pouët.net

it doesn't look as pretty as Visual C++ :)

visy: I want to say "Compile/Run" and see the problem about my code (if any) pointed out to me. I despise the idea of spending effort and losing my already-established focus on the IDE, just to be able to see what's wrong with my code / what are the outcome of the build process. This is what's wrong with GCC+Makefiles et al. Not to mention Makefiles are old, the problem with Linux is the very same reason to why people love Apple over Microsoft: Lack of innovation. Linux might be constantly updated in code, but the concepts and ideas used are from 20 years ago. Emacs, Makefile, configuration via text files sprinkled all over the place... etc. Get over it, it's starting to stink!

Oh also, Eclipse is the only usable development suite on Linux distributions. Though it's most likely the only thing I love about Linux development, since Eclipse on Linux is not Java byte-code interpreted but compiled to machine code.

visy: lack of good tools in second part of the toolchain: + debugger + profiler.

Code::Blocks is quite nice for a free and multi-plateform IDE, uses a human-readable project configuration file, imports most of Visual Studio projects without a problem, and for the most works quite well :)

Yes, but when the driver not working means that someone's kids don't eat, the driver tends to work.

GbND: More of a reason to use proprietary software then.

Decipher: Either that or withold food from the maintainers of the ubuntu usb drivers' children... that's a complex problem though.

Decipher: I have no problems running terminal windows in tiled mode :) I guess it just takes getting used to... having grown with text-based systems greatly helps, I'd say. WIMP user interface is just too limited for my tastes.

I would say that most people in this discussion look at GNU/Linux and free software in general from position of convenience. Free software is about ethics and freedom.

I understand that quite a few people would say that they believe philosophy to be crap and not real life - these people obviously share different premises than those who look at free software as an ethical way to use software. If you think of free software as no price software, just get cracked Windows and run uTorrent to get other cracked programs. If by free you mean freedom, then you should definitely stick or at least try to stick with free software whenever it is possible.

Someone here said that what Stallman speaks about is not what you get in an average everyday life. If by what you get in everyday average life you mean routine and usual things that happen, then love, inspiration, kindness, sincerity are also not on that list, but we still strive to live our lives sincerely and with lots of inspiration. Same with ethics. Those are delicate matters which are extremely easy to avoid in everyday fuss. But one time you might think you missed a very important part of life.

And as for pure convenience, in many cases it is getting used to a system that works differently. Take cars, today everything gets done by technical service. Cars are now even being designed in such a way that an average person cannot fix anything, even the simplest thing, by himself. Windows did the same thing - it does too much for the user, making him a consumer. Even if you want to change something, it is very difficult or even prohibited. And many of us got used to that.

Free software is in a difficult position. Proprietary software world is definitely stronger and backed up by huge money. But in the end freedom will win, like always. It depends on each one of us how long that journey will take.

Sorry for the pathos, but this is how I see it =)

As I see it, in the end, convenience will win, like always. There's been loads of cases in which freedom did, in fact, lose ;)

So I must use crappy tools to be in harmony with the Universe. Sorry, I have 3rd option: pay for the commercial operating system and tools you use. This way you have good software and clear conscience. That is freedom too: you have possibility to choose the best tool for the job without any philosophical implications.

This is so lame I cracked.

So software can be crappy to use as long as it's free as in freedom? Considering how let's say Gimp works, I wouldn't be surprised if the developers are more concerned about freedom than actually the usability of their software. And yeah, you're damn sure that I care for my convenience. I write (evil proprietary) software at work and when I come back home, I absolutely don't want to deal with any bullshit from my computer. I want it to work and I want to click on stuff and see it work. I see it as an appliance. I don't take any bullshit from my stereo equipment, my stove or my vacuum cleaner either.



Just out of curiosity, in all your righteousness, how many times have you actually

1) scanned the source code of a free program to look for something (programming ideas, protocols, back doors, whatever)?
2) improved something you weren't happy with and contributed to the original sourcebase?
3) created a totally innovative piece of free software that has revolutionized the world?



