1. 38
  1. 6

    I’m surprised at how few workplaces even allow/support Linux desktops for developers, much less encourage them. I’ve been lucky I’ve gotten to use Linux desktops at work since ~2012.

    1. 5

      Yeah. Everything moving to the cloud means that more stuff is controlled by fewer people.

      I wonder if Linux being ‘containerized’ kind of side-stepped the power that it had? Windows 10 is going to ship with a whole Linux kernel inside of it. So as a developer who just wants to Get Stuff Done, why would I even bother with Free Software?

      1. 4

        I like the message of hope. Keep using open platforms, contributing to them and pushing for them. We can still win because we’ve proven ourselves more convenient, we just need manpower and funding.

        1. 2

          Maybe a good candidate for the culture tag, and the ellision of the trailing | Linux Journal.

          1. 2

            We collaborate inside proprietary environments, such as Slack and Google Hangouts

            FLOSS development has, historically, not existed within a completely FLOSS ecosystem. Even linux, the article’s cornerstone of FLOSS, was hosted on the proprietary BitKeeper scm for much of its early development.

            Don’t get me wrong – it’s important to have open source competitors or equivalents for our tools – but purity is a sometimes counterproductive thing to strive for. “The use of nonfree tools sends an unacceptable message” would have prevented FLOSS from happening in the first place.

            1. 2

              Even linux, the article’s cornerstone of FLOSS, was hosted on the proprietary BitKeeper scm for much of its early development.

              Nitpicking the timeline a bit: Linux has existed since 1991, and the bitkeeper phase was 2002-2005. Seems like a relatively short time.

              1. 2

                True, but prior to that there was no source control system – it was tarballs and patch files. That became untenable, and there weren’t any good candidates for FLOSS scms for their use cases, so BitKeeper ended up being the first scm used by the project.

                At least, that’s my recollection, please correct me if I’m misremembering.

            2. 1

              The situation is exactly what the licensing is setup to allow. Give it away for free in form easy to modify, weaken licenses to allow corporate loopholes for ignoring responsibilities, and light enforcement of violations if any. You don’t see this as much with proprietary software since the licensing forces giving something in return with strong enforcement of violations. So, they keep giving selfish, closed-source-loving companies permission to freeload on them and build walled gardens. And then complaining that they need to voluntarily stop doing all that. They should stop complaining or try a different model like License Zero is doing.

              Now, far as using open solutions vs Slack etc, they should encourage that. More important, people should learn how to market the open solutions, start building more open solutions with high usability (i.e. competitive with proprietary), and selling them to further support this movement. An example is Mattermost which built an open alternative to Slack with kind of features folks were wanting. Others do Open Core where there’s extra features for enterprises, like Active Directory integration, that most users wouldn’t need. Finally, they can start dual licensing components proprietary vendors would be interested in with the strongest, copyright license to encourage them to buy a proprietary license. Genode is doing that.

              Folks gotta go make things happen. Develop products people like with open code or components. Iterate. Beat them in market. That makes money to hire documentation writers and organize developer conferences, too.