[GRASS5] Terminology: Free Software
bernhard at intevation.de
Wed, 10 Oct 2001 11:45:42 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Realising that I have started the debate,
I also think that was necessary to bring the issue up.
Hopefully we can keep it at a low temperature.
On Tue, Oct 09, 2001 at 10:28:56AM -0600, Roger Miller wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> Like Helena, I prefer to continue calling it Open Source software. =20
Let me add that we should not invent other terms or try to introduce them.
It has been done a couple of times and the result was:
You had to explain much more and other possible missunderstandings
> If you
> don't want to repeat some part of an older debate, then you might want to
> stop reading now.
There are also some missunderstandings=20
which I feel the need to address.
> My main problem is that "free" software isn't free, and can -- at least in
> the short run -- be more expensive than commercial software. I find that
> its far easier to explain what "open source" means then it is to explain
> the high cost of "free" software.
You understand that "free" in Free Software relates to Freedom.
If you are talking something like "Total cost of ownership"
it is of course a long debate.
For some pointers to study results:
Section: Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Weitere Infos: siehe http://www.gnupg.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----