9:51 p.m.
Hi All
So here it is yet another variant on the "Lets get noticed" merry go round.
(I'm having a pop at myself here by the way)
I'm not a Linux ("I'm not paying for it")purist, I'm very happy to
pay for
an application if its of benefit to me, actually I've just purchased Money
Dance: http://moneydance.com/ which is a pretty slick Finance Management
which comes in three flavours Linux, Mac and Windows.
I've also bought CrossOver as well, there are loads of applications out
there for Linux which have to be paid for so here's the question or better
still the great debate.
Can paid for Linux applications be classed as promoting Linux?
--
Regards
Dick Turpin
Arch Linux is an independent i686-optimized community distribution for
intermediate and advanced Linux users. Utilising a Rolling Release System
packages are regularly updated and an ISO release is just a snapshot to the
stable packages at that time. So there's no need for a fresh install the
command 'pacman –Syu' upgrades the whole system.
10:33 p.m.
New subject: Can paid for Linux applications be classed as promoting Linux?
Well, if it only runs on Linux i suppose it's promoting the use of
Linux. However, it's not promoting FOSS.
I'm not a "hardcore" Linux user. I have a windows machine because there
are various packages developed for windows that aren't for Linux, or i
don't have access to the Linux version. For example Maple and Pro
Engineer.
When recently discussing my use of Linux with a mate it came down to me
wanting something that doesn't take forever to configure. Something i
can just sit down and use. I need my computers for my education, so i
need them to be there, working and appropriate to my needs. So if there
was a software package i needed to run on Linux I'd buy it. Sometimes
you're paying for the support lines as well.
On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 21:51 +0100, ArchLinuxUser dick_turpin wrote:
Hi All
So here it is yet another variant on the "Lets get noticed" merry go
round. (I'm having a pop at myself here by the way)
I'm not a Linux ("I'm not paying for it")purist, I'm very happy to
pay
for an application if its of benefit to me, actually I've just
purchased Money Dance: http://moneydance.com/ which is a pretty slick
Finance Management which comes in three flavours Linux, Mac and
Windows.
I've also bought CrossOver as well, there are loads of applications
out there for Linux which have to be paid for so here's the question
or better still the great debate.
Can paid for Linux applications be classed as promoting Linux?
--
Regards
Dick Turpin
Arch Linux is an independent i686-optimized community distribution for
intermediate and advanced Linux users. Utilising a Rolling Release
System packages are regularly updated and an ISO release is just a
snapshot to the stable packages at that time. So there's no need for a
fresh install the command 'pacman –Syu' upgrades the whole system.
_______________________________________________
Staffslug mailing list
Staffslug(a)staffslug.org.uk
http://www.staffslug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/staffslug
--
Joe Zambon
http://www.jznet.org.uk/
12:57 a.m.
New subject: Can paid for Linux applications be classed as promoting Linux?
Can paid for Linux applications be classed as promoting Linux?
Yes. This is so because (as Joe says) the software makes use of the
Linux kernel. In the same way that software written for a proprietary
(or indeed another open source) operating system promotes the use of
that host OS.
If the question; can paid for Linux applications be classed as
promoting GNU/Linux were posed then the answer might not answered so
straight forward. Mere pedantry? In the context of a LUG discussion? I
do not think so.
My opinion on this is that I think it does promote "Linux" because
many people distrust and do not understand the word free in free
software (There is no distinction drawn between Open Source and Free
Software within this group of people). For some folk there is an
implication of higher quality the more money is required in exchange
for software. If awareness of such software in this group of people is
raised then so will be their regard for Linux.
I also have no problem with running proprietary software designed to
run natively on a distribution of Linux. The Crossover software from
Codeweavers (and their contribution to Wine) is a fine example. If you
are pro Free Software then you are pro free choice. You can't in my
view criticise the choices people make about which software they run
without the risk of accusations of hypocrisy.
7:39 a.m.
New subject: Can paid for Linux applications be classed as promoting Linux?
On 26/07/07, Chris Snow <cr.snow(a)gmail.com> wrote:
My opinion on this is that I think it does promote "Linux" because
many people distrust and do not understand the word free in free
software (There is no distinction drawn between Open Source and Free
Software within this group of people). For some folk there is an
implication of higher quality the more money is required in exchange
for software. If awareness of such software in this group of people is
raised then so will be their regard for Linux.
