Why you SHOULD switch to FOSS LinuX

[ThorBuildingLegos]

 

Short conclusion:
Monopoly bad, open collaboration and standards good.
No biscuit for Microsoft. Bad, company!
Next post: LESS BORING! More "ooooo....!"

 

There is a lot of confusion around the reasons for installing and using LinuX. Some fear the new environment they will have to learn, some require special tools and are not sure if there is a suitable alternative available for LinuX users. We don't want to lose productivity, time or feel inept at using a tool that we just a couple of hours ago were using just fine (just fine? Just fine...) It can be a scary and daunting experience for those who are just regular computer users. But through this post I hope that I'm able dispel some of those fears and replace it with healthy dose of nerdrage as I explain the various reasons why you SHOULD switch to FOSS LinuX.

 

But what's all the FOSS about? *get slapped*... Ehem. It stands for "Free & Open Source software" and is an entire can of worms in of it self. For the sake of "brevity" we will take the stance of using completely open source software, with the added exception of hardware driver software "tainting the kernel" since you pay for the license when you pay for the graphics card (seriously, it's an error you get while loading proprietary modules - you get a "tainted kernel"). But even with that tiny exception we are not completely FOSS, and there's a reason for that.

 

LinuX people reeeeaaally don't like proprietary software (but they do like foul language). This isn't some David vs Goliath fantasy or some daydream about the underdog rising up. The Open Source initiative is spearheaded by experts in all fields regarding computer science and programming on a worldwide basis. It's not just LinuX enthusiasts, but BSD enthusiasts, networking experts, developers of software, games, social platforms, and a whole mess of people. It's true that universities are and have been major contributors to the open source initiative, but despite what Microsoft thinks the OS community does not largely consist of students. Then again Microsoft has almost always spoken unfavourably about OS solutions. But that's probably because the threatening general consensus among followers of the open source is not to allow any one company the complete control of the fundamental operating system software used on a worldwide basis, in government, schools, businesses and homes because it is tantamount to monopoly and is actually bad for the free market, in that people have to develop software and make devices on the terms of the monopoly holders. This is why the FOSS initiative insists that the entirety of the operating system should be open source and developed by professionals working for different companies worldwide (or in their free time) rather than one company defining the parameters and standards for everyone. But not everybody using LinuX is as adamant about the OS and FOSS movements and in the BSD world proprietary inclusion and exclusivity is welcomed (hence: OS X). So the FOSS movement is more political than it is technical and the added benefits of open source software and free redistribution are apparent. But do we have an example or rather examples of software companies cultivating monopolies in real life? Oh my yes... but since I mentioned Microsoft it'd only be fair to give them some credit...

 

If you thought that Linus Torvalds giving the finger to Nvidia was bad you should see what he does when people mention Microsoft. This company  (amidst the MPEG group, Adobe, Oracle and many others) are the modern pioneers of patent trolling and aggressive licensing within software. There is even evidence suggesting that Microsoft has knowingly infiltrated and sabotaged several companies, only to buy them up and consolidate their patents (which is a practice that's not exclusive to Microsoft). Microsoft is also known for demanding licensing fees for devices with LinuX on them claiming that "the ability" to read/write FAT32 merits infringement upon patents, even if said device doesn't have any flash disks, HDDs or SSDs with fat32 on them. Microsofts argument is that since the system is capable of loading FAT32 modules (vfat module or fuse layers) it doesn't matter whether or not the functionality is not being used - it's still distributed with most LinuX distributions. The problem is that without the capability to read FAT32 you can forget connecting any external perepherials or even manipulating the (U)EFI file-system partition -- which is by standard FAT32. All that matters is that FAT32 is the de-factor standard of portable file-system and Microsoft needs to get paid. But how did it become the de-facto standard? I'd like to call it "monopoly by default". Microsoft is well known for their agressive marketing strategies, lobbying and throwing huges amount of money in to making Windows Server, Active Directory and the rest of the Microsoft ecosystem the de-facto standard. If you want your company to be professionally mobile without a crew of IT technicians on hand: you need Windows. That's why OS X comes with Kerberos and samba out of the box: so that it can also be apart of the ecosystem and not be locked out of business settings (Kerberos and Samba are flagship OS software btw, the latter often being perceived as a "necessary evil" and the former having received praise from Microsoft them selves).

