Microsoft/Windows - anti-freedom

[Icehuck]

No, I am saving time by not reading the license. It's not that big a deal because they are not enforced anyway. I'm not going to get into a troll fight with you guys. So let's just agree to disagree and move on.

Apple enforced their EULA against psystar and the GNU license has also been enforced a few times.

BTW - You were the troll. Obviously.

[Johnsie]

As you have resorted to name calling then it looks like I was right to call an end to this 'discussion'. This was just an other generic hate thread anyway, so it wont be missed when it get closed.

[brainac0cult]

microsoft is evil!!!!!!!

[Eisenwinter]

microsoft is evil!!!!!!!

Your signature repulses me.

I'm not defending Microsoft, but what you're doing to your sister is brainwashing.

[lykwydchykyn]

Interesting how people make statements like "I don't care about access to source code, I just want it to work", as though the two were mutually exclusive.

Naturally, proprietary apps often work, and sometimes open source ones don't work or don't work as well; so I understand where the statement is coming from. But access to source code is all about making a computer "just work". That's the point, not some geeky obsession with gazing at someone else's C handiwork.

If you have used a computer for a long time (as in, though multiple platform/version transitions) and for more than just web browsing and playing games, probably some of these things have happened to you:

- Had to purchase new software because the file formats changed and your version didn't support the new format
- Had to buy a new OS because the new application version you need doesn't support your OS version.
- Had to buy a new computer or upgrade your hardware because the new OS you required (for the reasons above) didn't support your hardware.
- Had to find a replacement for a program you relied on because the vendor went out of business, or decided they didn't want to keep supporting/publishing that title.
- Were prevented from switching to a competitor's superior software because you have GB of files in the current vendor's format, and there's no conversion utility.
- Were unable to do what you needed with a program because of an arbitrary (rather than technical) limitation imposed on your software because you bought the "lite" or "home" version, rather than the "pro" or "ultimate" version.
- Were driven to use one company's software because of compatibility issues, rather than choosing them on the basis of price/features/quality.

I could go on, but basically these are the kinds of fundamental problems with information technology that the free software movement was created to combat. Forget Microsoft, it's an issue of the proprietary "product" model vs. an open source "support" model. e.g., if your business relies on selling copies of a product, you only make money if people buy more copies of your products. The worst thing that can happen is someone buy your product and run it for 10 years happily. You need them to pay for an upgrade every 1-2 years, or buy an additional product, or buy more licenses of your product in order to stay profitable.

Recommended reading:

http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/magic-cauldron/

http://www.fsf.org/about/what-is-free-software

[Swagman]

"You could care less"

Is that even possible ?

I will assume you meant "Couldn't care less"

Amazing how many people use that term incorrectly.

[Dragonbite]

Today, I was talking to some classmates about Microsoft and Windows, and the freedom you have if you use it. I can't make them believe that Microsoft is crushing freedom. One guy is interested in learning more, but he wants it black on white from a reliable source.

I need you to post links from reliable sources that explain the major freedom issues of using Windows and other Microsoft products like Office. It has to be easy to understand. I'm explaining this to n00bs!

Cheers,

Stalker72

By charging money Microsoft is crushing my freedom of flying to the Bahamas for a winter vacation or building an addition on my house.

Oh wait, the same could be said about taking taxes out of my paycheck or giving up my money to pay for groceries. Then again, I won't go into how paying ME removes the freedom of the company to throw outlandish parties at ritzy places!

So long as Linux exists, I have a choice and thus freedom to go to another operating system that is capable of doing what I need (currently).

Just like so long as OpenOffice.org, KOffice and Google Docs exists I have the freedom to use them instead of MS Office. Any features that MS Office has that these alternatives have, I have the freedom to use it or not. Ironically it is these features that are included in an application that make one "less free".

So long as there is competition, there is freedom.

If I don't like the way things run I have 3 choices; take it, leave it or work around it. This can be by asking for the "feature" (see note above, though, on how this actually LIMITS my freedom), finding an alternative, coding a "fix" or modifying my expectations to existing within the boundaries of what is available.

[wolfen69]

I can do whatever I want with Windows or OS X, like they care what I do with it...

typical windows user response.

[Sealbhach]

microsoft is evil!!!!!!!

[Sealbhach]

"You could care less"

Is that even possible ?

I will assume you meant "Couldn't care less"

Amazing how many people use that term incorrectly.

+1

Leave the English language alone!


.