You don't use open source software because it's better (it usually isn't).
-
You don't use open source software because it's better (it usually isn't).
You don't use open source software because it's freer (it only sometimes is).
You don't use open source software because it's got better politics (it isn't always).
You use open source software because *it is the only option*. In the long run, if it isn't open source, it doesn't exist.
image source: keithstack.com
@mcc tbh it depends on the field, in some fields the open source option is the better option
but yeah, in many, many fields, that isn't the case
-
@mcc This made me remember all the awesome, free games on Newgrounds and other sites
@BoredomFestival @mcc the name of the project escapes me, but I believe there was a project a few years ago that has thousands? of newground games and a shell/wrapper around it to play them.
-
You don't use open source software because it's better (it usually isn't).
You don't use open source software because it's freer (it only sometimes is).
You don't use open source software because it's got better politics (it isn't always).
You use open source software because *it is the only option*. In the long run, if it isn't open source, it doesn't exist.
image source: keithstack.com
@mcc Using Twitter as the first time that a lot of people experienced this, I have started pitching this idea as "if a petulant billionaire decides to destroy this project, how much would he need to pay?" Every point of centralization is now a massive vulnerability instead of a cost-cutting necessity, because you don't even need the petulant billionaire.
-
You don't use open source software because it's better (it usually isn't).
You don't use open source software because it's freer (it only sometimes is).
You don't use open source software because it's got better politics (it isn't always).
You use open source software because *it is the only option*. In the long run, if it isn't open source, it doesn't exist.
image source: keithstack.com
@mcc Right but open source software can get abandoned too
-
@mcc any software that needs to communicate with a license server has a single point of failure. If someone’s writing code to deliberately stop their product working in a given circumstance then they are baking In unreliability and increasing support costs. There’s very few less rewarding tasks than convincing software that you’ve paid for that you’re not actually a thief.
@technicaladept @mcc I actually bought some software years and years ago that was perfect for doing some SQL Synchronization. They wanted me to update and said my version was expired. (cost over 2k!)
So, I set up a Windows 7 VM and set the date to 2007. Still works fine.
however, that may be a "if the date is past x then go check the license" rather than "try the license server"
-
As someone who was a true devotee of FutureWave SmartSketch (which became FutureSplash Animator, which became Macromedia Shockwave Flash, which became Adobe Flash, which became Adobe Animator) my sorrow is incalculable. Every day I long for software I had in the 90s which I can't find anything as good as today.
@mcc we should have a law/regulation that says that any discontinued/non-supported software MUST be made #opensource
-
You don't use open source software because it's better (it usually isn't).
You don't use open source software because it's freer (it only sometimes is).
You don't use open source software because it's got better politics (it isn't always).
You use open source software because *it is the only option*. In the long run, if it isn't open source, it doesn't exist.
image source: keithstack.com
@mcc Not to undermine your point, but this strikes me as more of an open file format issue than an issue of software as such. As long as we have open file formats, we can never be locked into a vendor.
-
@LordCaramac @Lenni @RogerBW @mcc I got the source to compile on my 64-bit Debian Trixie with gcc 14 with some minor tweaking: https://codeberg.org/indigoparadox/sapphire
It seems to run enough to get a REPL going, but I haven't played with it yet. There's some gnarly pointer/int math going on so who knows how it'll fare in 64-bit land?
-
You don't use open source software because it's better (it usually isn't).
You don't use open source software because it's freer (it only sometimes is).
You don't use open source software because it's got better politics (it isn't always).
You use open source software because *it is the only option*. In the long run, if it isn't open source, it doesn't exist.
image source: keithstack.com
@mcc And that's why I'm trying to switch jobs
-
@stib @BoloMKXXVIII @MisterWanko @mcc If only open source linux software came with better names it'd be significantly better!
-
@mcc I take exception to the line: You don't use open source software because it's better (it usually isn't).
I have been using OSS since the 90's. Back then it might have been true, and there are still some holes in some categories of OSS software, but I wouldn't trade my OSS software for today's closed source software even if someone else was paying for it.
