I can't go 100% free, libre, open source

[Welly Wu]

Listen. One of the reasons why I switched from Microsoft Windows 7 and 8 to Ubuntu 12.04.3 LTS 64 bit was to experience free, libre, open source software as much as possible. I wanted to free myself from closed source proprietary software applications that restricted my freedom to use the software in the way that met my needs. However, this has not been the case. I've learned that I wind up turning to the same closed source proprietary software applications for very specific and narrow features that I can't seem to find elsewhere. Does this necessarily make me a bad Ubuntu user? I don't think so. However, I also do admit that Ubuntu itself is irrelevant. The operating system doesn't matter now. It's the software applications that take precedent. I've purchased numerous open and closed source software applications since I've made the switch and it looks like that trend shall continue in the future. I like the fact that I can hack Ubuntu to make it meet my needs more readily than Microsoft Windows or Apple Macintosh OS X, but that doesn't mean that I'm a champion of free, libre, open source philosophies or beliefs either.

Here's my list of closed source proprietary software applications:

CrashPlan+ 64 bit
VM Ware Workstation 9.0.2 64 bit
Moneydance 64 bit
Intuit Quicken 64 bit
Microsoft Office 2010 Professional Plus Service Pack 1 32 bit
Microsoft Office Visio Professional 2010 Service Pack 1 32 bit
Microsoft Office Project Professional 2010 Service Pack 1 32 bit
Codeweavers CrossOver for Ubuntu Linux 64 bit
Steam for Ubuntu Linux 64 bit
InSync for Google Drive 64 bit
Adobe Flash, Acrobat Reader, AIR 64 and 32 bit
Oracle Java 64 bit
Google Music Manager 64 bit
Google Chrome 64 bit
Netflix 32 bit
Hulu Desktop 64 bit
Spotify 64 bit
Ahead Nero for Linux 32 bit
Zinio Reader 4 32 bit
Amazon Kindle 64 bit
Adobe Photoshop, Bridge, ImageReady 64 bit
LastPass 64 bit
Comodo Anti-Virus 64 bit
Skype 64 bit
Opera 64 bit
Fluendo Complete Multimedia Pack & DVD Player 64 bit
Brother MFC-8440 laser multi-function machine drivers

It's a long list of stuff! I'd like to be able to remove these software applications and just go with free, libre, open source software entirely, but I can't do it. I help friends and family and relatives and they use some of the same software titles listed above so I offer them help and technical support.

I'm not having a moral dilemma by any stretch of the imagination. However, I think that I wanted to share this with the community to ask you what do you use for closed source proprietary software applications and why do you need to use it? Could you find an free, libre, open source alternative and make the switch or is it too difficult at this point? How much have you invested in your software so far?

For me, it's quite the investment. I must have invested several thousands of dollars for my software applications. That's part of the reason why I just don't feel like I can abandon all of them. The other reason is that they are useful to have. Some of my family members, relatives, and friends refuse to use any other software applications because they don't know or trust any other alternatives. They are wedded to Microsoft Windows or Apple Macintosh OS X or Google Android or iOS. Since I'm their PC guy, I provide free technical support for a majority of these closed source proprietary software applications.

The dream of free, libre, open source software is a nice one to have. It's noble. However, it isn't reality for me and I just wish that it could be, but my situation dictates that I'll be purchasing more closed source, proprietary software applications in the long term future.

So, what do you use?

[mJayk]

Haya,

I am currently experiencing the same problems as you regarding office software. I would recommend you try kingsoft office for ubuntu instead of libreoffice, it integrates so so so much better with microsoft office (ppt and docs). Sadly it does not have good "equation" support at the moment but I use latex for my science papers.

As for google chrome i switched to firefox, it has a browser sync fuction etc.

Hope it helps

Matt

[mastablasta]

i think these two
Microsoft Office Visio Professional 2010 Service Pack 1 32 bit
Microsoft Office Project Professional 2010 Service Pack 1 32 bit

have some good alternatives. also perhaps your family mmebers should switch to linux and opensoruce if they want your support to continue :-)

[Elfy]

You'll be a long time waiting to be 110% free.

[Erik1984]

This is nothing new. Many Ubuntu users dual boot (me included) or use proprietary stuff on Ubuntu (Skype, codecs, device drivers etc.).

