Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Business News

TrollTech to IPO? 150

Posted by ScuttleMonkey from the unconfirmed-yet-still-interesting dept.
burninginside writes "Yahoo is reporting that Trolltech, the world's biggest producer of Linux software for mobile devices, may be heading public. 'Sources close to the company' said the move may come as soon as 12 months but the official word is still that it 'is not in our immediate plans.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

TrollTech to IPO? More

TrollTech to IPO?

Comments Filter:

  • trolltech? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Bananatree3 ( 872975 ) * on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @01:01AM (#13497317)
    Hmm.. around here troll-techs are usually not seen, as they are below the threashold, but Trolltech is about to go public?

  • Buy stock? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by kanweg ( 771128 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @01:02AM (#13497320)
    If so, as open source fans, should we buy stock to help ensure that Trolltech doesn't move off the right track?

    Bert

    • Re:Buy stock? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Ctrl+Alt+De1337 ( 837964 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @01:22AM (#13497387) Homepage
      It depends. If you don't mind the prospect of some current or future management of Trolltech possibly ruining the company and losing all the money you invest, then go right ahead.

      It's one thing to advocate open source via word of mouth, Internet message boards, etc. It's another thing to throw your money into an open source company without checking it out first. If/when the IPO draws near, do some research, dig into the financial reports, and find out if this is a financially sound company.

      Would you buy stock in any random company out of the business section of the newspaper without researching it first? I would hope not. While it's noble to suggest such things as this, let's face it: Trolltech is a for-profit company. It's not running a charity. Do you own Red Hat stock simply because it deals in open source software? If not, then why would you blindly buy Trolltech stock instead?
      • Developers, Developers, Developers !!!!!!

      • Of course, just what the hell IS their business model? They've been around for about damn as long as X windows has, but do they actually sell anything? heh
        • QT is quite expensive, actually (between $2600 and $5200 per developer).
          • Not that there is anything wrong with your post, but if the tools are really good (I vaguely remember that the license includes tools) then they are worth the cost in programmer productivity. If the tools save a week of time per developer over the lifetime of usage, it would pay for itself.

            Of course, I haven't seen a productivity tool since Sun's DevGuide that really saved me time...

  • More info (Score:2, Informative)

    by gulfan ( 524955 )
    Here's a link to another news story with a bit more info: Trolltech [reuters.com]

  • Microsoft execs (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @01:07AM (#13497337)
    You forgot to mention that TrollTech hired two former Microsoft executives recently -- added them to their board of directors, supposedly to help them go public.

    • Re:Microsoft execs (Score:5, Informative)

      by jg21 ( 677801 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @01:50AM (#13497493)
      The execs are Juha Christensen and Tod Nielsen [sys-con.com]. While at Microsoft, Christensen brought to market the Pocket PC, Pocket PC Phone Edition, and Smartphone, in addition to Mobile Information Server and Server ActiveSync. Tod Nielsen too held senior management positions such as vice president, Platform Group and vice president, Developer Relations.

      • Re:Microsoft execs (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Dr. Spork ( 142693 )
        Aah, I see how this works. Microsoft first plants some moles into Trolltech, and soon, it will be a company that anyone with a fat wallet can buy out. Yes, one of the dangers of going public is that you never know who your new owner will turn out to be. Manchester United, probably the most famous sports team in the world, went public and the next thing you know, some Yankee tycoon bought all their stock. Huge protests from the fans did nothing. These are the perils of going public - so seeing this done by a

  • Sam Kinison once said (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ReformedExCon ( 897248 ) <reformed.excon@gmail.com> on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @01:08AM (#13497340)
    DON'T DO IT!!!!!

    He was talking about getting married or something. I don't remember.

    But going public has been the ruin of many poor companies, and God knows I've been part of some. It ties you to the stockholders and limits the ways in which you can reasonably spend your capital. It also risks you losing some of your top talent who may just decide that being rich and staying at home is better than sticking around to watch the stock prices fall through the floor while they slave away 12 hours a day.

    Trolltech has a very good business model. They sell Qt licenses to embedded device makers (in addition to selling software licenses to desktop application developers). Since Gartner expects devices like cellphones and other devices not normally built with graphical UIs to be overtaken in the coming years by "smart" devices that need a solid GUI, not to mention easily programmable APIs, Trolltech is positioned very well in this area.

    But don't go IPO, man. Keep it small, keep it lean, and don't let your eyes glaze over with dollar signs.

    • Re:Sam Kinison once said (Score:5, Funny)

      by GISGEOLOGYGEEK ( 708023 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @01:34AM (#13497443)
      You are absolutely right.

      I mean come on! Look what the IPO did to poor Google!

      err.

      ya.

      • it's still early days for google. they are yet to face rough times and demanding investors. lets see how they handle things THEN
        • yes, you're right,

          Theres absolutely no chance that any company could ever face rough times and demanding investors and survive.

          Just look at what rough times and demanding investors did to poor Amazon.

          err.

          ya.

          well then again, its only a 500% return if you invested 4 years ago during the punishment.

          Imagine if they had actually made a profit during more than 3 quarters of the 40+ quarters the company has been in business!

          lets see how they handle things THEN
      • Well, let's all bombard Trolltech's mailboxes with "Add a do-no-evil clause" mails.

        Hopefully, we'll get the point across, (shortly before their mail servers become shapely piles of slag).

    • But don't go IPO, man. Keep it small, keep it lean, and don't let your eyes glaze over with dollar signs.

      You're missing the financial reasons why companies who have offered public stcok fail and why succeed - business model, leadership, first to market and ability to keep and stregnthen market share.

      Personally, I was friends with the creators of theglobe.com and they went public with a poorly formed business model (IMO), leadership that was highly inexperienced and during a time where anything ending
    • I agree with everything you had to write.

      However, the purpose of a business is to make as much money as it can. The purpose of software and computers is to be a labor saving device for the customers.

      If people get to have fun and are allowed to do the job right in the process those things are a bonus.

      I am not saying I like that way.

  • Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @01:09AM (#13497344)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • There is a contract between the KDE Developers and Trolltech that states that if Trolltech doesn't release a new version of QT under the GPL within 12 months, the older versions are automatically BSD licensed, or something along those lines. In other words, this would be stupid for Trolltech to do.

      • Re:Will their tools stay free? (Score:5, Informative)

        by oever ( 233119 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @02:56AM (#13497656) Homepage
        KDE Free Qt Foundation [kde.org]:

        The KDE Free Qt Foundation is an organization founded by Trolltech and the KDE e.V. in 1998 with the purpose to secure the availability of the Qt toolkit for the development of Free Software and in particular for the development of the K Desktop Environment (KDE).

        Agreement page 1 [kde.org]
          2 [kde.org] 3 [kde.org] 4 [kde.org]

        The question of course is: what is a new release? Just another version number?
        • "new release" is defined in the definitions section of the contract and states that such a release must include bug fixes, performance enhancements and new features in line with an actively developed commercial C++ toolkit as gauged by other active libraries in the industry

    • Re:Will their tools stay free? (Score:4, Informative)

      by mcbridematt ( 544099 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @01:51AM (#13497498) Homepage Journal
      As long as Trolltech continues to make a developer kit so that us less financially inclined can just complile and test software on their platform for free, I will be happy.

      On this topic, I'm sure KDE has the right to take the current QT version and call it their's if Trolltech go bankrupt or go 12 months without a QT release, and release it under a BSD-style license. (Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm too lazy to reread the agreement doc)

      Some details here [kde.org]
    • I'm having fun with my Zaurus

      It's a pity that Sharp didn't see fit to opensource the customised QT & QT/e that runs on the Zaurus... this caused a lot of work for quite a few people in trying to recreate some of the features. Sharp also didn't do anyone any favours in the way they ported the linux kernel - their SD flash driver is still closed/proprietary (and is now discovered to be broken on 2GB cards).

      So, whilst the Z is a great device, it's not quite the shining star of openness that people outs

    • Hopefully these new ex-Microsoft execs quit Microsoft to get away from Microsoft's corporate practices.

      Even if that is so, let some on else de-tox them before taking them on with Trolltech. Even if the ex-MS employees have good intentions, the culture there at MS will still have rubbed off. And who's to say that they interested in it for anything beyond what they'll get out of the IPO? They'd make money with it even if it went under two months later.

      Better to get people who have a safer background

      • So, what you're saying, is that by working for Microsoft, these people have no concept of how to operate a business? But isn't Microsoft one of the largest businesses out there?

