If you use Linux as your main OS, why? - Hardware & Software

[QUOTE=Janek566;35527708][B]Does FSF really support free software:[/B] I know what im about to say will be criticised but no, fsf does not support free software and licenses by GNU like GPL are not free. Why? Because they are copyleft (wiki it). In short copyleft licenses forces you to make your code free which is not what freedom is. The freedom must be taught to people but not shove down their throat. And so free licenses are: BSD, WTFPL, Apache license, MIT license, and such. making a license copyleft is basically denying one spectrum (proprietary software license) and forcing another (free software license). Real freedom is in licenses that do not limit you in ANY way whether it is for "good" of the end-users. Another thing to mention is the famous 4 freedoms. Without writing a lot about it I can just tell you they are wrong straight away: they say [I]freedom to[/I]. Just to clarify you cannot be free to. Freedom is "from" something not "to" something: It is like saying freedom to slavery - it does not make sense and misses the point: free software should respect user's freedom in that the user is free from: restrictions on how to redistribute software, free from restriction how to use it, how to modify it. This is just my little thought that no one else cares to point - you are free when noone tells you what to do not when someone forces the freedom to you or takes it away. Trying to determine whether you are free from "restrictions" is not always easy but just re-read my post and see if you are REALLY free from any restriction. Last thing i wanted to say is that completely free licenses will have less text in their body - you can guess that more text means more talk about what you are not allowed to do and what are the restrictions. So here is a (full) body of WTFPL - a truly free license: [CODE] DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO PUBLIC LICENSE Version 2, December 2004 Copyright (C) 2004 Sam Hocevar <sam@hocevar.net> Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim or modified copies of this license document, and changing it is allowed as long as the name is changed. DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO PUBLIC LICENSE TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION 0. You just DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO. [/CODE] Thanks, hope this is helpful and answers some of the raging windows fans questions :) Janek566[/QUOTE] The GPL and whatnot are free software. Why? Because free software is about the users, not the developers. Also your whole 'freedom to' argument is invalid. It's just wording. Do you want a long list of things you are free from, or 4 things that explain what you're free to do?

[QUOTE=Zero Vector;35267244]If you use Linux as your main OS, why?[/QUOTE] Why not?

[QUOTE=q3k;35552238]Why not?[/QUOTE] Windows is way more widely supported.

[QUOTE=Jookia;35552302]Windows is way more widely supported.[/QUOTE] IDA Pro runs on Linux, Xilinx ISE runs on Linux, I don't really need anything non-free apart that. All my hardware is perfectly supported, too.

[QUOTE=Jookia;35551059]The GPL and whatnot are free software. Why? Because free software is about the users, not the developers. Also your whole 'freedom to' argument is invalid. It's just wording. Do you want a long list of things you are free from, or 4 things that explain what you're free to do?[/QUOTE] It's just wording? I hope you're not serious stallman is over 50 now and he can't speak his own language? That's one. Two free software is, or should be FREE FOR EVERYONE not just developers or just users. However short your list is making it short doesn't make it right. So no that kind of software is not free. Oh also people should fight for that freedom and know about it not just being spoonfed by stallman who is de facto their "defender" who must make sure programs under gpl are copyleft because only stupid people use free software. There's some hardcore logic right there.

[QUOTE=Janek566;35570466]Two free software is, or should be FREE FOR EVERYONE not just developers or just users.[/QUOTE] But that's impossible. Either the developer is free to do what he wants, including infringing on his own users' freedom, or he's not free to do whatever he wants (for example, is forced to contribute his patches back) in order for users to have the right to use Free code. You can't have it both way. GPL keeps the code free, it doesn't really care about the developers. If you want developer freedom, something BSD derived is probably better. [quote]However short your list is making it short doesn't make it right. So no that kind of software is not free. Oh also people should fight for that freedom and know about it not just being spoonfed by stallman who is de facto their "defender" who must make sure programs under gpl are copyleft because only stupid people use free software. There's some hardcore logic right there.[/QUOTE] Can you rephrase that? It makes no sense to me.

[QUOTE=gparent;35571000]But that's impossible. Either the developer is free to do what he wants, including infringing on his own users' freedom, or he's not free to do whatever he wants (for example, is forced to contribute his patches back) in order for users to have the right to use Free code. You can't have it both way. GPL keeps the code free, it doesn't really care about the developers. If you want developer freedom, something BSD derived is probably better. [/QUOTE] that's bullshit. no one is forcing anyone to anything using permissive licenses. Yes users will (in perfect world) pick only free software and so logical step will be to write free software. You (developer) can do otherwise, you're completely free to do so, it just wouldn't be useful - which what i described is basically economy - you don't make something that won't sell. simple. Also why would a developer develop free software (so wanting the open source community help him develop) and then make non-free patches/bugfixes etc? surely he would start a whole project free or whole project proprietary.

[QUOTE=Janek566;35572301]that's bullshit. no one is forcing anyone to anything using permissive licenses.[/quote] Which part is bullshit? I don't think I said anything resembling that in my post, it seems like you made it up. [QUOTE=Janek566;35572301]which what i described is basically economy - you don't make something that won't sell.[/quote] Complete nonsense. You are [b]required[/b] to make things that do not sell in nearly all organizations. This includes internal documentation, internal applications, security guidelines, etc. [QUOTE=Janek566;35572301]Also why would a developer develop free software (so wanting the open source community help him develop) and then make non-free patches/bugfixes etc?[/quote] What you are describing is standard practice. Have you never heard of products with a proprietary "Enterprise" version that had more features than the open source one? It's a business model. Note that this doesn't work with the GPL, since it takes away the developer's freedom to close part of the code.

"Be wary of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master".

[QUOTE=gparent;35573282]Complete nonsense. You are [b]required[/b] to make things that do not sell in nearly all organizations. This includes internal documentation, internal applications, security guidelines, etc. [/QUOTE] all the stuff you mentioned are required/recommended to be produced for the product to sell. Just because they do not directly contribute to the cost doesn't mean they do not improve the capital. [QUOTE=gparent;35573282]What you are describing is standard practice. Have you never heard of products with a proprietary "Enterprise" version that had more features than the open source one? It's a business model. Note that this doesn't work with the GPL, since it takes away the developer's freedom to close part of the code. [/QUOTE] No i haven't i've heard of [B]freeware[/B] software that has enterprise version but never a FOSS software with enterprise version. Also your last point proves why GPL isn't free software license.

I don't use Linux as a main-OS, always had it dual-booted. The thing with dual booting is that I normally end up installing it, configuring it and then never using it, always booting into Windows. Considering going full on Linux when Ubuntu 12.04 comes out. Main reasons are gaming and using software that's not available on Linux (Sony Vegas, Photoshop etc.). Last time I tried Counter Strike: Source, it ran really well in WINE, so I think I can give up a bit of performance to move over. Still debating with myself wether it's a great idea though. Edit: Considering using Linux Mint Debian Edition instead. What would Facepunch recommend as a primary PC distro?

[QUOTE=Janek566;35582888]all the stuff you mentioned are required/recommended to be produced for the product to sell.[/quote] Yes, and this can include free software necessary for your organization to make a profit. See Ubuntu, Mozilla, etc. I'm glad you agree with me. [QUOTE=Janek566;35582888]No i haven't i've heard of [B]freeware[/B] software that has enterprise version but never a FOSS software with enterprise version.[/QUOTE] Well now you have. [QUOTE=Janek566;35582888]Also your last point proves why GPL isn't free software license.[/QUOTE] But the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPL"]GPL *is*[/URL] a free software license. My last point simply proves that the GPL aims to protect the code and end users more than the developers, whereas BSD does the opposite.

[QUOTE]No i haven't i've heard of freeware software that has enterprise version but never a FOSS software with enterprise version. [/QUOTE] [url]http://www.mysql.com/products/[/url] 'Community Version' is the FOSS version.

"well now you have" - what the fuck? Sources?

[QUOTE=Janek566;35584168]"well now you have" - what the fuck? Sources?[/QUOTE] See BBgamer720's post, I'm sure there are many more examples.

I use it as my main os because I honestly have much less problems with it than I do windows 7. I still use windows 7 for many things but I strongly prefer Linux. I was one of those people that always bought into the "Linux sucks" thing. But now that I'm using it I freaking love it.

I use Linux and Windows 50/50. When I work on university things or customize my system, I use Linux. When I play GMod or work on DarkRP, I'll use Windows. Browsing on the internet is something I do on whichever of the two I'm currently using. I love Linux because of the tiling window manager I use, because of the very useful terminal and because of the customization. I use Windows because I can play Garry's mod on it properly without messing with wine. I might fully switch to Linux once steam and GMod are supported natively.

I wish I could use Linux more. Especially with the way future versions of Windows are turning out (and yes, I'm aware I can just stay with Windows 7). But the main reason I use Windows is because there are certain programs I need that either aren't available for Linux or emulate poorly. Oh and I'm a gamer of course... which always kind of hinders what I can do. :/ For example, music composition. I prefer something like Ableton Live over any other music composition/remixing tool out there, but there's nothing that I can find on Linux that really does the same thing (I'm specifically talking about the beatmatching, arrangement views, and effects etc...) that I can find. There's Bitwig Studio, which is going to be crossplatform, but since that doesn't seem to be coming out for a while, there's nothing I can really do about that. I could just dual-boot, yeah, and just have my games on Windows, but then what happens? At first I just need an IM program to keep talking with people when I switch over, but before I know it I just settle back into Windows again.

[QUOTE=PsYchOsIs;35632747]I wish I could use Linux more. Especially with the way future versions of Windows are turning out (and yes, I'm aware I can just stay with Windows 7). But the main reason I use Windows is because there are certain programs I need that either aren't available for Linux or emulate poorly. Oh and I'm a gamer of course... which always kind of hinders what I can do. :/ For example, music composition. I prefer something like Ableton Live over any other music composition/remixing tool out there, but there's nothing that I can find on Linux that really does the same thing (I'm specifically talking about the beatmatching, arrangement views, and effects etc...) that I can find. There's Bitwig Studio, which is going to be crossplatform, but since that doesn't seem to be coming out for a while, there's nothing I can really do about that. I could just dual-boot, yeah, and just have my games on Windows, but then what happens? At first I just need an IM program to keep talking with people when I switch over, but before I know it I just settle back into Windows again.[/QUOTE] It is rather irritating when I have to switch to windows 7 for steam and things.

looks like i'm very lucky not being much of a gamer. Oh and linux fedora with full special effects on GTX560ti and 24 inch lcd led display is sweet. :quagmire:

I develop for embedded systems and using RTLinux distributions like Wind River gives me performance guarantees that I need when designing computing systems. On a purely psychological scale I treat my Linux machine as a tool I use in my trade rather than a personal computing device and as such I can work much more clearly and with more focus than I ever could in any other environment.

It all just looks good. I love how it sets up printers as soon as you plug them in. I pretty much like everything. I'm using Ubuntu Desktop 11.10

I'd love to use Linux (even though I know nothing about programming) just because I appreciate open source software and the concepts behind it. However, it's missing Photoshop, Corel Painter, and other useful programs for working on art. I know of GIMP but it's not up to the same level, I don't like the GUI as much, and it's not as widely supported resource-wise. Also Steam, but if that makes it to Linux as it's being rumored I may try to find some good workflow for art in Linux and make a switch over. Right now I'm on OSX. Just my 2 cents, take it or leave it. I can see both sides.

I find mypaint to be a great art program; It has a single feature that I adore: unlimited canvas. You don't have to work with image dimensions or image quality, you just paint on the screen and save. If you use a mouse though it'd probably be terrible; it's designed for drawing tablets.

[QUOTE=Galago;35895912]I'd love to use Linux (even though I know nothing about programming) just because I appreciate open source software and the concepts behind it. However, it's missing Photoshop, Corel Painter, and other useful programs for working on art. I know of GIMP but it's not up to the same level, I don't like the GUI as much, and it's not as widely supported resource-wise. Also Steam, but if that makes it to Linux as it's being rumored I may try to find some good workflow for art in Linux and make a switch over. Right now I'm on OSX. Just my 2 cents, take it or leave it. I can see both sides.[/QUOTE] Have you looked into Krita? One of the best art-creation tools I've ever used.

My reasons: 1. I'm a cheap bastard 2. I like to muck about with little scripts to do everything for me. 3. One word: synaptic 4. I don't play a huge amount of games and I've got a windows box for when I do. Also, I'm a bit addicted to minecraft at the moment, which is cross-platform. People like to say that Linux makes things harder, but I use it because it makes my life easier. If I need to do some odd task, I can easily create a script or download an open-source program to do it for me.

[QUOTE=st0rmforce;35912621]My reasons: 1. I'm a cheap bastard 2. I like to muck about with little scripts to do everything for me. 3. One word: synaptic 4. I don't play a huge amount of games and I've got a windows box for when I do. Also, I'm a bit addicted to minecraft at the moment, which is cross-platform. People like to say that Linux makes things harder, but I use it because it makes my life easier. If I need to do some odd task, I can easily create a script or download an open-source program to do it for me.[/QUOTE] This!

short answer: i don't. long answer: i do, to an extent. i work as an IT consultant, so i need constant access to a Linux box. i don't like using VMs because i'm just a finnicky person. i use Arch on my work laptop, FreeBSD on my Sun Ultra 20, and DD-WRT on my router. but, because i game a lot, i have Windows 7 on my G74SX. so 3 out of 4 of my computers run *NIX, but i wouldn't consider it my main OS.

I would use linux much, much more if there was some system-wide audio equalizer program like what they did some time ago with pulseaudio and some guy's equalizer plugin that you could just compile and had it working properly out of the box. Unfortunately, the equalizer stopped working after some updates and I could barely get pulseaudio to work properly even after trying several configurations in systems without pre-configured packages like debian. I then switched to ubuntu and the equalizer was no longer working like it did in 2010 when it was supported. I wonder if fedora still has it working well out of the box...

I have Linux on my slow laptop and my home computer is a mac. Dont hate me because i have a mac, it's actrually pretty good. I can use the basic linux commands, ssh to my server without any crappy programs just the terminal. It works well, runs the games i like most (GarrysMod and Minecraft) so i'm happy with it. I will not buy a new mac though because they're so expensive, my mom bought my last one so i didn't need to pay. When my mac gets old, i'm pretty sure that i will change to Linux. I really enjoy using linux on my Laptop. I have used it on my server for over a year and about 4 months on my laptop, where i am currently playing with LiveDebian, conky, different window managers and all that stuff and i'm getting pretty familiar with the linux commands now, which is actually easier than using gui most times.