Anyone familiar with Starster (*ster)?

Jericho · Post by **Jericho** » 2003-01-09 22:42

Well I did try this program out and thought it was fantastic. Worked like the typical kazaa p2p software with taking parts of the same file from different users of the DC network and connection to allowed hubs possible. The program was java based as well. All in all I thought it was a great program. Unfortunately it was trial for 7 days, meant for Sweden user mainly, and was going to be $10 use after trial. Needless to say that last part I assume was the creators downfall. About 2 weeks ago he pulled the software off the website and shutdown, saying (through a friend I mine since I didn't speak swedish) that there wasn't enough interest. I was wondering if DC++ had plans to go a similar route and I was also wondering there was anyone capable of cracking the starster software since I still have my original copy. Just a thought.

Goose · Post by **Goose** » 2003-01-11 01:46

Since it was a applikation made to cheat as easy as possible there's no loss...

Iceman[grrrr] · Post by **Iceman[grrrr]** » 2003-01-11 08:11

DC++ could not go into a close source paying client becuase it is now open source and anyone could release it again with a couple modifications...

everyone who tried to sell open source programs failed to do so (thinking about star office, ...)

ender · Post by **ender** » 2003-01-11 12:42

If Arne decided, he could close the CVS and make the DC closed-source, pay-for version, since it's his program. However, since the souce code (before he'd have closed it) was released under GPL, he could not stop developement (also, he'd either have to remove all code that wasn't written by him, or reach an agreement with the authors). StarOffice/OpenOffice.org isn't a good example, since Sun sponsored OOo developement, and has always intended selling his own version (you get some additional things with SO, which couldn't be made open-sourced). Much better example is ProjectMayo: even though the CVS was closed, sources taken off the server and used in DivX 4/5 (commercial), some people who had the source continued the developement, and now we have XviD...

sandos · Post by **sandos** » 2003-01-11 14:14

ender wrote:If Arne decided, he could close the CVS and make the DC closed-source, pay-for version, since it's his program. However, since the souce code (before he'd have closed it) was released under GPL, he could not stop developement (also, he'd either have to remove all code that wasn't written by him, or reach an agreement with the authors). StarOffice/OpenOffice.org isn't a good example, since Sun sponsored OOo developement, and has always intended selling his own version (you get some additional things with SO, which couldn't be made open-sourced). Much better example is ProjectMayo: even though the CVS was closed, sources taken off the server and used in DivX 4/5 (commercial), some people who had the source continued the developement, and now we have XviD...

There is also dual-licensing, MySQL for example.

FRANKE · Post by **FRANKE** » 2003-01-11 14:16

everyone who tried to sell open source programs failed to do so (thinking about star office, ...)

how did you come to that conclusion ?, redhat makes money

Iceman[grrrr] · Post by **Iceman[grrrr]** » 2003-01-12 08:23

FRANKE wrote:
everyone who tried to sell open source programs failed to do so (thinking about star office, ...)
how did you come to that conclusion ?, redhat makes money

RedHat is still open source distributed under the license GPL. You can sell the packaging of your programs under that license and that's what RedHat is doing...

For the near future of open source projects, profits will come for support to users like manuals and others...

rithym · Post by **rithym** » 2003-08-05 17:12

?blah blah blah

cyberal · Post by **cyberal** » 2003-08-06 02:02

*ster is (was?) EVIL!