display Linux and OSS on our
>>> marketing materials and website and have various links and articles
>>> about it. We certainly make a hell of a lot less from it than Google
>> I believe this is bound to change, especially with appropriate criticism,
>> which I am sure these posts project.
> I certainly hope so. Apparently from Mark's post I am not the only person
> in the community to feel this way or express it.
You are not alone in this, but you may be more vocal then others and the
arguments you outlined are rather powerful.
>>> Google is an OSS parasite. They are in a position to do so much for
>>> Linux/OSS, but all they do is take big and give a pittance in return.
>> One thing that I can assure you they do is employ people with *nix
>> skills, which in turn helps support Open Source. One could argue the
>> contrary and say that brain drain affects OSS the most, and not always
> Precisely. Taking away from OSS. On top of that, no doubt that they have
> some sort of clause in their employment contract that effectively states
> that anything developed by their employees belongs to Google. How does
> that effect OSS development? How do we know that they won't pull a SCO in
> the future with the code contributions that their employees have made to
> various OSS projects?
Don't compare Google to SCO. It will never happen and you know it.
> They certainly haven't shown any major effort of good faith that would
> convince me otherwise. Everything they've done has been 100%
What do you call Summer of Code and the involvement in OSS? It sure counts
for something, but as I said before, you expect the reciprocity to have a
correlation with impact and the figures in the bank account.
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Double your drive space - delete Windows"
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 74572E8E
1:25am up 18 days 20:31, 3 users, load average: 0.76, 0.71, 0.81