Re: [Staffslug] Can paid for Linux applications be classed as promoting Linux?

Sounds like we're stepping in Stallman territory! The fine line between Free Software and Open Source etc. "Can paid for Linux Applications be classed as Promoting Linux?" -- well theres two points to this. On one hand there are very novice computer users out there whom might have heard of Linux and the term Open-Source/Free hanging around together. They could be given the impression that everything on a Linux platform is free to use. If suddenly there were a lot more "quality"-non-free software in the Linux world, that were competing against our traditional open source alternatives, could be Linux community still use the "Come use Linux its free and not evil" type mantra? Personally if a sudden flood of non-free software came along to the linux platform, what would distinguish it from a normal Mac or Windows system? The only thing that would in essence remain free/open would be the kernel. On the other hand, surely if a big brand name ports it's own non-free software to the Linux platform, wouldn't this be a big motivation for some people to finally try/use Linux? In reality does this work? Sofar we've seen all kinds of non-free software move across, for example Nero, Xara, Skype, I know some of these are open-source forks of the Windows Version sponsored/created by the original vendors. But my point is these are big name brands in the windows world that would attract attention to the Linux world. How many people have tried Linux just because their favourite CD Writing software now has a native version? The question was about applications, however other non-free aspects include drivers and codecs for example. Does the fact there are ATI or Nvidia drivers for Linux, promote Linux itself? Does the fact that there are "on-demand" closed source MP3 Codecs for Linux promote Linux? (Ubuntu Reference, not true for all Distros) In terms of promotion people would most likely be confused as to why the MP3 codecs are not as standard like other closed source platforms? Wouldn't they think Linux is inferior compared to Windows, and does this promote Linux? I'm gonna leave this old chestnut alone... Personally it doesn't make a difference to me whether there are non-free software available for Linux or not. I try to use Open-source software on all platforms I use, and if there isn't one... then I shamefully download a warez version from my favourite torrent/rapidshare site. ps. I've generally just jotted all my thoughts down, most of it is probably irrelevant to the original question. ---- Adam Nicholls