Proprietary Text Editor: some free software humour
category: general [glöplog]
100% agree with Preacher and thanks for the sources.
This discussion's been had lots of times already I am sure and people probably have their own dogma that cannot be changed already. Just two minor comments.
Yes, it's best to care about your freedoms when you've already lost them, right? Not really... It's considerably harder to rise against the establishment than to actively defend against unwanted changes. When the thought police is already around you'll have as good odds at defending yourself as the book 1984 where the whole "thought police" thing is from demonstrates. We have organisations defending freedom of speech etc. right now even if our society doesn't have major speech issues because "the price of freedom is eternal vigilance" and "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing".
Regarding GIMP: Many people use GIMP today, myself included and get thing done with it. Seems to work for me. Maybe the UI sucks for you. Unless you're the official representative for all the software users in the world I wouldn't really recommend having any delusions about representing majority opinion either. If you're an usability professional you might have some constructive criticism to share with the devs, however....
Quote:
If the thought police comes some day, then we can continue this discussion. Until then, I fail to see any relevance.
Yes, it's best to care about your freedoms when you've already lost them, right? Not really... It's considerably harder to rise against the establishment than to actively defend against unwanted changes. When the thought police is already around you'll have as good odds at defending yourself as the book 1984 where the whole "thought police" thing is from demonstrates. We have organisations defending freedom of speech etc. right now even if our society doesn't have major speech issues because "the price of freedom is eternal vigilance" and "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing".
Regarding GIMP: Many people use GIMP today, myself included and get thing done with it. Seems to work for me. Maybe the UI sucks for you. Unless you're the official representative for all the software users in the world I wouldn't really recommend having any delusions about representing majority opinion either. If you're an usability professional you might have some constructive criticism to share with the devs, however....
I use GIMP all the time and have no problems with it. It works fine for what I want it for, and is available on Windows/Linux/OSX. I'm certain that Photoshop is superior software, but a bit overkill for a casual user. Not forgetting that it's expensive, but I'm sure most Photoshop users have stolen the software anyway.
GIMP - one of the best free image editors, and slowly getting better.
GIMP - one of the best free image editors, and slowly getting better.
I'll add that I think preacher does in my opinion have a fairly balanced view of things. He just happens to have a pragmatic view (in the short term) on things.
It's everyone's personal decision whether they value the free software ideals more than software quality/usability/comfort as has already been said. It's not like all proprietary software is good or all free software bad usability-wise. In principle, you're free to fix stuff if it's free software though and unable if it isn't. Of course not everyone will do that because they lack the interest to fix a tool they just happen to need to do other projects.
It's everyone's personal decision whether they value the free software ideals more than software quality/usability/comfort as has already been said. It's not like all proprietary software is good or all free software bad usability-wise. In principle, you're free to fix stuff if it's free software though and unable if it isn't. Of course not everyone will do that because they lack the interest to fix a tool they just happen to need to do other projects.
Quote:
I'll add that I think preacher does in my opinion have a fairly balanced view of things.
Look who's talking...
Quote:
Of course not everyone will do that because they lack the interest to fix a tool they just happen to need to do other projects.
Yes this is the point, why should I fix a tool designed to ease my life? It doesn't make any sense, and it's utmost ridiculous to expect the user to fix the software if the aforementioned software doesn't do what it is said to do or worse what it is supposed to do.
Quote:
Yes, it's best to care about your freedoms when you've already lost them, right? Not really... It's considerably harder to rise against the establishment than to actively defend against unwanted changes.
Sure, but in this case it's not a fascist regime (though the Finnish government is displaying worrying leanings towards it) that is stifling freedom of speech, but only a bunch of companies that make hardware and software. It's easy not to buy from those companies or use their software if their restrictions bother you, and if the restrictions get too tough, the legislature might have a thing or two to say about it (or at least one can hope). I personally oppose DVD region codes, for example, and therefore refuse to buy any content from any major movie publishers. On the other hand, Apple's somewhat boneheaded approach to DRM on the iPod doesn't really prevent me from enjoying music and software on it.
Btw, what DRM on the iPod? I can copy MP3s to it and it plays them. Where's the DRM?
Quote:
He just happens to have a pragmatic view (in the short term) on things.
Yes, I have a pragmatic view on most things. My pragmatic view on free software is that instead of waving flags and recommending people to stick with (possibly) inferior options for the sake of ideology only, it's instead better to spend that energy of making the (possibly) inferior options superior. If the Linux world was as awesome as some of their proponents claim, we'd all be using it.
If you build it, they will come.
Ever since Apple created iTunes+ or whatever the slightly-more-expensive without-DRM versions of songs on iTMS are called I think there's a lot less to complain about Apple regarding iPods. They certainly opened the floodgates for music stores that sell mp3s without DRM with that move and that move + what they said about it made it fairly obvious that Apple isn't the one who wishes to use DRM on the iTunes music store.
kb: You can't install applications on iPod Touch or iPhone it unless they're signed, and the firmware on (at least some) iPods is encrypted. That's why there's unfortunately no Rockbox for new iPod Nanos.
slux, I think Amazon were first and Apple had to follow. But yeah, since ITunes Plus has started I'm actually buying music there.
Considering the original topic of this thread: Everything that Preacher said. Although for me as a musician I can clearly say that I "prefer" Audacity over GIMP when it comes to choosing the most misconceived excuse for productivity software ever. :)
Considering the original topic of this thread: Everything that Preacher said. Although for me as a musician I can clearly say that I "prefer" Audacity over GIMP when it comes to choosing the most misconceived excuse for productivity software ever. :)
Preacher, ok, you're right on the applications thing - the encrypted firmware tho is akin to buying any other piece of proprietary soft- or hardware. You simply can't expect it'll do other things than those it was sold to you with.
I use the GNU compilers mainly for the reason that I can develop Windows & Linux & Mac and whatever platform ports of the software at the same time. It's not very easy to do multiplatform development with any of Microsoft's compilers. (and yes, I consider making software available for multiple platforms inherently a good thing).
Sadly, most of my development work is under strict NDA's or still under the process of selecting the proper licenses, so I cannot display my vpenis here at all ;)
Sadly, most of my development work is under strict NDA's or still under the process of selecting the proper licenses, so I cannot display my vpenis here at all ;)
Quote:
I use GIMP all the time and have no problems with it. It works fine for what I want it for, and is available on Windows/Linux/OSX. I'm certain that Photoshop is superior software, but a bit overkill for a casual user. Not forgetting that it's expensive, but I'm sure most Photoshop users have stolen the software anyway.
I love when people suggest that there's only black and white, only GIMP and Photoshop, and nothing in between. Also, Photoshop Elements is cheap as dirt and comes with many notebooks (ok, sony mostly). If it _must_ be free and must run on Linux I'd rather suggest Krita anyway.
Quote:
I can clearly say that I "prefer" Audacity over GIMP when it comes to choosing the most misconceived excuse for productivity software ever. :)
Audacity is simple and lacking, but to the point, with a straight forward user interface. If you just want to normalize some crap, or record something quickly from the mic it does the job. GIMP is a (potentially) much more ambitious project and thus falls from a much higher roof. ;)
There's also Paint.Net, Artweaver, Sumopaint, Cinepaint, Aviary... :)
Quote:
Although for me as a musician I can clearly say that I "prefer" Audacity over GIMP when it comes to choosing the most misconceived excuse for productivity software ever. :)
Now that you mention it, I cannot really decide whether GIMP or Audacity sucks more. Though GIMP clearly wins on the complexity side, and with that more convoluted suckage comes, too :)
At work I see Linux constantly used as an embedded kernel for various custom oilfield-related devices. In such a specialized situation (and limited production units) using embedded Window would be a ludicrous suggestion. (Licencing costs, inability to strip it down to only the necessary parts, etc...) Linux is the right choice for those devices.
Of course, that's just the kernel. No user interface, no sound, no 3d graphics. A desktop needs more than a kernel attached to a DB9 serial port intended for (simple) terminal-based setting adjustments. (Or data retrieval, whichever...)
On a Linux desktop you have the kernel. (Which I would argue is actually not too bad) Then the X server. (A bewildering layer of crust. Bewildering as in "Why is it still used?") Then there's that whole sound thing. (Arts? Jack? OSS? ALSA? Pulseaudio? Huh?) Finally there's the desktops such as Gnome/KDE/etc., which again I would argue are not that bad, but because they are stacked upon the X server (and that sound mess) they give the impression of being slightly poo-ish.
In summary, if the X server was replaced and the sound mess was cleared up (plus some missing driver support for things such as wireless chips, etc.) we'd finally start to see the real birth of Linux as a desktop OS. (The directory structure is also hyper-geeky, but that can be easily changed, as Gobo Linux proves.)
But that's just my opinion, and we all know what opinions are like...
Of course, that's just the kernel. No user interface, no sound, no 3d graphics. A desktop needs more than a kernel attached to a DB9 serial port intended for (simple) terminal-based setting adjustments. (Or data retrieval, whichever...)
