Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, David, Thresher
How is Apple not a cool jail? That's not trolling - that's telling it like it is.
Yup, he's exactly like that. Rabid off topic comment for the win there ronch. If *you* see him as a terrorist - that's just you.
How would you like to be the one in Steve's place and someone says something like what Stallman said? Is that a good thing to say? Is that a good mentality to have?
ronch wrote:Check this out.
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/f ... -gone/9707
I'm not an Apple fan, and I do use Linux on my laptop (Windows 7 on my desktop), but I think this guy's had it all wrong. Nobody is forcing you to buy Apple. There's a place for Apple and there's a place for free stuff such as Linux (and a place for Windows too!). Apple products are pricey, there's no arguing that, but they also work out of the box.
ronch wrote:Linux and other free software are, well, free, but you also have to live with the fact that there's a higher chance that they're buggy
ronch wrote:and are usually more suited for techy people.
ronch wrote:You could say that Linux/other free stuff work well, but the fact remains that they don't enjoy the same level of in-house testing and debugging that only a commercial organization can provide through proper, systematic internal funding and management. Remember, no Linux community member can possibly dedicate all his time to debugging Linux or free stuff. He has a day job, after all. Those working for Apple, however, do nothing but work on their products day after day.
ronch wrote:Both Apple and free software have their merits and drawbacks, but to publicly state that Apple is a cool jail is just trolling on this Stallman guy's part.
If you ask me, this guy's the computer world's equivalent of Bin Laden. He has his followers (who knows, some may even be ok to die for their cause), but he sure is an extremist. And statements like these from him or from others dedicated to their cause only serve to tarnish the free software community's image.
JBI wrote:Furthermore, Linux (and other Open Source software) has become quite ubiquitous in embedded and handheld devices. Millions of non-techy people use it every day, probably without realizing it.
shaq_mobile wrote:BTW Cheesy, I JUST watched Dead Alive (well I got halfway through it last night, have to finish it up today). Hands down the funniest zombie movie I've ever seen. Super butt puckering as well. So many moments where I'm not sure whether to laugh, cry, puke or close my eyes. Usually its a combination of the four.
derFunkenstein wrote:Uhm...that's exactly what Stallman was doing. Using Jobs' death to promote his own platform. It's tacky and his comments were probably better off ignored rather than repeated.
Scrotos wrote:shaq_mobile wrote:BTW Cheesy, I JUST watched Dead Alive (well I got halfway through it last night, have to finish it up today). Hands down the funniest zombie movie I've ever seen. Super butt puckering as well. So many moments where I'm not sure whether to laugh, cry, puke or close my eyes. Usually its a combination of the four.
Rich and creamy, just the way I like it!
/me retches
ronch wrote:I'm not an Apple fan, and I do use Linux on my laptop (Windows 7 on my desktop), but I think this guy's had it all wrong. Nobody is forcing you to buy Apple. There's a place for Apple and there's a place for free stuff such as Linux (and a place for Windows too!). Apple products are pricey, there's no arguing that, but they also work out of the box.
Linux and other free software are, well, free, but you also have to live with the fact that there's a higher chance that they're buggy and are usually more suited for techy people. You could say that Linux/other free stuff work well, but the fact remains that they don't enjoy the same level of in-house testing and debugging that only a commercial organization can provide through proper, systematic internal funding and management. Remember, no Linux community member can possibly dedicate all his time to debugging Linux or free stuff. He has a day job, after all. Those working for Apple, however, do nothing but work on their products day after day.
Both Apple and free software have their merits and drawbacks, but to publicly state that Apple is a cool jail is just trolling on this Stallman guy's part.
If you ask me, this guy's the computer world's equivalent of Bin Laden. He has his followers (who knows, some may even be ok to die for their cause), but he sure is an extremist. And statements like these from him or from others dedicated to their cause only serve to tarnish the free software community's image.
destroy.all.monsters wrote:That without the rdf - the hope is that the appeal of walled gardens will lessen. Steve's charisma and p.r. acumen was really a driving force of that.
ronch wrote:destroy.all.monsters:
Respect the dead. No matter what an a$$hole he/she was.
