Why Doesn't Anyone Give a Crap About Freedom Zero?

blog
41

Honestly, I really don’t care about freedom-0, it makes no diff to me, I buy tools to solve issues right now, if the tool no longer fills my needs, I either upgrade or buy and alternative (or check open source). What it boils down to, open source without a commercial entity behind it rarely, if ever, rises to an awesome tool, like the commercial applications. (having said that, 7zip does rule and I’m certain other examples exist, but by and large, they are exceptions, not the rule)

I’m not free with freedom zero because, honestly, if everyone stopped developing on Firefox tomorrow, what makes you think I have the time, inclination or ability to maintain or manage the application? So when development stops, it is just as dead as when commercial software stops. Lastly, and my biggest gripe about alleged “free” software is it as JUST as locked down as proprietary - I can’t take code from it and use it as I see fit, if it is GPL, it is viral, I can’t use it for anything I want to sell (and maintain proprietary code apart from the GPL snippet).

42

I think a lot of the apathy regarding the issue could be traced to how ubiquitous vendor lock-in is. If you see it everyday in most of the products that you use and love, you won’t naturally see it as evil, and even when someone points it out to you there will be some internal resistance to the idea.

43

I disagree. Apple isn’t as evil as you make them out to be.

While you may only be able to run Mac OS X on Apple hardware, you can also run Windows or Linux. I believe Apple’s reason for limiting OS X to Macs is more about the desire to produce excellent products than anything else. If Apple had to support OS X on arbitrary 3rd party machines you would lose the simplicity of OS X and end up with Windows or Linux, having to deal with installing driver updates and blah blah blahhhhhh. Simply put, Apple doesn’t think anyone else’s hardware is worthy of their software. Arrogant, perhaps, but I tend to agree.

Additionally, Apple embraces open source. A large portion of Mac OS X is based on FreeBSD and other open source software; see Darwin (which does run on 3rd party hardware). Safari’s rendering engine, WebKit, was originally based on the KHTML engine, and they’ve made such significant improvements that KHTML is incorporating much of the work done on WebKit back into KHTML.

Since OS X is POSIX compliant It’s also nearly trivial to use most software written for Unix/Linux on OS X, they even include X11 for graphical programs.

44

"People buy consoles like the Xbox 360 and Wii because they work with a minimum of fuss."
No, people buy Wiis and Xboxes simply because they can easily grab games on the internet and run them on the console.
My point is that they buy these ones rather than say PS3s because the ROI is okay if you don’t need to pay for games, not because they provide a better user experience.
So I don’t think your example is the best you could have chosen here.

Only open source advocates care about freedom 0.
When I talk with proprietary software/hardware users they just don’t understand what’s wrong with being locked up by fortune 500 companies.
Like, “But look at this design ! it can even fit in an enveloppe !”

The hype VS substance battle has been lost ages ago.

45

I think you have this the wrong way.

With a Mac, you pay more, but you can run any software that you want. Check out Parallels or Boot Camp. You can run Linux and OSS no problem.

What you can’t do is run OS X on non-Apple hardware. So complain about how Macs are more expensive if you want, or complain that they won’t support non-Apple hardware configurations, but you’ve answered your own question in writing this post. After you heft over the extra cash, you have the freedom to run ANY software you want.

46

Macs differ from consoles in one crucial respect – you can run whatever software you want on a Mac, you’re not stuck with Mac-only Cocoa apps. In particular, see MacPorts and Fink. Thus, although I run OS X on a Macbook, the rest of my software ecosystem consists of Firefox, emacs, ssh, bash, latex, octave, Gimp, etc. I bought a Mac because it was the best platform on which to run these apps. Furthermore, I have specifically avoided depending on Mac-only solutions like the Omni apps or defective iTunes AAC’s.

47

I actually respect people who engage in “flogging the gnu”.

At least they are practicing what they are preaching.

I can’t stand people who steal music with file sharing software and watch downloaded bootlegged movies days before the movies are released in the movie theaters and claim they are doing it based on principle.

They say they oppose the large corporations not properly rewarding the people who help make the content so stealing it is somehow rationalized as an act of virtue.

Give me a break! Those people are stealing what they are stealing because they like it, not to make a statement or support anyone. If they didn’t like it, they never would have bothered stealing it in the first place.

People who are “flogging the gnu” and are willing to do without some features as a consequence of choosing that lifestyle really impress me.

I think music, movie and software thieves should look to the “flogging the gnu” crowd as an example of what living with some real integrity looks like.

Personally, I run a mix of proprietary and open source software on a Windows XP laptop. Open source apps like Audacity, jRipper, Firefox, and Juice and proprietary apps like Microsoft Media Player and Microsoft Word.

Knowing the open source crowd is out there busily working away day after day and night after night to provide free software solutions as the need arises makes me feel a little more safe at night, kind of like knowing our soldiers, hospitals and police are out there, ready to help us, 24 hours a day.

48

You act as if the horrible interface and complete lack of standardization in user experience on windows is the fault of its more “open” hardware platform.

Some of the hardware configuration issues are. The fact that even a random shareware app built for Mac OS using apple’s tools is likely to have a more usable interface than most major software for windows is not.

And the only thing a mac locks you out of are:

  1. Software written for another operating system (which, btw, every hardware platform does)
  2. Replacing your motherboard cheaply.

Everything else is only limited by the different vendor’s market research.

49

I give a crap about freedom zero. It’s why I first started using Linux. It’s why I use Gimp even though I think Gimp is a piece of shit. It’s why I refuse to use Opera for more than a few seconds at a time.

The people why give a crap might by a minority, but it’s still a pretty significant group of people.

50

Jeff,

You are usually right on the money, but I’ve got to call Bravo Sierra on you today.

Apple consumer electronics products are fairly tightly closed, but Mac/OSX is a fairly open platform. No one is telling me that I have to run iEveryThing apps. Lawyers aren’t knocking on my door to check for non-Apple approved software. FireFox and gVim (suck it, emacs users) run perfectly fine. Heck, Apple makes it easy to run open source software by supplying an open port of X11 for the platform. Apple supplies a full suite of open build tools as well, making it easy to do whatever I need to do, including install and run the latest Gnu approved utilities.

And the hardware is pretty open now. There isn’t as much variety as the windows ecosystem, but that is not always a minus. I can plug in plenty of USB and FireWire devices. If I need to write a driver for them, I can. I don’t need apple to sign it or anything.

The Mac/OSX combo is superior, compared to the Windows platform, in every way but one. Mac/OSX are sold as a combined package. Your choice of platform is certainly more closed than mine overall.

51

Sorry… I was the ‘didn’t read the whole thing’ guy…

52

I feel like you answered your own question, Jeff. No one gives a crap about freedom zero because it doesn’t innovate. It’s the difference between generic store-brand and Name Brandtrade; stuff. It may be basically the same thing, but nobody’s ever going to get excited over or make a rush for store-brand goods.

Another reason is that very few people care about the way something is made. Most people do not care. They don’t care about the politics or the process that brought a piece of software to fruition. Look at Wal-Mart. Nobody walks in there lamenting the poor laborers that made all that stuff. They want a toy for their kid to make him stop crying, and their budget is $1.96. People don’t stop the presses when they buy a cup of coffee to ask whether it’s Fair Trade coffee or not. People don’t care. And they’re not going to care unless it becomes a headline issue on CNN. Then they’ll care for about two, maybe three weeks, tops.

53

I’ve messed around with Linux distro and although many of the new package managers have been improved tremendously over the years (yum, apt-get), it still isn’t attractive to the mainstream non-geek users. For them they still see it as a step backwards from simply double clicking on a installer and blindly hitting “next” 5 times and have the software working. Worse if you have to run some shell script to config it. We’re geeks, we can spend hours messing around in a terminal, the mainstream users just want something that works.

Freedom 0 is a very noble idea, but too often as Shmork says, software-development-as-decided-by-a-lot-of-programmers simply does not work out because there’s no usability testing involved. It’s the reason why Apple succeeds. Their end user softwares are extremely intuitive.

54

Wikipedia says that Movable Type was released under GPL about two months ago.

55

I happen to be someone who believes in proprietary software development – even though I actively contribute to open source projects. Why? Because software just doesn’t live very long. Yes, my Mac and it’s OS X will probably become dead weight in a few years, with the closed architecture totally locking me out. But will I even care in a few years, when I will have already moved on to something else?

The GNU advocates would have me use crappy software because it’s free, waiting hopefully for the day when geeks everywhere will suddenly fall in love with that most ungeeky of things: simple usability. I used to think Linux people didn’t value their time, after wasting days trying to configure a server with a wretched interface. But then it hit me: dicking around with the OS isn’t a waste of time for them; it’s the whole point.

When I buy a pen and paper, I’m totally locked in. When the ink runs out, I have to buy more. I can’t really modify my pen for any purpose other than writing. The paper decides for me what its texture and shape will be. But by the time I’m really geared up to care, I will have moved on.

Give me functionality over hollow philosophy any day; or give me a philosopher who knows what life is really about.

56

While by and large I agree with the entire post (I’m one of the few I know that has no real interest in owning an iPhone), there’s a whole other axis of “freedom” that isn’t being addressed. People have the right to choose what works best for them, even if that means going with a crippled, third-party-resistant apple product. People are free to choose something that is, itself, less free.

It’s easy for developers to miss this point (myself included), as we tend to see anything that plugs in as a playground. Those of us who have done mobile development were kicked in the gut when the iPhone didn’t have an sdk- It was like being that kid on crutches in the “pied piper” story, who got to see a glimpse of paradise before the door was shut in his face forever.

But not everybody is a developer. For a lot of people, “the freedom of choice” is a lot more like “the burden of decision.” They want to turn on the machine, get whatever they need out of it with minimum hassle, and walk away. It doesn’t make anyone a sheep (not that you implied that- I’m just emphasizing)- it just means they have different priorities for their time energy. For those people, Windows is workable, Apple is perfect, and Linux would be outright ridiculous:P

57

Here’s an interesting insight into how Apple killed Darwin:

http://www.synack.net/~bbraun/writing/osfail.html

58

What!!! You’re kidding me! Mac IS NOT a Dongle. You can run Windows on mac. I know MacOS must be installed for the system to work, but THAT COMES WITH THE COMPUTER. There will be no customers who cannot run a brand new mac because they don’t have the software. Every apple mac comes with everything that it needs to run. Call it a dongle if you want, but it’s an Intel based computer capable of running windows, OSX and a variety of other OS’s given you have the drivers. Hell even in OSX you can emulate another system. It is so much more flexible than a dongle.

There is no gaming console by Nintendo, Microsoft, or Sony which will run any of eachothers system games. That would be a major advantage. The mac does it. It has eaten its competition so call it a dongle all you want… It does not change the fact that it goes above and beyond every other PC out there…

Windows is like a gasoline pickup built with standalone engine, wheels and cab. Greasy. Powerful. Dirty. Mac is like a honda gasonline-electric hybrid. It will run the alternative option, it will run the standard. But good luck trying to use it’s parts on anything else other than the honda.

But I guess I have completely misunderstood your definition of Freedom Zero. I just bought a macbook after years of PC use(since ppc clones were stopped). I feel free as ever. Much more free than any other intel PC i’ve purchased.

I think what you’re really trying to say is that you want to use macosx on a pc legally. and it angers you that you cant.

Yo mommas a dongle.

59

Theres a few misconceptions I’d like to address, despite the lack of knowledge I have :slight_smile:
First, freedom zero is of little real use to a general consumer, because consumers don’t really use software. They go to the shop, pick up a piece of software, use for the reason they bought it, and thats it. Freedom zero for these people is only really useful if it didn’t quite do what you needed, because you could pay a person to make the changes for you.

Second, freedom zero is of paramount importance for government and large business contracts. The reason for this is clear: Governments have changing needs, and the software they need is complex and unpredictable. The requirements of yesterday are not the same as the requirements of tomorrow, and governments should be able to flex their financial muscle to ensure they get the source as part of the deliverables.

Third, freedom zero is of some importance to students, lecturers and enthusiasts, because being able to examine how an application works is one of the best ways to learn the trade.

Fourth, free software has often innovated in interesting and tangible ways: Apache, Firefox, 3D compositing desktops, and source control are examples of areas where open software is stronger than most closed source relatives.

Not to mention, open source software is just more fun to write. For me, that intellectual hive of people all looking to build the best software is addictive, especially to someone who has spent a great deal of time surround by people purely interested in getting a paycheck.

Finally, I believe the point Jeff is trying to make with the apple mac “dongle”, is not that you can do what ever you want to the mac, but that you can’t run your mac software on other platforms. A Dongle restricts access to software.

60

Wow, this post seems to have drawn the Apple fanatics out of the woodwork.

Fact: The Intel Macs wouldn’t have the market share they have now if it weren’t for the fact that you can use other OSes via BootCamp or Parallels/Fusion. This means that OSX isn’t the be-all and end-all when it comes to operating systems. And guess what? Apple allows other OSes on their hardware but DOES NOT ALLOW other hardware to run their OS.

OSX doesn’t run without a Mac, therefore the Mac is a dongle for OSX. Simple, really.