| |||||||||||||
QA with Matt Asay: How Linux is Beating Apple and Much More (Linux.com)QA with Matt Asay: How Linux is Beating Apple and Much More (Linux.com)Posted Mar 16, 2010 1:48 UTC (Tue) by rqosa (subscriber, #24136)In reply to: QA with Matt Asay: How Linux is Beating Apple and Much More (Linux.com) by Zack Parent article: QA with Matt Asay: How Linux is Beating Apple and Much More (Linux.com)
> If what you claim is true It isn't. if we try and grow our community artificially by stressing the technical merits of Free Software over proprietary competitors, then a single swoop of marketing and lifestyle advertising that will lure those users into believing that a system is technically better or socially more hip and acceptable will render the effort moot. It's not a bad thing to stress the technical merits of Free Software over proprietary competitors in the case that it's actually true that the software in question has greater technical merits. And it often is true, because of the fact that free software doesn't have an artificial barrier preventing developers from contributing to it.
(Log in to post comments)
QA with Matt Asay: How Linux is Beating Apple and Much More (Linux.com) Posted Mar 16, 2010 12:13 UTC (Tue) by trasz (guest, #45786) [Link]
@rqosa: On the other hand, Free Software has economical barriers. So, while it's true that Free Software produced the best Lisp-based text editor out there, killing its closed source competitors, it doesn't mean that it will be able to make better operating system.
QA with Matt Asay: How Linux is Beating Apple and Much More (Linux.com) Posted Mar 16, 2010 13:35 UTC (Tue) by rqosa (subscriber, #24136) [Link] Well, as far as I'm concerned, Debian Linux and Arch Linux are already "better" then Mac OS X (for what I want to use them for). As for "economical barriers", there are lots of paid developers working on the "operating system" (including the "desktop") now.
|
|||||||||||||