5 ms·

> Now I realize there is a world of difference between free and open source software There isn't. It's essentially the same set of software. That's the whole p

> Now I realize there is a world of difference between free and open source software There isn't. It's essentially the same set of software. That's the whole point of OSI. To just rebrand it. It's like saying that there's a world of a difference between global warming and climate change, or freedom fighters and rebel insurgents.

sls 9y ago
RMS is very clear on the difference between open source and free software [1]. > The two terms describe almost the same category of software, but they stand for views based on fundamentally different values. Open source is a development methodology; free software is a social movement. For the free software movement, free software is an ethical imperative, essential respect for the users' freedom. By contrast, the philosophy of open source considers issues in terms of how to make software “better”—in a practical sense only. It says that nonfree software is an inferior solution to the practical problem at hand. Confusion certainly has arisen over the dual meanings of "free", where the intent is to convey "unrestricted" but often "without cost" is understood. Similarly, a confusion naturally arises between what OSI may define as qualifying for the term "open source," and the plain meaning of the words which imply that when the source is open for inspection, then the project is open source. But as you see above, even when the terms are understood as their definers intend, they have very different meanings even if they describe a similar set of software, because they have very different cultural contexts and goals behind them. [1] "Why Open Source misses the point of Free Software" https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point....
smudgymcscmudge 9y ago
Now that I know you have that perspective, I'm curious what you meant by your previous question, "And what about now, how do you think that open source is good for business in ways free software is not?"
- jordigh 9y ago
  I think you already answered, in a way. When they called the same software by a different name, you stopped thinking that money was disallowed. You repeated that you (only?) think about what is good for business. So, yeah, OSI's rebranding worked. Same software, but focus on the business side.

sls 9y ago

RMS is very clear on the difference between open source and free software [1]. > The two terms describe almost the same category of software, but they stand for views based on fundamentally different values. Open source is a development methodology; free software is a social movement. For the free software movement, free software is an ethical imperative, essential respect for the users' freedom. By contrast, the philosophy of open source considers issues in terms of how to make software “better”—in a practical sense only. It says that nonfree software is an inferior solution to the practical problem at hand. Confusion certainly has arisen over the dual meanings of "free", where the intent is to convey "unrestricted" but often "without cost" is understood. Similarly, a confusion naturally arises between what OSI may define as qualifying for the term "open source," and the plain meaning of the words which imply that when the source is open for inspection, then the project is open source. But as you see above, even when the terms are understood as their definers intend, they have very different meanings even if they describe a similar set of software, because they have very different cultural contexts and goals behind them. [1] "Why Open Source misses the point of Free Software" https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point....

smudgymcscmudge 9y ago

Now that I know you have that perspective, I'm curious what you meant by your previous question, "And what about now, how do you think that open source is good for business in ways free software is not?"

jordigh 9y ago
I think you already answered, in a way. When they called the same software by a different name, you stopped thinking that money was disallowed. You repeated that you (only?) think about what is good for business. So, yeah, OSI's rebranding worked. Same software, but focus on the business side.