Open-Source Group Razzes Microsoft With 'BadVista.org'

An open-source group mocked Microsoft on a newly launched Web site dubbed BadVista.org and claimed the Windows operating system is a "power grab" to steal control over users' computers.

The Free Software Foundation's campaign will both promote free software alternatives to Vista and publicize what it sees as the danger of Microsoft's new operating system, the group said.

"Vista is an upsell masquerading as an upgrade," said John Sullivan, the group's program administrator, on the site. "It is a ruse to compel the further transfer of control over peoples' computers to an external and mysterious certification authority with peculiar standards of 'genuine.' It's a ploy to artificially motivate the purchase of expensive, unnecessary hardware."

In other entries on the BadVista.org site, Sullivan labeled Microsoft's Trusted Computing initiative as "Treacherous Computing," called the company's marketing campaign a "power grab," and promised to promote free operating system alternatives, especially Linux.

View: Full Article @ InformationWeek

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft Turns Up The Heat On Windows 2000 Users

Next Story

Samsung's Plan for Terabit Flash Memory

88 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Why does the FSF's propaganda get a post on Neowin and mine doesn't? In spite of BadVista.org I have created BadOSX (for now the temp url is http://ownednoobs.info/badosx ) because Vista isn't much of an evil especially when we have a much eviler company out there with no one trying to take stabs at them! I'm sick of everyone always making fun of M$ when Apple is much worse (false advertising, not explaining how viruses got on their ipods, creating users with dog-like loyality, taking every possible opprotunity to attack M$, more false advertising, etc.) so if youre sick of Apple visit my site instead I'm also writing an article about Apple, part of it explains how by using this website known as "Newegg.com" we can find the same parts for a Mac Pro for less than half the price of how much Apple sells it for :P Check it out.

Quote - hunter1234 said @ #39
this is like when mac fanboys trying to over throw pc users. but this is even more childish.

Agree.
The open-source group should pay more time on producing open-source software, rather than setting up such kind of websites. As a beginner of Linux, I want to *show off* my knowledge in Linux by doing some fantasic thing, rather than laugh at the people who use Windows (and Microsoft products).

Please... Linux (and other open-source software) is still under developement if they want to get the markets from Microsoft.

That site is bull****, read the comments about it on slashdot. Half the sites listed on that site describe vista like they have never used it!

Oh come on......

I can't believe anyone is taking this seriously, these "guys" can be nothing more than open source fan-boys, spouting the usualy unbalanced arguments against anything that isn't open source.

I mean lets face it the whole "website" is nothing more than a glorified blog. I actually visited to try and work out what these "guys" were touting as a realistic comparitive to Vista available in the open-source market, and all i read was "don't buy vista, don't buy vista, don't buy vista, don't buy vista".

If anybody wants to be taken seriously with something like this (and I really do encourage someone with the know to do this) they need to put together a simple guide that will get users a "free" solution offering a rich and extensive experience, such that the Vista solution will provide.

John Sullivan sounds a lot like "The Comic Book Guy" on The Simpsons.

When he speaks he tries to make himself sound very intelligent as if he knows all

"Vista is an upsell masquerading as an upgrade," said John Sullivan, the group's program administrator, on the site. "It is a ruse to compel the further transfer of control over peoples' computers to an external and mysterious certification authority with peculiar standards of 'genuine.' It's a ploy to artificially motivate the purchase of expensive, unnecessary hardware."

Better be safe and wear your tinfoil hat.

"Vista is an upsell masquerading as an upgrade," said John Sullivan, the group's program administrator

Good thing all those payed upgrades for Mac OSX are useful!

Quote - black_death said @ #33

Good thing all those payed upgrades for Mac OSX are useful!

Agreed! People seem to thing that vista is only an update to the gui.
Vista (or XP) IS ease of use. Even linus torvalds would agree on that.
Some people seem to thing that everything thats free is "da ****".

I can agree, in some cases, but when it comes to linux, theres litterally thousands of
developers out there, each contributing their code (to sombody elses code). The only thing
standarised is the linux kernel. At microsoft this is all put in a system, so if theres found a bug in the code,
it's fixed by the people that made it, who know the code, not by sombody on the other side of
the globe, who corrects the code and then introduces another bug, becaus the correction he made, was'nt
the right correction for sombody else.

I would have found linux as a desktop alternative, IF it was more ease of use.

Btw.... what does wine tell you? it says to me; " I want to be windooooooows" :p

For wrapup: This is my personal meaning, If some of my "facts" were wrong, i really don't need to know.
(and just so you know, linux is a super os for servers, even in a Windows Domain!)

