All Things Microsoft > Microsoft as a Company
Massachusetts set to switch off Microsoft
piratePenguin:
--- Quote from: skyman8081 ---Okay, Photoshop and the GIMP. Cinelerra and AVID Media Composer. iTunes and xmms. GAIM and Trillian. Audacity and Sound Forge.
--- End quote ---
Free software: 5
Non-free software: 0.
(I'm joking)
What about Linux, GCC, Emacs, Xorg, GNOME and apache?
Like I said:
--- Quote ---Sure, there might be areas where non-free software is better than the free alternatives, and there are also areas where free software kickes the balls of non-free software.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: skyman8081 ---Open Source is great, as long as you are a programmer.
--- End quote ---
It helps (alot), but you don't have to be a programmer to use apache, Linux, GCC et cetera.
skyman8081:
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---What about Linux, GCC, Emacs, Xorg, GNOME and apache?
--- End quote ---
AIX, Borland, vi, Aqua, et. al.
We can prattle on with anecdotal evidence all day. We won't get anywhere. Not until there are some serious studies done on the average quality of Open source vs proprietary software.*
Open source is a fucking religion, get over it.
________________
* Not that it matters, even if a formal study is done, unless it come back with glowing praise for open source, it will be decried and villified as "bought" by $propreitarySoftwareVendor.
piratePenguin:
--- Quote from: skyman8081 ---AIX, Borland, vi, Aqua, et. al.
We can prattle on with anecdotal evidence all day. We won't get anywhere. Not until there are some serious studies done on the average quality of Open source vs proprietary software.*
Open source is a fucking religion, get over it.
________________
* Not that it matters, even if a formal study is done, unless it come back with glowing praise for open source, it will be decried and villified as "bought" by $propreitarySoftwareVendor.
--- End quote ---
I should've brought this up before, but...
http://www.dwheeler.com/oss_fs_why.html
That's a long, intensive paper.
If you have any doubts about it's conclusions (quoted here), do youself a favor and read the full paper:
--- Quote ---OSS/FS has significant market share in many markets, is often the most reliable software, and in many cases has the best performance. OSS/FS scales, both in problem size and project size. OSS/FS software often has far better security, perhaps due to the possibility of worldwide review. Total cost of ownership for OSS/FS is often far less than proprietary software, especially as the number of platforms increases. These statements are not merely opinions; these effects can be shown quantitatively, using a wide variety of measures. This doesn
--- End quote ---
skyman8081:
There was a metric fuck-ton of Cherry-picking in that study.
Yes, there are SOME cases where open source applications are better than proprietary counterparts. But you still have not proved to me that by virtue of being open source, an application will be INHERENTLY better than it's proprietary conterpart.
piratePenguin:
--- Quote from: skyman8081 ---There was a metric fuck-ton of Cherry-picking in that study.
Yes, there are SOME cases where open source applications are better than proprietary counterparts. But you still have not proved to me that by virtue of being open source, an application will be INHERENTLY better than it's proprietary conterpart.
--- End quote ---
I'm not trying to do that.
You brought up this discussion (post #50, you said that free software dev's are lazy or some other shit).
You still haven't elaborated on that, even though both myself and worker201 asked you to.
After that, I stated:
--- Quote ---You [Aloone_Jonez] always bring up Firefox and Opera, and it's getting very annoying. Sure, there might be areas where non-free software is better than the free alternatives, and there are also areas where free software kickes the balls of non-free software (most notably, apache).
--- End quote ---
(which is a bit like what you just said: "Yes, there are SOME cases where open source applications are better than proprietary counterparts.") to which you replied:
--- Quote ---Okay, Photoshop and the GIMP. Cinelerra and AVID Media Composer. iTunes and xmms. GAIM and Trillian. Audacity and Sound Forge.
--- End quote ---
(By that, were you suggesting that non-free software is inherently better than free software?)
EDIT: My point: I'm not trying to prove to you that free software is inherently better than non-free software.
And I don't even know what you're trying to prove.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version