Non-free SF on free systems

Ok, let's see, I am going to just add my two cents worth of ideas about this even though I do freely admit I don't have much idea about Free Software.

I think you may be quite wrong in something there. I don't think many people want to install Photoshop in their Linux computers just because they are ignorant of what free software means. I think they want to do it because they are accustomed to that program, they *know* how to use it, they simply like it or also very possible: it's the program their company wants them to use or what they have to learn at university because it's what companies require them to know about.

Although you are very right about education of free programs being non-existent I really think you should look a bit further than simple ignorance for the reasons why people might want to have Photoshop in their computers. Very possibly they do support the free software movement and that's why they use Linux but the people they work for just might make it necessary for them to have it.

Don't be evil…

I'm sorry, but i believe you are wrong.

I'd LIKE to have a 100% free system, but i don't consider it a requirement. If i require non-free software to be able to do everything i need to do, i will use it. Two examples:

1. All my friends use Skype for voice chatting..Skype is non-free software…so this leaves me with 3 options: Don't use Skype and don't be able to talk to my friends, use Skype or get my friends to move over to something else that is free/OSS (which will never happen)

2. I browse the web…A LOT, and i come across all kinds of flash games, youtube videos, .WMV's, .MOV's that i want to watch cuz they look interesting or something. If i chose to use only free software and i came across one of those, i'd be like: "Whoops, uses flash, looks like i'm SOL". NO.

I want to be able to do everything i want with my computer. The more free software, the better, but i don't see it as a requirement. I'd be happy to use Gnash (for example) over Adobe Flash when Gnash can play all the same flash content Adobe can without massively killing my CPU or causing massive issues.

Should proprietary software become free IMO? YES
Would the world be a better place if that happened? YES

But this isn't going to happen so might as well just use the non-free software for the time being and deal with it until there are good alternatives.

No, we install non-free software because we want our hardware and files to work and internet experience to be complete.

Pure open source is a wonderful idea, but some of us can't be be purist when we get stuck with hardware that requires proprietary blobs to work or work more fully.

Point is, yes we know - we just make the conscious decision to compromise.

For a lot of people, the choice isn't "use an all-free system or not".

It's much closer to "can I abandon Windows as a base at all while retaining some Windows apps".

I study voting systems as an election integrity consultant and activist. All of the current crop of hideous voting systems have an MS-Windows base and usually use other MS tools. Diebold, one of the market leaders, runs their central tabulator on an MS-Access base of all things.

It's been almost two years since I last booted Windows on a system I own. The only way I can do my job is to have WinXP as a virtual machine (VirtualBox) which in turn is under Ubuntu.

Would you rather I not "contaminate" my FOSS system with an entire XP image (on a system that shipped with Vista BTW), or would you rather I dual-boot and risk a Windows virus on that side nuking every partition on the disk, Linux and Windows?

Just three days ago I installed Ubuntu for a guy who had about $3k tied up in an iTunes library, and a WinXP install that was infected to hell and gone. Do you think FOSS purity was going to make him abandon that collection? Hell no. VirtualBox to the rescue again: WinXP, iTunes and it turns out iTunes in that situation can burn CDs to a USB-connected burner.

He had THREE choices only:

* Stay on a pure Windows system;

* Go FOSS and abandon his stuff;

* Run a mixed FOSS/non-FOSS setup.

YOU pick. What should he have done? What should I have done to help him?

Purity only goes so far.

I certainly want to get to an all-free system,
but why should people wait for the apps to be
ready before switching to a free operating system?
Switching to the free OS and bringing along one or
two proprietary apps until free replacements are ready
seems like a fine middle ground.

See also my recent presentation, http://kegel.com/wine/lugradiolive2008/lugradiolive2008.pdf

RMS would be proud, so do I :)

The problem is also the computer education in the schools. But, fortunately, things are changing, at least in Andalucía.

Why don’t Google support The Gimp instead of a Wine support for Adobe Photoshop?

Because everybody is FREE to support FREE or NON-FREE software.

I wish it would be always as easy as to say let's all just use free software and never look back. I pretty much did the switch and apart from some proprietry drivers I'm very happy with it. Btw some of our clients are using Skype as well. But I refused to install it on my main Linux computer I'm always available since I think it is asking more from me to install a non free bloated chat progam than I ask them to choose between 15 protocols which are currently supported in Pidgin.

