Richard Stallman says he is glad Steve Jobs is gone

There has certainly been a massive outpouring of praise and sadness over the passing of Steve Jobs. The founder of Apple, who died on Wednesday evening at the age of 56, has been called one of the most influential men of all time, among other titles. But Richard Stallman, who launched the free software movement in the 1980s with the GNU Project, has a somewhat different view on Jobs and his influence.

In a post on his personal blog site this week he states:

Steve Jobs, the pioneer of the computer as a jail made cool, designed to sever fools from their freedom, has died.

As Chicago Mayor Harold Washington said of the corrupt former Mayor Daley, "I'm not glad he's dead, but I'm glad he's gone." Nobody deserves to have to die - not Jobs, not Mr. Bill, not even people guilty of bigger evils than theirs. But we all deserve the end of Jobs' malign influence on people's computing.

Unfortunately, that influence continues despite his absence. We can only hope his successors, as they attempt to carry on his legacy, will be less effective.

It's perhaps not surprising that Stallman would feel this way about Jobs, considering Stallman's past and his views on free software. But his new statements have come under attack by others. ZDNet's Linux and Open Source blog has a response from Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols which states, "I’m glad to say that the vast majority of open-source developers don’t agree with Stallman’s myopic views." He adds, "By choosing to use the occasion of Jobs’ death for one more public jab at proprietary software, Stallman did neither his personal causes nor the larger ones of free and open-source software any good."

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

LA Noire developer owes over $1 million in total to staff

Next Story

New PS3 remote control coming to US in late October

154 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

In my opinion Richard Stallman is a idiot of saying those things about Steve. Sure we all like things for free, but I'm a developer... software is my income also.
If you want software to be for free why not make food, cars, homes etc for free also?

Marius F said,
In my opinion Richard Stallman is a idiot of saying those things about Steve. Sure we all like things for free, but I'm a developer... software is my income also.
If you want software to be for free why not make food, cars, homes etc for free also?

READ. Stallman's goal is NOT ABOUT giving away software for free.

Im so sick of all this steve jobs news. Can we have some real technology news please. People die everyday its a way of life. While yes he done stuff for technology but thats it he is dead please enough of this.

Soldiers33 said,
Im so sick of all this steve jobs news. Can we have some real technology news please. People die everyday its a way of life. While yes he done stuff for technology but thats it he is dead please enough of this.

Are you an idiot? Seems to me you are. Because if you go to the front page, there's TONS more tech news. Why don't you open your eyes a bit.

Spirit Dave said,

Are you an idiot? Seems to me you are. Because if you go to the front page, there's TONS more tech news. Why don't you open your eyes a bit.


No im not an idiot. But maybe if you looked to you would see all the Jobs rubbish. Jobs left 4 year plan, jobs died, jobs movie, jobs book, jobs this jobs that. No one cares about him.

Soldiers33 said,

No im not an idiot. But maybe if you looked to you would see all the Jobs rubbish. Jobs left 4 year plan, jobs died, jobs movie, jobs book, jobs this jobs that. No one cares about him.

Talk about Contradicting yourself, in one breath you say their is too much news about Steve Jobs then in the next you say nobody cares.

I actually don't think you actually have any idea what you are talking about, alot of people actually did care about Steve much more than you think or want to belive, if you hate apple that is fine but what he has done for technology is amazing...

Soldiers33 said,

No im not an idiot. But maybe if you looked to you would see all the Jobs rubbish. Jobs left 4 year plan, jobs died, jobs movie, jobs book, jobs this jobs that. No one cares about him.

"No one cares about him"

LOL! Wow ... there you go. Idiot

Sad way to die, sad for his family and friends, im not happy that someone has died, but I to am glad he is gone from the tech scene !

I think I've heard about this guy from FOSS debates on ZDNet.com. Sure he's a dick and showed lack of tact and respect by publishing this article now. Also I'm in total disagreement regarding FOSS - which is simply socialism.

Wow...seriously? "Idk who this Richard Stallman guy is, but now I know he's a dick"...I really don't see why you guys are getting so worked up about his opinion. frankly, the amount of (IMO) unwarranted praise going to Steve Jobs now has started to make me agree with him. Sure, Steve did a lot for the PC revolution, but IMHO he is not comparable to Edison or Einstien.

Actually I think far more people agree with the sentiment than are willing to admit. You can sort of get an idea about people's feelings by the widespread misrepresentation of the quote. He explicitly says he isn't glad Jobs died, and yet the majority of angry responses see the entire quote as "He's happy Jobs died?!"

The kneejerk reflex of putting words into Stallman's mouth demonstrates not simply a lack of reading comprehension, but a fundamental need to avoid seeing Jobs through any lens other than a "lost hero".

While I think Jobs deserves a degree of respect for his contributions, I doubt this much sadness will flood the internet whenever the day may come that we lose Wozniak. A month ago people happily criticized Jobs' handling of Apple, and now that he's gone, any degree of negativity is perceived as tactless and rude.

Frankly, when that douchebag Jerry Falwell died, discussions were equally obsessed with being respectful and anyone who even gave a similar "Death sucks, but I'm glad his influence is gone" comment risked the mighty downvote.

I think, perhaps, we are too culturally focused on death being phenomenally meaningful and tragic, rather than an inescapable reality that we all face. The many deaths humans face are far less unique than the many lives we all live, and yet we're so much more struck by death itself as cause for solemn reflection, rather than as an opportunity to talk about the life that preceded it.

In this case, Jobs' life was complex, and his career had pros and cons. To ignore anything about his life simply because it may or may not be worthy of criticism is far less respectful of Jobs than the criticism itself, because you're burying away a part of his existence. All or nothing, don't pretend. Remember, nobody buys into the crap whenever some kid dies in a drunken car crash and all of his family and friends talk about how popular, smart, fun and funny he was, how he had everything going for him, etc. Because odds are just as good that he was a dick, or a bully, or a pothead, or sleeping with his English teacher.

Joshie said,
Actually I think far more people agree with the sentiment than are willing to admit. You can sort of get an idea about people's feelings by the widespread misrepresentation of the quote. He explicitly says he isn't glad Jobs died, and yet the majority of angry responses see the entire quote as "He's happy Jobs died?!"

The kneejerk reflex of putting words into Stallman's mouth demonstrates not simply a lack of reading comprehension, but a fundamental need to avoid seeing Jobs through any lens other than a "lost hero".

While I think Jobs deserves a degree of respect for his contributions, I doubt this much sadness will flood the internet whenever the day may come that we lose Wozniak. A month ago people happily criticized Jobs' handling of Apple, and now that he's gone, any degree of negativity is perceived as tactless and rude.

Frankly, when that douchebag Jerry Falwell died, discussions were equally obsessed with being respectful and anyone who even gave a similar "Death sucks, but I'm glad his influence is gone" comment risked the mighty downvote.

I think, perhaps, we are too culturally focused on death being phenomenally meaningful and tragic, rather than an inescapable reality that we all face. The many deaths humans face are far less unique than the many lives we all live, and yet we're so much more struck by death itself as cause for solemn reflection, rather than as an opportunity to talk about the life that preceded it.