[ssam]

No need to try to go from all closed to all open in a single step. go step by step. For example see how far you can get with libreoffice (look up using the ppa to get the latest version), if you have problems with it report bugs. if you can make a document that renders differently in MS word and libreoffice, then report that so the devs can fix it.

do you really need acrobat reader? do you have any documents that dont render right in evince? if so report them.

You have spent a lot of money on closed software, have you ever donated to any opensource projects?


I would recommend you try kingsoft office for ubuntu instead of libreoffice

kingsoft is not opensource.

[buzzingrobot]

Free software was created by developers to foster the interests of developers. It's single essential tenet is access to source. Users derive tangential benefits from that. But, pretty much by definition, source code is of no interest to users.

Users have no more moral obligation to confine themselves to free software, any more than developers have to write only free software. if someone limits his or her software choices to free software that's fine. But it is not a morally superior position. Morality should have no role in our software choices.

When users are told that morality should, in fact, decide our software choices, and that we should only choose free software, that only serves to *limit* our freedom to choose what we will.

Unix was my first OS. I adopted Linux because it is, essentially, Unix. I use it because I like it. I don't use Windows because I don't like it. If Linux was closed and proprietary and cost $200, and Windows was free and open, I'd still use Linux.

So, use what you want. No one is keeping score.

[Welly Wu]

Thanks guys. I've been looking at some free, libre, open source alternatives:

1. Mozilla Firefox which I still use
2. Evince instead of Adobe Reader
3. Project Libre or Project instead of Microsoft Project Professional 2010 Service Pack 1 32 bit
4. Dia instead of Microsoft Visio Professional 2010 Service Pack 1 32 bit
5. KeePassX or KeePass 2 which I use instead of LastPass
6. LibreOffice instead of Microsoft Office 2010 Professional Plus Service Pack 1 32 bit

I can't seem to find a working alternative to Moneydance or Intuit Quicken Home & Business 2013 64 bit. I tried HomeBank and I tried GNUCash, but they don't sync with my PNC Bank. It's difficult to download my bank transactions because I switched from a free checking to a Virtual Wallet account which means that I can't download transactions using free, libre, open source software applications. I have to use Intuit Quicken Home & Business 2013 64 bit to do that.

Kingsoft is nice, but it's limited and it's not open source.

I understand that I am not compelled to switch to open source 110%, but I would like to do so. I'll evaluate this list later.

[whatthefunk]

CrashPlan+ 64 bit
VM Ware Workstation 9.0.2 64 bit
Moneydance 64 bit
Intuit Quicken 64 bit
Microsoft Office 2010 Professional Plus Service Pack 1 32 bit
Microsoft Office Visio Professional 2010 Service Pack 1 32 bit
Microsoft Office Project Professional 2010 Service Pack 1 32 bit
Codeweavers CrossOver for Ubuntu Linux 64 bit
Steam for Ubuntu Linux 64 bit
InSync for Google Drive 64 bit
Adobe Flash, Acrobat Reader, AIR 64 and 32 bit - Envince
Oracle Java 64 bit - Open JDK
Google Music Manager 64 bit
Google Chrome 64 bit - Chromium
Netflix 32 bit
[U]Hulu Desktop 64 bit
Spotify 64 bit
Ahead Nero for Linux 32 bit - K3b...its a KDE program so if you use Unity youll be pulling a lot of libraries
Zinio Reader 4 32 bit
Amazon Kindle 64 bit
Adobe Photoshop, Bridge, ImageReady 64 bit - You could try out GIMP
LastPass 64 bit
Comodo Anti-Virus 64 bit
Skype 64 bit
Opera 64 bit
Brother MFC-8440 laser multi-function machine drivers

I suggest alternatives for the ones in bold.

For the underlined ones, I think you need to be more specific as to how you use the products. Steam, for example. Do you want a service similar to Steam that is open source or do you want an open source way to use Steam (which is impossible, as far as I know). Same goes for Netflix, hulu and Spotify. Keep in mind that when dealing with copyrighted material, nearly all services use closed source programs.

For me, I try to find an open source program, but in the end I just use what works. Is it really worth the head ache to try to find open source drivers for your printer? (Is the printer open source??)

[RichardET]

Free software was created by developers to foster the interests of developers. It's single essential tenet is access to source. Users derive tangential benefits from that. But, pretty much by definition, source code is of no interest to users.

