You don't use open source software because it's better (it usually isn't).
-
@Lenni @LordCaramac @RogerBW @mcc Tell us you are not a programmer without telling us you are not a programmer.
-
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 Add to that: If it's open source, even a single author project, if support stops, it is still usable.
The mail client I have been using for the last 28 years has not seen any updates for 4 years. The author disappeared without a trace (probably life happened). It still works. I can still compile it. I can still fix the small issues that are annoying. I know, one day I will have to find a replacement, but today is not the day.. probably not even the year.
-
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 I know you're being rhetorical but I actually do mostly use FOSS because it's better. It's usually a lot less bloated and just does the thing it's supposed to do. That to me is better.
-
@LordCaramac @mcc Yeah, but at least then it would only take a sufficiently skilled group of people to make it work again, without _also_ needing to pay off greedy IP owners who'd rather see it rot.
@RogerBW @LordCaramac @mcc It doesn't take a group. All it takes someone who goes on a "I can get this working again" frenzy for a weekend. Once it compiles and works again, updating and extending it, is easy.
-
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 This is going to add at least 15 minutes to "Adobe Must Die".
-
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 I wish we had copyright laws that cared about protecting consumers. Requiring corporations to put the source of their applications in escrow somehow, to be released when they end support. Something like this for electronic devices, releasing the source + requiring the ability to install custom firmware, would prevent so many of them from becoming e-waste.
-
@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 highly unlikely but okay
-
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 FOSS is often better in my experience though? Sure, there are issues but pretty much everything else I try is worse.
-
@BoloMKXXVIII @mcc highly unlikely but okay
@MisterWanko @mcc Highly unlikely for you apparently. I stand by my statement.
-
@mcc FOSS is often better in my experience though? Sure, there are issues but pretty much everything else I try is worse.
@mcc Also there is some (less nowadays but still some) closed-source for-profit software you can own. I’m kind of impressed at how wrong this entire post is
-
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 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.
-
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@mastodon.social thing is, there really isn't anything that would fill that hole
And the claim that open source outlasts proprietary software is a bit [citation needed] -
@mcc Add to that: If it's open source, even a single author project, if support stops, it is still usable.
The mail client I have been using for the last 28 years has not seen any updates for 4 years. The author disappeared without a trace (probably life happened). It still works. I can still compile it. I can still fix the small issues that are annoying. I know, one day I will have to find a replacement, but today is not the day.. probably not even the year.
@attilakinali @mcc damn, what email client is that? im curious
-
@attilakinali @mcc damn, what email client is that? im curious
@ozamidas @mcc That's sylpheed https://github.com/sylpheed-mail/sylpheed
-
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 Same. It was a revelation and a revolution. So much web content created (sure, not all of it good, but...) An it was, except for crashiness, a pleasure to use.
-
@mcc If you use open source software that isn't particularly popular, it might cease to exist as well. I used a "soundtracer" (a kind of synthesizer that you script in a language similar to that being used for POVray scenes) called "sapphire" over a decade ago, and then it suddenly vanished. I can't even find the source anymore, and the last time I downloaded the source a couple of years ago, I couldn't compile it because all the dependencies were outdated.
@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.
-
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 I still remember how excellent and affordable Cool Edit Pro was until Adobe bought it, rebranded it as Adobe Audition, and made the price instantly astronomical.
-
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.
