Ready to be published? LXer is read by around 350,000 individuals each month, and is an excellent place for you to publish your ideas, thoughts, reviews, complaints, etc. Do you have something to say to the Linux community?
What do we do when we have a substandard free software product that we could use, but would be more productive with a proprietary competitor? What sacrifices should we make in order to use a free software program? Originally the GNU Project was intended to provide a free (as in rights) replacement for proprietary Unix -- the dominant industrial operating system at the time. This project was initiated with the understanding that proprietary software would have to be used until free alternatives were made available. Today we have many free replacements for proprietary programs, but are they truly equivalents?
What blows my mind is when you see people faced with a choice between a faster, safer, better supported and more productive Open product or a closed alternative, and they go for the closed alternative. Like, d'oh?
Sometimes they even pay money up front to go with the slower, riskier, poorly supported and less productive mystery-code product. What comes after d'oh? D'eer?
It's a very clear proof that we do indeed live in a fallen world. (-:
And then they say that Open Source advocates are dreamers disconnected from the real world. I guess they must be living in another world than the one I live in...
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:
|||||
10
Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sometimes they even pay money up front to go with the slower, riskier, poorly supported and less productive mystery-code product. What comes after d'oh? D'eer?
It's a very clear proof that we do indeed live in a fallen world. (-: