Can I make a closed source Linux derivative ?

[abdo375]

I've seen a lot of people bash Linux for being hard to use, but to hate Linux for ideological reasons for being free this is very strange.

You guys just don't seem to understand! Now for example if you were the head of a department of CAD engineers who use the real CAD programs, and there was a proprietary CAD program available for Linux at maybe a 1,000 dollars would you buy it ?

Why wouldn't you use the proprietary software, open source programmers might be against proprietary software but if the alternative is not available it's OK to use it.

Also open source software isn't about getting free programs, its about leaving the source code open for development, there are plenty of companies that sell Linux for money, and a lot of money that is, the only thing the GPL mentions is that the source code must be bundled with the software.

Remember the open source hack jobs available don't do even 1/10 of what a real CAD program does. That is because the open source programmers would get "bored" programming the really hard , detailed stuff.

So is programming a kernel and reverse engineering Nvidia's graphic driver not "really hard , detailed stuff.".

1) the open source guys never worked in real companies, they play around, they have no idea what it means;

Most of the leading programmers in the open source community would be paid a seven figure salary if they decided to work for proprietary software companies, including Microsoft.
http://esr.ibiblio.org/index.php?p=208

Other low-profile open source programmers just do it for fun, or to improve there programming skills, while working for proprietary companies.

4) can proprietary software even be made for Linux ? is not the constraint of dynamic linking to libraries too much and too conditioning for flagship products (this I really don't know..)

I don't understand what you mean by that, I'm using Suse Linux and I have MATLAB installed and using Nvidia'S proprietary driver.

 

[FulhamFan3]

Like some of the other people have said, if you want to make a closed source system based on open source work then do it off of BSD. GPL simply won't allow it. However I have read some misconceptions here. You are allowed to modify GPL's code and sell it. However you must include the source code and you can't prevent derivative works from it. It's completely legal for me to make CD's of Firefox or VLC and sell it. There's just no point in it because everyone can pretty much get it for free.

I have a lot of complaints about linux but it has nothing to do with it being open source. Just how it's basically for power users and installing software is a headache compared to windows. I know things are changing with Ubuntu and other products. If anything annoys me is the insistance that everything must be open source. I think truly free software should be able to run anything proprietary or not. If a company wants to develop software for a Linux based system and keep it proprietary then I say that's fine. I know software does exist like Maya and Mathematica but there always seems to be a grumble from the community when they have to put up with stuff like that. Even more so with drivers from NVidia and ATi.

 

[Thrice]

If a company wants to develop software for a Linux based system and keep it proprietary then I say that's fine.

Well yeah they're free to do it, but you haven't explained why I have to like it. I really value the ability to look into a program & perhaps use some of its technology.