Free Software Foundation trashes Windows 7
There's nothing like trashing the competition.
_270x390.png)
The Free Software Foundation is using the launch of Windows 7 to try to convince businesses to dump Windows in favor of an open-source operating system.
(Credit: Free Software Foundation)And that's exactly what the Free Software Foundation plans to do on Wednesday, staging a demonstration in Boston where it will encourage businesses to throw away Microsoft Windows in favor of free alternatives.
In addition to the public display, the foundation is sending letters to the CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, warning that Windows is a threat to their businesses' privacy, security, and freedom.
Although the demonstration and letter center around Microsoft's imminent release of Windows 7, Free Software Foundation Executive Director Peter Brown says the protest has to do with Microsoft's approach in general and not with the specifics of Windows 7.
"Any time Microsoft tries to push them to a new version, it's a good time to make that case," Brown said in a telephone interview on Tuesday.
With Windows 7 getting fairly positive reviews, Brown said he knows it could be tougher to garner public support than was the case with the oft-criticized Vista.
"There's kind of this attitude of 'Well, it's better than Vista,'" Brown said, "so we are kind of working against the grain."
But, he said, the stakes are high--and it's about more than just which operating system gains market share. Brown points to Amazon.com's recent deletion of e-books from the Kindle as an example of the kinds of action that could become commonplace if the world becomes more filled with digital rights management technologies.
"That's the kind of power that proprietary software gives to these corporations," he said. "When we give that power, sooner or later somebody comes knocking, whether it is the government or the corporations themselves. Free software is kind of the answer to that."
Although the letter focuses on Microsoft, he said the group is also concerned with other products, including the new Snow Leopard operating system from Apple, which goes on sale on Friday.
"It's not just Microsoft," Brown said. "It's a problem generally for society that we should accept proprietary software when there is an alternative."
During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft. E-mail Ina. 
Now get back into the prison of your mind.
Or failing that, have a politician steal it from whoever earned it.
"Free" can mean two things:
- without cost, as in "free beer"
- without constraint, as in "free speech"
The Free Software Foundation is not concerned with the cost of software. It's about the *freedom*. Got that?
Before you're run off this comment thread, :-) I think people conveniently forget that there's a LOT more to software than just choosing free or non-free software. We forget that there are -substantial- training and support costs involved, and unless you can get a decent deal on training everyone in an organization, the conversion costs from Windows to something else could be quite steep, to say the least.
Now, where's the freedom to modify Windows so it doesn't cripple your HD films just because you haven't got end-to-end encryption, or did they remove that limitation?
Seaspray, you're in a glass house. Put down the stones.
"free software" is as free as a puppy is free.
Any business that takes up this so-called "free" software , ends up spending a fortune on , training, support and ancillary costs. There is no free lunch. You pay for it one way or another.
It's bad enough we have a communist in the White House, who is busy squandering a massive $787 Billion PORKULUS "stimulus" money, including billions of dollars in gove-aways to his vote rigging pals at ACORN, we gotta take this crap from these clowns too?
Hey, Mr Brown, this is a free country. You wanna use open source garbage, go right ahead and use it, but then get the heck out the door when i decide to use Windows.
Enterprise ready is a meaningless term. Better to say 'nuthouse ready.'
Judging from its half-assed economic performance, corporate America could get by on the odd abacus and carrier pigeon.
Linux, your constraint is to use any software that runs on that OS, and that software intern must conform to MS rules on how it access's and uses the OS.
There is little difference in the MS world your typically pay up front, in the Linux world you pay on the back end.
Linux software must conform to Linux rules on how it uses and access's the OS. zzzz
The tool as a name, and it's krushyou.
"Plus Linux for the enterprise is not free nor is the support"
What are you talking about? It's free both as in free speech and free as in free beer. You can download it for free -- nobody's forcing you to pay anything -- and you're free to do whatever the f you want with it. As for support, well that's why it's called the "Free Software Foundation" and not the "Gratis Support Foundation."
Wrong, with MS you pay up front, in the middle and on the back end.
Unless there are regulation issues, paid support is never necessary with Linux.
Odd we pay redhat and oracle a ton for our Linux environment. Actually it was only a few weeks ago, that the 5 years study was completed, and it was determined the ROI on the Linux experiment for our oracle environment was a fail. Our MS Oracle site came in about 17% less over the 5 years. Free is not free specifically when it comes to linux.
I guess we're all just that stupid.
Anyway, at work I've actually used this a few times. Nobody buying a certain product, raise the price a couple percent. Worst case scenario you sell the same amount, none. Typically what happens though is sales pick up a little bit. Regardless of if a price change is up or down. I dunno.
I even know of a school in the third world that was using Open Office and nearly went bust when their finance officer decided it was a good idea to upgrade all the PCs with MS Office.
Not sure what kind of power MS has on people, but people pay big bucks for something that they can have for free. You have to hand it to Microsoft for making people buy their expensive bloated software.
However, I do think that people are wising up to Google Docs, Open Office and better value services and packages.
Whenever I hear someone say "we are a Microsoft shop" meaning they use Microsoft for everything, tehn I can't help but hear, "we have more money than common sense".
I agree standard office tools need not cost and you don't have to pay for an os. sadly as you said users are ignorant and Linux is new different and less user friendly. I wish open source luck but only cause they need it badly.
ps. free beer isn't that what the Egyptians gave their slaves?
We are a mixed shop but, we don't have the support to put Open Office in front of users. Our organization uses features in MS Office not supported in Open Office. And that's on top of the simple fact, Linux (we've evaluated several different flavors) isn't easily upgraded for basic things. You can't have a user upgrade their Flash plug-in with out a 45 minute tutorial. Once that's worked out, we can talk about Open Source on the desktop. Then again, when push comes to shove, the lawyers like to have the ability to sue someone if something goes wrong. Hence, anything with high security in our organization ends up proprietary.
You sure as hell don't know **** about Linux. Tutorial to upgrade flash? Here's my tutorial. Click on the update notification when it appears, just like with Windows update. See there's a flash update. Click on Update now. Restart FireFox. Fini.
Seriously, this guy's an absolute lie-factory.
The users should not care nor have privileges for updating Flash. That's what should be done by the network admin, centralised, invisible for the users. If they have to do it, you're doing it wrong.
Software can and probably should cost less but it cant ever be free! If we can get free software then why not free mobile phones, free cars, free hi-fi systems etc ! Why is software different from other commodities? Just because you don't 'sweat' to write it?
Duh! How about an "free Executive Jet" like the one that CITI Bank was prevented from purchasing by the Obama Administration. Better yet, Commander_Spock and Crew would prefer to ride the "Concorde" for free.
There are countless programmers getting paid to write free software.
Why don't Mr. Brown complain against Google too, since they plan on using Linux to their own advantage and have an end to end solution wrapped in both hardware and Google branded services called Chrome OS. Where is the competition against that when the operating system is the web browser, there will be no Firefox to install, no Opera install. How will Ubuntu and other Linux distributions compete when they start getting squeezed out of the market? What about OpenOffice? What will they do when Google starts pushing Google Docs? What about Ximian Evolution and ZOHO when Google starts pushing Google Apps Premier and Gmail?
If I were Mr. Brown, I would be glad there is a Windows 7 coming.
See what you people don't understand is that he's no talking about Free as in Money he's talking about your Freedom to privacy and your Freedom in general. Like he stated in the article what makes you think that these companies wont one day pull the plug on you. It has happened to a few people already, running vista. Some folks have lost music collections that they paid for, some have also lost files because their systems have locked them out. So the one question I have; What will all you people say when the government decides that they should enable a filter software on your PCs? Guess what you won't be able to do Jack **** about it if your running a windows or Apple system due to DRM. If they can control your PCs from remote then kiss your, music, videos and any personal files goodbye and that is what he's talking about not money. They love money just like everyone else does.
What you people need to remember is that just because you've been conditioned to follow a certain set of rules does not mean you can't break them or deviated from them. Value your FREEDOM because in the end it is all we have, money comes and goes. Once your freedom is taken its very hard to get it back.
loose != lose. -10 IQ points, reya276.
no vs not. -10 IQ points, reya276.
The rest of your post does not make sense either. Seems like it is just some mindless ramble. Now, I don't agree with Mr.Dee, but wow, you better keep that tin foil hat ready.
MS was threatened to be sued over not putting DRM in their software. With Linux, the user is able to be sued or the organization that is distributing the software. I agree the DMCA was one of the biggest hits on our freedom (with the Patriot Act) in the past 100 years but, when push comes to shove, someone's going to get sued. Will it be you?
-5000 smugness points and no biscuit Sausage. While you're at it, learn to adress points instead of just making vague generalised attacks. I too can declare that your comment is like reading the degenerate witterings of a Kafkaesque madman. It doesn't make it true.
