3 ms·
Just a note, I think Ubuntu is marketed as an open source OS, the OSI definition says it has to be freely distributed. Strangly enough it's free software that i
by klrr 14y ago
Just a note, I think Ubuntu is marketed as an open source OS, the OSI definition says it has to be freely distributed. Strangly enough it's free software that is free as in freedom, not as in free beer, open source is free as in free beer (according to OSI).
- tracker1 14y agoFunny, I downloaded Ubuntu free of charge last month. I know you have to click differently, but given their failed attempts to monitize, who can blame them.
- klrr 14y agoMy statement about OSI was wrong, but Ubuntu is free of charge and will always be. Canonical can't charge for software they have only partly written.
- eurleif 14y agoWhere do you see that in the open source definition (http://opensource.org/osd http://opensource.org/osd)?
- Flimm 14y agoNo, open source does not have to be free of charge, according to the OSI. The first clause clearly says: "The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software"
- klrr 14y agoExtremely sorry, now I feel really stupid.
- macco 14y agoThat was not my point. My point was that an Ubuntu computer may have the same price as a Windows PC or maybe even more expensive, because you become a better value for your money.