Comments on: Handheld Usenet Newsreader Updated

SonLight Software has released a new version of Yanoff (v2.1), the portable news reader for Palm OS. The software connects to the hundreds of thousands of Usenet user-groups and discussions.

Read the Full Article Text Here

Article Comments

(12 comments)

The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. PalmInfocenter is not responsible for them in any way.
Please Login or register here to add your comments.

Comments Closed
This article is no longer accepting new comments.

good article Ryan!

drw @ 7/16/2004 2:51:51 AM #

This is the perfect type of story for PIC, keeping me informed of something I never would have found out otherwise. I tried yanoff years ago, but found it lacking for some reason. That was 14,4, now I have a Wifi C and will try the new version.

---
David

No thanks

Patrick @ 7/16/2004 3:40:01 AM #

The curmudgeon that I am says no thanks to this update until they remove PocketPurchase from the application.

As far as I am concerned, the jury is still out whether PP is spyware. Of course, the application authors swear up and down that it isn't, but that is hardly of much comfort these days. At the very least, it is annoying marketing push-ware... an extra piece of software you have to keep on your device and whose only benefit is to the seller. From what I understand, each and every time you sync, it calls home to sniff out whether or not there is a new "offer" it wants to show you, and then pops it up on your screen, whether you like it or not.

RE: No thanks

Winter_ @ 7/16/2004 5:50:45 AM #

What would happen if some firewall stopped the app from calling home?

RE: No thanks

asiayeah @ 7/16/2004 5:55:34 AM #

How is PocketPurchase classified as a spyware? From its website, it looks like it is a software activation technology. Is there any website that points to a more detail discussion?

Together with the questionable GPL license of Yanoff and its bundling of PocketPurchase, Yanoff+ is really something that is worrying...

I hope the staff from Yanoff+ can clear this up.

--
With great power comes great responsiblity.

RE: No thanks

Patrick @ 7/16/2004 4:24:24 PM #

I don't know that it is spyware, which is why I said the jury is still out for me. However, the language used on the web site is vague and, I believe, deliberately so.

I'm sorry but I simply will not purchase software which calls home, for whatever reason. Sellers will say it is for my own good. I can't say on a public forum what my response to them would be.

Obviously, I feel very strongly about this. Probably much more so than most folks. You pays your money and you makes your choice.

RE: No thanks

jayman @ 7/16/2004 6:56:10 PM #

> The curmudgeon that I am says no thanks to this
> update until they remove PocketPurchase from
> the application

If you look at the website, that's exactly what they've done with version 2.1 - the downloads include a version with PocketPurchase and a version without. The version without PocketPurchase works fine - both unregistered and registered.

GPL License?

asiayeah @ 7/16/2004 5:32:54 AM #

Yanoff has always been a free software with GPL License. Now this New Yanoff is a closed-source form of the original Yanoff?

Once a software has become GPL, is it legal to convert it to a closed-source project? I suppose some of the codes in the original Yanoff may have come from the open-source world. I don't think anyone (including the orignal author of the GPL software) has the rights to take ownership of the codes and change it to a closed-source project. Is it the case?

If any software is built on GPL software, any user can request the source codes of the software, including its changes to the GPL software. Why Yanoff could be an exception?

Maybe I don't understand the GPL license correctly. Any comment?

--
With great power comes great responsiblity.

RE: GPL License?

skeezix @ 7/16/2004 10:35:55 AM #

The author can do what he wants with it -- when a works is released as GPL, thats to anyone who uses that version of it to honour GPL. The original author can still do as he pleases.

I don't know the history here, but I believe the new author bought out the original author including all rights, so he can legally do as he sees fit. Hes also including the free versoin as well.

jeff

The Shadow knows!

RE: GPL License?

asiayeah @ 7/17/2004 12:51:51 PM #

Thanks.

So that means anyone could release a GPL software and after getting enough contributions from the open-source world, the original author of the software could then take ownership of those public contributions and sell it to other.

True?

--
With great power comes great responsiblity.

RE: GPL License?

skeezix @ 7/18/2004 3:39:18 PM #

No --

Several things though.

1) GPL does not prevent selling something; it just means it must include source available when sold. See 995soft.com who essentially resells GPL works, and includees source and support.

2) Remember, if author Bob makes a tool and releases as GPL, you now have two things -- i) he can do what he wishes with his code, and ii) Everyeone else has GPL of that code. If user Jane then modifies it, those modifications must also be GPL, and rememebr the relationship.. Jane's particular mods are her own, and relased as GPL, so the original author Bob has to honour Jane's code as GPL.. it is not his.

So when an author releases his work as GPL, he has original rights toll his work, but must treat donated work as GPL, and so he must release that code with all his own changes.

So I guess the question with Yanoff is .. if no one else donated code, no problem; if anyone did donate code, then the new author would have to have rights to all that code (From those authors) to keep it in his now closed source work.

Complex, but interesting nonetheless :)

jeff

The Shadow knows!

RE: GPL License?

jayman @ 7/19/2004 7:46:13 AM #

Carrying on from Jeff's post, I would imagine (but am not sure that) the situation is the following:

(i) if Bob releases his code (the "Original Code") under the GPL, Bob is perfectly free at any subsequent time to re-release the Original Code under another licence (e.g. closed source), sell it to someone else, etc;

(ii) if Jane modifies the Original Code, the modifications automatically come under the GPL and neither Bob nor Jane nor anyone else can licence the modifications under a licence other than the GPL; but

(iii) notwithstanding Jane's modifications, Bob is perfectly free at any subsequent time to re-release ONLY the Original Code (i.e. not including Jane's modifications) under another licence (e.g. closed source), sell it to someone else, etc.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong!

Suspect

vesther @ 7/18/2004 10:21:01 PM #

I think there was certain reasons why the Yanoff fathers convert this one into Closed Source for reasons that I would not want to name and/or announce at this time. To me, for Yanoff going to closed source can be a turnoff to opensource fans, but it's basically up to the ownership what is right and what is wrong.

Intel PXA27X, Motorola's ARM Processor, or Texas Instruments OMAP? Pick one Palm Enthusiasts, the choice should be yours. When handheld makers make you choose the ARM Processor, you win.