×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Celebrate Software Freedom Today

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the not-like-you-were-actually-busy-today dept.

GNU is Not Unix 107

An anonymous reader writes "It's that time of the year again: when we all unite regardless of the (free) licenses we cherish and go out into the streets to let people know how Free Software has changed our lives. With over 425 events in 80+ countries, communities as diverse as Joomla!, FreeBSD and The OpenDisc, to name just a few, will be celebrating all over the world. Don't wait; grab your best arguments and join the wild masses of freedom lovers to the software freedom parties. Where will you be partying today?"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

107 comments

On Saturday? (2, Funny)

ge7 (2194648) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428108)

Why not have it on weekdays when most people don't have dates, wild parties or bar nights to check out the girls? What were they thinking?

Re:On Saturday? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37428138)

Why not have it on weekdays when most people don't have dates, wild parties or bar nights to check out the girls? What were they thinking?

You must be new here.

Re:On Saturday? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37428158)

You think people who'll celebrate open source software will be likely to have dates are wild parties?

Linux's Birthday (1)

suso (153703) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428302)

Well, today I'll be celebrating Linux's 20th birthday. I guess all you people who celebrated earlier dates for Linux's birthday must celebrate your own birthday as the day yo mama told everyone she wasn't fat, she was pregnant.

Re:On Saturday? (1)

thirdrdwiki (2320318) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428326)

THE Irc Channel is #fsd . Get on there now .. Be apart of the Free Software Movement ... Slahdot effect REQUired. .... Deploying Spikes ..... ..... END OF

Re:On Saturday? (0)

hackus (159037) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428480)

Girls?

Is that a git branch of the kernel? What is that?

-Hack

Re:On Saturday? (1)

camperslo (704715) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428950)

GIRL: It's sort of like URL, except the resource is "generally infrequent" and possibly difficult to locate.

If you think about it, isn't a Freedom Day event a safer place to bring a date than a wild party? In which setting is a date more likely to run off with someone else?

Whether it be a girl, the Dell Dude, or just Hands Solo, bring your date along.

Re:On Saturday? (1)

sourcerror (1718066) | more than 2 years ago | (#37433202)

GIRL is GNU in Real Life. Originally started by hippies by pooling their girlfriends, creating more competition and better services.

My description of SFD (-1, Flamebait)

master5o1 (1068594) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428148)

I prefer to call it the day where I try to convince people to join the Cult of Linux and accept the bleeding-edge and bug-loving software ;)

But this year I spent my day on Windows playing Civilization 5 which I bought on Steam. Not very Free Software friendly.

Re:My description of SFD (-1, Flamebait)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428396)

Welcome brother! Coffee and donuts are in the back and I'll be giving a lecture on "How to never be hit by the scourge of WinRot" at 2PM, be sure to catch it. For those that won't be there the correct answer is "TuneUp Utilities" which will kill WinRot dead.

And I'm sure to get hate for pointing this out, but who gives a crap, I got more Karma than God. You wanna know why Linux is stuck a a lousy 1%, even lower than a Java based phone OS? [netmarketshare.com] Its actually VERY simple and easy to explain, and no, it isn't some conspiracy by Gates and the Illuminati, they are too busy using the World bank to take over the planet.

It is because YOU DON'T LISTEN, neither to consumers nor to the world at large. Haven't you gotten the memo? the word is CONSUMERS in 50 foot flaming neon, so what do you do? "Hey lets put a link to bash on the desktop! It'll make our neckbeards thick and copypasta in a terminal makes you leet!". it is like the way RMS still calls everyone "hackers" like he is at a computer club in 79, it isn't even funny anymore, its just.....kinda sad, that's what it is.

In case you haven't gotten the memo THE WORLD IS GUI NOW and NOBODY, but nobody, well except for server admins, use terms for anything anymore. Do you see a terminal link on the desktop of Windows 7? Nope you got to go to start...all programs... accessories...and there it is, buried as far down as they can because NOBODY USES IT. Oh and before anyone wastes their time pointing out Powershell look it up on MSDN, the articles are ALL "How to manage YOUR SERVER with Powershell" because it ain't for consumers folks! hell look at the closest thing Linux has ever had to a hit, Android. What is it? Why its all GUI, no CLI, clicky clicky GUI city!

You've got this great OS, with tons of software, all free, nice looking DEs, all this wonderful stuff, yet your stubborn refusal to wake up and smell the 21st century is dooming it to a niche OS so tiny Java craphones kick its ass. If there is ANY CLI then YOU HAVE FAILED. if the one and ONLY answer is "open up bash and type"? Then YOU HAVE FAILED. hell look at the biggest weakness Linux has right now, driver issues. Do you have a simple "roll back drivers" button? How about a "find drivers" button, both of which your competitor has had for years? NOPE, all you have is "open up bash and type" which as I pointed out was fail.

Do you know what the definition of insanity is? Its doing the same thing over and ov er and expecting a different result. you've had 20 damned years folks, you are STILL dead last. Doesn't that give you a clue? How about the fact that a decade old Windows beat the shit out of Linux on netbooks [computerworld.com]? LISTEN TO THE CONSUMERS and change, or stay last place. because you will NEVER get them to join in the forum dance, you will NEVER get them to "open up bash and type" and you will NEVER get them to "embrace the power of CLI" like its the damned force, okay? Is that REALLY so hard to understand? Hell even on servers Windows is winning at a 70%/30% split. Why is that? simple, as a Linux admin told me "Linux is powerful if you know EXACTLY what you need to do and the steps to do it. Windows is quicker if you are given a task where you've never had to do it before" why? Because GUIs are intuitive and reward exploration, and CLIs give you a blinking cursor and a shitload of man pages, that's why!

Its just human nature folks, humans are visually oriented creatures that like to touch and explore. GUIs enhance and appeal to these parts of our nature. CLIs are about as UNINTUITIVE an interface as you could possibly design and the only reward you'll get for exploring is frustration or breaking something, this is why they fell out of favor for EVERYONE BUT YOU. But hanging onto a terminal like Disco Stu hanging onto his bell bottoms won't make the term come back, hell bell bottoms will come back first .

Re:My description of SFD (1)

Securityemo (1407943) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428624)

It's almost impossible, IMHO, to understand the user-interface mindset of someone who only uses GUI apps when you've used CLI since your mid-teens. It's even harder to understand someone who doesn't think like a programmer and doesn't relate the abstractions of the UI to underlying structures, GUI or not.

Re:My description of SFD (1)

RobbieThe1st (1977364) | more than 2 years ago | (#37429212)

Mod. Parent. UP.

Actually, on top of the above, I think it also has to do with the personality-type of the user: Aside from a slight bit of DOS when I was about 8(i.e. "a:, install" etc), I'd been windows-only and rarely used a command line until I tried Linux at about 15. Sometime in the next year I ended up switching to it, and now, five years later, I can't live without my command line handy. It's just /so/ convienient to have all that scripting power right there, and access to everything I want, instantly.
Of course, that isn't to say I don't like having a nice GUI desktop environment... but I love having shell access.

Re:My description of SFD (-1, Troll)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 2 years ago | (#37431694)

Congrats, you are part of the whole 0.001% that use a CLI friend! Now be honest here, no fibbing....do you HONESTLY believe you will get the other 99.9% of the planet to do as YOU do, or do you think you will have better luck getting them to use your product (because that's what it is if you want ANY share, if you don't call it a hobbyist OS and just be happy with what you have) if you give them what THEY want?

I repeat, do you know what the definition of insanity is? its doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Where was Linux 4 years ago? 1% Where was it two years ago? 1%...guess where it'll be in two years if you stay on this path? Don't need Kojak to solve the case, the answer is 1%.

If you want to be a hobbyist OS? That is COMPLETELY fine, no worries, I'm happy for you. But you can't have your cake and eat it to, you can't say "Linux is ready for the desktop!" or "Linux is as good as Windows and OSX!" while relying so heavily on CLI because IT IS NOT EVEN CLOSE, its a lie. YOU know this, I know this, and the numbers don't lie friend. I can give you link after link of retailers dropping your product if you'd like.

So make the choice, step away from the bell bottoms and CLI and join the 21st century, or stop bullshitting and pretending Linux is usable for the masses when they will NEVER EVER NO MATTER WHAT YOU SAY OR DO embrace CLI like its the damned force. they DO NOT CARE how powerful it is, they DO NOT CARE if you think it is easy, they DO NOT CARE if you think copypasta is the correct answer to a problem. you WILL do it their way or you WILL gain no share, its simple as that.

Choose now, because in 2014 millions of XP machines will go EOL and you COULD grab a good share of those, if only you'd change. the choice is yours, get busy growing or get busy dying I believe is the phrase.

Re:My description of SFD (1)

RobbieThe1st (1977364) | more than 2 years ago | (#37431756)

Well, see.. I, for one, don't care. It works for me, and I'm just as glad not to have to provide support for the idiocy I see in a number of the unwashed Windows-using masses.
I will put my coding time into making tools /I/ want to use, and if they happen to require some CLI to use, well, so be it.

If you, or anyone else wants to make a noob-friendly version, I'm not stopping you. You can take from the massive amounts of applications, desktops and other things, choose whatever you want, patch it, and distribute it(Just so long as you keep it open source).
I suppose the problem is simply that there's only a few companies willing to do it(for desktops) -- like Canonical -- and most don't have the funds to do it.
So we wait. And make it better for us. And endure comments such as yours which make us believe more in our position because, really, do we /want/ to be doing the same things as the unwashed masses?

Re:My description of SFD (-1, Troll)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 2 years ago | (#37432642)

THANK YOU...you see? It is THAT, that total bullshit elitist with NO numbers to back it up attitude that dooms Linux to nowhere land. Did you know that Win9x/Win2K together equal MORE than your OS? Two completely abandoned Windows beats your latest and greatest?

But I hate to burst your bubble, but copypasta into a term doesn't give you magical gonad powers, nor will it make Angelina Jolie suddenly show up and be impressed by your "hacker" skillz. THERE IS A REASON why everyone abandoned CLI and it is because it is an unintuitive pita irritating little bitch.

As I said, and as was told and confirmed to me by a Linux admin with over a decade at his job and a half a dozen certs. you give both a Linux admin AND a Win admin a server task that NEITHER has ever done before and guess what? The win admin will win every single time because CLI is powerful IF AND ONLY IF you know EXACTLY what you need to do and the steps to accomplish it, period. All the CLI is is a giant game of Simon, where you memorize and parrot back.

But hey, you wanna be lower than even a crappy Java based phone OS? No skin off of me friend. when all those millions of boxes hit EOL all those shops like mine will just IGNORE YOUR OS and put Win 8 on the ones that will run it, and strip the rest. sure it'll be a massive pile of machines that COULD have been running Linux, but so what? you don't want any unwashed masses touching your precious bell bottomed OS, right? enjoy last place.

Re:My description of SFD (1)

RobbieThe1st (1977364) | more than 2 years ago | (#37433586)

Yeah, I know, I shouldn't be feeding the trolls.
- - -
Thing is, I don't *need* numbers. Why in the heck should I care whether 5;000 people use it or 500,000,000? So long as it does what I want, I see no reason to use something else. And until I see stuff like Teamspeak *dropping* support instead of adding it... I have no need to worry.

Also, please realize that I am not "the linux community". I have never provided code to an existing product, or properly compiled my own kernel. I'm just a guy. I have no real say in much of anything, Linux OR Windows. Yet you seem to believe that I could change something if I wanted to. *sigh*

Oh, and BTW, I *have* windows 7 on my laptop. I also have Debian LXDE. I find Debian starts quicker, stops quicker, runs apps quicker. W7 is shinier, yes... but it's also way slow(even with Aero disabled). And my laptop's no slouch - 4GB of ram, 2.4GHZ C2D, ATI mid-range graphics chip(it'll run TF2 at 50fps, 1920x1080, mid settings, no AA). And yet, when Linux runs what I need far faster, why would I want to run Windows?

*sigh*.

Re:My description of SFD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37428654)

Actually, for getting a command prompt in Windows 7, you don't have to drill all that way down. When you click on 'Start', in the box that has 'Search programs and files', you just have to type 'cmd' and presto!!! The only time I need to call any tech support is when my internet is down, and typically, the first thing the support person tells me is to do that and invoke such a window, and then ping the gateway address.

I do agree w/ you otherwise that everything that's done in Linux & BSD on the CLI should have been doable on a GUI. In the 90s, NEXTSTEP came closest to that, and hopefully, GNUSTEP is capable of it. I would have hoped that GNUSTEP would have been the UI of choice for both BSD and Linux. But w/ the insistence on using CLI to edit /etc and other files to make things in Linux work, I'm afraid you are right!

Microsoft has likewise failed (3, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428704)

even lower than a Java based phone OS?

I clicked the link and got "There was a problem retrieving your account information. Please contact support."

If there is ANY CLI then YOU HAVE FAILED.

Then Microsoft has likewise failed because the Windows recovery console is not graphical, and because the process for specifying arguments to a program run as a scheduled task (Start > Control Panel > Scheduled Tasks) is not graphical.

How about a "find drivers" button, both of which your competitor has had for years?

Ubuntu has one of those: System Settings > Hardware > Additional Drivers. So how does one convince device manufacturers to make working Linux drivers available to Linux distributors from day one, as opposed to Windows and Mac OS X on day one and Linux as an afterthought? The only way to get a "find drivers" button is to make a kernel that can use another operating system's drivers, and ReactOS has a chance to succeed where Linux failed because ReactOS aims for compatibility with the NT 5.x kernel used in said ten-year-old version of Windows.

Its just human nature folks, humans are visually oriented creatures that like to touch and explore.

So how does one automate a task by touching and exploring? I thought the whole point of using a computer was to automate repetitive information processing tasks.

CLIs are about as UNINTUITIVE an interface as you could possibly design

That's like saying giving someone instructions in English is about as UNINTUITIVE an interface as you could possibly design. Better to point and grunt.

Re:Microsoft has likewise failed (1)

tenco (773732) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428878)

That's like saying giving someone instructions in English is about as UNINTUITIVE an interface as you could possibly design. Better to point and grunt.

Your analogy is flawed. Better to draw, point and explain. Like, an icon with tooltip when moused over.

Re:Microsoft has likewise failed (1)

RobbieThe1st (1977364) | more than 2 years ago | (#37429244)

Actually, I'd say the lack of a "find drivers" button is usually a *good* thing... because you shouldn't need it.
With Linux, all of the nice, up-to-date drivers come with the kernel, so any time you upgrade you get them upgraded too!
In fact, the only time we need such a button is when we have the stupid non-free drivers which can't be distributed with the kernel. I, for one, would be plenty happy to have the Nvidia driver included with the kernel by default, but until Nvidia decides to open-source it, I guess we're stuck downloading and installing it, just like on Windows.

Re:My description of SFD (0)

lucmove (757341) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428866)

I love the CLI and use the terminal all day every day, but in essence, I have to agree with hairyfeet's assessment wholeheartedly.

Just instead of lashing out at the CLI, I complain that sound in Linux is clumsy and flawed, I still have trouble configuring Wifi, Bluetooth is almost impossible to be made to work decently, clipboard management STILL is an absolute pile of shit, Web browsing is noticeably slower than on Windows, Kon Colivas' patch set is refused over some silly technicality, and most window managers are installed with such abysmally lacking default configurations that I can't deny the whole Free Software case is just hopeless. This thing has always been, still is and shall ever be designed for servers. It is all downright hostile to anyone intending to run a desktop/workstation. If I really want to be honest, I have to admit: I use Linux because I am a hobbyist.

Re:My description of SFD (1)

unixisc (2429386) | more than 2 years ago | (#37429516)

But that's what it comes down to, doesn't it? I installed Linux on my laptop, and unlike previously, it does fine detecting my network card, and I know the command for setting the IPs for the interface. But when I need either sound, I have to find which version of ALSA matches my kernel in order to get even mediocre sound. WiFi, forget it, which essentially converts my laptop into a brick. Clipboard management - I use the one under kde, which is somewhat flaky because it automatically copies something I highlight, as opposed to something I highlight and then copy - but I at least have the option of going and clicking on the words I wanted. About Gnome - whether 2 or 3 - the less said, the better. Honestly, Linux would do well to take a page out of Apple, make GNUSTEP the default user interface, which is the final interface in getting things working, and do a better job burying things under that interface. Oh, and allow things like KDE, GNOME, XFCE, et al to run, but as a switchable option, and if one exits that, one should be taken back to GNUSTEP, as opposed to the CLI. (Speaking of which, why does an OS need so many 'shells' - ash, bash, csh, ksh, and so on?)

Re:My description of SFD (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428906)

Wow, calm down :)

I don't think many Linux users are concerned about becoming the number 1 desktop market. We care more about using open standards which will enable us to use Linux if we want. One way of encouraging open standards is to get people to use Linux, OpenOffice, etc - but who cares what OS other people are using, as long as things are set up so that you can communicate freely with them, sending and receiving data in a format that anyone else can understand?

Having said that, when using Ubuntu I never had any reason to use the CLI outside of doing geeky webserver/programming type things. With Mint I did need to use the CLI to turn off "tap to click" on the trackpad, so admittedly that sucks. But when I was using Windows recently I had to Google just as much to find out where the option to "disable touchpad when typing" was because the GUI controlling the Synaptics driver settings wasn't worded very well.

gconf-editor already does something similar for Gnome, it's basically it's the equivalent of regedit. You still have to type gconf-editor from a terminal to run it - but MS don't put regedit in the Start Menu either. Some settings need to be made less accessible so that people don't screw up their system doing "exploration."

I suppose someone could write a GUI that automatically parses all the most popular Unix config file types and locations and lets you change settings from that. It would be quite convenient, especially for people who don't yet know where settings files are likely to be located. If nobody's actually done that yet then I might give this a go, good idea HairyFeet :p Similar to the idea that gconf-editor and regedit aren't available from a menu, I'm not sure it would be a good idea for it to be startable from outside a CLI though.

Windows is quicker if you are given a task where you've never had to do it before" why? Because GUIs are intuitive and reward exploration, and CLIs give you a blinking cursor and a shitload of man pages, that's why!

That really depends on the task now, doesn't it? Some things you just can not do in Windows without downloading a specialised application. As a silghtly sideways example I've used many simple text editors over the years, but recently after trying emacs I love it. I can use regexps in my search and replaces, and create macros to do things that 99% of text editors simply cannot do. I get that most people don't care about this kind of feature, but there are just some things that either take a very long time, or are simply not possible when you're using a basic GUI. You have to wait until someone makes a GUI that does what you want.

Re:My description of SFD (2)

Lanteran (1883836) | about 2 years ago | (#37430534)

Oh fuck off, hairyfeet.

Re:My description of SFD (4, Interesting)

Lanteran (1883836) | about 2 years ago | (#37430726)

I'll elaborate: despite your vendetta against the command line, do you use sign language instead of talking to people? The command line is far more natural and powerful than the GUI- it's like speech. Hell, even MS is implementing better command lines, does that mean microsoft is in decline? Or rather, is that the reason that microsoft is in decline? Not even, powershell is one of the most useful- or perhaps, the only useful administration tool they've introduced in years.

Ignoring your disgusting double standards and logical fallacies, your argument, or rather, conviction, is wrong as well. You hardly have to use the command line on linux if you don't want to, anyway, what- do you think this is still '95? One should never have to open the terminal in ubuntu, or mint for instance, to fix anything- it just makes it easier. What's more intuitive, "open up this program, browse to this menu, you sould see this, browse to this sub menu, click this button..." or "type this into bash and you're done"? Even if you maintain a CLI-free usage, you can still fix any problems that crop up in a... roundabout way. Your argument is both poor and totally irrelevent.

And, I know you're not likely to understand this as the biggest Microshill on slashdot, we don't want to castrate our OS for market share. Believe it or not, I, and many others, could not care less about being the most popular OS in the world- in fact, that'd take the fun out. I just want a solid OS kernel that powers distributions that I can run on stuff dating back to the 486, without issue- with good hardware support. What's the point of using linux if we've made it as unstable, crashy, bloated and locked down as windows, in a quest to emulate the biggest triumph of marketing over technology the world has yet known? Market share is irrelevant. What is relevant is making the best damn OS out there.

As for your bashing of OS market shares, even maintaining 1% is growth, as the number of computers in the world is much higher than it has ever been- however, the actual linux market share is 2%, most of that gained even in the past 3 years. Not to mention that little success that was linux on the phone, which you consistently refuse to acknowledge in your postings.

Re:My description of SFD (0)

lucmove (757341) | more than 2 years ago | (#37433566)

"I, and many others, could not care less about being the most popular OS in the world- in fact, that'd take the fun out."

You are a fucking mindless idiot. You and everyone who modded you up. I want Linux to be a lot, lot more popular, so:

- more software companies will make versions of their software for it (like TextMaker);

- my bank will make their extra security module available for Linux so I can do online banking like normal people;

- my smartphone manufacturer will make its support applications available on Linux, so I can backup and restore at least my contact data, not type all my 100+ contacts manually when I buy a new phone because some basement-dwelling dipshit thinks that using an unpopular OS is l33t and kewl;

- hardware manufacturers will have more interest in offering drivers for Linux.

Do a favor to the world: die.

starving, drowning infants; difficulty celebrating (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37428170)

patriots of world disarmament day. salutatory saturday. for each of the creators harmed in any way (selfish fear based neglect included)....

babys+just folks outnumber genocidal neogod mutants 10,000,000:1

let's take a vote then? what should be voted on? the 'proper' direction of our required depopulation? maybe we should, just for now, schedule hearings & a vote (plus we'll have to be told our 'choices' in the most appealing language available), to schedule a vote, sometime in the future, when our sentiments are made clear to us, & we understand how our freedom is to be administered for us, so we don't get goofy, & think we can do whatever we think is good for us/our fellows without supervision, & society enhancing tithing?
 

Re:starving, drowning infants; difficulty celebrat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37428874)

thx for you posting, brother.

see you there.

open??? (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37428214)

Funny that many "open" source sites don't allow spidering or indexing of their site.

Re:open??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37428424)

Not to mention their copy/right/ed documentation, logos and trade marks. Doublethink FTW.

Re:open??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37429308)

open != public domain

Re:open??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37428448)

open != free

Open Source Definition vs Free Software Definition (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428714)

open != free

Then why does each of the criteria of the Open Source Definition, as published by Open Source Initiative, echo one of the freedoms of the Free Software Definition, as published by Free Software Foundation?