 

This is probably why the EU has commissioned something called FLOSS, which stands for Free/Libre Open Source Software, why Germany has tried converting to LinuX and LibreOffice, why LinuX is gaining more and more momentum around the globe. It's all about what most people in the OS community believes is right. We believe that we cannot let one single company, or a small group of companies, control and self-regulate technological standards development, pricing and licensing of the fundamental computing systems and standards that are being used in both private and official affairs the world over. I will again restate that it is monopoly, no matter how you slice it, and is one of the reasons why I prefer LinuX and advertise against using Microsoft Windows or Apples OS X.

 

There is also a deep history surrounding the development of UNiX and UNiX derivatives in regards to patents and licensing. If you'd like to know more about how business interests and software development interests have clashed the passed 30 or so years grab your self a coffee and start Googlin' (OR Duck Duck Going ).

 

So there you have it. The real reason to make the switch. You may not find that alternative program, it may be a learning experience, it may also slow down your productivity for a while, but if you are against one company having the entire world on a string by default you may want to switch to FOSS LinuX, without MPEG additions, without anything but open source alternatives. Convert your MP3s to OGGs, your AACs to FLACs, your AVIs or MP4s to MKVs open source codecs (actually just go ahead and do that anyways, with or without open source codecs, because MKV is a thousand times more awesome as a container format). Use LibreOffice or OpenOffice and other LinuX software for your productivity needs. Install AMD or Nvidia drivers begrudgingly, knowing they haven't released open source drivers yet. Try alternative settings, software and themes to give you that truly customized, open and free experience that only OS operating systems such as LinuX provides. Switch to FOSS LinuX today...! Or.. when I write the next post about the viable FOSS compliant distributions. You could Google/DuckDuckGo it though... but, for now

 

I''ve been Thor and I'm chillin' wit da penguins.

 

(PS: Anything I've missed? Did I make an egregious error? Did I make a completely false statement? Let me know so we can duel with pistols at dawn... or, you know: edit the post so that future searchers can benefit from reading something that's not completely wrong in some way or another).

[UnderADyingSun]

I agree, but then how ever will I play my games!

 

Y' know, piracy undermines the man too! The obvious disclaimer, I'm not endorsing this...no moar points pleez

[rashdanml]

I wouldn't completely lump in Apple/OS X with Microsoft/Windows. While OS X does contain closed-source components, Apple does more to support open-source development than Microsoft. A large portion of OSX is built on open-source components, or at least was, even if it's not any more. 

 

As for alternatives to programs ... http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/25689-free-andor-open-source-alternatives-to-many-common-programs/ I'm almost tempted to dare anyone to give me a proprietary program for which there isn't a viable and feature-rich* free and/or open-source alternative. Excluding games.

 

* I don't emphasize form over functionality. Clunky interfaces do exist, but it's entirely possible to work past personal bias towards particular interfaces. 

 

The good news is, open-source drivers are on the rise for expensive/specialized hardware. Later Linux kernel versions contain support for a wide range of hardware completely out of the box, without having to install drivers. Kernel blobs for specific hardware being the exception. 

[ThorBuildingLegos]

I wouldn't completely lump in Apple/OS X with Microsoft/Windows. While OS X does contain closed-source components, Apple does more to support open-source development than Microsoft. A large portion of OSX is built on open-source components, or at least was, even if it's not any more. 

 

As for alternatives to programs ... http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/25689-free-andor-open-source-alternatives-to-many-common-programs/ I'm almost tempted to dare anyone to give me a proprietary program for which there isn't a viable and feature-rich* free and/or open-source alternative. 

