Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX
gnu=borg - discuss
Aloone_Jonez:
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---Whenever I'm chosing software, non-free software is out of the question. Why? Because, I believe that non-free sofware is an insult_to_humanity_and_development. "I wrote X. I own X. You will give me Y in return for X. You are not allowd to modify X in any way. You must not distribute X in anyway.
piratePenguin:
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---The software creator is providing you with software for a fee. How is it suck an insult to humanity that someone provides a service to you in return for something?
--- End quote ---
I wasn't referring to that, I was referring to everything but that.
Quite a difference.
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---What would be an insult to humanity is if people couldn't create software and receive something in return for it. :rolleyes:
Right, now you're making sense, there's should be more laws in place to restrict the conditions software vendors can place on their users but what you're suggesting goes to the other extreme - communism. :rolleyes:
--- End quote ---
You misinterpreted what I said.
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---So if you owned a business and you had a choice bewteen two pieces of software, one is free but will only serve half your needs and the other is perfect for you but costs
--- End quote ---
Aloone_Jonez:
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---
Read my post again PROPERLY ffs :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
--- End quote ---
What were you trying to say then?
"It's wrong for a company to write a piece of software and for them to keep the source to themselves and impose certain restrictions on how people are allowed to use the binary.
All software should be free, and companies should have release the source code, and people can do what the like with it providing they adhere to the GPL, BSD or whatever."
My point about you not being very good at making money is true if you would use some inferior freesoftware over some better although much more expensive propietry sofware. This would indicate you have no idea about getting value for money and to make money you need an idea of what value for money is.
My point of view is if you write a piece of software you can do what the fuck you like with it (get used to it) providing you own all of the code. If you want you can release it under the GPL (which is communism although by your own choice) if you like or if you want to make serious money you can keep your trade secrets.
The biggest problem with Microsoft is not the ELUA (altough if doesn't help things) it's the lack of competition. This debate is silly really since you're the user you can choose what software you use and sure you should look at the licence but it shouldn't be the final deturmining factor in your choice, value for money should be.
piratePenguin:
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---What were you trying to say then?
"It's wrong for a company to write a piece of software and for them to keep the source to themselves and impose certain restrictions on how people are allowed to use the binary.
--- End quote ---
Exactly. Except I said that it's an insult to humanity etc.
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---All software should be free, and companies should have release the source code, and people can do what the like with it providing they adhere to the GPL, BSD or whatever."
--- End quote ---
Now that you added in yourself, but. Good.
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---My point about you not being very good at making money is true if you would use some inferior freesoftware over some better although much more expensive propietry sofware. This would indicate you have no idea about getting value for money and tomake money you need an idea of what value for money is.
--- End quote ---
How would I lose money by using GNU/Linux with only free software on my desktop and all the other desktops say in some web-design office I setup? The web-designers can use The GIMP for making raster images or editing some photos, Inkscape for the odd icon, and NVU if they're too noob for emacs, vim, gedit, or whatever.
In what areas in any type of business (not only web-design) would I be losing money? Or what job even?
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---My point of view is if you write a piece of software you can do what the fuck you like with it (get used to it) providing you own all of the code. If you want you can release it under the GPL (which is communism although by your own choice) if you like or if you want tomake serious money you can keep your trade secrets.
--- End quote ---
Elaborate on the GPL == communism bit please.
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---The biggest problem with Microsoft is not the ELUA (altough if doesn't help things) it's the lack of competition.
--- End quote ---
The EULA as an example of a non-free software licence. And non-free software is a big problem.
If you rented a one bedroom appartment (for one person only), and before renting it you had to agree that only you could step inside it... Alot of people would see this as a problem. EDIT: Why they don't realise similar problems with non-free software, I don't understand. The licences clearly state "You must not allow anyone else to use this software. Blahblahblah.".
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---This debate is silly really since you're the user you can choose what software you use
--- End quote ---
In that case, there is no problem with Microsoft whatsoever.
--- Quote from: Aloone_Jonez ---and sure you should look at the licence but it shouldn't be the final deturmining factor in your choice, value for money should be.
--- End quote ---
That's your opinion. I believe otherwise.
--- End quote ---
toadlife:
--- Quote from: ksym ---The only way GPL can be used in the enterprise is with the de-facto technologies, like HTML/XHTML clients/servers (Apache), OpenGL (mesa, SDL), X-window system (X.org, XFree86)
--- End quote ---
And of the software's you mentioned , only SDL is licensed under the GPL - and it's actually the LGPL. The rest are released under BSD-like licenses.
If your primary goal is adoption of software, then the GPL is not really the best choice.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version