But not everyone has this choice as of yet without restricting themselves, sometimes more, sometimes less. My girlfriend is a graphic designer and she learned using Photoshop/Indesign/Illustrator. That's her daily bred and she paid for the software. As much as she wants to try linux and she is becoming jealous, she is locked in to her windows operating system because of the reluctance of Adobe to release the software for Linux. (They have it running on Mac OSX so I wonder if it is really that difficult) Anyway - I don't think it is the right way to pressure people into adopting our believes of why we think free software is important. I totally agree that 90% of the people don't know what they are talking about mixing up OS and free software, but I think it takes time and effort to make them understand what they are actually missing and that free software is based on a concept that works in their favor as users. But it's not their fault for wanting a system that does what they want/know. If they understand more why free software is important and what the dangers from prorietry technologies are, maybe they will take some action and in the case of Photoshop on Linux raise their voice so they release it on Linux. Well, that doesn't make it free software but at least it's not the developers/customers @ Wine/Codeweaver who have to pay for the development and where the money could be used to do something more useful.

To most people, "free" means they were not required or asked to make a monetary payment. In that sense, Flash, Skype, iTunes, and other proprietary programs are free (although related services may not be). To some, even Mac OS X and Windows are free when they're preinstalled. "Educating" people that "free" means something else is equivalent to redefining the English language. It won't work any more than attempts to legislate the value of pi have.

A lot of people also just don't care about the distinction between free-of-cost and free-from-constraint. They're probably more concerned about whether they'll be able to avoid the next round of malware that's about to go around. Free of cost is good enough.

I could not agree with you more. This is actually an old problem that is rooted in the very existence of the "Open Source" movement. I am glad however, to see that the problem is still being discussed. This "Open Source" label harms the work of the Free Software Movement since all discussions begin and end with practical issues. Any and all ethical issues (like freedom) are kept hush-hush and categorized as off topic.

In fact, I've always said that the best way to understand the effects of the Open Source camp is to think of "Free as in leech". Open Source folk seem to feel no shame in using the best Free Software for some jobs and for other jobs, the same old tired freedom-restricting wares that they're tied to in one way or another. For them, the fact that they sing the practical praises of a few freedom-granting wares while tied in shackles seems to have them thinking that they're part of a "movement". Quite laughable (but sad) really.

So the bottom line is the same line that it's always been. We must continue to choose our language carefully. We must speak of and educate in the areas of freedom. We must advocate in order to grow our numbers or face isolation, then extinction.

JD,

Wow, you are so special. Is it really all about you? Everything you say is "I, me, want, need, and now". Your mind is small and your sense of the ecosystem you exist in appears to be even smaller. Yes, you are the EXACT kind of GNU/Linux user that makes me sick. The maggot, the leech, the one with every tired, old, self-centered excuse ready in a shameless attempt to excuse yourself from taking responsibility; first for yourself, then for the community you are a part of.

All your excuses tell me is this:

1. You feel powerless.

2. You do not believe you can inspire change in those around you.

3. You are afraid of change.

4. You feel that you are a victim of other people's decisions.

[...] Non-free SF on free systems [...]

thanks much, man

in spanish http://solognu.wordpress.com/2008/05/11/software-no-libre-en-sistemas-libres/

thanks ;)

Gracias trinux

¿no te animas a escribir en español ya? desde luego en inglés ganas la ostia de público XD saludos compi gaditano, de un cordobés

sosias comencé a escribir en castellano a principios de 2004. Hace unos meses cambié por lo que comentas, si escribes en inglés es accesible a más personas.

Saludos cordobés, gran tierra por cierto

"People are ignorant"

Good argument to start with. Why don't you , say, STFU?

I mean, do you want more people to use free software? Give them good alternatives. Any graphic artist can tell you a hundred of features in photoshop not present in The Gimp. Starting with the easy-to-use GUI. You don't want them to use Adobe evil software? Then give them a better and free solution if you can. But stop telling people which software they should run. And stop using third grade arguments like "they don't do the things I do, they're ignorants"

WTW, the company I work for develops and sells propietary software that runs under linux. Must be evil for you. Should be move to Windows?

[...] 11 Mayo, 2008 por sosias Traducción del artículo original en inglés Non-free SF on free systems de Alfonso Jiménez. [...]

Bueno si las leyes se aplicasen como realmente deben de aplicarse, casi todo el mundo usaria software libre. De hecho la gente le daria una patada en el culo a windows, photoshop etc etc. Pero bueno, esto es España y aqui no pasa na.

TheName, you are showing me that you don't know about the origin, the history and the purpose of the system, just by calling it Linux. Of course, your company is not acting ethically. GNU/Linux wasn't made for propietary software.

I ALWAYS give free alternatives (link) to everyone who has asked me for them.