[Info-vax] What Will Drive More OpenVMS Adoption?

[Phillip Helbig undress to reply]

In article <som4dg$edu$1 at dont-email.me>, Dave Froble
<davef at tsoft-inc.com> writes: 

> On 12/6/2021 2:12 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> > On 2021-12-05, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <helbig at asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
> >> In article <soj03a$202$2 at dont-email.me>, Dave Froble
> >> <davef at tsoft-inc.com> writes:
> >>
> >>>>>>> With the VSI Community License Program, members of the community can
> >>>>>>> download OpenVMS for free for learning, open source development, and
> >>>>>>> exchanging knowledge of the operating system on Alpha and Integrity
> >>>>>>> systems. This program replaces the HP Hobbyist program.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The wording has changed a bit.  But it is still non-commercial.
> >>>>>> Open-source can be non-commercial, but it can also be commercial.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Isn't there a difference between working on commercial software, such
> >>>>> as porting to VMS, and using commercial software?
> >>>>
> >>>> Using commercial software has nothing to do with VMS licenses.
> >>>
> >>> Huh ?????????????????
> >>
> >> ????????
> >>
> >> Obviously VMS is commercial and its use involves VMS licenses.  That is
> >> not the topic here.  The question is whether the hobbyist license would
> >> cover open-source development on VMS for commercial software and, if so,
> >> if that would be the case only if the developer received no
> >> compensation.
> >>
> >
> > I think David might be asking if you can run commercial software on
> > a hobbyist system.
> >
> > For example, if you could somehow get hold of a legal copy of Word Perfect
> > for Alpha, could you run it on a hobbyist system for personal use ?
> >
> > If so, that's a good question, and I don't know the answer.
> >
> > Simon.
> >
> 
> No.  David took one look at the statement:
> 
> "Using commercial software has nothing to do with VMS licenses."
> 
> Now, if Phillip meant to refer to hobbyist or CL or ISV licenses, he should have 
> written that.  He didn't.

The statement quoted immediately above was not written by me, merely 
quoted by me.