Re: "Red Hat recommends Windows for consumers"
On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 07:27, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-11-07 at 11:45, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 11:01:58AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > > As in "proprietary, closed-source apps"?
> > >
> > > Well, that depends on if you see them as a "problem", or something
> > > that you prefer not to use.
> > >
> > > I prefer not to use proprietary, closed-source apps, but, when
> > > necessary, will pay for them, and use them, even on Debian.
> >
> > Personally I haven't really made my mind up about prioprietry apps, and
> > whether RMS is right or not. However, the success of Linux is widely
> > attributed to the open-source development model, so I can't really see
> > the future of Linux throwing it away.
>
> I'm all for the open-source development model. However, we must
> respect that some companies want to keep their source closed, and
> still sell to the Linux market.
(snip)
Personally, I think the battle should be about open *standards*. I think
Open Source is good, but I quite happily use as my preferred browser, Opera
(which I'm pretty sure isn't Open Source), in preference to Konq or Galeon.
Just a matter of personal preference.
What I won't tolerate (when I have any say in the matter) is proprietary
standards whereby one company tries to establish a monopoly (and yes I do
mean Microsoft). Anybody sends me a Word doc is likely to be asked to send
it again in some open format. I don't care that Open Office can read it
(though I rather welcome the existence of OO - anything that helps to
undermine the Evil Empire can't be bad :)
Unfortunately I can't apply this at work.
cr
Reply to: