Should FLOSS code be ported to a proprietary environment? - Page 2

Extreme Coder · 05-18-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigBlueCat

We need gateway applications.

I started with Firefox in windows then Thunderbird. This got me interested in FOSS. Now I run Ubuntu at home.

Key introductory applications are a good thing.

I also agree that if it is free it is free.

But there should be a distinction between specific gateway apps and all other OSS apps. If we give them K3B, they wouldn't use Nero, same case with all other apps. So even if they turned their Windows PC to use only OSS software, they would say: "What's the difference? Same apps but a different OS which means a learning curve"

Extreme Coder

ButteBlues · 05-18-2007

It's not our job to coerce them into using Linux.

Extreme Coder · 05-18-2007

I didn't mean force, I meant more like a reason to make them try it, but whatever...

Extreme Coder

Jasper84 · 05-18-2007

@ButteBlues, @motin
I agree, the projects should focus on what they do, and having more people enjoy it is a good thing. Also, exploit attempts can be used to improve the software. I do think libre OS'es should have priority though.
Education of the general public is sort-of an seperate campaign, which the community can do. Like get-firefox marker probably helped firefox's popularity. (I am sure in the future, a get-Ubuntu (or perhaps another libre OS?) campaign will be done. Is it ready?)

elcasey · 05-21-2007

The free software movement is not, fundamentally, about coercing or forcing people to use GNU/Linux, it's about promoting free software. And free software that runs on a proprietary OS is still free.

I maintain the stance that the average end (l)user does not need to be running a UNIX-like operating system! UNIX was never designed to be an OS for people like that, and I don't believe it ever will be (if it can, cool).

Things like ReactOS (free software WindowsXP, in a nutshell) is what we need for those people. Amarok is apparently going to release a Win32 port at some point, and I say good on 'em!

It's not our job, and it's not certainly not our philosophy (by "our" I mean free software advocates) to evangelize a particular operating system, even when that OS is free software, like GNU/Linux...it should be our job to promote free software, wherever it runs. When people see the benefits of free software applications, why wouldn't they become curious about free OSs...they will.

This isn't about "look what I have, you can't have it because you're not smart or experienced enough to run GNU/Linux!" Does that sound very free to you?

cunawarit · 05-26-2007

Free is free. I should be able to use it any way I want.

05-18-2007	#23 (permalink)
Extreme Coder ^_^; Join Date: May 2007 Location: Cairo,Egypt Posts: 1,203	Re: Should FLOSS code be ported to a proprietary environment? I didn't mean force, I meant more like a reason to make them try it, but whatever... Extreme Coder

05-18-2007	#24 (permalink)
Jasper84 under construction Join Date: May 2007 Location: Utrecht, the Netherlands Posts: 593	Re: Should FLOSS code be ported to a proprietary environment? @ButteBlues, @motin I agree, the projects should focus on what they do, and having more people enjoy it is a good thing. Also, exploit attempts can be used to improve the software. I do think libre OS'es should have priority though. Education of the general public is sort-of an seperate campaign, which the community can do. Like get-firefox marker probably helped firefox's popularity. (I am sure in the future, a get-Ubuntu (or perhaps another libre OS?) campaign will be done. Is it ready?)

05-21-2007	#25 (permalink)
elcasey Interested participant Join Date: May 2007 Location: Florida Posts: 18	Re: Should FLOSS code be ported to a proprietary environment? The free software movement is not, fundamentally, about coercing or forcing people to use GNU/Linux, it's about promoting free software. And free software that runs on a proprietary OS is still free. I maintain the stance that the average end (l)user does not need to be running a UNIX-like operating system! UNIX was never designed to be an OS for people like that, and I don't believe it ever will be (if it can, cool). Things like ReactOS (free software WindowsXP, in a nutshell) is what we need for those people. Amarok is apparently going to release a Win32 port at some point, and I say good on 'em! It's not our job, and it's not certainly not our philosophy (by "our" I mean free software advocates) to evangelize a particular operating system, even when that OS is free software, like GNU/Linux...it should be our job to promote free software, wherever it runs. When people see the benefits of free software applications, why wouldn't they become curious about free OSs...they will. This isn't about "look what I have, you can't have it because you're not smart or experienced enough to run GNU/Linux!" Does that sound very free to you?

05-26-2007	#26 (permalink)
cunawarit Commentator Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 48	Re: Should FLOSS code be ported to a proprietary environment? Free is free. I should be able to use it any way I want.
cunawarit Commentator Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 48