What is everyone's opinion about the Free Software Foundation?
Linux - GeneralThis Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
What is everyone's opinion about the Free Software Foundation?
Asking this question as someone new to Linux. I'm very much like the idea of freedom... but I also hear a lot of criticism also. I don't understand it all or really know who's on the right side of things. Thought I'd ask general Linux users about this topic.
Distribution: OpenSUSE 13.2 64bit-Gnome on ASUS U52F
Posts: 1,444
Rep:
There is no right or wrong on that topic. I like the FSF but I also understand the difficulty on having a system with only opensource software. You would be very limited on what you can do or even on what you can use.
So just be open minded about all matters and embrace open source as well as close source I mean you can pick your favorite and that is all up to nobody but you.
I like to be balance and use both free and non-free software on my linux system. If I can't play or use proprietary stuff on my linux OS it would be as dull as Richard Stallamn's own desktop who is a strong advoacate of free software usage.
Last edited by Terminal_Meltdown; 07-20-2013 at 05:14 PM.
The free software organization has provided computer users a great amount of programs, including the GNU operating system. However, I think Richard Stallman is a little bit of an extremist. I think that the idea that all software becoming "free as in beer" is unrealistic.
That being said, I'm thankful for all the work by the FSF and generally view them in a positive light.
Treverend,
there lies a can of worms or difference of opinion. For me, without Stallman, and cohorts, you would not have "Linux".
With "Linux" you have choice. Some would say Stallman is an extremist but his position is about more than just software, it's just awkward when powers control the means to learn/utilise tools that should be there as building blocks.
Open source code is fine but what are you allowed to do with it?
To your question, choose your level/methord of restriction, be it by microsoft or your knowledge.
Location: Through Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin in Lake Michigan
Distribution: Fedora
Posts: 28
Rep:
The antithesis of free software is the closely held software of the giants. Which came first?
I escaped M$ just a few months ago, and will not go back.
Now that security encryption has reached the public consciousness, which software source does one trust, open source and presumably free, or from M$/G00gle hegemony?
This can't be a uninamous idea. Every one has his own view on this. This can be a topic of debate but i think yes a software should be free for all users.
You are not using software because you cant afford it, I think we should leave this idea for Real Estate.
I am all for commercial projects. Those companies have generally employed the people who wrote free stuff. Commercial projects tend to have a focus on providing the public with a product that is good and has some standard. It wouldn't help us to have 150 different standards of hardware and 300 different operating systems. Standards of hardware have flowed from commercial OS and app creation and revers.
Linux can be used in some instances but I don't believe that a common user could use all free software.
I am for people being paid. Linux as a hobby is OK for those that wish to donate. People deserve to be paid for their work and efforts in some way. Either in cold hard cash or the simple code lines with their name.
People who want custom applications will always be willing to pay somebody to write them.
The C++ Visual Suite for Windows is one of the worst packages I've ever tried to use. With or without the manual, try to even compile and run the example programs.
Perhaps the people who taught where I studied Computer Science put together a particularly nice environment, I don't know. Back then, my choice for writing applications was Turbo Pascal, by Borland. I wrote research applications, in a University environment.
I love the idea; unfortunately, i think that it could never work successfully within a capitalist culture.
Not to derail the topic, but I think that you're thinking of corporatism which is what America has, not true free-market capitalism. I myself am an anarcho-capitalist/voluntaryist. In a true capitalist society IP and copyrights would not exist and corporations are entities protected by the government, not the market. Thanks for all the replies people. I just don't want to go that far... if I lived in the way Richard Stallman asks me to live then I don't think I could use Steam on Linux or use game consoles because in his eyes they would be bad because the hardware is closed and cannot be modified.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.