According to ARM one of the Benefits of using Microcontrollers – no GPL


LOL I’ve not read something so ignorant for years🙂
Hello guys! There is no restriction closed source software to run on Linux, it’s other thing if somebody will decide to use such software on this OS where everything is open.

10 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. Paul Jones
    Apr 30, 2015 @ 10:28:16

    This is even more stupid since the title of the video is “Microcontroller Projects for Makers”!!!

    Reply

  2. Trackback: ARM: “Microcontrollers Are Better Because There’s No GPL”
  3. peterretief
    Apr 30, 2015 @ 11:18:15

    Did they say you don’t have to publish your source code? no gpl? doesn’t make any sense to me what are they trying to say?

    Reply

    • Max
      Apr 30, 2015 @ 11:32:43

      I can only guess, but perhaps something like “If you write your code from scratch / only using support libraries you can keep it closed source, as opposed to starting to sell a router with Linux slapped on for OS and finding out you need to make your modifications to it public because it’s under GPL…” Ehhh, who cares anyway – I like ARM chips, but I still like the GPL more…

      Reply

  4. Leon Anavi
    Apr 30, 2015 @ 14:51:11

    The video is no longer available. Obviously the guys from ARM have realized it was not a smart idea to publish it🙂

    Reply

  5. Paolo Redaelli
    Apr 30, 2015 @ 18:25:54

    Reblogged this on P. Redaelli and commented:
    The success of the Arm architecture is based of free-as-in-freedom software. GPL is one the major free-as-in-freedom license. I don’t understand why they bash one the reason of their success

    Reply

  6. SNaiil (@naiil_s)
    Apr 30, 2015 @ 20:36:02

    To me, GPL is a hypocrite. I license all my open source stuff under MIT.

    Reply

  7. zoobab
    May 02, 2015 @ 10:36:36

    The video is gone “L’utilisateur a supprime cette video”.

    Reply

  8. m0tfh
    May 13, 2015 @ 11:14:00

    Some (corporate) lawyers are allergic to the GPL, placing requirements that it not be used at-all in company products.
    Usually this is because they have been bitten once by a library that was statically linked in and resulted in a court-case. Sometimes it is because they used something in an un-modified state and were then hammered for making the (un-modified) source available.
    The GPL is great and good, but it doesn’t play well with corporate paranoia and subsequent requirements.
    Pointing out that a particular route does not depend on GPL code does play well to the lawyers…
    Source: I’ve been around this loop with the lawyers before…

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: