Mysterious Disappearance Of PearOS

A distro with GUI resembling MacOS and known for distribution of multimedia codecs has suspended downloads. That could violated GPL licensing unless the new owners appear promptly.“Its future is now in hands of a company who wants to remain anonymous for the moment. The concept has pleased them it and now wants to continue and improve the system for their own products. I can not give a name but it is a very large company well known …”

What well known company would do this? An OEM? Apple, M$? We shall see. I reserve judgment until then. It all depends on who and why. If it’s Apple or M$ that’s likely an anti-competitive act. That’s very unlikely as PearOS was barely on the radar at Distrowatch. If it’s an OEM, this could be an important step to getting GNU/Linux onto retail shelves. For some reason OEMs prefer distros with some angle different from the likes of Debian although Debian is not anti-business in any way. They just don’t ship software without a proper licence like some codecs. Presumably a business could afford to pay whatever licensing fees are required and fix that. Why then, PearOS? Some OEMs think Apple is the one true source of wisdom. Perhaps they think imitating Apple is a recipe for success. Samsung was accused of that but Samsung is way ahead of Apple now and is not looking back. Maybe GNU/Linux’s time is coming.

See David Tavares – Google+.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Mysterious Disappearance Of PearOS

  1. ram says:

    The interrupted downloads is probably just the purchasing company moving the content to their own corporate servers. That doesn’t happen instantly.

    I have seen PearOS being used by fashion conscious Chinese college students. Hmmm?

  2. oiaohm wrote, “GPL does not place requirement of keeping on supplying the binaries.”

    There could be an issue if someone previously obtained binary-only. I think the new owners do have to supply the source code but it doesn’t have to be for $0…

  3. oiaohm says:

    GPL does not place requirement of keeping on supplying the binaries.

    Agent_Smith GPL does allow projects to be killed. Just over 5 years to complete the process completely inside license. Binaries can be stopped instantly. Source has to be provided for so long. No fork project disappears for good.

  4. I am not a lawyer but if someone sells a business they sell it warts and all, that is the buyer should take on the responsibilities of the former owner. That should mean supplying source code along with distros. It could be that tweaks by the former owner could go under a non-FREE licence. I presume the buyer has done due diligence.

  5. Agent_Smith says:

    Can they do that ??? I mean, if it’s GPL, they cannot just suffocate the project and let it die…

  6. dougman says:

    Well someone was given a large sum of money, gut feeling it was Apple knowing how anal they are.

    I just grabbed the 64-bit and 32-bit ISO’s of the last version.

Leave a Reply