login info join!
Forums > Off-Topic Discussion > the four essential software freedoms Search   Reply
12last
Retoucher
Joann Empson
Posts: 430
Walnut Creek, California, US


A nice, short explanation of users' four essential software freedoms, spoken by the man who created the GNU General Public License*:

https://imageshack.us/scaled/landing/818/screenshot1kq.png


* Programs released under the GNU GPL include WordPress, FileZilla, LibreOffice, Audacity, VLC, Pidgin, Blender, GIMP, Krita, and of course, the GNU/Linux operating system, which is where the license gets its name.
Feb 08 13 03:10 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Peter Claver
Posts: 26,657
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


I don't disagree with any of it inasmuch as I like it when I have software freedom.. but I don't require it.

I've release software as free software and I use free software.. but I also release non-free software and use non-free software.  Sometimes the free software is better than anything else out there for my purposes (eg. the GNU compiler, Vim, Linux in certain situations, Apache web servers, ssh servers, etc) and other times the non-free software is better for my purposes (eg. Maya, my phone and its installed software, iTunes). 

It's good to have variety.
Feb 08 13 03:16 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Joann Empson
Posts: 430
Walnut Creek, California, US


It's good to have a variety of fully free software. I prefer to have no proprietary software at all on any of my computers, including my phone.

On my phone, I use a fully free fork of Android called Replicant. Because there are currently no free drivers available for my phone's wireless device, I just live without it. My phone still works as a phone, which is all I really have it for. I can transfer data and apps to and from it through a USB cable.

On my computers I use only fully-free GNU/Linux distros -- distros from which all the nasty, proprietary bits have been meticulously cleaned out.

I avoid GNU/Linux distros like Ubuntu, which make compromises and include nonfree binary bits. Ubuntu is nearly as bad as Mac OS X and Windows.
Feb 08 13 03:29 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Peter Claver
Posts: 26,657
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


Joann Empson wrote:
It's good to have a variety of fully free software. I prefer to have no proprietary software at all on any of my computers, including my phone.

On my phone, I use a fully free fork of Android called Replicant. Because there are currently no free drivers available for my phone's wireless device, I just live without it. My phone still works as a phone, which is all I really have it for. I can transfer data and apps to and from it through a USB cable.

On my computers I use only fully-free GNU/Linux distros -- distros from which all the nasty, proprietary bits have been meticulously cleaned out.

I avoid GNU/Linux distros like Ubuntu, which make compromises and include nonfree binary bits. Ubuntu is nearly as bad as Mac OS X and Windows.

It's impossible for me to live and work with only free software.  Either what I need to do doesn't exist (and I don't want to/can't write it my self) or it exists and the quality or functionality isn't good enough.  I would stab my eyes out if I had to use Linux at home or on the road every day.  I'm glad it exists and I have it installed on almost a thousand machines at work.. but it's just not useful for what I want to do in my spare time.

Feb 08 13 03:42 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Joann Empson
Posts: 430
Walnut Creek, California, US


Peter Claver wrote:
I would stab my eyes out if I had to use Linux (sic) at home or on the road every day.

The GNU/Linux distros released in the past couple of years have been ridiculously user-friendly, much more so than Windows or Mac OS X.

* For video editing, I use Kdenlive.

* For 3D graphics and animation, I use Blender.

* For raster graphics editing, I use the GNU Image Manipulation Program.

* For vector graphics editing, I use Inkscape.

* For text editing, I use vim and emacs.

* For professional typesetting, I use LaTeX.

* For word processing/spreadsheets/presentations, I use LibreOffice.

Feb 08 13 04:03 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
R A V E N D R I V E
Posts: 15,867
New York, New York, US


Joann Empson wrote:
* For word processing/spreadsheets/presentations, I use LibreOffice.

useful list, this is better than openoffice now?

Feb 08 13 04:21 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Peter Claver
Posts: 26,657
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


Joann Empson wrote:

The GNU/Linux distros released in the past couple of years have been ridiculously user-friendly, much more so than Windows or Mac OS X.

* For video editing, I use Kdenlive.

* For 3D graphics and animation, I use Blender.

* For raster graphics editing, I use the GNU Image Manipulation Program.

* For vector graphics editing, I use Inkscape.

* For text editing, I use vim and emacs.

* For professional typesetting, I use LaTeX.