Quote - morphen said @ #33.1

Agreed! People seem to thing that vista is only an update to the gui.
Vista (or XP) IS ease of use. Even linus torvalds would agree on that.
Some people seem to thing that everything thats free is "da ****".

I can agree, in some cases, but when it comes to linux, theres litterally thousands of
developers out there, each contributing their code (to sombody elses code). The only thing
standarised is the linux kernel. At microsoft this is all put in a system, so if theres found a bug in the code,
it's fixed by the people that made it, who know the code, not by sombody on the other side of
the globe, who corrects the code and then introduces another bug, becaus the correction he made, was'nt
the right correction for sombody else.

I would have found linux as a desktop alternative, IF it was more ease of use.

Btw.... what does wine tell you? it says to me; " I want to be windooooooows" :p

For wrapup: This is my personal meaning, If some of my "facts" were wrong, i really don't need to know.
(and just so you know, linux is a super os for servers, even in a Windows Domain!)

I totally agree and Linux is much better coded than Windows however speed and security (both I have taken care of msyelf ;)) or having a (physical) server aren't issues for me so that's why I use Windows. I do however completely disagree with the people who made this site, Vista is a very big upgrade perhaps the biggest since 3.1 -> 95 but that doesn't make it a useful one, XP is better than Vista but Vista is not some attempt to "control everyones computers", obviously M$ is the last company to have that kind of an agenda since they have over 90% marketshare already however lets say there was some kind of an organization aiming to make software developers only do what they love as a hobby isnetad of getting payed for their hardwork and to make everyone use Linux instead of having a choice, perhaps they're the ones with some kind of a socialist agenda :sleeping:

Ease of use... I use linux, and I find it easier to use than windows. You use windows and you find it easier.

Just use what you like and don't expect one system to fit everyone's needs/tastes.

Quote - ichi said @ #33.3
Ease of use... I use linux, and I find it easier to use than windows. You use windows and you find it easier.

Just use what you like and don't expect one system to fit everyone's needs/tastes.

I never criticised linux, I said exactly what you said, I criticised BadVista and the FSF.

Quote - black_death said @ #33.4

I never criticised linux, I said exactly what you said, I criticised BadVista and the FSF.

Yeah well, it was actually aimed at morphen's comment. Sorry for not being clear enough.

Quote - ichi said @ #33.3
Ease of use... I use linux, and I find it easier to use than windows. You use windows and you find it easier.

Just use what you like and don't expect one system to fit everyone's needs/tastes.


Agree.
We work with computer because it can improve the efficiency.
Different people have different efficiency when using different OS.

hmm so I'm not (that) mad.

See, I'd swear I did see something like "Running Vista today is a headache" on Neowin's front page, now I see on that site that it's an article from the inquirer.

Not that I'll bother reading it, but I was just curious about what it was about, as I didn't have time to check it before it was removed.

Regarding the topic, the site design sucks (but then again so do most sites' )

Instead of telling me why I shouldn't buy Vista, why not tell me why Open Source is better? Come up with a standardized GUI and make things easy for people to use and something that normal users can use. Until we get those, Linux will never really crossover.

btw, I'm a linux server user.

Why does Linux need a standardised GUI?

I think it's good to have GUI choices. I can use Gnome, KDE, XFCE or anything I like.

Nothing bad about that ;-)

And normal users CAN use Linux.
The final issues left are:
-hardware support (which is annoying during installation)
-OEM support (which is annoying - because many people don't like to install an OS themselves)
-programs support (games, AutoCAD, Photoshop... - though things are getting ported, and Wine is another solution)

Despite these issues, it's perfectly possible to use (Note: I said use, not install) Linux without using the command line.

This sounds like it was set up and written by either a group of kids who don't know what they are talking about or 30-somethings that still live at home, can't find a job, and are taking it out on Microsoft for no reason.

Either way it's a huge embarassment and I hope Microsoft is getting a good laugh out of it.

I personally think it's great :)
At least it's something for those of us not enamored with M$ to check every now and then and have a laugh while other people are out trying to reactivate their $400 vista on some new computer they bought.

See freedom is about having the ability to make your own decisions, choices, and draw your own damn conclusions Not having views enforced onto you by other people. They should do a little less time whining and bashing MS and do a little more promoting their open source software. Alot of people who claim they don't like MS have spent a little too much time listening to other people criticize about it and that in turn influences their choice. I see what their trying to do but they go about it all wrong, its just tasteless and highly unprofessional to say the least. I personally use win, linux, mac all equally because they all offer something good in their own way. I use them based on my own choice. Now thats "Freedom" right there.

I think its important to realise that the "Free Software Foundation" DONT speak for free software or open source in general, although they clearly like to think they do.

Firefox for example has nothing to do with these morons.

I hope this site directs the abuse where its appropriate, at the Free Software Foundation and Richard Stallman, and not at free and open source software in general.

Here is an image of the man himself btw *Richard Stallman* See, thats the unimpressive man at the heart of this stupid organisation. Doesnt help its credability does it? Btw, there is also a google video somewhere of him picking at his feet and eating it while giving a lecture.

Classy guy

Quote - *John* said @ #1
...
Here is an image of the man himself btw *Richard Stallman* See, thats the unimpressive man at the heart of this stupid organisation. Doesnt help its credability does it? Btw, there is also a google video somewhere of him picking at his feet and eating it while giving a lecture.

Classy guy :/

Yes, let's resort to an ad-hominem personal attack, rather than discussing valid logical items. :rolleyes:

I have as much respect for your post as the posts that "discuss" Microsoft by making fun of Ballmer.

Quote - markjensen said @ #24.2
Yes, let's resort to an ad-hominem personal attack, rather than discussing valid logical items. :rolleyes:

I have as much respect for your post as the posts that "discuss" Microsoft by making fun of Ballmer.

Awww, you were so pleased with yourself at including the term "ad-hominem", you even felt the need to put it in itallics :*)

I wonder how you must feel, now knowing that you used the term incorrectly? :***************(

Quote - *John* said @ #24.4
Awww, you were so pleased with yourself at including the term "ad-hominem", you even felt the need to put it in itallics :*)

I wonder how you must feel, now knowing that you used the term incorrectly? :***************(

It is in italics because it is non-English. Like saying voila! http://www.uccbpress.ca/styleguide(huma).htm

Plus the term is quite accurate for that misdirection you did. http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

Not only do you fail to intelligently carry a discussion, you showed just how limited your knowledge is.

Thank you. Good bye.

Quote - markjensen said @ #24.5
It is in italics because it is non-English. Like saying voila! http://www.uccbpress.ca/styleguide(huma).htm

Plus the term is quite accurate for that misdirection you did. http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

Not only do you fail to intelligently carry a discussion, you showed just how limited your knowledge is.

Thank you. Good bye.

:shakeshead:

An ad-hominem can be translated as a personal attack. Therefore your statement "ad-hominem personal attack" doesnt make sense.

Do....you....get.....it......now?

:rolleyes:

I'd rather get a few extra Big Mac's a year with the registration cost for that domain. I mean, seriously, this is the image that this open-source group tries to deliver? And you wonder why people don't give enough respect to them.

There is nothing wrong with pointing out the flaws in products as long as the criticism is done without emotion or bias. This web site is not a positive thing for our industry. Even though MS spreads very similar FUD, we have to remember that two wrongs don't make a right.

This site needs to grow up and realize that what they are saying is completely in the opposite directly that MS is going. This is a stupid idiotic move IMHO. But whatever, I will just sit back and let them prove themselves wrong.

Was sourgrapes.com taken or something? Seriously these people make everyone who uses open source applications look stupid. If you like something, use it, but don't bleat on about why everyone should too.

Bashing Microsoft & criticising vista is all freedom...But this is too UNPROFESSIONAL...I hate these kind of websites...

People will well understand if there are any new features..like office 2007, why dont linux introduce those kinds..Try to stop bashing MS & go back to your desk & stick to your linux..

I like linux, But i dont hate Vista...

Vista is good.. Maybe sooner microsoft will should start "badapple", "badlinux" etc...
I know Microsoft wont play this game!..they are Professionals...creating professionals (i mean developers!)

I agree about BadVista.org not being a professional site, and just being a bad idea in general.

However, Microsoft does play this game too. Ever heard about their 'Get the facts' website?

Quote - Mathiasdm said @ #18.1
However, Microsoft does play this game too. Ever heard about their 'Get the facts' website?
Or the "Linux is a cancer" spiel?

However, returning the same negative vibes is just really bad karma. (and the middle column on that site is awful in my browser's typical width)

I love morons. They make the world a better place to live in. Please, save me from my inability to choose for myself!!

Great. Useless garbage from Open Source. I never would've expected this. This is a Microsoft FUD sounding thing. Is FOSS going to start FUD'ing it up?

Ha! Yhere are zealots in every camp.............. what a joke!

I'm a huge Open Source fan, but this is just over the top.

Barney

this is just sad.... if they are making such amazing free source software.. why an't everyone useing it... oya.. casue it's NOT better... u pay for what u get.... yes.. windows needs ALOT of work.. but.. u know what.. it does work most of the tme... and does not require an IT degree and yer ass attached to the keyboard 30 hours a day to learn it enuf to install a program =/

Let's use real arguments here, not FUD.

