Previous
My response to Richard Stallman
Talkback To NNTZ, the conehead responds. Sorry, that's just my recognition that my british picture makes me look like I have a pointed head. Hope that doesn't preincline Dilbert fans to view me a certain way. If we assume, for the moment, that proprietary...
[January 11, 2004, 19:41]
My response to Richard Stallman
Talkback If you don't agree with Stallman, great. Stallman forcing you to do something you don't want? I don't know, why does Stallman care so much about the fact that proprietary software exists in the world?
[January 9, 2004, 16:12]
My response to Richard Stallman
Talkback > Stallman is saying that we should ONLY have open source, and probably GPL, code in the world. Stallman has a very specific way of writing. I've read LOTS of Stallman's writing. Stallman states this in a clear and straightforward manner at nearly...
[January 9, 2004, 22:27]
My response to Richard Stallman
Talkback If you don't agree with Stallman, great. But I wonder why you care so much; is Stallman forcing you to do something you don't want? It's all about choice. I choose to use free software because I enjoy the amount of customization it affords me.
[January 9, 2004, 13:39]
My response to Richard Stallman
Talkback Carroll admitted the possibility of earning revenue by charging for support, but I doubt whether even this is possible in Stallman's world. Under Stallman's philosophy, anyone providing support should be obliged to share his support knowledge in...
[January 9, 2004, 22:38]
My response to Richard Stallman
Talkback But just as you shouldn't eat nothing but Gruyere cheese, you shouldn't have nothing but open source / GPL.and that IS what Stallman advocates. Some more clarifications. In fact, he wrote that the entire goal of the Free Software Movement is to...
[January 9, 2004, 22:43]
My response to Richard Stallman
Talkback Apparently, we are to assume that, when RMS writes something, his words mean what John Carroll says they mean rather than what the writings of Richard Stallman themselves may say. John Carrol revaricated in the following manner:
[January 10, 2004, 0:35]
My response to Richard Stallman
Talkback You speak as if reality is some platonic form that you and Richard Stallman have some special channel into. Stallman. To the previous poster. Before I start, could you make up some nonsense handle and let ZDNet display it?
[January 10, 2004, 13:45]
My response to Richard Stallman
Talkback Stallman says at every occasion that his goal is to benefit the users of software. Precisely, in what way, do you find that Stallman's activities aid developers at the expense of users? I'm sorry, John.
[January 10, 2004, 15:49]
My response to Richard Stallman
Talkback Yes, you are free to change your Schwinn. You are also free to create new software for Windows. Unfortunately, Schwinn might not be the best example, since bikes tend to be made from off the shelf parts, and there really isn't much that isn't...
[January 9, 2004, 13:23]
My response to Richard Stallman
Talkback I cant help feeling that some of the attitudes spouted by some open source advocates (not Stallman though) are a bit patronising and feel they know what is best for every user. I agree with John. Most users are not that interested in seeing the...
[January 12, 2004, 10:38]
My response to Richard Stallman
Talkback Does this mean Lindows would be doomed if "everyone, everywhere" followed rank step behind Stallman? Never heard of Lindows. Lindows is based on GPL software, but it is not "free. Sure, you can download all the source for the varous parts and...
[January 12, 2004, 15:54]
My response to Richard Stallman
Talkback From the writings I've read on this subject, the assumption is always just 'software'. That's like saying all 'commodities' should be ordered from catalogues. Clearly some are more conducive to the model than others.
[January 15, 2004, 12:47]
My response to Richard Stallman
Talkback Stallman's philosophy sounds like the mirror image of Microsoft. John, Real freedom in this arena means that those creators who want to make their source code available -- under whatever conditiions they can negotiate with users -- should be free...
[November 29, 2004, 3:13]
My response to Richard Stallman
Talkback I am free to modify my schwinn after I have bought it. Most proprietary software is not guaranteed suitable for any particular use and is not able to be modified so it can be suitable. If I want to change the gear ratio of my schwinn so i can ride...
[January 9, 2004, 12:54]
My response to Richard Stallman
Talkback I always find these conversations amusing. I use a computer at work and when I am at home. At work the company technician sets it up per the company requirements. I don't have any input. At home I occasionally use Word to write a letter and I...
[March 2, 2004, 16:05]
My response to Richard Stallman
Talkback The "Open Source" debate has many sides, and usually discussions about the subject try to view every side of it. I like the article in that it is a simple statement: Open Source (or, more precisely, the GPL) is a pretty uncertain base to base a...
[June 15, 2004, 9:13]
Expunging the myths of open source
Talkback Richard Stallman is not responsible for Linux which was created by Linus Torvalds and contributed to by many people across the world. Software was shared long before Richard Stallman created the Free Software Foundation.
[November 25, 2004, 16:50]
Gnome Foundation hires Timothy Ney
News The Gnome Foundation has hired Timothy Ney, the key organiser behind Richard Stallman's Free Software Foundation and its managing director. Ney has been working with Richard Stallman over the last three years to bring more attention to the free GNU...
[August 24, 2001, 8:30]
Stallman: Software patents victimise developers
News In a talk earlier this week, Richard Stallman described software patents as a sort of lottery, bringing benefits to people only rarely. On Monday afternoon Richard Stallman was invited by the Foundation for Information Policy Research to speak at...
[March 28, 2002, 10:40]