 

* I don't emphasize form over functionality. Clunky interfaces do exist, but it's entirely possible to work past personal bias towards particular interfaces. 

 

The good news is, open-source drivers are on the rise for expensive/specialized hardware. Later Linux kernel versions contain support for a wide range of hardware completely out of the box, without having to install drivers. Kernel blobs for specific hardware being the exception. 

 

Yes, I will clump them together. Do not mistake Apple for something as wholesome as fruit. They have their dark side and behave just as aggressively and negatively as Microsoft does. They are in fact one of the top contenders. I will say however that they are better at following open standards than Microsoft is.

 

Believe it or not but Microsoft has provided code to both the LinuX kernel and other open source projects. Figure that.

 

I do however want to make this absolutely clear. I am not talking about the developers and engineers at Apple and Microsoft. They are some of the most professional people in the business and deserve credit where credit is due. But it does not excuse the overall business practice that both Microsoft and Apple accept.

[ThorBuildingLegos]

I agree, but then how ever will I play my games!

 

Y' know, piracy undermines the man too! The obvious disclaimer, I'm not endorsing this...no moar points pleez

 

Well you kind of are endorsing piracy to people who wants to undermine da man I don't want to endorse it myself (like software for 20$, 50$, 100$ or even 300$ is acceptable (for a LARGE suite of tools and content that are free to use commercially) depending upon how much value I am getting from the software in question), but I am left with no choice in some cases (I don't have a yearly software budget of 15000$ - so yeeeeaaaaah) And the piracy of films? Completely different and separate problem/debate with even more boring text, old world versus new world, physical versus digital, logistics and logic versus playing the victim and placing the blame elsewhere. Let's... let's stick to this, because I'm about to open up a whole new can of whoopass on that subject...

[Lyons]

I use OSX (which is free from the App Store) for daily computing (uni work, programming etc.) as a hackintosh and Windows for Gaming. The only software I pay for is games I play online (of which I buy one or MAYBE two per year). OSX is a nice middle-groud as it is UNIX based and has excellent software support. I've tried using Linux as a daily driver for a few months but my productivity falls and I waste too much time configuring things that are already done for me in other OS's. Don't even get me started on running Linux on laptops. It's a nightmare of terrible battery life, high CPU usage and a complete lack of drivers. This is really the fault of the manufacturer but by proxy it makes Linux a bad experience.

 

Linux is great, but the software just isn't quite good enough for me to use on a daily basis. There's always something I want but can't get to work, or a piece of software that is an alternative that just plain sucks. All of my friends and family use Skype, and Skype for Linux is just terrible. The interface is painful to look at and it doesn't function nearly as well as the OSX or Windows version, and every other IM/VOIP program sucks too. Linux also doesn't have any music players I've found that are as good as Foobar (Windows) or Swinisan (OSX).

 

I also don't really care if something is open source or not. If it works up to the limit then I need it to, then I'm happy. I have a real gripe with the 'Richard Stallman' approach to computing (much like the OP's, IMO), and am much more comfortable with the 'Linus Torvalds' approach. There are people who want to make a career from what the do, and free-as-in-beer/free-as-in-freedom software doesn't offer that to developers, so I side with them when them when they don't disclose their hard work to the public. Software is a commodity just like anything else, and trying to undermine companies because they are trying to make money off something that is a perfectly reasonable business model and saying 'FOSS is better because it's FOSS', is inane.

 

It's like religion; If Linux works for you, great, but not everyone in the world needs or cares about FOSS. The assumption that everyone should know about it and be advocating for it is pretty ridiculous.

 

Also where is this capital X in 'LinuX' coming from? It;s annoying to read

[ThorBuildingLegos]

I use OSX (which is free from the App Store) for daily computing (uni work, programming etc.) as a hackintosh and Windows for Gaming. The only software I pay for is games I play online (of which I buy one or MAYBE two per year). OSX is a nice middle-groud as it is UNIX based and has excellent software support. I've tried using Linux as a daily driver for a few months but my productivity falls and I waste too much time configuring things that are already done for me in other OS's. Don't even get me started on running Linux on laptops. It's a nightmare of terrible battery life, high CPU usage and a complete lack of drivers. This is really the fault of the manufacturer but by proxy it makes Linux a bad experience.