In this case, Jobs' life was complex, and his career had pros and cons. To ignore anything about his life simply because it may or may not be worthy of criticism is far less respectful of Jobs than the criticism itself, because you're burying away a part of his existence. All or nothing, don't pretend. Remember, nobody buys into the crap whenever some kid dies in a drunken car crash and all of his family and friends talk about how popular, smart, fun and funny he was, how he had everything going for him, etc. Because odds are just as good that he was a dick, or a bully, or a pothead, or sleeping with his English teacher.

agreed completely

So... just because this fool wants to work for free his whole life, means that Gates and other software developers should work 20 years and not receive a dime for it? Thats his implication, or should they have been shop workers, and on their spare time, create bad ass software that millions of people use every day. Tell me you dumbasses who think this guy's "free movement" is all kinds of fantastic, would you work your life away for free? Nope.. would you develop products with a awesome OS for free? Nah... business is business for a reason, puts food on the table and creates jobs for others to do the same. Also go f*ck yourself if you are glad that someone you don't even know is "gone" because you think the world will be a better place. If anything, be glad Apple doesn't go corrupt and take over all the GNU products just so you can pay for the ****, I'm positive that if those software developers had even the smallest reason to do so, they could easily do it and crush you and your small time free software company who never makes a dime because you think you're making a difference.

and,
+1 to IntelliMoo

holori said,
So... just because this fool wants to work for free his whole life, means that Gates and other software developers should work 20 years and not receive a dime for it? Thats his implication, or should they have been shop workers, and on their spare time, create bad ass software that millions of people use every day. Tell me you dumbasses who think this guy's "free movement" is all kinds of fantastic, would you work your life away for free? Nope.. would you develop products with a awesome OS for free? Nah... business is business for a reason, puts food on the table and creates jobs for others to do the same. Also go f*ck yourself if you are glad that someone you don't even know is "gone" because you think the world will be a better place. If anything, be glad Apple doesn't go corrupt and take over all the GNU products just so you can pay for the ****, I'm positive that if those software developers had even the smallest reason to do so, they could easily do it and crush you and your small time free software company who never makes a dime because you think you're making a difference.

and,
+1 to IntelliMoo


I dont agree with most (if not all) of his current ideas but you should read what the man has done:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman

If people didn't have a proctologists outlook, they'd recognize this guy is right on the ball.

Most people love Apple because of the iProducts. That was all Jon Ive's doing, he was the genius behind Apples public success over the past 13 years not Jobs, it should be him that you lot "iWorship".

Anyway, I know plenty of people who have met and worked with Jobs who absolutely hated him as a human being, let a lone a business man. How much does a person need to do to make you hate their very existence? Try to answer that yourself before you start judging the "haters" or "truth tellers".

Im more surprised people dont know who Richard Stallman is on a tech ite. What kind of techs are you? What kind of site has this become?

Some of you need to stop hating (even though his comments were way out of line) and see what this guy has done, even if you dont agree with his ideas (I dont): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman

htcz said,
Im more surprised people dont know who Richard Stallman is on a tech ite. What kind of techs are you? What kind of site has this become?

Some of you need to stop hating (even though his comments were way out of line) and see what this guy has done, even if you dont agree with his ideas (I dont): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman

Stop hating thats good, I agree, lets make that for both Stallman and Jobs

what kind of techs dabble with something so insignificant such as linux and gnu crap. the fact that these open source advocate morons need a leader is hilarious, and such leader looks like he hasnt taken a shower in ages speak volumes about the followers. there has never been anything compelling about %99 of any open source software(%1 is probably the stuff apple and microsoft release). its either someone trying to emulate an original piece of code, but with less skill, or someone writing insignificant software. proprietary software is of the highest quality because of the result of writing such code. money.

OpenOffice/LibreOffice? Firefox? Google Chrome? Oracle Virtualbox? Those are all outstanding open source projects. 9 out of the 10 most reliable webservers last month ran some version of Linux as the host operating system. Millions of people world-wide, including entire corporations, run open source operating systems and software solutions on their computers. Crawl out of your box and learn the facts before you start insulting people you've never met.

vcfan said,
what kind of techs dabble with something so insignificant such as linux and gnu crap. the fact that these open source advocate morons need a leader is hilarious, and such leader looks like he hasnt taken a shower in ages speak volumes about the followers. there has never been anything compelling about %99 of any open source software(%1 is probably the stuff apple and microsoft release). its either someone trying to emulate an original piece of code, but with less skill, or someone writing insignificant software. proprietary software is of the highest quality because of the result of writing such code. money.

vcfan said,
what kind of techs dabble with something so insignificant such as linux and gnu crap. the fact that these open source advocate morons need a leader is hilarious, and such leader looks like he hasnt taken a shower in ages speak volumes about the followers. there has never been anything compelling about %99 of any open source software(%1 is probably the stuff apple and microsoft release). its either someone trying to emulate an original piece of code, but with less skill, or someone writing insignificant software. proprietary software is of the highest quality because of the result of writing such code. money.

Again, currently he is about the free software movement, just like Jobs was about the iPhone. Before that, he did ALOT more things that contribute on the software side of things just like Jobs SOLD (I repeat SOLD, as in MARKETING) the Apple I, which goes onto my next point.

Stallman has developed alot more things than Jobs. Jobs sold them. Thats the plain and simple truth.

wow alot of comments... over Stallman opinion?

he didn't say he was glad about his dead, it was about what he thinks Malign INFLUENCE on peoples computing.
of course people would take it too personal and attack this person opinion, but even if he was glad Jobs was dead. who cares? its someone opinion.
its not like anyone pointing their fingers at him, would make themselves better persons than Stallman. and its not like Jobs was the super human who everyone has to be sad about his dead. and love and care about.
even though this guy writing about jobs make him care about it. but i don't care lol

i honestly don't care about the whole Jobs death. I didn't like him and I don't like Apple, nor pixar/disney, so why should I care? so i feel indifferent about it.

BUT i comment here because i think its stupid to talk about Stallman like if he had said "oh yeah im glad he is dead" when he clearly doesn't say that. its not his fault no more influence from Jobs in computing its because he is dead.

And Stallman movement about free software its something i dont like, and I would never really support it in most ways.
but that doesn't mean i will go and attack the guy like if he had done something wrong.
or by saying what he thinks, he is now a bad person and everyone else are saints calling him a bad person? no, because its what he thinks.

Because in today's world, everybody is too pre-occupied being worried about what other people are saying. It's all, "Live and let live" until somebody says something they don't agree with, and then it's, "He's a moron".

EmilyTheStrange said,
wow alot of comments... over Stallman opinion?

he didn't say he was glad about his dead, it was about what he thinks Malign INFLUENCE on peoples computing.
of course people would take it too personal and attack this person opinion, but even if he was glad Jobs was dead. who cares? its someone opinion.
its not like anyone pointing their fingers at him, would make themselves better persons than Stallman. and its not like Jobs was the super human who everyone has to be sad about his dead. and love and care about.
even though this guy writing about jobs make him care about it. but i don't care lol

i honestly don't care about the whole Jobs death. I didn't like him and I don't like Apple, nor pixar/disney, so why should I care? so i feel indifferent about it.

BUT i comment here because i think its stupid to talk about Stallman like if he had said "oh yeah im glad he is dead" when he clearly doesn't say that. its not his fault no more influence from Jobs in computing its because he is dead.

And Stallman movement about free software its something i dont like, and I would never really support it in most ways.
but that doesn't mean i will go and attack the guy like if he had done something wrong.
or by saying what he thinks, he is now a bad person and everyone else are saints calling him a bad person? no, because its what he thinks.

Good way of getting your name higher up on Google I suppose.

You don't have to care what he says.

what said,
Good way of getting your name higher up on Google I suppose.

You don't have to care what he says.

He doesn't use Google or endorse them, they are part of the government's tracking system!!
Yes Stallman is one of those types.

z0phi3l said,

He doesn't use Google or endorse them, they are part of the government's tracking system!!
Yes Stallman is one of those types.

