Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Joe C

Proprietary software in Linux

Recommended Posts

Looks like the time has arrived, at least for Ubuntu

 

It was only a matter of time before the proprietary software started populating in the Ubuntu Software Center. This was something Mark Shuttleworth had been promising for quite some time. Not only proprietary software, but plenty of other purchasable items would arrive

http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/opensource/open-source-community-up-in-arms-over-proprietary-software-for-ubuntu/3998?tag=nl.e011&s_cid=e011

 

I guess open source is good until it gets large enough and finds out it can be more profitable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

don't really get your point joe.

 

propriety software has been used on most linux distro's for years IF the user wants, and most do, skype for instance is propriety software i use on my setup.

 

doesn't cost anything, there's loads of propriety software out there a linux user probably already installs now, like graphics drivers, etc.

 

the only difference now is that ubuntu are adding them to their repo's instead of you having to go find them elsewhere on the net, the user still has the choice to install them or not.

 

should make things safer for their users too, less chance of the software including malware, because it will all be tested before being included in their repo's.

 

so the os is still open source and it's up to the user want they want or don't want to install on it unlike

windows the choice is still the users and always will be.

 

the proreiety software isn't "in" linux but runs on it if the user so desires.

 

personally i don't see any problem and there's loads of benefits for the ubuntu users in my opinion.

 

:b33r:

Edited by terry1966

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you read my link?

I am referring to software like Quick Books that charge $$$ that you must purchase to use. No freebees software. The repo's will provide software that you have to purchase a license/key to use

Would you have any issues paying to use Nexflix on your linux box?

 

 

 

 

 

.

Edited by Joe C

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes i did read your link joe, and i still don't see your point, if the user wants netflix or quick books then i really don't see any problem.

 

so they have to pay for the software, linux games players already pay for most of their games software.

 

the os itself is still free and open source, it's the users choice what they want to run on it.

 

i can tell you ms will be really worried about this tho, think of all those business accounts that may soon disapper from their control. :mrgreen:

 

:b33r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's closed source software, it goes against the *nix mantra of "free and open"

Edited by Joe C

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nope actually it doesn't.

 

linux is still "free and open source", and there is absolutely nothing wrong with paying for software you want to install and use on it.

 

:b33r:

 

just look at all those android phones and tablets out there, android is "open source" and people buy software and content to run on it every second of every day. ;)

Edited by terry1966

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah, i don't really get what you're getting at joe. a software company offers a product that a consumer purchases. you don't seriously think this is new to linux, do you? the only new thing is that ubuntu will offer the repo's.

 

android is linux based and open source and offers proprietary software through it's service, google play....where's the complaining about that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't there some kind of rule for all *nix software (software...not the o.s.) to be open as per a GNU agreement?

Isn't Ubuntu is heading to use closed source software?

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Edited by Joe C

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the software isn't linux....linux is only the operating system. just because it runs on linux doesn't mean it has to be open source. just as software that runs on windows (closed-source) doesn't need to be closed-source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hasn't Nero been available as paid software for ages for Linux??

Not sure what the issue is, unless they start to charge for Ubuntu et al??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you read my link?

I am referring to software like Quick Books that charge $$$ that you must purchase to use. No freebees software. The repo's will provide software that you have to purchase a license/key to use

Would you have any issues paying to use Nexflix on your linux box?

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

Been using closed source software since I started using Linux back in 1995. Not sure what you think the big deal is :lol:

 

Later in the early 2000's I used software from called IBM Via Voice.

 

All 2D and 3D cad software was first available on Unix/Linux systems before it ever made it's way into Windows.

 

There are all kinds of software applications out there that are closed source.

 

Many open source software packages have a smart way of doing things, download and install for free, but pay for "support" in fact that has been RedHats way since it was first concieved. It is the way SuSE was from it's beginning also.

 

Yes Nigsy nero has been available for years if people are silly enough to pay for something that is inferior to K3B.

 

So Joe what is the issue? :P

Edited by Bruce

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't there some kind of rule for all *nix software (software...not the o.s.) to be open as per a GNU agreement?

Isn't Ubuntu is heading to use closed source software?

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

Not sure where you ever got such a silly idea.

 

The only software that has to be open which is software that uses previously open code.

 

If you write software to run on Linux and don't want the code to be open then you don't release the source.

 

Nvidia drivers are a perfect example of code that is not open.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to be honest joe, there's always been a lot of confusion surrounding exactly what people think "free open source" actually is, even the open source developers have differing ideas and why there are different types of open source licences.

so i can easily understand where your coming from, when you thought linux meant cost free or open source software only.

 

:b33r:

Edited by terry1966

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm not sure joe really thought that linux meant ONLY open source but rather that it goes against the spirit of what linux is about. joe can correct me if i'm wrong there...

 

in a sense, joe is right about that, but that really only applies to linux itself and other software that uses the GNU license format. proprietary software will always have it's place on any format, be it windows, mac, linux, bsd, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will claim to be an Open Source Advocate, That i am...

 

Open and closed sources tend to work well when it comes to sharing.

 

For example: Where did the Nouveau driver come from?

 

Well imagine this, how can a company like Nvidia produce an open driver for the linux platform and patch it too?

 

What devices that sport Tegra 2 and 3, In fact this open code will/ is merged into linux kernel 3.8

 

Personally the open driver is exceptional, it performs well.

 

Look at Id software, John Carmack has opened sourced most of his game engines under Gpl license.

 

HP, IBM, I can go on and on, These are people that see a benefit.

 

You have the Skype users and the Ekiga users, if you can get your friends to Voip, Or they just prefer Skype, Pray that MS released a better than nonfunctional open version of skype, or simply go ahead for the closed source version .

 

That mentioned, Shuttle wack job just wants to make money as well the software vendors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm not sure joe really thought that linux meant ONLY open source but rather that it goes against the spirit of what linux is about. joe can correct me if i'm wrong there...

 

in a sense, joe is right about that, but that really only applies to linux itself and other software that uses the GNU license format. proprietary software will always have it's place on any format, be it windows, mac, linux, bsd, etc.

 

that's more along the line I was thinking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...