4 ms·

Why do you feel entitled to use proprietary software with no restrictions? Yes, Adobe and Microsoft are going to charge you rent. So what? Just use free (as in

Why do you feel entitled to use proprietary software with no restrictions? Yes, Adobe and Microsoft are going to charge you rent. So what? Just use free (as in freedom) software instead. Adobe and Microsoft were never your friends, and if you feel bad about this recent development I don't know why you were using their software in the first place. They were always looking for a way to do this to you, all that's changed is that they've figured out how.

TeMPOraL 12y ago
> They were always looking for a way to do this to you, all that's changed is that they've figured out how. And that's why things start to suck. What they way "always looking to do" to us is bad, but we had a period of happiness when they couldn't effectively implement their vision.
anon1385 12y ago
>I don't know why you were using their software in the first place Who says I'm concerned about myself here? Maybe I'm concerned about other people, especially those with less technical understanding who don't fully appreciate what it means for all their files to be locked away on a cloud server. >They were always looking for a way to do this to you So we can't complain when bad people do bad things now? Also, I was replying to a post that was celebrating this as the future of all software (and democracy and human knowledge in general it seemed).
JohnBooty 12y ago
> Just use free (as in freedom) software instead. If the last several decades have shown us anything, it's that the free software movement is excellent at creating some kinds of software (operating systems, development tolls, severs) and generally pretty bad at many other kinds of software (games, content creation software, etc).
- tree_of_item 12y ago
  The reason for this is that those kinds of software require lots of money to pay developers to work on them full time, because they aren't straightforward applications of the sort of thing you'd get in an engineering/computer science education. Recent years have suggested that "software as a service" is the only way to get this money due to rampant piracy. If the free software community doesn't like this state of affairs, they need to step up their game.
  - swills 12y ago
    Wait, which of those two (kernels/compilers/etc. or games/content/etc) are you suggesting have developers who work for free?
    - tree_of_item 12y ago
      Free (as in freedom) software developers often write software that serves some purpose for themselves. That is, there are any number of people writing GPL software for...software development and similar things. Consider the grandparent post again: > If the last several decades have shown us anything, it's that the free software movement is excellent at creating some kinds of software (operating systems, development tolls, severs) and generally pretty bad at many other kinds of software (games, content creation software, etc). This seems to suggest that, if the last several decades have shown us anything, free (as in freedom) software developers are more likely to be willing to write software used for software development, and not very likely to write high quality games or content creation software like Photoshop. It's well known that those in the free software community are often not paid very well, if at all. Consider the problems OpenSSL has had getting funding, despite millions of people all over the world using it every day. The people who _are_ writing Photoshop are very much in it for the money, and are taking every step they can to ensure a steady income stream. Look at how Adobe is now trying to rent people Photoshop instead of giving them their own copy.
  - Closie 12y ago
    Completely agree. Although the open source movement has plenty of great engineers and is great at solving complex software problems, it doesn't tend to have everything else that great software companies have. UI designers, customer researchers, graphics artists, strategy teams (to set an overall vision) e.t.c. tend to be under-represented compared to other software companies. I also think that open source software tends to be less innovative, as 'design by committee' isn't something that is followed inside for-profit companies with closed software.
e12e 12y ago
> Why do you feel entitled to use proprietary software with no restrictions? Because without laws regulating the sale of products to private citizens, we'd have chaos? So we need some protections to ensure the rights of users? Like the rights to re-sell used software (or media) etc. Now, that said, without such reasonable rules in place, levelling the playing field, it's hard to fault companies for trying to give as little and charge as much as they can get away with. If you buy a hammer, you have a lot of reasonable consumer protection. If you buy a laptop many of the same rules apply -- why shouldn't you have similar protections regarding software? A hammer isn't going to cease working when the company that sold it goes out of business (or is bought up, or refocuses on a different market) -- why should your office suite? I'm not saying one should be guaranteed upgrades in perpetuity -- but the ability to install the same software on a reasonably similar configuration should be a no-brainer, really. Or be able to run it under an emulator. But again, these things really needs to be legislated as consumer protection, so some company can't get away with not providing some of these freedoms.
ksk 12y ago
Speaking out against something you don't like or think will have a bad effect on something you hold dear IS NOTHING LIKE being entitled.

TeMPOraL 12y ago

> They were always looking for a way to do this to you, all that's changed is that they've figured out how. And that's why things start to suck. What they way "always looking to do" to us is bad, but we had a period of happiness when they couldn't effectively implement their vision.

anon1385 12y ago

>I don't know why you were using their software in the first place Who says I'm concerned about myself here? Maybe I'm concerned about other people, especially those with less technical understanding who don't fully appreciate what it means for all their files to be locked away on a cloud server. >They were always looking for a way to do this to you So we can't complain when bad people do bad things now? Also, I was replying to a post that was celebrating this as the future of all software (and democracy and human knowledge in general it seemed).

JohnBooty 12y ago

> Just use free (as in freedom) software instead. If the last several decades have shown us anything, it's that the free software movement is excellent at creating some kinds of software (operating systems, development tolls, severs) and generally pretty bad at many other kinds of software (games, content creation software, etc).

tree_of_item 12y ago
The reason for this is that those kinds of software require lots of money to pay developers to work on them full time, because they aren't straightforward applications of the sort of thing you'd get in an engineering/computer science education. Recent years have suggested that "software as a service" is the only way to get this money due to rampant piracy. If the free software community doesn't like this state of affairs, they need to step up their game.
- swills 12y ago
  Wait, which of those two (kernels/compilers/etc. or games/content/etc) are you suggesting have developers who work for free?
  - tree_of_item 12y ago
    Free (as in freedom) software developers often write software that serves some purpose for themselves. That is, there are any number of people writing GPL software for...software development and similar things. Consider the grandparent post again: > If the last several decades have shown us anything, it's that the free software movement is excellent at creating some kinds of software (operating systems, development tolls, severs) and generally pretty bad at many other kinds of software (games, content creation software, etc). This seems to suggest that, if the last several decades have shown us anything, free (as in freedom) software developers are more likely to be willing to write software used for software development, and not very likely to write high quality games or content creation software like Photoshop. It's well known that those in the free software community are often not paid very well, if at all. Consider the problems OpenSSL has had getting funding, despite millions of people all over the world using it every day. The people who _are_ writing Photoshop are very much in it for the money, and are taking every step they can to ensure a steady income stream. Look at how Adobe is now trying to rent people Photoshop instead of giving them their own copy.
- Closie 12y ago
  Completely agree. Although the open source movement has plenty of great engineers and is great at solving complex software problems, it doesn't tend to have everything else that great software companies have. UI designers, customer researchers, graphics artists, strategy teams (to set an overall vision) e.t.c. tend to be under-represented compared to other software companies. I also think that open source software tends to be less innovative, as 'design by committee' isn't something that is followed inside for-profit companies with closed software.

e12e 12y ago

> Why do you feel entitled to use proprietary software with no restrictions? Because without laws regulating the sale of products to private citizens, we'd have chaos? So we need some protections to ensure the rights of users? Like the rights to re-sell used software (or media) etc. Now, that said, without such reasonable rules in place, levelling the playing field, it's hard to fault companies for trying to give as little and charge as much as they can get away with. If you buy a hammer, you have a lot of reasonable consumer protection. If you buy a laptop many of the same rules apply -- why shouldn't you have similar protections regarding software? A hammer isn't going to cease working when the company that sold it goes out of business (or is bought up, or refocuses on a different market) -- why should your office suite? I'm not saying one should be guaranteed upgrades in perpetuity -- but the ability to install the same software on a reasonably similar configuration should be a no-brainer, really. Or be able to run it under an emulator. But again, these things really needs to be legislated as consumer protection, so some company can't get away with not providing some of these freedoms.

ksk 12y ago

Speaking out against something you don't like or think will have a bad effect on something you hold dear IS NOTHING LIKE being entitled.