Kevin Carmony has taken the heat from some in the FOSS community for offering non-free software in Linspire, and in particular, for attempting to lure the FOSS community into contributing to Linspire via Freespire. Don Parris spoke with Linspire’s Kevin Carmony to learn more about his position. Are the community’s accusations fair? What other options are there?
ok,
so meanwhile we have fedora, opensuse, ubuntu and now freespire…
except some distrospecific managemnt tools and apps,
all have the same stuff included – talking about tremendous waste of efforts…!
how about at least merging opensuse and fedora (rpm) as well as ubuntu and freespire (deb) – possibly even debian or based on debian itself, and later maybe all via progeny’s work on apt4rpm/deb?
should be possible in a way that the involved comapanies still can differentiate their commercial offerings – if not 2 base distros, then at least shared maintaining/packaging of shared rpms/debs (synching of used releases of the various libs/parts).
how about it, folks?
Edited 2006-05-09 18:51
It’s rather unlikely that Fedora (Red Hat) and openSuse (Novell) will merge their products in any way, shape or form. The best we can hope for is group efforts toward certain goals (xgl, drivers, etc)
…except that Novell and RedHat are two seperate and competing companies that are using their free versions as testbeds for their enterprise offerings (i.e. what they actually make money off of). add to that the fact that regardless of sharing a packaging format (rpm) suse and redhat/fedora are very different distributions, even in terms of adherence to file system hierarchy.
same goes in terms of differences for ubuntu/freespire, though to a lesser extent perhaps since they are both building off of a common base already (debian). just wildly different from each other in terms of what they do with it.
anyhow, I don’t know that I’d say it’s a waste of effort. other that choosing/writing whatever patches they’d use on the upstream sources, as well as how conservative they want to be with versioning, the components of any distro will be largely the same. it _is_ the distro specific tools and support models that differentiate them.
plus, the whole variety breeds competition which is supposed to improve technology and all that, which means you the user win in the end (at least theoretically).
Read the link then make up your opinion on Freespire/Linspire.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20060424164142296“ linky
sheesh, that story on Groklaw was just a BIT overly-dramatic: “Think about all the fun you can have if you compromise. Think about convenience, not freedom, not ethics, not your neighbor.”
But, it had a good point.
Still … this is simply software, not nuclear war. Geez. Take it easy.
That groklaw article is nauseating. Linspire gives users a choice. It is a good distro and makes linux easy for new users.
I do not use Linspire myself, but it is actually a boon to the community in actuality. An example is the Nvidia drivers. Nvidia is one of the 2 major suppliers of video cards, and the best supportes one in Linux. Without the proprietary drivers then you don’t do anything which really requires full video capabilities. I mention that as Linspire is geared towards home users, of which they use it for Yahoo, or MSN, neither of which are fully supported yet, though once Gaim gets the video and voice going then it may be feasible. As well is used for gaming, which in these days requires good 3D graphics capabilities and such. Though the video and voice is not well supported yet for IM users, the 3D is if you go with proprietary drivers only.
not really, that’s only true if you want to have the latest and greatest cards, or absolutely want to go Nvidia. radeon 9250s and below ATIs run with open source DRI, as well as the Intel onboard video chipsets. (not that I’d be recommending intel for anything…) it’s really only nvidia who seems to have this paranoid fear of even freeing up the specs on an old TnT card for open drivers..
anyhow, I’m not sure I see your linspire + video drivers connection. what does the one have to do with the other? if it’s that “regular users” need proprietary software to be functional, I’ll call you out on that one. the only folk who “need” proprietary software are application specific users (people who will only use photoshop and nothing else for instance). regular computer users (and free software types that realize that for most of these things, there are in fact decent open/free alternatives out there nowadays) would be fine with open systems (once they realize certain basic parameters, eg. you can’t expect that game from walmart will work anymore than a nintendo cartridge would work in a playstation)
My main point is just that actually. The “Regular User” wants and needs to be able to go to Walmart to buy that game or software off the shelf. The OpenSoure DRI is not nearly as good as the proprietary drivers IMO. As well, the regular user will end up getting a current generation video card as that is what is on the shelves, and the older cards can’t be gotten without searching. The connection is that Linspire supports and bundles the proprietary items needed for a system. They are the only Linux distro that comes with a legal DVD Player since they do support the proprietary codecs and such. Note the word legal please before I get slammed for ‘Just download it’.
