[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: hplip: hp-toolbox advertising?



On 3/28/07, Alfredo Ferrari <list pceet030 cern ch> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Simo Sorce wrote:

>
> Bernard,
> I can't agree more with what you said, this discussion is silly, it
> start reminding me some of the more brain-damaged discussions on Debian
> lists. I hope it is an isolate incident, and is not becoming the norm or
> next we will declare that Trademarks, documentation, and just everything
> in the world is software and any license but the GPL is bad.
>
> Don't get me wrong, I love the GPL, it is the license I use for my
> software, but _software_ is the key here. Names, logos, documentation
> are a different matter. Please let's not get stupid and let's recognize
> things from what they are.
>
> Trademarks, are not good or bad by themselves, it is the use you do of
> them that can be good or bad. HP's trademark/logo in hp-toolbox is on
> the side of the "good" way much more than what is the Mozilla's Firefox
> trademark/logo.
>
> On Tue, 2007-03-27 at 19:04 -0600, Bernard Johnson wrote:
>> All the "free software zealots" say to vote with your pocketbook.  I
>> did.  I bought a $1000 SOHO printer BECAUSE THEY HAD LINUX SUPPORT.  And
>> not just a blob, real GPL software.  Now I hear total bogus arguments
>> like "it's advertising" [but don't look at these other things that are
>> advertising as well that we will let slide] or "yeah, it's free but it's
>> not good enough"[2][3].
>
> HP People didn't attach any string to the use of that logo for that
> software, so any discussion about removing it, is just plain silly, IMO.
>
> We are beyond "free software zealots" we reached the point of "berserk
> kamikaze zealots" if we actually go down this road.
>
>> This is exactly the attitude that will cause Linux to not get any
>> support by vendors.
>
> Wise words. We need more software not less, there is still a *LOT* of
> software niches that have no sort of free software of any kind, and
> pretty big ones.
>
> And people here waste time arguing by a trademarked logo in a GPL
> package that comes with no sort of requirements? Are you insane? Or
> what?
>
>> The fact of the matter is that it takes vendor support to make
>> Fedora/RedHat anything other than a toy operating system for many uses.
>>  At many junctures, we have to make conscious trade offs between
>> idealogical beliefs and functionality.  That trade off may be a little
>> recognition of the hard work that someone / some company put into the
>> software, and I say that's great, give it to them.
>
> If only this little "advertising" could be used to make more companies
> write and distribute GPL software I would ask for MORE of this kind
> advertising, that would be just great.
>
> On the software quality I would really avoid commenting, we have such
> crap in free software that complaining about the quality of *useful*
> *free software* is beyond my comprehension. When the people that don't
> like it, will rewrite and support a better piece of software to cover
> the same functionality, then they will be entitled to speak about
> removing others software.
>
> Please, I beg you try to use your head and think:
>
> a) what is the right thing to do to help users (NOW, not "in 10 years
> maybe") with *free software*
> b) what is the right thing to do to spread more *free software*
> c) what is the right way to get more vendors to help us with *free
> software*
> d) what is the right thing to do to avoid waisting time and produce more
> *free software*
>
> To me the answers are pretty clear wrt this case.
>
> Simo.
>
>

I can't agree more with Bernard and Simo. Rampant masochism is the real
enemy of free software.

               Alfredo

BTW I bought a multifunction HP printer/scanner/fax etc JUST BECAUSE
     it was fully and freely supported in Linux...


Me too, I had no idea there was such apparent hatred of the solution.

--
Fedora Core 6 and proud


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]