If you have used F#, you can take the survey here: http://fsharpworks.com/survey.html
951 karma · joined October 18, 2010
As you can see, about a fifth of the of the credits have to come from "support electives (soft skills)" and applied subject courses. I suppose this is quite representative for a German bachelor program.
You also have to keep in mind that the curricula at a US high school and a German Gymnasium are not equivalent. German students at the beginning of their university career on average have the equivalent of at least one year more of school education compared to the US students -- at least that used to be case.
http://www.hetzner.de/en/hosting/news/trafficpreis-dauerhaft...
Who knows, maybe a part of the "exciting plans for 2015" is to release PolarSSL under a liberal open source license...
I do think that libraries should be distributed as open source, but I'm also hoping that at least in certain areas there is a way to commercially develop them as a product business. Provocatively speaking, if software "eats the world", then libraries are too important to just be developed as a by-product of some other ventures or in support of a platform/eco system.
Personally I'm planning on releasing a library under a GPL + commercial dual licensing scheme and later on another library under a non-commercial (incl. academic and government research) + commercial dual license. We'll see how that works out.
By completely open sourcing your only software product with a liberal license you seem to be turning a software (product) company into a software consultancy, is that a fair assessment?
Do you think the market conditions that lead you to this decision are very specific to GPU computing, or would you expect similar conditions in the more general scientific computing/HPC market? Would you say that it's generally simpler to earn money by doing specialized consulting than by selling technical software libraries, even though the former is less "scalable"?
If you're earning all the money with consulting and support, how do you allocate ressources to the further development of the library? Do your software engineers enjoy working on your company's product the same as working on client projects?
Btw, if you copy the original link into the Google search field, you get a search result with the page, and then you can just view the cached version by clicking on the small green arrow at the right side of the URL.
http://www.hanselman.com/blog/AnnouncingNET2015NETasOpenSour...
or
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://...
That's incredible!
I don't think the examples and quotes used by the author are great, but I do think that there is some truth to this argument.
I think the author wants to express that open source has changed a lot from the early days. As far as I remember it, open source originally was driven mainly by students, academics and hobbyists, and by service companies like Red Hat or maybe IBM. Nowadays, many of the larger, successful and enduring open source projects are mainly developed by professional developers working for companies that use the open source software for their commercial products or infrastructure.
In any case, I wonder whether the original success of Qt would still be possible in today's business and open source community environment.
Because there is already one: SourceTree (which is also available for OS X).