if rsm would die today the majority of the world would not miss him. The same does not apply to steve jobs...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Richard M. Stallman is glad Jobs is gone
- Thread starter kresh
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There is more to open source than Linux..
http://opensourcemac.org/
If you go there you'll probably find a program you use quite regularly..
Webkit, the engine that powers safari, mail, and dashboard is Open Source
I know there is... I know there are some products we use on a day to day basis that is based off the open source. But reading how he views a web page no thanks. Again, I agree with some of his views but not all.
He only does what he does because he doesn't know how to make money off of technology. Those who can: do. Those who can't: Lecture. Steve Jobs was a visionary, easily one of the most brilliant minds to ever live. Hundreds of years from now, people will still be reading about him, thinking about him, and reaping the benefits of his vision.
Almost no one knows who Stallman is and no one will care. Jobs is the future even in death, and is worth hundreds of Stallmans.
Almost no one knows who Stallman is and no one will care. Jobs is the future even in death, and is worth hundreds of Stallmans.
You make it sound like the only goal in life is to make money. Sure Steve Jobs couldn't resist the lure of filthy lucre.
Obviously, you don't know who Stallman is. Stallman did, is doing and will keep doing for years to come. Stallman's goal is not to make money off technology, it's to Free technology from the grasp of corporations to put it in the hands of individuals, with full rights to use, modify and distribute the results and to interoperate with the world at large Free of restrictions.
Free as in freedom.
All I have to say is WOW...
Or cares very little for wealth..
This is applicable to University Professors.
Steve Jobs was a passionate salesman, and a wonderful packager..he took things and made them approachable..
You don't know who Stallman is but you're not the majority..In a 100 years people will be talking about the birth of the free exchange of ideas, not AAPL
**edit**
This really wants to make me go back to Linux, I may have had to compile stuff but you won't find CEO worship a linuxquestions.org..It's sorta scary..remember folks this is a computer not you family..
And yet.. it was Stallman who said he was glad Jobs was "gone", simply because Jobs was pushing closed, proprietary solutions. If anyone in this argument has a f*cked up set of priorities, it's Stallman.
The thing is Jobs' tech/design DNA is so thoroughly diffused into the Apple hierarchy that it makes no difference that the man himself is dead. Cook/Ive will continue the Jobs principle of closed/proprietary. Stallman simply issued an emotional rant against a man he deeply hated. My guess is nobody will be shedding tears for Stallman when he croaks.
I appreciate he said he's "glad he's gone" and not "glad he's dead". But we all know why Jobs is gone, and it's a very graceless thing to cheer his passing, so near to his death; simply because Jobs was (very successfully) selling solutions Stallman didn't like.
Why exactly is he happy? Does he think Jobs' passing will mean closed, proprietary solutions will go away? I like proprietary solutions, if it means well designed and tightly integrated solutions. I (and many, many consumers) choose the closed, over the open. If the 'pro-freedom'/'pro-choice' Stallman would prefer I didn't have the closed, proprietary Apple option, that would be rather ironic.
pfft
Perhaps people busy stallman bashing would do well to reflect that OS X Developers are busy happily using Stallmans Free Compiler GCC in Mac-ports. If you dont like stallman or his comments then stop using his compiler, in fact why not stop using elements of Open Source and Free Software like Ruby, Python, Perl oh and whilst your at it when you open your terminal prompt that's the Bash Shell /bin/bash but now I suppose we'll all hear how thats patented apple software... They have their own virtual machine called LLVM & Clang so why is everyone still insisting on using stallmans GCC compiler...
Why not go ahead and use clang just don't come bitching to other developers when things Clang together!
If you think stallmans comments where a bit much then your going to love Mike Daisey calling the founder of Apple a "Brutal Tyrant!"
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news...014-1lnj5.html
Actually I think you'll find half the open source community will be deeply moved when Stallman croaks, he's one of the founding father's of the GNU, with no GNU or GCC compiler your OS X would not exist you "such a one who stands atop a mountain in a lighting storm screaming that the goddess of lightning has a face like a diseased ulahula root!"
Perhaps people busy stallman bashing would do well to reflect that OS X Developers are busy happily using Stallmans Free Compiler GCC in Mac-ports. If you dont like stallman or his comments then stop using his compiler, in fact why not stop using elements of Open Source and Free Software like Ruby, Python, Perl oh and whilst your at it when you open your terminal prompt that's the Bash Shell /bin/bash but now I suppose we'll all hear how thats patented apple software... They have their own virtual machine called LLVM & Clang so why is everyone still insisting on using stallmans GCC compiler...
Why not go ahead and use clang just don't come bitching to other developers when things Clang together!
If you think stallmans comments where a bit much then your going to love Mike Daisey calling the founder of Apple a "Brutal Tyrant!"
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news...014-1lnj5.html
Actually I think you'll find half the open source community will be deeply moved when Stallman croaks, he's one of the founding father's of the GNU, with no GNU or GCC compiler your OS X would not exist you "such a one who stands atop a mountain in a lighting storm screaming that the goddess of lightning has a face like a diseased ulahula root!"
Last edited:
"Free" as in what Stallman calls freedom.
The antithesis of Stallman is Linus Torvalds, whose goal it is to create the best operating system he can, using methods that he thinks will give the best results. "Open Source" as a tool to produce the best software, given the resources at his disposal.
Stallman, on the other hand, seems purely driven by ideology. The worst example was the VLC player for iPhone and iPad, where in order to guarantee the full rights of individuals to use, modify and distribute the results these individuals couldn't possibly be allowed to use, modify and distribute a version that runs on iOS. I don't believe for one second that his goal is "free" software. Stallman's goal is forcing Stallman's ideology on the world.
I am quite sure that I understand Stallman exactly as he wanted to be understood.
I doubt it. People don't talk about Stalin and the birth of equality of men, do they?
GNU/Linux is FREE software, Stallman has already acknowledged it as such...
Thats why you can download copies of it from the GNU...
He's not forcing his ideology on anyone, people are happily embracing his ideology every-time they download Gnu/Linux, at a last count the number of Linux users was starting to out-way the numbers of OS X users.. I mean the amounts of people discovering it every-day Ubuntu, Mint, Suse, RedHat, Fedora, Knoppix, Back|Track, Debian, gNewSense, FreeNAS, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, LinEx, Puppy..etc one day the amount of people using it will far out-way the numbers of people using OS X.
I imagine when that happens stallman will be a very happy man...
Tell me something when you walk into an office do you see copies of GNU/Linux running everywhere or do you see a load of Mac's and Windows PC's?
So why isnt everyone using BSD or Linux, well thats easy to answer, it requires it's users to have a brain...
If everyone could use Linux don't you think they would!?
Unfortunately theres no help-desk support if you get stuck using Linux, you have to figure out how to fix it on your own...
Thats why you can download copies of it from the GNU...
He's not forcing his ideology on anyone, people are happily embracing his ideology every-time they download Gnu/Linux, at a last count the number of Linux users was starting to out-way the numbers of OS X users.. I mean the amounts of people discovering it every-day Ubuntu, Mint, Suse, RedHat, Fedora, Knoppix, Back|Track, Debian, gNewSense, FreeNAS, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, LinEx, Puppy..etc one day the amount of people using it will far out-way the numbers of people using OS X.
I imagine when that happens stallman will be a very happy man...
Tell me something when you walk into an office do you see copies of GNU/Linux running everywhere or do you see a load of Mac's and Windows PC's?
So why isnt everyone using BSD or Linux, well thats easy to answer, it requires it's users to have a brain...
If everyone could use Linux don't you think they would!?
Unfortunately theres no help-desk support if you get stuck using Linux, you have to figure out how to fix it on your own...
Last edited:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)
Next year is the year of Desktop Linux. No, really. They swear. This time they promise. The other years were just a "practice." This time it's the real thing. Just watch.
FoSs10 said:
Next year is the year of Desktop Linux. No, really. They swear. This time they promise. The other years were just a "practice." This time it's the real thing. Just watch.
No, most FOSS software's Usability bar is placed so low that its in Satan's wine cellar. A poorly designed UI will mystify the most avid computer users.
We get some oddities like Firefox and KDE, but I wouldn't touch a lot of FOSS with a barge pole.
Linux is probably THE most used OS in serious enterprise, that's not something to be laughed at. But Linux as it stands will never work in consumer space.
Last edited:
Keep telling yourself that....
http://8200.6.img98.net/out.php/i90700_2011-10-15-1318681387-13scrot.png
Sorry to disappoint you I am a consumer and I stick Linux on the iPod, in fact I stick linux onto anything and everything I can get it working on.
My poorly designed UI was one I built and designed myself, it was so incredibly difficult to pick up those programmers guides entitled README and listen to what they had to say, you could say they left me very mystified as you can see from my screen shot.
Far be it from my understanding to know how to make it work with Smart-Card authentication in tow with RC4 security certificates and user based access controls and multi-level authentication.
Rock on Stallman and Torvald some of us are your biggest fans...
