Open source apps on rise.

http://www.techworld.com.au/article/364612/ubuntu_open_source_apps_use_rise_linux_users_group

 

Ouch, her comments about Stallman were biting.

 

I have to agree with the remarks, though. They're not particularly charitable, but they're true. The progress and growth of FOSS today are thanks to entities like Canonical, Google, and Mozilla, rather than Stallman and his obsessive rhetoric.

What makes it really funny is that Stallman apparently doesn't realize this at all. I can imagine him thumping himself on the chest and declaring victory when FOSS succeeds, when the reality is that FOSS succeeded despite people like him.

 

Those comments seem to sidestep the principles of FOSS and simple concentrate on the products.
I know that our FOSS products used by my employer were chosen because of the features, support and cost. FOSS was simply not a consideration. Most businesses are money driven and more interested in how much things cost, how much money it can help the business make. FOSS is simply not a factor in the choice, only a consequence.

Flip side of the coin there are many contributors to FOSS products that belief in FOSS principles.

Cheers, Nick

 

While the lady has just used her right to freedom of speech, I wonder how many would disagree with what Stallman is quoted as saying here:

Link: http://www.techworld.com.au/article/363417/governments_must_abandon_proprietary_software_stallman

 

If Richard Stallman had his way, chances are we'd all be browsing the Internet by fetching raw markup code using wget and reading it by eye.

I don't believe FOSS principles and software quality are inherently mutually exclusive. But when you pursue the former at all costs, including ignoring the latter, then there's a problem. A very big one at that.

 

I rate that comment as trolling. Doesn't even deserve a reply other than this one.

 

I'm not sure which is funnier; that you think I'm trolling, or that Stallman actually does do something along those lines.

Admittedly my earlier comment wasn't entirely accurate (I was recalling it from memory), but apparently it's close enough. I know he's a personal hero to many FOSS proponents, but please wake up and realize that he's also a complete nutcase. Canonical and Google are promoting FOSS the right way. Stallman is not.

 

I beg to differ.
Google's way of developing FOSS software, in particular Android, has been criticised for several reasons and let's not forget, their really cool stuff is as closed as it gets (like search algorithms, GFS, MapRecuce).
Then there's a conflict between the idea of freedom in "F"OSS and Eric Schmidt's idea of privacy...

 

Well, drop Google from the list if it makes you feel any better. My point was that there are open source software vendors who recognize the need to provide a credible alternative to proprietary software instead of just obsessing over principles, and FOSS market adoption is thanks to them instead of people like Stallman.

 

Whatever! But I'd still feel uncomfortable about criticising Stallman given all that he's done. The guy's a crusader and crusaders tend to see things in black and white. It's up to the moderates to work out the middle path.

 

The way he prefers to use his computer is up to him. It doesn't mean that if it was up to him we'd all be whatever.
The fact that he wrote the GPL and a bunch of programs, the GNU project, and.. should give you a clue already.
It's all about you using what you want, how you want it, share it with who you want, change it.......

Precisely. I don't need to agree with everything he says or does. The fact remains that most FOSS people admire or respect the man.

 

Well, at least where Chromium is concerned, even the Mozilla devs have said they borrow some of its code to improve Firefox, so Google can't be all bad.

 

They even say so themselves, so you must be right
Anyway I wouldn't call them a poster child for FOSS promotion and development.
Re Chromium the hater would say, the reason for their rapid and compared to their other projects very open development is they want a stable base for Chrome OS fast and once that's feature complete and released they switch to a more Android like development (private closed tree and outdated, incomplete source for the rest). But since there's no evidence so far that this will indeed happen, I'm not saying it

 

I don't mean to be disrespectful, but I honestly don't know how to respond to this other than saying you're being naive. Just take a look at the rhetoric he's famous for. Stallman fights for free software, not for technological advancement and innovation, and he does so without trying to make free software a viable alternative. The fact that FOSS is competitive with proprietary software today has little to do with him. Ubuntu is a polished competitor to Windows and OS X these days, but even if it wasn't he'd still gladly shove it down everyone's throats if he could simply because Ubuntu is free, and if there was no Ubuntu he'd foist Gentoo and BSD on you. He advocates making people's lives difficult simply for the sake of ideology, and they're not even political, moral, religious or philosophical ideals, they're ideals about computer software.

If Stallman was in charge, end user computing would most likely still be stuck in the stone age, and that'd still probably be an understatement. He's not in charge, but he's still doing incredible damage to the FOSS movement every time he opens his mouth in public by turning off people who aren't dorky nerds living in their parents' basement - like, for example, the general public that FOSS market uptake depends on.

So do I, actually. But I respect him for his technical savvy, not for his opinions.

 

GNU is a viable alternative to proprietary UNICES, exceeding it in user-friendlessness even. If it only had a working kernel
The "GNU Network Object Model Environment" is the most successful free graphical desktop.
You all know who founded the GNU project?

But yes, his ideas on end user computing are obsolete. He's getting old, that's all.

 

To tell you the truth, most of the time you do sound disrespectful, and this sentence is no exception. Naive? No i'm not. But that's just the way you argue i guess.

You missed it completely.
It has mostly to do with him, and people like him, Linus, Ts'o, ...

Tell you what, if you use Linux, uninstall everything that is GPL licensed, and reboot.

 

That was in the 1980s. How about to proprietary Windows and OS X in the here and now?

Tell you what, why don't you uninstall everything that isn't GPL licensed and reboot, and see how far Stallman's rhetoric gets you.

 

In interest of Linux and open source I for one would rather have Shuttleworth than Stallman as its face but I do fully acknowledge and respect Stallaman's contribution toward open source.

 

Last reply.

That doesn't work on me, twisting things around.
Uninstall every GPL licensed programs and reboot. If you don't want to acknowledge this, that's ok, i know you're just trolling.

 

vrms might come in handy for you guys
Maybe some firmware blobs, graphic drivers and flash, not much at any rate,

 

How was it supposed to "work" on you, exactly? I was merely offering you the opportunity to put your money where your mouth is. If you believe Stallman's advice is good and reasonable, then why not do as he advocates and see how far you get?

Acknowledge what? So Stallman authored the GPL. Do software that get the GPL slapped on them automagically become high-tech, innovative, quality products? I suggest you come back with accusations of trolling after you learn to make sense, not before.

 

Interesting.

FWIW, the output on my Maverick install.

Code:

             Non-free packages installed on ****-*****

p7zip-rar                 non-free rar module for p7zip

             Contrib packages installed on ****-*****

conky                     highly configurable system monitor (transitional packa
conky-all                 highly configurable system monitor (all features enabl
nvidia-common             Find obsolete NVIDIA drivers

  1 non-free packages, 0.1% of 1365 installed packages.
  3 contrib packages, 0.2% of 1365 installed packages.

Doesn't seem particularly reliable if you ask me; Chrome, Opera, and Skype weren't detected.

 

I think it only checks what's been installed by the package manager, maybe even only 1st party repos.