WRONG-O! They include Xine WITHOUT libdvdcss2 in the base 50 buck iso download. You want DVD playback, you pony up for access to CNR AND an additional amount (forget if it is 10 bucks or 40 bucks). Either way, it does NOT come with a DVD player that is any different than totem-gstreamer on Ubuntu/Fedora Core UNLESS you pay for it.
Yes, it is an additional cost/download.
but it is also legal!
and that goes a long way, Not everyone will be as grey about the copyrights involved with the dvd codecs.
So Linspire:
You pay a couple bucks to get a legal DVD Codec
Ubuntu/Fedora Core:
You download the right codec and install it
Both work, one is legal, one is “grey area”
Now what I really want is PowerDVD on Linux, like what came out with Turbolinux a couple years ago goddamnit!
Edited 2006-05-09 20:56
Fluendo is working on a gstreamer-based DVD player, and aims to release second half of this year. They already have an mp3 codec available for free purchase which works quite nicely on my FC5.
Granted, and having to pay or not was not part of the discussion. That is why I pointed out the word ‘legal’ in my statement. In actuality downloading libdvdcss2 for use is illegal, period. With Linspire, they are actually distributing it legally, and have the proper agreements in place. Therefore, it is the only Linux distro that comes with legal support for playing DVD Movies. This is of course from a US point of view as that is where I am located. I forgot, there is TurboLinux as well I think that distributes it legally as well.
Statement was that it comes with a legal DVD player. No, it does not come with anything more than any other distro, save TurboLinux, comes with. You want legal playback, you pony up extra bucks. That is not COMES with, that is OPTIONAL at extra cost.
Is all semantics. The boxes I looked at in CompUSA came with CNR for a time, for $49.99. For $99 you get one year of gold. You are correct in saying it is not there ‘Out of the box’. What I was trying to point out is that you can then get it with a couple mouse clicks. Sorry if I was not clear on that, but to me that is comes with, else I would have said out of the box, which to me is different. So what if it costs extra, the fact is you can get it that way. Is like saying Ubntu debian or Ubuntu come with mp3 support, which they do not until you add it in. Is all in the way you look at it I guess. Either way no arguments, that is what opinions are for
If you don’t like Linspire, don’t use it.
If you don’t like Freespire, don’t use it.
Don’t take other people’s freedom away from them because their cup of tea, isn’t yours.
We need an easy to use, supported distribution of Linux for the mass market. Linspire is it.
I’ve tried Ubuntu, nice.
I’ve tried MEPIS, nice.
I’ve tried Fedora, nice.
But none of them are as easy to use for an end user as Linspire.
And none of them are being sold in Walmarts on inexpensive systems.
Geek users can choose any distro they want. But, let Linspire get the number of Linux users in the millions, and suddenly there will be apps like Quicken or Quickbooks, or Turbo Tax and the like.
And then… There will be room for another desktop distro to take the spot.
All this criticism of Linspire seems wacked to me.
If you don’t like it, don’t buy it.
i agree.
I agree as well!
Why pay for a product, when you can get it for free legally?
Perhaps there is a market in USA with it’s weird laws, but Linspire has nothing which isn’t already on my Gentoo system or has an equivalent.
Most likely not all of that is legal according to US laws, but it’s perfectly legal for me.
Freespire has worse video support than Gentoo or Fedora (if you use extra repositories for the latter one).
But I agree that PJ’s post on Groklaw was somewhat overdramatized. However, I’m deeply surprised to see anyone actually reacting on her post. She just had a bad hair day or something.
