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 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
