From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,577c9f9c0cdd76d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: tmoran@bix.com Subject: Re: Confusing language, was Re: Help help.. please.i am totaly new in ada programing Date: 1999/11/04 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 544521076 References: <7vs4g9$7hs1@news.cis.okstate.edu> X-Complaints-To: abuse@pacbell.net X-Trace: typhoon-sf.snfc21.pbi.net 941746168 206.170.2.13 (Thu, 04 Nov 1999 12:09:28 PST) Organization: SBC Internet Services NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 12:09:28 PST Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-11-04T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: >>>From The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing (07Oct99) [foldoc]: > > proprietary > > 2. In the language of hackers and users, inferior; implies a > product not conforming to {open-systems} {standard}s, and thus > one that puts the customer at the mercy of a vendor who can > inflate service and upgrade charges after the initial sale has > locked the customer in. It's been pointed out multiple times that free(libre) does not imply free(gratis), so am I prevented from taking the GNAT source, modifying it, say for MacOS, and charging for it (following the same source code release requirements as ACT, of course)? Is ACT prevented from charging for upgrades after the customer is locked in? And ACT currently has a large support charge - what prevents them from inflating it further once the customer is locked in ? Or the same for any other vendor of "{open-systems} {standard}s" software?