[cctalk] Re: Hardware vs Simh (and FPGA)

Wow, what a cogent and convincing argument. Personally, if it's what I expect it is - a bunch of VHDL-or-equivalent describing various interesting things - the biggest pragmatic issue I would have with the data is that, however open it itself may be, it's unusable without going through undocumented - closed - software and hardware, as far as I can tell. At least, last time I recall seeing it discussed here, there apparently were no documented FPGAs. (I probably would have other pragmatic issues with it, but they're not related to openness or lack thereof.) The name is also rather unfortunate; I've noticed a distinct correlation between having "open" in the name and actually being closed and proprietary, to the point where I usually interpret "open" as referring to customer pocketbooks. That, in itself, says nothing - it's equally true of, say, Oracle. I suspect it's largely backlash against a long history of privacy invasions and ludicrous hoop-jumping. Which I certainly find totally understandable, however (in)appropriate the reaction may be in any particular case. Not necessarily. Openness is hardly an all-or-nothing thing. Does the license permit (modification and) redistribution? That's actually the important test, to me, for whether it deserves the `open' part of the name. /~\ The ASCII Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML mouse at rodents-montreal.org / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B