Why pay for a product, when you can steal it?
PJ’s post on Groklaw
Two perfect characterizations of the FOSS lunatics.
Huh? Who wrote anything about stealing?
I specifically wrote about getting software for free, LEGALLY!
Personally I think PJ is a tad, well.. extreme, about Linspire, but I don’t really care about her view on it. I care more about her following the SCO/Caldera vs. IBM.
I’m not one of those folks who get red in the face when linspire is mentioned, honestly I don’t care that much either way about them. that said, your post seems representative of the idea that “market share” is what we should be after, not bringing free computing to the world (I wanted to rephrase that to be less melodramatic sounding, but you get the idea…)
saying we want a whole lot of people using linux so that we can have quicken, photoshop, office_whatever, etc., seems to be missing the point to me. why not just use windows then, or get a lower end mac?
we want folk using linux, bsd, free_whatever_os, etc., (though they’re also free not to of course, it goes both ways) because we actually care about being able to do with your software what you want it to do, in terms of technology, legality, and ethics, and not be shackled to the whims of a license of some corporate intellectual “property” which will dictate how you may, and may not, use your own computer in all it’s various components.
maybe none of this matters to you, but I doubt the thousands of free softare hackers that have spent their own time making systems like linspire (and fedora, and suse, …) possible didn’t do it just to make those few companies CEOs and shareholders rich of off their (often unpaid) labour.
But isn’t saying that one should only use Open-source software the same as saying one should only by from this or this vendor? I for example want linux (and I use it), but I certainly don’t like the fact that I can’t play some games. There are some good proprietary sollutions, and while a market dominated by one proprietary software maker is a big problem, a non-monopolistic market with a lot of options isn’t that bad either. Linux shows this completely, why are there so many distro’s? because there are so many tastes, sure one distro would be better for now, since we have a monopolist, but take that away, and most of the problems will be solved. Besides: anyone IS using non-proprietary-non open code or formats, look in the multimedia area.
you make a good point there, about a non-monopolistic market with a variety of choices (even closed ones). (perhaps like the 80s with commodore, apple, ibm, radio shack, etc? mind you, I don’t know that a shelf full of software with multiple copies for various incompatible ports is all that ideal either…)
I don’t think there’s equivalence in saying use only free software vs use only one vendor’s wares though. free software almost by definition will come from a variety of sources, some in cooperation and even friendly competition with each other. closed software can much more easily lead to the nasty path of vendor lockin. (mind you, I don’t want to harp too much here. on pretty much a daily basis I also use non-free software myself. I just respect some of the ideology and reasoning behind free software as a whole and don’t think market drive should be it’s primary motivator.)
saying we want a whole lot of people using linux so that we can have quicken, photoshop, office_whatever, etc., seems to be missing the point to me. why not just use windows then, or get a lower end mac?
we want folk using linux, bsd, free_whatever_os, etc., (though they’re also free not to of course, it goes both ways) because we actually care about being able to do with your software what you want it to do, in terms of technology, legality, and ethics, and not be shackled to the whims of a license of some corporate intellectual “property” which will dictate how you may, and may not, use your own computer in all it’s various components.
See, there’s the dichotomy of this whole issue. For people to experience freedom you’re basically saying choice should be taken away from them.
Linux or any other *nix has much to offer users as an OS platform, why should the ability to use high quality commercial applications be exclusive of that just because they’re closed source or proprietary?
I guess it boils down to whether you see OSS as a means to an end, or you simply see FSF as the end unto itself.
I won’t begrudge people that insist on pure software freedom, that is certainly their right but by the same token, I think that same sector of the community needs to come to grips with the fact that closed-source and OSS are going to have to learn to co-exist for the forseeable future.
At the end of the day, I believe people should pick the best tool for the best job. Whether that means using GIMP on WinXP or Photoshop on Suse, people should be able to choose. Take that choice away from them and force them to use something they don’t feel is appropriate for them and things start to break down.
maybe none of this matters to you, but I doubt the thousands of free softare hackers that have spent their own time making systems like linspire (and fedora, and suse, …) possible didn’t do it just to make those few companies CEOs and shareholders rich of off their (often unpaid) labour.
No, but the companies like IBM, or Nokia, or HP, or Novell etc. that have made massive investments in linux, whether in terms of R&D, code contributions, licensing or patent indemnification, may feel a little differently. Particularly since without their contributions, linux likely could not have reached it’s current point of development.
People contributing code to OSS and licensing it under the license of their choice, whether GPL, BSD whatever should be doing so with both eyes open. For-profit organizations can contribute code to linux knowing that the GPL prevents that code from being appropriated and closed off for use by a competitor. It’s the reason these companies spearhead linux versus a comparable “free” platform like BSD. But at the same time, people contributing GPL code must accept that their code may be used for commercial purposes as well, as long as it is within the provisions of the GPL.
To my mind, linux is almost the ideal example of a balanced “eco-system” that can be created when commercial and community interests work together. You don’t see Apple doing much to help elevate BSD as a desktop platform (I know, I know, Darwin, whatever) despite the billions they’ve made by building off of it. But then, they’re not required to.
Linux is a multi-billion dollar industry now, and linux isn’t dominating global datacenters just because of LAMP. People are running high-end heavy iron apps like Oracle, SAP, WebSphere etc. that cost significant dollars. The fortune 500 have embraced linux and OSS, doesn’t mean they’re about ready to throw aside conventional business models and embrase FSF entirely.
So it should be with the desktop. Linux isn’t a religion, I don’t think Linus ever inteded it to be, it’s simply an enabler. Hell, even Gnome, the declared “official” GNU/Linux desktop, waves GTK’s LGPL licensing as a benefit to developers producing closed source and/or commercial application development without having to pay a license fee or otherwise contribute anything back. Linux is a fantastic platform, but it’s hardly going to accelerate an agenda towards universally free and open software, which is probably part of it’s popularity. BSD maybe, but linux is made for living comfortably in both worlds.
Linspire isn’t my cup of tea, and I’ve commented before that they give me the impression of being a bit sleazy with their tactics for transitioning Windows customers, *but* that is just my opinion and at the end of the day, I don’t really see anything technically wrong with what linspire is doing. Considering in my job I sell a considerable amount of commercial software that runs on linux server platforms, I’d be hypocritical to think otherwise.
Vive la choice, strings or not, that’s what freedom should be about. To me, anyways.
Anyways, don’t mean to vent, I understood where you were coming from but just wanted to throw in my 2c.
They actually want to get paid for providing a service to their users ? Oh noes !
Basically click’n’run is what Linux zealots claim Linux vendors *should do* to make money : provide a service. In this case the service is not only support, but also providing existing open source packages in a convenient, easy to install way for their users. So why are they whining ? Because apparently they don’t believe their own rhetoric (“It’s free as in speech, not free as in beer”.) And ofcourse there’s also the ULTIMATE EVIL : offering software that isn’t even open source (*gasp*), I’m waiting for these idiots to complain about the fact some people run Oracle on their Linux servers.
Finally, all the naysayers should take some time to reflect on the costs Linspire incurs to provide click’n’run too : server bandwith, development costs, system engineers to keep everything running, tester, etc … Seems fair to charge something for it to me.
Beware of people who present themselves as oh-so-moral and say they want to free you, like the author of this article. They’ll say “All you need to is not say this and not do that, and do say this and do do that.” (it’s not Linux, but gnu-linux – don’t use this software, use that software)
It’s all about control – this is as true in religion as it is in politics, but I can’t figure out in which one of these categories this article belongs. Keep control of your life, tell all these would-be little cult-leaders and petty dictators to take a hike.
Edited 2006-05-09 21:53
Sht or get off the pot. If 100% FOSS is TRULY better, then about you STFU and let the free market decide? That’s what I thought.