 

Linux is great, but the software just isn't quite good enough for me to use on a daily basis. There's always something I want but can't get to work, or a piece of software that is an alternative that just plain sucks. All of my friends and family use Skype, and Skype for Linux is just terrible. The interface is painful to look at and it doesn't function nearly as well as the OSX or Windows version, and every other IM/VOIP program sucks too. Linux also doesn't have any music players I've found that are as good as Foobar (Windows) or Swinisan (OSX).

 

I also don't really care if something is open source or not. If it works up to the limit then I need it to, then I'm happy. I have a real gripe with the 'Richard Stallman' approach to computing (much like the OP's, IMO), and am much more comfortable with the 'Linus Torvalds' approach. There are people who want to make a career from what the do, and free-as-in-beer/free-as-in-freedom software doesn't offer that to developers, so I side with them when them when they don't disclose their hard work to the public. Software is a commodity just like anything else, and trying to undermine companies because they are trying to make money off something that is a perfectly reasonable business model and saying 'FOSS is better because it's FOSS', is inane.

 

It's like religion; If Linux works for you, great, but not everyone in the world needs or cares about FOSS. The assumption that everyone should know about it and be advocating for it is pretty ridiculous.

 

Also where is this capital X in 'LinuX' coming from? It;s annoying to read

 

You didn't want to read this post... but you very much wanted to reply to it, didn't you?. Where do I start?

• I took the time to make the title of the post "why you SHOULD switch to LinuX", emphasising the "SHOULD", meaning it's not a must. Maybe you should've taken the time to read it.
• I have Arch LinuX running on a crappy Acer APU laptop that lasted like 4 hours on Windows. After barebones install of minimalistic LinuX with tiny RAM footprint... 6 hours. Then again both your and my conditions are circumstantial and cannot be submitted as anything else but individual problems and solutions
• Banshee really whips the llamas ass! Other than that there are TONS of music players, in various interface formats and usage. MPD is one of my favourits since it has a separated backend and frontend. That means the media playback functionality, library management, playlist management, DSP effects and so forth can be directly accessed in a variety of ways. GTK GUI, QT GUI, web-server, or just keyboard shorcuts if you want to keep it down a notch. This is pretty cool since I can start MPD as a service, so every time I login I just press play and the playlist continues where it left off the last time. I can also use an MPD interface across network (yes, long before AirPlay)
• I am not sure you know what LinuX is, entirely. I mean, do you know the difference between distributions, the differences between a vanilla kernel and a heavily modified one? Do you know the differences between various bootup and backend services, the type of file systems installed, the various versions of old or cutting edge software that each distro chooses to use? If you used Mint or Ubuntu: you are in no position to gauge the stability or performance of LinuX, my friend. Some people have LinuX installations that have lasted decades, How long does the average WIndows install last? Or even OS X, if you're the kind of guy who likes to install stuff outside of Apples App Store ecosystem ("just works" my foot).
• SKYPE is your reason for sticking to Windows? Skype isn't even the best VoIP service on Windows anymore... not in professional capacity at least. it used to be, I'll agree to that. But me and all of my friends migrated to Mumble (Open Source, btw - preferred by the gaming community due to the Opus codec) when we got sick of Microsoft "updating" Skype, making it unstable and borderline unusable in group conversations. I believe this is why Linus diitched skype for group convos. Other than that Skype was stable on LInuX - I used it while gaming, and in group convos without a hitch... this was before Microsoft took over though, so do with that as you will...
• What IM programs suck? Be specific. Pidgin, Kopete, Ubuntu and Gnome's background dilly? You seem to be veeery unspecific about what you're talking about...
• You don't care? Well WHO CARES?! Many hundreds of thousands of people besides you care. Is the universe all about you now?

