Comments on: Free Beer vs. Free Software

By: Sithrazer

Sithrazer — Mon, 10 Oct 2011 06:47:54 +0000

I get what you’re saying. The only reason I have Windows on my desktop is because that’s what the games I like to play are programmed to run on.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 22:00:50 +0000

So far I’ve not paid a dime for my OSS. But maybe I should have said FOSS instead of OSS to avoid confusion with the POSS (paid open source software)

But the point I’m making is still the same: Proprietary = piss. As does free beer. But FOSS is …. oh never mind.

By: Sithrazer

Sithrazer — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 20:44:05 +0000

I think we’ve got an intersection of opinion on what constitutes ‘open source’ here. I’m including software covered by licenses such as the GPL as Open Source software in such cases where the code and documentation are made as such. You seem to be of the opinion that Open Source software is any that is not covered by a license.

I don’t recall what exact license/terms the Linux kernel is covered under, and while I may not like/agree with it I don’t think TiVo is doing anything that isn’t allowed with the Linux kernel.

By: Shawn Smith

Shawn Smith — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 05:28:47 +0000

And let’s get the difference between OpenSource and Free software correct. There is nothing preventing someone from taking OpenSource code, modifying it slightly, and making the entire modified version proprietary. Free software (i.e. software licensed under the GPL) explicitly prevents that. That’s the “viral” aspect that Bill Gates has complained about in the past.

I’ve heard the Series 2 TiVo uses the Linux kernel (Free Software) as a base, but decided to lock up their file system, as part of the agreement with content providers to avoid getting sued for enabling copyright infringement. In my opinion, that is a pretty severe infringement, because a new file system is not just an incidental addition.

By: Randy Owens

Randy Owens — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 02:40:16 +0000

Ack. Guilt trip, because I’m behind on the Fedora packages I’m now responsible for. But aside from that, yes, I have plans myself to release part of a software suite in a free-as-in-speech but not free-as-in-beer manner.
Also worth a mention is the term ‘libre’, which some use because in French and Spanish, it has the free-as-in-speech meaning, but not the free-as-in-beer meaning. The OpenOffice fork LibreOffice was recently named after it.

By: sithrazer

sithrazer — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 02:31:04 +0000

I suppose that depends on whether or not you choose to involve yourself with the communities that create and maintain various Open Source programs.

It’s not just programming, either. Bug reports, feature requests, and user feedback can be contributed by anyone who uses the software. Often times, even if the software is free to download and use, there are ways to make donations to help pay for web hosting or hiring full-time dedicated personnel.

By: Midnight Rambler

Midnight Rambler — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 02:11:09 +0000

More often than not, it requires continual love and feeding to be successful in the form of your personal investment in time to make it worthwhile.

And frequently comes as a big box of screws and panels with a sheet of paper that says only “Some assembly required”. But, you can’t complain for that price!

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Sat, 08 Oct 2011 23:36:32 +0000

My personal experience is that for the software I use, I am required to provide less nurturing for the OpenSource options than for proprietary options, though that’s probably not true in all areas.

By: Mike

Mike — Sat, 08 Oct 2011 22:42:56 +0000

I love free software. (This is posted from FireFox.)

But, in the realm of free, it’s not free like beer. It’s free like a puppy. More often than not, it requires continual love and feeding to be successful in the form of your personal investment in time to make it worthwhile. BTW, you can get the joys from the experience too.

By: Sithrazer

Sithrazer — Sat, 08 Oct 2011 22:38:25 +0000

Open Source Software isn’t necessarily ‘free’ as in ‘free beer’, there’s nothing stopping the creator of a program from charging a fee for it. That’s generally considered a commercially limited option, though, so more often than not it doesn’t work that way.

(posted from a laptop running Linux Mint and Firefox web browser 😀 )