Re:Open Source Definition vs Free Software Definit (1)

Seyedkevin (1633117) | more than 2 years ago | (#37429496)

Most people don't follow the Open Source Definition when calling anything 'open'. The term 'open' has always been close to the dictionary definition and is a more relative term than that of Free Software. It's often coincidental that "open source", as defined by the average person, means the OSI's definition of the Open Source Definition.

In addition, 'open' is somewhat considered to be some sort of consumer inspired movement to go beyond just source code licensing and into allowing for a business model that's closer to the "Bazaar" model at literally every aspect.

Remember, most of these open source projects are small and ran by donations and would rather have their bandwidth used for something useful. There is no obligation for Free Software/Open Source projects to let you use up massive amounts of bandwidth on their servers to be 'open', which, in this case, means little to their cause. If they wanted you to have offline documentation, they'd probably have put out download links or included documentation in the source code which your distro probably included in the package, as well.

That being said, you can still spider their site by ignoring robots.txt and changing your user-agent.

Re:open??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37429376)

In what way does stating "please do not index this content" contradict openness?

Free as in...? (4, Interesting)

Wowsers (1151731) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428348)

I do not mind if there was a charge for Linux, although being free is nice.

I decided to try Linux because as each iteration of Windows came about, more and more things get locked down so the user cant do things. For testing I still have a Windows install (used rarely), but by going from WinXP to Win7, even silly things like recording "What you hear" from the sound system have been locked down. It's this constant locking down of features that drove me to Linux.

Leaving aside major changes like KDE3 to KDE4, at least I am free to change the desktop the way I like, and not some way Microsoft wants you to "experience" in Windows.

One thing I will say, sometimes you can't get people to Linux no matter how many Live Distros you run showing their really old computer can be used again at a faster speed with up to date Linux compared to an ancient copy of Windows (and is too old to run up to minute Windows).

Re:Free as in...? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37428404)

I put Ubuntu on my mediaserver and started learning bits & pieces about Linux, after I got pissed off at Win7 bogging it down. So #fsd for me is about Linux and everything that I (didn't ;) ) torrent.

Re:Free as in...? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37428458)

BTW, the perceived "lock down" in Windows 7 of the audio system is in fact the ineptitude or unwillingness on the part of Microsoft to provide a media crossbar application for CoreAudio in Windows. The problem existed since Vista. The developer kit once contained a small application that solved the problem, but was removed, unfortunately. This is also one of the reasons for me why I've become a permanent Linux user for some years now.

Re:Free as in...? (3, Informative)

Dr_Barnowl (709838) | more than 2 years ago | (#37429492)

It's totally on purpose. Microsoft have really bent over for the media cartels - the whole "Protected Media Path" gubbins is about this. You can't get an unsigned driver to load (outside of debug mode), which means you can't, for example, write a video driver that just dumps frames to disk.

Re:Free as in...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37428514)

no matter how many Live Distros you run showing their really old computer can be used again at a faster speed with up to date Linux compared to an ancient copy of Windows (and is too old to run up to minute Windows).

That's not really true anymore. The current version of Ubuntu's system requirements are much steeper than XP's, and not far from Win 7's.

Modern desktop Linux just isn't suitable for older machines. You could install something like Slackware or Gentoo, but that will just result in you becoming permanent tech support.

Re:Free as in...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37428710)

That's not really true anymore, sometimes people put linux on their toaster and those distributions are fairly responsive on anything faster than a tricorder.

Lubuntu (2)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428752)

The current version of Ubuntu's system requirements are much steeper than XP's, and not far from Win 7's.

Nearly any desktop PC manufactured in the past ten years has a 1 GHz PIII or P4 CPU or faster and at least 512 MB of RAM (or enough slots for it), which is the minimum spec for mainstream Ubuntu. Lighter-weight Ubuntu flavors are also available: Lubuntu can run on a Pentium II with 128 MB. What are the specs of the machine that failed to meet the system requirements?

Re:Lubuntu (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37431274)

Nearly any desktop PC manufactured in the past ten years has a 1 GHz PIII or P4 CPU or faster and at least 512 MB of RAM (or enough slots for it)

The current desktop edition of Ubuntu lists 1 GHz P4 as the minimum proc. Which means that the same machine could run Win 7 if the owner is willing to buy some more RAM, which is cheap.

I've got nothing against Linux (actually typing this post on a Linux box, heh), but the poster above was advocating putting it on antiquated machines for non-technical users. Like I said, you could do it easily with a minimal distro, but will the end user actually be able to use it? Or will they call you up twice a week asking you to install new peripherals, fix their broken x config, etc?

I haven't tried the Ubuntu fork you mentioned, but my experience with those in general is that lightweight DEs are awesome for people who know what they're doing, but not so great for CLI-phobic users who need the hand-holding provided by the more bloated DEs. Admittedly it has been a while since I've tried LXDE, and I would be happy to be wrong on this point. I'll look into Lubuntu next time I want to resurrect an old machine.

Or Puppy for that matter (2)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#37431450)

If you're trying to resurrect an old machine, consider Puppy. I liked it for the month or so I used it on an old laptop that had run Windows 98, until I found that its window manager's Alt+drag binding (if I remember correctly) interfered with a binding used by my favorite paint program, at which point I switched to Ubuntu.

Re:Free as in...? (0)

lucmove (757341) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428926)

Ah yes, recording "What you hear" from the sound system is not "locked down" on Linux. Except it doesn't work. One has to deal with the intrincacies of JACK, which never worked for me on any of the three distros where I tried it.

In fact, any sound working on Linux at all is almost a miracle considering how confusing and feeble all the Linux sound architectures are. Even so, it works, but the last second of a song will be clipped, and you're lucky if you can have two sounds playing at the same time. And it all makes perfect sense, since Linux has always been, still is and shall always be designed for SERVERS. Why in the world would anyone need sound output in a server?

