Domain: tlug.jp
Stories and comments across the archive that link to tlug.jp.
Comments · 19
-
Re:This part is old old news.
this writeup explains it all.
After giving this a good thorough read when it was first published, I "fixed" my mom's box when she called me up by installing linux on it.
She is even happier now than she was before. Notices no difference what-soever.
When friends try to prop you for a windows cd, don't give it to them. Give them a linux install instead.
-
Re:So...Because Windows is free. Here's some evidence.
Briefly: People mostly get it with a new computer, so they don't actually shell out anything for it and they don't know about the (often hidden) option to omit installation of Windows for cash. Or they pirate it instead of getting Linux, because that's what they are used to.
-
Re:Open source on non open OS?
Operating systems seem to come with culture. Linux comes with "free" culture, and if one uses Linux (forgive me, RMS), one tends to adapt the culture and consider free soft natural state of things.
On MacOS, however, the culture goes like "you pay for everything". Apps are crippled and if you need something good - you pay. In this environment you consider being paid for software natural state of things.
Note, I have never in my life used MacOS. What I have just said is more like theoretical observation.
On windows front this issue is very unclear. People expect everything for free, but it should have a price tag, or it is shit.
I have no idea what developers think there. Do they? -
Re:your comment on FOSS is complete FUD
I refer you to this article
-
Stop windows piracy if you want linux to grow.
STOP PIRATING WINDOWS if you want linux to grow.
This means refusing to hand your cd's over to your friends, refusing to visit usenet or x/y torrent site and download it, etc.
If you present them with the actual cost of windows, rather than the ubiquitous perception of "free", they will be compelled to see the real value...
200 bucks for MS operating system, or free for one that works 99% as well for 99% of users. -
Re:Wrong mantra.Why use Ubuntu with Windows is "free". Why use OpenOffice with MS Office is "free"? Your english is teh suck. Go kill yourself now.
-
Re:Wrong mantra."When used incorrectly and in direct conflict of something that you are promoting, DRM sucks!"
That's too long. DRM sucks period. Very true, however: By making the usage of your software a hassle, you risk further pushing more users of your applications to other solutions." I think Microsoft should actually be encouraged to add more DRM to their products. If people can't get Windows and Office for "free" all the time as they do now people actually have to pay those high prices for it. Or go with the better alternatives that exist. Why use Ubuntu with Windows is "free". Why use OpenOffice with MS Office is "free"? -
Re:Freaking flamebait articles.
You're forgetting that Windows is free anyway.
-
Re:This is something new?
I don't really see why people view Linux as an alternative to Windows as it's really an entirely different beast. Most of the people (me counted) I know use Linux because that's exactly not wat they want to use, not just a free alternative to windows.
Using Linux instead of Windows because it's free is really no reason at all because, as previously stated in an article posted here, Windows is free (http://articles.tlug.jp/Windows_Is_Free) -
Re:Is this FUD?"There are looming possibilities of "patent claims" and "copyright infringement" against linux and the components that various distributions include. As a Linux OEM, I would think that fact poses significant risk to your business."
If you are that concerned about the patent issues, you can always sell one of the distributions that have signed a deal the Microsoft. I installed Suse 10.02 last night and I have to admit I would be comfortable installing it on my 78 year old mother's machine. It has come that far in usability.
I agree with Dave Gutteridge when he says the real problem is that Windows is free. Think about it. How many people do you know who have walked into a store and paid $200 for a copy of Windows?
-
Re:Is this FUD?"There are looming possibilities of "patent claims" and "copyright infringement" against linux and the components that various distributions include. As a Linux OEM, I would think that fact poses significant risk to your business."
If you are that concerned about the patent issues, you can always sell one of the distributions that have signed a deal the Microsoft. I installed Suse 10.02 last night and I have to admit I would be comfortable installing it on my 78 year old mother's machine. It has come that far in usability.
I agree with Dave Gutteridge when he says the real problem is that Windows is free. Think about it. How many people do you know who have walked into a store and paid $200 for a copy of Windows?
-
Windows Vista; a waste of time?
I've been a big proponent of the new OS over the past few months, even going so far as loading it onto most of my computers and spending hours tweaking and optimizing it. So why, nine months after launch, am I so frustrated? The litany of what doesn't work and what still frustrates me stretches on endlessly. The upshot is that even after nine months, Vista just ain't cutting it. I definitely gave Microsoft too much of a free pass on this operating system: I expected it to get the kinks worked out more quickly. Boy, was I fooled! If Microsoft can't get Vista working,
So I guess Windows (Vista) is only "free" if your time is worth nothing, huh? ;) -
Mobile version of the article
http://tlug.jp/articles/Windows_Is_Free/mobile
It is 56K, which takes about 12 seconds to load on a DoCoMo FOMA phone in Tokyo. YMMV. :) -
Re:Linus is rightLinus should have stuck to his non-commercial-use-only license. He only adopted the GPL because of pressure from others and has never believed in it. I don't advocate people doing things they don't believe in.
I'm generally a very pragmatic person: that which works, works. When it comes to software, I _much_ prefer free software, because I have very seldom seen a program that has worked well enough for my needs, and having sources available can be a life-saver.
From an interview with Linus Torvalds himself - http://www.tlug.jp/docs/linus.html :
So in that sense I am an avid promoter of free software, and GPL'd stuff in particular (because once it's GPL'd I _know_ it's going to stay free, so I don't have to worry about future releases).
I changed the copyright to the GPL within roughly half a year: it quickly became evident that my original copyright was so restrictive that it prohibited some entirely valid uses (disk copying services etc - this was before CD-ROM's became really popular). And while I was nervous about the GPL at first, I also wanted to show my appreciation to the gcc C compiler that Linux depended on, which was obviously GPL'd.
Further more:
Making Linux GPL'd was definitely the best thing I ever did.
So... I'd say you are completely and utterly wrong. -
Re:Death to pirates!
I don't know about the Open Source camp, but the Free camp as led by RMS would strongly disagree with you. RMS has said that if you have proprietary software and your neighbor wants a copy, you're morally obligated to copy it and give it to him. RMS says that even if the proprietary ware is "free" like beer it is still inferior because you cannot modify it. RMS' old story of not being able to use a printer because he didn't have the source code to the driver rings true even today: look at how badly 64-bit Windows is hamstrung because the driver inventory is poor, compared to Linux where 64-bit works quite well because almost all the software and drivers are free and easily modified to run 64-bit.
So RMS would say copy the software, even if it's proprietary, but that the Free software is better. -
Re:LInus and GPL
Linus has said before that he'd probably choose a different licens if had was to choose one today.
Would you mind backing that up with a reference? I've seen him comment on the GPL several time in interviews, and all of those comments have been fairly positive.
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1731874,00.as p: "I don't think the GPL is perfect, and one of my issues has been how verbose it is. Another is just the politics involved, which I haven't always enjoyed." ... "But, hey, nothing is ever perfect. So while I may have some niggling concerns with the GPL, they are in the details, and in the end, I actually think that the GPL simply is the best license for the kernel."
http://www.tlug.jp/docs/linus.html: "Making Linux GPL'd was definitely the best thing I ever did." -
RMS on Commercial softwareYou're all right up until:
(2) commercial software deprives people of vital rights - ie, they are evil.
Commercial software does no such thing. It is proprietary software that deprives people of rights. The GP's point was that it's important to realize that commercial FOSS projects can be good for the community, and note that FOSS part means (among other things) non-proprietary. Or to quote RMS:
You have to be very careful there. Commercial software and Proprietary software are totally different concepts. "Commercial" refers to the financial arrangement of the software. "Proprietary" refers to what the users are permitted to do. Free software must have the freedom to copy, to modify, and have the source code. So proprietary software is mutually exclusive with free software, but there can be commercial software that are free software.[1]
Perhaps that makes it clearer what he thinks. Not that what he thinks matters as much as you claim it does.
[1] Quotation from an interview available here.
-
Re:GNU/HurdOh, dude, you pretty much stuck your foot in it here. As evidence that Torvalds gave Stallman permission to use the name "GNU/Linux," you cited this article. Did you read it? Here's the salient portion.
HY: About the GNU/Linux argument; have you talked with Richard Stallman about this?
Sounds good, right? But the thing is, it didn't stop there. Torvalds goes on:
Linus: rms asked me if I minded the name before starting to use it, and I said "go ahead".I didn't think it would explode into the large discussion it resulted in, and I also thought that rms would only use it for the specific release of Linux that the FSF was working on rather than "every" Linux system.
(Emphasis mine.)
I never felt that the naming issue was all that important, but I was obviously wrong judging by how many people felt very strongly about it. So these days I just tell people to call it just plain "Linux" and nothing more.
So Torvalds, who has exclusive control over the name "Linux," as used to describe computer operating system software, initially granted permission for the use of the name "GNU/Linux," but he and Stallman had different ideas of how that variation on the "Linux" trademark was to be used. In this interview, Torvalds makes it clear that he does not approve of the use of the mark "GNU/Linux" to describe "'every' Linux system." Consequently, the name "GNU/Linux" is an infringement on Torvalds's trademark.
If you want to call the operating system "Foonix," you're free to do so. You can call it whatever you want-- to the extent that you don't violate anybody's copyright. But you can't dilute or otherwise distort the trademark "Linux" without permission, which Torvalds explicitly denied in that interview.
Thanks for pointing out that article. It makes the issue even more crystal-clear to me. -
Re:I'm sticking with MS
The president of the Tokyo Linux User Group doesn't look too bad either.