What is Digg?221 Comments
- dogStar, on 07/03/2008, -13/+69All praise St. Stallman. What an awesome article! One thing to note, however, is that the BBC are carrying this story. Normally very pro-Microsoft (to the point where they are facing an European Commission investigation into them providing with illegal state-aid around iPlayer), they probably thought it worthwhile being more 'balanced' in their reporting.
- Pinkertinkle, on 07/04/2008, -3/+37I just noticed I'm not using any Microsoft products while reading this article. Sweet.
- mattlee, on 07/03/2008, -1/+34OS X might have some free software distributed with it, but Mac OS X is proprietary, make no mistake.
- Kingoftherings, on 07/03/2008, -2/+30OS X is still $130, plus the Apple Hardware.
Its a proprietary OS, based on Open Source Software, its almost as bad as Microsoft. - ins3, on 07/03/2008, -22/+50Go open source!
- CrispyBeef, on 07/03/2008, -9/+36There is no excuse for the government here in the UK to not switch to Linux for a lot of things. Some cities in Germany and other countries have done so to great effect. It would save money, secure systems more effectively and allow government departments to modify software to make it suit their needs more closely. So much better.
I've been using Linux for the last few years, that along with my PS2 - and hopefully PS3 soon - I have no need to use Windows at all. It's also worth noting for those that don't know, Mac OS X is based on open source software. You can have a very similar experience also without the hefty price tag. - guyjohnston, on 07/03/2008, -10/+35Excellent article. A great change from the normal BBC articles about software and Microsoft, such as the ones when Windows Vista came out, which were basically just advertisements for it.
- Borbus, on 07/03/2008, -2/+25It's as bad as Microsoft. Don't forget Apple made DRM a lot more popular with their itunes service and they have a complete lack of support for free and open formats such as FLAC and Vorbis on there.
- Borbus, on 07/03/2008, -0/+21I agree the government should definitely be using only FREE software and open formats. Using GNU/Linux for schools would be a good start. I stopped paying my license fee when the BBC started distributing DRM, I can't stop paying my taxes can I?!
- guymandood, on 07/04/2008, -17/+34This is easily the most ridiculous article I've ever read.... There's nothing wrong with Open Source Software. There's nothing wrong with proprietary software either. Proprietary software works - it serves a purpose. Thankfully, there are alternatives for those who choose them - but being a cheerleader for OSS by wasting cycles bashing legitimate for-profit businesses is patently ridiculous.
- inactive, on 07/04/2008, -5/+19Yes schez my boy, Stallman is on record saying that anyone who doesn't give away his code under the license he approves of is "immoral" and should "find another job". That's extremism. He is on record saying that companies that write "non free" software should release their code or disappear. That's extremism.
ESR on the other hand, realizes that will happen around the time pigs fly, so his approach is much more pragmatic.
Emotional phrases like "defending freedom" have no place in discussions about people who advocate the elimination of people who don't think like them.
So yeah, his *technical* contributions notwithstanding, he is an extremist. - chitta, on 07/04/2008, -0/+14I've seen quite a bit of OSS bashing here. I feel some people confuse free software relating to free price.
imho
1. OSS does not have to be for free. See what RedHat and Novell (to name a few) are doing by providing enterprise class product, support and services.
2. Open Source creates a competitive environment. Microsoft did not bring a uniformity to personal computing. IBM did it by making their PC architecture open.
3. DRM restricts your freedom to do what you want with your music. Why can't I rip my music CDs so that I can listen it on my MP3 player? It is not restricting my freedom?
4. Why did Microsoft have to propose and push through the OOXML standard when we already had the Open Document Format?
5. Stallman is not a Apple fanboy.
6. Those who are complaining that Linux is not easy to use have obviously not tried the latest Linux distributions. Installing Linux is almost as easy and installing Windows. How many novice Windows users have installed Windows by themselves?
7. Has Microsoft's spending millions and millions of dollars to develop Vista paid off?
8. Proprietary software companies use their cash to not just develop software but also buy off corrupt govt. agencies into using their software.
9. OSS software (for example Mozilla Firefox) is most of the times more standards compliant then Internet Explorer.
10. I am okay with paying to software but not for it restricting me in how I can use it. If I buy a media player, I don't want it to tell me that I can only play a MP3 a particular number of times and on only a select MP3 players. - chrizzle, on 07/03/2008, -5/+18i wouldn't consider stallman an extremist. he doesn't advocate sabotage or violence or anything illegal in the support of his cause.
he's more like an evangelical: a proselytizer. he's out there pushing the word on everyone.
he's over the top, he's an iconoclast, he's pushy, but he's brilliant and mostly harmless. - Tricon, on 07/03/2008, -4/+16This is an excellent article, and I am passionate about FOSS as well.
Jeff Atwood makes an interesting point: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/001044.h ...
While FOSS has truly inspired and created some of the greatest software and technology available, there are some proprietary software that beats its FOSS counterparts hands down. For example, I own an art and technology studio in Central IL. We have a RED camera and thus use Final Cut Pro religiously. That on top of Photoshop, After Effects, and many other software solutions makes it hard for us to adopt Linux exclusively.
I realize that there is progress being made to WINE some of this software, and I'm looking forward to future developments. Ideally I'd like to see so many users adopt Linux that it becomes a viable market for Adobe and others to begin to write native versions of their software for Linux, but that's a catch 22 as the software needs to become available for users to see Linux as a viable solution. Granted these software only apply to some users, and many could adopt Linux as it is today.
Yet even if the software does become native, it's still proprietary. What we need are visionary developers and companies to come together and to begin to create competing FOSS for the greater good. As an artist, I want other artists to be able to express themselves -- $10,000 software shouldn't stand in the way of their creativity. I only hope that I can afford to hire developers to develop custom solutions for my company, releasing them open source at the same time.
If we are going to develop more complex systems and software in the future, collaboration is key. - hapax, on 07/04/2008, -0/+12Sometimes we need extremists, to move the sheer weight of status quo.
- Szandor, on 07/04/2008, -5/+17"There's also the Digital Restrictions Management: software features designed to "stop" you from accessing your files freely. Increased restriction of users seems to be the main advance of Vista. "
Someone explain this to me, especially the last sentence. - freqk, on 07/03/2008, -1/+12It can be. Depends how you do it.
- superkendall, on 07/04/2008, -2/+13The thing is he doesn't seem that far out now that we've had a taste of what software patents really mean.
Wherever he seems far out now, may not seem nearly so crazy in five years. Just remember that. - aliguana, on 07/04/2008, -2/+12why are Apple different? If anything they are worse, because you get hardware lock-in too. At least I can install Windows and Adobe products on any machine I want to.
- tenjin1, on 07/04/2008, -2/+12Yep Mac is crippled with anti-features just like Winblows..it is not open-source..although at it's operating system core it is UNIX, but not LINUX.
- Borbus, on 07/03/2008, -4/+14Or, rather, free software!
- tatis44, on 07/03/2008, -11/+21Free as in freedom!
http://www.binaryfreedom.info
http://www.dailyradical.org - Soval, on 07/04/2008, -0/+9"Digital Restrictions Management" :D
- Stonekeeper, on 07/04/2008, -0/+9Living in the UK, the biggest irk i have with the government WRT computers is the fact that a lot of it's websites which education establishments are REQUIRED BY LAW to use are IE only. This is entirely unjust and makes me mad (which i have every right to be being a tax payer).
- mattlee, on 07/04/2008, -1/+10Where did you get that idea from? There's thousands of people getting paid to work on free software.. companies like Red Hat, Sun, Novell, Intel, IBM, Joyent, Nokia... all paying people to work on free software development.
- KibibyteBrain, on 07/04/2008, -0/+8Unless your PC has FOSS firmwares and BIOS, it probably does too, even if its a Linux or *BSD box.
- saejinn, on 07/04/2008, -2/+10You just got a +1 to Computers
- rockus, on 07/04/2008, -0/+8Wow, you are equating Benazir Bhutto with the others? Mindblowing!
- daengbo, on 07/04/2008, -1/+8DRM is baked into the core of Vista. Google is your friend on this:
http://www.forbes.com/2007/02/10/microsoft-vista-d ... - schestowitz, on 07/03/2008, -10/+17Defending freedom is now 'extremism'?
- hatgreeting, on 07/04/2008, -8/+15Stallman is a great guy. He's really far out there in open source land, so far out that he's a little ridiculous sometimes, but it takes someone that extreme to make an impact. I especially appreciate his stance on silly software patents. Keep it up, oh Jerry Garcia of the software world.
- grumpyrain, on 07/04/2008, -1/+8GIMP is great. I have used it as an amateur photographer for about 4 years. But it is to Photoshop what Wordpad is to Word. Good enough for the casual user, but inadequate for someone in the industry trying to get some work done.
- Pake, on 07/04/2008, -0/+7You can install Windows on an Apple computer... the problem with Apple is the opposite in that you can't install OSX on anything but an Apple computer legally.
- misterdrumz, on 07/04/2008, -6/+12This makes me laugh, let me just play devil's advocate here: Microsoft get a whole lot of jip for being closed off and restrictive, yet has software that will run on any platform with any kind of hardware you want. Heck it will even allow you to install their software on competing operating systems and actively develop software such as Office for a direct competitor. and Bill Gates is transformed into this oppresive boogeyman.
On the other hand you have Apple who force you to buy their (lets face it) over priced bespoke hardware, not allowing you to build your own (despite recent attempts), makes a big deal about their software being on their platform only (not Safari or iTunes, I mean other ones like photo/video editing) and yet the world and their dog praises Steve Jobs for being the Anti-Bill.