* For word processing/spreadsheets/presentations, I use LibreOffice.

aside from vim none of the above would ever cut it for what I do and/or how I do it.

Feb 08 13 04:36 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Joann Empson
Posts: 430
Walnut Creek, California, US


R A V E N D R I V E wrote:
useful list, this is better than openoffice now?

In short, yes.

OpenOffice used to be maintained by Sun Microsystems. After Oracle bought Sun Microsystems, the OpenOffice development team got worried that Oracle would kill their project, so they made a fork/copy of the OpenOffice source code, and they began maintaining both projects in parallel.

Then Oracle gave the team an ultimatum: focus on OpenOffice and stay employed at Oracle, or leave and work on LibreOffice on your own. Most of the team opted to leave and work on LibreOffice on their own. They secured funding and donations from companies like Google, IBM, and Novell, and they formed the Document Foundation.

After a period of stagnation, Oracle decided to throw OpenOffice away. The LibreOffice guys hoped that Oracle would at least let them have the OpenOffice trademark, but instead Oracle gave it to a competing free software development organization -- the Apache Foundation -- perhaps to spite its former employees.

So now the Apache Foundation maintains OpenOffice, and the Document Foundation maintains LibreOffice.

LibreOffice has lots of improvements and new features that are absent from OpenOffice. Apache has a lot of catching up to do to bring OpenOffice up to speed.

Feb 08 13 05:50 pm  Link  Quote 
Artist/Painter
JJMiller
Posts: 467
Buffalo, New York, US


I avoid GNU/Linux distros like Ubuntu, which make compromises and include nonfree binary bits. Ubuntu is nearly as bad as Mac OS X and Windows.

In what way is ubuntu as bad as mac or win I am curious.

  I think most people's adherence to non-free software just comes from familiarity with closed source stuff- a reason why autodesk gives away it's full suite to students. I use gimp a lot, so PS seems clunky to me now. But I have to say, Blender is amazing, and the pace of development is insane. Nowhere else can you do so much with a 60Mb download.

Feb 08 13 06:40 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Joann Empson
Posts: 430
Walnut Creek, California, US


JJMiller wrote:
In what way is ubuntu as bad as mac or win I am curious.

The main reason Mac OS X and Windows are bad is because they keep their users in the dark about what is happening on their computers. This means users can never be sure if their computer is helping someone spy on them. Microsoft doesn't even bother hiding the fact that they have backdoor access to all Windows systems.

Ubuntu is not quite this bad -- most of the nonfree bits included in Ubuntu are inherited from Linux (the kernel), and they come in the form of "binary blob" device drivers. But Ubuntu is about to become bad in another way: starting with the next release, it will include adware as a default part of the distribution. Advertising is generally OK, but the way they're doing it exposes users' local application and file searches to a 3rd party -- namely, Amazon.

Feb 08 13 07:35 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Peter Claver
Posts: 26,657
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


Joann Empson wrote:
Microsoft doesn't even bother hiding the fact that they have backdoor access to all Windows systems.

Come again?

Feb 08 13 07:58 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
KonstantKarma
Posts: 2,513
Hickory, North Carolina, US


Peter Claver wrote:

Come again?

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/ … _Windows_7

They've denied it for Windows 7, but it's been a thing in the past.

Feb 08 13 10:23 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
KonstantKarma
Posts: 2,513
Hickory, North Carolina, US


R A V E N D R I V E wrote:

useful list, this is better than openoffice now?

I think Libreoffice has surpassed OpenOffice myself. It's quite wonderful.

Feb 08 13 10:24 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
KonstantKarma
Posts: 2,513
Hickory, North Carolina, US


JJMiller wrote:
I use gimp a lot, so PS seems clunky to me now.

I agree, Adobe is clunky compared to gimp 2.8.

I much prefer gimp for higher-end retouching, dodging and burning, curves and layer work. Elements is more suited for basic touchups.

Feb 08 13 10:33 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
AdelaideJohn1967
Posts: 12,286
Adelaide, South Australia, Australia


Does OpenOffice fit in the criteria of that video?

Can you give copies away? mod it or such?
Feb 08 13 11:25 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
KonstantKarma
Posts: 2,513
Hickory, North Carolina, US


AdelaideJohn1967 wrote:
Does OpenOffice fit in the criteria of that video?

Can you give copies away? mod it or such?

Yep.

