User: Password:
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Balancing accessibility and software freedom

Balancing accessibility and software freedom

Posted Aug 12, 2010 6:28 UTC (Thu) by ekj (guest, #1524)
In reply to: Balancing accessibility and software freedom by mpr22
Parent article: Balancing accessibility and software freedom

True. The specific meaning of open, is subject to interpretation.

But atleast it makes it clear that it is talking about the sourcecode being open -- i.e. oposite of closed, which is definitely the right direction.

Whereas "Free Software" runs the risk of being thought of primarily as in 'for zero cost', and doesn't indicate that it's got anything to do with sourcecode at all.

Thus, imho, both terms are possible to misunderstand, and need some explanation to make clear exactly what is meant. But it's a lot easier to go REALLY wrong with "Free software".

Especially since "zero cost" is the default interpretation most people will choose if presented with "Free [product]" where product is something that often costs money.

"Free icecream" "Free beer" "Free game" "Free entry"

True, the same people choose a better interpretation if free is used in connection with something that isn't seen as a "product" that normally costs money. They do get the right idea if you say "Free elections" or talk about having a "Free press" (not the same as "Free Newspaper")

(Log in to post comments)

Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds