korp@atlantis.ees.anl.gov (Peter Korp) (11/15/90)
SunFLASH Vol 23 #12 November 1990
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Package Includes Window System and Toolkits
MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. -- November 13, 1990 -- Sun Microsystems
announced today that the source code for its OpenWindows(TM)
application development environment will now be available free of
charge (cost of media only -- $995). This means that hardware and
software developers will now have a cost-effective way to incorporate
OpenWindows -- including the easy-to-use OPEN LOOK(R) graphical user
interface -- into applications developed or ported to many platforms
from different vendors.
The package includes code for the X11/NeWs(TM) Window System, OPEN LOOK
toolkits, and OpenFonts(TM) with its TypeScaler(TM) technology. Before
today, only OpenWindows binaries were available from Sun.
"Offering free source code for the industry's most advanced,
comprehensive window environment demonstrates our ongoing commitment to
open systems," said Ed Zander, vice president of marketing at Sun.
Advanced Imaging Model
The X11/NeWS Window System that is part of the source package combines
a fully compliant X implementation with Sun's NeWS(R) technology, which
offers the most advanced PostScript(R) imaging model available today.
NeWS lets developers work with interactive, on-screen PostScript
graphics -- particularly useful for commercial applications such as
desktop publishing and multimedia.
Also part of the source code package is OpenFonts -- Sun's
nonproprietary font technology, which includes 57 scalable fonts.
OPEN LOOK Toolkits Provide Portability
The keys to OpenWindows' portability are two OPEN LOOK toolkits,
XView(TM) and the OPEN LOOK Intrinsics Toolkit (OLIT). XView is Sun's
X-based toolkit that gives developers an easy way to design new
applications with the OPEN LOOK graphical user interface, as well as to
migrate the 2,800 existing kernel-based SunView(TM) applications to the
networked window environment of OPEN LOOK and X.
The OLIT toolkit -- based on AT&T's OPEN LOOK toolkit (XT+) --
implements the OPEN LOOK look and feel and supports MIT Intrinsics.
The XView toolkit is also offered free on the X11 R4 tape available
from MIT. OpenWindows is a standard part of the industry's leading
UNIX(R) operating system, UNIX System V Release 4 from AT&T.
Since OPEN LOOK toolkits will be available for a range of platforms,
developers can standardize on a single graphical interface. Toolkits
from Sun and other vendors are available now or will be offered within
three months for UNIX workstations from Digital Equipment Corp.,
Hewlett-Packard and IBM, for VAX/VMS systems from Digital.
Availability
OpenWindows source code will be available January 1, 1991 on magnetic
tape for $995 (which includes the cost of media and documentation)
through Sun distributors. The source license is included at no cost.
There are no royalties for distributing applications developed with
OpenWindows. Hardware vendors will pay nominal royalties for systems
they resell that run the OpenWindows environment.
Sun Microsystems, Inc., headquartered in Mountain View, Calif., is a
leading worldwide supplier of network-based distributed computing
systems, including professional workstations, servers and UNIX
operating system and productivity software.
###
OpenWindows, XView, X11/NeWS, OpenFonts and TypeScaler are trademarks
and NeWS is a registered trademark of Sun Microsystems, Inc. OPEN LOOK
and UNIX are registered trademarks of UNIX System Laboratories, Inc.
PostScript is a registered trademark of Adobe Systems, Inc. All other
products or services mentioned in this document are identified by the
trademarks or service marks of their respective companies or
organizations.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Cathleen Beall Garfield (415) 336-6536
Diana Murray OpenWindows Licensing Manager (415) 336-1567
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ea08+@andrew.cmu.edu (Eric A. Anderson) (11/16/90)
>will now be available free of charge (cost of media only -- $995).
Does this mean that they will be making it available on the net?
Becuase then the cost of media should be $0.
Thanks in advance,
-Eric
*********************************************************
"My life is full of additional complications spinning around until
it makes my head snap off."
-Unc. Known.
"You are very smart, now shut up."
-In "The Princess Bride"
*********************************************************wnp@iiasa.ac.at (wolf paul) (11/16/90)
In article <1990Nov15.144507.22915@mcs.anl.gov> korp@atlantis.ees.anl.gov (Peter Korp) writes: > >SunFLASH Vol 23 #12 November 1990 >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. -- November 13, 1990 -- Sun Microsystems >announced today that the source code for its OpenWindows(TM) >application development environment will now be available free of >charge (cost of media only -- $995). Will Sun permit the redistribution of this source code via the usual USENET channels, i.e. anon-ftp, anon-uucp, and archive servers? What media does this come on that cost nearly $1000? Note that I am not griping, just asking questions. I think it is great of Sun to make this available, even at $1000. -- Wolf N. Paul, UNIX SysAdmin, IIASA, A - 2361 Laxenburg, Austria, Europe PHONE: +43-2236-71521-465 FAX: +43-2236-71313 UUCP: uunet!iiasa!wnp INTERNET: wnp%iiasa@relay.eu.net BITNET: tuvie!iiasa!wnp@awiuni01.BITNET
mouse@LIGHTNING.MCRCIM.MCGILL.EDU (11/16/90)
> MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. -- November 13, 1990 -- Sun Microsystems > announced today that the source code for its OpenWindows(TM) > application development environment will now be available free of > charge (cost of media only -- $995). A thousand dollars for media? What's it on, gold tape? > OpenWindows source code will be available January 1, 1991 on magnetic > tape for $995 (which includes the cost of media and documentation) Ah, a doc set too. That's more reasonable. > through Sun distributors. The source license is included at no cost. I'm impressed. (I'd be more impressed if they'd put it up for anonymous ftp, but this is still a significant move.) > There are no royalties for distributing applications developed with > OpenWindows. Hardware vendors will pay nominal royalties for systems > they resell that run the OpenWindows environment. Hmmm, this sounds ominous. Could someone (someone from Sun, say) post the text of the license? I've been assuming that if the source is supposedly available free, it is also freely redistributable. If this is not true, I'll have to revise my opinion, but I don't want to jump to conclusions. (Calling it "free" but charging money and restricting redistribution would be an impressive piece of doublespeak. I hope my trepidation is baseless....) > FOR MORE INFORMATION: > Cathleen Beall Garfield (415) 336-6536 > Diana Murray OpenWindows Licensing Manager (415) 336-1567 Hey, Sun, email addresses would have been nice...I wouldn't've had to bother the whole net with this then; I could've asked directly...or did the person who transcribed this miss them? (Seems doubtful.) der Mouse old: mcgill-vision!mouse new: mouse@larry.mcrcim.mcgill.edu
fullmer@alfalfa.sps.mot.com (Glen Fullmer) (11/16/90)
In article <1990Nov15.144507.22915@mcs.anl.gov> korp@atlantis.ees.anl.gov (Peter Korp) writes:
MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. -- November 13, 1990 -- Sun Microsystems
announced today that the source code for its OpenWindows(TM)
application development environment will now be available free of
charge (cost of media only -- $995). This means that hardware and
^^^^^
Expensive media! Ok, I understand -- its the pay that Sun gives its
tape operators! ;-)
--
___ _ "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence"
{__/ // "over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled."