1. It's perfectly possible to learn Linux without an IT degree. My mother could use Linux - if I set it up for her. It's the same with Windows: she can use it if I set it up for her.

2. I open my package manager, look in the list of over 20 000 programs, and install the one I need.
If it's not available in the repositories, I download the program and double-click to install (things like Autopackage). If it's a Windows program, I use Wine.

I tried posting comments on their site in a positive manner about MS and they removed my comments, then they removed my comments, on commenting that they remove comments.

I found it quite ironic they say that MS evil and bad and misleading, they really ought to look at themeselves I think. And yeah, their site is horrible, design wise, I mentioned that too and yeah they took off my comment.

Didn't they learn anything from Apple, from when Apple spent like a half hour bashing MS at their huge conference they had a while back.

I don't understand why so many people don't get the fact that if you don't like something, then don't use it, if you think it's bad, and corrupt, don't use it.

I personally use both MS products, Adobe Products, etc. and some Open Source products and in my opinion I have yet to find an Open Source software that will meet the needs that I have, the technical support, and the overall ease of use factor.

Gimp for example, could be awesome software, but the UI is such a mess, Blender 3D it's great for low level 3D stuff, but when it comes down to producing real high quality 3D it fails, most people I know in the 3D community find Blender to be joke.

OpenOffice, yeah it's great, used to use it for quite a while, but Office is still so much better to me, especially the new office, nothing even compares.

But once again, it comes down to personal preference and what will work for you in your particular situation.

I have to say that I am SO tired of MS bashing. I'm glad that *nix flavors are our there, and that there are alternatives to the OS and Office applications.

However when someone states how much company "A" sucks instead of telling me the benefits of their company or product... I get nervous. I don't want to hear; "that other product is awful", "that other company is terrible". I want to hear the reasons why their company/product is good.

Quote - Joshie said @ #11.1
I bet you can't stand politicians.

That my friend, is an understatment. I'm perfectly fine with a politician doing things that *I* dont like... what I dont like it the politician trying to be all things to all people. You simple can't.

When I lived back in San Francisco the Mayor was Willie Brown. When he was asked on Politically Correct that had taken more money from special interest than any other House speaker (his previous job) and could he be trusted to work for the public's interest. He said; "Just because I take your money doesnt mean Im not going to screw you too."

I love the 'too" in that, as all politicians are screwing all of us. Or so I believe... but this is far off topic.

why is it that linux users get these theorys that microsoft is trying to rule the world. cant they just stfu and enjoy thier os. for people that hate microsoft they sure spend alot of effort talking about them. Im a linux dual booter and i enjoy both. These people make me embarassed to be a linux user cause i always get asked if i whine about being "forced" to use windows like the rest of them.

Quote - thagame said @ #10
why is it that linux users get these theorys that microsoft is trying to rule the world. cant they just stfu and enjoy thier os. for people that hate microsoft they sure spend alot of effort talking about them. Im a linux dual booter and i enjoy both. These people make me embarassed to be a linux user cause i always get asked if i whine about being "forced" to use windows like the rest of them.

Well, we're not all like that ;-) (As you already know, since you're dual-booting yourself)

These people are just 'the loud minority'.

I'm sticking with the motto: "Use what you like."

God forbid that I should ever be seen supporting Microsoft, and I have to admit that I partially agree with what the site is trying to say; that MS has forgotten it is the users who should own and dictate how they use their computers, and not MS.

But, and it's a HUGE but, the way this "group" go about it is pathetically childish. It's one of those sites that will be hit for a week or two as people learn of it, and then be forgotten like almost all other similar protest sites.

Although I agree that the site is pointless, how many users actually *choose* Windows? Most people use Windows because:

1. that's what came with their new computer
2. the only 'option' they got was as to what flavor of windows they want
3. that's what everybody else uses... so why stick out?

I agree that choosing Vista is part of the thing we call freedom of choice. But can we really call it a choice, when there was simply no other option at the time of purchase?

99% Linux users on the other hand, use Linux because they *chose* to.

With that said:
1. the site is indeed pointless, or even stupid as you said.
2. people are not *forced* to use vista, but when that's the only option available at purchase, is it really an option?

Although you may not be forced, a majority of people who buy a computer will be forced to use it, as they know of nothing else. In fact, most people would be shocked if you told them the operating system is a choice (they would probably think its a "part" of the computer)

That's a cop-out and you know it.

If people don't have the option to purchase Linux (or don't know that they have that option) that's not the fault of Windows, Microsoft, or any grand conspiracy. It's due to poor execution and/or marketing on the part of Linux vendors - along with the fact that Linux just isn't a good desktop operating system for 99.5% of users.

