View Full Version : Not all take full advantage of open-source

September 16th, 2008, 01:41 PM
I know, people around me do it, I do it, chances are you do it.
People only use the free of charge part of open-source. And why shouldn't they? Most are really greedy (or cost-aware) and or have no idea how to compile from source, or even at least understand the source code.
But why should we not take advantage of the generosity of programmers, i mean it does say in about ubuntu:

"Free software" doesn't mean that you shouldn't have to pay for it (although Ubuntu is committed to being free of charge as well); it means that you should be able to use the software in any way you wish: the code that makes up free software is available for anyone to download, change, fix, and use in any way. Alongside ideological benefits, this freedom also has technical advantages: when programs are developed, the hard work of others can be used and built upon. With non-free software, this cannot happen and when programs are developed, they have to start from scratch. For this reason the development of free software is fast, efficient and exciting!
And i totally agree with that. You can should be able to do anything with software, Come on! Commercializing software is kinda foolish to me. If it's proprietary, somehow, somewhere, somebody is already pirating it. Software is not made of gold, it's just data. It's very easy to duplicate. And I've seen software companies ripping off other software companies. A lot of $30 video converters look and feel and even function the same with only the branding as difference!
And if people reason that other people might take credit for your work if it's not proprietary, then I :lolflag: at them! What if they claim it's theirs, and somehow close source it. It's happened before, look at wine! it's still alive you know.

anyway, at least i got this issue off my chest.

September 16th, 2008, 01:51 PM
What issue, what are you saying ?

I'm trying to work out if you are in favour of piracy and free for all, or the opposite.

September 16th, 2008, 02:06 PM
Well, if you put your software under gpl, and a company takes it, this happens...

http://digg.com/linux_unix/Verizon_hit_with_GPL_copyright_lawsuit_over_router _software

There are TONS!!!!!! I am just posting one.

September 16th, 2008, 02:33 PM
Of course not everyone will taket full advantage. We can't all be 1337 hax0rs and poke around with the source :P

September 17th, 2008, 11:56 AM
It's just that I'm slightly dissapointed with open-source because people are easily lured to "free of charge", and often ignore that the programmers have generously given their code so that others could contribute to their hard work.
It's not that I hate open-source, I like the idea of a community-driven development. In commercial software, you often pay for the materials, the labor, the intellectual property (in big companies, you pay for the branding too). Sometimes, the cost is too absurd. Come on, some programs are ripoffs of other programs, and sometimes retailers price expensive software that does so little. Take the video converters for example, companies sell flv to whatever converters, 3gp to whatever converters, or whatever to whatever converters for $30 dollars a piece, so if you would buy all their software to rival ffmpeg, it would cost a heck of a lot of money.

And on that article about verizon, doesn't it seem to harsh? As NovaAesa said, not all of us are haxors, and most of the time, there is no need to edit the code. (Let me clarify on what I think is taking full advantage of open-source: modifying the program itself in ways not limited to the source, the gui or even the look and feel.)

On a side note, Is it possible to write a program without compiling or is there a language that doesn't need compiling (aside from low level languages)? Because that is sort of one of the drawbacks of modifying source code, and I'm the kind of guy who likes tinkering with stuff but is impatient to wait for things like compiling.

September 17th, 2008, 12:25 PM
whats there in taking advantage of do you think everyperson on earth understands the sourcecode and modifiy it, reality is everyone wants spoon feeding thats what microsoft is giving them even if people have to shell out huge amounts,unless this is changed there won't be any proper utilization of open-source,again this development process stops at developers because in case of linux developers are not able to convert proper engineering requirements into enduser's need,they all have preassumptions that enegineering requirement of a product is itself enduser's need,ubuntu have somehow recognised it and moving good let see how this cart of apple goes

September 17th, 2008, 12:26 PM
HungryMan, what is your point? there's pretty obvious that few people are actually able to understand the code behind an application, not to mention editing it. so? people have jobs, people do different things besides computers, people use computers. they use open source. and that's wonderful. stating the obvious makes very little sense
and btw, you mix up proprietary programs with proprietary programs that costs money. I hope you there are thousands of good freeware applications

September 17th, 2008, 01:07 PM
Hmm... these replies really made me rethink what I first said. First, I'd like to share my discovery that open-source not only applies to software, but on other aspects as well. Second, I'd like to clarify why I said such things in the first place.
At first, I admit, I was pretty biased and unclear. I really was just disappointed with open-source meaning free to a lot of my friends and colleagues. It was like they were ignoring the fact that, the developers have practically given you the software and the chance to modify it. When my disgust of this attitude faded away, I realized, not everyone has the need and/or ability to change the software (yeah, took some time for that to sink in). Sorry if I confused people. I really was just disappointed that to most people, open-source and freeware are the same thing.

And to tell you the truth, some people here in the Philippines don't know that the software they're using is pirated (at times they don't really care). I've been to computer shops with the Windows Genuine Advantage Balloon or the "This copy of windows is not genuine" popping up. No wonder why the line between open-source and freeware is vague. And not only between freeware and open-source, some of the pirated cd vendors sell various linux distros (ubuntu included) and software bundles which include open-source, and often GPL programs. When people confiscate the cd's, they often also include them with the pirated software for destruction.
Once again, sorry for the confusion. I was really really pissed off with open-source=freeware.

sorry orz orz orz

ps: in the case of ubuntu being available at pirated cd stores, can I just ask for it? :lol: