Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

TheOpenCD Launches First Edition

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the building-a-new-grid dept.

Emil fra Loeneberg writes with welcome news from TheOpenCD. "This article on NewsForge describes a project which plans to distribute Open Source Software (OSS) widely to Windows users. You can download a CD image from a mirror site and start spreading the OSS message. It's basically an OSS distro for Windows. This project was also mentioned on Slashdot back in April and now they are ready with a first release. Any first reviews?"

7 of 201 comments (clear)

  1. Re:KNOPPIX by bahamat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've found that it's much easier to say to people 'hey, check out this software that runs on windows' than it is to say 'hey, ditch windows and use linux'. People are generally more responsive if they don't have to leave their comfort zone, then once they have a chance to use Free Software, see that they like it, that it's better, have used OpenOffice in windows, then say oh yea, Linux can do that, and more, and with more freedom. It's especially easy to nab programmers that way, because they get to see the source of what they're using.

    I've been doing this for a while, building my own CDs and passing them out. First with Win32 software then a Linux distro. Knoppix was rad because it let me add another step to the conversion process. It's a step to change mindshare and for a lot of people OpenCD will be their first step towards computing freedom.

    I leave a trail of little Linux users everywhere I go and this is the tactic I've been using for a long time. Now they've made my job easier.

  2. This is great by Bluesman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've been using Open Office on Windows for a few weeks, and it's just fantastic.

    I think too many people focus on Linux when they talk about open-source software, when the beauty of this software is that it's portable and usable on so many platforms. When I have to use Windows, I love to be able to use The Gimp and OpenOffice, since I'm not locked into proprietary formats.

    Microsoft's monopoly exists in their applications, which have always been much better than the easily available alternatives, until now.

    --
    If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
  3. Value difference with free OSes lowers... by CaVi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Free OSes (Linux, BSDs,...) have a lot of values, _one_ of which is their large library of free applications.

    By bundling those for windows, people will have less reasons to switch to one of those free OSes. Of course, there are still reasons, but there is one less.

    People who don't matter for ideology behind free OSes won't bother switching. ANd I'm afraid this means a lot of users...

    There is some momentum which is needed with free OSes to have the attention span of big companies, and convince them to throw resources at supporting their products under those OSes. Having less people switch to those means less momentum, and therefore less attention.

    On the other end, using those tools under Windows will at least render much easier data exchanges, and is therefore a first step in breaking the dependency on those proprietary and more or less closed formats.

    I'm not sure if this is ideologically good or not. It will for sure be usefull for those who have no possiblity to switch of OS (because of job requirements, or games,...).

    My 2 cents...

    --
    -- No signature yet.
    1. Re:Value difference with free OSes lowers... by concord · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree with you. I don't know the answer to that either but it's not going to succeed or fail based upon what you or I do.

      Let's not forget the fact that free software _is_ free and that includes the fact that people will _always_ want to port it to unstable but popular platforms - we can't (thank you GPL) stop it. We don't want to anyway, right? If software is free but only to people who want to use it or port it to particular "approved" platforms, is it really free?

      Let's not lose sight of the fact that we aren't here to hurt Microsoft. We're here to help people enjoy better software and to give them the freedom to enjoy it secure in the knowledge that it'll always be there for them, their children and their children's children. The GPL ensures that it always will be.

      In the long run I hope you're right about the fact that it'll make popular free OSS windows programs which can save in formats compatible for _all_ users of the program, regardless of their OS.

      My 2

      --
      MFG: "The system supports both the LAMP (Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP) and WIMP (Windows, IIS, MySQL, PHP) platforms."
    2. Re:Value difference with free OSes lowers... by Peter_Pork · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, let's make OSS look like M$... This is about free software, that you can use in any platform, in any way you want. As people use OSS more and more, the OS will matter less and less, that is the only way to get rid of monopolies (call them M$ or Linux, they can be as bad).

    3. Re:Value difference with free OSes lowers... by rickymoz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe you have one reason less to switch, as you say, but you will have one reason less NOT to switch. Think of all the people who say: hu? OpenOffice? I don't know that, I'll stick with MS Word, at least I'm comfortable with it.

      So basically their reason not to switch is that they are not familiar with OSS. With this CD, they will be and this kills this reason which keeps them hooked on proprietary software.

  4. Open source philosophy?! by Christopher+Doopov · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the What is TheOpenCD website:

    "It also includes a selection of essays about Open Source philosophy, and links to other programs that might be of interest."

    I'm sorry, but what is exactly open source philosophy? Open source is about technical and economical advantages. Free software is about philosophy. Please do not flame me for saying the obvious. When Eric Raymond took Debian Free Software Guidelines and published them as Open Source Definition in 1998 he did it exactly because he wanted free software without the strong philosophy associated with the "free software" term since at least the announcement of the GNU Project in 1983.

    I think that TheOpenCD project should not talk about philosophy if they want to promote the open source movement. But if they think that the philosophy is important, then they should promote the free software movement and change their name to TheFreeCD. Because the philosophy is exactly the difference between free software and open source movements. If they talk about "open source philosophy" they are being against the main priciples of both movements.

    TheOpenCD project people should read these books:

    Those books are not very long, but they provide enough background to let avoid using such unfortunate oxymorons like "open source philosophy." I strongly respect both free software and open source movements and I can not stay ignorant when people insult any of them, while the term "open source philosophy" insults both.

    --

    ~Christopher Doopov