Quote - Brandon Live said @ #7.3
along with the fact that Linux just isn't a good desktop operating system for 99.5% of users.

lol You mean "fact" as in "get the facts", right? XD

Quote - Brandon Live said @ #7.3
That's a cop-out and you know it.

If people don't have the option to purchase Linux (or don't know that they have that option) that's not the fault of Windows, Microsoft, or any grand conspiracy. It's due to poor execution and/or marketing on the part of Linux vendors - along with the fact that Linux just isn't a good desktop operating system for 99.5% of users.


It's mostly due to 'inertia'. People stick with what they know best.
Edit: and that's perfectly understandable. Trying something new requires a leap of faith.

Linux not being a good desktop OS? That's debatable...

Quote - Mathiasdm said @ #7.5
Linux not being a good desktop OS? That's debatable...

Don't twist his words, he didn't say that. He said "Linux just isn't a good desktop operating system for 99.5% of users", which is different, as it has context.

Quote - Brandon Live said @ #7.3
If people don't have the option to purchase Linux (or don't know that they have that option) that's not the fault of Windows, Microsoft, or any grand conspiracy. It's due to poor execution and/or marketing on the part of Linux vendors - along with the fact that Linux just isn't a good desktop operating system for 99.5% of users.

I'd like to comment on the above actually for a second. Alot of Linux users say that distros such as Ubuntu are infact usable for the general public. Well if anyoine remembers there was a debacle 6 months ago that happened in a Ubuntu upgrade where it prevented users loading the GUI and being forced to fix an issue in the command line. Accompying this was people defending the OS saying that a user should learn to use the command line ect. To be honest if a user has to learn how to use a command line to fix a faulty update then the OS isnt ready for the prime time.

Ubuntu and other distros may be good but if problems are allowed to happen like the above and the users defend the company saying the user should know how to issue command line fixes then really the OS still has some way to go until it's ready to be installed as default on casual users systems.

I mean many will cite gaming as the reason not to adopt Linux or software. Really most people could get by on open office and an email client I'd assume.

The above isnt an attack on luinux either. Its a great system. I just wanted to comment on the above and add my bit to it.

Quote - Kirkburn said @ #7.6

Don't twist his words, he didn't say that. He said "Linux just isn't a good desktop operating system for 99.5% of users", which is different, as it has context.

My apologies, I didn't mean to twist his words.

What I meant was: "It's debatable that Linux isn't a good desktop operating system for 99,5% of users."

My claim is: if a tech-savvy user installs Linux, most people will be able to use it. So I disagree to what he said.

I didn't mean to twist his words, but I think it came out wrong ;)


Quote - Smigit said @ #7.7

I'd like to comment on the above actually for a second. Alot of Linux users say that distros such as Ubuntu are infact usable for the general public. Well if anyoine remembers there was a debacle 6 months ago that happened in a Ubuntu upgrade where it prevented users loading the GUI and being forced to fix an issue in the command line. Accompying this was people defending the OS saying that a user should learn to use the command line ect. To be honest if a user has to learn how to use a command line to fix a faulty update then the OS isnt ready for the prime time.

Ubuntu and other distros may be good but if problems are allowed to happen like the above and the users defend the company saying the user should know how to issue command line fixes then really the OS still has some way to go until it's ready to be installed as default on casual users systems.

I mean many will cite gaming as the reason not to adopt Linux or software. Really most people could get by on open office and an email client I'd assume.

The above isnt an attack on luinux either. Its a great system. I just wanted to comment on the above and add my bit to it.


I agree with what you said. Things like this just shouldn't happen, and it's a big mistake by Canonical (the company that works on Ubuntu) to not have enough quality checks.

I hope it won't happen again (and I believe they were adding additional quality checks).

Quote - Mathiasdm said @ #7.8
My apologies, I didn't mean to twist his words.

What I meant was: "It's debatable that Linux isn't a good desktop operating system for 99,5% of users."


You are correct, I misspoke (miswrote?) - what I meant was "along with the fact that 99.5% of users don't think Linux is a good desktop operating system for them." And clearly 99.5% isn't a scientifically determined figure, but I doubt many will object to my point.

Thus the connection to poor product execution and marketing on the part of Linux vendors. Whether or not Linux actually is a good desktop operating system for those people is another matter (in my opinion it's not for most of them, though I'll agree that there are some cases where its "good enough" factor and its "cheap as free" factor do come together). The fact is that most people have never once been exposed to any kind of desktop Linux marketing. Heck my 21-year-old college-student sister thinks Linux is a programming language. They also don't care for a second that it's Open Source or about silly "free as in speech" arguments.