Last edited:
Keep telling yourself that....
http://8200.6.img98.net/out.php/i90700_2011-10-15-1318681387-13scrot.png
Sorry to disappoint you I am a consumer and I stick Linux on the iPod, in fact I stick linux onto anything and everything I can get it working on.
My poorly designed UI was one I built and designed myself, it was so incredibly difficult to pick up those programmers guides entitled README and listen to what they had to say, you could say they left me very mystified as you can see from my screen shot.
Far be it from my understanding to know how to make it work with Smart-Card authentication in tow with RC4 security certificates and user based access controls and multi-level authentication.
Rock on Stallman and Torvald some of us are your biggest fans...
"I am a consumer"
You're sure not wearing a consumer's uniform.
You're about as far from the bulk of the market as a snake's nutsack from the moon.
You are most certainly not the average user. Linux is, to this day, unfit for mass-market use. I'm afraid that harping on the spread of Desktop Linux is a losing proposition - not just here, but in general. A lot of us bought into the FOSS/Linux propaganda back in the day, but we soon realized it wasn't much more than a (possibly) fun experiment that others could rip ideas from and actually render usable for everyone.
Desktop Linux exists. That is the goal. For it to simply exist as an option. It is not designed, marketed (there isn't any marketing) or otherwise built to compete with OS X, and not even Windows. The quality of software just doesn't exist, there is no uniformity in design, and there is simply far too much complexity for the average user to bother with.
You can continue to tout the benefits of Linux from the Linux User's Ivory Tower, but please, don't kid yourself and everyone else into thinking that it will overtake any of the mainstream operating systems. It was never built for that purpose (Ask Linus, he admits to this) and it shows. There's a reason it's free.
Contradictory. In two sentences that follow each other.
What makes you believe his ideology isn't "Free software" ? You're saying 1 sentence that you don't believe his goal is "Free" software, then the next you're saying that's what he's pushing on the world...
Hum... doesn't make sense.
VLC for iOS was in breach of the GNU/GPL. The GPL isn't about the user's freedom or the programmer's freedom like the BSD license is, it's about the source code's freedom. The GNU/GPL guarantees that once the code is out there, no one will ever fork it and close it down aside from the original copyright owner. Everyone else will be able to get, modify and distribute the resulting software. VLC for iOS did not permit such a thing.
So yes, like you say, Stallman is about pushing is ideology (just like Steve Jobs pushed his ideology, just like Gates pushed his, just like Larry Ellison and tons of other peeps push theirs every day), and that ideology is the Freedom of software.
So where is it now? Where were the ASUS Eee PC Linux boxes we were promised? Where were the Ubuntu Dell computers we were promised?
Sorry to disappoint you I am a consumer and I stick Linux on the iPod, in fact I stick linux onto anything and everything I can get it working on.
My poorly designed UI was one I built and designed myself, it was so incredibly difficult to pick up those programmers guides entitled README and listen to what they had to say, you could say they left me very mystified as you can see from my screen shot.
Far be it from my understanding to know how to make it work with Smart-Card authentication in tow with RC4 security certificates and user based access controls and multi-level authentication.
Rock on Stallman and Torvald some of us are your biggest fans...
So you're saying that every person is going to pick up an electronic device and program their own UI for each and every single device?
Cool Story Bro.
Philosophically speaking, GPL and LGPL is not free at all as they still have restrictions placed upon the user. The FreeBSD and MIT Licenses on the other hand are truly free, allowing one to do everything with them.
However in reality this doesn't make a damn piece of difference. If something isn't accessible people aren't going to use it, philosophy be damned. EG: Gnome 3 was dead in the water until the Graphics drivers were fixed. Which I'm still mystified why nVidia and ATi had to fix them in the first place, considering they worked fine with every other DE.
Last edited:
You need to read my post again. I addressed this very point. And in the end, the BSD and MIT licenses permit modification and distribution without providing source, hence limiting the user's and the developer's freedom over those modifications. The GPL is the only license that garantees no matter what happens, the software will always have 100% Freedom. It's not about the people, it's about the software.
People who think Freedom is about the people don't understand Stallman's and the FSF's goal.
Just think, if Crazy old stallman had been allowed to give one laptop to every child pre-loaded with Gnu/Linux, I wonder how many of those children would have suddenly been designing their own interface to the awesome window manager, which requires its users to have a working knowledge of the Lua programming language... Totally unacceptable by anyones standards eh!
Last edited:
But if the end result of software is to be utilized and modified by people, then wouldn't restricting the people's actions and uses also restrict the software.
Except thats not anything related to what my response was.
Last edited: