12

http://blogs.computerworld.com

I recently suggested that, given Apple and Adobe's growing war over iPad and iPhone applications, it would make sense for Adobe to move not only its end-user applications, but its Creative Suite development stack, to Linux. While I don't know if Adobe is considering it, Canonical, the company behind Ubuntu Linux, would welcome Adobe.

Full story »
arslinuxum's picture
Created by arslinuxum 4 years 30 weeks ago
Category: Industry   Tags:
Ubuntu87's picture

Ubuntu87

4 years 29 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago

7

But the Free Software community wouldn't..

Yeah, Canonical is a for-profit company that only cares about making profit, obviously. So basically, Canonical is even ready to welcome Mafiasoft. It wouldn't matter to them so long as it's making them good profit.

However, the free software community cares about freedom. So, I see it very unlikely that people who are loyal to software freedom would be happy to have Adobe proprietary (and extremely expensive) software on their machines.

That is, unless a miracle falls down to Earth and Adobe decides to publish its software under GPL (et al.), which is impossible.

Moreover, do we even need Adobe software? I mean, we got GIMP, Inkscape, and so many more good alternative software, ya know.

knowing-card's picture

knowing-card

4 years 29 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago

-4

Adobe on GNU/Linux = more users = more freedom

If Adobe develops for GNU/Linux then:

a) there will be one less reason not to switch to GNU/Linux
b) users who switch will have more freedom than if they stick with Windows or Mac
c) more users will mean more companies focusing on developing for GNU/Linux
d) more focus on developing for GNU/Linux will mean more funding for GNU/Linux developers
e) more funding for developers will mean the GNU/Linux will improve
f) improvements will mean more adoption
g) more adoption will mean more exposure to free software

All of this means more freedom not less.

I have no problem with it. People who oppose this sort of thing don't see the big picture or are possibly too hard-line to care. I'm sure they'll all vote me down for pointing this out.

aboutblank's picture

aboutblank

4 years 29 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago

6

Users do not appreciate freedom

What I promote is that one cannot have freedom when one chooses proprietary software. You're promoting that popularity will lead to more support which will lead to freedom. The idea of your big picture is that by attracting support to GNU/Linux, users can be led to freedom. The problem is that when one does not value one's freedom, one will eventually lose it.

The same is true for GNU/Linux. Even now, there are non-free software in Linux itself. Nobody knows how to study, tinker and improve this non-free software in any practical manner. As for Linux, users are helpless in some cases. Now consider a whole GNU/Linux system that contains more non-free software, all practically impossible to study, tinker, and share. Promoting helplessness and social division is not the same as promoting freedom. This is the big vision that you're promoting.

knowing-card's picture

knowing-card

4 years 29 weeks 6 days 47 min ago

1

Baby steps

one cannot have freedom when one chooses proprietary software.

But what about degrees of freedom? You can be more free by using more free software. And don't give me that BS about being half pregnant. Consider the freedom that these situations allow:

a) being in an induced coma
b) being in solitary confinement
c) being locked in a jail cell
d) being under house arrest
e) having your passport revoked

The point here is that you can be more - or less - free. Why don't you promote more freedom?

when one does not value one's freedom, one will eventually lose it.

That is false. It presupposes that one cannot come to value freedom. People are more likely to value freedom once they've experienced it. I say we promote experiencing freedom so that people have an opportunity to value it. I also suggest that we accept that some people may never value (software) freedom. But just because they don't value their freedom right now, does that mean we shouldn't try and give them more? Does it mean we should stop trying to help them experience it?

Promoting helplessness and social division is not the same as promoting freedom.

Nor is showing people they can use proprietary software on a free OS rather than a proprietary OS the same as promoting helplessness and social division.

This is the big vision that you're promoting.

No it's not.

Consider a bird of prey that has been kept in a tiny cage all of it's life. You can't just open the door of the cage and bang on it until the bird flies out and then shut the door before it can fly back in. If the bird is not used to flying, roosting in trees, catching it's own food and drinking from natural water sources it won't survive. Instead you could put the little cage inside a much bigger cage and leave the door of the little cage open. Put it's food and water bottle just outside the door of the little cage to tempt it out into the bigger one. Introduce other birds, a pond and some mice. Eventually it will not want to go back into the little cage. It will learn to drink from the pond and catch the mice and you can take away the little cage the old food and the water bottle. Once you know it no longer needs the safety and comfort of the cage you can begin the process of letting it go into the wild.

That is the big picture I'm talking about.

Ubuntu87's picture

Ubuntu87

4 years 29 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago

3

I think you're right here.

I think this is true, I admit.

Promoting the immediate and total adoption of Free Software is a loosing game, for sure. It sounds pretty much like the epic failure to get people to immediately and completely stop drinking alcohol during the Prohibition Era.

Instead, you have to go step by step (and have a great deal of patience). Instead of forcing people to immediately dump proprietary software altogether, you should try to tempt them to take a little step forward in their road to freedom, by allowing them to run the non-free software on a Free platform. Then, you can start to show them the merits of using Free alternatives to their non-free software, and how this is going to affect their lives positively, and so on.

But forcing people to stop using proprietary software immediately will probably push them even further from Freedom than closer to it.

aboutblank's picture

aboutblank

4 years 29 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago

2

> Once you know it no longer

> Once you know it no longer needs the safety and comfort of the cage you can begin the process of letting it go into the wild.

> That is the big picture I'm talking about.

This is good. However, this is not the message being taught when one promotes proprietary software. They don't teach, "hello, your freedom is valueable". The message is almost always, "adopt this proprietary program". I will continue to vote against stories that exist to promote subjugation even if that subjugation targets GNU/Linux. I am fine in promoting stories that promote freedom even if it targets Windows or OS X.