2 ms·

Wow. Starts to sound like Ford's freedom of color choice for his cars. By rejecting all files created in Microsoft Office and Apple iWork, you can send a s

Wow. Starts to sound like Ford's freedom of color choice for his cars. By rejecting all files created in Microsoft Office and Apple iWork, you can send a strong message to your friends, colleagues and businesses that you do not support the actions of these companies. Intersting. iWork lets me export document in PDF, RTF and plain text. I guess that does not count, and I am going to burn in hell anyway, just because I used something else than OO? By rejecting these files, you can open a friendly dialog with the person, and ask them to support a free society by using a free format like OpenDocument. I guess one will have more chances to look like moron than „open a friendly dialog“. And I still think that freedom means I can choose any tool and format i like, not the ones that FSF tells me to.

loup-vaillant 17y ago
(1) The only way for you to burn in hell will be to share the default export format of Office and iWork. Don't tell me you didn't understand that, I won't believe you. (2) Yes, that's makes you look like a moron. No, freedom doesn't mean that. If you want to maximize your (immediate) freedom, then I understand. If you also want to be ethical and stop at the freedom of others, then you should restrict yourself to open formats.
- rimantas 17y ago
  1) It says nothing about default. Let me quote again: all files created in Microsoft Office and Apple iWork 2) How about others being ethical and not telling me what format to use?
  - loup-vaillant 17y ago
    1) You are understanding the letter, not the spirit. Open format for which there exists a free software implementation are OK no matter what (short of patents). That includes PDF, RTF, and plain text. 2) So you want total freedom, for yourself. Carried to it's ultimate conclusion, your total freedom can have me enslaved, should you decide so. More reasonably, your freedom to smoke oppose my freedom to breathe. And here, your freedom to use proprietary formats and software oppose my freedom to not use them. There is no way around that. Most of the time, the larger my freedom, the smaller the rest of the world's. Some compromises are just better than others at maximizing (or sharing) total freedom.
    - bruceboughton 17y ago
      1) Since when was PDF an open, friendly format. Didn't Adobe go after MS when they tried to add PDF export to Word 2007? 2) His freedom to use any format he likes does not impact on your freedom not to use those formats. You are free to ignore the documents he creates. If I decide to invent my own language and speak only in that, that does not impact your freedom not to learn my language. (I'm not sure the analogies are making these arguments any clearer)
      - loup-vaillant 17y ago
        (1) Whoops, bad example. I suppose this is because of patents? (EDIT: this is a genuine question, I really don't know) (2) In that case, I have limited options: either I ignore the document, or I keep my (more important) freedom. If you sent me an open format, I could have my cake and eat it too, which ultimately results in more freedom.
    - rimantas 17y ago
      1) Are you sure you understand the spirit as intended by FSF? They could have that formulated the other way, say "rejecting all files in proprietary format", but what they wrote is different. Why? 2) Where do you get that stupid idea that I want freedom for myself only? If I happen to like Pages I just use it. You are free to use whatever you want, be it Word or OpenOffice. FSF on the other hand wants me to ditch everything in favour of that ugly piece of software. Why should I? More reasonably, your freedom to smoke oppose my freedom to breathe Very wrong analogy. And here, your freedom to use proprietary formats and software oppose my freedom to not use them. No, it does not. I will use what I want, you use what you want. How me using iWork forces you not to use OpenOffice? And please, don't mix proprietary formats and software — they are not the same. As I said, I can produce pdf or rtf or plain text in Pages. All this is just a lame attempt to replace quality with politics.
      - loup-vaillant 17y ago
        (1) Good point. We should actually ask them. (2) Sorry for the confusion, that was careless. Of course your using proprietary software doesn't restrict me directly, unlike your sending me documents in a proprietary format. Now you should still ditch them, because once you're hooked, who knows what evil scheme they could put upon you? (like expensive updates, or even spying) Now, to make it clear, I still use proprietary software (mostly games). But when I do, I am not proud of it, and I tell myself I should stop, eventually. All this is just a lame attempt to replace quality with politics. I am not sure I follow here. The FSF has been about politics from the very begining. From the begining, the FSF asked everyone to ditch proprietary software, even in favour of worse alternatives (quality wise). Quality always came second. What did you mean?

loup-vaillant 17y ago

(1) The only way for you to burn in hell will be to share the default export format of Office and iWork. Don't tell me you didn't understand that, I won't believe you. (2) Yes, that's makes you look like a moron. No, freedom doesn't mean that. If you want to maximize your (immediate) freedom, then I understand. If you also want to be ethical and stop at the freedom of others, then you should restrict yourself to open formats.

rimantas 17y ago
1) It says nothing about default. Let me quote again: all files created in Microsoft Office and Apple iWork 2) How about others being ethical and not telling me what format to use?
- loup-vaillant 17y ago
  1) You are understanding the letter, not the spirit. Open format for which there exists a free software implementation are OK no matter what (short of patents). That includes PDF, RTF, and plain text. 2) So you want total freedom, for yourself. Carried to it's ultimate conclusion, your total freedom can have me enslaved, should you decide so. More reasonably, your freedom to smoke oppose my freedom to breathe. And here, your freedom to use proprietary formats and software oppose my freedom to not use them. There is no way around that. Most of the time, the larger my freedom, the smaller the rest of the world's. Some compromises are just better than others at maximizing (or sharing) total freedom.
  - bruceboughton 17y ago
    1) Since when was PDF an open, friendly format. Didn't Adobe go after MS when they tried to add PDF export to Word 2007? 2) His freedom to use any format he likes does not impact on your freedom not to use those formats. You are free to ignore the documents he creates. If I decide to invent my own language and speak only in that, that does not impact your freedom not to learn my language. (I'm not sure the analogies are making these arguments any clearer)
    - loup-vaillant 17y ago
      (1) Whoops, bad example. I suppose this is because of patents? (EDIT: this is a genuine question, I really don't know) (2) In that case, I have limited options: either I ignore the document, or I keep my (more important) freedom. If you sent me an open format, I could have my cake and eat it too, which ultimately results in more freedom.
  - rimantas 17y ago
    1) Are you sure you understand the spirit as intended by FSF? They could have that formulated the other way, say "rejecting all files in proprietary format", but what they wrote is different. Why? 2) Where do you get that stupid idea that I want freedom for myself only? If I happen to like Pages I just use it. You are free to use whatever you want, be it Word or OpenOffice. FSF on the other hand wants me to ditch everything in favour of that ugly piece of software. Why should I? More reasonably, your freedom to smoke oppose my freedom to breathe Very wrong analogy. And here, your freedom to use proprietary formats and software oppose my freedom to not use them. No, it does not. I will use what I want, you use what you want. How me using iWork forces you not to use OpenOffice? And please, don't mix proprietary formats and software — they are not the same. As I said, I can produce pdf or rtf or plain text in Pages. All this is just a lame attempt to replace quality with politics.
    - loup-vaillant 17y ago
      (1) Good point. We should actually ask them. (2) Sorry for the confusion, that was careless. Of course your using proprietary software doesn't restrict me directly, unlike your sending me documents in a proprietary format. Now you should still ditch them, because once you're hooked, who knows what evil scheme they could put upon you? (like expensive updates, or even spying) Now, to make it clear, I still use proprietary software (mostly games). But when I do, I am not proud of it, and I tell myself I should stop, eventually. All this is just a lame attempt to replace quality with politics. I am not sure I follow here. The FSF has been about politics from the very begining. From the begining, the FSF asked everyone to ditch proprietary software, even in favour of worse alternatives (quality wise). Quality always came second. What did you mean?