Differences between version 3 and revision by previous author of CompetitiveComparisons.
Other diffs: Previous Major Revision, Previous Revision, or view the Annotated Edit History
| Newer page: | version 3 | Last edited on Monday, September 16, 2002 1:19:53 pm | by JohnMcPherson | Revert |
| Older page: | version 1 | Last edited on Monday, July 22, 2002 11:28:35 pm | by CraigBox | Revert |
@@ -1,4 +1,7 @@
+This is an example of [FUD].
+----
+
!!!Why Windows 2000 Server and the Server Appliance Kit over Linux?
For OEMs considering or planning to enter the server appliance market, the choice between Linux or Windows for a server appliance operating system involves critical trade-offs between platform functionality, incremental engineering and development effort, overall cost, and, most importantly, time-to-market. Ultimately, the OEM's goal is to select an operating system and tool set that enable them to get to market quickly, limit development cost, and differentiate their appliance, all on a reliable platform that delivers superior price-performance. In addition, OEMs want an operating system that delivers proven value from a reputable vendor who will support them for the long term.
@@ -152,9 +155,10 @@
!!Better business alignment with straightforward licensing and clarity of intellectual property ownership
!Windows
The Microsoft licensing model does not contain licensing provisions that require an OEM, and potentially its licensees, to disclose the source code for its intellectual property in a widespread fashion to open source participants. An OEM building a server appliance with Windows 2000 Server operating systems and the SAK has the assurance the software code and added value it develops remain the OEM's intellectual property.
-''Microsofts licensing model for code is that you may not use it all. __Some__ Linux code is licenced under the [GPL] which offers you the opertunity to use the source code on the condition that you return that code so others may test it and build on it, other parts of Linux the code is free for anyone to use for any purpose.
+
+
''Microsofts licensing model for code is that you may not use it all. __Some__ Linux code is licenced under the [GPL] which offers you the opertunity to use the source code on the condition that you return that code so others may test it and build on it, other parts of Linux the code is free for anyone to use for any purpose.''
!Linux
To ensure proper management of its intellectual property rights, an OEM must carefully examine an array of licensing complexities around the General Public License (GPL) that govern Linux. These complexities have resulted in embedded and dedicated operating system companies such as Wind River saying that they are seeing “a growing problem due to the growing uncertainty of using GPL-based code in embedded devices". An example of this risk can be taken from NVIDIA. An NVIDIA programmer, in the course of developing a driver for one of its products, used a portion of code from a freely available video driver. The developer failed to realize the code was licensed under the GPL and would therefore require NVIDIA to release the source code for its entire driver. Because NVIDIA did not want to release the source code to its commercial software, the company incurred substantial cost to develop a new driver that did not contain the GPL code.