On a Linux desktop you have the kernel. (Which I would argue is actually not too bad) Then the X server. (A bewildering layer of crust. Bewildering as in "Why is it still used?") Then there's that whole sound thing. (Arts? Jack? OSS? ALSA? Pulseaudio? Huh?) Finally there's the desktops such as Gnome/KDE/etc., which again I would argue are not that bad, but because they are stacked upon the X server (and that sound mess) they give the impression of being slightly poo-ish.
In summary, if the X server was replaced and the sound mess was cleared up (plus some missing driver support for things such as wireless chips, etc.) we'd finally start to see the real birth of Linux as a desktop OS. (The directory structure is also hyper-geeky, but that can be easily changed, as Gobo Linux proves.)
But that's just my opinion, and we all know what opinions are like...
Quote:
Just out of curiosity, in all your righteousness, how many times have you actually
1) scanned the source code of a free program to look for something (programming ideas, protocols, back doors, whatever)?
2) improved something you weren't happy with and contributed to the original sourcebase?
3) created a totally innovative piece of free software that has revolutionized the world?
Over the last 5 years or so:
1. At least 100 times
2. About 10 times for random programs and ~100 times for 1 program in particular.
3. I created 1 program that revolutionized a small aspect of a group project. Even when my program is only for maybe 20 people, I find it important to give them free software.
I am not an open source zealot but I do think having the source available makes something more valuable. If I put in the effort needed to use it, having control over it is great.
For instance, you can't open a picture of a bank note in Photoshop or PSP, and in fact they tried quite hard to make sure you can't*. With free software, such a restriction is impossible, because it is always easy to remove.
If you don't see the problem with vendor lock-in, feel free to use a Mac/Ipod/whatever. But I find them far too restrictive.
Oh and about gdb sucking: only if you use it directly, duh. Use it from within your development environment (e.g. Emacs).
* It has to do with Digimarc watermarks, see http://www.accessroot.com/arteam/forums/index.php?showtopic=8063 for more info (login required).
Gobo Linux's filesystem certainly looks interesting (although why do they want to capitalize everything? Have they never used a terminal/tab complete before?).
Preacher, what specifically don't you like about GDB? Aren't you stuck with that on Mac aswell?
Preacher, what specifically don't you like about GDB? Aren't you stuck with that on Mac aswell?
Or rather, what features do you miss from GDB?
I'd say check out the Visual Studio 2005/2008 debugger and come back when you find something worth comparing
Quote:
I love when people suggest that there's only black and white, only GIMP and Photoshop, and nothing in between. Also, Photoshop Elements is cheap as dirt and comes with many notebooks (ok, sony mostly). If it _must_ be free and must run on Linux I'd rather suggest Krita anyway.
Heh, sorry if it sounded that way but I am aware of some of the alternatives. Photoshop Elements for example, probably good for improving photos but it must lack other important features that make a complete image editor - also I notice that they sell the Mac & Windows version separately, meaning I'd have to buy it twice if I wanted to use it on my laptop and PC (the Mac version is a major release behind the Windows version).
As for Krita, I tried that a few months ago. Sure it looks better than GIMP, but after you use it for a few minutes you realise that it still has a long way to go before it can replace GIMP. Maybe in a year or two..
bartman, sorry I should have been clearer. I meant GDB used through Eclipse or some other IDE.
What people seem to forget here is that they have their history and experience of one way of doing things. Boo hoo, Gimp doesn't work like Photoshop, Makefiles are sooo difficult when compared to Visual Studio projects etc. etc. Switching directly from MS-DOS to Linux I had next to none problems with the text-based interface and now with the Mac laptop I'm still a happy terminal user for many things that are just more effective that way.
And concerning gdb: it's really ancient stuff you're comparing to. Like many people have already pointed out there are human-usable frontends and editor-based interfaces. Edlin too is a pretty bad document processor when compared to LyX.
Overall I'd say there's been quite a big change in the attitudes since the 90s, probably due to the age of the sceners. Previously it was ok to hack and experiment with obscure tools - people were more willing to learn - but now people demand professional tools and out-of-the box functionality. More mainstream, more professionally-oriented. While I personally am rather disappointed by the loss of the alternative attitude I also acknowledge that it's probably just a natural unavoidable development.
And concerning gdb: it's really ancient stuff you're comparing to. Like many people have already pointed out there are human-usable frontends and editor-based interfaces. Edlin too is a pretty bad document processor when compared to LyX.
Overall I'd say there's been quite a big change in the attitudes since the 90s, probably due to the age of the sceners. Previously it was ok to hack and experiment with obscure tools - people were more willing to learn - but now people demand professional tools and out-of-the box functionality. More mainstream, more professionally-oriented. While I personally am rather disappointed by the loss of the alternative attitude I also acknowledge that it's probably just a natural unavoidable development.
I never thought I'd do this but: what Marq said. :)