thelinuxlink.net

I have come to a conclusion that I will not no longer say that Linux is free. People seem to confuse free with cheap, I was on one board where a blogger bragged about how he has free Microsoft software. I let the blogger know of the misunderstanding. From now on I will refer to linux and it's counter parts as Free(dom) software instead, which seems to better describe the open source community. What do you think?

Freedom Fries, Freedom Vanilla, Freedom Maid, Freedom Toast and Freedom Software.

When dealing with other IT people I say opensource and they know exactly what I'm talking about.

I like to use the phrase "Linux" and people have no idea what I'm talking about. Becuase mostly no'one cares. They don't care about open source, freedom, or Linux. They care about facebook, mp3 downloads, netflix and e-mail, and office.

eddie wrote:From now on I will refer to linux and it's counter parts as Free(dom) software instead, which seems to better describe the open source community. What do you think?

Why go only half way? If you feel that way, and you're going to call it "freedom" software, why would you still use the term "open source" community? The term "Open Source" was invented as a marketing term to promote "free software" to businesses without ever talking about "freedom". Eric Raymond has been very honest and blunt about this fact.

yea, thats a good point.

you know, i heard this story once. this friend of a friend put a washer and dryer out in front of his house with "FREE" on them. they sat there for a month. so, he put $25 on each, and somebody stole them!

there is something to the perceived value of something that is free. whether warranted or not.

NYbill wrote:yea, thats a good point.

you know, i heard this story once. this friend of a friend put a washer and dryer out in front of his house with "FREE" on them. they sat there for a month. so, he put $25 on each, and somebody stole them!

there is something to the perceived value of something that is free. whether warranted or not.

I couldn't agree more, Linux should remain free but there is not any reason that it can't be sold.

MattKingUSA wrote:

NYbill wrote:yea, thats a good point.

you know, i heard this story once. this friend of a friend put a washer and dryer out in front of his house with "FREE" on them. they sat there for a month. so, he put $25 on each, and somebody stole them!

there is something to the perceived value of something that is free. whether warranted or not.

I couldn't agree more, Linux should remain free but there is not any reason that it can't be sold.

i was thinking more along the lines of eddies first post. when you tell someone something is free they are suspicious that there is something wrong with it. i think linux is the first time in my life where the old saying "if it sounds too good to be true it probably is" didn't apply.

however, i don't have a problem with people charging for linux. redhat and SuSe provide a service. and i've bought software for linux in the past. ok, it was just a couple of games. but, it felt good to support companies that where supporting linux.

Well, yeah, I didn't get your point. But Mandriva comes with all kinds of non-free junk. And it's useless if you are all Linux. But if you are moving from windows it's really good to have some of the codecs. But yeah 100% is where it's at.

Then there is Xandros, probably the most expensive Linux desktop at $149.

http://www.xandros.com/products/ip_assurance_yes.html

LinuxMint-4 wrote:Then there is Xandros, probably the most expensive Linux desktop at $149.

http://www.xandros.com/products/ip_assurance_yes.html

Do they not have a free version too?