Eric Raymond on desktop Linux

bpisciot · 2006-08-30 18:11:24

I've been flogging a lot of articles on the forums lately, and here's another:

http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS2761311745.html

Author Steven Vaughan-Nichols discusses desktop development of Linux with Eric Raymond. I was particularly interested in Mr. Raymond's thinking about the use of proprietary software in Linux. Here's a quote:

Linux, Raymond is sure, also needs, one way or the other, to support proprietary equipment like iPods. "When a twenty-something year old comes up to me and I talk to him about Linux, the first thing he wants to know is: 'Can I run my iPod on it?'" Saying, as some do, that Linux should only support non-proprietary, DRM-free (digital- rights- management- free) media formats, like Ogg Vorbis, misses the point. If desktop Linux doesn't become popular, no one will use it, and the open formats will become mere curiosities.

This makes sense to me, but I'm conflicted. Any other strong opinions out there?

Bob P.

arooaroo · 2006-08-30 18:29:13

I personally have always been thinking along those lines ever since I switched to Linux. I never started using Linux because of the GPL. For me, the number one factor is Getting The Job Done At A Price I Can Afford.

Generally, I can't afford to pay anything, so that makes Linux distros ideal. But for me, that still means that proprietary freeware is also fair-game, and I'll use it accordingly if it Gets The Job Done (To My Liking).

So, on my box I have ATI drivers (although I've since disabled), Flash, Real Player, Java, ttf-ms, Acrobat, Skype, (not to mention WinXP + games) etc.

That's not to say that I don't rate the open source model - because I do. I've made a few very minor contributions to the software world and they are all under Free licenses. I always seek FOSS alternatives to accomplish a task, but I'm not FOSS exclusive. And if I want to convert non-techie types off Windows to Linux, then they won't really care in the slightest.

Unlike Microsoft, if Linux ever took over the desktop market, it wouldn't just stagnate. I'd say that getting Linux on the desktop is main quest. I'm sure a lot of things will fall into place afterwards.

allucid · 2006-08-30 22:57:55

So...what's his point? Companies can make closed-source software for Linux. How does he propose we get apple to release iTunes for Linux?

arooaroo · 2006-08-30 23:07:55

allucid wrote:

So...what's his point? Companies can make closed-source software for Linux. How does he propose we get apple to release iTunes for Linux?

Well, why does Apple release iTunes for Windows? Basically because the OS is so popular that they'd be severely limiting the popularity of the iPod if the majority of users couldn't plug it in to their Windows PC.

So, I think what Eric is getting at is that companies need a compelling reason to develop for a target platform. So how do we get Apple to release a Linux version of iTunes? Well, the Linux platform needs to become a major desktop player.

allucid · 2006-08-31 00:21:04

arooaroo wrote:

So, I think what Eric is getting at is that companies need a compelling reason to develop for a target platform. So how do we get Apple to release a Linux version of iTunes? Well, the Linux platform needs to become a major desktop player.

Oh, linux needs to become a major deskotp player. Good thing we have guys like Eric Raymond to point that out for us.

elasticdog · 2006-08-31 01:02:52

You can always send Apple feedback with a request for a Linux version of iTunes...might not do anything, but it might at least draw more attention to it if many people do so.

pauldonnelly · 2006-08-31 01:48:33

Well, I posted my much-more-prolix-than-intended opinion on this topic in another thread, but I'll squish some words together here too.

It seems to me that insistence on a "free software only" world is mostly rooted in paranioa. I'm quick to agree with free software zealots the world over that it would be better to have only free software on my computer: that means full control is in my hands where it belongs, code is well-reviewed, and I can learn from or improve the code. I even also agree that being forced to use any particular proprietary software is a Bad Thing (with a capital BT), because it gives too much control to whoever makes that software. However, I'm much more hesitant to say that using a binary blob to make my hardware go or interfacing less-than-open hardware with my computer is going to destroy the free software world as we know it.

I sense a lot of fear that our wonderful system of sharing is going to collapse as binary blobs leach decay first into our hardware, and then into our souls. After our hearts are corrupted the proprietary vendors will either enslave us or cease supporting us altogether, whichever they think will hurt more. I'm more confident in the community. There's a "continuum of openness" along which our systems may lie. I do think that depending on too much proprietary software would be bad, but I also think that we free software hippies are capable of stopping before we're over the edge. The slope isn't as slippery as some say, and if we stop sliding down it before we give proprietary vendors enough power to abuse us then we'll be fine.

So, by that logic, I think that it's okay to use Nvidia's driver (the same example from the other discussion) to get my graphics. I give up all the benefits of a free software driver, but I do get the benefits of having a driver that works well. Nvidia provides, and as long as I still have the freedom to dump them when they cease to do so, I'll use what they have to offer if it's the most effective solution. It's true that they could dump me at any moment, but I'm willing to trust them until my next upgrade, which surely won't be more than a few years away. I'm constructing a computer system here, not picking a life partner.

brazzmonkey · 2006-08-31 10:40:07

there are good quality closed-source software around here. sure it could be open-source, and it would be even better from some users point of view.
still, sometimes closed source is just better quality (i don't know if it's because it's closed-source, though).
look out vmware stuff (and compare it to qemu - btw, kqemu is not open source).
there's a poll about which browser do arch users use. guess who's 2nd : opera.
it's cool when a manufacturer like nvidia, or some printer manufacturers release linux drivers.

i use open source software whenever i can. but sometimes quality is just better in the closed source world (especially when it come to hardware drivers). and sometimes there is no equivalence for closed source software.
i suppose both should co-exist.

Arch Linux

#1 2006-08-30 18:11:24

Eric Raymond on desktop Linux

#2 2006-08-30 18:29:13

Re: Eric Raymond on desktop Linux

#3 2006-08-30 22:57:55

Re: Eric Raymond on desktop Linux

#4 2006-08-30 23:07:55

Re: Eric Raymond on desktop Linux

#5 2006-08-31 00:21:04

Re: Eric Raymond on desktop Linux

#6 2006-08-31 01:02:52

Re: Eric Raymond on desktop Linux

#7 2006-08-31 01:48:33

Re: Eric Raymond on desktop Linux

#8 2006-08-31 10:40:07

Re: Eric Raymond on desktop Linux

Board footer