Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

poll: free software or open source

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • poll: free software or open source

    just interesting what is the ratio of FS camp to OSS camp .
    37
    Free Software
    45.95%
    17
    Open Source
    54.05%
    20

  • #2
    You failed to list "Both" as an option.

    I've released software that I've developed for FOSS under MIT/X11, BSD, GPL, and LGPL- I willingly chose each for varying reasons and would license works I'm free to do so with under all of them.

    Comment


    • #3
      Where can i get the tutorials for free open source software, especially linux?

      Comment


      • #4
        Where can i get the tutorials for free open source software, especially linux?
        You mean tutorials to using software? Google I guess.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Mithrandir View Post
          just interesting what is the ratio of FS camp to OSS camp .
          I lean slightly towards free. I support a person's right to produce software, and keep the source code for themselves. Sell it, reproduce it, etc. For themselves.

          Without individual rights, there is nothing.

          If that individual decides they want to open the source of their software for the rest of us, I'll applaud it every single time. But it should be up to an owner to open source, not a bunch of strong arm tactics that force someone to do it against their will.

          (AMD/ATI is a good example. We've polled, petitioned, asked, and taken our business somewhere else. But nobody did anything illegal, dangerous, or otherwise highly stupid. AMD/ATI decided to do it on their own. They're my heros of the year) :-)

          Comment


          • #6
            I really don't care. I think the split between FS and OS does harm the community so to speak. The vast majority of people really don't care at all. Or they see FS/OS as a negative, not a positive. The amount of people who see FS/OS as a bedroom hobbyist movement and henceforth won't use it in a business environment is amazing. They don't seem to realise that most of the large distros (Red Hat, Ubuntu etc) are run by companies and many of the large and successful projects (Open Office, Firefox, MySQL) are heavily supported by large companies.

            Comment


            • #7
              I'd opt for OSS. It gives you more freedom and security if the developer goes bust or starts to stray (can you believe how large the Nero suite is now).

              Companies that offer free software may have an agenda to make up the money they invested in developing the software. I'm not paranoid, but this may be so for the Mozilla/Google tieup.

              Comment


              • #8
                Free software

                I would say free software - as a goal.
                That is what we are going for.
                On the other hand, I think that there are more reasonable ways of explaining it than the Stallman approach. When he is in his balanced mood, it is fine, but sometimes he gets a bit... Dementor-like.

                Comment


                • #9
                  My main criteria is as with the majority of users is "working software".

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    i really dont think this poll is very good..

                    it seems some people consider free as "closed, but free of charge to acquire", while i think(certainly hope) most think "free as in freedom"..

                    Can we perhaps have this poll reset and renamed with better options?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I'm also wondering wether this means which kind of software we prefer, or which name for free as in freedom?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by halfmanhalfamazing View Post
                        I lean slightly towards free. I support a person's right to produce software, and keep the source code for themselves. Sell it, reproduce it, etc. For themselves.

                        Without individual rights, there is nothing.

                        If that individual decides they want to open the source of their software for the rest of us, I'll applaud it every single time. But it should be up to an owner to open source, not a bunch of strong arm tactics that force someone to do it against their will.

                        (AMD/ATI is a good example. We've polled, petitioned, asked, and taken our business somewhere else. But nobody did anything illegal, dangerous, or otherwise highly stupid. AMD/ATI decided to do it on their own. They're my heros of the year) :-)
                        Doesn't free (as in freedom, libre) software imply open source as a requirement to achieve that? If the user has no right to view and modify the code, it's not free/libre anymore. I'm sure you're refering to BSD-style, but as I understood it, the original open source is free, but if a program is made from that code does not open it's source, it may be obeying the terms of the licence, but it's no longer free/libre by defintion.

                        My view? They both go hand in hand, and both rely on eachother. I agree the infighting is damaging, and making people loose track of why people of both sides chose to go down the alternate path, and who the 'real' (lack of better term) 'enemy' is, the proprietary world of Microsoft, Apple, Adobe etc.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Why does open source have to mean free. I would be willing to pay more for a piece of software that I had the source code to. And as far as companies go, I'm sure they would be thrilled to be able to purchase code to edit as they need.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by derred View Post
                            And as far as companies go, I'm sure they would be thrilled to be able to purchase code to edit as they need.
                            There are examples of that in the real world. One that springs to mind is Shake for Linux.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X