@BoloMKXXVIII @mcc Basically the places where people are using F/OSS because it's better are the same places where people forget that they're using F/OSS. Eg, web servers. Everyone's using Apache or nginx, and it's not like they're saying "oh I'll skip MS IIS and use a free server instead", they just use nginx because it's the default option for any serious infrastructure.
Some day apps will be like that as well, but we have some walled gardens to topple first.
-
@mcc Right but open source software can get abandoned too
-
You don't use open source software because it's better (it usually isn't).
You don't use open source software because it's freer (it only sometimes is).
You don't use open source software because it's got better politics (it isn't always).
You use open source software because *it is the only option*. In the long run, if it isn't open source, it doesn't exist.
image source: keithstack.com
-
@mcc amen.
What does "amen", or the Jewish contraction el melekh ne’eman, translated: “God, faithful King,”
Have to do with FLOSS software?
-
@eedly HECK! I'm kinda sick today and off my game. Also I thought Macromedia was good.
@mcc@mastodon.social @eedly@mindly.social Back when Macromedia owned the Flash IP people actually wanted to use it but the player was crap, and they would not let people to make their own to have total control over the platform.
The result is it died.
Now you can write your own player but nobody cares anymore, we have WebGL.
-
@LordCaramac @Lenni @RogerBW @mcc I got the source to compile on my 64-bit Debian Trixie with gcc 14 with some minor tweaking: https://codeberg.org/indigoparadox/sapphire
It seems to run enough to get a REPL going, but I haven't played with it yet. There's some gnarly pointer/int math going on so who knows how it'll fare in 64-bit land?
@indigoparadox @Lenni @RogerBW @mcc Thanks. I think the last time I wrote any code in C was some 15 years ago; the entire number of C lines I have written in my life is probably less than 3000, and I have forgotten most of what little I used to know about GCC, and that was ages ago.
I'm much more familiar with Pascal and Python, I suck at Java, and I could probably still do a lot of silly things in GW-BASIC because that's what came with my first MS-DOS PC. I had to learn some Haskell at uni, but I never used it again and forgot almost everything. I also had to learn C++ and forgot most about it, although its similarity to Java means that I probably remember more than I think, but I stink when it comes to C++.
I mostly write single purpose command line tools in Pascal or Python for my own purposes, and most of those get called by bash scripts. -
@LordCaramac @Lenni @RogerBW @mcc I got the source to compile on my 64-bit Debian Trixie with gcc 14 with some minor tweaking: https://codeberg.org/indigoparadox/sapphire
It seems to run enough to get a REPL going, but I haven't played with it yet. There's some gnarly pointer/int math going on so who knows how it'll fare in 64-bit land?
@indigoparadox@mastodon.social @mcc@mastodon.social @LordCaramac@discordian.social @Lenni@fosstodon.org @RogerBW@discordian.social You can compile 32bit if you insist. Many distributions still support it, at least on x86.
Also the way to do the global variable is you put an extern declaration in the header, and non-extern declaration in one C file. -
@LordCaramac @mcc This. The depth of today's software stack, even in OSS, is enormous, and nearly everything is on a mandatory-update treadmill thanks to compiler and runtime developers no longer caring about backward compatibility. And you can't just not update because everything is exposed to network-borne threats (and other stuff you want/need to run requires newer dependencies).
I've gotten saltier about this in the past 20 years.
-
@crankylinuxuser @dbat @mcc he's just agreeing with the post
-
@indigoparadox@mastodon.social @mcc@mastodon.social @LordCaramac@discordian.social @Lenni@fosstodon.org @RogerBW@discordian.social You can compile 32bit if you insist. Many distributions still support it, at least on x86.
Also the way to do the global variable is you put an extern declaration in the header, and non-extern declaration in one C file. @bunny @mcc @indigoparadox @Lenni @RogerBW I'll give it a try later, but right now I'm too busy playing with my kitten Momo who had to visit the strange humans in the scary house full of strange animals and weird chemical smells who stuck her with needles earlier today. It definitely sounds nice to play with Sapphire again. It's just a completely different sort of sound design compared to my usual synths (mostly ancient digital synths from the 1980s and 1990s).
