Bill Gates' letter to hobbyists

[ifrit05]

I was watching Revolution OS (the BEST documentary, it's about the GNU/Linux and the rebels against SUN, Micro$oft and UNIX OS's) and they mentioned this "Letter to Hobbyists" where he ranted against the groups about "stealing software that developers slaved over" and {censored}. Go ahead, read it, he gets pretty ticked off, lol.

 

This Documentary inspired me about the Open Source Foundation and the Free Software Foundation. It's a great Documentary. Go ahead and google it.

 

"Rebel against the Software Totalitarism giant, because the war isn't won until the Redmond gates fall..." (just thought of that....lol )

[InorganicMatter]

The dash in Micro-Soft gives me serious doubts about this letter's validity.

[3phemeral]

The dash in Micro-Soft gives me serious doubts about this letter's validity.

I'm quite sure that's how it was called at first. Of course i can't find anything backing that up right now ( wikipedia), but if i'll do i'll let you know.

[ Suzie's Soliloquy]

I'm quite sure that's how it was called at first. Of course i can't find anything backing that up right now ( wikipedia), but if i'll do i'll let you know.

It WAS originally called Micro-soft, short for Microcomputer Software, but that was very short lived

[InorganicMatter]

Out of sheer boredom, I read the whole letter. I'd say his claims are fairly justified. A 90% software piracy rate is nothing short of pathetic. I don't know how exaggerated his claims are, but I'd be fairly pissed at the hobbyist market as well if their piracy reduced the value of my time to $2/hour. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

 

Also, just exactly how does people pirating BASIC relate to the *nix subforum?

[Alessandro17]

Also, just exactly how does people pirating BASIC relate to the *nix subforum?

 

Maybe because much of what Mr Gates wrote in that letter was proven wrong by open source software?

 

Without good software and

an owner who understands programming, a hobby computer is wasted. Will

quality software be written for the hobby market?

 

Yes, it was written (Linux, for instance, and not only for the hobby market).

 

Hardware must be paid for, but software is something to share.

 

Everybody but him considered that normal at the time. Software was shared between people who had written it.

 

Who can afford to do professional work for nothing? What hobbyist

can put 3-man years into programming, finding all bugs, documenting his

product and distribute for free?

 

32 years later we can shout: YES, IT CAN BE DONE! And the result can be even better than what you have achieved, Mr Gates!

[mifki]

But most Open Source developers are 42 year old ex-hippies who live in thier moms basements and dont have real jobs.

[Rockviech]

cant agree more kiko,

if i spend my sparetime into programming something, i want to get paid for it

whats so bad for it? if you use it often, buy it

 

most of the opensource software is {censored} in all ways. 13 years development of gimp, and it still cant do more then for example paint.net and this project startet 2004. its also free.

i installed debian a few days ago and i wanted to install pidgin. well it needed 100mb of dependancies so it could install this little application. if gnu/linux doenst get some standards into his system, especially a basesystem with libraries which dont get an update every day, it will continue to suck like it does today.

[CLiDE FTW!!1]

32 years later we can shout: YES, IT CAN BE DONE! And the result can be even better than what you have achieved, Mr Gates!

But at the end of the day, where it matters the most, we have yet to see a free open-source OS (or distro) that is worthy to replace Windows as a desktop OS on a mainstream level.

 

It's a sad reality, really.

[Alessandro17]

most of the opensource software is {censored} in all ways.

 

But at the end of the day, where it matters the most, we have yet to see a free open-source OS (or distro) that is worthy to replace Windows as a desktop OS on a mainstream level.

 

It's a sad reality, really.

 

Those are just your opinions. There are hundred of thousands of people who use OSS and are perfectly happy with it.

And what about OSS on servers? Is that {censored} as well?

[CLiDE FTW!!1]

Those are just your opinions. There are hundred of thousands of people who use OSS and are perfectly happy with it.

And what about OSS on servers? Is that {censored} as well?

Uhm, it's not really 'just my opinion'.

 

It's a fact that (semi-)closed-source OS's are predominate in the desktop market.