Users have no more moral obligation to confine themselves to free software, any more than developers have to write only free software. if someone limits his or her software choices to free software that's fine. But it is not a morally superior position. Morality should have no role in our software choices.

When users are told that morality should, in fact, decide our software choices, and that we should only choose free software, that only serves to *limit* our freedom to choose what we will.

Unix was my first OS. I adopted Linux because it is, essentially, Unix. I use it because I like it. I don't use Windows because I don't like it. If Linux was closed and proprietary and cost $200, and Windows was free and open, I'd still use Linux.

So, use what you want. No one is keeping score.

I was a long time subscriber to SuSE when they offered such a service, so I see nothing wrong with paying for a 'free" OS. Afterall, even GNU/Linux companies have to pay the light bill,
and I am not in a position to create my own OS.

[prodigy_]

It's all subjective. I often find proprietary software lacking and annoying. MS Office and Skype have always been particularly disappointing. A quick example: Skype stores text messages in a database but you can't even search the whole DB, only one discussion at a time. It would be really easy to fix that. 5 lines of code. OK, maybe 10. But the developers don't care although they spent time and effort to turn the client into adware. Well, at least Skype is free as in beer. MS Office has a high price tag and so many shortcomings it's amazing. A quick example: recently I saw a DOC file with broken page numbering. In the end I had to use LO to fix the file. But the worst part was that the status bar in Word showed the correct numbering. Again, how hard is it to add "Reset numbering to match actual page numbers" checkbox? Another 10 lines of code. Another thing that just didn't happen in 20 years.

The biggest problem with paid proprietary software is that too often it's not convenient, not well-designed, not even reasonably bug-free. I.e. it doesn't actually deliver its promised and implied benefits.

[cortman]

A healthy dose of pragmatism is invaluable when trying to use free software. If it works for me, I'll use it in preference to a nonfree program. If I really need something that is not free, I will use it. Aristotelian ethics. :)

[SuperFreak]

I believe Opera 64 bit is available to download from the Opera site (http://www.opera.com/computer)

[whatthefunk]

I believe Opera 64 bit is available to download from the Opera site (http://www.opera.com/computer)

Opera isnt open source.

[Welly Wu]

At this point, I can't do without the special functions and features of Microsoft Office, Project, or Visio and Intuit Quicken. They make my life productive and convenient to be able to exchange Microsoft Office documents with family members, relatives, and friends without having to worry about open source document formats and conversions between Office and Libre Office. Intuit Quicken is the gold standard for personal and business finance software and it ain't going nowhere except to stay on my Ubuntu installation using Codeweavers Crossover. Codeweavers Crossover is an integral part of my Ubuntu and it helps me to download and install select Microsoft Windows software applications that I can't do without.

This is bad, but I have little other choices. I'm so wedded to closed source proprietary software applications that it's not even funny. It's expensive, but it's what I need to stay productive in my retirement years. I'm disabled and retired now. I've got my relatives Microsoft Office documents that I share using Google Drive so InSync is important to share folders and files with them.

100% free, libre, open source software is an ideal that is good to have, but it is hard to attain. Many of the FLOSS alternatives lack specific proprietary features and functions that closed source has and it makes it almost impossible for me to stop using them. It's too bad.

[montag dp]

What's the big deal? There's nothing inherently wrong with using or developing proprietary software. Use what you like, and don't worry about what other people use or what they think you should use.

[monkeybrain20122]

What's the big deal? There's nothing inherently wrong with using or developing proprietary software. Use what you like, and don't worry about what other people use or what they think you should use.

Nothing inherently wrong, but it is bad if you feel that you are locked into it against your wishes. I use proprietary software such as codecs and drivers, but other than that I try to use open source as much as possible, or at least software that respects open standard.

[monkeybrain20122]

A. They make my life productive and convenient to be able to exchange Microsoft Office documents with family members, relatives, and friends without having to worry about open source document formats and conversions between Office and Libre Office..

I won't use MS Office not just because it is proprietary, but it locks you to its closed standard. Since MSO 2012(3?) is supposed to be able to read odt, I make a point of sending documents in open formats unless otherwise requested, or send two copies in both formats. If it is only for family and friends I can't see why I must conform to their use of proprietary standard while they can't reciprocate. Afterall it is free for them to download LibreOffice but it would cost me $100 + to get MSO. If they worry about LO not being compatible enough they should pay for it. When I was a TA in university I submitted my grading sheet in calc. Once a prof. asked about it I told him the same thing and he switched to LO himself.

[buzzingrobot]

Better yet is not needing Office or LibreOffice. :D

[neu5eeCh]

For serious writing, there's still no good word processors for Linux. Libre has been riddled with the same small bugs for years and they're only getting worse: For instance, smart quotes don't work if a sentence ends with a dash. Autocorrect no longer works when correcting three dashes with an em-dash. Auto-correct doesn't correct en- or em-dashes if they are not discrete (unlike Word or WordPerfect), there's still no convenient way to vertically center text (this is so stupid it's downright embarrassing), etc... Textmaker doesn't even have a customizable autocorrect feature and neither does Kingsoft. Textmaker doesn't have an adjustable vertical ruler (one has to adjust these settings deep in the menu system), their font rendition is mediocre, etc...

I personally find the best solution is to use Word or WordPerfect in Virtualbox.

I suspect that Kingsoft will soon be a viable alternative. I don't have much faith in Libre. I honestly don't get them at all. It's like they keep obsessing over the spark plugs despite the headlights not working and tires falling off.

Anyway, all this is to say, you gotta' use what you gotta' use. I'd like to go %100 open source, but one can only handle so much third rate performance.

[montag dp]

Nothing inherently wrong, but it is bad if you feel that you are locked into it against your wishes. I use proprietary software such as codecs and drivers, but other than that I try to use open source as much as possible, or at least software that respects open standard.
But you're not locked in. As you said, you can switch to something else if you want. If no alternative existed, you still have the choice to not use the software. In my opinion, if someone develops a software that users value, then there is absolutely nothing wrong with charging money for it to reflect that value. In fact, if charging money for software allows the software to become better, then I would say charging money is a good thing.

That all being said, I'm not trying denigrate open source software at all. In fact, I have a few programs I've put out that are open source, and obviously, being a Linux user I really like many aspects of the open source philosophy and its benefits. But, I would say that even more than that I respect the right of the developer to release software in the format he or she feels is best.

[monkeybrain20122]

Better yet is not needing Office or LibreOffice. :D

Yeah, you can use Latex but most people use an Office Suite. :)

[monkeybrain20122]

I suspect that Kingsoft will soon be a viable alternative.



It just perpetuates MS's closed formats, you may as well use MSO as far as I am concerned. I don't really have a problem that some people use or make proprietary software, my problem is that closed standard becoming the de facto standard thereby vendor locking you in, and KingSoft only encourages it even more. It is this aspect that takes away choices. It may be a bit over the top, but there is an opinion among Chinese free software advocates that KingSoft is a MS Trojan horse.

[llanitedave]

Thanks guys. I've been looking at some free, libre, open source alternatives:

1. Mozilla Firefox which I still use
2. Evince instead of Adobe Reader
3. Project Libre or Project instead of Microsoft Project Professional 2010 Service Pack 1 32 bit
4. Dia instead of Microsoft Visio Professional 2010 Service Pack 1 32 bit
5. KeePassX or KeePass 2 which I use instead of LastPass
6. LibreOffice instead of Microsoft Office 2010 Professional Plus Service Pack 1 32 bit

I can't seem to find a working alternative to Moneydance or Intuit Quicken Home & Business 2013 64 bit. I tried HomeBank and I tried GNUCash, but they don't sync with my PNC Bank. It's difficult to download my bank transactions because I switched from a free checking to a Virtual Wallet account which means that I can't download transactions using free, libre, open source software applications. I have to use Intuit Quicken Home & Business 2013 64 bit to do that.

Kingsoft is nice, but it's limited and it's not open source.

I understand that I am not compelled to switch to open source 110%, but I would like to do so. I'll evaluate this list later.


I've used KMyMoney, which I've liked better than GNUCash. I don't know how it compares to Quicken, because I've never used it. But it matched my needs.

[monkeybrain20122]

But you're not locked in. As you said, you can switch to something else if you want..

But you are locked in if you have to stay compatible with some closed proprietary formats (eg. MSO or Skype if all your friends are on Skype etc) Proprietary software itself is not a problem if it respects inter portability and open standard, it becomes a problem when you are forced to use it because of compatibility with OTHER PEOPLE's 'choice' (or maybe not really a choice because 'others' also think that they need to use MSO because they ASSUME others would use it, thus making it self fulfilling)

So there is a fallacy in saying that you get more choices with proprietary software rather than less because it exists in parallel with free software. If it starts forcing a closed standard (e.g MSO) then it takes away choice. Also from a development point of view a lot of development resources would be freed up if LO doesn't have to reversed engineer MSO's formats and actually use their time and energy on improving LO itself. So I boycott MSO and more importantly MSO formats as a matter of principle ( I understand that not everyone can get away with it, it may be necessary for work, but there is absolutely no reason IMO to perpetuate them in personal usage like with friends and family)

[llanitedave]

Since MSOffice isn't even compatible with itself, being locked in really doesn't gain you anything.

[buzzingrobot]

I was a long time subscriber to SuSE when they offered such a service, so I see nothing wrong with paying for a 'free" OS. Afterall, even GNU/Linux companies have to pay the light bill,
and I am not in a position to create my own OS.

Same here, I bought my first Linux (Yydrigsal, maybe the first packaged Linux?) as a shnrink-wrapped box of CD's at a local bookstore. Bought shrink-wrapped Slackware, Red Hat and Suse for as long as they were on the shelves. This was pre-broadband days, so pulling down a distribution was an onerous affair. Much easier to drive to the mall and buy it.

Regardless of its justfication, there is a widespread perception that the majority of Linux users run it because they do not need to pay for it, and, hence, are unlikely to buy any third-party products. Red Hat's well-publicized inability to make money by retailing Linux still influences this perception.

[Welly Wu]

I'm not railing against people making money from their hard work to develop software applications. It's a matter of quality of the software. I hate to say this, but closed source proprietary software is more features rich and it tends to offer unique capabilities that free, libre, open source software can not match in my experience. I know this is heretical, but it's been my experience thus far. Sure, proprietary software has a lot of gotchas, but if you can live with them, then it's not all bad. I tried to switch to LibreOffice, but I'm missing key functions in various Microsoft Office software products most of which are proprietary in nature. One good alternative that I recommend is KeePassX and especially KeePass 2. These are better than closed source proprietary software like LastPass in my experience. But, that's about it. I'm keeping my closed source proprietary software because I paid for all of them and I want to continue using them to get my money's worth.

Don't hate upon me. I've got lots of people that I offer help and technical support to and I can't just abandon them. Nor is it possible for me to convert them to free, libre, open source software because their jobs depend upon closed source proprietary software and I can't ask them to quit their jobs.

[santosh83]

It all boils down to ethics ultimately. When a proprietary software company is ethical in its business practices there are no problems in using its software and paying for it, since the price would be reasonable, the software would cooperate with open standards, bugs would be fixed with reasonable diligence and the interests of its user base would be respected. On the other hand, simply having sources in the open is no guarantee a program can be considered good if it's creators/maintainers do not have ethical standards. But strictly speaking open source would always have the flexibility of someone creating a fork or derivative, while with a closed source program your only choice with an unethical vendor is to go along with the abuse or stop using it altogether. Again this wouldn't be an issue if the company was ethical to begin with, but we all know how money and power corrupts over time.

So the issue should be how one can as far as possible choose software that has higher ethical standards (without going into what this means), rather than choosing between open source vs closed source or paying vs freeware. This decision can only be made on a case-by-case basis having informed oneself to the extent possible. That's why transparency is so important. Without it, we cannot even make wise decisions without a lot of trouble.

[buzzingrobot]

It all boils down to ethics...

I have used Linux for almost as long as there has been a Linux, but I hafta say software choice has never been an ethical issue for me.

I'm not a fan of abusive monopolies. But, selling for profit is not unethical. Source code availability is obviously a good educational tool. But, that's a matter of practicality, not ethics. We shouldn't expect businesses to give away their single most valuable asset. Not releasing source is no more an ethical affront than grandma not giving away the recipe for her pies.

The locked in/lose your freedom thing doesn't make sense to me. I am most free when I don't limit my choices. If I say I will only use commercial, or only use FOSS, I am restricting my choices.

[santosh83]

I have used Linux for almost as long as there has been a Linux, but I hafta say software choice has never been an ethical issue for me.

I'm not a fan of abusive monopolies. But, selling for profit is not unethical. Source code availability is obviously a good educational tool. But, that's a matter of practicality, not ethics. We shouldn't expect businesses to give away their single most valuable asset. Not releasing source is no more an ethical affront than grandma not giving away the recipe for her pies.

The locked in/lose your freedom thing doesn't make sense to me. I am most free when I don't limit my choices. If I say I will only use commercial, or only use FOSS, I am restricting my choices.

Hi buzzingrobot, the rest of my post makes it quite clear that I in no way think charging for a closed source piece of software is unethical by any stretch. By unethical I was talking more about business practices like intentional vendor lockin, refusing to cooperate with standards or subverting standards, sky-high pricing which monopolisation fosters (thus forcing some users to take the ethical side-alley of pirating), not respecting user wishes or responding to users, abusive support packages, colluding with hardware makers to cartelize the ecosystem and keep-out legitimate competition, forced frequent upgrades and migrations, less transparency especially in view of security threats of possible backdoors and so on, abusing the patent system to maintain monopoly, and so on and on.

As I said, if business practices were ethical then there's no reason not to support or pay for their products, but more often than not, they are not, which is partly why the open source movement has grown so big in the first place. I suspect most people would be happy to pay reasonable prices for proprietary software as long as they are treated with respect and not just viewed as consumers whose wallets must be lightened at every opportunity, and whose voices can be rode roughshod upon, in preference to management/shareholder whims.

[Welly Wu]

I just purchased VM Ware Workstation 10 for Linux 64 bit. Well worth the price in my opinion. Now, I can run my GNU/Linux virtual machines with all of the VM Ware Workstation 10 features. Loving it!

[Lars Noodén]

I just purchased VM Ware Workstation 10 for Linux 64 bit. Well worth the price in my opinion. Now, I can run my GNU/Linux virtual machines with all of the VM Ware Workstation 10 features. Loving it!

Why not VirtualBox or Qemu? They are Free/Libre/OpenSource.

[Welly Wu]

I do use Oracle VM Virtualbox, but my friends use VM Ware Workstation 9 and I have to give them my help and support. Their companies don't support Oracle VM Virtualbox for their virtualized machines or appliances.

[DarkAmbient]

My older laptop got 100% foss on it, Arch Linux w/ xfce. The only thing I do on it is developing using gedit, but mostly I use my new one. Which has Steam, Sublime Text 3, CrossOver, Heroes of Might and Magic 4, 5, and 6, and ofcourse tons of music and video which is not free nor open.

[Welly Wu]

I'll admit the obvious truth: I'm addicted to closed source proprietary software applications. It makes me productive and I need it to offer help and technical support to family, relatives, and friends.

There's nothing wrong with purchasing and using closed source proprietary software applications. I have become a pragmatist in choosing the best tools for each specific job or task.

I'm loving my software! As you can see, I'm a rather productive and wealthy disabled retiree. Life is good.

[buzzingrobot]

Hi buzzingrobot, the rest of my post makes it quite clear that I in no way think charging for a closed source piece of software is unethical by any stretch. By unethical I was talking more about business practices like intentional vendor lockin, refusing to cooperate with standards or subverting standards, sky-high pricing which monopolisation fosters (thus forcing some users to take the ethical side-alley of pirating), not respecting user wishes or responding to users, abusive support packages, colluding with hardware makers to cartelize the ecosystem and keep-out legitimate competition, forced frequent upgrades and migrations, less transparency especially in view of security threats of possible backdoors and so on, abusing the patent system to maintain monopoly, and so on and on.

As I said, if business practices were ethical then there's no reason not to support or pay for their products, but more often than not, they are not, which is partly why the open source movement has grown so big in the first place. I suspect most people would be happy to pay reasonable prices for proprietary software as long as they are treated with respect and not just viewed as consumers whose wallets must be lightened at every opportunity, and whose voices can be rode roughshod upon, in preference to management/shareholder whims.

Well, yes, but...;)

Most people probably work for a business with ethics much like Microsoft's.

Standards are entirely voluntary. No enforcement agency or mechanism exists. The market controls standards, not a few engineers in a committee.

Sure, MS can charge higher prices. But, Windows is not priced so high that few people can afford it. Most people, though, actually, never buy Windows. They pay a $40-$50 premium when they buy a new PC.

Anyway, MS is not an actual monopoly. I'm 20 minutes away from two malls with Apple stores, just as close as I am to any big box selling Windows. If MS was a monopoly, neither Apple or Linux would exist.

The reality is that most people who buy a PC buy very little subsequent software. They buy a PC with Windows, take it home, and use it. All the things you and I notice they never notice.

