Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 26th Aug 2009 22:23 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source When Windows Vista was launched, the Free Software Foundation started its BadVista campaign, which was aimed at informing users about what the FSF considered user-restrictive features in Vista. Luckily for the FSF, Vista didn't really need a bad-mouthing campaign to fail. Now that Windows 7 is receiving a lot of positive press, the FSF dusted off the BadVista drum, and gave it a fresh coat of paint.
Thread beginning with comment 380825
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Why?
by Kyin on Thu 27th Aug 2009 03:17 UTC
Kyin
Member since:
2009-01-19

Same old song and dance. The FSF gave us the GPL, which is a great weapon to keep free software free. To keep people like Apple from incorporating the code into their system and then closing it off to everyone else. They have a nifty list of free software on their site. I'm sure they've made other contributions, but I don't know what they are.

Probably because all I can hear is them yelling how evil Microsoft is. Seriously? Microsoft controls Windows? Windows is prone to viruses? What, windows costs money? Wow, if the FSF hadn't pointed these things out I would never had known.

I've been using Linux for a long time. And I have to agree with Linus when he said Microsoft hatred is a disease. This disease is crippling free software when people spend more time yelling about Microsoft than they do contributing to their own cause.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Why?
by StaubSaugerNZ on Thu 27th Aug 2009 05:55 in reply to "Why?"
StaubSaugerNZ Member since:
2007-07-13

You hypocrates - all of you who profess to use all the GNU stuff [with the small Linux kernel underneath]). You use the product of millions of man-hours of labour and whinge about the philosophy of those who did it for you, for free.

If you don't like the philosophy don't use the software, ok? It is the rational thing to do. Go and get an Apple or switch to BSD, Solaris, or Windows. Otherwise, accept you are logically irrational ingrates and STFU. You are not contributing anything.



Oh yeah, for the next poster. I've written medical software (for research though, not life support certified but medical nevertheless) and it would not be possible to do without Free Software (due to the cost involve to buy all components). The Internet runs on Free Software but because most of you are so goddamn noobie in your outlook you think all computing is your desktop and your company's wimpy Exchange server.

Right now I'm writing software for a project that will process mail for millions of users and is hosted on Linux (the only thing that can scale cost-wise in such huge server farms - same way Google uses Linux). Doing this would not be economical if we were paying for Windows licenses on this scale. Free Software is good for all businesses (except for one company perhaps who is the only one to really benefit from monopolising computing and developer mindshare).

Free Software makes this business possible, and because it is Free Software it'll still be around in 10 years (since we can always maintain it ourselves, 'cause we got the skills unlike the whiners on this site who consider themselves l33t gurus since they know how to install MS Office).

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Why?
by nt_jerkface on Thu 27th Aug 2009 06:34 in reply to "RE: Why?"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

Right now I'm writing software for a project that will process mail for millions of users and is hosted on Linux (the only thing that can scale cost-wise in such huge server farms - same way Google uses Linux). Doing this would not be economical if we were paying for Windows licenses on this scale.


I didn't say Linux is useless, I was just pointing out how silly it is believe that proprietary software is immoral. Most life-saving software is proprietary, so would the world be better if it didn't exist?

As for your project Linux isn't the only Unix that can be used in server farms. There's also FreeBSD and OpenSolaris.

For all the corporate support of Linux it is funny how Freebsd which as a fraction of the funding is still a viable alternative. If Linux didn't exist FreeBSD would have taken its place on all those backbone servers. It isn't like the internet wouldn't exist if Stallman didn't put forth his Commandments of Freedom.

Sorry but I'm not going to keep my mouth shut when a collectivist who doesn't have to work for a living spends his time defaming proprietary software. You are free to follow him and his Freedoms** while I am free to call bs on the whole thing.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Why?
by pjafrombbay on Thu 27th Aug 2009 06:52 in reply to "RE: Why?"
pjafrombbay Member since:
2005-07-31

This is probably a waste of time; but here we go!

Like others have already said; you are seriously missing the point. Some of us do like the concept of free and open source software but that DOES NOT make proprietary software bad. Its simply horses for courses. One of the (many) reasons I haven't made the switch to Linux is some of the software that I really like and use a lot that is oly available on Windows. It also happens to be shareware (and I have paid for my copies) and for me, it just works really well.

Oh! and please don't tell me about Wine (been there and done that :-( ).

A little open-mindedness in the geek community wouldn't go astray sometimes. Seems to me that many on "my side of the discussion" have tried both open source and proprietary software but not many on the other side have done the same; for them its a "religious experience" thing (bit like the Taliban did someone say?). Try Windows 7, if you can remove your blinkers you might be surprised.

Regards,
Peter

Edited 2009-08-27 06:59 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1