        Use your hate for something more appropriate.
        • Nice ad hominem there. Here's a clarification of the point avoided by it:

          I'm saying that by working for Microsoft, the culture there must have rubbed off on them, whether a little or a lot or voluntarily or non-voluntarily. It is well documented that M$ is one of the least ethical companies in the IT sector and has repeatedly been found guilty of illegal business methods which range from illegal tying to false advertising. What I'm saying is that it would be a bad idea for TrollTech to bring in people

  • Usually what happens when something goes IPO is their product offerings will go up in price before the IPO is sought.

    I hope either way that they continue to develop fine products and keep the prices at a reasonable level.

    Their prices are purely driven by what the market is prepared to pay, and from it seems the introduction to these tools at a commerical level is fairly steep in price for a small commerical developer.

    On a side note, I would love to see a new ISO C++ standard (royalty free) to especially cat

    • Well, the quality of service has gone down and the price has gone up, so that would fit the IPO speculation.

      They're a nice company and have a nice product, but Qt4 isn't quite ready for prime-time yet, and (despite claims to the contrary) they've discontinued support for Qt3 (if your bug doesn't cause a SEGV, it doesn't get fixed). This is not a great situation if you're a paying Trolltech customer and have 100kloc based on Qt3 to support.

      And, right now, I'm waiting for a return call from their product

      • heh - indeed.

        By the way, love your spade tools Steve.

      • They're a nice company and have a nice product, but Qt4 isn't quite ready for prime-time yet, and (despite claims to the contrary) they've discontinued support for Qt3 (if your bug doesn't cause a SEGV, it doesn't get fixed).

        Eh? They released Qt 3.3.5 yesterday.

        http://www.trolltech.com/developer/changes/changes -3.3.5.html [trolltech.com]

        Looks like they've fixed more than SEGVs.

        I'm not going to argue with you on Qt4, though.

        • Re:This is not a suprise (Score:5, Interesting)

          by SSpade ( 549608 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @01:55AM (#13497509) Homepage

          Sure, they've fixed a bunch. This is the first release that'll run on OS X 10.4, for instance (so, yes, I've had production releases of my code using pre-release snapshots of Qt3.3.5, as Qt 3.3.4 doesn't run on Tiger).

          But if you report a bug to TrollTech - and I'm talking some fairly serious bugs, like, say, QTabBar fails horribly in QAquaStyle or drawing chords doesn't work at all or docked widgets cannot be resized to smaller than 245 pixels high or... - then you'll be told "It'll be fixed in Qt 4.1". When pressed they'll tell you that their policy is not to fix anything other than critical bugs in Qt3.

          Showstopper bugs in Qt3 are not even being worked on, let alone fixed. The stock answer is "it'll be fixed in a future release of Qt4". Quite apart from the rewrite needed to move from Qt3 to Qt4 not being trivial, Qt4 doesn't work yet. The latest release I have of Qt4 on my Mac... well... the included tools don't work, let alone the libraries. Assistant has appalling focus problems, such that the Index box doesn't work at all, just as one example.

          (To be fair, I suspect that Windows and Linux users have a better situation, as Qt3 for those platforms is more mature than Qt3 for OS X - but given I'm paying for a TrioPack license I expect all three platforms to be supported).

          Once Qt4 is finished it'll be nice, but the currently available versions are early-beta quality, at best. And developers using Qt3 are being told that bugs will not be fixed, ever, and they should migrate to Qt4, where the bugs will be fixed eventually.

          • Re:This is not a suprise (Score:1)

            by Anonymous Coward
            If you prove there is a showstopper bug in qt3, I am sure they will fix it.
            Stop your anti Trolltech FUD.
          • The problem is that Trolltech have been enjoying their open source for too long and now expects all customers to fix mission critical bugs themselves and send Trolltech the patches.

            Any major software company would do that, and KDE does as well.

          • Re:This is not a suprise (Score:5, Interesting)

            by XO ( 250276 ) <blade.eric@NoSPAM.gmail.com> on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @07:16AM (#13498521) Homepage Journal
            see, here's the problem:

              You are expecting Unix developers to care one bit about the smallest Unix market segment there is. And one that has so much other stuff jammed into it, that not even God knows where your issues are.
              If the problems amongst the software were as bad as you say they are, do you think there'd even BE a Mac release? From what you're talking , not a single part of it functions.. so, either grab the source, and get to work, or figure out where the problem on your system is, since i doubt it's shared by everyone.
          • Sure, they've fixed a bunch. This is the first release that'll run on OS X 10.4, for instance (so, yes, I've had production releases of my code using pre-release snapshots of Qt3.3.5, as Qt 3.3.4 doesn't run on Tiger). (emphasis mine)

            Huh? I have software running on Tiger right now [llnl.gov] that's using Qt 3.3.4. And not the X11 version.
      • Qt3 support has not been discontinued. In fact 3.3.5 was just released and will be up online soon. The changelog is already up here: http://www.trolltech.com/developer/changes/changes -3.3.5.html [trolltech.com]

  • About Trolltech (Score:4, Informative)

    by Ctrl+Alt+De1337 ( 837964 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @01:11AM (#13497351) Homepage
    For any of you wondering who Trolltech is and why you would care about them, their biggest claim to fame is that they develop Qt, the GUI used by KDE.

    • Re:About Trolltech (Score:5, Informative)

      by rm69990 ( 885744 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @01:49AM (#13497492)
      Actually, QT is a cross platform C++ toolkit. The KDE developers develop their own GUI using QT. It would be the same as saying that GTK is a gui...which makes no sense whatsoever. GTK is a widget set, Gnome is the GUI.
      • I think you have the right idea, but this is not exactly correct. GNOME strictly speaking is a desktop environment and collection of software developed for that environment, written using GTK as the main toolkit. GNOME is not a GUI itself, it can't be because individual apps have GUIs and GNOME is not a single app.

        There are plenty of GTK GUI apps that have nothing to do with GNOME, but any app which uses GTK likely has a GTK GUI. Likewise any app built using Qt (including the KDE apps) likely have a GUI bui

  • So what happens to Qt (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    .. when the shareholders want more profit?

    The problem with doing an IPO is that you lose a lot of control of your company. You might end up being taken over by someone else without your original vision.

    What happens to KDE if the major shareholders decides to stop developing Linux/Qt and discontinue it, while keeping Windows /Qt and Mac/Qt.

    But Qt is GPL you say? Yes, but where does that leave proprietary applications? It would be impossible and illegal to develop proprietary applications for KDE using Qt and
    • Hello, meet the KDE Free Qt Foundation [kde.org], founded in 1998 exactly to prevent this kind of problem. In case Trolltech ownership changes and tries to snatch Qt from under our feet, Qt goes BSD-license by contractual agreement.

      This being said, much as I like Qt from an engineering point of view, and have appreciated my contacts with the Trolls so far, I don't know what to make of that IPO. This might be a good time to sit back and watch and wait.

    • Re:So what happens to Qt (Score:5, Insightful)

      by 10Ghz ( 453478 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @04:01AM (#13497841)
      The problem with doing an IPO is that you lose a lot of control of your company. You might end up being taken over by someone else without your original vision.


      Not necessarily. The old owners (in this case: mostly TT-employees) could still hold majority of the shares. You do not have to sell all your shares, you could just sell some shares.

      What happens to KDE if the major shareholders decides to stop developing Linux/Qt and discontinue it, while keeping Windows /Qt and Mac/Qt.


      Previous version of Qt would get re-licensed under BSD-license, as per agreement between KDE and TT. Also, KDE_folks (and anyone else interested) would pick up the lates free version of Qt, and start working on it. So there would be to Qt's: the commercial Qt provided by TT available on Mac/Windows only, and free-software Qt, developed by KDE and others, available for Linux, Mac and Windows.

      Yes, but where does that leave proprietary applications?


      If TT did what you fear, those proprietary applications would do just fine. In fact, they would flourish, since Qt would be under the BSD-license. That said, I don't care about proprietary apps. I find it strange that people are pushing free software. But when Qt and TrollTech is concered, those same people get their panties in a bunch because you can't write proprietary apps with it for free. Tough luck I say. Why don't you also whine because you can't take Linux-kernel and turn it in to something proprietary?

      This is why having ONE company have complete control over the desktop APIs is a bad idea.


      Huh? The toolkit is GPL'ed! I really can't believe when I see people whine because some piece of software is licensed under the GPL! I can see why someone would complain when some sofdtware is proprietary and you are dependant on it, but this is GPL'ed software! But if you don't like it, go use GTK+ and Gnome. No-one is stopping you.