Quote - Brandon Live said @ #7.9
You are correct, I misspoke (miswrote?) - what I meant was "along with the fact that 99.5% of users don't think Linux is a good desktop operating system for them." And clearly 99.5% isn't a scientifically determined figure, but I doubt many will object to my point.

Thus the connection to poor product execution and marketing on the part of Linux vendors. Whether or not Linux actually is a good desktop operating system for those people is another matter (in my opinion it's not for most of them, though I'll agree that there are some cases where its "good enough" factor and its "cheap as free" factor do come together). The fact is that most people have never once been exposed to any kind of desktop Linux marketing.

I agree. There are a lot of things that could be improved (though I believe the most important ones are up to hardware manufacturers and such).

Heck my 21-year-old college-student sister thinks Linux is a programming language. They also don't care for a second that it's Open Source or about silly "free as in speech" arguments.

Oh, many Linux users feel the same way.

Personally, I think that Open Source has its advantages, but I don't see why people should be so religious about it. Open formats are another thing... I continue to feel that open formats are important. (Think AutoCAD and such. That company is deliberately encrypting their format, to prevent reverse-engineering. Because of this, other companies that often have better products, can't enter the CAD market.)

Anyways, it's a shame this topic is going to fall off the page soon, it's providing some interesting discussion (and strangely, I haven't seen that much flaming yet! :p)

I see this as very unprofessional and they act just like communists. People should choose the software they like.

They shouldn't tell us how bad Vista is, they should tell us what makes their alternatives better. But obviously there's nothing that makes them better, otherwise they would use this tactic already.

Quote - Nexx295 said @ #1
I see this as very unprofessional and they act just like communists. People should choose the software they like.

They shouldn't tell us how bad Vista is, they should tell us what makes their alternatives better. But obviously there's nothing that makes them better, otherwise they would use this tactic already.

You're right, very good point.

What does the site have to do with communism? I don't see any party affiliated or advertising on the site. You have a twisted view of what communism is...

zivan56 said,
What does the site have to do with communism? I don't see any party affiliated or advertising on the site. You have a twisted view of what communism is...

The person said they're ACTING like communists. They didn't say it was an actual communist party

Idiots. Right. That's exactly what they say, "if you dont buy it it's not free". It's free as in freedom, not in price, "idiot".

edit: misunderstood the post. apologies.

I think that's what he meant...

My thought on that argument is simply this: why does purchasing software take away our freedom?

Quote - John said @ #3.2
I think that's what he meant...

My thought on that argument is simply this: why does purchasing software take away our freedom?

It takes away your freedom to change later. Its a pain when you've got all your documents in Microsoft Works Word Processor and you want to switch to Linux or a Mac, for example. Its not the purchasing that's the issue, its the fact that the source is unavailable - the only way to get at many file formats used by un-free software is to hack them or pay huge licence fees to their developers.

Quote - John said @ #3.2
I think that's what he meant...

My thought on that argument is simply this: why does purchasing software take away our freedom?

If that software restricts your freedom to do what you want with the software that you've purchased, or your media files etc then i'd say that freedom was being restricted. Wouldnt you?

Quote - John said @ #3.2
I think that's what he meant...

My thought on that argument is simply this: why does purchasing software take away our freedom?

Purchasing doesn't. I purchased my Linux boxed set when I tried Linux for the first time. My freedoms weren't affected by the cost at all. I can use the software in any way I please (not so with Windows). I can re-distribute to as many other people or computers as I please (again, not so with Windows). I can also look and learn from the source code and participate in development, if I please (or if I had the talent! ). Again, not so with Windows.

It is the license that makes software free or not free. Not the price tag (or lack thereof).

Quote - markjensen said @ #3.5
I can use the software in any way I please (not so with Windows). I can re-distribute to as many other people or computers as I please (again, not so with Windows). I can also look and learn from the source code and participate in development, if I please (or if I had the talent! ).


What do you mean "You can use the software in any way you please?" How are you restricted from using Windows in a way that you'd want to? Also, there *are* restrictions on how you can use Linux. Most Linux code is bound by the GPL, not to mention the fact that your use of any operating system is bound by the law. For example, using a computer to steal another person's private information is illegal no matter what operating system you're using.

Your point about redistribution is really just a matter of pricing. You're not permitted to share your copy of Windows for the same reason you're not permitted to share your copy of Mac OS, iLife, Doom 3, Zelda, or tons of other software that isn't free. You aren't giving up any freedoms by paying for something. Our country and indeed most of the world have markets that are built on the exchange of goods and services for money... it's not exactly an "evil" concept despite how you make it sound sometimes.

