Some common words include: “open source”, “free”, “libre”, “FOSS”, “FLOSS”, “closed source”, “non-free”, “proprietary”. Which ones do you like to use or not like to use, and why?
Also, I understand that some of them are not the same (e.g. “free”/“libre” and “open source”), but are sometimes used as if they were. How do you feel about that?
I personally like to use the word proprietary. It has a clear definition, even without the need for something like the Free Software Foundation or the Open Source Initiative to provide one. That cannot be said for words like “free” or “open source”. Both “free” and “open” feel very shaky. I can imagine companies allowing very minor and trivial freedoms to users, to justify promoting themselves and their products as “free” and “open”. That might not work on hardcore enthusiasts like me, but it might be enough to confuse the masses and manipulate the public’s understanding of these words. I feel like we should take that more seriously. But maybe I’m just paranoid. Please tell me what you think about this. I am very curious
Most often, I say FOSS when talking to other folks in our community. It covers all the bases and everyone knows what it means around here.
I’ve never used “Libre” and I never hear it used, outside of software names like LibreOffice.
For outsiders, I don’t use “free software.” People hear “free” and only think it refers to the price. I don’t care too much for the debate between “free” and “Open source,” I get the distinction, but I think compromise is necessary if we want to have any hope of moving people away from proprietary software.
If I only stuck to GNU-style free software, I would never have switched away from proprietary software. If you want to do more than just write text emails and play 5 games ever, you have to move away from “pure” free software.
That being said, I use mostly FOSS software on all my platforms. All my computers and servers run Linux. My cell phone uses GrapheneOS. I self host almost all my services like Jellyfin and my TrueNAS. I’m a massive FOSS advocate, and I push hard against proprietary software all the time.
Yes, that’s why I don’t like to use it either.
I don’t understand what you mean by that.
That is good to hear, fellow soldier.
I think they mean like how gnu/fsf can be a bit fanatical about it
I think “free” is okay. If the software does come at no upfront cost, then fine, why not add that as an incentive to get people on board. They will figure out how to “pay back” sooner or later.
I can tell you a word I do avoid, and that is “alternative”. It makes FLOSS items sound like cheap knockoffs, always playing catch-up with their supposed proprietary and closed equivalents, always seeking feature parity, but never really getting as good as the original. This is not the case. Most software projects, once they reach maturity, more often than not, evolve into their own thing.
Yeah, I shy away from “alternative” for the same reasons.
I now say stuff like, “Protonmail is an email service that respects your privacy and runs fast in your browser.” Get them moved off MS and Goog.
You can also turn things on its head, like
“Krita supports a wide range of tablets and drawing devices out of the box, so you won’t miss expensive closed proprietary alternatives like Photoshop one bit”.
👆 improvised, but you get the idea. You get to reference something the user may know (and this helps you out giving them a clear idea of what you are talking about), and you cast “the alternative” (Photoshop) in a less positive light than the free/libre software at the same time.