You know, in Korea, even if a person was your enemy, it's customary and common practice to still attend his wake and pay your respects to that person when he/she passes away. All the person's dishonorable acts are forgiven. Very honorable, I might add.
Flatland_Spider wrote:I don't think this thread ever had any hope of not getting on board.
Flatland_Spider wrote:Red Hat, Canonical, and Suse will sell you support licenses.
Flatland_Spider wrote:Most Linux, and free stuff, code comes from businesses who pay developers for their work.
Flatland_Spider wrote:They aren't any different then Apple, except they believe in open systems, free software, freedom of choice, and they aren't trying to cash in on a buzzword. Ok, so they may be totally different from Apple.
Flatland_Spider wrote:Stallman is correct.
Flatland_Spider wrote:Apple is throwback to when software was the fudge and cherry of the banana split and hardware was the ice cream and banana.
Flatland_Spider wrote:The core Apple belief is one of vendor lock in. This creates a very well manicured lawn, but it also limits you to Apple's tyrannical vision of the world.
Flatland_Spider wrote:But, he keeps the FOSS movement on course
Glorious wrote:Flatland_Spider wrote:Red Hat, Canonical, and Suse will sell you support licenses.
Which are obviously intended for business enterprise, not home users.
Flatland_Spider wrote:They aren't any different then Apple, except they believe in open systems, free software, freedom of choice, and they aren't trying to cash in on a buzzword. Ok, so they may be totally different from Apple.
Apple believes in making software/hardware that individual home users actually want to use, not promoting some social cause that is all-but-meaningless to the vast majority of people.
Incredibly, this has worked out rather well for them. Who knew!
Flatland_Spider wrote:Stallman is correct.
Stallman is a publicity-seeking zealot.
Flatland_Spider wrote:Apple is throwback to when software was the fudge and cherry of the banana split and hardware was the ice cream and banana.
I have no idea what that metaphor means, but if you think they're a "throwback" you obviously haven't been paying attention to the market. Apple's vision for the future is trending, not Stallman's.
Flatland_Spider wrote:The core Apple belief is one of vendor lock in. This creates a very well manicured lawn, but it also limits you to Apple's tyrannical vision of the world.
People seem to really like manicured lawns. There is something to be said for them. If that's what they want, who are we to say otherwise?
Flatland_Spider wrote:But, he keeps the FOSS movement on course
No, no he doesn't. People spouting Stallman's zealotry are one of the reasons linux advocacy is so counter-productive. People just want to use computing devices, they're simply not interested in enlisting in some esoteric social cause that is entirely irrelevant to them.
Flatland_Spider wrote:Canonical is very plain about catering to the home user. (http://www.canonical.com/consumer-services)
Flatland_Spider wrote:Glorious wrote:Flatland_Spider wrote:But, he keeps the FOSS movement on course
No, no he doesn't. People spouting Stallman's zealotry are one of the reasons linux advocacy is so counter-productive. People just want to use computing devices, they're simply not interested in enlisting in some esoteric social cause that is entirely irrelevant to them.
He does. The FOSS movement with, say, Miguel De Icaza in charge wouldn't be the FOSS movement we know now. It would be a crippled hybrid.
Flatland_Spider wrote:...
FOSS is more then the GPL and Richard M. Stallman. It's about open standards, open systems, and enriching the world by freeing information.
Dirge wrote:Ok so RMS is pretty staunch when it comes to his views on Free Software. But there is an article where Eric S Raymond goes to bat in defence of Stallman Over Steve Jobs. Apparently the media misquoted him http://www.muktware.com/news/2623
ESR wrote:RMS, who is quite like Jobs was in that he’s brutally honest when he’s not mythologizing himself for marketing reasons, has caught a lot of flak for his unsparing take on Jobs’s legacy. Certainly RMS's remarks were rude, intemperate, and ill-timed – so much so that one of his more prominent former supporters has called for forking the FSF as a result.
But, though it’s often been my job in the past to be a peacemaker after RMS has made the open-source community look bad in public, I can’t disagree with the actual substance of what RMS wrote, and I won’t pretend to.