Software Livre

by Jon "maddog" Hall

      Recently, I took part in a meeting for 4Linux company from Sao Paulo in Brasil. One of its parts were questions from audience. There was a lot of them and unfortunately, because of the time restrictions, I couldn't answer them all. However, after the meeting was closed, 4Linux director, Marcelo Marques, has sent me a question asked by a young student - Lucas Schenkel Schieferdecker - and asked about my comments. I've concluded that it was interesting enough, for me to write an article about it this month.
      The question was: "Would you use Windows, if it were Software Livre (free software)?".
      As a matter of priority, I have to explain what do I mean, when I say Software Livre. In this case, it's something different than we usually mean when we're using the term open software. For many years I've been using open source programs under the native versions of BSD Unix and other operating systems, where software distributors are not obliged to release the source code. Usually, this programs were very good, but sooner or later, I needed their source, to fix some problem or to make slight modifications, and unfortunately, I didn't have such an option.
      If I were to even think about using Windows software, my first term would be, for this software to be really "free" (free, as in the word freedom). Its source code readily available, and its licence not limiting me in any way as to the ways of using it. I think, that such freedom is found in GPL. Some say, that GPL is more restrictive than BSD, but Lucas' question was about the terms, Windows would have to comply to, for me to start using it. My basic criteria then, is: Windows would have to be "free software" under the GPL licence, and not just "open software".
      I have nothing against paying for software. In my life, I have bought a lot of programs, cheaper and more expensive ones. Because of my education (and my nature) I've never bought many of them, as I was able to write down or modify software, that I needed at the time, myself, and operating systems like Unix or GNU/Linux, provided me with necessary tools. I think, that software developers have the right to decide, what do they do with it, so if they want to sell it as a product, and their creation fulfills my needs and seems worth its price, I will certainly pay for it. Unfortunately, quite often, very restrictive licences are lowering the products worth to zero, and because I'm for following the licence to the letter, I can't use their programs.
      If I would be using Windows, would depend majorly on its worth. The fact is, however, that Microsoft Windows is worth very little, as majorly it's just an operating system; it doesn't contain any compilators or any really useful programs. Many products, that user gets free of charge when buying new computer, is just creators way to force him to buy costly upgrades/extensions. They give us a shaver, and wait until we buy the blades. When we finally buy the rest of the programs, that will make our system worth anything (for example Microsoft Office, Adobe Photoshop or software for multimedia development), it may occur to us, that our expenses have reached hundreds or even thousands of dollars per computer. Assuming, that some of those programs are also Software Livre, I wouldn't mind paying for them, under the condition, that I could all by myself upgrade, extend and even copy them temporarily on another machine without triggering anti-piracy alarms.
      GNU/Linux meanwhile, provides me with all the tools I need at work, every day some new show up. So, my next term would be for most - if not all - software working under Windows (especially those, that I need), to also be Software Livre.
      Third term is more of a personal thing: I like to have several user interface options. I have nothing against learning how to use new interface or familiarising with command line program, if it's gonna help me in my work. Many people avoid the command line, preferring the graphical interface in the style of Microsoft Windows, however, I'm not one of them. For me to think about using Microsoft products, they would need to have rich, fully functional and system integrated command line interface.
      Last, important in my eyes element is quality. I was once working for a software development company, so I know how hard it is to create a good quality product, that would meet the expectations of hundreds of millions of customers. I also understand problems associated with analysing, testing and distributing actualizations, however, I like to decide myslef, when and which patches to install. It is also mostly available only in open source code.
      Would I use Microsoft Windows if it would be Software Livre then? Perhaps, in the past, but this times have already gone. I have everything I need in readily available Software Livre products, so Microsoft would have to do something really spectacular, for me to switch to it.