Feb 08 13 11:53 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Peter Claver
Posts: 26,657
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


KonstantKarma wrote:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/ … _Windows_7

They've denied it for Windows 7, but it's been a thing in the past.

So when youshe said "they don't even bother to hide the fact" youshe actually meant they actively deny it and there is, in fact, not even a tiny bit of proof to that fact...

Gotcha.

Feb 09 13 12:05 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
KonstantKarma
Posts: 2,513
Hickory, North Carolina, US


Peter Claver wrote:

So when you said "they don't even bother to hide the fact" you actually meant they actively deny it and there is, in fact, not even a tiny bit of proof to that fact...

Gotcha.

I think you're confusing me with another poster.

Feb 09 13 12:09 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Peter Claver
Posts: 26,657
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


KonstantKarma wrote:

I agree, Adobe is clunky compared to gimp 2.8.

I much prefer gimp for higher-end retouching, dodging and burning, curves and layer work. Elements is more suited for basic touchups.

In my line of work we need 32-bit editing.


I love free software as much as the next guy... but to think it can work in all cases is just silly.

Feb 09 13 12:11 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Peter Claver
Posts: 26,657
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


KonstantKarma wrote:

I think you're confusing me with another poster.

Whoops.. quite correct.

Feb 09 13 12:11 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
KonstantKarma
Posts: 2,513
Hickory, North Carolina, US


Peter Claver wrote:
In my line of work we need 32-bit editing.

What makes you think we don't?  32 bit has been supported since 2.6.

Feb 09 13 12:16 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Peter Claver
Posts: 26,657
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


KonstantKarma wrote:

What makes you think we don't?  32 bit has been supported since 2.6.

everything I read says its not coming until 3.0

Feb 09 13 12:42 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Looknsee Photography
Posts: 20,834
Portland, Oregon, US


As a believer in copyrights, I'd say that the users don't define the "freedom" associated with a specific piece of software -- the creators get to define how users can & should use, modify, and redistribute their creations.

Using the word "freedom" is just propaganda to make it sound "noble".

What would be similar "freedoms" associated with photographs be?
Feb 09 13 09:00 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
KonstantKarma
Posts: 2,513
Hickory, North Carolina, US


Looknsee Photography wrote:
As a believer in copyrights, I'd say that the users don't define the "freedom" associated with a specific piece of software -- the creators get to define how users can & should use, modify, and redistribute their creations.

Using the word "freedom" is just propaganda to make it sound "noble".

What would be similar "freedoms" associated with photographs be?

Some photos also fall under the opensource copyleft.

Like, for example, the wikicommons photo collection at http://www.openstockphotography.org/ .

As of October 2007, the Wikimedia Commons, a central media archive operated by the Wikimedia Foundation, contains about 1,986,590 files* uploaded by over 30,000 registered users. Each of these files is available under a free content license or in the public domain; there are no restrictions of use beyond those relating to use of official insignia. Licenses which limit commercial use are considered non-free.

So, one can alter, give, and do whatever to any photo.

Feb 09 13 09:04 am  Link  Quote 
Artist/Painter
JJMiller
Posts: 467
Buffalo, New York, US


Also, Gimp isn't the be-all end-all in free software, for high bit depth and cmyk support there is Krita. And Cinepaint if you are tech saavy. For Linux people I'm really impressed with Darktable for color adjustments, it's really nice.
Feb 09 13 12:19 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Virtual Studio
Posts: 5,465
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


Peter Claver wrote:

everything I read says its not coming until 3.0

There's an unmaintained fork of Gimp called CinePaint which does 32 bit.  Developed for frame editing in animated movies, apparently was used by some of the big studios in the early 2000's.

I'm looking forward to Gimp 3.0 though - will be a real competitor to PS.

Feb 09 13 05:29 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Virtual Studio
Posts: 5,465
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


KonstantKarma wrote:

Some photos also fall under the opensource copyleft.

Like, for example, the wikicommons photo collection at http://www.openstockphotography.org/ .

As of October 2007, the Wikimedia Commons, a central media archive operated by the Wikimedia Foundation, contains about 1,986,590 files* uploaded by over 30,000 registered users. Each of these files is available under a free content license or in the public domain; there are no restrictions of use beyond those relating to use of official insignia. Licenses which limit commercial use are considered non-free.

So, one can alter, give, and do whatever to any photo.

I put all my deviant art stuff up there on a "creative commons - attribution left" license.

Feb 09 13 05:31 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Al Lock Photography
Posts: 15,790
Bangkok, Bangkok, Thailand


Joann Empson wrote:

In short, yes.

OpenOffice used to be maintained by Sun Microsystems. After Oracle bought Sun Microsystems, the OpenOffice development team got worried that Oracle would kill their project, so they made a fork/copy of the OpenOffice source code, and they began maintaining both projects in parallel.

Then Oracle gave the team an ultimatum: focus on OpenOffice and stay employed at Oracle, or leave and work on LibreOffice on your own. Most of the team opted to leave and work on LibreOffice on their own. They secured funding and donations from companies like Google, IBM, and Novell, and they formed the Document Foundation.

After a period of stagnation, Oracle decided to throw OpenOffice away. The LibreOffice guys hoped that Oracle would at least let them have the OpenOffice trademark, but instead Oracle gave it to a competing free software development organization -- the Apache Foundation -- perhaps to spite its former employees.

So now the Apache Foundation maintains OpenOffice, and the Document Foundation maintains LibreOffice.

LibreOffice has lots of improvements and new features that are absent from OpenOffice. Apache has a lot of catching up to do to bring OpenOffice up to speed.

Thanks for this information. I've downloaded and installed LibreOffice.

Feb 09 13 08:59 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 18,967
Chicago, Illinois, US


Joann Empson wrote:

The main reason Mac OS X and Windows are bad is because they keep their users in the dark about what is happening on their computers. This means users can never be sure if their computer is helping someone spy on them. Microsoft doesn't even bother hiding the fact that they have backdoor access to all Windows systems.

Ubuntu is not quite this bad -- most of the nonfree bits included in Ubuntu are inherited from Linux (the kernel), and they come in the form of "binary blob" device drivers. But Ubuntu is about to become bad in another way: starting with the next release, it will include adware as a default part of the distribution. Advertising is generally OK, but the way they're doing it exposes users' local application and file searches to a 3rd party -- namely, Amazon.

In all fairness its easy to turn off the Amazon search:   http://lifehacker.com/5953180/how-to-re … buntu-1210   However I get your meaning but  Canonical is trying to survive.   They are now accepting donations and trying to monetize Ubuntu as much as possible.   Its got to be expensive to keep developers and to pay for hosting and downloads.   A few years back you could only download Slackware during certain hours as they were trying to save money.   I think Slackware is a one man band though.   Maybe some of the distros who use Ubuntu as a base could kick in like Zorin and Mint and Pinguy and the others.   They use the software manager.

Money woes have stopped several cool distros.   Its funny I'm a member on several Android forums and goofs there are always asking the developers to rush ROMS and bitc7ing about things that don't work but very few of those freeloaders ever send in a dime.

Feb 09 13 10:35 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
KonstantKarma
Posts: 2,513
Hickory, North Carolina, US


Big Mint fan here, I switched from Zorin after Gimp 2.8 wouldn't install. The "feel" of an OS has never been better for me.
Feb 10 13 05:57 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Virtual Studio
Posts: 5,465
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


My big question though is:

When will the OS guys do something original?

My concern with the OS community is that to date all they have done is rip off the functional specs of successful closed source software and hack up na competitor product.

Gimp - Photoshop
Linux = Unix
LibreOffice = MS Office
PERL = Awk
Apache = Netscape
Firefox = Netscape

etc etc

I worry that the OS fanboys are actually killing innovation in the industry. In much the same way that software patents have killed software innovation in the USA because I cant monetize any investment I may make in a producing a software artifact without paying off a patent troll I know that if I produce something good there will be an OS clone out there within months.

So really are we chasing FREE at the expense of  the industry?
Feb 10 13 06:17 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Looknsee Photography
Posts: 20,834
Portland, Oregon, US


Looknsee Photography wrote:
As a believer in copyrights, I'd say that the users don't define the "freedom" associated with a specific piece of software -- the creators get to define how users can & should use, modify, and redistribute their creations.

Using the word "freedom" is just propaganda to make it sound "noble".

What would be similar "freedoms" associated with photographs be?
KonstantKarma wrote:
Some photos also fall under the opensource copyleft.

Like, for example, the wikicommons photo collection at http://www.openstockphotography.org/ .