      Since when did free software and Linux turn from being about *gasp* free software, in to "we must satisfy the whims of companies who want to write proprietary software!". With attitude like that, why don't you people just stick to Windows?
    • ...being taken over. Ya know, people don't just "take over" companies, for the most part. Besides, 99% of the world probably hasn't even got the slightest idea what TT sells. (I don't, all their products that I'm aware of are GPL)

      "impossible and illegal to develop proprietary applications for KDE using QT" .. uh.. do you know anything about the GPL? Or the BSD license that QT would automagically revert to if Trolltech disappeared?

      Windows/Mac versions + compatability = myth.
  • Unless you are really lucky like the searching and indexing companies, you can be easily killed by being a public company.
    Your publicly perceived value is the one of your stocks.
    While your real value is the one that yelds from your products and services when sold and used.
    Which one is more important?
    I hope that the tie-guys at TrollTech will take more care about technology than finance!

  • I don't quite like the idea. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by AsparagusChallenge ( 611475 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @02:49AM (#13497631)
    I'd buy shares from them. They sell a quality product for a reasonable price.

    But I'd prefer Trolltech to stay private as it is now. The reason being, if I remember correctly, their employees own more than half of the actions, I thing over the 70% even. That sounds good, because the ones that do the work have a reason to worry for doing it good. If that has anything to do with their current quality I don't want to see this changing.
    • They sell a quality product for a reasonable price.

      If I were you I would stay far away from any sort of investment. You don't have the sense for it. The point of investing is to make money. That is the only point of investing.

      I'm sure you think that you have a valid reason, that is to influence the company somehow. But you will not have any influence, and your money will be at risk.

      Selling a quality product at a reasonable price is a great way to lose money. If you don't charge the price that maximizes
      • Spare me the techno-babble about how the market forces people to be evil, man. Making money is a subproduct of generating some abstract (or not so abstract) value. Maximizing profit is a consequence, not a goal.

        I do have reasons to not fully like a Trolltech IPO, but they're not related to not wanting to invest on a company that sells what people wants to a price people will pay.
  • It seems to me there is a real risk in Trolltech's going public that another larger company with objectives that are not really compatible with open source could buy a controlling stake in Trolltech and then be in a position to implement a number of closed-source strategies which might include making Qt closed-source, making the Qt development tools closed source, or even ending all Qt development.
    • It seems to me there is a real risk in Trolltech's going public that another larger company with objectives that are not really compatible with open source could buy a controlling stake in Trolltech and then be in a position to implement a number of closed-source strategies which might include making Qt closed-source, making the Qt development tools closed source, or even ending all Qt development.
      I belive there are legal agreements with some of the KDE folk that prevent this happening.
      The worst that co
    • Actually, it's not just that. With public companies there is a much larger pressure for the bottom-line. With so many products using Qt, they (without an outside company buying) could find it would be more profitable to close the licensing. While this wouldn't effect past releases, it would effect KDE and the like. I saw someone posted KDE had some agreement, but that wouldn't effect future version unless there was money that changed hands. Secondly, they noted that the community could continue to deve
      • Actually, Qt is dual licensed under the GPL and a prorietary Qt license. Not only that, but if TrollTech decides that they are no longer going to support the GPL'd version of their libraries, they become BSD'd... so it isn't going to be financially sound for them to do such a thing in the near future. Yeh yeh. redundant... but this is pure (if unintentional) FUD.
    • see this post [slashdot.org].
  • Then release it totally GPL'd.

    Maybe they could find another use for it too....

    • Re:Google should buy it (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      ermmm. Qt is already GPL'd.
      • GP said totally GPL'd, i.e. ditch the QPL.
        • Or LGPL.

          GPL in libraries in problematic... eg. bits of KDE might be LGPL in theory but because they link to QT they're actually GPL (since GPL overrides all other libraries), which in turn means all kde apps must be GPL...

          • which in turn means all kde apps must be GPL...

            Wrong, since Qt free edition are under a dual license GPL/QPL. KDE applications can be licensed under any open source license.
        • GP said totally GPL'd, i.e. ditch the QPL.

          Oh yes brilliant move, remove the OPEN SOURCE license making it possible to use other OSS licenses than the GPL when using Qt. The QPL you know are the license letting you use ANY open source license you want when using Qt. It makes it possible to use BSD, MIT, X11, APL, Artistic and all other open source licenses with Qt for free. That must be bad in some way, but I can't see why so feel free to explain?

          • I felt the AC who responded to Luke Psywalker had misunderstood Luke's post... so I thought I'd try to clarify things (of course, it is possible I misunderstood). Can't suggest anything specifically wrong with QPL as I'm quite happy with it :-)

            • Ok, perhaps the AC had misunderstood, as sometimes you see rants against the QPL and that Luke fellow may have been one. Mostly from clueless people who never have read or understood the QPL, so I misunderstood and thought you was of them(Sorry).

              On the other hand I think the AC got it right, I think Luke Psywalker tries to uses the "Qt are not pure GPL" or "not really GPL" troll argument:-) Which is even more silly, but hey they usuall get used by anti TrollTech/Qt/KDE trolls. :-)
        • GP said totally GPL'd, i.e. ditch the QPL.

          It's a disjunctive license, you can choose to have it under GPL or QPL, just like mozilla's triple licensing (GPL/LGPL/something else). You still have all the rights you have under the GPL. Taking away the QPL would just reduce your license options.

  • If you look at the previous jobs of Juha Christensen (Microsoft's Mobile Devices division and Symbian before that), and Tod Nielsen (senior VP of technology marketing at Oracle, Microsoft), it is obvious that Trolltech is strongly going into the smartphone OS market. They could bundle some Linux based embedded OS and add QTopia onto that and sell it as a complete solution + some good tools for developing apps for this mobile platform.

    If they make some success on this market, Qt/{X11,Windows,MacOSX} would l

  • No thanks (Score:1, Funny)

    by PMOnoTo ( 854402 )
    Sources close I, for one, prefer open sources
  • "biggest producer of Linux software for mobile devices"

    This isn't meant as a flamebait, but where are these mobile devices with linux on it?

    The Zaurus isn't sold outside Japan (O own a SL 5500), the (still very few) Motorola phones come with an development environment that supports Java only (nevertheless I'll buy an A780 soon just for the bulit in GPS navigation it has in European models).

    It's rather difficult to find a device with qt/embedded that's programmable in C++. The only thing that I can think of
    • It's rather difficult to find a device with qt/embedded that's programmable in C++. The only thing that I can think of is the new Nokia surfing tablet, but IIRC it's not available yet.

      Actually, the Nokia is/will be GTK based. Even though the 770 isn't out, you can download and play with it's Debianesque OS (called Maemo) here [maemo.org]
    • "biggest producer of Linux software for mobile devices" This isn't meant as a flamebait, but where are these mobile devices with linux on it?
      br> In China, where the world biggest producers of smartphones are. Easiest way to find them, try TT customers page.
  • Yeah, I'll be sure to invest. Last year I bought Red Hat at 30 bucks a share and now it's somewhere around 14 or 15 bucks. Oh and I thought I would be cool and I bought VA Software stock at 2 bucks a share. Now it's down to about 1.50. I think I'll just invest in Apple or MS...
  • This news has been going around since the dotbomb era.

    Oh, and TrollTech doesn't really belong in the Linux category, either. They've been around since before Linus, let alone before Linux.
  • Companies going public are required to list all the dangers to their business model and all possible things that could go wrong as part of their full disclosure to potential investors.

    Reading these lists can be quite an educational experience.
  • ....Then Microsoft can buy the place up and turn it into a parking lot; thus eliminating some of the competition for Windows CE.

    Bleck.
  • I just read the KDE foundation Trolltech agreement.

    Link is here: http://www.kde.org/whatiskde/kdefreeqtfoundation.p hp#updated_agreement [kde.org]

    What is says is very, very simple. The KDE foundation is permitted to license the latest QT Free edition under any open source license, explicitly including the BSD license, as long as one of the following three conditions is meet:

    1. QT Free edition is not updated for 12 months.
    2. QT Free edition is not updated within 12 months of the release of a new QT proprietary edition
  • The stock plummets. The CEO is quoted as saying "YHBT YHL HAND".
  • I've learned not the believe everything I hear from "sources close to the company", unless they are Open Sources.

Slashdot Top Deals

As you will see, I told them, in no uncertain terms, to see Figure one. -- Dave "First Strike" Pare

Close