And as for your final argument about FOSS being some oversensitive reaction to people making money: did you read ANYTHING I wrote or did you just commit a kneejerk emotional reaction to something you didn't like, much like me the other day? Look. I'll say it again: I am not against big businesses or proprietary software at all. YOU are not reading in between the lines properly and perhaps I didn't make my self clear:

 

 

We believe that we cannot let one single company, or a small group of companies control and self-regulate technological standards development, pricing and licensing of the fundamental computing systems and standards that are being used in both private and official affairs the world over.

 

 

In other words: they can be apart of making standards, they can regulate their own software and standards therein, they can price it within reason of not losing money (fundamental importance of free market enterprise), they can provide fundamental computing systems and even certifiying people to work with said system... but not to admonish and exclude other competitors, to actively go out and line the pockets of everyone from here to Katmando to ensure that people keep buying your product or service, and generally not doing any productive work rather than manipulating the market. This is what we call MONOPOLY! If everyone used LinuX it would mean LinuX was the monopoly and it would be equally as bad.

 

And yes, monopolies are bad. Just ask the founder or modern free market economics Adam Smith, who said himself, and I quote: "Monopoly of one kind or another, indeed, seems to be the sole engine of the mercantile system".  If you don't know what a mercantile system is it's how the kings and queens of the 16th and 18th century made their money off colonization, slavery, and all that good stuff (woohoo -- free market enterprise, regress back to 16th century economics and business ideals - WOOHOO).

 

So I don't think you're in a position to be debating against FOSS ideology or politics... you definitely have the choice NOT to use FOSS LinuX, but you're reasoning against FOSS LinuX and your perspectives on markets and business practices is lacking and ignorant at best. I am not actively trying to be offensive here, but it seems you've completely misunderstood the entire reason I made the post in the first place, and that was not to argue against OS X or Windows as software, because they are both sound from a software engineering perspective (and so is LinuX.. if you're a software engineer). So you are COMPLETELY off topic, really.

 

Oh and I write it LinuX because that's how it was intentionally meant to be written. It's a light mix the word UNiX and Linus Torvalds first name; i.e LinuX. Aren't we learning a lot today? ^^ Yes, I'm a condescending prick ^^ But that only makes us even ^__~

Edited January 17, 2014 by ThorBuildingLegos

[HaneZane001]

Is there a linux distro which looks exactly like windows 7 or xp for example and has all of the features included with it, along with its own set of features too?

[ThorBuildingLegos]

Is there a linux distro which looks exactly like windows 7 or xp for example and has all of the features included with it, along with its own set of features too?

 

Exactly? No. There are attempt at making look-alikes, like the CDE themes and the general GUI that was inspired by XP is still available on LinuX (ie how windows look, how boxes look, indentations, coloring, etc), but the closest thing has to be LXDE. There were several DEs that incorporated the XP look, but they're gone with the wind I'm afraid.

 

For a more complete list of possible DEs (or "desktop environments") please check out either the Arch LinuX Wiki page on the subject or the WikiPedia page on DE comparisons.

[Lyons]

You didn't want to read this post... but you very much wanted to reply to it, didn't you?. Where do I start?

