Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230

 

 

 

I didn't choose GNU/Linux because it's free..

Off-Topic discussions about science, technology, and non Debian specific topics.
Message
Author
plugwash
Posts: 2507
Joined: 2006-09-17 01:10
Contact:

#21 Post by plugwash »

thamarok wrote:Well yes, I would pay for freedom.
but how much freedom would you really have? if you want to make people pay for something that means that your license can't allow redistribution and that is a major freedom gone.

User avatar
GMouse
Posts: 280
Joined: 2007-03-02 22:28
Location: Ohio, USA

#22 Post by GMouse »

Which is why things like donations and commisioning the devs are great alternatives.

User avatar
Hevoos
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-03-30 18:04

#23 Post by Hevoos »

plugwash: Isn't Red Hat open source? You have to pay for it but you still have the source code, well atleast for fedora which is quite the same.

plugwash
Posts: 2507
Joined: 2006-09-17 01:10
Contact:

#24 Post by plugwash »

source for all of the free software components of rhel is indeed freely availible and you can download rebuilds of them freely from many sources. People who buy rhel aren't really buying the free software that makes up the bulk of it they are buying the support of redhat and the eligibility for support from vendors of non free software for linux.

User avatar
Dargor
Posts: 653
Joined: 2006-08-14 08:54
Location: New Zealand, Hamilton

#25 Post by Dargor »

heaps of people have paid for freedom, most recently African Americans. it wasn't cheep.

just because they paid for it doesn't make them any less free.

thamarok

#26 Post by thamarok »

Note: GNU/Linux is free as in freedom, I know, but if it was commercial, I would pay for it. That's what I mean.

User avatar
DeanLinkous
Posts: 1570
Joined: 2006-06-04 15:28

#27 Post by DeanLinkous »

it is commercial
I will *sell* you the debian netinst cd for $1,000,000
interested?

thamarok

#28 Post by thamarok »

DeanLinkous wrote:it is commercial
I will *sell* you the debian netinst cd for $1,000,000
interested?
In that case, I would buy Windows, because of overpricing.

User avatar
DeanLinkous
Posts: 1570
Joined: 2006-06-04 15:28

#29 Post by DeanLinkous »

Okay what if both windows and linux were $500? which would you choose?

Trying it because it is free(cost) and then coming to realize the importance of free(dom) is a good thing. Only using it because it is cheap and you want to turn it into a *cheap* windows clone is something else.

I have windowsXP and it costs me nothing. I do not get viruses with windows XP either. I find windows to be stable. I use about the same apps on both. Both OSs provide the drivers that I need for my laptop. I could care less about debugging data since I wouldn't know how to do much with it anyway.

But free software makes sure I am in control of my system. It guarantees that I decide what is best for me. Free(dom) is why I use GNU and linux too... ;)

thamarok

#30 Post by thamarok »

Well yeah, now I realize the importance of freedom too.. :oops:

User avatar
hrsetrdr
Posts: 181
Joined: 2007-03-17 15:14
Has thanked: 1 time

Re: I didn't choose GNU/Linux because it's free..

#31 Post by hrsetrdr »

Free from the servitude to a certain large greedy software corporation.

Also, just "getting back to the basics" of the attitude/philosophy of the '60's.

b4k4
Posts: 47
Joined: 2006-04-25 05:59

#32 Post by b4k4 »

1. its better
2. the future of civilisation is at stake
plugwash: Isn't Red Hat open source? You have to pay for it but you still have the source code, well atleast for fedora which is quite the same.
you pay for the service. If you want it for free, its called CentOS.
b4k4
Hiroshima

Post Reply