If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
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) :-)
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.
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.