Why does a part of a community seems a bit off?

You know, like people who uses Ubuntu, Manjaro, and favours non-free software a lot because "it helps them to get their stuff working". Haven't the community been rather (or widely) split? You have one side where there is the free software foundation and it's community, the people that are just using GNU/Linux because they like it and actually learn from it while being mostly free software, and then their are the people that just uses often Ubuntu or what not and learn nothing much and benefiting non-free software.

Huh, maybe it's just me, not sure.

most are in the middle of the "bell curve"
but there will ALWAYS be a few on the FAR left or right

It's just you.

People have different outlooks on everything since the dawn of time.
People just being people.
____holes & saints. Free loaders and Workers. It is all about me. Here, let me give you a hand.

Just from someone who knows a whole lot of nothing about everything.

Originally Posted by rokytnji Just from someone who knows a whole lot of nothing about everything.

You know alot more than you give yourself credit for.

Originally Posted by rokytnji People have different outlooks on everything since the dawn of time.

However, all viewpoints are not equally good.

There is some philosophy to ponder, while riding your bike. (Just don't ponder so deeply that you do not concentrate on the road and get into an accident.)

Huh, thanks for the reply anyway, it's just what people thinks frankly.

I'll maybe shock you but I don't see nothing wrong in using Ubuntu.. And I'm a Slackware kind of guy ..

Actually, I really hope the community keeps "spliting" as you put it.. because that means that normal, common users start using Linux (be it Ubuntu, Mint or the likes)..

As for learning, that takes time.. When you have an (at least) 8-hour job unrelated to IT why the hell should you spend time learning command lines rather then spend time with family and use the best tool for the job (which, I for one, am happy if people start considering even Ubuntu the "right tool" rather than Windows)..

Most people use and expect to use a computer in the same manner as a toaster, microwave or television. They don't care how it works, just that it does what they want whether it is reading email, watching movies or whatever and that is not likely to change.

I always wonder how many of the open source fanatics have replaced BIOS or UEFI with Coreboot?

Also, I'm always amused by the Debian approach to non-free drivers: excluded from the installation disk, but the installer will prompt you to supply a required driver on a usb stick so that it can install it! That sound like humbug to me.

Originally Posted by DavidMcCann I always wonder how many of the open source fanatics have replaced BIOS or UEFI with Coreboot?

Unsure. I have though, and my computers boot faster than ever, and run just fine. Plus I get to have the warm and fuzzy feeling that I have 0% licensed software on my home computers, so I'm not supporting the patented evil empires of Microsoft, Apple, Dell, HP, etc.

But while I am an advocate for Free Software and Unpatented hardware, I don't consider myself a fanatic.

I'm glad there is a wide spectrum of Linux users. I use Linux for a few reasons: It's more logical to work with and explore than Windows; there are no odious agreements to accept to use it; there's more software available to play with and, yes, I also like it because it is free (though I have and will donate money). Plus, there's a community of eclectic, helpful and sometimes grumpy people making and using it.
I like that there are people who have no interest in how Linux works using it because it means developers are making things smoother for everyone.
I also like that, while it's a sad compromise, I can get proprietary NVIDIA drivers and Flash. I'm also happy I can use Steam and play Goat Simulator and that there are a few Second Life clients for Linux. Without a decent sized install base there may not be any of those.
So I am both kinds of user described and I am glad there are many of both.

Originally Posted by 273 I'm glad there is a wide spectrum of Linux users. I use Linux for a few reasons: It's more logical to work with and explore than Windows; there are no odious agreements to accept to use it; there's more software available to play with and, yes, I also like it because it is free (though I have and will donate money). Plus, there's a community of eclectic, helpful and sometimes grumpy people making and using it. I like that there are people who have no interest in how Linux works using it because it means developers are making things smoother for everyone. I also like that, while it's a sad compromise, I can get proprietary NVIDIA drivers and Flash. I'm also happy I can use Steam and play Goat Simulator and that there are a few Second Life clients for Linux. Without a decent sized install base there may not be any of those. So I am both kinds of user described and I am glad there are many of both.

Well that's good for you, to be honest with you, but somehow you just need a propiretary software/driver to get things running, like at least an Nvidia driver for my desktop, a propiretary wireless driver for my Samsung Netbook +N150. I would wish for a free wireless driver for the netbook, and I could swap the propiretary Nvidia driver with a free one (may have support for nVidia Geforce GTX 770) I also do gaming with Steam in which is also propiretary with games like Counter Strike, Half Life, Goat Simulator, Team Fortress, etc.

For the side note for others: I'll check up on coreboot, seems intresting especially if it's free software.

Hey, there's absolutely nothing wrong with buying software, from a company that doesn't release its source-code to the public's eye, as long as that company is strong and you get what you pay for.

Every "going concern" must have pockets and something (money) to put into those pockets. All of the important open-source efforts have a "Foundation" behind them, and the budgets of some of those can be quite large, indeed. (This in addition to the cooperative contributions of expertise upon which all such projects rely.)

And then, over and above that, there's also the proprietary model ... which undeniably works.

Lots of open-source efforts are "foundational" (no pun intended) in what they do, and the efforts are financially supported by other companies who build proprietary products on top of, and using, the cooperatively-developed common ground.

Leaving out the whole "should all software be free" debate I should clarify that the reason I find the NVIDIA situation a sad compromise is that the way their development works means that things like optimus (or whatever the dual graphics card laptop thing is called) cause problems on Linux and Wayland has to wait for support. I don't dislike the binary blob particularly per-se just some of the problems around it and the way the situation upsets people like Linus.
As to Flash, again it's not specifically that it's non-free more that it's resource hungry and bug prone but is still required for "the full internet experience". Oh, and the fact Linux development has now stopped outside of the Chrome plugin.

Just one thing about non-free drivers. There's a big difference if the driver is a binary blob and does not have proper source. And it's technological, not just politcal. Personally I would never read the source of a driver, and don't really care. But if it's non-free, I understand the kernel developers can't really test things as good as with a driver with source. So the chances of bugs appearing in newer kernels or in combination with other things is much higher. That's why I try to avoid non-free drivers whenever it's possible. And I like the fact that Debian treat them differently.