I did want to sit back watch but I think you've hit a nail on the head it
always amazes me the total lack of comprehension by some people of FOSS as
you know all it means is "Your FREE to do what you with it and the code"
(Within its license restrictions if there are any) for the coder there is a
COST involved and for the end user, in most cases, probably only the COST of
downloading it.
Thats why, IMO, the title FOSS is flawed on two levels, I've had this
discussion a thousand times over the years firstly its always that title
which causes the problem. IMO I think the *F* needs to be dropped or
possibly changed to *Unrestricted* (UOSS) that would clear the muddy water
in respect of cost.
Secondly I think it re-muddies the water when talking about FOSS and Linux.
Yes yes yes Linux is Open Source but we are talking of two distinct things
e.g. driving a car and transportation. Hopefully when people say "Why not
use open source to do that" they are talking of such things as Open Office,
Gimp and Amarok etc. Now as we all know a lot of OSS runs on Windows so
thats promoting FOSS to the Windows/MS users.
The title of this thread was "Promoting Linux" not necessarily FOSS I was
thinking more in terms of negatives you get to installing Linux as apposed
to Vista;
A. I cant play games. [cedega?]
B. I have to use Paint shop [CrossOver?]
You get me drift, given that they probably are considering OpenSUSE, Gentoo,
Ubuntu etc etc would the £22.00 (Roughly) for CrossOver deter or get them to
make the *Leap of faith* and use/switch to Linux? and if so IMV a propriety
piece of software has promoted Linux but hey I may be wrong remember they
crucified a bloke for being perfect. :-)
--
Regards
Dick Turpin
Arch Linux is an independent i686-optimized community distribution for
intermediate and advanced Linux users. Utilising a Rolling Release System
packages are regularly updated and an ISO release is just a snapshot to the
stable packages at that time. So there's no need for a fresh install the
command 'pacman –Syu' upgrades the whole system.
3:34 p.m.
New subject: 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
4:07 p.m.
New subject: Can paid for Linux applications be classed as promoting Linux?
On 26/07/07, adam nicholls <inkysplat(a)gmail.com> wrote:
-<cut>-
ps. I've generally just jotted all my thoughts down, most of it is
probably irrelevant to the original question.
Wow all hail to thee Adam
I think you've said just about everything I was thinking only more
eloquently.
P.S. Thanks for killing my thread ;-)
--
Regards
Dick Turpin
Arch Linux is an independent i686-optimized community distribution for
intermediate and advanced Linux users. Utilising a Rolling Release System
packages are regularly updated and an ISO release is just a snapshot to the
stable packages at that time. So there's no need for a fresh install the
command 'pacman –Syu' upgrades the whole system.
5 p.m.
New subject: Can paid for Linux applications be classed as promoting Linux?
Nice :P
I think any Linux application that works well and gets the job done is worth
it. No matter weather it's free or not.
That's my 2 pence.
On 26/07/07, ArchLinuxUser dick_turpin <dick_turpin(a)archlinux.us> wrote:
On 26/07/07, adam nicholls <inkysplat(a)gmail.com> wrote:
-<cut>-
ps. I've generally just jotted all my thoughts down, most of it i
> probably irrelevant to the original question.
Wow all hail to thee Adam
I think you've said just about everything I was thinking only more
eloquently.
P.S. Thanks for killing my thread ;-)
--
Regards
Dick Turpin
Arch Linux is an independent i686-optimized community distribution for
intermediate and advanced Linux users. Utilising a Rolling Release System
packages are regularly updated and an ISO release is just a snapshot to the
stable packages at that time. So there's no need for a fresh install the
command 'pacman –Syu' upgrades the whole system.
_______________________________________________
Staffslug mailing list
Staffslug(a)staffslug.org.uk
http://www.staffslug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/staffslug
--
Regards,
Kris Douglas - Softdel Limited
Web: www.softdel.net
Mail: kris(a)softdel.net
6117
days inactive
6118
days old
6 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
adam nicholls -
ArchLinuxUser dick_turpin -
Chris Snow -
Joe Zambon -
Kris Douglas