• I took the time to make the title of the post "why you SHOULD switch to LinuX", emphasising the "SHOULD", meaning it's not a must. Maybe you should've taken the time to read it.
• I have Arch LinuX running on a crappy Acer APU laptop that lasted like 4 hours on Windows. After barebones install of minimalistic LinuX with tiny RAM footprint... 6 hours. Then again both your and my conditions are circumstantial and cannot be submitted as anything else but individual problems and solutions
• Banshee really whips the llamas ass! Other than that there are TONS of music players, in various interface formats and usage. MPD is one of my favourits since it has a separated backend and frontend. That means the media playback functionality, library management, playlist management, DSP effects and so forth can be directly accessed in a variety of ways. GTK GUI, QT GUI, web-server, or just keyboard shorcuts if you want to keep it down a notch. This is pretty cool since I can start MPD as a service, so every time I login I just press play and the playlist continues where it left off the last time. I can also use an MPD interface across network (yes, long before AirPlay)
• I am not sure you know what LinuX is, entirely. I mean, do you know the difference between distributions, the differences between a vanilla kernel and a heavily modified one? Do you know the differences between various bootup and backend services, the type of file systems installed, the various versions of old or cutting edge software that each distro chooses to use? If you used Mint or Ubuntu: you are in no position to gauge the stability or performance of LinuX, my friend. Some people have LinuX installations that have lasted decades, How long does the average WIndows install last? Or even OS X, if you're the kind of guy who likes to install stuff outside of Apples App Store ecosystem ("just works" my foot).
• SKYPE is your reason for sticking to Windows? Skype isn't even the best VoIP service on Windows anymore... not in professional capacity at least. it used to be, I'll agree to that. But me and all of my friends migrated to Mumble (Open Source, btw - preferred by the gaming community due to the Opus codec) when we got sick of Microsoft "updating" Skype, making it unstable and borderline unusable in group conversations. I believe this is why Linus diitched skype for group convos. Other than that Skype was stable on LInuX - I used it while gaming, and in group convos without a hitch... this was before Microsoft took over though, so do with that as you will...
• What IM programs suck? Be specific. Pidgin, Kopete, Ubuntu and Gnome's background dilly? You seem to be veeery unspecific about what you're talking about...
• You don't care? Well WHO CARES?! Many hundreds of thousands of people besides you care. Is the universe all about you now?

And as for your final argument about FOSS being some oversensitive reaction to people making money: did you read ANYTHING I wrote or did you just commit a kneejerk emotional reaction to something you didn't like, much like me the other day? Look. I'll say it again: I am not against big businesses or proprietary software at all. YOU are not reading in between the lines properly and perhaps I didn't make my self clear:

In other words: they can be apart of making standards, they can regulate their own software and standards therein, they can price it within reason of not losing money (fundamental importance of free market enterprise), they can provide fundamental computing systems and even certifiying people to work with said system... but not to admonish and exclude other competitors, to actively go out and line the pockets of everyone from here to Katmando to ensure that people keep buying your product or service, and generally not doing any productive work rather than manipulating the market. This is what we call MONOPOLY! If everyone used LinuX it would mean LinuX was the monopoly and it would be equally as bad.

And yes, monopolies are bad. Just ask the founder or modern free market economics Adam Smith, who said himself, and I quote: "Monopoly of one kind or another, indeed, seems to be the sole engine of the mercantile system". If you don't know what a mercantile system is it's how the kings and queens of the 16th and 18th century made their money off colonization, slavery, and all that good stuff (woohoo -- free market enterprise, regress back to 16th century economics and business ideals - WOOHOO).

So I don't think you're not in a position to be debating against FOSS ideology or politics... you definitely have the choice NOT to use FOSS LinuX, but you're reasoning against FOSS LinuX and your perspectives on markets and business practices is lacking and ignorant at best. I am not actively trying to be offensive here, but it seems you've completely misunderstood the entire reason I made the post in the first place, and that was not to argue against OS X or Windows as software, because they are both sound from a software engineering perspective (and so is LinuX.. if you're a software engineer). So you are COMPLETELY off topic, really.

Oh and I write it LinuX because that's how it was intentionally meant to be written. It's a light mix the word UNiX and Linus Torvalds first name; i.e LinuX. Aren't we learning a lot today? ^^ Yes, I'm a condescending prick ^^ But that only makes us even ^__~

So much projection and condecention in a single post - colour me impressed!

[ThorBuildingLegos]

So much projection and condecention in a single post - colour me impressed!

 

How did I project, psychologically speaking that is? I will concede to being condescending ^_~ But after such a run-of-the-mill, template response to this kind of post without actually countering any of the points I made with any concrete examples or counter-arguments I just gave up on being objective, collapsed like a house of cards I did. His whole conclusion hinges on the idea that LinuX and FOSS are nothing more than special interest groups who have no influence other than over each other. This is... insulting, to say the least, but also incredibly ignorant and detached from reality. So I took him down for size. Big whoop. Wanna fight about it?

[rashdanml]

The comment about software developers wanting to make a living out of software:

 

Majority of FOSS developers do it because they WANT to, not because they HAVE to. If developers WANT to do something, they wouldn't care about being paid if they ENJOYED doing it. The ones who HAVE to make a living out of software development are forcing themselves to do it for the money, no matter what anyone claims to the contrary, because they don't really enjoy what they do. 

 

That being said, if a developer enjoys what they do, enough to do it for free, they'll find a way to make a living out of it without having to sell their software. 

[ThorBuildingLegos]

The comment about software developers wanting to make a living out of software:

Majority of FOSS developers do it because they WANT to, not because they HAVE to. If developers WANT to do something, they wouldn't care about being paid if they ENJOYED doing it. The ones who HAVE to make a living out of software development are forcing themselves to do it for the money, no matter what anyone claims to the contrary, because they don't really enjoy what they do.

That being said, if a developer enjoys what they do, enough to do it for free, they'll find a way to make a living out of it without having to sell their software.

It is actually very possible to make a buttload of money off of Open Source software. Mostly off support and patches, but still. Companies like Oracle singlehandedly survive on it, not to mention that most Open Source developers rely on their own reputation as developers rather than the reputation of their application. That's why for instance people are switching from MySQL to MariaDB. The guy who was the architect for both MariaDB and MySQL sold MySQL for a buttload o' money to Oracle and now people feel that Oracle has in some ways borked MySQL (mostly with the introduction of proprietary extensions) and it needs replacing (mostly due to licensing actually and nothing to do with the code - again I cannot emphasise how important the internal politics are to FOSS users and programmers). But people are also mostly migrating from Oracle due to Oracles aggressive and twofaced business modell... hence why OpenJDK, MariaDB and all many other open alternatives to Oracle software exists. Some LinuX/UNiX applications are direct responses to political ramifications (Like OpenJDK). In fact it's central to the whole OS and LinuX community.

 

Not to mention GitHub and all that, where people can freely distribute their code as a resume. In most cases this is the best idea because it shows off your initiative, it provides a clear and readable overview of the code, as well as commenting and rating by your peers. So a developers could pretty much exemplify anything through a public reposistory like GitHub and if said developer gets good at specializing within a certain field, which is again exemplified by his GitHub profile, chances are the big boys might want to hire this new up-n-comer...

So, yeah... some do it because "they enjoy it" (but most likely they have a day job programming as well)... other do it because they get gainfull emplyoyment... aaaand some do it for a s**tload of money.

So the idea that "open source is against money and non-profitability" is false, facicious and again: detached from reality.

[Lyons]

His whole conclusion hinges on the idea that LinuX and FOSS are nothing more than special interest groups who have no influence other than over each other.

 

Prove that it isn't. Linux is clearly not ready for the average consumer to use, otherwise it's market share outside the professional and specialist market would be greater than a few %.

[ThorBuildingLegos]

Prove that it isn't. Linux is clearly not ready for the average consumer to use, otherwise it's market share outside the professional and specialist market would be greater than a few %.

 

Still not the right angle. Many average people are using LinuX. Some don't even know, like with routers that have firmware running the LinuX kernel and other asorted open source software. It's just so seamless that you wouldn't expect it to be LinuX, but as embedded kernels go LinuX/UNiX is the prefered choice, and the former more than the latter. And that's excluding android smartphones and other LinuX based smartphones like Jolla phones. Yes, they both based on LinuX and remain true to the codebase - even though Dalvik runs on top of Android and is about the only thing any developer or use will be able to interface directly with, so again. It runs seamlessly in the background of many, many devices.