 

OSS isn't {censored}, though, and Rockviech is very foolish for saying that.

[Alessandro17]

OSS isn't {censored}, though, and Rockviech is very foolish for saying that.

 

However you wrote "we have yet to see a free open-source OS (or distro) that is worthy to replace Windows as a desktop OS on a mainstream level."

I have been using SUSE as my main desktop OS since 9.0 (2003), and at the time I already believed that SUSE was better than XP.

I know people who have been using a Linux distro as their main/sole OS since much earlier than 2003.

[Azurael]

Much Open Source Software is a load of rubbish, but it only takes a few gems to validate the methodology.

 

What I don't like is certain quite prominent, and also militant members of the FOSS community (like that half-wit Stallman, and to some extent Mr. Self Important himself, Linus Torvalds) who believe that all software should necessarily be free and open source. It's all very well pointing out specific examples where developers have been paid for writing open source software, but that's not a viable methodology on a large scale.

 

That's not freedom, that's communism. Not that capitalism is any better.

[Alessandro17]

What I don't like is certain quite prominent, and also militant members of the FOSS community (like that half-wit Stallman, and to some extent Mr. Self Important himself, Linus Torvalds) who believe that all software should necessarily be free and open source.

 

Linus has never said anything like that, he is a pragmatist. And most definitely he isn't Mr. Self Important, he is very down to earth.

 

That's not freedom, that's communism. Not that capitalism is any better.

 

Since when "sharing with your neighbour" is "communism"?

True Christian could argue that it is a true Christian principle, for instance.

[SDRacer48]

Personally, I think the open source movement is great. Not for the reasons that most other people think so though. I am not a tree loving hippie, who thinks that the entire world should share, and it is the responsibility of everyone to provide for his or her neighbor. Although, my business goal in life is to start a homeless community in the United States, but that is a different story.

 

I love capitalism. Only the strong survive is a great way of looking at things in my opinion. All of the open source software is doing one thing and one thing only in my eyes. That is driving Microsoft and Apple to enhance their software and end products. Competition is the root of all evolution. It creates fierce competition and an overall better end product for the consumer. Whether it is an Apple, Microsoft, or even a BSD (or linux) based system such as Solaris or SUSE.

[Alessandro17]

I love capitalism. Only the strong survive is a great way of looking at things in my opinion.

 

We Europeans have become aware that capitalism is responsible for very evil things. I don't mean small or medium business.

My favorite model is socialdemocracy: it is still capitalism, but the State (should) control that the economy isn't solely in the hands of huge multinationals and the banks, and should take care of its weaker citizens.

With this kind of capitalism we have now, only a handful of people in the world are likely to benefit, certainly not you and me.

[Rockviech]

its not that i dont like the thought behind oss, but i hate how they realize their projekt and that whole gnu stuff. only projects like gnome, kde and the linux kernel itself have a hirarchy in the development, everyone can write stuff and patches for it, but the release itself is in the hand of linus torvald.

 

thats what i said, is missing the whole community and developers of gnu/linux. the problem we all have now are the dependencies, which are in some cases nearly never ending.

 

why isnt there a hirarchy for the whole basesystem of gnu/linux? thats what iĺl never understand. because of the case that everyone can fix and release again software, there are so many version out there of one type of library, which nearly doesnt differ from the original.

 

but you cant deny that most of the software for windows, which is also opensource or free as beer is in most case better than for gnu/linux. thats what i meant with most oss software is {censored} , compared to other free stuff out there.

i can only think that thats because of the always changing base where you develop your applications on.

 

it would be awsome of all the poeple who put so much afford into osx86 had put its afford into a newly linux/gnu system. chaning the unix dir tree, creating a good basesystem(maybe developing a framework basing on gtk or qt would be enough), an installing system (not that 10mb local and 200mb dependancies via web installing).

damn linux would rock this way well atleast im doing some of these parts currently.

 

 

And what about OSS on servers? Is that {censored} as well?

im only at the point of view of a desktop enduser, so i cant say anything about that.

[CLiDE FTW!!1]

However you wrote "we have yet to see a free open-source OS (or distro) that is worthy to replace Windows as a desktop OS on a mainstream level."

I have been using SUSE as my main desktop OS since 9.0 (2003), and at the time I already believed that SUSE was better than XP.

I know people who have been using a Linux distro as their main/sole OS since much earlier than 2003.

There's alot of flaws in the OSS OS world that make closed-source OS's more appealing... I think we're all intelligible enough here to come to our own conclusions on this. It all derives on what you mean by "better", and while the whole aspect of OSS is, in theory, better than CSS, the reality is quite different.

[Alessandro17]

There's alot of flaws in the OSS OS world that make closed-source OS's more appealing... I think we're all intelligible enough here to come to our own conclusions on this. It all derives on what you mean by "better", and while the whole aspect of OSS is, in theory, better than CSS, the reality is quite different.

 

As you rightly say, it is a matter of how you perceive it. For me, Windows is a nightmare from too many points of view: activation (it seems that it pays better to use a pirated copy than a legal one), crashes, instability...

Underneath the surface, it is a total mess, a huge melting pot: the Registry, the DLL Hell...

You can't cleanly uninstall an application, and I have lost count of how many times installing/uninstalling software has crashed the OS (last time only 2 days ago).

OTOH, contrary to what has been said here, I find Linux (depending on the distribution) a very coherent and stable lot.

It is extremely rare that a problem in Linux crashes the OS beyond recovery.

[ifrit05]

That's not freedom, that's communism.

Oh no you didn't! DONT EVEN COMPARE OPEN SOURCE/FREE SOFTWARE TO COMMUNISM! Com. FORCES you to share or you'll get thrown in jail!!!! The GPL does NOT make you share or distribute your software for free!!!!! Get over yourself! I'm a fellow OS maker, and I resent that!!!! (Im still working on my base system, made from linux)

 

We Europeans have become aware that capitalism is responsible for very evil things.

Even though I'm American, i believe you all the way, lol!

 

As you rightly say, it is a matter of how you perceive it. For me, Windows is a nightmare from too many points of view...

True, true!

 

I didn't mean for this to get out of hand this way.... sorry. i just thought the letter was interesting!

[SticMAC™]

Hey is still a better discussion than this {censored}!!

 

http://forum.insanelymac.com/index.php?s=&...st&p=744559

 

nobody knows where this phsyco get all his info from!?

 

StiCMAN

 

Oh no you didn't! DONT EVEN COMPARE OPEN SOURCE/FREE SOFTWARE TO COMMUNISM! Com. FORCES you to share or you'll get thrown in jail!!!! The GPL does NOT make you share or distribute your software for free!!!!! Get over yourself! I'm a fellow OS maker, and I resent that!!!! (Im still working on my base system, made from linux)

 

 

Even though I'm American, i believe you all the way, lol!

 

True, true!

 

I didn't mean for this to get out of hand this way.... sorry. i just thought the letter was interesting!

[Azurael]

Linus has never said anything like that, he is a pragmatist. And most definitely he isn't Mr. Self Important, he is very down to earth.

 

What, Mr. 'I made the Linux kernel and all other systems are utterly rubbish'?

 

Yep. OK, you've never read any of his famous Usenet posts, have you?

[pebcak]

I have yet to see a closed source application/a closed source os that runs native on at least 17 architectures.

[mifki]

i have yet to care about the other 16 architectures. How about you?

[pebcak]

i have yet to care about the other 16 architectures. How about you?

 

5 different architectures at home. What about your router or switch?

 

I think you have no clue about advantages and disadvantages of OSS or of UNIX, when I read the suggestion to change the UNIX dir tree I want to puke... changing to what? The crippled non-standard tree of OS X? No, thanks.

 

I also think all the bashing of OSS is funny, microsoft users wouldn't be in the net without OSS (freebsd tcp/ip stack anyone?). All the servers delivered with Mac OS X are OSS-projects. Strange my worthless free OS is able to read&write almost each and every filesystem, what about yours? There are so many points where your closed source software/os is ages behind... stop bashing OSS when you get so much out of it without even knowing.