As of October 2007, the Wikimedia Commons, a central media archive operated by the Wikimedia Foundation, contains about 1,986,590 files* uploaded by over 30,000 registered users. Each of these files is available under a free content license or in the public domain; there are no restrictions of use beyond those relating to use of official insignia. Licenses which limit commercial use are considered non-free.

So, one can alter, give, and do whatever to any photo.

The difference being that the copyright owner is the one who chooses to place the photographs into the public domain.  The person using the photos doesn't make that choice for the copyright owner.

Feb 10 13 09:18 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
netmodel
Posts: 6,786
Austin, Texas, US


Virtual Studio wrote:
My big question though is:

When will the OS guys do something original?

My concern with the OS community is that to date all they have done is rip off the functional specs of successful closed source software and hack up na competitor product.

Gimp - Photoshop
Linux = Unix
LibreOffice = MS Office
PERL = Awk
Apache = Netscape
Firefox = Netscape

etc etc

I worry that the OS fanboys are actually killing innovation in the industry. In much the same way that software patents have killed software innovation in the USA because I cant monetize any investment I may make in a producing a software artifact without paying off a patent troll I know that if I produce something good there will be an OS clone out there within months.

So really are we chasing FREE at the expense of  the industry?

The motivation is $$$. They want something as good as commercial software but FREE to those who cannot afford it.

Seriously most people CANNOT afford a $1000 suite for their $400 computers.

Feb 10 13 11:44 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 18,967
Chicago, Illinois, US


Virtual Studio wrote:
My big question though is:

When will the OS guys do something original?

My concern with the OS community is that to date all they have done is rip off the functional specs of successful closed source software and hack up na competitor product.

Gimp - Photoshop
Linux = Unix
LibreOffice = MS Office
PERL = Awk
Apache = Netscape
Firefox = Netscape

etc etc

I worry that the OS fanboys are actually killing innovation in the industry. In much the same way that software patents have killed software innovation in the USA because I cant monetize any investment I may make in a producing a software artifact without paying off a patent troll I know that if I produce something good there will be an OS clone out there within months.

So really are we chasing FREE at the expense of  the industry?

There is commercial software that copies OS versions.  Some OS software is better then paid software as well.   I would debate that in most ways most full featured Linux desktops best Windows and in some cases OS X.   I had Windows 8 preview until the license expired so I went back to Windows 7.   I don't want to pay $40.00 for a upgrade nor would I want to pay $100.00 for a new install.   What is a funny thing is its that its largely the OS community that pushes innovation.   Go to the XDA forums are see what the Android guys are doing with custom ROMS.   All free to use and usually better then stock ROMS.   Many of the developers of paid software develop OS software also.   

However another member beat me to it.   The Linux world appeals to those on a budget who perhaps can't afford Photoshop or MS office.   Windows 7 is still the most used consumer computer OS so I don't see the OS community as a threat to to MSFT and MSFT has responded by making it difficult to load Linux on Windows 8 systems.   Another cool thing though is many of the OS versions work on systems with less RAM and modest processors.

Feb 10 13 12:00 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Virtual Studio
Posts: 5,465
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


Tony Lawrence wrote:

There is commercial software that copies OS versions.  Some OS software is better then paid software as well.   I would debate that in most ways most full featured Linux desktops best Windows and in some cases OS X.   I had Windows 8 preview until the license expired so I went back to Windows 7.   I don't want to pay $40.00 for a upgrade nor would I want to pay $100.00 for a new install.   What is a funny thing is its that its largely the OS community that pushes innovation.   Go to the XDA forums are see what the Android guys are doing with custom ROMS.   All free to use and usually better then stock ROMS.   Many of the developers of paid software develop OS software also.   

However another member beat me to it.   The Linux world appeals to those on a budget who perhaps can't afford Photoshop or MS office.   Windows 7 is still the most used consumer computer OS so I don't see the OS community as a threat to to MSFT and MSFT has responded by making it difficult to load Linux on Windows 8 systems.   Another cool thing though is many of the OS versions work on systems with less RAM and modest processors.

There is commercial software that copies OS versions.

Go on then - what?

Feb 10 13 12:03 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Peter Claver
Posts: 26,657
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


Looknsee Photography wrote:

Looknsee Photography wrote:
As a believer in copyrights, I'd say that the users don't define the "freedom" associated with a specific piece of software -- the creators get to define how users can & should use, modify, and redistribute their creations.

Using the word "freedom" is just propaganda to make it sound "noble".

What would be similar "freedoms" associated with photographs be?

The difference being that the copyright owner is the one who chooses to place the photographs into the public domain.  The person using the photos doesn't make that choice for the copyright owner.

That is the case with the software released under the license the OP talks about.  The software creators choose to release their software under those licensing terms.  Nobody here (I don't think) is asserting that users can (or even should) assert these rights unilaterally.

Feb 10 13 12:07 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Michael Bots
Posts: 5,452
Kingston, Ontario, Canada


European Court of Human Rights Rules Copyright Monopoly Punishment a Violation of Human Rights, Prosecutions to Cease

http://theintelhub.com/2013/02/08/europ … -to-cease/

"Here is a summary in English of the French verdict:
For the first time in a judgment on the merits, the European Court of Human Rights has clarified that a conviction based on copyright law for illegally reproducing or publicly communicating copyright protected material can be regarded as an interference with the right of freedom of expression and information under Article 10 of the European Convention. Such interference must be in accordance with the three conditions enshrined in the second paragraph of Article 10 of the Convention. This means that a conviction or any other judicial decision based on copyright law, restricting a person’s or an organisation’s freedom of expression, must be pertinently motivated as being necessary in a democratic society, apart from being prescribed by law and pursuing a legitimate aim.
It is, in other words, no longer sufficient to justify a sanction or any other judicial order restricting one’s artistic or journalistic freedom of expression on the basis that a copyright law provision has been infringed. Neither is it sufficient to consider that the unauthorised use, reproduction or public communication of a work cannot rely on one of the narrowly interpreted exceptions in the copyright law itself, including the application of the so-called three-step test [...]"

more at link


"One of the most obvious and compelling points brought forward by opponents of intellectual property is the fact that these monopoly privileges are a disadvantage to the economy and society as a whole because it stifles innovation and guarantees that prices will remain high.
The negative impact on innovation is primarily the result of an artificially high barrier to entry for new inventors and entrepreneurs.  However, when seeing how much research and development money is getting thrown away in court and on patent filings, it becomes apparent that there is an array of contributing factors that all lead in the same direction, stagnation."
Feb 10 13 12:09 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 18,967
Chicago, Illinois, US


Virtual Studio wrote:
There is commercial software that copies OS versions.

Go on then - what?

One quick example is Reaver Pro which is being sold by a Hacker website.   Its Reaver which is Opensource with a GUI.   Reaver is in Backtrack.   Many of the features in commercial software comes from the OS community where hundreds or thousands of people work on the code.   The folks that worked on WebOS came from Apple.

A bit more.   OS is often the precursor of commercial software OS X was based in part from BSD.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_S … stribution

Feb 10 13 12:14 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Virtual Studio
Posts: 5,465
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


Tony Lawrence wrote:

One quick example is Reaver Pro which is being sold by a Hacker website.   Its Reaver which is Opensource with a GUI.   Reaver is in Backtrack.   Many of the features in commercial software comes from the OS community where hundreds or thousands of people work on the code.   The folks that worked on WebOS came from Apple.

A bit more.   OS is often the precursor of commercial software OS X was based in part from BSD.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_S … stribution

This is the Reaver which is a cut down OS version of the pro tool developed by Tactical Network Solutions ?

hmmmmm - that's your best example? something developed as full featured closed source and then offered as a crap ware OS version to get the punters interested?

Feb 10 13 12:29 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tony Lawrence
Posts: 18,967
Chicago, Illinois, US


Virtual Studio wrote:

This is the Reaver which is a cut down OS version of the pro tool developed by Tactical Network Solutions ?

hmmmmm - that's your best example? something developed as full featured closed source and then offered as a crap ware OS version to get the punters interested?

Dude you asked for a example and I gave two.   OS X is based on BSD.   Windows comes from a OS source as well.   There are others though.   So is OS X crap ware?   Some developers have a OS version they test and then add features and make it a paid version.   The same guys who work on Linux software also develop for Windows and OS X.

Feb 10 13 12:35 pm  Link  Quote 
12last   Search   Reply



main | browse | casting/travel | forums | shout box | help | advertising | contests | share | join the mayhem

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

©2006-2014 ModelMayhem.com. All Rights Reserved.
MODEL MAYHEM is a registered trademark.
Toggle Worksafe Mode: Off | On
Terms | Privacy | Careers