(BTW, I don't think paying $200 for an OS is unreasonable. I'd pay that for Ubuntu if it was commercial.)\

[CharlesA]

I'll admit the obvious truth: I'm addicted to closed source proprietary software applications. It makes me productive and I need it to offer help and technical support to family, relatives, and friends.

There's nothing wrong with purchasing and using closed source proprietary software applications. I have become a pragmatist in choosing the best tools for each specific job or task.

I'm loving my software! As you can see, I'm a rather productive and wealthy disabled retiree. Life is good.

Indeed. I usually use what works for me and if that is Office or KVM or VirtualBox, so be it. :)

[santosh83]

Well, yes, but...;)

Most people probably work for a business with ethics much like Microsoft's.

Standards are entirely voluntary. No enforcement agency or mechanism exists. The market controls standards, not a few engineers in a committee.

Sure, MS can charge higher prices. But, Windows is not priced so high that few people can afford it. Most people, though, actually, never buy Windows. They pay a $40-$50 premium when they buy a new PC.

Anyway, MS is not an actual monopoly. I'm 20 minutes away from two malls with Apple stores, just as close as I am to any big box selling Windows. If MS was a monopoly, neither Apple or Linux would exist.

The reality is that most people who buy a PC buy very little subsequent software. They buy a PC with Windows, take it home, and use it. All the things you and I notice they never notice.

(BTW, I don't think paying $200 for an OS is unreasonable. I'd pay that for Ubuntu if it was commercial.)\

I would say on the desktop PC world Windows and Mac effectively have a duopoly, and although scores of alternatives "exist," they are simply too impractical for an average person. Even Linux is often criticised as impractical and hard to use for such and such a purpose, so good luck telling the average Joe that he can use always use FreeBSD, MINIX etc. :-/

As for pricing, the thing with Microsoft's Windows is that it is priced roughly the same all over the world (actually I've hard figures only for here in India, but I assume it's the same elsewhere), when purchasing power differs drastically from country to country. For example Windows is roughly $200 over there and very affordable as you say, but over here, Microsoft sells it approximately for the Rupee equivalent of $200, which is around Rs. 10,000 to 14,000, and which for the average Indian is 2-4 month's salary. And now the average Indian who earns in this ballpark usually spends the vast majority of his salary the same month, and what little is left goes for more critical things like medicines, insurance and so on. To buy a retail copy of Windows, an average Indian would have to set aside considerable money for 6 months to an year before he can go out and purchase it, and that's why piracy is so rampant here and in other places.

Crudely speaking, it would be the same as selling it for $5000 to $10,000 over there and expecting everyone to purchase a legit copy.

Granted millions of upwardly mobile urban Indian do earn enough to easily purchase it, but for each person who can do so, you'll get 10 more who can't, and must consequently pirate if at all they want to learn and use computers, (since Linux still remains in the shadows.)

Countries like India actually afford an excellent opportunity for open source software to kick off in a big manner, if vendors like Ubuntu and SuSe could sell polished OS packages for a reasonable price, say Rs. 500 to Rs. 1000 which would be $10 to $15 at current rates. The government especially could do much towards popularising Linux and FOSS alternatives but unfortunately many of the politicians are bought off by the big companies to either remain silent with regards to Linux or to promote proprietary software use, at steep and unnecessary expense.

[buzzingrobot]

I would say on the desktop PC world Windows and Mac effectively have a duopoly, and although scores of alternatives "exist," they are simply too impractical for an average person. Even Linux is often criticised as impractical and hard to use for such and such a purpose, so good luck telling the average Joe that he can use always use FreeBSD, MINIX etc. :-/

So true. It's a mistake to think that simply using Windows or OS X (trapped in proprietary purgatory, from the FOSS perspective) provides an incentive to switch. The percentage of people who will be motivated to switch by ideology is probably what we see today. Free software has been around for about 30 years. If "freedom" alone was going to motivate more people to switch, we'd have seen it already.

If someone is using proprietary software, the existence of a comparable FOSS product is *not* an incentive to switch. If someone is using Photoshop on a Mac, the availability of a FOSS app that does the same thing does not provide an incentive. Why go to the hassle of switching just to be able to do what you are already doing? Ditto LibreOffice. Why jump from Office on Windows to LibreOffice on Linux? Some other icentive needs to be there.