Third, there's access to the source code. While the actual code is obviously closely guarded, you don't really need it. One of the most important reasons for the success of Windows is that it's a very open and pluggable platform with extremely well-documented APIs. Sure, there are advantages to the OpenSource model for the handful of us that know how to program and who can go in and fix bugs that annoy us. But for 99.5% of the market there's no advantage. There are, however, several disadvantages including security concerns, fracturing of the codebase, and the incompatibilities that inevitably arise as programs and modules are built with conflicting dependencies.

I don't think OSS is bad or that traditional "closed source" is bad. They both have their uses and places in the market. I really wish we could get past the whole "us versus them" mentality on both sides.

Quote - Brandon Live said @ #3.6
What do you mean "You can use the software in any way you please?" How are you restricted from using Windows in a way that you'd want to?

How about the EULA?

Quote - Brandon Live said @ #3.6

Also, there *are* restrictions on how you can use Linux.

No, there're restrictions on how you can modify and/or redistribute Linux, which hardly falls under what your "99,5% of the market" consider as usage.

Quote - Brandon Live said @ #3.6

Your point about redistribution is really just a matter of pricing. You're not permitted to share your copy of Windows for the same reason you're not permitted to share your copy of Mac OS, iLife, Doom 3, Zelda, or tons of other software that isn't free. You aren't giving up any freedoms by paying for something. Our country and indeed most of the world have markets that are built on the exchange of goods and services for money... it's not exactly an "evil" concept despite how you make it sound sometimes.

And in the case of GPL, the price is your word (so to speak, more like a contract, or license, or whatever) of contributing back to the comunity anything you make that's based on GPL'ed code.
Yet, while there's a price, you're still free to use the software as you please. Use as in installing it wherever you want, as many times as you want, handing copies to friends, etc... It's not the price, it's the rights you obtain over the usage of the adquired item.


Quote - Brandon Live said @ #3.6

While the actual code is obviously closely guarded, you don't really need it.

I'll decide what I need and what I don't, thank you very much.

Quote - Brandon Live said @ #3.6

several disadvantages including security concerns

There also advantages concerning (surprise) security.

Quote - Brandon Live said @ #3.6

I don't think OSS is bad or that traditional "closed source" is bad. They both have their uses and places in the market. I really wish we could get past the whole "us versus them" mentality on both sides.

Agreed.

So defensive!

"No, there're restrictions on how you can modify and/or redistribute Linux, which hardly falls under what your "99,5% of the market" consider as usage."

Uh, yes it would? Unless you're redefining the word 'use', of course ... I fail to see how the EULA is significantly to a GPL in terms of what it talks about?

"Yet, while there's a price, you're still free to use the software as you please. Use as in installing it wherever you want, as many times as you want, handing copies to friends, etc... It's not the price, it's the rights you obtain over the usage of the adquired item."

What exactly is your point now? That copyright is bad? People shouldn't make money from software? Stealing is okay? Free software is in some way morally superior to paid-for software? Paying for software somehow constitutes a loss of freedom no matter what the actual software says? I could make something freely available and say "you cannot redistribute this" - or I could make you pay for it and say the same. Am I now wrong for doing the latter?

You seem to miss the point that Brandon is talking about *most* people. Not YOU, alone.

Quote - Brandon Live said @ #3.6
<lots of points made here>
Your points are largely incorrect. Microsoft's EULA prevents users from multiple simultaneous connections, as a specific example. You work for them. Have you even ever read your EULA? Filled with restrictions on use, and informing you that Microsoft reserves the right to install whatever they please on your machine - with or without your approval.

In amongst your incorrect statements and misunderstandings, you stated something that I can only assume you directed toward me, personally (since I was the only one you quoted). You said, "it's not exactly an "evil" concept despite how you make it sound sometimes". I have never said Microsoft or Capitalism is "evil". Not sure where you are getting that from, but you are defending a point that I didn't make.

In fact, you are quite welcome to search every single post I have ever made with regards to Microsoft or Windows, and see if I have ever said they were evil, poorly written, or must be destroyed or replaced with Linux or anything else.

Your lack of understanding of the terms of use for the primary product of the company you work for astounds me.

Quote - Kirkburn said @ #3.8
So defensive!

"No, there're restrictions on how you can modify and/or redistribute Linux, which hardly falls under what your "99,5% of the market" consider as usage."

Uh, yes it would? Unless you're redefining the word 'use', of course ... I fail to see how the EULA is significantly to a GPL in terms of what it talks about?

"Yet, while there's a price, you're still free to use the software as you please. Use as in installing it wherever you want, as many times as you want, handing copies to friends, etc... It's not the price, it's the rights you obtain over the usage of the adquired item."

What exactly is your point now? That copyright is bad? People shouldn't make money from software? Stealing is okay? Free software is in some way morally superior to paid-for software? Paying for software somehow constitutes a loss of freedom no matter what the actual software says? I could make something freely available and say "you cannot redistribute this" - or I could make you pay for it and say the same. Am I now wrong for doing the latter?

You seem to miss the point that Brandon is talking about *most* people. Not YOU, alone.

What the heck are you talking about?

1.- GPL has nothing to do with MS's style of EULA. If you fail to see the difference that just shows you didn't even bother to get a clue.

2- Your second reply just confirms that you don't have a clue. Paying for something has nothing to do with what right you have over that item... care to point where exactly did I said OSS was better because of the price? I was talking about freedom, ffs.

I'm not missing Brandon's point, Brandon just didn't make any valid point besides the last couple of lines.

Next time take your time before replying, just to make sure you won't embarrass yourself.

Quote - ichi said @ #3.10

What the heck are you talking about?

1.- GPL has nothing to do with MS's style of EULA. If you fail to see the difference that just shows you didn't even bother to get a clue.

2- Your second reply just confirms that you don't have a clue. Paying for something has nothing to do with what right you have over that item... care to point where exactly did I said OSS was better because of the price? I was talking about freedom, ffs.

Then why don't you explain your argument for why the GNU Public License and and End User License Agreement don't have anything in common? Instead you decided went all ad hominem on us.



I'll decide what I need and what I don't, thank you very much.

What a foolish, selfish response. If giving you that code (when there are already publicly documented means to accomplish pretty much anything you could want to) has a negative impact on other users of the software (for reasons I described above) - then it is irresponsible to do so. The dependency issues alone completely justify, in my mind, the existence of private APIs and undocumented source code. Forget about changing them, just using undocumented APIs either means that your application is likely to break on future versions of the OS (or with something as simple as a security update) - OR that you've now added to the already ungodly compatibility burden for the owner of said API.

If you want something exposed via a public interface that isn't right now - there are plenty of great channels for that feedback. In fact, if you have anything particular in mind I'd be very interested to hear it.

Quote - markjensen said @ #3.9
Your points are largely incorrect. Microsoft's EULA prevents users from multiple simultaneous connections, as a specific example. You work for them. Have you even ever read your EULA?

Well to be honest license agreements don't usually make the top of my reading list, no. However, connection limits are key to differentiating different SKUs. That's a limitation of the version of the product you're buying, not a "use restriction" any more than not having a feature is a "use restriction" using that feature.

In amongst your incorrect statements and misunderstandings, you stated something that I can only assume you directed toward me, personally (since I was the only one you quoted). You said, "it's not exactly an "evil" concept despite how you make it sound sometimes". I have never said Microsoft or Capitalism is "evil". Not sure where you are getting that from, but you are defending a point that I didn't make.

I never claimed that you did. The key phrase was "how you make it sound." However, you're correct that it wasn't specifically directed at anything you said - it should have been more specifically addressed to the "BadVista.org" people and those defending them.

Your lack of understanding of the terms of use for the primary product of the company you work for astounds me. :no:

I'm not sure why it would. I'm also not a lawyer nor do I work in licensing for any Microsoft product. I've never felt impeded in my use of Windows due to its licensing. I certainly don't think it's perfect - quite the contrary, I have several opinions about how Windows licensing could be greatly improved while still maintaing shareholder value. But I have opinions about a lot of things and not everyone agrees with me :)

Still, my point remains that tons of Open Source software comes with licensing restrictions. Clearly they are different restrictions, but they are restrictions nonetheless. Thus I found the argument along the lines of "When you buy Windows you give up your freedoms" to be completely absurd. You are in fact enacting your freedom to buy Windows. If you don't, you're enacting your freedom to not buy it. It's a bit like saying that when you buy a Porsche 911 that you're "giving up your freedom" to go off-roading.

lol the website BadVista.org is pretty serious

The BadVista campaign is an advocate for the freedom of computer users, opposing adoption of Microsoft Windows Vista and promoting free (as in freedom) software alternatives.

Quote - JiveMasterT said @ #1
As a fan of open source software, let me be the first to say that this is really embarassing.

I am a MCSE so i work a lot with Microsoft software..

But i also use a lot of open source software, and in some companys i recomend some open source software to replace microsoft software, example openoffice.

But this is really embarissing for anyone who supports open source, because it's not like this that people will promote open source, they are just making themselves look bad, it's like "If you don't use open source you're a jerk".. :sleeping:

One of the more funnier things I saw going to that site was that it required MSXML5.0 from MS corporation. I dunno, just struck me as ironic, lol.