Wonder if all the Fandroids supporting him will now whistle a different tune....

MrPink said,
I really hope the dude gets run over by a ****ing truck.

I don't know what is more sickening, the fact you and people like you don't have the intellectual capacity to comprehend what Stallman said, or the fact you're showing yourselves to be outright sociopaths for wishing death on someone simply because they have a contraversial opinion.

Since you didn't seem to be capable of reading the article, I'll highlight the relevant quote for you:

"Nobody deserves to have to die - not Jobs, not Mr. Bill, not even people guilty of bigger evils than theirs."

Athernar said,

I don't know what is more sickening, the fact you and people like you don't have the intellectual capacity to comprehend what Stallman said, or the fact you're showing yourselves to be outright sociopaths for wishing death on someone simply because they have a contraversial opinion.

Since you didn't seem to be capable of reading the article, I'll highlight the relevant quote for you:

"Nobody deserves to have to die - not Jobs, not Mr. Bill, not even people guilty of bigger evils than theirs."

Theres people on here that are glad Jobs is gone, I hope that applys to them aswell, seems strange you have a issue with what mr Pink said, but making excuses for Stallman.

evo_spook said,

Theres people on here that are glad Jobs is gone, I hope that applys to them aswell, seems strange you have a issue with what mr Pink said, but making excuses for Stallman.

No it doesn't, because it's an entirely different concept.

Come on people, it's not hard to understand the difference between wanting or being glad someone is dead, and being glad someone is gone.

Or is George Bush a zombie now?

MrPink said,
I really hope the dude gets run over by a ****ing truck.

What's the difference with what you are saying now and what this guy is saying? Oh yeah he's not saying he's glad he is dead. So I guess you are the ruthless one.

Athernar said,

No it doesn't, because it's an entirely different concept.

Come on people, it's not hard to understand the difference between wanting or being glad someone is dead, and being glad someone is gone.

Or is George Bush a zombie now?

Its amounting to the same thing. Glad you're making excuses for him.

evo_spook said,

Its amounting to the same thing. Glad you're making excuses for him.

George Bush is "gone" from the Presidency, people were "glad" he was "gone".

Does that mean he's dead now? No, it doesn't.

But sure, let's make absurd leaps in meaning. Steve Jobs wanted to restrict freedoms, GUESS THAT MAKES HIM LIKE ADOLF HITLER LOL!!!!1111oneone

Sorry, but if you can't understand the difference, then you're just quite frankly -dumb-.

MrPink said,
I really hope the dude gets run over by a ****ing truck.
I don't. A man of his size might cause quite a collision and injure the poor truck driver.

I don't know why people are getting so worked up about this. The guy is not saying that it's a good thing Jobs died, he's saying it's a good thing that he's gone.

Apple make great products, but the company is essentially evil. Certainly not the only one, but one of the largest.

Mikeyx11 said,
I don't know why people are getting so worked up about this. The guy is not saying that it's a good thing Jobs died, he's saying it's a good thing that he's gone.

Apple make great products, but the company is essentially evil. Certainly not the only one, but one of the largest.

I don't think you know what evil is

Mikeyx11 said,
I don't know why people are getting so worked up about this. The guy is not saying that it's a good thing Jobs died, he's saying it's a good thing that he's gone.

Apple make great products, but the company is essentially evil. Certainly not the only one, but one of the largest.

then why didnt he say it 6-7 weeks ago when jobs left? nothing can be said to make me think that stallman didnt say this as a direct response to jobs death.

also... evil? apple going to bring about the apocalypse or something?

Skruff said,
then why didnt he say it 6-7 weeks ago when jobs left?
Erm... because Jobs didn't leave Apple. He just dropped off the CEO position and went to be chairman of the board of directors.

A lot people went nuts when Steve Jobs died. But, take a look at Steve Again. What did he do to the world to deserve the title?? Steve is not Micheal Jackson. I hardly see any news about Steve Jobs donate this or that to charity. All I see is how much Steve earn money from high priced devices.

Steve is indeed a wonder businessman. All for the business. But, for humanitarian side, he is clearly lack of.

satus said,
A lot people went nuts when Steve Jobs died. But, take a look at Steve Again. What did he do to the world to deserve the title?? Steve is not Micheal Jackson. I hardly see any news about Steve Jobs donate this or that to charity. All I see is how much Steve earn money from high priced devices.

Steve is indeed a wonder businessman. All for the business. But, for humanitarian side, he is clearly lack of.

Then you get these types of people, you just have to read this ridiculous "article" to see hoe far the cult of Jobs will go to defend him:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/la.../the-charity-of-steve-jobs/

z0phi3l said,

Then you get these types of people, you just have to read this ridiculous "article" to see hoe far the cult of Jobs will go to defend him:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/la.../the-charity-of-steve-jobs/

They even wrote articles to defend him already? I don't get why people went nuts about him. I have Macbook, iPod (Classic + Touch), and PC. But, I am not that crazy. My mind is clear. Sure, he makes great products but they are just products. The things that Steve become so famous because the genius marketing woes about innovation and make old rusty things become hot products again in a nice cool package. Plus, the wonderful business ecology system around the iTunes store.

However, at the end of the day, I don't see he changes the world that much to deserve title. Most of the things he introduced to the world are tech acquired from other people. Let's take a look, shall we?

1) Before iPod, we have MP3 portable player. You could have thousands songs in your pocket. Again, iPod is not Steve idea. I believe he acquire it from someone. Also other addon nice thing like coverflow etc.

2) Before iPhone, we have Palm, Pocket PC, and Then Windows Mobile. They are many years before iPhone. Not many people care to use because it is not the right time yet. At that time, it was Nokia era of dumb phone or I can call a Phone with nice design of hardware. You have chocolate bar style cellphone, flip, all kind of things. I remember I bought the first HP Compaq iPaq and I was happy with it. To me, touch interface innovation started right there.

3) Before iPad, we have Tablet PC which was way ahead of the time. Again, nobody care. I saw my friend has one in university and he wrote everything on it. Hell, I don't even want to use it because I didn't want to scratch the screen. (That time there was no Gorilla Glass or anything like that for gadgets).

-=SEDIN=- said,
Lol a lot of people are taking this too personal.

Then they have an iphone stuck so far up their own as... er.. they have to take it personally.

sagum said,

Then they have an iphone stuck so far up their own as... er.. they have to take it personally.

Hate is taking it personally aswell, do they have a Droid stuck up their **** aswell?

No one is forced to buy Apple. It's their buisness model and you as a consumer have the freedom to choose it or to not choose it.

Duckie37 said,
No one is forced to buy Apple. It's their buisness model and you as a consumer have the freedom to choose it or to not choose it.

That may be true for their products, but the consequences of Apple's actions are often not a choice and affect many, many more people and businesses than just their 'consumers'.

Stallman is just saying what we're all thinking. While it's tragic that anyone dies, Jobs was just yet another greedy capitalist who promoted the closed software centric model. I for one wont miss that part.

Joey S said,
Stallman is just saying what we're all thinking. While it's tragic that anyone dies, Jobs was just yet another greedy capitalist who promoted the closed software centric model. I for one wont miss that part.

Because the software model at Apple will change now /sarcasm

Joey S said,
Stallman is just saying what we're all thinking. While it's tragic that anyone dies, Jobs was just yet another greedy capitalist who promoted the closed software centric model. I for one wont miss that part.

Let's not forget, he had Al Gore on his board.. hahaha just shows where he's coming from... (cough eugenics cough)

leakAddict said,

Because the software model at Apple will change now /sarcasm

Who gave any hint that they think it would??