Ian. Show me one, just one, example (oh, and nice tactic by the way, you read like King of the jobsworths "it's not my decision but..."), exactly one example of someone getting sued for the reason you state. Find _one_ example of someone getting sued for playing HD content without all the garbage MS has put into Vista. If you can't find this example, kindly get bent, it's like reading the documents on Iraq's WMDs with the constant insistence that what's being said is true with ZERO proof.
It is just like little kids refusing to try other foods.
"you do not need to have a "special" configuration that separates you from the other human beings you're trying to interact with for your every day tasks."
Actually, I do need a "special" configuration because of my physical disability. You see, I'm unable to utilize my arms and/or hands, which means I must rely upon speech-recognition software to command and control my system. Since no flavor of Linux provides a viable speech-recognition option, I am forced to utilize the Windows OS for my everyday tasks!
Next time you think someone doesn't need a special configuration, please stop and think before you write and/or open your mouth!
/jp/
Now, I assume some idiot will call me a "MS slave." Save your breath. I actually use a Mac, but I recognize that business is business, and code doesn't magically come from thin air. Businesses need standards for things to work, and all the crazy ranting about MS and Intel being a substandard duopoly doesn't change the fact that they got the job done, when IBM, Sun, Apple, AMD, and many others failed in their various attempts to crack the behemoth. They made a more versatile, imperfect, and widely adopted product. Sucks, but that's the reality.
Freedom is not just about being able to do physical things; Digital freedom is just as important since we are moving more and more towards a digital world. However is good to hear that you are at least giving Linux a shot.
Please if you are going to make a pro-movement for Freedom, do not make the others who share your view come across as uneducated.
I am in no means implying that you have to be perfect. Heck, it's the internet. However, once you begin trying to convince people that your ideas might be the correct ideas, it becomes more prevalent to clean up.
The reason for this, basically, is that I like your ideas reya276. However, I distance myself from saying that because I find it hard to believe that you actually share those ideas and understandings with me. Instead, to me, it seems as if you are just recycling someone's ideas and calling them your own.
Who knows? I am probably wrong. I do not really care. However, I do enjoy the flames that come after a post like this. :)
Have a great day!
Oh yes it does.
Biggest fanatics on the internet are the open source crazies and the Applebot nasties.
@ reya276 :" It is about everyone's Freedom they are fighting for"
Huh?
What would you sheep know about freedom?
Explain to me how a bunch of long haired crazies, demonstrating to actually PREVENT Americans from carrying out their FREE choice to use Windows 7, constitutes "fighting for freedom"?
These idiots are fighting AGAINST everyone's freedom to chose what operating system to use. They fight against the public's right to use their own hard earned money, to buy what operating system they want.
How the heck is that "fighting for freedom"?
The open source crazies are the most ANTI-freedom people you could ever meet.
They are in effect, telling the public, "we know what you can do with your money, better than you do, and we are gonna dictate to you, how to use your money"
I say , Nuts to these vermin!
I having been just giving Linux a 'shot'... I have been using linux since kernel 1.2.3 and have also used FreeBSD. Fanaticism has been in the Linux community since almost the beginning. Freedom is great, I use opensource applications daily, but there should also be room for people to make a living. I want the Freedom to use what I consider the best tool for the job. And your analogy between digital freedom and Freedom in a country is an insult to any who have fought for their country... horrible analogy and it only proves my point of fanaticism.
Beyond that, most corporations write their own software or have it contracted out.
The part that is not "free" is being bound to Office, or priority media formats, or other things like that. That is both where you lose your freedoms and where your privacy can be sacrificed. And free alternatives like Google apps don't get you anything back in terms of that. Projects like OpenOffice and similar apps should be where this group focuses, as well as royalty/DRM free music and video codecs of high quality.
Leave Windows and Snow Leopard alone. Go after the true rippoffs out there like Office and iTunes.
try Sharepod
It is not free, it restricts and controls you.
Hint: upgrading from ex-pee to fista sp3 AKA w7 is in fact learning an all new OS interface. They have to relearn how to work the software anyway due to the drastic (cosmetic) changes, so why not learn how to use something that's ... well, better in every conceivable way (except gaming, of course - and no, not because DirectX is worth anything but because of the typical collusion B$ that M$ has played with game developers).
The only reason to go with fista sp3 AKA w7 is because you're a house slave who has never even seen the outdoors, therefore you have no idea what "freedom" is like. Maybe M$ is right to rule over you with the cruel whip of WGA, since you haven't got the brains to control your own computer anyway.