I use proprietary software so I am incapable of love?



Sitting in front of a computer trying to get a wireless to work, after which trying to get a bunch of shit to compile, fix simple compilation errors in a source distribution and then realize that the GUI follows absolutely no sensible standards or guidelines whatsoever?



"Windows does too much for the user". I rest my case.

For the record, I have never found myself in the position on proprietary operating systems that it wouldn't let me do the thing I wanted. I haven't encountered it either on Windows or OS X, and I don't see why I would, as long as I stay away from DRM'd media files. I have used a bunch of open source/free software, and I like to use emacs for example, but I wouldn't call them exactly bug free either.

Since you seem to be passionate about this, would you be kind enough to name one relevant/everyday use case where something I might want to do is prohibited? DRM'd media doesn't count, since that's easy to avoid.



Oh yes, the evil huge money corporations.. damn them. To defeat them, I would recommend competing with software quality and support. Any takers?

Preacher has the leading.

always those damned linux communists...

Some do it for the leetness.
Some think it's about ideals or they were told it's cool because of some great ideal or something.
Some people are living within the OS, maybe they are curious, maybe they need to know how everything works or they claim that's the magic with linux but maybe they never actually bother to compile a tool or code a driver when there is none.
Some need the OS just as a platform to do their job (like me, I don't have the time to bother with the OS when all I want to do is demos).
It's like some kind of politics while all that matters at the end is taste. Some want to do their job easilly and don't find some meaning in having so-called control, others want to feel they are cool because of linux, or maybe they really are curious, I don't know.

You can't just say that linux is this or that and windows users are lame or something. I personally don't care. I don't want to code when I don't need to code. I code only for demos and own project. If the media player is broken while I watch a movie, should I recompile and fix it? I just want to see a fuckin movie. I code only when I want to code not when I am doing regular jobs. Maybe I am not geek enough? It's a matter of taste or style or for some coolness or ideals or a mixed bug of that.

But why I am writting this? I actually enjoy this thread, it's a bit funny..

preacher certainly does have leading. but i've heard of some nasty future plans for "personal computing" which could be just over the horizon. so just in case Microsoft has plans to DRM my personal text files, it's good to know linux is there as an alternative.

But GIMP, I mean WTF!? I tried that piece of crap for the first time last week. it's like they've purposeful done everything in the exact opposite to Photoshop, just for the sake of it. what a lame program.

hello: Stolen software usually has crippled DRM/protection mechanisms, so you're safe.

oh god not another one of those linux vs. windows threads...

I use Ubuntu since 2005. I only had problems with proprietary drivers (nvidia in my case). Never anything else. my 2cents.

Preacher: what you say may sound very reasonable in short term logic. Also, I agree that to a non-programmer this is a less obvious problem. With time it will be more and more obvious however, when Microsoft have a chip in your computer an then block you because they suspect you have downloaded "illegal" content. The "trusted" computer scheme is already realized in several computers and will be there soon in much more.

But I would say that debating about free software is a bit time wasting. It all comes down to either agreeing or not with an end user agreement of proprietary software that says you cannot share with your friend. If one believes this is not a problem and his friend better pay and forget about getting something from you (assuming he is your good friend), then of course - free software philosophy might seem crap to you.

Also, I think that the "crappiness" of free software in this thread is overemphasized to an extent of being untrue. Gimp is a very powerful editor, actually, one of the strongest free software packages out there. But it takes time to master. If you couldn't do it in a couple of days, doesn't mean the software is bad. It took me a long time to master Photoshop and before I did I sincerely believed it was a crappy programm. I was, of course, wrong.

Free software questions are not that easy. It requires thinking over. It is easy to just dismiss stuff in a forum debate. It is also very easy to say: "No you are not correct", but for the opposing side it is much more difficult to explain and back up arguments because it would require the one disagreeing to carefully consider all the arguments presented.

Try this: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/shouldbefree.html
But again, you should share the initial premise that community and helping each other is a valuable thing.

