On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 01:51 +0200, Rubén Rodríguez Pérez wrote:
> > I would think that would say some people who were enslaved as were
> > blacks in the 1800's. Would they say that now?
>
> There are still slaves nowadays.
This is true.
> Tell a deeply underpaid hand worker
> in a underdeveloped
But now I can also see the other side that having only these ATI drivers is
also not giving me much Liberty or many free choices to choose from, that I
see, but at least we get them for free, that I think is still a good point
and YES of course I wish they were open-source which I personally
Well there are two different points to software when it comes to Freedom.
1. Free Software
2. Open Source
Free software can be proprietary or open source. Perfect example as I've been
talking about all along, the ATI drivers are proprietary, but they are free,
they do not cost us money, ther
I agree with the points made by Luis above. It all boils down to whats more
important to you. What do you value most; the relatively minor "benefits" of
using proprietary software; or the principle of software freedom for all?
Trisquel is for those people who have chosen the latter.
There's
2010/5/1
> ATI and Nvidia drivers do not cost consumers any money to use them, so
> someone please explain why these are bad?
>
That's not bad, it's great. But Trisquel follows FSF's definition of free
software which is not about price but freedom. You are free to decide which
is more important.
Dasfox.
Think of it this way. Would you buy a car which does not let you use the
roads you want, open it for reparation or modification, sell it or sell it
modified? Would you think this for of commerce should be legal?
If the car would be given a way, would it make a difference? Should they
have
> Let me ask you this, are you saying that all software should be open
> source and free?
All software should be free as in freedom. That doesn't require it to
be free as in free beer.
> What is wrong with a coder developing their own software and keeping
> it proprietary if they want to? After all it is really their software
> not ours?
It's wrong because if they do then it is *their* software, not yours.
You lack the freedom to use it the way you like, only the developer way
> Therefore, ATI and Nvidia drivers are bad because they are not open
> source.
Free software != Open Source:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html
Nobody is forcing you to use Trisquel. Trisquel follows the design of a real
GNU operating system.
I suggest you read a few articles on gnu.org to get a bit more familiar with
the philosophy, which would give an answer to your questions.
- Original message -
> ATI and Nvidia drivers do
I believe that the most significant difference between Trisquel and a
regular distro is that Trisquel is free as in freedom (source code is
available for all parts of the os under a open source licence).
If you want a proprietary thing in Trisquel you can find a way to install it
or even better try
ATI and Nvidia drivers do not cost consumers any money to use them, so
someone please explain why these are bad?
What is wrong with a coder developing their own software and keeping it
proprietary if they want to? After all it is really their software not ours?
No one here using GNU/Linux o
12 matches
Mail list logo
