On Wed, 11 May 2005 10:10, Adam Moore wrote: > <snip> > > > It replaced my Windows. Our organization uses no non-libre software. > > Nor will we. We will not sacrifice our freedom for some hotsy-totsy > > technology. If it's not libre it's useless. > > Why is it useless? What about open source software makes you more > free than other software. Does other software not let you get your > work done?
To be completely honest, I don't really give a s%*# about either aspect. Provided software is not exorbitantly priced (value for money), and does not have draconian licensing terms (I can install/rte-install it on all my machines that I currently have, or may upgrade to in the future), is stable and reasonably easy to administer (which IMO rules out Windows), then I'll use it. I use Linux simply because of its stability and powerful administration tools. not simply because it is free (in either sense). For my uses, it is the most suitable. As an aside, I'll be upgrading one of my machines over the week-end. The old one will become a local file server and FTP/rsync server. It will initially run Linux, but will probably be changed to run one of the BSD systems, because for some of the usage I have in mind, BSD is more suitable than Linux. > > So you have no Macromedia Flash, Shockwave, Only the plugins. If I were running Windows, they would still not be on my box, since IMO they are way over-priced, and I don't really like the license terms. If I need a flash presentation, I have OO.o Impress.... > adobe acrobat, Reader only. I have no need for anything else, since I have OO.o (or Scribus) for creating PDF documents > or anything > else like that on your computer? I would think it would make for a > less enjoyable computing experience. What, having them on your machine would make for a less enjoyable experience? I guess worrying about the licenses and whether you could afford to pay for the next version /could/ detract.... I personally fail to understand the hoo-hah relating to Java. While it is not Open source, the licensing is one of the most liberal non-OSS ones around, it is free and freely available, the API is readily available and documented... It seems that certain elements in the FOSS movement are concerned that they are losing some of their clout and influence. From my POV, they are behaving like wannabe dictators. No matter how much OSS may owe them in respect of their contributions to where we are now, they do *not* have the right to dictate what technologies should or should not be used by Open source projects. Unfortunately, the most vocal of them (ESR in particular) are fast losing my sympathy. If the keep carrying on like rat-bag fringe loonies, they will end up becoming a joke, and lose most (if not all) of their credibility. -- Alex Fisher Co-Lead, CD-ROM Project OpenOffice.org Marketing Community Contact Australia/New Zealand http://distribution.openoffice.org/cdrom/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