It's like saying we shouldn't be glad that a criminal has been locked away because there are other criminals out there that won't change.

(I'm not comparing Jobs to a criminal, just using as an example...)

Mikeyx11 said,

Who gave any hint that they think it would??

It's like saying we shouldn't be glad that a criminal has been locked away because there are other criminals out there that won't change.

(I'm not comparing Jobs to a criminal, just using as an example...)

Joey S gave a hint that it would. He said he wouldn't miss that part ("that part" being the closed software centric model from his comment).

Angel Blue01 said,
I agree with Stallman this time, Jobs's approach (RIP) set back non-proprietary computing even further from the public eye.

Unfortunately it seems many people are glamoured when it comes to Jobs. He did nothing to help humanity. All that wealth he accumulated was for nothing. If he'd spent half as much time and energy supporting FOSS software as he did seeking the almighty buck, he might have a real legacy to be proud of, but as it stands, he was just another greedy capitalist who limited people's freedoms.

Joey S said,

Unfortunately it seems many people are glamoured when it comes to Jobs. He did nothing to help humanity. All that wealth he accumulated was for nothing. If he'd spent half as much time and energy supporting FOSS software as he did seeking the almighty buck, he might have a real legacy to be proud of, but as it stands, he was just another greedy capitalist who limited people's freedoms.

Everybody lives for money... if i could give 1 billion
Wouldn't you want it ?

He's just looking for attention.. Isteve did better things than he shall ever do. I mean .. he's a totally nobody..

rcardona said,
Jobs exercised his freedom, Richard should be happy for that.

He hindered others freedom and choice. Many were manipulated in to buying a product that couldn't do what they wanted due to marketing. People are stupid, what can you do.

patseguin said,
Couple and total idiot. Anyone who is glad that someone who died is gone is human debris in my opinion.

If you'd spent a minute to actually read what Stallman said rather than flying into a fanboy rage you would've seen he quite clearly stated he's not glad Steve is dead.

patseguin said,
Couple and total idiot. Anyone who is glad that someone who died is gone is human debris in my opinion.

He's glad he is gone from the technology area, but yeah, it is not good to say this from a person that has just died...

robert_dll said,

He's glad he is gone from the technology area, but yeah, it is not good to say this from a person that has just died...

Fanboy rage? Wow take it easy. I was only conveying that I hate when someone says they're glad a person is gone. I posted that from a Windows 7 machine FYI.

patseguin said,

Fanboy rage? Wow take it easy. I was only conveying that I hate when someone says they're glad a person is gone. I posted that from a Windows 7 machine FYI.


I'm not a fanboy, I actually hate Stallman, and I'm also posting this from a Windows 7 PC, just saying he is not glad he's died, he is glad he is gone FROM TECH, let's be fair

robert_dll said,

I'm not a fanboy, I actually hate Stallman, and I'm also posting this from a Windows 7 PC, just saying he is not glad he's died, he is glad he is gone FROM TECH, let's be fair

I was referring to the guy told me I went on a fanboy rage, not you.

patseguin said,

I was referring to the guy told me I went on a fanboy rage, not you.


Oh, sorry, it's just that I didn't read the previous reply and you quoted me

patseguin said,

Fanboy rage? Wow take it easy. I was only conveying that I hate when someone says they're glad a person is gone. I posted that from a Windows 7 machine FYI.

No, you stated that Stallman was "Human Debris" for something he explicity said was not the case. Don't try and change what you said.

And I fail to see how being on a Windows machine is at all relevant. Stallman is a proponent of free software, he even implies he would feel the same if this was Gates, rather than Jobs.

and that's the kind of douchebags that answer your linux questions in forums... no wonder linux never took off in the PC market

What a stupid man. I have never heard of him until now. In fact I saw him wearing tin foil on his badge saying that there is a tracking device in his badge and that we are all being track.

link6155 said,
In fact I saw him wearing tin foil on his badge saying that there is a tracking device in his badge and that we are all being track.
The badge had an RFID tag.

I said it in the forums and I'll say it again.

At the very least I'm glad he had the mayor to quote because who knows what the hell would have come out of his mouth if he couldn't piggyback off of a quote.

The guy is a disgrace though. Standing on a dead man to push his message

Stallman is so whiney. i appreciate the open software movement, but it wouldnt be there without the closed proprietary systems being there first. I like open software because of the obvious freedoms and the enthusiasm/attitude of most users/developers. but in all seriousness, had it not been for Steve Jobs, Stallman wouldnt be known for anything. He's still practically a nobody to most of the world and it's probably due to his attitude and his words. If he could make a modern computing environment totally free (as in speech) as linux does, then he can rest on his laurels. creating GNU was huge, but not enough to warrant him a star as he thinks he is.

The thing is, in a bunch of cases he doesn't even consider Linux to be free enough. Distros keep bending over to please him and he finds something else wrong to complain about.

Stallman is NOT about freedom for the user. If he was, he would accept the fact that the user should be free to choose what what software they wish, be it Open Sauce, or "ebil" closed proprietary salvery inducing software. What he wants is revenge on his fellow programmers who had the unmitigated gall to install a password on the computer system he used to keep people from mucking around in it.

I am glad Jobs is gone from Apple. And no, not glad he is dead....glad he no longer has direct influence over Apple.

Hopefully there will be changes in the company. Changes like giving the consumers more for their $$$ and stop blaming the consumers for their own product faults. Apple has been getting stale for a long time and only now just barely catching up to Android devices spec wise. Even now new android devices are coming out that overshadow the iPhone 4s. Apple used to be the company others tried to be like and catch up to. Just seems now they are falling short.

Ah, the spec argument.

Sorry, bigger screens and faster Hz doesn't necessarily mean better specs or better hardware overall. With that logic, a 3GHz Pentium 4 would smoke a 2.2GHZ Core 2 Duo just because 3 > 2.2.

It's about efficiency. How well does the device run, and how long does it last off of one charge. My iPhone 4 can last two days. My Samsung Focus can barely make it through the day. My Evo 4G spent most of its time on the charger. The latter two devices have, "better," specs than the iPhone 4.

omgben said,
Ah, the spec argument.

Sorry, bigger screens and faster Hz doesn't necessarily mean better specs or better hardware overall. With that logic, a 3GHz Pentium 4 would smoke a 2.2GHZ Core 2 Duo just because 3 > 2.2.

It's about efficiency. How well does the device run, and how long does it last off of one charge. My iPhone 4 can last two days. My Samsung Focus can barely make it through the day. My Evo 4G spent most of its time on the charger. The latter two devices have, "better," specs than the iPhone 4.

Not what I meant about specs. But thanks for sharing

omgben said,

It's about efficiency. My iPhone 4 can last two days.

How do you know when someone's a fanboy? They claim their iPhone lasts longer than a day. LOL.
You can't lie about a device that 1 in 4 people have. Everyone's seen it, used it, tested it for a day. It doesn't last a day.

Thanks for sharing dude.

Sacha said,

How do you know when someone's a fanboy? They claim their iPhone lasts longer than a day. LOL.
You can't lie about a device that 1 in 4 people have. Everyone's seen it, used it, tested it for a day. It doesn't last a day.

Thanks for sharing dude.

It does If you leave it on standby ;D

<i>“prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia” [...] All of these acts should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only because of prejudice and narrowmindedness.

Some rules might be called for when these acts directly affect other people's interests. For incest, contraception could be mandatory to avoid risk of inbreeding. For prostitution, a license should be required to ensure prostitutes get regular medical check-ups, and they should have training and support in insisting on use of condoms. This will be an advance in public health, compared with the situation today. For necrophilia, it might be necessary to ask the next of kin for permission if the decedent's will did not authorize it. Necrophilia would be my second choice for what should be done with my corpse, the first being scientific or medical use. Once my dead body is no longer of any use to me, it may as well be of some use to someone. Besides, I often enjoy rhinophytonecrophilia (nasal sex with dead plants). -
</i> Richard Stallman.

And yes, that is an actual quote by the loon master.

that is wierd ****, especially the necrophilia. But he thinks child sex/porn is okay if the child gave concent? I'd like to know how he gets the animals permission for bestiality!!

Thinks for that, made me chuckle that all these haters of Jobs who's being supporting him are actually supporting such a douchebag

evo_spook said,
But he thinks child sex/porn is okay if the child gave concent?
He clearly states "as long as no one is coerced". Whatever you do with beasts is coercion, because beasts are not rational to consent. And about the pedophilia, the same applies from beastiality. But I believe he is talking about that pedophilia in a sense of not being black and white, with an example: the statutory rape mess in the USA...

tiagosilva29 said,
He clearly states "as long as no one is coerced". Whatever you do with beasts is coercion, because beasts are not rational to consent. And about the pedophilia, the same applies from beastiality. But I believe he is talking about that pedophilia in a sense of not being black and white, with an example: the statutory rape mess in the USA...

I'm sorry, but no... just no. Why on earth does an adult need child porn or child loves?

WickedScribbler said,
Why on earth does an adult need child porn or child loves?
Some literature/films might be considered child pornography thanks to a strict black-and-white interpretation. Some 18yo with 15yo significant others might be considered child molesters.

tiagosilva29 said,
He clearly states "as long as no one is coerced". Whatever you do with beasts is coercion, because beasts are not rational to consent. And about the pedophilia, the same applies from beastiality. But I believe he is talking about that pedophilia in a sense of not being black and white, with an example: the statutory rape mess in the USA...

Why do you believe he's talking about that? Nobody refers to marginal cases still covered by statutory rape as "pedophilia." And Stallman was talking about pedophilia being illegal in general.

Explanations of that animals can't consent, and that makes bestiality more wrong than everything else, is just rationalization. Animals aren't stupid, they're intelligent --- and of course they can decide whether to be submissive or to struggle, and deciding to be submissive is consent while struggle means they're being raped. Its not that complicated. People just don't want to admit to themselves that they're making a subjective moral judgement on that, just like religious people do on other sexual behavior.

The legal system doesn't give animals rights anyway, since law is basically a social contract ('natural law'). As far as the law is concerned, animal cruelty is also stopped based on the immorality of the act, not to protect animal rights.

UndergroundWire said,
I'm glad he's gone too. Hopefully the iPad 3 now gets Adobe Flash and hopefully turtlenecks died with Steve Jobs as well.

So someones live is worth a crappy plugin in your opinion?

evo_spook said,

So someones live is worth a crappy plugin in your opinion?

Stallman isnt saying he is glad Jobs is dead....hes glad that he will no longer have any say/influence over Apple. There is a difference and I for one hope that there are changes in Apple now that Jobs is gone. But I kinda doubt there will be.

*sigh* Droid fanboys.

Sadly, for you, Jobs' influence and legacy will live on at Apple. I have to ask.

If you don't use Apple products, and I'm guessing this because you're the usual Apple disliking suspect, why do you so badly want the company to change? Why should a company that's doing perfectly fine doing what you don't like have to change to fit the liking of people who have nothing better to do then rage about them on Neowin? People who don't but their junk? Is it because you're insecure? The man and company achieved more in a day than we will in our entire lives.

evo_spook said,

So someones live is worth a crappy plugin in your opinion?

No just I didn't like the man. I don't have to act all phony and be like "OMG, R.I.P. Steve Jobs". There is a lot of the person I don't like. Without getting into too much detail, I don't like some of his say that went on the products. I don't like that he said Bill Gates could have been more innovative had he done drugs. I don't like that he gives credit for his innovation to drug use. I don't like that he refused Bill Gates in making a donation.

So am I glad he's gone, 100% HELL YES!

omgben said,
*sigh* Droid fanboys.

*sigh* You don't know what you are talking about.

How about that I have a Mac. How about that I have an iPad. How about that I have a several Windows desktops and laptops. How about that I have an Android Tablet. How about that I have an Android Phone.

Are you getting the pattern? I'm a gadget freak. Can't I say that I want Adobe Flash on an iPad?

*sigh* Internet morons.

This line is the most horrific of all. And also really untrue!

But we all deserve the end of Jobs' malign influence on people's computing.

I mean, really?

Edited by FMH, Oct 9 2011, 1:53pm :

tiagosilva29 said,
He's not talking about his death...
I know! I was talking about Job's influence. Job's had the most positve effect on computing, and even his competitors are going in that direction. Life for consumers and developers is a lot easier and safer, in Apple's-way.

FMH said,
Life for consumers and developers is a lot easier and safer, in Apple's-way.

Wow, you've got no clue about REAL computing that isn't all dressed up.

FMH said,
I know! I was talking about Job's influence. Job's had the most positve effect on computing, and even his competitors are going in that direction. Life for consumers and developers is a lot easier and safer, in Apple's-way.

Apple's "safer" way is just a delusion. If they had the sales as PCs have, they would get nailed hard as well.

Safety is up to the end user and how they use the tech.

FMH said,
I know! I was talking about Job's influence. Job's had the most positve effect on computing, and even his competitors are going in that direction. Life for consumers and developers is a lot easier and safer, in Apple's-way.

+1

FMH said,
I know! I was talking about Job's influence. Job's had the most positve effect on computing, and even his competitors are going in that direction. Life for consumers and developers is a lot easier and safer, in Apple's-way.

Yeah, I can't wait for a future where every program released has to go through some secret submissions process, that sounds great!

techbeck said,

Apple's "safer" way is just a delusion. If they had the sales as PCs have, they would get nailed hard as well.

Safety is up to the end user and how they use the tech.

Let's talk about Microsoft. If Microsoft's Windows was as close as Apple's, what do you think would be the end result?

Microsoft implements security technology and research into Windows like no other company, because almost all the hackers are pointing towards it. No one, not even Apple can match there security standards.

But if Windows also became a bit more "closed", and MS made sure that no harmful programs were installed on your PC by putting Windows Store in place, don't you think Windows would become a lot more secure? Product with bad security would not even make it to your PC! Don't you like that idea?

Microsoft would save you a lot of time and energy by looking itself, what programs should be allowed and what shouldn't.

Uhyve said,

Yeah, I can't wait for a future where every program released has to go through some secret submissions process, that sounds great!
The end result for you, the consumer, would be great. Microsoft would be the one, who checks whether a product is of good enough quality.
Is't a spyware or malware. Doesn't install crapware with it, when you install.
Has good and ample security features.

Haven't you experienced this? That when you install some program, you want to know if this is the real deal, and not some sneaky malware. I download a lot of browsers, just for checking them out.
I'm a little worried, if I'm not installing some form of dangerous software. Now with this 'closed' method, I would feel a lot more safe and secure.

A program going through some secret submissions process doesn't hurt me!
It's even good for the developers. Microsoft gives them feedback, on how to improve there software futher before publishing it. And a bad app wouldn't make it through, thus forcing the developer, to "do more"!

FMH said,
A program going through some secret submissions process doesn't hurt me!
It's even good for the developers. Microsoft gives them feedback, on how to improve there software futher before publishing it. And a bad app wouldn't make it through, thus forcing the developer, to "do more"!

While it sounds great in theory, it never seems to work like that. You have the Apple store where if you get refused submission, you often get no feedback and you've wasted alot of time on some App that'll never see the light of day. And you have Xbox Live which often gets patches much later than PC versions due to having to go through two sets of QA. Never mind the fact that this is all just disguising that these services are forced stores, which take a very healthy publishing fee for what is a very simple service.

Now, I don't disagree with all download services on principle. Steam, GoG, Impulse and even Origin are good examples, in that they offer the services that you describe, but they're not the only options available.

For an example of how this forced control hurts customers, just compare the 360 versions of Portal 2 and Unreal Tournament 3 with the PS3 versions, where the rules are ever so slightly more relaxed.

Mark said,
Ah so according to this guy, anyone who opposes his ideals needs to die.

I suppose it is, it would be more accurate to say that he'd be happy about the death of anyone who opposes his ideals.

Mark said,

I suppose it is, it would be more accurate to say that he'd be happy about the death of anyone who opposes his ideals.

Again fallacious.

He explicitly said he is not happy that he is dead just that he is gone from computing. I'm pretty sure that would include Jobs retiring if he was still alive. Most people don't read the source but seems as if you've commented without even reading a paragraph. well done!

He's like one of them hippies that want free music and no record companies.... if that happened there would be no good music... he needs to realise we live in a economy, without money flowing we would all be jobless

AshUK said,
He's like one of them hippies that want free music and no record companies.... if that happened there would be no good music... he needs to realise we live in a economy, without money flowing we would all be jobless

Free as in freedom... this guy has nothing to do with anything you just said.

Uhyve said,

Free as in freedom... this guy has nothing to do with anything you just said.

That guy is just being bitter.

FOSS is THERE. I have not bought an iDevice or Mac. So what's his problem? I had a choice. I chose not to use a Mac, and chose to use FOSS that suits what I WANT.

That's freedom. You don't force on me FOSS, You don't force on me iPhones, You don't force me Linux or Windows. Freedom means I have a choice and you also respect my choice. If I bought an iPad upon my will, or an Android upon my will, that's freedom. If I download Audacity or choose to purchase Adobe Soundbooth, that's freedom for me.

In short, that guy should focus on fighting Capitalism instead.

He may put it a bit blunt, but he has a point. IMO the recent outpour of emotion is sometimes seriously over the top.. Compare Jobs to Edison or Einstein.. I mean seriously.. not even in te same league.. Jobs did not invent anything, he had some good ideas and had people around him to build what he dreamt up. Been like that form the first Apple.


If Bill Gates dies there will be a lot less of this emotional charge to it, yet IMO Gates has been vastly more influential, has done vastly more important things and again IMO is a much, much better person in everyday life. Let's not forget Jobs has pulled some seriously questionable stunts in his personal life and has claimed some ínventions/innovations which were far from his idea.

So yes.. In a perfect world people should not die of horrible things like cancer.. But it happens, and it happened to Steve Jobs. May the man rest in peace and some of his business practices die with him.

Whenever anyone dies these days, you'll only see indiscriminate praise. The same thing happened with Ronald Reagan a while back, anyone who disagreed with the coverage automatically looked like a dick. It even happened when Deng Xiaoping died in 1997, and the media praised him as an economic reformer, barely mentioning his role in the Tiananmen Square massacre. Its wrong, we should be honest when someone dies. Being honest isn't the same thing as disrespect.

However, I think in Stallman's case, he's truly being stupid. Jobs death will not lead to the triumph of the free software movement, nor did Jobs invent proprietary software. Even if you disagree with his app model, Jobs is not a tyrant that's forcing you to use his devices, you can use Android or Linux based devices if you want.

Jobs was mostly an entrepreneur and not an inventor, but he still helped push computers forward. Stallman is hung up over petty political differences, that he can't see the forest for the trees, and turns everything having to do with his pet ideology into a battle between good and evil.

paulheu said,
He may put it a bit blunt, but he has a point. IMO the recent outpour of emotion is sometimes seriously over the top.. Compare Jobs to Edison or Einstein.. I mean seriously.. not even in te same league.. Jobs did not invent anything, he had some good ideas and had people around him to build what he dreamt up. Been like that form the first Apple.


If Bill Gates dies there will be a lot less of this emotional charge to it, yet IMO Gates has been vastly more influential, has done vastly more important things and again IMO is a much, much better person in everyday life. Let's not forget Jobs has pulled some seriously questionable stunts in his personal life and has claimed some ínventions/innovations which were far from his idea.

So yes.. In a perfect world people should not die of horrible things like cancer.. But it happens, and it happened to Steve Jobs. May the man rest in peace and some of his business practices die with him.

Sadly the comparisons have more to do with a pure lack of understanding of technology and the field the person was known for playing a role in.

If the media had a clue, Apple products would never have been as popular as they were, and 'reporters' would have noticed or did journalism on the same products that existed before Apple 'invented' it.

This was true of the people he was compared to as well, if people knew more about science in general, they would not have got recognition. Even Edison was more about marketing than inventions, the things he is known for by the average person are not technologies he invented, nor do we even use his versions of the competing technologies. He was brilliant and did a lot of good things, but not what people seem to think.

This is true of Steve Jobs as well, his brilliance was less in technology and more in appeal and simplification and ergonomics with a brilliant understanding of marketing them.

It took this brilliance to get what Woz was doing out of the hobby and the garage.

Steve had little understanding of the technology compared to Woz,but knew how to sell it and knew how to get access to parts from his father's friends at HP, etc. This was his brilliance, and it was more in line with PT Barnum than Einstein.

I feel for his family, but and was surprised by Woz's comments that his drive was based on the fact that he assumed to die young. I assume he thought he had some immortality, and thus gave up what I see as important things in life for his job. His job was his life and his gift to the world, and for that we do owe him thanks that he in a weird way cared more about impacting the world than taking time to enjoy life in ways many of us would.


----
I agree that as for 'technical' understanding of computer science and a grand vision, Gates is our Einstein, as he was the one that pushed for the idea of a 'personal computer', which is why Apple often made fun of 'generic' computers by calling them PCs., where everyone had a computer and access to all technologies the world could envision.

Gates was also more involved with the science of technology, working on and creating some of most brilliant aspects of technology today.

Edited by thenetavenger, Oct 9 2011, 9:44pm :

He is going to be hated on because he didn't say something popular. Can't remember the exact quote but it went something like this "it's not always right to take the popular decisions". BTW to haters, he never said he was glad to see Steve Jobs die but in fact the opposite just as all you have, it's just that none of you stated whether you were glad to see him gone from technology.

Everyone has their opinion. No big deal really. I am sure this is not the worst someone has said...or is going to say.

Even if he didn't agree with Steve Job's views it doesnt change the fact that an obviously influential (and he seemed like a nice person) has passed away in a horrible way aka cancer.

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols also said that "Jobs was our generation's Disney, its Edison".

That's right, he compared Steve Jobs to a thief [spoiler]and a Templar[/spoiler].
If Steve Jobs is Edison, then Steve Wozniak is ****ing Tesla.

Richard Stallman does not take pleasure in Job's death. He just showed his disagreement to Jobs' contribution to the computing world. Jobs was a glorified businessman, like any other cult leader.

I think it's not smart to say something like this out loud...

I bet many people a thinking to themselves:
"I think it's not smart to say out loud, but I agree."

It's just not very nice to say...

Bamsebjorn said,
I think it's not smart to say something like this out loud...

I bet many people a thinking to themselves:
"I think it's not smart to say out loud, but I agree."

It's just not very nice to say...

I think exactly that, but I'm not a dick.

Bamsebjorn said,
I think it's not smart to say something like this out loud...

I bet many people a thinking to themselves:
"I think it's not smart to say out loud, but I agree."

It's just not very nice to say...


No offense, but what you just said counts as saying it out loud. xD

MightyJordan said,
No idea who this Richard Stallman guy is, but from reading this, he's obviously a dick.
I heard of him first time too. I did a little research, it sounds like, he wants softwares to be free!

FMH said,
I heard of him first time too. I did a little research, it sounds like, he wants softwares to be free!
Free as freedom, not gratis.

tiagosilva29 said,
Free as freedom, not gratis.

Yup. Forcing people to use free software and companies to make free software is what he wants, in the name of freedom. Ain't that awesome? /s

Aethec said,
Yup. Forcing people to use free software and companies to make free software is what he wants, in the name of freedom. Ain't that awesome? /s
notsureifserious.png
There's no forcing, and the available licenses are quite permissive. It's not like we are the ones buying technical comitees for standardization and governments.

tiagosilva29 said,
notsureifserious.png
There's no forcing, and the available licenses are quite permissive. It's not like we are the ones buying technical comitees for standardization and governments.

And the chances are you're using part of the licenses he's helped create. Without them we'd all be doomed to mid 90's software lock downs. With proprietary everything. We'd certainly not have anything in terms of firefox, or chrome, we wouldn't have MP3 technology for free and we wouldn't have things like divx/xvid, VLC. You can pretty much thank stallman for you easy access to 1000s of movies and music etc with just a few opensourced codecs.

Anyone who remembers the likes of realplayer and quicktime before there were alternatives knows how bad the software and the the bull... you had to deal with. yeah you get the idea.


Richard stallman might be a total jackass at times, but he's helped technology move on more then a lot of people give him credit for. Even Apple have to give a nod in stallman's direction.

sagum said,
And the chances are you're using part of the licenses he's helped create. Without them we'd all be doomed to mid 90's software lock downs. With proprietary everything. We'd certainly not have anything in terms of firefox, or chrome, we wouldn't have MP3 technology for free and we wouldn't have things like divx/xvid, VLC. You can pretty much thank stallman for you easy access to 1000s of movies and music etc with just a few opensourced codecs.

Anyone who remembers the likes of realplayer and quicktime before there were alternatives knows how bad the software and the the bull... you had to deal with. yeah you get the idea.


Richard stallman might be a total jackass at times, but he's helped technology move on more then a lot of people give him credit for. Even Apple have to give a nod in stallman's direction.

confused.ppm

I'm defending Stallman, dude. Maybe you misreplied to the other guy. And yes, I'm using free software, with the exception of the BIOS.

sagum said,

And the chances are you're using part of the licenses he's helped create. Without them we'd all be doomed to mid 90's software lock downs. With proprietary everything. We'd certainly not have anything in terms of firefox, or chrome, we wouldn't have MP3 technology for free and we wouldn't have things like divx/xvid, VLC. You can pretty much thank stallman for you easy access to 1000s of movies and music etc with just a few opensourced codecs.

Anyone who remembers the likes of realplayer and quicktime before there were alternatives knows how bad the software and the the bull... you had to deal with. yeah you get the idea.


Richard stallman might be a total jackass at times, but he's helped technology move on more then a lot of people give him credit for. Even Apple have to give a nod in stallman's direction.

*cough* Bullcrap...

The items you mention are either from or a part of standards groups that HAD NOTHING to do with the Free software movement.

If you want to promote access to technology and ideas, then you need to champion these standards bodies and organization like Microsoft that may not give you the source code to NT to use, but will explain in detail all the ideas behind NT and share all their ideas freely with the industry.

The OSS/Free Software movement has done little to promote IDEAS, instead it continues to pump legacy and specific code concepts that with the IDEAS are worthless and one trick ponies.

Which would you rather have, a piece of OSS that optimizes the memory stack in a specific distribution of Linux on a specific platform, or a new memory optimization theory that is shared with everyone, that is explain in detail so that anyone can write and implement it?

As for the codecs, MP3, etc? You do realize these came the MPEG group, and that the ideas that 'came' from the early work were GIVEN away. Even XVid/Divx and various side codecs from H.264/MPeg4, came from IDEAS that Microsoft developed in producing the first MPEG4 codecs, and freely gave to the world, and even gave the code in 'example' of the ideas.

Microsoft also used them as examples of FAILINGs in the base codec designs, and tried to share these ideas with people, that fell on deaf ears, which is when they dumped the work and started WMV that became VC1.

See IDEAS can work both ways, by adding to the dialog, they can add new concepts or show flaws in current trends and concepts. Luckily the final MPEG4 implementations did FINALLY deal with some of the issues Microsoft raised, and is why H264 and VC1 are the 'official' HD standards for BluRay and HD Streaming.

The Free software movement is locked in their own intellectual disconnect that focuses far too much on code and sharing of code than the ideas and the concept of understanding that far more important than specific functions or pieces of code.

Just because Apple or Microsoft doesn't ship out the source code to their products doesn't mean they haven't added IDEAS that they have shared with the world. (Agreeably Apple far less than Microsoft.)

However when looking at the technologies of the past 20 years, when you are using your GPU, your CPU, your keyboard, your mouse, to 1000 other items that make up your computer and the technology around you...

Take notice that many of these 'IDEAS' came from specifically from Microsoft, and they didn't ask for a freaking dime for any of them, as they considered them to be IDEAS to be shared and given to standards organizations and hardware vendors.

The GPU technology in the XBox 360 was designed by Microsoft engineers and is the CORE BASIS of all GPU technologies used today. Show me one piece of GPU designs or architectures that the OSS or Free Software movement added.

Even OpenGL would have been left to engineering and non-gaming modalities if it hadn't been for Microsoft telling them and the world this can be used for Gaming, and breaking off to create DirectX, which today sitting on Microsoft's GPU technologies is the basis of computer graphics and gaming today. Even the freakign PS3 is using a GPU that is based on hardware designed by Microsoft, and user level shader language technology designed and written by Microsoft, and given to the industry as 'IDEAS' for free. (*Reference VS/PS NVidia Shader language, porting Microsoft user shader technologies and languages.)

The unified shader, the new DMA modes and BUS memory technologies from the XENOS GPU define the current computing GPU models, and the technologies it specifically made possible, like the modern form of GP-GPU (Cuda 2.x, OpenCL, etc).

Again, freely given to the technology industry and world as a whole, not just as 'IDEAS' but even hardware schematics, samples, and new ideas for coding methodologies. Sure Microsoft didn't hand over the source code to the XBox 360 or DirectX, but they sure gave the IDEAS that are MORE IMPORTANT to ATI, NVidia, Intel, etc. They even gave them to the OpenGL, OSS, Apple, IBM and other communities and companies.

And this is where the OSS and Free Software movement gets 'caught' in a loop as they see everything through open source 'code' and not through the generic sharing of incredible new ideas.

Microsoft even has a full OSS division and gives out code and work through it. They however, DO NOT support the limitations of the GPL and other BAD licensing that 'constrains' the use of the 'Free open source' exchange of ideas. So they branded their own license, that is more open than the OSS standard licenses, in that people can do whatever they want with the code in any way with NO obligations.

The OSS and Free Software movement has turned into a marketing 'con' that companies like Apple and Google have used against consumers. For example Android is open source and that makes it a good thing, right? Wrong, it is open in that you can see the code, but the defacto standard is defined by a sole company and they have no obligation to share ideas or implement anything they do not want to implement. This also applies to the con of WebM/VP8, as Google can decide that their 'version', which used by Chrome as the defacto standard, reports information back to Google and Advertisers and there is NOTHING anyone can do about it, nor can they implement a version that is more of a 'standard' because the leading product of the technology is ALWAYS the standard, even if it is something the rest of the OSS world would never condone.


You can get more 'IDEAS' from spending time in the free Microsoft repository of white-papers and code samples and MSDN and R&D sites, as it is the largest collection of FREE technologies IDEAS and repository in the world, and it grows daily almost exponentially.

There are more IDEAS given to the world from Microsoft in six months that the entire Free Software movement gave to the world in 20 years.

I really hate how destructive the Free/OSS movement has been to the current generation. I have had the younger generation explain how wonderful a freaking Roomba is because it is Open Source. They are perplexed when I ask them the IDEAs they got from this, and why they have problems reading the machine code in competitive products. (All code is Open Source if you are smart enough to machine code and don't need your hand held with it all put together in pretty C++. Again, a great product that doesn't give people ideas, instead gives them open source code and leaves the ideas out, and is used as a marketing con, because it is open source they can do more with it. *cough* bullcrap...

thenetavenger said,

*awesomeness*

This, sir, must be the awesomest comment I've ever seen on this kind of topic. As much as I'd like to see more peoples use Open Source Software and see a wider adoption rate (LibreOffice, for example), I can't help but try to see what Open Source software really brought to the World. I've got a friend that can't help but think that everything "closed" is not worth a sh*t. But when I ask him to show me something used widely used or new and useful for "normal" peoples that Open Source software have brought up, there's nothing that comes to his mind. It feels like Open Source is, well, "closed", on itself.

thenetavenger said,

Wall of Text snipped

Sharing of knowledge and the FOSS movement aren't mutually exclusive, we can have both. The FOSS movement doesn't deal with ideas, because that is the realm of intellectual property and not directly linked to software, although I guess by definition, the code that is made available is an implementation of an idea anyway, so wouldn't that, by definition make it sharing of ideas? *shrug*

While the sharing of ideas is good, the advantage we gain by adding these ideas to FLOSS software makes those ideas exponentially better because we can simply take that idea, and its implementation, and build upon it. A full implementation can be taken from an open source project, enhanced, fixed and updated by anyone to make it even better. Licences like GPL promote the software equivalent of "standing on the shoulders of giants" by allowing anyone to build upon existing code to make it better, and then sharing the code again so that the next person can come along and improve your idea to make THAT even better.

As for the FOSS "con", there's no such thing. If (to take your example) a company like Google wants to make a version of WebM and put tracking code into it, if the code is available under a licence under a truly FLOSS licence, there's nothing to stop another person taking the source code, ripping out the offending tracking code, and making it available again. If you're unable to do this, then by definition it is not open. Android/Chrome works on the same principle, If Google puts tracking code into that, we, as contributors are legally allowed to go fork the project, rip out the offending code, and re-release it. See SRWare Iron as a working and active example of software that does exactly this. As for having tracking code in standards, FLOSS doesn't cater to standards compliance or setting of standards, talk to the ISO committee if you've got a problem with the way they work.

The FLOSS movement has done nothing to the current generation except made them better by providing implementations of ideas for them to learn from, see theories in action, and give them a big leg up into writing software without the need for them to re-invent the wheel. Hell, even if they want to reinvent the wheel, they're free to do so. There's simply no down side to letting people view source code. Without FLOSS for example, if I had a need for a particular type of operating system for a very specific purpose, I have two choices: use someone elses implementation, and deal with the limitations, or implement my own from scratch. WITH FLOSS, we have this great thing called GNU/Linux (as a single example), and you or I can take the code from an existing distribution, make any necessary modifications, and go from there. With closed source operating systems, we're locked into the manufacturers ideas, theories, and implementations, regardless of how good or bad they may be.

With regard to your final comment about "All code is open source...". Sure that's true, but having access to the source code makes life infinitely easier. I could learn to modify machine code directly, but that implies that my time isn't worth anything. Your comment also smacks of the elitist assembly programmer BS that everyone who wants to modify a program should have to do so via hex editor, instead of downloading the source from a repository, making said change, and recompiling as necessary. It boggles the mind how anyone could be opposed to the second way.

Ekko said,
I can't help but try to see what Open Source software really brought to the World. I've got a friend that can't help but think that everything "closed" is not worth a sh*t. But when I ask him to show me something used widely used or new and useful for "normal" peoples that Open Source software have brought up, there's nothing that comes to his mind.

Your friend isn't great with memories. How about some of these:

- Linux: The world's most popular smartphone OS kernel, web server OS kernel, and scientific OS kernel. [GPL licence]
- Android: The world's most popular smartphone operating system. [Apache licence]
- Mozilla Firefox: The world's second most popular web browser, and the browser that forced MSIE into standards compliance. [GPL licence]
- MySQL: The world's third most popular relational database management system. [GPL licence]
- Webkit: The browser layout engine used in Google Chrome, Apple Safari, Steam's in-game browser and many others [LGPL and BSD licences]

Need I go on?

Majesticmerc said,

Need I go on?

Nah, It's alright and I didn't think about it too much for myself (even writting it on Firefox...)

Not that I want to start arguing, but for the Linux kernel, most peoples don't know what it is. Ultimately, some may be using a derivative, be it Android or Ubuntu or any other distro, but they still don't know what it is. First thing that seems to come to their mind -if any- is "Oh, that omgleethaxor complicated terminal thingy where you enter weird stuff to make it work?".

For Android, yeah you're right. But for Firefox (which still needed a *lot* of time before gaining it's wide adoption number), most still use IE, let alone know what a browser is. But here goes with Chrome which is Open Source AFAIK.

MySQL and WebKit, utilmately, yes, but once again, most don't know and care about what it is.

The sad thing with OSS software is communication with users. And by that, I don't mean the great (really) community that's behind most OSS, but UI-wise and ease-of-access-wise, support-wise, for those who don't care about their computer but having it working when they want. If it wasn't for this achilles heel, I guess OSS would be more widely adopted.

That's where Jobs excelled: Communication with consumers, users.

Ekko said,

Nah, It's alright and I didn't think about it too much for myself (even writting it on Firefox...)

Not that I want to start arguing, but for the Linux kernel, most peoples don't know what it is. Ultimately, some may be using a derivative, be it Android or Ubuntu or any other distro, but they still don't know what it is. First thing that seems to come to their mind -if any- is "Oh, that omgleethaxor complicated terminal thingy where you enter weird stuff to make it work?".

For Android, yeah you're right. But for Firefox (which still needed a *lot* of time before gaining it's wide adoption number), most still use IE, let alone know what a browser is. But here goes with Chrome which is Open Source AFAIK.

MySQL and WebKit, utilmately, yes, but once again, most don't know and care about what it is.


So ignorance and laziness is the excuse. Ok.

Ekko said,

The sad thing with OSS software is communication with users. And by that, I don't mean the great (really) community that's behind most OSS, but UI-wise and ease-of-access-wise, support-wise, for those who don't care about their computer but having it working when they want. If it wasn't for this achilles heel, I guess OSS would be more widely adopted.

That's where Jobs excelled: Communication with consumers, users.


OSS is built using funding from various sources. Most of the people who contribute, work on their own time out of personal interest. They don't have millions and billions of dollars to spend on presentations and advertisements and support like Apple, Google and Microsoft do. If you are willing to give 1 billion to the OSS community, you'll hear more about it in the news because news is biased towards who pays them more. Look at Neowin front page, for example. LOL How many Apple iProduct rumors did you hear about in the last 4 weeks?