jonathan@ukmug.uk.mugnet.org (Jonathan Allen) (05/27/91)
From: mitchell@MDI.COM (Bill Mitchell) > 1. CRC of the file to be patched. > Don't patch it unless the CRCs match > User must have an exact copy of the file-to-be-patched. No, this is no good. If I have implemented some nifty change of my own, then I can't spool in the changes without pulling all of my stuff out, then putting it back in again afterwards. Given the size of AM's modifications I hardly think that this would be an attractive proposal. > 2. list of ranges of lines to be deleted from the original file > something like "1,4,7-96,112" > this would include all lines which the changes either delete or modify See above - if my changes (even to the comments) change the line numbers then stuff gets blown away. > Seems this file ought to be free of copyrighted information > from the original file. Why is this desirable? Has Andy been sued over and over by PH for distributing cdiff's now, atlhough they contain PH's copyrighted code fragments ... not to mention all the others who do. In this batch of news, for example, what about Klamer's !# modification to MM - that includes MM code fragments as part of the posted cdiff. > Seems it shouldn't be too tough to implement a program to convert > diffs and cdiffs into this format, and to write a program to use > patch information in this format to patch files. Oh no, not another set of formats and conversion programs. It seems to me, IMHO, that the basic problem stems from the fact that PH are a book publisher and not a software company. If they were the right sort of business, they would be doing things the right way. IAC, copyrights and patent rights and trademarks and so on are a question of barter - based on the perceived value of what the original, the derivative and the enhancement are, negotiated between the parties involved. AFAIK, the real concern at PH is actually that they know that AM is BETTER (in some ways) than 'standard' MINIX, and if it were commonly available their sales (and hence profit) would slip. They don't want their product to become a 'second class' item. What they don't appreciate is that just about everyone runs some patches on vanilla MINIX (mine wouldn't fly without the PC shared text patches, for example) and that these have been collected together by NL-MUG (and others) to make into kits. I had a discussion of some length with our local PH representative on the question of upgrades. I have a customer who wants to upgrade 1.1 to 1.5, and buy the manuals. PH want to sell him the full 1.5 as they don't recognise 1.1 --> 1.5 as a valid upgrade, and there is (of course) no boot disc for 1.3 to prove ownership, since the chap is already running 1.3, having done the upgrades off the net. What would you do ? Jonathan
jonathan@ukmug.uk.mugnet.org (Jonathan Allen) (05/28/91)
Keywords: advanced minix mugnet PH Apologies if you read this twice ... some of my header dates cause CNews to drop my 'formal' news postings on the floor, and I wanted to be sure this would get out ... From: mitchell@MDI.COM (Bill Mitchell) > 1. CRC of the file to be patched. > Don't patch it unless the CRCs match > User must have an exact copy of the file-to-be-patched. No, this is no good. If I have implemented some nifty change of my own, then I can't spool in the changes without pulling all of my stuff out, then putting it back in again afterwards. Given the size of AM's modifications I hardly think that this would be an attractive proposal. > 2. list of ranges of lines to be deleted from the original file > something like "1,4,7-96,112" > this would include all lines which the changes either delete or modify See above - if my changes (even to the comments) change the line numbers then stuff gets blown away. > Seems this file ought to be free of copyrighted information > from the original file. Why is this desirable? Has Andy been sued over and over by PH for distributing cdiff's now, atlhough they contain PH's copyrighted code fragments ... not to mention all the others who do. In this batch of news, for example, what about Klamer's !# modification to MM - that includes MM code fragments as part of the posted cdiff. > Seems it shouldn't be too tough to implement a program to convert > diffs and cdiffs into this format, and to write a program to use > patch information in this format to patch files. Oh no, not another set of formats and conversion programs. It seems to me, IMHO, that the basic problem stems from the fact that PH are a book publisher and not a software company. If they were the right sort of business, they would be doing things the right way. IAC, copyrights and patent rights and trademarks and so on are a question of barter - based on the perceived value of what the original, the derivative and the enhancement are, negotiated between the parties involved. AFAIK, the real concern at PH is actually that they know that AM is BETTER (in some ways) than 'standard' MINIX, and if it were