Quote:
It's strange for me to be in the role of MS apologist but your sniping was mis-aimed in this case. I feel icky now.... Thanks a lot.
When I wrote that, I had open on the laptop next to me the Windows Update page for XP Pro. It states rather emphatically that "Windows XP Support on Windows Update sill soon require XP SP1 or later."
Ever heard of Windows Product Activation? As a method of "punishing" those who have bypassed the proper method of obtaining Windows, Microsoft has stated that it is their intention to withold updates (including security updates) from people who have not applied SP1. It is well-known that SP1 (and later service packs) tighten the WPA down and de-activate pirated copies of XP. The end result is that the percentage of unpatched copies of XP will increase, perhaps dramatically, and thus increase the number of malware-infested machines spewing forth yet more malware which we who are I.T. professionals have to deal with.
So, no, my "sniping" was not mis-aimed, it's perfectly accurate.
Of course, the lack of security even in fully-patched Windows is part of the reason I am fully employed, so at best, I have mixed feelings about it. Still, I'd rather have to deal more with user education (also part of my job) and less with frantic scrambles to secure against the latest exploit.
But back to the point of this whole thread: I don't personally use AMS, or (knowingly) any other module that has a commercial or semi-commercial basis - yet. But the GPL is very clear on this: One certainly
may create a derivative work and charge for distribution, packaging, and support, so long as source code is provided. Furthermore, as soon as I convince $DAY_JOB's VP that FOSS can provide the level of support we need for our intranet, I will be commissioning a module which
will be released under the GPL, and I have every expectation that the authors will charge for support. I expect it and I encourage it.
If one can support one's own needs without paying Mith, or Red Hat, or Microsoft, or whomever, then bully! But if not, one has no
right to demand cost-free support if it isn't offered. Of course, with closed-source software, you're pretty well screwed if the publisher decides that your problem isn't important (or sufficiently profitable) enough to merit attention.
And that's the bottom line.