\ // _ ___ Dick Feynman, Appendix F of Shuttle Disaster Report
{__/ </_</_// <_ fullmer@alfalfa.sps.mot.com sun!sunburn!dover!fullmerlcp@ibism.UUCP (Larry Poleshuck) (11/16/90)
In article <1990Nov15.144507.22915@mcs.anl.gov>, korp@atlantis.ees.anl.gov (Peter Korp) writes: > > MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. -- November 13, 1990 -- Sun Microsystems > announced today that the source code for its OpenWindows(TM) > application development environment will now be available free of > charge (cost of media only -- $995). This means that hardware and What media are you using -- gold-plated clay tablets? -- Larry Poleshuck Citibank 111 Wall Street New York, NY 10043 Phone: 212-657-7709 Fax: 212-657-0068 E-Mail: uunet!ibism!lcp
lewine@cheshirecat.webo.dg.com (Donald Lewine) (11/17/90)
In article <1990Nov15.144507.22915@mcs.anl.gov>, korp@atlantis.ees.anl.gov (Peter Korp) writes: |> free of |> charge (cost of media only -- $995). Yes, Lotus 1-2-3 is FREE also when you pay $495 for the media. If this media costs SUN $995 I would like to talk to them about selling them blank tapes. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Donald A. Lewine (508) 870-9008 Voice Data General Corporation (508) 366-0750 FAX 4400 Computer Drive. MS D112A Westboro, MA 01580 U.S.A. uucp: uunet!dg!lewine Internet: lewine@cheshirecat.webo.dg.com
ittai@shemesh.GBA.NYU.EDU (Ittai Hershman) (11/17/90)
application development environment will now be available free of
charge (cost of media only -- $995).
When OpenWindows 1.0 (binary FCS) was released it also just had a
media charge, but it was only $295.
The irony here is that this $995 media cost is just $5 less than a
Motif source ***license***. To be fair, there are no royalties owed
to Sun for any derivative binaries, whereas Motif binaries are subject
to a royalty payment. Source-licensed universities can distribute
Motif binaries in-house for free, all others pay based on a sliding
quantity scale (from $40 quantity one, down to $10 for the quantities
a hardware vendor ships).
No flames please. I'm just pointing out that Sun('s pot) can't really
call the OSF kettle black.
-Ittai
PS: This analysis doesn't apply to those of you who want NeWS,
however.jpmg@eng.cam.ac.uk (Patrick Gosling) (11/18/90)
In article <1154@dg.dg.com> uunet!dg!lewine writes: >|> free of >|> charge (cost of media only -- $995). > >If this media costs SUN $995 I would like to talk to them about >selling them blank tapes. Just to be fair to sun, I gather that what you get for your $995 includes a fairly large stack of documentation. Take the price that GNU (sorry, the FSF) (for example) charge for media ($150 per tape isn't it?), and the kind of price you pay for books nowadays, and it don't seem _too_ bad. just my 2p's worth ... share+enjoy, Patrick -- Patrick Gosling, jpmg@eng.cam.ac.uk Cambridge Univ. Engineering Dept., UK.
mleisher@nmsu.edu (Mark Leisher) (11/18/90)
Let's not forget DOCUMENTATION! It probably weighs more than a SPARCStation. Most likely the reason for the $995. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- mleisher@nmsu.edu "I laughed. Mark Leisher I cried. Computing Research Lab I fell down. New Mexico State University It changed my life." Las Cruces, NM - Rich [Cowboy Feng's Space Bar and Grille]
dbrooks@penge.osf.org (David Brooks) (11/18/90)
In article <7247@shemesh.GBA.NYU.EDU> ittai@shemesh.GBA.NYU.EDU (Ittai Hershman) writes: >To be fair, there are no royalties owed >to Sun for any derivative binaries, whereas Motif binaries are subject >to a royalty payment. No; this is from the Sun annoucement: There are no royalties for distributing applications developed with OpenWindows. Hardware vendors will pay nominal royalties for systems they resell that run the OpenWindows environment. This doesn't explicitly cover software operations that resell binaries with added value, but the above two cases are the same for Motif. -- David Brooks dbrooks@osf.org Systems Engineering, OSF uunet!osf.org!dbrooks "No, I didn't say I wanted a Bud light!!!" -- Oedipus
carroll@cs.uiuc.edu (Alan M. Carroll) (11/19/90)