commonly available their sales (and hence profit) would slip. They don't want their product to become a 'second class' item. What they don't appreciate is that just about everyone runs some patches on vanilla MINIX (mine wouldn't fly without the PC shared text patches, for example) and that these have been collected together by NL-MUG (and others) to make into kits. I had a discussion of some length with our local PH representative on the question of upgrades. I have a customer who wants to upgrade 1.1 to 1.5, and buy the manuals. PH want to sell him the full 1.5 as they don't recognise 1.1 --> 1.5 as a valid upgrade, and there is (of course) no boot disc for 1.3 to prove ownership, since the chap is already running 1.3, having done the upgrades off the net. What would you do ? Jonathan
dprrhb@inetg1.ARCO.COM (Reginald H. Beardsley) (05/30/91)
In article <910527186@ukmug.uk.mugnet.org>, jonathan@ukmug.uk.mugnet.org (Jonathan Allen) writes: [ text deleted] > > > It seems to me, IMHO, that the basic problem stems from the fact that > PH are a book publisher and not a software company. If they were the > right sort of business, they would be doing things the right way. > IAC, copyrights and patent rights and trademarks and so on are a > question of barter - based on the perceived value of what the original, > the derivative and the enhancement are, negotiated between the parties > involved. You're quite correct. If PH were not a book publisher the problem wouldn't exist. There would be NO source code available. > > AFAIK, the real concern at PH is actually that they know that AM is > BETTER (in some ways) than 'standard' MINIX, and if it were commonly > available their sales (and hence profit) would slip. They don't want > their product to become a 'second class' item. What they don't > appreciate is that just about everyone runs some patches on vanilla > MINIX (mine wouldn't fly without the PC shared text patches, for > example) > and that these have been collected together by NL-MUG (and others) to > make into kits. Better than PH's distribution? For what? Andy put a LOT of work into creating Minix in the first place. What goes (or does not go) into PH is his call. What goes into your system is your call. However, the carping above is bad manners. You should apologize. > I had a discussion of some length with our local PH representative > on the question of upgrades. I have a customer who wants to upgrade > 1.1 to 1.5, and buy the manuals. PH want to sell him the full 1.5 > as they don't recognise 1.1 --> 1.5 as a valid upgrade, and there is > (of course) no boot disc for 1.3 to prove ownership, since the chap > is already running 1.3, having done the upgrades off the net. What > would you do ? Pay PH the measly $169 for the regular distribution. Will Borland let you upgrade for free from the net? Microsoft? ANYONE ELSE? Will they let you have the source? Andy worked for several years to create Minix in the first place. He went to the trouble of distributing it through a book publisher. Show me a SINGLE software vendor selling a comparable product for a better price or with more generous terms. Fred has the problems he deserves (as we all do). If you don't like PH's policy don't use Minix. Coherent is similar, sold by a software vendor, doesn't provide source, doesn't provide upgrades over the net, and is cheaper than Minix. What more do you want? Sorry, folks, but the carping about PH really gets to me some days. I buy a lot of books from them. They do a very good job of editing and publishing. Their marketing of Minix could be a bit more aggressive, but they don't think in terms of adding in the cost of hundreds of full page ads to each of their products. Why do people spend thousands of dollars for hardware and then balk at the price of a book? Sigh.... -- Reginald H. Beardsley ARCO Information Services Plano, TX 75075 Phone: (214)-754-6785 Internet: dprrhb@arco.com
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (05/31/91)
In article <1991May30.140729.15683@Arco.COM> dprrhb@inetg1.ARCO.COM (Reginald H. Beardsley) writes: >In article <910527186@ukmug.uk.mugnet.org>, jonathan@ukmug.uk.mugnet.org >(Jonathan Allen) writes: > >[ text deleted] >> >> >> It seems to me, IMHO, that the basic problem stems from the fact that >> PH are a book publisher and not a software company. If they were the >> right sort of business, they would be doing things the right way. >> IAC, copyrights and patent rights and trademarks and so on are a >> question of barter - based on the perceived value of what the original, >> the derivative and the enhancement are, negotiated between the parties >> involved. > >You're quite correct. If PH were not a book publisher the problem wouldn't >exist. There would be NO source code available. > > This is in no way meant as disrespect towards MINIX or its creator, but this is NOT the same as a product such as Unix, Finder, AmigaDOS, OS/9, etc. This is code MEANT to be used primarily in