Now, for people, say, who don't own Windows and Office, or who want to try their hand at photo processing, then Linux with LibreOffice or GIMP can offer an icentive. If nothing else, it's cost-free.


As for pricing, the thing with Microsoft's Windows is that it is priced roughly the same all over the world

When I lived in London a few years back, American products were typically priced in pounds at the dollar equivalent. Not just software, but books, CD's, grocery products, etc. If a software product sold for $100 in the States, it was 100 pounds in London. This did not go unnoticed, of course. Microsoft once, I recall, blamed it on the costs of shipping all those boxes to the UK. Actually, the retail packages were assembled in a Microsoft facility in Ireland and shipped, via the ferry, into the UK.

I can only assume that Microsoft has calculated that they stand to make more money by maintaining their current pricing structure around the world versus what they lose to piracy. If legitimate copies of Windows were sold someplace for the equivalent of $20, what's to prevent Americans or Europeans from buying them?

[Welly Wu]

That was a very interesting portrait of Indians that purchase or pirate closed source proprietary and commercial software in India. Thank you.

Piracy in the United States is at around 22% according to the BSA. The majority of Americans do purchase their software legitimately because we can afford it.

I think that had I not have to offer my help and technical support to family members, relatives, and friends, I would choose to go almost 100% free, libre, open source software. While I don't have any show stopping bugs with closed source proprietary software yet, it's due to my years of usage of both Microsoft Windows 7 and 8 combined with Ubuntu 12.04.x.y LTS 64 bit.

I get the level of features, functionality, and capabilities that I need to stay productive and to enjoy my retirement years as a relatively young and disabled American. I think were it not for the fact that I was not working, I would have purchased even more closed source proprietary software applications just to test the waters and to see what's available for GNU/Linux especially Ubuntu.

There is also a strong reason why I chose to stick with Ubuntu 12.04.3 LTS 64 bit as most of the closed source proprietary software applications officially support this latest LTS release. I've found numerous bugs with Ubuntu 13.04 64 bit and it does not enjoy nearly the same level of support as LTS releases.

In the end, I chose the best tools for each job. I have found closed source proprietary software applications to be invaluable in their features and capabilities. I do plan to purchase newer software applications from various sources in the near future.

Life is good now. These are the best years ahead of me.

[whatthefunk]

Im not quite sure what the point of this thread is anymore. You started out wishing that you could go 100% open software, and now you cant wait to throw money at proprietary software companies. And you havent told us what you are doing with all these programs that youre buying so we cant help you at all....

[monkeybrain20122]

So true. It's a mistake to think that simply using Windows or OS X (trapped in proprietary purgatory, from the FOSS perspective) provides an incentive to switch. The percentage of people who will be motivated to switch by ideology is probably what we see today. Free software has been around for about 30 years. If "freedom" alone was going to motivate more people to switch, we'd have seen it already.


It is very simple, people use the default and Windows is the default for retail machines. Many people think that it is a part of the computer! So they don't go out of their way to get any OS, just use whatever comes prepackaged. The vast majority of computer users don't use GIMP, but neither do they use Photoshop or other fancy apps. There is no fancy apps in tablets why is it that their sales go through the roof? Another factor is marketing. Mac is a huge marketing success. I see many people using Mac in university Campuses and coffee shops. Are these people all graphic artists or musicians? No way. What do they use it for? Going on the internet, making documents, listening to music.. In other words, they could have gotten something 3 times cheaper and it wouldn't make a difference.

Linux is not preinstalled and it doesn't have the branding so it doesn't take off in terms of sales.

Finally, while you can make a very polished consumer desktop off Linux (Ubuntu is trying to do just that), but Linux's real strength is its flexibility and array of tool sets. So in the mass desktop market it is handicapped as it has to conceal its real strength to make it appealing to the general users, it has to compete not on its terms because of the nature of the market.

[monkeybrain20122]

Im not quite sure what the point of this thread is anymore. You started out wishing that you could go 100% open software, and now you cant wait to throw money at proprietary software companies. And you havent told us what you are doing with all these programs that youre buying so we cant help you at all....

Yeah I agree and it reads more and more like "Why I want to go 100% proprietary" and also may be to tell us that he has a lot of money. :)

[Welly Wu]

Lol!

[Welly Wu]

I think that this should be closed. It's reached it's end now. Thanks.

[matt_symes]

I think that this should be closed. It's reached it's end now. Thanks.

Done as requested.