A console TTY makes plenty of sound (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37429124)

What is this "sound" from the computer of which you speak? One communicates with a computer via a console, and the only sound a glass TTY makes is the beep when you receive an ASCII character. Perhaps one can program the line printer to make musical sounds by printing at particular rates.

Oh.. you're talking about a home entertainment media platform running Windows.. that's a different matter. That's not a computer any more, stop thinking of it as one. Can you record "what you hear" coming from your phonograph? Of course you can.. that's what audio cables and/or microphones are for. You even pay a small fee on your blank recording media to compensate the rights holders.

Re:Linux was NOT designed for servers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37429126)

Linux sound is terrible, but Linux was NOT "designed for servers". Linus Torvalds:

(I’ve never wanted a server OS-I started out writing Linux for my own PC, not to be some file server

Re:Free as in...? (1)

RobbieThe1st (1977364) | more than 2 years ago | (#37429286)

Recording audio from "what you hear" Ah... Memories.
I never could get it working in ALSA. It just... wouldn't. I could record from the synth channel of my Audigy 2, just nothing on the wave in channel.

PulseAudio, however... it was easy. One google search and I had a nice record command that'd record any applications audio out, and it seemed to work nicely.
Not that PA doesn't have its own problems

Re:Free as in...? (-1, Flamebait)

node 3 (115640) | about 2 years ago | (#37430556)

One thing I will say, sometimes you can't get people to Linux no matter how many Live Distros you run showing their really old computer can be used again at a faster speed with up to date Linux compared to an ancient copy of Windows (and is too old to run up to minute Windows).

This is the clue right there.

As a geek, you might think there's a value in running a really old computer at a faster speed with an up to date Linux. Most people will not find value in that. They would rather just use their own, trusty Windows install, or buy a whole new computer.

No one, and this bears repeating, NO ONE who isn't already familiar with Linux, or interested specifically in either the geekiness of Linux of the open ideals of Linux, will EVER switch to Linux for the sole purpose of making an aging, but still primary, desktop computer faster.

And for those that would rather just buy a new PC, that's what people make money for. To buy things.

Joomla sucks! (0, Troll)

Narcocide (102829) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428356)

Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!

Re:Joomla sucks! (0)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#37429282)

yes it does, but I have yet to find anything that has all that extra bonus gravy and is not maintained by a bunch of morons (xoops)

Ummm... (0)

wsxyz (543068) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428540)

Maybe it's just me, and I'm sorry, but I imagine that the local "Software Freedom" party would be only very slightly less painful and awkward than the "CoCo Forever" party thrown last week by the local Tandy Computer User's Group.

Hilarious (1, Funny)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428572)

People planning Software Freedom Day parties with Google Maps. Maybe they'll send invitations by sharing MS Word documents on Facebook too...

Re:Hilarious (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37428644)

It's Open Street Map.

Re:Hilarious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37428980)

Link here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/

Re:Hilarious (1)

Technician (215283) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428772)

Speaking of MS Word, I looked at the list of celebrations for one in Microsoft's back yard. None are listed in Washington state. Time to get busy for next year. This year I'll looking to cross the river to Portland, but the link doesn't list a location for the event. Portland is a big place. I'll have to Google Wordpress to see if there is more info.

OpenStreet Map! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37430000)

It's OpenStreet Map!!

How do I make money in a free software world? (0)

cryfreedomlove (929828) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428896)

I need to feed my family. I write code for a living. How do I get paid for doing this in a world where all software is free?

Re:How do I make money in a free software world? (1)

Brucelet (1857158) | more than 2 years ago | (#37429058)

The small percentage of people who have found true success will tell you to use donations. For everyone for whom that didn't work, I have no idea. Perhaps paid support or extras?

Re:How do I make money in a free software world? (1)

cryfreedomlove (929828) | more than 2 years ago | (#37429198)

The small percentage of people who have found true success will tell you to use donations. For everyone for whom that didn't work, I have no idea. Perhaps paid support or extras?

How about if I withhold my software until you pay me? The free market will set the price. Is that OK?

Re:How do I make money in a free software world? (2)

bcrowell (177657) | more than 2 years ago | (#37429550)

How about if I withhold my software until you pay me? The free market will set the price. Is that OK?

Of course. Why are you setting up ridiculous straw-man arguments?

First you ask about how you can make a living in a hypothetical world in which all software is "free," presumably meaning that it's free-as-in-beer (doesn't cost money). But that world doesn't exist, and never will, for fundamental reasons. E.g., nobody is going to write an application for free for a corporation's internal use, to do something that only that corporation needs to do. Furthermore, nobody is calling for a world in which all software is free-as-in-beer -- not even people like RMS, who would like to see everyone use 100% free-as-in-speech software.

Now you seem to be asking whether someone's going to ... what, send the police to your house and force you to release your software for free? Nobody has proposed that.

Please stop trolling.

Re:How do I make money in a free software world? (1)

unixisc (2429386) | more than 2 years ago | (#37429972)

Actually, as Eric Raymond pointed out in 'The Cathedral & the Bazaar', the usage of the term 'Free' was an unfortunate choice of words, given that it more intuitively implies free of cost, rather than free to re-engineer. What made it worse was that most 'Free' software was actually free (as in beer), making the differences b/w the two even more nebulous.