In article <17545@rasp.eng.cam.ac.uk>, jpmg@eng.cam.ac.uk (Patrick Gosling) writes: > In article <1154@dg.dg.com> uunet!dg!lewine writes: > >|> free of > >|> charge (cost of media only -- $995). > > > >If this media costs SUN $995 I would like to talk to them about > >selling them blank tapes. > > Just to be fair to sun, I gather that what you get for your $995 includes a > fairly large stack of documentation. Take the price that GNU (sorry, the > FSF) (for example) charge for media ($150 per tape isn't it?), and the kind > of price you pay for books nowadays, and it don't seem _too_ bad. > Isn't it $150 for all of the GNU stuff, not per tape? And if you need $850 worth of books to use OpenWindows, I'm not going anywhere near it. Also, my impression is that the FSF deliberately sets the price of their tapes high to discourage people from actually ordering them, instead of getting the stuff off the net or from a friend. How many people do you know that run Emacs and actually paid for a GNU tape? If Sun doesn't allow the source to be put on an anon-FTP site, then there's no comparison to GNU source, regardless of the the FSF charges per tape. -- Alan M. Carroll Barbara/Marilyn in '92 : Epoch Development Team + This time, why not choose the better halves? CS Grad / U of Ill @ Urbana ...{ucbvax,pur-ee,convex}!cs.uiuc.edu!carroll
korp@atlantis.ees.anl.gov (Peter Korp) (11/19/90)
In article <16263@paperboy.OSF.ORG> dbrooks@osf.org (David Brooks) writes: >In article <7247@shemesh.GBA.NYU.EDU> ittai@shemesh.GBA.NYU.EDU (Ittai Hershman) writes: >>To be fair, there are no royalties owed >>to Sun for any derivative binaries, whereas Motif binaries are subject >>to a royalty payment. > >No; this is from the Sun annoucement: > > There are no royalties for distributing applications developed with > OpenWindows. Hardware vendors will pay nominal royalties for systems > they resell that run the OpenWindows environment. > >This doesn't explicitly cover software operations that resell binaries >with added value, but the above two cases are the same for Motif. Yes this is true for Motif, but if we talk Open Look and Motif only then this is somewhat misleading. Open Look, in the form of the XView toolkit is free to all, no strings attached. Now if you were just comparing OpenWindows with Motif I agree the policy seems to be very similar. But if you do this comparison then you are comparing apples to oranges. >-- >David Brooks dbrooks@osf.org >Systems Engineering, OSF uunet!osf.org!dbrooks >"No, I didn't say I wanted a Bud light!!!" -- Oedipus Peter
korp@atlantis.ees.anl.gov (Peter Korp) (11/19/90)
>In article <17545@rasp.eng.cam.ac.uk>, jpmg@eng.cam.ac.uk (Patrick Gosling) writes: >> In article <1154@dg.dg.com> uunet!dg!lewine writes: >> >|> free of >> >|> charge (cost of media only -- $995). >> > >> >If this media costs SUN $995 I would like to talk to them about >> >selling them blank tapes. >> >> Just to be fair to sun, I gather that what you get for your $995 includes a >> fairly large stack of documentation. Take the price that GNU (sorry, the >> FSF) (for example) charge for media ($150 per tape isn't it?), and the kind >> of price you pay for books nowadays, and it don't seem _too_ bad. >> Since the announcement I have heard all the talk of the mysterious $995 *media* charge. They do seem to use gold tape no? Well it seems there is an answer to all this. In attempting to make OpenWindows freely available Sun had to negotiate with AT&T. Apparently some AT&T code exists in OW 2.0 or own some rights to it. Therefore, the best deal(?) Sun could come up with was to charge a rather large one time fee for docs and media yet allow you to copy source freely. The costs for redistributing binaries of OpenWindows with systems is also basiclly to cover the royalties to AT&T for each copy. An interesting side effect is that if you port OpenWindows to a non-UNIX platform then no royalties must be paid. So it is not as great a deal as we all wish it would have been, but I think Sun has got the right intentions. Let us hope that OpenWindows version 3 will be kept clear of all of these licensing issues. As a side note, since the announcement by Sun I have found at least 3 vendors whose engineering groups are claiming to be ready to ship X11/NeWS servers with their hardware/UNIX. 1) Everex - PC maker and ESIX makers will ship X11/NeWS with release 4 of ESIX this will be sometime Q1-91. 2) Commodore - Makers of the Amiga and also V.4 on Amigas, says that once the current implementation of X11R4 is up, they will concentrate on porting X11/NeWS to their system. Timeframe, probably Q2-91 3) UHX - Makers of some techinally cool hardware, i860/486 machines claims to be shipping X11/NeWS as part of their V.4 package. This seems to be a good start for OpenWindows. Peter
bob@odi.COM (Bob Miner) (11/19/90)
Peter Korp <korp@atlantis.ees.anl.gov> writes: > In attempting to make OpenWindows > freely available Sun had to negotiate with AT&T. Apparently some > AT&T code exists in OW 2.0 or own some rights to it. Therefore, > the best deal(?) Sun could come up with was to charge a rather > large one time fee Yup, that sounds right, it has the smell of the dead hand of AT+T's lawyers all over it. (calm down Tim ...) The code in question must be the OLIT widget set, AT+T have been selling source licences for $1000 for some while (we have one), like motif. It sure would be nice if Solbourne would take a similar approach with their OI toolkit and drop the price of source from $10,000 (last I knew) to something reasonable like $1000. Perhaps this will spur them on. Bob Miner ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Object Design, Inc. ~ OOOOOO 1 New England Executive Park ~ OOOO OOOO Burlington, MA 01803 USA ~ OOOOO OOOOO bob@odi.com -or- uunet!odi!bob ~ OOOO OOOO voice: (617) 270-9797 FAX: (617) 270-3509 ~ OOOOOO bject Design Inc. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "From there to here, from here to there, funny things are everywhere." - Dr. Seuss ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
fgreco@dprg-330.GOVt.shearson.COM (Frank Greco) (11/19/90)
>Yes, Lotus 1-2-3 is FREE also when you pay $495 for the media. If >this media costs SUN $995 I would like to talk to them about >selling them blank tapes. The $995 includes *all* the docs and the media costs which include: X/NeWS manuals, NeWS 2.1 manuals, Xt Intrinsics manuals, OLIT docs, the two Addison Wesley OPEN LOOK books, the "red" and "blue" Adobe Postscript books, 3 O'Reilly Books (Vols 1, 2 and 7), and the tape. Of course in this price, there is an embedded cost of duplication, ie, paying people to handle the duplication process, paying people to box this stuff, paying people to handle shipping these things out and tracking them, and support (for binary *and now* source) costs. Quite frankly (and of course I'm "frank" with everyone ;-), a one-time cost $995 for an entire (non-reseller) installation is certainly inexpensive. I was told that educational institutions will get it at standard academic pricing, ie, cheaper. Perhaps Economics 101 is in order? I heard they talk about "widgets" too ;-> Frank G. If you happened to be at the NeWS BOF at Unix Expo in NYC, you could have obtained all this for free. Sun donated about 100 sets of the docs and "expensive" media to Open Vistas. ..talk about a feeding frenzy!
mwm@raven.relay.pa.dec.com (Mike (My Watch Has Windows) Meyer) (11/20/90)
In article <12086@ibism.uucp> lcp@ibism.UUCP (Larry Poleshuck) writes: In article <1990Nov15.144507.22915@mcs.anl.gov>, korp@atlantis.ees.anl.gov (Peter Korp) writes: > charge (cost of media only -- $995). This means that hardware and What media are you using -- gold-plated clay tablets? The same stuff BSD ships their distribution on? I don't know what's in the distribution, but if you assume that it's about the same size as X11, then you've got 4 tapes worth of stuff. Assuming you get a full set of documentation, you're getting about the same set of stuff that BSD ships in their distribution. And all they charge you is "media" charges. Last time I looked, CSRG wanted $700 for a BSD tape set. Given that CSRG was using student labor to copy tapes, they should be noticably cheaper. The price is very high for "free" software; especially if you're used to microcomputer software prices. For workstation software, that's not a high price. And it's in line with other "free" unix distributions of similar size. <mike --
xpert@HYDRO.SAIC.COM (xpert_news) (11/20/90)
Would you please post or email the address/phone no of UHX (the makers of an i860/486 machine) Thanks much in advance.
poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger) (11/20/90)
In article <17545@rasp.eng.cam.ac.uk> jpmg@eng.cam.ac.uk (Patrick Gosling) writes: >In article <1154@dg.dg.com> uunet!dg!lewine writes: >>|> free of >>|> charge (cost of media only -- $995). >> >>If this media costs SUN $995 I would like to talk to them about >>selling them blank tapes. > >Just to be fair to sun, I gather that what you get for your $995 includes a >fairly large stack of documentation. Take the price that GNU (sorry, the >FSF) (for example) charge for media ($150 per tape isn't it?), and the kind >of price you pay for books nowadays, and it don't seem _too_ bad. > >just my 2p's worth ... >share+enjoy, > Yeah, but if you have net access, you can get it for FREE via ftp from many sites. Russ Poffenberger DOMAIN: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com Schlumberger Technologies UUCP: {uunet,decwrl,amdahl}!sjsca4!poffen 1601 Technology Drive CIS: 72401,276 San Jose, Ca. 95110 (408)437-5254
korp@atlantis.ees.anl.gov (Peter Korp) (11/20/90)
In article <9011191901.AA03932@hydro.Saic.COM> xpert@HYDRO.SAIC.COM (xpert_news) writes: >Would you please post or email the address/phone no of UHX >(the makers of an i860/486 machine) > >Thanks much in advance. The correct name of the company is UHC, I think i misposted. they can be reached at UHC 3600 S. Gessner Houston, Texas 77063 Voice: (713)782-2700 FAX: (713)782-3377 They will probably refer you to a local distributer Peter
janssen@parc.xerox.com (Bill Janssen) (11/20/90)
In article <9011161043.AA13336@lightning.McRCIM.McGill.EDU> mouse@LIGHTNING.MCRCIM.MCGILL.EDU writes: > through Sun distributors. The source license is included at no cost. Seem more like you can buy a source license for $1000 and they throw in the doc set. If the source license is free, I can presumably copy someone else's release, and write to Sun for a (free) source license? Anyone know? Bill -- Bill Janssen janssen@parc.xerox.com (415) 494-4763 Xerox Palo Alto Research Center 3333 Coyote Hill Road, Palo Alto, California 94304
elvis@EE.MsState.Edu (presley) (11/20/90)
I suggest that you all read the post on comp.windows.openlook for the
official sun explanation on the media charge.
