4 ms·

IMO there's nothing "fundamentalist" about rejecting a _particular_ piece of proprietary software. When trying to sell a niche product, r/linux might not be th

IMO there's nothing "fundamentalist" about rejecting a _particular_ piece of proprietary software. When trying to sell a niche product, r/linux might not be the best place to ask. I'm wondering if the author would have had the same response when someone on a windows or mac subreddit did not want to use their software. Instead try to sell to people who you solve a particular problem for.

mherrmann 8y ago
Imho it is fundamentalist if the only reason for the rejection is that it's proprietary. Don't know if that was the author's exact experience. But it has been mine. And it's not just dogmatic and stupid in a similar way as religious fanaticism, it's harmful for the entire ecosystem.
- bjpbakker 8y ago
  > it is fundamentalist if the only reason for the rejection is that it's proprietary Personally I don't use software that I cannot review myself for tasks that are important to me. That includes reading email. Hence, the reason for rejection is that it's not open source. I don't see how this makes me a horrible fundamentalist, but maybe you care to enlighten me :) > it's harmful for the entire ecosystem I also completely fail to see how me personally want to review source code is harmful to the "entire ecosystem" (I assume you refer to the FOSS ecosystem?)
  - mherrmann 8y ago
    You are, obviously, free to choose the software you use. What you install on your computer is, again of course, completely up to you. What I take issue with are people who jump into any discussion of proprietary software and downvote / criticize with "proprietary" being the only point. A fair criticism should take the form "Cons: Not open source", "Pros: ...". But it never does. It's always just "Nobody needs this proprietary crap". That is what I consider actively harmful, because it suppresses options that may actually be useful, if not for you then maybe for other people. If you don't like it, why not just let it be? I don't like JavaScript. I don't go around forums and shout "It's a horrible language!" where ever I see it mentioned.
- danieldk 8y ago
  It does not need to be fundamentalist, it can also be utterly pragmatic. If counted the number of times that proprietary vendors have let me down, with no recourse (e.g. the cancellation of BeOS, software vendors moving to outrageous subscription schemes, Apple replacing Spaces by the Mission Control), it would be pragmatic to stop using proprietary software. Since with FLOSS software the community could maintain something ad infinitum when there is interest. (Disclaimer: I do use some proprietary software.)

mherrmann 8y ago

Imho it is fundamentalist if the only reason for the rejection is that it's proprietary. Don't know if that was the author's exact experience. But it has been mine. And it's not just dogmatic and stupid in a similar way as religious fanaticism, it's harmful for the entire ecosystem.

bjpbakker 8y ago
> it is fundamentalist if the only reason for the rejection is that it's proprietary Personally I don't use software that I cannot review myself for tasks that are important to me. That includes reading email. Hence, the reason for rejection is that it's not open source. I don't see how this makes me a horrible fundamentalist, but maybe you care to enlighten me :) > it's harmful for the entire ecosystem I also completely fail to see how me personally want to review source code is harmful to the "entire ecosystem" (I assume you refer to the FOSS ecosystem?)
- mherrmann 8y ago
  You are, obviously, free to choose the software you use. What you install on your computer is, again of course, completely up to you. What I take issue with are people who jump into any discussion of proprietary software and downvote / criticize with "proprietary" being the only point. A fair criticism should take the form "Cons: Not open source", "Pros: ...". But it never does. It's always just "Nobody needs this proprietary crap". That is what I consider actively harmful, because it suppresses options that may actually be useful, if not for you then maybe for other people. If you don't like it, why not just let it be? I don't like JavaScript. I don't go around forums and shout "It's a horrible language!" where ever I see it mentioned.
danieldk 8y ago
It does not need to be fundamentalist, it can also be utterly pragmatic. If counted the number of times that proprietary vendors have let me down, with no recourse (e.g. the cancellation of BeOS, software vendors moving to outrageous subscription schemes, Apple replacing Spaces by the Mission Control), it would be pragmatic to stop using proprietary software. Since with FLOSS software the community could maintain something ad infinitum when there is interest. (Disclaimer: I do use some proprietary software.)