Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Debate pits open source Linux against Microsoft

Filed under
Linux
Microsoft

In 1991, when Linus Torvalds posted on a USENET newsgroup about his new creation, a functional desktop operating system that came to be known as Linux, he had no idea that a revolutionary war would ensue because of his operating system.

Many argue that Linux, for a variety of reasons, is a better operating system than any product from Microsoft's Windows line. However, for every Linux lover it's not too hard to find someone who will take the opposing viewpoint.

Alex Daley, an academic relations manager from Microsoft, and Eric Lucas, a Drexel graduate and member of the Philadelphia Linux Users Group, took opposing viewpoints in a debate sponsored by Drexel's Math and Computer Science Society May 19.

The debate was set with each candidate giving a three-minute talk and one-minute rebuttal for a series of predetermined prompts compiled by the MCS Society.

The first topic up for discussion focused on the pros and cons to both open source programming and proprietary, or closed source, programming. Lucas concentrated on the positive aspects of open source programming and argued that an open source program is one that users have the right to distribute, modify, derive works from, and universally use. There are no licenses that bar the user from owning the software.

"With open source it's your business, your data, your right to use it as you see fit," said Lucas.

He also added that Microsoft licenses do not give users ownership of the software, only the right to use it.

Full Story.

More in Tux Machines

Mir 0.8 Works On Less ABI Breakage, Touchspots, Responsiveness

While Ubuntu 14.10 on the desktop isn't using Mir by default, Mir 0.8.0 is being prepared for release by Canonical and it has a number of interesting changes. Read more

Open source history, present day, and licensing

Looking at open source softwares particularly, this is a fact that is probably useful to you if you are thinking about business models, many people don't care about it anymore. We talk about FOSS, Free and Open Source Software, but if we really are strict there's a difference between free software and open source software. On the left, I have free software which most typically is GPL software. Software where the license insures freedom. It gives freedoms to you as a user, but it also requires that the freedoms are maintained. On the right-hand side, you have open source software which is open for all, but it also allows you to close it. So here we come back to the famous clause of the GPL license, the reciprocity requirement which says, "If I am open, you need to be open." So software that comes under the GPL license carries with it something that other people call a virus. I call it a blessing because I think it's great if all software becomes open. Read more

Mozilla Wants to Save the Open Web, but is it Too Late?

Again, I think this is absolutely correct. But what it fails to recognise is that one of the key ways of making the Web medium "less free and open" is the use of legally-protected DRM. DRM is the very antithesis of openness and of sharing. And yet, sadly, as I reported back in May, Mozilla has decided to back adding DRM to the Web, starting first with video (but it won't end there...) This means Mozilla's Firefox is itself is a vector of attack against openness and sharing, and undermines its own lofty goals in the Open Web Fellows programme. Read more

Open source is starting to make a dent in proprietary software fortunes

Open source has promised to unseat proprietary competitors for decades, but the cloud may make the threat real. Read more