--
Appearing again:
-John West- elvis@athena.erc.msstate.edu
Engineering Research Center for Computational Field Simulation
Mississippi State University ***** National Science Foundation
P.O. Drawer EE {Simrall Bldg, Rm 431} (601) 325-8234 (voice)
Mississippi State, MS 39762 (601) 325-2298 (fax)
.........the opinions presented here are those of the King..........mouse@LIGHTNING.MCRCIM.MCGILL.EDU (11/20/90)
>>>>> free of charge (cost of media only -- $995). >>>> If this media costs SUN $995 I would like to talk to them about >>>> selling them blank tapes. > Well it seems there is an answer to all this. In attempting to make > OpenWindows freely available Sun had to negotiate with AT&T. > Apparently some AT&T code exists in OW 2.0 or own some rights to it. > Therefore, the best deal(?) Sun could come up with was to charge a > rather large one time fee for docs and media yet allow you to copy > source freely. It's not free if you can't give it away to the world. That's why I suspect the label "free" is doublespeak: letting the source out free but charging for binary redistribution is a little unlikely. So, you want me to believe the source is free, you put it up for anonymous ftp. Until then, I will continue to maintain that it's not free and that calling it so is doublespeak at best, misleading advertising (which incidentally is actionable, I think) at worst. > So it is not as great a deal as we all wish it would have been, but I > think Sun has got the right intentions. Let us hope that OpenWindows > version 3 will be kept clear of all of these licensing issues. I don't want to give the idea that I think Sun shouldn't be offering this $1000 source-tape-plus-doc-set. What I take exception to is their calling it free when (if) it's not. der Mouse old: mcgill-vision!mouse new: mouse@larry.mcrcim.mcgill.edu
mouse@LARRY.MCRCIM.MCGILL.EDU (11/20/90)
>>> charge (cost of media only -- $995). >> What media are you using -- gold-plated clay tablets? > The same stuff BSD ships their distribution on? > [...assuming a couple of reasonable things...], you're getting about > the same set of stuff that BSD ships in their distribution. And all > they charge you is "media" charges. Last time I looked, CSRG wanted > $700 for a BSD tape set. Given that CSRG was using student labor to > copy tapes, they should be noticably cheaper. Last time I looked, nobody was hyping BSD as free, either. If you have a V7 or later source license, then as of last time I looked, you can get your BSD tape from anybody who has one and nobody will care. (Berkeley would probably be happier that way because then they don't have to grind through writing another tape, even.) The comparison is thus invalid: BSD isn't selling AT&T licenses, and if you have the relevant license, BSD *is* free. Sun, on the other hand, *is* selling you whatever license(s) is(are) involved, and recent postings give me the impression that Sun is the only place you can buy such a license. Not at all comparable. der Mouse old: mcgill-vision!mouse new: mouse@larry.mcrcim.mcgill.edu
rhaar@rcsrlh.GMR.COM (Bob Haar CS50) (11/20/90)
In article <1990Nov20.004706.17609@sj.ate.slb.com>, poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger) writes: |> >In article <1154@dg.dg.com> uunet!dg!lewine writes: |> >>|> free of |> >>|> charge (cost of media only -- $995). |> |> Yeah, but if you have net access, you can get it for FREE via ftp from many |> sites. ^^^^^ WRONG! You may not pay for it, but someone does. Net transfers are not free. There is not unlimited bandwidth on the networks. Also, there are certainly legal problems with making copyrighted documentation available for electronic copying. Bob Haar CSNET: HAAR@GMR.COM UUCP: uunet!edsews!rphroy!rcsrlh!rhaar Computer Science Dept., G.M. Research Laboratories DISCLAIMER: Unless indicated otherwise, everything in this note is personal opinion, not an official statement of General Motors Corp.
jg@crl.dec.com (Jim Gettys) (11/21/90)
Grumpf... Can we take this discussion off of comp.windows.x to somewhere more reasonable? If comp.windows.open-look or comp.windows.news isn't sufficient, how about alt.flame? This entire discussion has ZERO technical content. And even the non-technical points seems to have now been made, and people are now arguing about the definition of words like "free". (or maybe we should trot out a duck around now... :-)) - Jim
tbray@watsol.waterloo.edu (Tim Bray) (11/23/90)
carroll@cs.uiuc.edu (Alan M. Carroll) writes: >And if you need $850 >worth of books to use OpenWindows, I'm not going anywhere near it. Yeah, well you need that many books to use Motif too, except they don't exist. Tim Bray (Motif hack in a bad mood (@!$!$#$ form widget...))
