ADCLing (was: Re: Realtime/embedded project to help with employment.)

[Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@d2-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>]

Warren W. Gay VE3WWG <ve3wwg@cogeco.ca> wrote:
:  M$ sees how useful this
: is and either tries to buy you out, or just creates one of its
: own and then just gives it away. Based on history, I'd say you'd
: be better off taking the M$ offer, given the way the outcome
: works. But you'd have to be left "feeling dirty" with M$
: money. ;-)

There is also a broader economical problem with these free gifts:
Two examples: stream file formats, and in-computer encryption.

As for stream file formats, you get players from MS (and earlier Real)
for free. The content providers don't get stream producing software
for free, and come to depend on MS, moneywise and otherwise (software/
documentation/licenses for streaming software).
Why do they commit to this?
Because everyone of the majority of their customers has got this player,
and expects streams to play with their free players (Is any of the
recent Real players for free any more?)

So how would the ADCL work in this context? Who will give any
money to ADCL developers writing a streaming client and/or server
library for some file format that is or is not DMCA (Hollywood
copyright) related?
In view of the current media player situation, what are
the chances of a client/server solution to become successful?:

 client side
                       cost by license       incentive to buy
                       ---------------       ------------------
    MS offering        free                  d/c
    ADCLed offering    free/not free         voluntary/required
    GPLed offering     free                  voluntary

 server side (commerial for the sake of the argument)
                       ---------------       ------------------
    MS offering        not free              required
    ADCLed offering    not free              required
    GPLed offering     free                  voluntary

Will companies pay (conribute) voluntarily? They might.
Look at IBM for an example.
Who else will pay, and for what?

As for in-computer encryption, what kind of security does this
offer? I'd guess it is the kind of security known in stock
trading or secret services. :-)
You can get hardware based "security" like in that Xbox, (another
stolen name BTW) and software based "security" by downloading the
recent media players.  So if you feel you had better not use a
"signing computer" because you have something to tell to Amnesty
International about your dictator e.g., what do you do? If all
communication is signed by hardware, you will be pretty near a
Big Brother is Watching You situation. If it is only signed by
your free email client (viz. Outlook Express's free system add on
signing libraries), an alternative way of sending an email through
the wire might help.

What eMail client software will have more supportive customers
in the view of a free one by MS? An ADCLed one,
or a GPLed one? What speculations are there on which an answer can
be based?

Will we still be able to communicate in c.l.ada without signedness
of postings?...


: This has happened at all software size levels, from what I can
: see. Where is the profit in this?  If I release my software free,
: (under the GPL), this actually puts M$ at a disadvantage. That
: thought, warms my heart ;-)

And there are situations in which to do this is moral and decent!
:-)


Georg