I love the idea of open source software, but I would like some
reimbursement for my work. Like it or not, people want motivation for
putting in a lot of hard work, and my hourly contract billing has
traditionally been expensive. Plus I'm taking time away from my work on
Mac OS X at Apple and my work on my own Mac OS X software product to
put this together.
As a compromise, however, I would like to propose the following: I will
sell Presence for now as closed-source software but, if this agreeable
to you I would open-source it under a BSD-style license:
1) After a year, or
2) After I sell 300 copies at $34 apiece.
Whichever comes first.
This way I get paid for my time, and the Newton community gains a
valuable open-source product, and I don't get paid until/unless I
actually ship something that meets your needs. (is the number of copies
too high/too low? what are your thoughts on this?)
After evaluating the current sync software that I have (FilePad Link)
and figuring out how I can adapt the code for this purpose, this is how
I expect the software to work:
The synchronization will happen via a custom Newton application and a
custom Mac application. I have no plans to integrate with iSync at this
point. (Maybe when they make their API public) Sync will happen either
over TCP/IP or serial. This will take care of those people with
ethernet cards, and AppleTalk is definitely being phased out of Mac OS
X. The Mac application will be written in Cocoa, and will basically be
designed as a framework. People can then develop their own Cocoa
bundles to synchronize with different applications. In 10.2, you can
execute AppleScript code from Cocoa as well, so this means that you can
use a Cocoa bundle as a "wrapper" for AppleScript. Bundles to
synchronize with iCal and Address Book will be included when it ships,
and they will be open-source immediately.
I'm open to input on this; I hope to work with the list every step of
the way to make sure that this is the product you all want.
John Anderson
On Monday, September 30, 2002, at 09:44 AM, Simon Roberts wrote:
>
> on 30/9/02 5:24 pm, Newtvana at newton_at_ordersomewherechaos.com wrote:
>
>> I'm pushing for solutions that use either:
>>
>> 1) open source software or
>> 2) "free" closed source software or
>> 3) software that comes with the OS.
>>
>> And in that order. If the Newton Community is to have unfettered
>> access
>> to their tools then this would seem to be the way to go. Closed
>> source,
>> purchased software dramaticly limits some of us in terms of who can
>> acquire the necessary pieces for the necessary cost.
>>
>
> Good points. Whilst I don't wish to do anyone out of their livelihood,
> it
> seems to me that an open source collaborative approach to Newton
> software
> development is specially appropriate and important at this time in the
> Newton's lifecycle.
>
>
> Simon
>
>
> --
> Read the List FAQ/Etiquette: http://www.newtontalk.net/faq.html
> Read the Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/
> This is the NewtonTalk mailing list - http://www.newtontalk.net/
>
-- Read the List FAQ/Etiquette: http://www.newtontalk.net/faq.html Read the Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/ This is the NewtonTalk mailing list - http://www.newtontalk.net/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Oct 31 2002 - 12:01:57 EST