On RMS, he was once asked about the competitors to GNU, and when he listed some and was asked about Microsoft, his response was that they don't have a moral right to exist, and that they should be forced to open their sources if they wanted to remain a legal business. Once one's done that, there is no way Microsoft can charge $199 or $499 for any version of Windows, since people would be forking it left & right, and selling lower cost versions of it - maybe for as low as $5 - thereby trashing their market. RMS did say that it would still be legal for someone who's written a GPLed software to charge billions for it, but the market reality problem w/ that is that those who didn't write it can change just one line of it, fork it and then charge anything less, thereby trashing the market value of the original product. So the OP is effectively correct about this in the end, even if the Software Freedom advocates insist that trashing the software industry is not the goal. How many people have you seen actually purchase Firefox, Chrome, Apache, MySQL, GCC and so on? Why don't they - is it b'cos the developers of all these titles are such saints that they'd rather not taint themselves by selling their creations? Reason is that nobody buys that which they can get for free, unless there is a value added, which is what one sees for RHEL, Suse and other commercial Linux distributions, where the service is what's being sold.

Re:How do I make money in a free software world? (1)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 2 years ago | (#37431910)

Who exactly said it wasn't? I don't see anyone saying you shouldn't be able to sell software. Not even RMS advocates that. You're just knocking down a strawman, to make some lame point about the free market.

You go ahead and withhold your software, Galt, the world won't miss you.

Re:How do I make money in a free software world? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37429098)

with such a lack of analytical thinking skills, i'm surprised you got hired to do any coding.

Re:How do I make money in a free software world? (1)

brit74 (831798) | more than 2 years ago | (#37429216)

Don't worry about getting paid. Do it for the benefit of society, citizen! Just like teachers, doctors, and bus drivers.

Wait, what? Those people get paid for their work? fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu.

Seriously, though: you write a product wanted by a corporation - like Google giving hundreds of millions of dollars to pay for Mozilla Development, or companies spending millions on Linux development. Donation-based money from consumers is basically a way to poverty. So, I guess that pretty much limits developers to making a few software products for big corporations if you want to earn a living -- which is not only a small slice of the software development world, but leaves most of the software people want (like pretty much all games) undeveloped. (Oh, but if you can get to the top of the free-software, like Stallman, then people will give you big donations for your contributions to society. But, you'll still look like you live under a bridge and can't afford a razor or deodorant. But, you'll be well-liked by college students everywhere because free - whether it's software or pizza - is always appreciated.)

Re:How do I make money in a free software world? (1)

unixisc (2429386) | more than 2 years ago | (#37430008)

If he was lucky enough to make it big in free software like Stallman, I doubt he'd be living under a bridge, or plugging the 'Food movement' [stallman.org]. But does Stallman even program nowadays - I thought all he does was head the FSF, which doesn't do any development, just advocacy, which is something anybody can do. So yeah, the OP might want to pursue that line of work, feed his family while not writing even a line of code, which ain't going to do squat for his income anyway!

Re:How do I make money in a free software world? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37429432)

I write code for a living, too. I write middleware for a large banking conglomerate and they really have two choices:

1) they pay me to write all the code needed from scratch

2) they pay me to extend GPLed code where possible and write just a little code myself (also GPL, as is required by the license).

They consistently chose 2) so far, although if they chose 1), I'd be happy too, safe busy employment for the next 5 years or so...

Someone has to write the software in the first place and for that, they get paid. Nobody says the customer needs to hog the end result like a jealous squirrel, though.

Re:How do I make money in a free software world? (1)

jgrahn (181062) | more than 2 years ago | (#37429442)

I need to feed my family. I write code for a living. How do I get paid for doing this in a world where all software is free?

You don't, but that world does not exist and never will. All the software I *directly* use in my daily life is already free; all the software I produce as a hobby is free. Yet I have no trouble finding things to do at work.

Re:How do I make money in a free software world? (3, Insightful)

bcrowell (177657) | more than 2 years ago | (#37429468)

I need to feed my family. I write code for a living. How do I get paid for doing this in a world where all software is free?

I would think the answer was pretty obvious. Write software for which there is no free equivalent, or write software that is better than the free equivalent.

Re:How do I make money in a free software world? (4, Insightful)

msobkow (48369) | about 2 years ago | (#37430240)

You provide services to install, configure, maintain, and customize the OSS core.

Or you use the OSS components to build custom solutions.

Except for wildly successful proprietary solutions, the money has always been in the customization. The only difference with OSS is you may have competition because other people also have access to that same OSS core.

Re:How do I make money in a free software world? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37429650)

You are selling a *service* and *domain expertise*, not "software". Consulting as a signal processing / applied math guy, I use 90% free source hosted on girthub. Its too complicated and lacks documentation for anyone but a handful of friends in other places to understand, source is worthless to the client. They need
it to add the 10% that makes it work on their hardware in the field and do so reliably.

Re:How do I make money in a free software world? (4, Insightful)

mspohr (589790) | more than 2 years ago | (#37429746)

IBM, HP and many other companies make billions of dollars supporting free software. It's called customization and maintenance. You should check it out.

Re:How do I make money in a free software world? (2)

Murdoc (210079) | about 2 years ago | (#37431222)

It's called Technocracy [technocracy.ca], where not only would you not have to worry about being paid, but everything would be open source anyway. What programmer wouldn't love that, the ability to code to your heart's content, on whatever project you want, whenever you want?

Re:How do I make money in a free software world? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37432062)

If you can't then do something else. This is the market telling you to find another industry.

BTW, I get paid to write software. Lots of companies want custom code.

You can't own abstractions, so get over it.

Long SEO (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37428914)

Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete! http://kimi.edu.vn

No offense, but... (2)

Luke727 (547923) | more than 2 years ago | (#37428938)

...this sounds so fucking gay. It reminds me of a line from Super:

She sucked more dick than my brother Victor and you saw that faggot come in here once with a cum worm on his beard. He didn't even know it was there. How you don't know someone jizzed in your face?

That's what I imagine these "parties" being like.

Sacrifice Gnome 3 on the fiery altar! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37429362)

To celebrate, can we put Gnome 3 on a fiery altar and watch it burn?

