Re: Windows and free software

[John Swensen]

On Sep 12, 2011, at 12:17 PM, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:

> On 12 September 2011 08:29, Chipmuenk <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Having said that, I perfectly understand the Octave developers who are not
>> too keen on supporting a commercial operating system that they are
>> unfamiliar with,
> 
> I don't have a problem with commercial operating systems as long as
> they're free (e.g. Red Hat, so free that CentOS exists).
> 
>> that requires kludges to get things going and that is not
>> Open Source,
> 
> I don't care so much about open source. It's more important to be free
> (frei) than open.
> 
>> In my case, _all_ the scientific software I need is available for
>> Windows (Labview, Xilinx ISE, Actel Libero, Matlab, LTSpice, Cadence
>> and Mentor EDA, ...),
> 
> Please don't advertise non-free software in the Octave mailing list.
> 
>> I think there is no need for the "holier-than-thou" attitude of some
>> people when it comes to *nix.
> 
> While I think that Windows *users* are an important target, and we do
> need a good Windows distribution of Octave, the above holier-than-thou
> attitude is because it's also important to keep in mind why we're
> making Octave in the first place. It's not because we don't want you
> to pay for your software. Instead of paying for a Matlab license,
> consider sending the equivalent amount to Octave's lead developer
> who's dedicated 20 years of his life to this work. As for me, I work
> on Octave because I think you deserve an alternative that you can use,
> study, modify, and distribute without a license manager and without
> hidden source code. How many times have you or your students asked how
> does Matlab's operator \ work? I've wondered how does bwlabeln work,
> which is another secret. And as you said your students already copy
> Matlab as if it were free, and is this an acceptable way to conduct
> education? Break the law while you can get away with it, because we
> all agree the law is unjust? Perhaps, but we need to either change the
> laws, or work with the laws we have. For the moment, the latter is all
> we have, with Octave. And even if the laws change, that won't help
> with the operator \ question. And your students will likely not be
> able to break the law forever, but you've already bred a Matlab
> addiction in them for when they go on to get jobs later where breaking
> a license will not work because companies are much more afraid of
> copyright lawsuits than university students are.
> 
> If we make Octave for Windows users it is because they need help,
> because they won't be able to be free otherwise as long as they keep
> using Matlab and they feel locked down without an alternative.
> 
> Windows is the opiate of the masses. ;-) And a Windows version of
> Octave (or Scilab or Scipy) is their rehab programme.
> 
> - Jordi G. H.

That is a pretty narrow-minded position.  If Windows users weren't already 
hesitant to contribute, comments like this are sure to drive them away.  I 
think everyone needs to cool it.

John Swensen