Linspire for your average end-user type has a lot better whole-package than any current 100% FOSS OS/distro. And that just psses Stallmanites off to no end.
Is it me or do linspire-ites think that their distro is the salvation of the desktop? They honestly think that they have the only distro that is viable for home users. And they think that CNR is the envy of the whole linux community and every distro is clamoring to get their hands on that hot technology.
Poor old linspire, getting attacked. Whats up with the change of tune here lately anyway? They have always claimed running as root is better so why change it in freespire. They always said CNR is worth paying for and is the money maker so why open source the client? Heck, they have always claimed they are right no matter what the question was.
I think they are about to go down the drain and they have to do something quick so freespire is suppose to save them somehow.
As far as contributing to open source, they contribute to the products they want to see developed more. Nothing else. Basically they BUY some developing because it affects them not because they want to see open source prosper.
They paid SCO and are immune to the linux lawsuits! nuff said!
Oh btw – legal is something for a court to decide. I dont think that linspires DVD player is any more/less legal than anyone using a package that lets the hardware that was purchased do what it is intended to do and yes I would gladly go to court over it.
>> Poor old linspire, getting attacked. Whats up with the change of tune here lately anyway? They have always claimed running as root is better so why change it in freespire. They always said CNR is worth paying for and is the money maker so why open source the client? Heck, they have always claimed they are right no matter what the question was.
I think they are about to go down the drain and they have to do something quick so freespire is suppose to save them somehow.<<
If Freespire was some drastic last ditch effort to “save” them (didn’t know they needed “saved”), they wouldn’t be taking their time to get the project up on it’s page (it would be available for download already).
>> As far as contributing to open source, they contribute to the products they want to see developed more. Nothing else. Basically they BUY some developing because it affects them not because they want to see open source prosper. <<
You mean they aren’t hippies or commies living in their parents basement? Wow, I didn’t know that. How the F— do you think FOSS GETS CODE? Let me enlighten you: from tinkering snot nosed hobbyist playing in their spare time and/or from CORPORATE WELFARE from companies like Linspire.
>>If Freespire was some drastic last ditch effort to “save” them (didn’t know they needed “saved”), they wouldn’t be taking their time to get the project up on it’s page (it would be available for download already). <<
If they HAD been planning this for two years then you would think they would have SOMETHING ready huh?
How Linspire is on a “we have changed and we now get it” campaign? You really believe they have?
Shame the insiders are going to get the shaft. Dang, no need to pay to beta test anymore huh?
harsh, but true.
The whole semantic word game that certain F/OSS supporters like to play is a shocker.
Every time I read or hear or see someone say that freedoms are eroded by people using closed source drivers it makes me wonder just where your mind has to be to deliver such nonsense (what tends to be) so fervently.
It’s such a modern day niche rendering of the “freedom is slavery” doublethink Orwellian world it’s pretty bizarre. If it was in a sphere more central than software I’d be frightened.
I’m just glad that these extreme F/OSS thinkers seem to mostly just live in the cosy cardigan wearing bubble of Gnus Not Unix (slap that man) Land.
Yea, nothing is eroded by closed source and basically being at their mercy. We should all accept sony rootkits, operating systems calling home, purchasing the same music to play on diffferent devices… Freedom isn’t eroded by the fact you are tying a string to your wallet, a string to your data, a string to your computer…
Oh shiit…yes it is
As long as we accept closed then closed is what we will have, PERIOD! It isn’t us cardigan wearing hippie communist fanatics that caused as Carmony put it:
>>in ten years of holding out, the FOSS community has made relatively few gains, in terms of convincing vendors to release libre codecs and drivers. In other words, the strategy doesn’t seem to be working <<
It is all the people still clamoring to get the latest closed stuff that has caused no gains to be made. Use closed, always have closed! Why would a company do otherwise?
>>Yea, nothing is eroded by closed source and basically being at their mercy. We should all accept sony rootkits, operating systems calling home, purchasing the same music to play on diffferent devices… Freedom isn’t eroded by the fact you are tying a string to your wallet, a string to your data, a string to your computer… <<
Just because the current system has problems does NOT automagically mean extremist views are the correct route. I hate the Bush administration and a whole lot of US policy and status quo. That doesn’t mean I agree with Bin Ladens world view. I don’t like a lot of the things closed source companies do. When they break the law they should be held accountable. Should the laws that govern software/hardware, DRM et all be changed? HELL YES. But COMMERCIAL software has benefits over FOSS (and likewise vice/versa). Extreme solutions in either direction are flawed; and both views should not be mutually exclusive.
>> As long as we accept closed then closed is what we will have, PERIOD! It isn’t us cardigan wearing hippie communist fanatics that caused as Carmony put it:
>>in ten years of holding out, the FOSS community has made relatively few gains, in terms of convincing vendors to release libre codecs and drivers. In other words, the strategy doesn’t seem to be working <<
Let me guess, you ONLY use Debian-free? But of course you have a Windows partiton for games? No? An XBox? I know TONS of Linux users who TALK THE TALK but not ONE who walks the walk. If YOU use any closed systems for WHATEVER reason then YOU are a complete hypocrite. If you do NOT use any, you are an idealist extremist idiot.
is he completely out of the picture with linspire ? the way i remember when linspire was the infant lindows, mr gave the impression this os was going to find a solution for peace in the middle east and to end world hunger.
no man WORLD peace and harmony and so forth…
I think he grabbed his 20million and ran
not a hypcrite, maybe a idiot
Dont care if xbox is closed since I only play games with it..maybe I should. Maybe you have a point. But my point is that I dont want anything tied to my computer, wallet, or data. Computers are a unique field and IMO cannot be compared to other material stuff because, well just because it is so different. So next week if the owner of the MP3 technology said every user has to pay a buck per song it wouldnt bother you that they can do that? What happens when you dont pay, and XP detects illegal MP3s and shuts down all the media players on the system. Okay, I am getting extreme….but my stuff is my stuff and no hooks attached. What hook is attached to my XBOX? none that I know of, it is under my control for what I use it for so I THINK I am happy and not too much of a hypocrite, now idiot is another matter
http://www.linspire.com/lindows_products_license.php#ope
and you have done what today? except flame them.
Oh Pleeease get off your moral horse and give it some water, it must be very tired of all that galloping around junking Linspire/freespire.
And each time anyone asks HOW MUCH is donated/sponsored/paid, they are told to take a hike. One of the main developers of GAIM, in irc chat, said that he had no use for the changes made to GAIM to produce that wonder of nagware, PhoneGAIM, the default messenger in LOS. Wow, half a million to WINE (and when they wanted to keep the changes to themselves, Codeweavers walked, ending the early “Lindows will run anything Windows will” sales marketing spiel).
http://www.kde-apps.org/ and http://www.kde-look.org/ took up the sponsorship from Linspire so did http://www.dccalliance.org/ and http://www.namesys.com/ all sponsorship is recognised on the front page of each website. No hiking here. Please supply your sources of information and not just speculation. NVU is now used in the SUSE distro http://www.novell.com/products/linuxpackages/professional/nvu.html which was developed by Linspire and is open source. Lphoto and Lsongs are also open source and free to use by anyone if they choose. These is factual information.
for caring about my horse, that was cute and funny…
Yes linspire contributes *some* to projects but as I stated ONLY when it affects them, when they are wanting something done and it may affect their bottom line. Not as generous company who wants to support a project that may need assistance or because they seen something that would be a boon to the opensource world in general.
“Lphoto and Lsongs are also open source and free to use by anyone if they choose” and can get it to work….
NVU, seen any new developement on that. Some reason to recreate instead of assisting the projects alredy out there?
Man give those linspire pom-poms a break…. it is JUST a distro not your momma or wife okay, dont get so defensive.