Who owns 'Free'? (0)

unixisc (2429386) | more than 2 years ago | (#37429616)

Why is Free something that's more associated w/ Linux & GNU than BSD? Why has it evolved to the point that it's considered different from open, which ought to mean the same thing? Why is it that 'Freedom' has carried w/ it such a ball & chain that it's synonimous w/ drivers not being available for a certain platform for which the 'Free' OS is being implemented? If you want basic things, like sound, networking/wifi to work, chances are you'll run into a roadblock? All that has made 'Free' synonimous w/ 'does not work w/ basic things I need'.

I understand all the arguments about Freedom being the capability of looking at, and changing the source code if something doesn't work, but guess what - most people don't have friends who can write a proper device driver for them, the way they might have someone help them w/ mail-merge or pivot tables. So having proprietary software for major essentials, such as drivers, is okay! Also, the civil wars in the Free Software movement about which licenses are really free vs which ones aren't, and are better avoided, do no favors to the Free Software movement. Right now, Free Software, having the market share it has, is a follower, and needs to support what it can, be it drivers, popular software and popular hardware. Once all that is there and people develop free alternatives that are also feature competitive (w/ Office, for example, or Photoshop, or Movie Maker), then it would make sense to become more rigid and demand that software be made open in certain situations. But until then, doing what a lot of Free Software advocates do is shooting oneself in the foot.

Re:Who owns 'Free'? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37430032)

Well, if it weren't for RMS, there would be no free BSD licenses either.

RMS tried to convince the Berkeley folks to go with a GPL type license. He failed that, but some of his argument for free software sunk in with the folks at Berkeley.

Personally, I like the viral component of the GPL license, because I don't want bigcorp stealing my code as a base, and then charging me if I want access to their improvements. If you are ok with such things, then BSD is for you. But, even if you prefer the BSD license, you should know that it came from the same place/person as the GPL, and probably would not exist if not for RMS and the GPL.

So celebrate RMS and the GPL too.,

All valid points. More like Bowel Movement. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37430370)

Of all the software you expect to get for free, the Free Software "Bowel" Movement has averted from all the Shareware and Freeware software available from the get-go to only assert that the OS is what is considered Free in that equation. Then they reclassify the Free as being the equivalent of Gasoline. In my classification system, no: Software is a random gauge on the dashboard and the users are the passengers while the Gas-tank is the wrong analogy. If you don't have a Driver that can comprehend the Gauge, then you need to hire another Driver. That Car and Gas-tank analogy is bogus. Just looking at the breadth of the Free Software Movement and you'll see that they equate Freedom as the ability for competitors to view eachother's Code and that is not acceptible because from the beginning of thought and an example of the poor inter-operability of developers in Linux GUI and Kernel development you will see that everyone has their own proprietary explanation of how something should be done and politics and government organization in Society is an example of this. Regard this as a failure on the part of Richard Stalman and Eric Raymond: these individuals have conned everyone for economic purposes and results that none will benefit from, because it isn't about the OS but skilled labor being done that requires the OS to step-aside while Applicaication-Specific operations are being performed that can't be comprehended by the designers of that proprietary OS. An OS that locks you out for failing to comprehend your operations is a closed OS, and that proves Linux and BSD are more closed than Microsoft operating systems ever will be. By example of Closed nature, there was no Microsoft support for a USB host driver in Windows NT 3 but because that OS was Open in nature there were a couple private companies that wrote drivers for USB host adaptors but costed quite a bit. This was unlike Linux and the BSD's in which they required complete kernel over-haul for such kind of hardware to exist as well as compensate for the possibility of an input device to arrive from a random USB identity rather than the legacy PS2 or AT bus. Who is Closed and who is Open, they said? This is the wrong analgy as well. It should be re-penned as, "who is Able-bodied and who is documented?" Microsoft operating systems have always been Able, but un-documented for the most part, while Linux and the BSD's have always been Closed but completely documented on their closure of what their limitations are. If hardware arrived tomorrow then they would need to backport compatibility into the mainline Kernel of a "Free" OS like Linux, while a Microsoft operating system already has that exposed for the kernel to just step aside as long as no timing issues unsyncronize existing operations.

Ahem... (3, Funny)

LaminatorX (410794) | more than 2 years ago | (#37429798)

Richard Stallman had a printer,
whose code he could not see.
So he began to tinker,
And set the software free.

Re:Ahem... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37430988)

Software software software!
He writes it every day.
Whether it's hacking Emacs
or making Hurd less gay.

Re:Ahem... (1)

tokul (682258) | more than 2 years ago | (#37432492)

Richard Stallman had a printer, whose code he could not see.

More like "Xerox created printer, which could not print". Lets thank Xerox and other commercial software/hardware vendors for what they did to OSS.

What terrible comments (3, Insightful)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#37429886)

Half are trolls, most are useless, and few are above +3. Slashdot's demographics seem to have rotted out completely.

Re:What terrible comments (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37433290)

For some people, slashdot is a fun place to make stupid and sarcastic comments about technology.

We view just as many adverts as you.

RMS doesn't own a printer. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#37430246)

It was bought with someone else's money donated for Research purposes.

Besides that, what kind of printer are we talking about: plotter, dot matrix, typewriter, pixel map, extruder, hydraulic press, coin, punch-card, or what?

Many arts of printing have have destroyed, either by government or lack of articulation. RMS doesn't need anything more than a typewriter.

Malaware still included? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37432658)

The web page http://www.theopendisc.com/programs/productivity/ still mentions "PDF Creator" which is now bundled with MalAware in the included the "PDF Forge Toolbar".

The page still mentions OpenOffice.org as the office suite but they said they change it to LibreOffice. I hope that they removed PDF Creator too. I will not bother downloading an ISO with malaware let alone sharing/giving it to anyone.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...