Subject: Network Cables
Really don’t make good toys, why would anyone think this is a good idea?? Really??

Please don’t do this, ever. Thanks!

“Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,”

To satisfy this requirement I’m including the URL to the source code on the application information page and in the start up screen of the application. This goes much further than most GPL software. Some software (screen for instance) tells you the software is licensed under the GPL but does not provide the location to find the source code. GNU’s version of grep doesn’t even tell you what the license is when you run it, even if you show the help page. The man page also doesn’t list the license.

Upon completion of the initial release of robotfindskitten for the iPhone I started to think about other software I could port to the iPhone and quickly remembered Oxyd, a marble-based puzzle game I used to play as a kid. I remembered that there was an open-source licensed version of the game. When I start projects I generally send an email to the developers’ mailing list, asking if anyone is already working on it or would like to participate. The response I got was nothing short of disturbing (well, to me).

A few developers noted that I would not able able to port the game to because Apple’s iPhone because of restrictions in the Apple contract that were incompatible with the GPL. I shall now switch to point, counter-point mode:

#1 (The biggie): Apple’s developer contract states that developers are not allowed to release the source code.
This is simply not true. I’ve read, reread, and re-reread the Apple developer contract and there is not a single mention of source code. This might have been true before Apple changed the contract in late 2008. There’s many applications available for the iPhone (through Apple’s App Store) that are open source. Colloquy Mobile (http://colloquy.mobi/) is licensed under the BSD, WordPress for iPhone (http://iphone.wordpress.org/) is licensed under the GPL are just a few.

#2: Apple becomes the owner of your IP, code and associated resources when you submit an Application.
Are you kidding? Do you think that software development houses would allow this? The Apple contract states this is not true and that Apple does not own any part of your code. They simply provide a distribution network, payment and billing system and possibly a marketing outlet for applications. Think about this, would Apple want to be responsible for every bug in an Application?

There are quite a few articles on the interwebs about the GPL and its incompatibility with Apple’s iPhone processes and contracts. You might notice that most of them were written last year, before Apple changed some of the policies around the iPhone development process. I can’t find the actual text of the old contracts and all the articles on the FSF’s website don’t actually quote or cite any Apple text.

The Free Software Foundation could use the iPhone as a great tool to get some exposure but instead they choose to have a tantrum about issues that are simply not true. There are many reasons to dislike the iPhone and the process behind it and a new issue seems to appear every week. Regardless, spreading FUD is exactly the kind of tactics the FSF denounces when companies like Microsoft point their fingers at open source.

Anyways… I watched the Google Wave keynote/introduction video.. maybe more than once. Does watching sections over and over count? The hype is everywhere. Google Wave is the next awesome thing! Or maybe not! My main concerns stem from what may, at first glance, seem like an over-engineered solution to a problem that may not exist. If I remember correctly from the video, the original idea was to come up with a modern replacement for email and real time internet communication in general. Wave’s primary goal seems to revolve around communication based on streams, where everything happens immediately. Documents are shared with groups and can be viewed, edited, updated and distributed to other groups as quickly as working on them in a conference room. Wave also seems bent on replacing email as we know it.

Wait, what? The technologies and protocols behind a simple email to your friend are some of the oldest and simplest that exist. Sorta. Because of a lack of SPAM prevention, built-in encryption and security (in both the protocol and the messages themselves) and a host of other problems email has become a hairy beast. I can understand why Google wants to replace the whole system and start from scratch but their solution seems unnaturally complicated. New protocols, new architecture, new interfaces, new new new. If Google wants to supplant email and its related technologies it’s going to need a massive strategy to get Wave implemented on as many devices and systems. I’m not convinced that a system invented in 2008/2009 is going to be better than 1970s.

That said, when I get a Google Wave invite I’ll surely play around with it and change my mind and express how awesome it is. That’s right, I’m gonna WAVEr on my opinion. GET IT… ahhh.. I amuse myself.

Mmmm, Kitten Liver, originally uploaded by geoffeg.

Kitten Liver is quite delicious if cooked properly.

Deer foot.. months later, originally uploaded by geoffeg.

This is the same deer foot from flickr.com/photos/geoffeg/2569854685/ but taken 8 months later (and in much better lighting).

Every city should have a City Museum.

Ice in Arkansas, originally uploaded by geoffeg.

From the January 2009 Ice Storm near Deer, AR.

Little Crab Apples, originally uploaded by geoffeg.

From the side yard.