casey@gauss.llnl.gov (Casey Leedom) (11/25/90)
| From: mwm@raven.relay.pa.dec.com (Mike (My Watch Has Windows) Meyer) | | | From: lcp@ibism.UUCP (Larry Poleshuck) | | | | | From: korp@atlantis.ees.anl.gov (Peter Korp) | | | | | | ... cost of media only -- $995 ... | | | | What media are you using -- gold-plated clay tablets? | | The same stuff BSD ships their distribution on? | | Last time I looked, CSRG wanted $700 for a BSD tape set. Given that CSRG | was using student labor to copy tapes, they should be noticably cheaper. | | The price is very high for "free" software; especially if you're used to | microcomputer software prices. For workstation software, that's not a | high price. And it's in line with other "free" unix distributions of | similar size. The CSRG distribution fee covers far more than tape distribution costs. One of the big ticket items it covers is Keith Bostic's salary. If you call CSRG for help with 4BSD, it's Keith who answers your questions. CSRG considers this distribution support as part of the distribution cost. I haven't heard of any such support being advertised for OpenWindows, but I expect that there will be some effort to answer problem reports on XPERT in much the same way that Heather Rose and company answer problem reports about XView. And, as others have pointed out, the OpenWindows distribution probably comes with a fairly hefty chunk of documentation. You might be inclined to compare the cost of CSRG's operating system against Sun's software system, claiming that they're not the same size, complexity, etc. On the other hand you should remember that CSRG operates with a very small staff with almost no waste. Sun is a major corporation sporting much higher salaries both in management and at the peon level (which is the only level which CSRG has! :-)) Casey
casey@gauss.llnl.gov (Casey Leedom) (11/25/90)
| From: mouse@LARRY.MCRCIM.MCGILL.EDU | | If you have a V7 or later source license, then as of last time I looked, | you can get your BSD tape from anybody who has one and nobody will care. | (Berkeley would probably be happier that way because then they don't have | to grind through writing another tape, even.) Actually since CSRG already has the tape ordering and distribution setup, cutting another tape is not a hassle. And, as I said before, the distribution fees are used to fund phone/email 4BSD support. I think that CSRG would prefer you to get the distribution from them. If everyone were to get free copies from their neighbors, CSRG couldn't afford to offer 4BSD support. Casey
mouse@LIGHTNING.MCRCIM.MCGILL.EDU (11/25/90)
[ BSD vs Sun, and "free" source code ] >>>> ... cost of media only -- $995 ... >>> What media are you using -- gold-plated clay tablets? >> The same stuff BSD ships their distribution on? >> Last time I looked, CSRG wanted $700 for a BSD tape set. > The CSRG distribution fee covers far more than tape distribution > costs. One of the big ticket items it covers is Keith Bostic's > salary. If you call CSRG for help with 4BSD, it's Keith who answers > your questions. CSRG considers this distribution support as part of > the distribution cost. Hm. So we got our BSD tape from a neighbor, but on the other hand we have never tried to call upon CSRG for help, so I needn't feel guilty. Right? Why can't the same be true of OW? (Or if Sun is worried about Evil Rip-off Users who get free tapes and then ask for support, admit that support is really what you're selling.) To take another tack, compare the levels of support. I don't know whether you've ever tried to get real help out of a vendor. I once was involved in a project that supposedly had purchased the right to help from Sun. We would up UTSLing anyway. I have never had occasion to ask Keith Bostic for help with anything, but from what I have heard of him I would expect real help. --But wait a minute, that's backwards, Sun is the one charging a lot of money! > You might be inclined to compare the cost of CSRG's operating system > against Sun's software system, claiming that they're not the same > size, complexity, etc. Which strikes me as a reasonable argument. (You don't say which one you think is larger, more complex, etc, though I can probably guess.) > On the other hand you should remember that CSRG operates with a very > small staff with almost no waste. Sun is a major corporation > sporting much higher salaries both in management and at the peon > level (which is the only level which CSRG has! :-)) You seem to be saying that it's OK for Sun to charge lots of money because they waste most of it. Are you sure you mean to say that, and if not, what *do* you mean to say? Or, to put it another way, why should we accept a high level of waste from Sun when CSRG's example demonstrates that it's clearly not necessary, even for a more complex system? In any case, none of this really bears on the root of the problem - Sun calling their source free when it clearly isn't. der Mouse old: mcgill-vision!mouse new: mouse@larry.mcrcim.mcgill.edu