I hate format wars and brand fanboyism as much as the next guy but don't like it when a company that has managed to get the leading market share gets villified when everyone else is either doing exactly the same, worse and probably wishes they had the same results! - FZero, on 07/03/2008, -26/+32No digg, sorry. I support open source, but I think Stallman is not only past its prime but actually harmful to the whole free/open software movement. All extremists are harmful.
- balaknair, on 07/04/2008, -0/+6Just a minor correction- Point number 6:"Installing Linux is almost as easy and installing Windows"
Having installed various versions of Windows since Win95 to WinXP, I have to say installing Linux is easier than installing Windows, at least with all the distros I'd recommend- Ubuntu being the best of the lot in that respect, but PCLinuxOS and Mandriva are close behind. Fedora/RHEL and OpenSUSE/SLED aren't that friendly to Linux noobs. But they're still far easier than installing either WinXP or Vista. I've tried Vista only once, never going down that path again- it was like they'd replaced dll hell with driver hell, though the install itself was easy enough(the validation part was horribly irritating though, almost made me wish I'd used a crack/hack. Everything you need on a Linux box is right there, no need to pop in a separate manufacturer CD/DVD for drivers, no need to install MS Office, Photoshop etc etc separately. There are still a few troublesome areas Linux like WiFi and nVidia/ATI proprietary drivers, but things are improving on that front rapidly, and I'm sure in a few years time once a critical mass of users is achieved, the vendors themselves will solve these issues. - balaknair, on 07/04/2008, -2/+8Great article. Shame on MS for their FUD tactics. I only wish they'd spend as much money, time and effort on writing good code as they do on marketing(and on their lawyers and FUD agents).
- inactive, on 07/04/2008, -1/+7unethical customer treatment of customers. lol. Go somewhere else, and buy some other product. OH wait.,....
- aptanalogy, on 07/04/2008, -0/+6All generalizations are bad.
- lerker, on 07/04/2008, -1/+7You realise your PS2 runs proprietary software, right?
- WiseBoy, on 07/04/2008, -1/+6Well, then don't contribute to free software. Neither RMS nor anybody else can force you to do that. But it doesn't mean that Stallman is wrong.
- inactive, on 07/04/2008, -0/+4How are they scum? They are better than what FNC or CNN have.
- balaknair, on 07/04/2008, -1/+6Irony? Why?
You might want to take a look at the Creative Commons site
http://creativecommons.org/about/
Some key points-
"Creative Commons defines the spectrum of possibilities between full copyright — all rights reserved — and the public domain — no rights reserved. Our licenses help you keep your copyright while inviting certain uses of your work — a “some rights reserved” copyright."
The CC Noderivs License:
Licensees may copy, distribute, display and perform only verbatim copies of the work, not derivative works based on it.
You are free:
* to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work
Under the following conditions:
* No Derivative Works. You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.
* For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. The best way to do this is with a link to this web page.
* Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder.
* Nothing in this license impairs or restricts the author's moral rights.
In other words you can quote from the article, reproduce the article in a magazine or website, make pamphlets and distribute it or sell copies... as long as you change nothing in the article(like substituting the Author's name with your own or publishing it under a different license(which gives you or someone else copyright or takes away the author's rights).
I'm afraid I don't see the irony. You're free under this license to use this article, but you're not allowed to steal it or change it. For a look at the other end of the spectrum, read up on 'Copiepresse vs Google' and 'Copiepresse vs EU'(you can find articles on this by Googling it or read about it on Groklaw. - mattlee, on 07/04/2008, -0/+5How is GNU/Linux proprietary?
- mattlee, on 07/04/2008, -2/+7Proprietary software means users are unable to share their software with their friends, study how the software works, modify it for their own needs and even run it for any purpose.
Those things alone are enough wrong with proprietary software. - daengbo, on 07/04/2008, -0/+5You could call Novell, IBM, or Red Hat if you like. They're pretty big names in the industry. In fact, Unix installations have almost all gone open source. It's the Windows installations where the transition costs and document formats make migrating uneconomical. I think the article even mentioned lock-in.
Your second paragraph is just silly. Open is open. You can look to see whether there are back doors or not, and that's the reason why many paranoid non-U.S. governments are pushing to move away from MS products. "Intel" has a different meaning in the government sector than it does in computing. - daengbo, on 07/04/2008, -0/+5So you missed the whole "I hope that I can hire developers" part of his post, eh? What a stupid troll you are.
- rmmst49, on 07/03/2008, -8/+13yeah, like mlk, ghandi, nelson mandela, benazir bhutto, mother theresa, isaac newton and copernicus. all extremists, so, i guess, all harmful.
- scex, on 07/04/2008, -0/+5You do realise that Richard Stallman is as much against Apple as he is against Microsoft?
As for the free part, I'm not going to even bother with that.Suffice to say it has nothing to with the monetary cost of the product. - inactive, on 07/04/2008, -1/+6Just because you've become comfortable with the corporate dick up your ass...
-
Show 51 - 100 of 221 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is