an educational environment to teach the principles of writing an operating system. One of the main selling points of Tannenbaum's book is that it includes the MINIX source and discusses it. If they didn't reveal the source, IMNSHO, the book would be just another of the many books on operating systems and they'd make practically no money. Instead, BECAUSE the source is public, it is a popular book. Now consider my position. At Columbia, you can get the MS-DOS and Mac versions for FREE because this is for educational purposes. Meanwhile, I can't get a version for my Amiga, since Columbia doesn't support us in any way, unless I pay prentice hall $169. This is for a product that is redistributable for educational purposes. This isn't going to make them money. Certainly not from me at least. Instead, it means that, instead of doing work from my room on my machine, I have to go to some silly computer lab and work on PS/2s. Joy. >Pay PH the measly $169 for the regular distribution. Will Borland let you >upgrade for free from the net? Microsoft? ANYONE ELSE? Will they let you >have the source? > Sorry, I'm a college student. $169 is NOT measly. Especially for something which I'll be using for one semester, and considering the fact that I'm not paying for the source, I'm paying for an Amigatized version of that source which has been compiled. And, as an example of companies that DO give free upgrades, there is Apple and Commodore. Apple IS giving free upgrades, and from the net. Commodore is giving free upgrades to the new version of the OS to anyone who bought a machine after April 15 of last year. >Andy worked for several years to create Minix in the first place. He went >to the trouble of distributing it through a book publisher. Show me a >SINGLE software vendor selling a comparable product for a better price or >with more generous terms. Fred has the problems he deserves (as we all >do). >If you don't like PH's policy don't use Minix. Coherent is similar, sold >by >a software vendor, doesn't provide source, doesn't provide upgrades over >the net, and is cheaper than Minix. What more do you want? > Ah, that's where you are wrong. If Coherent doesn't include source, it ISN'T similar. What Minix's main selling point is is that it comes with source. It is used in university after university for that very reason. In fact, I don't know of any similar products, and perhaps that is part of the problem: no competition. Just one question: how many copies of Tannenbaum's book are sold each year? How many would be sold if it weren't for the Minix included with it? Now the world has gone to bed, Now I lay me down to sleep, Darkness won't engulf my head, Try to count electric sheep, I can see by infrared, Sweet dream wishes you can keep, How I hate the night. How I hate the night. -- Marvin
rik@dec01.fcit.monash.edu.au (Rik Harris) (05/31/91)
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: > This is in no way meant as disrespect towards MINIX or >its creator, but this is NOT the same as a product such as Unix, >Finder, AmigaDOS, OS/9, etc. This is code MEANT to be used >primarily in an educational environment to teach the principles >of writing an operating system. > One of the main selling points of Tannenbaum's book is >that it includes the MINIX source and discusses it. If they >didn't reveal the source, IMNSHO, the book would be just another >of the many books on operating systems and they'd make >practically no money. Instead, BECAUSE the source is public, it >is a popular book. I don't consider Andrew's book as "just another ... book on operating systems". His books and research papers are very readable and most understandable. I have learnt quite a lot on Operating Systems and Computer Networks from Andy's books and papers. The fact that he wrote his own OS is a plus, indeed. You can buy all you need to get minix running, with quite a lot of documentation with the program, and don't need the book to get the source. > Now consider my position. At Columbia, you can get the >MS-DOS and Mac versions for FREE because this is for educational >purposes. Meanwhile, I can't get a version for my Amiga, since >Columbia doesn't support us in any way, unless I pay prentice >hall $169. This is for a product that is redistributable for >educational purposes. This isn't going to make them money. >Certainly not from me at least. Instead, it means that, instead >of doing work from my room on my machine, I have to go to some >silly computer lab and work on PS/2s. Joy. So perhaps you should complain to Columbia, along with all the other potential Amiga users, to get them to buy it. Otherwise, do what you would do with any other software that is only available on PC's, and go off to the labs. rik. -- Rik Harris - rik.harris@monash.edu.au || | | |\ | | \/ +61 3 571-2895 (AH,ans.mach) +61 3 573-2428 (BH) || |__| | \| | /\ Faculty of Computing and Information Technology, || Caulfield Campus, Monash University, Australia || RULES