Active Topics

 


Page 27 of 30 « First 172526 27 2829 Last »
Reply
Thread Tools
R-R's Avatar
R-R is offline R-R
2009-10-05 , 01:17
Posts: 739 | Thanked: 242 times | Joined on Sep 2007 @ Montreal
#261
Originally Posted by bobthebuilder View Post
What ethical problems?
What system of ethics makes it unethical to make money for hardwork?
To sell a license to use software?
Heck I love open source software, but closed source software is not evil, programmers need to eat food too.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to R-R For This Useful Post:
johnkzin's Avatar
johnkzin is offline johnkzin
2009-10-05 , 01:23
Posts: 1,878 | Thanked: 646 times | Joined on Sep 2007 @ San Jose, CA
#262
Originally Posted by R-R View Post
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/
That's not ethics, that ideology.
__________________
My Personal Blog
 

The Following User Says Thank You to johnkzin For This Useful Post:
bobthebuilder is offline bobthebuilder
2009-10-05 , 01:23
Posts: 64 | Thanked: 16 times | Joined on Jan 2008
#263
Originally Posted by R-R View Post
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/
I am familiar with the philosophy of the GNU program. I reject it as idealistic, not mention wrong on several points. You can argue the Open Source software is more secure or that you feel more comfortable running it on your machine because you know what its doing. But you cannot say that someone is doing something unethical or immoral by licensing closed source software.

I would say I use 90 percent open source software, or free in the gnu sense, but not for moralistic reasons I just like it.
__________________
-
BobtheBuilder
 

The Following User Says Thank You to bobthebuilder For This Useful Post:
ewan's Avatar
ewan is offline ewan
2009-10-05 , 01:41
Posts: 445 | Thanked: 572 times | Joined on Oct 2009 @ Oxford
#264
Originally Posted by Texrat View Post
That's highly speculative and reliant on too many "perfect world" dependencies that never really pan out... unfortunately.
Such as? The iPhone store has made it pretty clear that the key 'differentiator' for smartphones/pocket computers is in add-on apps, and that means attracting developers. Google get that, which is why they're pushing to get a critical mass of Android running on as many different units as possible. How attractive will Maemo really be if it only runs on the N900?
 

The Following User Says Thank You to ewan For This Useful Post:
johnkzin's Avatar
johnkzin is offline johnkzin
2009-10-05 , 01:44
Posts: 1,878 | Thanked: 646 times | Joined on Sep 2007 @ San Jose, CA
#265
Originally Posted by ewan View Post
Such as? The iPhone store has made it pretty clear that the key 'differentiator' for smartphones/pocket computers is in add-on apps, and that means attracting developers. (...) How attractive will Maemo really be if it only runs on the N900?
How many different machines does iPhone OSX run on?

I don't seem to recall people saying that the iPhone is an under-achiever in the market...
__________________
My Personal Blog
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to johnkzin For This Useful Post:
ewan's Avatar
ewan is offline ewan
2009-10-05 , 01:52
Posts: 445 | Thanked: 572 times | Joined on Oct 2009 @ Oxford
#266
Originally Posted by bobthebuilder View Post
What system of ethics makes it unethical to make money for hardwork?
To sell a license to use software?
Heck I love open source software, but closed source software is not evil, programmers need to eat food too.
It's not about money; it never has been. The GNU project made money selling their software from the very beginning. It's about freedom, and how taking that away from people just because you can isn't a good way to behave. It's secondarily about the idea that pooled efforts give better results than divided ones.

For the anti-free software folks in this thread, I'd ask you this - why's Nokia going as far down the road of using and creating free software as they are if they didn't think it would make them more money than staying proprietary, even when they already had their own proprietary OS?
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ewan For This Useful Post:
Texrat's Avatar
Texrat is offline Texrat
2009-10-05 , 01:54
Posts: 11,700 | Thanked: 10,045 times | Joined on Jun 2006 @ North Texas, USA
#267
Originally Posted by ewan View Post
How attractive will Maemo really be if it only runs on the N900?
You're building a straw man. My contention was with the theory that Chinese knockoffs will be good for Nokia.
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
 
Texrat's Avatar
Texrat is offline Texrat
2009-10-05 , 01:55
Posts: 11,700 | Thanked: 10,045 times | Joined on Jun 2006 @ North Texas, USA
#268
Originally Posted by ewan View Post
For the anti-free software folks in this thread
Another straw man.

Who can you identify here as "anti-free software"?
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
 

The Following User Says Thank You to Texrat For This Useful Post:
bobthebuilder is offline bobthebuilder
2009-10-05 , 01:57
Posts: 64 | Thanked: 16 times | Joined on Jan 2008
#269
Originally Posted by ewan View Post
It's not about money; it never has been. The GNU project made money selling their software from the very beginning. It's about freedom, and how taking that away from people just because you can isn't a good way to behave. It's secondarily about the idea that pooled efforts give better results than divided ones.

For the anti-free software folks in this thread, I'd ask you this - why's Nokia going as far down the road of using and creating free software as they are if they didn't think it would make them more money than staying proprietary, even when they already had their own proprietary OS?
I dont think you should call anyone in this thread anti-free software.
I am not arguing against free software. I am arguing against free software being the only ethical or moral option.
I appreciate the collaboration done to create open source software and I think good things have come frome it. Things I use on a daily basis. I agree that it is good to see people voluntarilly give of their time to make free software, but I do not think it is unethical to make closed software. And I clearly want to point out that at this point in time closed source software is much more lucrative.
How many people make a living off open source software compared to closed source?
The programmers need to eat and one way to ensure they eat is to sell licenses to use their software. And there is nothing wrong with that.
__________________
-
BobtheBuilder
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to bobthebuilder For This Useful Post:
ewan's Avatar
ewan is offline ewan
2009-10-05 , 02:02
Posts: 445 | Thanked: 572 times | Joined on Oct 2009 @ Oxford
#270
Originally Posted by bobthebuilder View Post
I dont think you should call anyone in this thread anti-free software.
That's fair; it's an excessively crude characterisation. Nevertheless, there's basically a two-sided debate here, and I simply mean the people on the other side.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to ewan For This Useful Post:
Reply
Page 27 of 30 « First 172526 27 2829 Last »

Tags
balance, basic rights, defective by design, get your stink on, gpl holy crusade, open source, open source advocacy, sw wants to be free, try to correct an error, why isn't the gpl law?!, zealots be here

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:07.

Contact Us - Home - Archive - Top