Louigi: The part about Gimp. That is complete and utter bullshit. The underlying systems may be powerful, but that's no use when the GUI is the most shitty interface ever conceived. "takes time to master" should read "takes time to get used that fucking shitty GUI". It's obviously created by people that have no real conception on how the average artist works, and instead of actually improving the interface, they spend years adding simple features like brush sizes.

On the other side, Photoshop has a really intuitive GUI and a much more comfortable learning curve.

And also, I totally agree with preacher.

I noticed that you didn't answer any of my questions. Let me repeat them here for you:

Just out of curiosity, in all your righteousness, how many times have you actually

1) scanned the source code of a free program to look for something (programming ideas, protocols, back doors, whatever)?
2) improved something you weren't happy with and contributed to the original sourcebase?
3) created a totally innovative piece of free software that has revolutionized the world?

and

would you be kind enough to name one relevant/everyday use case where something I might want to do is prohibited? DRM'd media doesn't count, since that's easy to avoid.


I have to say that I don't follow you here. Are you saying that I am not a programmer? Or that non-programmers don't care for the quality of their software?

As far as I can tell, I only said that "software should be good and compete on its merits". I'd say that's a rather sensible approach to developing software in the long term as well. Ideology will not help me get my shit done.



Yes, I do know about Palladium and all that crap. I am writing this on a Macbook Pro that most definitely has a trusted computing module inside it, plus probably some additional Apple devilry. It hasn't prevented me from doing any of the things that I have tried to do on it, nor do I think it ever will, because the uproar would be so huge. That remains to be seen. If the thought police comes some day, then we can continue this discussion. Until then, I fail to see any relevance.



Yeah. You could use the time spent writing your reply improving some bits of free software, and I could use it for finetuning my Breakpoint demo (which will be public domain and therefore naturally free as in freedom software). Both of these things would do the world more good than posting on a forum.


I thought that the Free Software thing was also about your ability to change, modify and learn. Also, I don't personally give much of a damn about copyrights or patents and have absolutely no problems with sharing. However, as a both professional and hobbyist software developer, I know all too well the time and effort it takes to make proper software, and I am happy to give the hobbyist or a company a bunch of money for their hard work if he or she doesn't want to share it for free.

That's actually a freedom too.


I have absolutely no problems with the philosophy. I support it for the most part. What I do have a problem about is the fact that a lot of its proponents are self-righteous, the software quality varies wildly and the idea that a developer should not have a freedom to do as he pleases with his software. Furthermore, I think that just like music, software should be mostly evaluated on one single metric: quality. I have outlined my experiences with a popular piece of free software earlier in this thread and concluded that the quality is not up to par, or at least wasn't then.


Number one rule of interface design: If it needs a manual or you can't use it out of the box, it is bad. This applies to everything from door handles and DVD players to computer software. If your elderly grandmother can't use it, it is bad. If making it work requires editing configuration files manually and checking for library dependencies, it is bad. If getting it to work requires googling and then browsing forums full of people that irk and post "n00b" when you ask a perfectly reasonable question, then it's exceptionally bad.

There is a lot of good free software out there, naturally. I like emacs for instance, and Python, and on a machine that it works on I am a happy Kubuntu user.



Assuming that people have not thought over these matters if they're on the "opposite" side is rather condescending, wouldn't you say?



Indeed. Would you please answer my questions now if we want to continue this. They're on the top of the post.



I have read it years ago already and translated it for a school project. I have also read through the Cathedral and the Bazaar, most of Stallman's website and the Jargon file. I am a member of the Electronic Frontier Foundation Finland. It still doesn't change the fact that the free software world could learn a thing or two from the proprietary software world, and make their offerings not suck in many regards.

Please start with the debugger. If anything, that would make me want to develop software on a free as in freedom platform.



I haven't ever turned down a single request for assistance in demo-related matters, I have always given out source code to anyone who asks and I have now officially gone 100% open source in the demoscene. But if I happen to think that proprietary software has its uses and a lot of it is functionally superior to free software and ask the free software people to compete on merits and not ideology, I don't think helping each other is a valuable thing?