An open-source software is not equivalent to "free-of-charge software".
You can decide to charge no fee or requires payment.
I can understand the concept of free software. I can understand the separate concept of open source software. What I cannot comprehend is how anyone attempting to make a living producing software is going to have a chance of survival under the group's ideals.
What motivation does a software company have if their programs have no copyright protection? Why continue on? If a person wants to make their living from writing a popular program what hope do they have under the FSF plan?
I don't have a problem with the production of free/opensource software, and I do use some of it, but I also donate to those projects I use or buy the commercial version if it is available (i.e. AVG, Hamachi).
To me, the concept of 'Software Wants to be Free' reeks of a juvenile mentality and those incapable of establishing adult boundaries.
Yet companies such as RedHat or IBM make a very good living producing free software.
"To me, the concept of 'Software Wants to be Free' reeks of a juvenile mentality and those incapable of establishing adult boundaries."
Ok, "wants to be free" should be your clue. Software does not want to be $0. It wants to be free. Like the bird. Like free speech. Ever heard of free speech? Well there's plenty of reactionaries out there who will say the same thing you do, about free spech. That it's a hippie degenerate socialist idea. Is that what you believe?
Personally, I do not trust anything that the "free software foundation" has to say. They have their own agenda, and trashing Microsoft is just their way getting some free press.
This is the basic, common truth about the Open Source movement. You have a bunch of ideas, some good, some not so good and getting them to work together requires a lot of work. Give me a solid Open Source solution by one vendor which integrates nicely with a directory service, requires limited modification, has content management built in, does document control, has solid document compatibility, and can be put together and deployed with limited amounts of resources... it just doesn't exist. Open Source = bubble gum and scotch tape. The thing that Microsoft has going for it (much like IBM, Oracle, and Apple) is it owns end to end the solution. It does not require a bunch of man hours just getting things integrated and guess what? When the man hours come a CIO has a solid standard for professionals wth MCSE/MCPs who are educated and know how the systems integrate. Microsoft also has development tools which make creating modifying and adding capabilities to its software programatic and much easier to implement. If I could get a penny for the amount of times my customer decides to go the cheaper road because the software cost was so "high" compared to free only to find the cost to develop was significantly higher.
I certainly see nothing wrong with saving money but saying that the cost of the software is the biggest cost is really quite stupid. It's the man hours that cost the $$$.
Open Source = freedom to choose what you want and what works best for you. Not what Microsoft or anyone else says works best for you.
This is teh difference: 90% of the world's computer users already know how to use Windows, why on earth should they spend even more billions training for open source software again?
Sausagebiscuit "Open Source = freedom to choose what you want and what works best for you. Not what Microsoft or anyone else says works best for you."
Naaaaah
From what these demonstrators are saying, Open Source = Don't chose Microsoft
As far as these clowns are concerned, freedom of choise is fine..so far as you only choose open source.
Now that is not the kind of supposition I am gonna be taking kindly to. These people don't don't my job for me. They can't tell me what operating system I should buy. That's my business.
Holy freaking crap!
Did you just say MCSE's and MCP's are educated and understand computer systems?
LOLOLOLOL
Please stop you are killing me!!!!
The problem with single-vendor solutions is if any one part of it sucks it's so 'integrated' you can't just swap it out for something that actually does the job.
So why does he not suggest we trash the OS used on the Kindle (Linux)?
@ni-x-ar: actually that is part of the point. DRM is one of those freedom strippers every one ******* with windows and osx. It is probably not going anywhere and if it does something even more annoying will fill in. open source will find ways around it or neglect it's use entirely and Bill and Steve get rich cause they will find a simple way to work with it.
everyone wants their dollar bills from the riaa to the fsfp
Linux isn't loaded with DRM, but Windows is.
Linux is annoying? No phoning home, no popups everytime you push a button, no restrictions. Yeah, freedom is annoying and if pushing 3 buttons to have a complete install is too hard for well that is your fault.
Oh, and on average CEOs don't listen to IT. They dictate what they want based on some flashy presentations that don't tell half of the facts.
- by coolkev99 August 26, 2009 6:50 AM PDT
- Wow, what a waste. "Windows is a threat to their businesses' privacy, security, and freedom." Do they really care that much about fortune 500 companies, or thier own agenda? Seems they are as bad as MS. Just get the OS you like and does the job for you. If you are willing to pay for it who cares. These people have way too much time on thier hands.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 3 pages (169 Comments)