AcrobatReader: A bug or intentionally?

[Mark Wallace]

I've read the GNU link.  It doesn't purport to deal with licensing 
issues.  It makes a good case that, if the provider of proprietary 
software attaches so many strings that you can only get limited use 
out of a  product, that you aren't getting very much.  That would be 
hard to argue.

But it doesn't really attempt to define terms with regard to Acrobat 
or anything else.






At 12:22 AM 26/04/2007, you wrote:
>Art Alexion wrote:
> > Adobe wants two things:  To give away as many readers as possible 
> to add value
> > to the PDF format and, hence make money selling PDF creation and editing
> > software.  To keep its code proprietary.
>
>Given that they make money off proprietary creation software (despite
>broad competition), I don't understand (purely from a financial point of
>view) why they keep the reader proprietary; making it free software
>would make increase distribution.
>
> > Heresy alert: I don't care what Richard M. Stallman says, there is a
> > difference between free software and open source software.
>
>I guess you mean "at no charge" when you say free.  It would help if you
>said gratis instead, to avoid confusion.  I mean freedom when I say free
>software and sometimes say libre to clarify.  Stallman agrees with your
>statement, but for a totally different reason
>(http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html).
>
> > People can give
> > away proprietary software (like Adobe does) and sell open source software
> > (Like Red Hat and Suse do)
>
>Certainly.  Almost all the software Red Hat sells is /both/ free and
>open source software.
>
>Matthew Flaschen
>
>--
>kubuntu-users mailing list
>kubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com
>Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
>https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users

Robert Mark Wallace
Tita P Walllace
Regina E P Wallace
R M Ceferino P Wallace
60 Delaware Road
Newburgh, NY 12550-3802
Telephone: (845) 566-0586