Why do Windows users put up with this crap?

[Rat]

For freeware, yes. Free/open source software doesn't do this scammy bundling stuff. Even if it did, there'd be an easy way to avoid it. (Just create and distribute an alternate bundle, without the extra software or ads.)

I'm sure you're aware of this. And yes, you can still go to another site and download the zip file without the installer to avoid it, but it's still there.

 

[xtifr]

Android and Chrome OS are Linux based, but nobody in Linux really wants to call them Linux. Fair or unfair.

Do I detect a "No True Scotsman" fallacy? I call them Linux, and I've been using Linux occasionally since 0.12, and regularly since Debian 1.1 came out. And I'm pretty sure that Linus considers Android to be Linux, since he works with folks from Google on the kernel on a regular basis.

It's not GNU/Linux, but it's definitely Linux.

(Of course, I prefer GNU/Linux myself. In fact, I prefer the GNU toolchain on any userspace to any OS without the GNU toolchain, and would be nearly as happy running GNU/BSD or GNU/Solaris as GNU/Linux. In fact, the GNU tools have saved my ass on many occasions, on everything from SunOS to HPUX to SCO Unix, dating back to before there was a Linux.)

 

[xtifr]

Because, once again, programmers need to eat. You can get some free (as in beer) software because some people are willing to spend their free (as in spare) time on hobby projects, or because some companies are willing to spend some money supporting it. But if all programming were expected to be done for free (as in beer), how could programming even exist as a job?

There's a fallacy here. Not charging for the software doesn't mean not charging for programming. In fact, making money with free software and turning a profit is older than most people realize. Long before Red Hat became a major player in the industry, Cygnus Corporation (note the "gnu" in "Cygnus") was happily turning a profit supporting Gnu software on Windows. They remained profitable until they got bought by Red Hat (which had not yet turned a profit themselves at the time, but had had a very successful stock offering). And before that, of course, was the guy who wrote the ADA compiler for GCC, who famously got paid up-front for that work, in the mid-eighties.

Now, of course, there are many companies making money with free software. From Red Hat (now very profitable) to Suse to Google to Apple (most of OS/X is free/libre software, even if the entire bundle isn't) to your consultant neighbor. And me. Free software is a multi-billion dollar business these days.

Something like 9 out of 10 programmers work in house for companies that aren't selling software at all. Programmers are employed by everyone from banks to manufacturers to retail chains to special effects studios to ISPs to Web Service providers to governments to casinos to... The list goes on and on. And these 9 out of 10 (or whatever the exact percentage might be) are actually happier with Open Source, since it makes their jobs easier if they can work with the source, and are perfect happy to share their improvements (especially with core components) with the world, since that also makes their jobs easier in the long run.

So go on. Just tell me there's no money to be made with free software. I've only been supporting myself and paying my bills with free software for a decade or two. Explain to me how I can't possibly exist.

Or better yet, go take a look at the members of the Linux Foundation and note the amazing diversity of companies actively supporting Linux with cold, hard cash. It'll amaze you. Toyota? (Who spent a minimum of 100,000 USD for their Gold membership.) Barnes and Noble? J. P. Morgan? Jaguar?

 

[John Jones]

Seriously?

So what machine was that exactly and when was it produced?

And so no updates unless you flesh the ROM?

*goes for the popcorn*

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Overall, I read everything I can as carefully as possible... for the most part decent freeware is okay even wirh the toolbars advertized in them. One exception to this though is those apps bundled with open candy which really do require you to pay attention even for savy computer is users. Utirrents gotten into that trend I noticed... any time I hear of those kinds of addons I avoid them at all costs.

 

[Cuddles]

How indeed? How do you explain the existence of Linux, Firefox, Chromium, LibreOffice, and all the thousands of other free software products? I have not yet heard of any of these programmers starving to death.

So go on. Just tell me there's no money to be made with free software.

I have no idea what you two think you are arguing about, but could you please try actually reading my posts rather than quoting them and then responding with some completely unrelated bollocks that claims I said the exact opposite of what I actually said.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Do I detect a "No True Scotsman" fallacy? I call them Linux, and I've been using Linux occasionally since 0.12, and regularly since Debian 1.1 came out. And I'm pretty sure that Linus considers Android to be Linux, since he works with folks from Google on the kernel on a regular basis.

It's not GNU/Linux, but it's definitely Linux.

(Of course, I prefer GNU/Linux myself. In fact, I prefer the GNU toolchain on any userspace to any OS without the GNU toolchain, and would be nearly as happy running GNU/BSD or GNU/Solaris as GNU/Linux. In fact, the GNU tools have saved my ass on many occasions, on everything from SunOS to HPUX to SCO Unix, dating back to before there was a Linux.)

Yeah, but this distinction is apparently very important to seemingly the vast majority of Linuxers I read online. I don't know why. And oh god, you brought up the GNU/Linux naming debate! So you get angry rants everywhere you go ?

 

[xtifr]

I have no idea what you two think you are arguing about, but could you please try actually reading my posts rather than quoting them and then responding with some completely unrelated bollocks that claims I said the exact opposite of what I actually said.

If multiple people misunderstand you, you might want to consider the possibility that you're not communicating very clearly. I'll refrain from further comment until I can figure out what you might think you were actually trying to say.

eta: and even if you weren't posing the "free software will make it impossible for programmers to earn a living" fallacy, that fallacy is common enough to be worth rebutting. But I apologize for any incorrect implication of your intent in my post.

Yeah, but this distinction is apparently very important to seemingly the vast majority of Linuxers I read online. I don't know why. And oh god, you brought up the GNU/Linux naming debate! So you get angry rants everywhere you go ?

I'm not talking about the naming debate, which I don't care about. I'm talking about GNU+Linux, which I prefer to Linux without GNU. I even prefer GNU+anything to most instances of Linux without GNU. GNU/HPUX is the only acceptable form of HPUX, and even GNU/Windows is an almost-tolerable system.

 

[Axiom_Blade]

I'm not talking about the naming debate, which I don't care about. I'm talking about GNU+Linux, which I prefer to Linux without GNU.

Are there Linux distributions without GNU? I've never thought about it before.

 

[xtifr]

Are there Linux distributions without GNU? I've never thought about it before.

Sure. Mostly embedded systems that use BusyBox^WP, but since that category includes both Android and Tivo, it may well be that Linux without GNU is more common than Linux with.

You could also probably use BSD or OpenSolaris utilities recompiled for Linux, though I don't know of anyone who has actually done that.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Cnet is one of the worst offenders (IMO). Anything you download from them comes packaged with a whole gaggle of extra crap, carefully phrased to make opting out as confusing as possible. If I see something they recommend that I want to check out I look for someplace else to download it. (FileHippo usually has whatever it is, and they vet their stuff pretty carefully.)

Yeah, I used to use CNET all the time. I don't at all any more.

 

[BenBurch]

When? I have often heard that PC gaming was about to be killed off, usually by consoles, but I've never known it to be remotely true.

In fact there is much, much less piracy now that there are things like Steampowered and Origins and Gog and etc.

Most people would rather pay for the game than spend the time required to find and download it, and avoid the risks associated with that.

 

[rustypouch]

In fact there is much, much less piracy now that there are things like Steampowered and Origins and Gog and etc.

Most people would rather pay for the game than spend the time required to find and download it, and avoid the risks associated with that.

I concur. Steam and the like just make things easy. A few clicks, a couple moments to download, and you're playing.

Or downloading a cracked version, a keygen, and hopefully it all works, without any unpleasantness.