Descentforum.DE Forum Index Descentforum.DE
Search | FAQ | Memberlist | Usergroups | Newsfeed Newsfeed  Register
Profile | Log in to check your private messages | Log in 
Chat | D3-Tactics | Downloads | Map | Links | Serverlist | Teamspeak 

Closed Source vs. Open Source bei Spielen
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Descentforum.DE Forum Index -> Pilotenbar - MessHall - Meckerkasten
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
The Lion
Forum-Nutzer


Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 55
Location: The Netherlands

PostPosted: 22.03.2008, 15:32    Post subject: Reply with quote

zico wrote:
So if *I* do a Closed Source program because I do not want someone to "steal" what I am so happy about and makes it look as his/her own work - is that also "evil"?

Is that Microsoft evil because I want to prtect my own work and force you to something like Microsoft does when we make theories about forcing someone to do something?

No, but it's a selfish reason. ("Evil" is unclearly defined. We could keep
arguing about it forever. The same holds for the meaning of "normal".)
Which means we can use it only when we look at it from your point of
view.

Adobe (I'll stop using Microsoft as an example because it just leads to
more confusion) wants to make more money (selfish, but not a problem
in and of itself). Adobe chooses to do this by releasing e.g. Photoshop
while denying others the rights to modify and redistribute it (destructive,
as the manifesto calls it). How is that not a problem? Sure, Adobe has a
very good reason to do it anyway, but it applies only from their own
point of view.

Then there are the freeware authors that simply don't know about free
software / open source and haven't thought of a reason to distribute
source because it's not as obvious; people don't need the source to just
use the software. Also, most other programs they know of also come in
binary-only form, so they pick up on the habit. This covers the ignorant
portion of proprietary software authors.

You seem to be arguing that there's a third group, but haven't given me
any example yet, thereby merely feeding my "ignorance". Or are you
really asserting that denying people the rights to modify and redistribute
(or even just use it, in case they don't agree with the terms*) is not a
problem for those people? I'm pretty sure that assertion won't last long
if we put it to trial/discussion.

* They're usually contracts you `sign' by clicking "I agree". There's a lot
of controversy about this and whether they are even valid. The GNU
GPL is just a copyright license; it merely states the conditions for being
allowed to copy and redistribute it (possibly modified). You don't have to
accept them if you just use the software covered by it.

Zorc: don't worry, this isn't going out of control. We know better than to
start flaming each other.

_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zorc
Forum-Nutzer


Joined: 05 Jul 2001
Posts: 961
Location: Ratzeburg

PostPosted: 22.03.2008, 15:38    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sehr glücklich
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
zico
Rebirther


Joined: 23 Nov 2005
Posts: 452
Location: Ebersbach

PostPosted: 22.03.2008, 16:59    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
No, but it's a selfish reason. ("Evil" is unclearly defined. We could keep
arguing about it forever.

And that's simply the point. Probably it's selfish but it's my decision and as long as ppl respect it I'm fine. Also I would like to be respected if I *use* such kind of software. Nothing more I demand here.

Quote:
Which means we can use it only when we look at it from your point of
view.


That's what I try to do almost all the time: seeing things from a different point of view. I think it would be selfish as well seeing things only from my own point, right?
Probably it looks like I want to defend Closed Sourc esoftware, but that's not the case. If that discussion would go the other way, I would also defend the "open side". I do not want to make clear what's right or wrong.

Quote:
Adobe has a
very good reason to do it anyway, but it applies only from their own
point of view.

Same as above. Even their point of view should be considered as well.

Taking my own freedom just by using such software is just no argument for me since I still have a free will to use or not to use it.
My girlfriend uses Closed Source OS and some ClosedSource programs as well but she also uses GIMP for her images and OpenOffice for her daily work. And that's the way how it should work in my opinion. So... she's now.. partially free?

Quote:

Then there are the freeware authors that simply don't know about free
software / open source and haven't thought of a reason to distribute
source because it's not as obvious; people don't need the source to just
use the software. Also, most other programs they know of also come in
binary-only form, so they pick up on the habit. This covers the ignorant
portion of proprietary software authors.


I fully understand that. I am also not fully happy with a Closed Source D3 - you KNOW my problems there, right? I am also not happy with a Closed Source graphics driver. Bute here it's my decision. I don't blame NVidia for making Closed Source Drivers and I cannot blame anyone for not providing free drivers with the Hardware which work as good as this NVidia card I have. But it's still my choice to use it or not. Probably I am just too pragmatic and I just use it until I get a better alternative... but still I do not feel forced in any way. In general I would not even know who to blame - Corp. XXX for only providing Closed Sorftware or Crop. YYY for not providing an alternative...

Quote:

You seem to be arguing that there's a third group, but haven't given me
any example yet, thereby merely feeding my "ignorance". Or are you
really asserting that denying people the rights to modify and redistribute
(or even just use it, in case they don't agree with the terms*) is not a
problem for those people? I'm pretty sure that assertion won't last long
if we put it to trial/discussion.


I do not want to give examples by intention since I feel examples are overused to explain things in general. However I respect ppl. making and using non-free software as well as I respect ppl. doing and using the contrary. As I said - it's still up to the *users* of agreeing the terms and using it. If it would not be in our hands, I would not understand why I am able to use free software if I had no chance to. Okay this was sarcastic ... but I think you know what I mean.

Just my main point is:
I still have the *freedom* to decide if I want to go one way or the other.
And no matter what's written in the GPL manifesto it's just my humble opinion I wish a group calling themselves "free" software foundation would also respect that. For me the name already applies that - not what they have written in their manifesto.
It's just my wish and I even do not claim to be right - just respected in that opinion.

And I think that's all I can still say here since it expresses everything I think about this whole situation. I hope my english wasn't so bad so I am probably misunderstood.


Last edited by zico on 22.03.2008, 17:01; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
King Lo
Forum-Nutzer


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 320
Location: Stuttgart, BW

PostPosted: 24.03.2008, 19:59    Post subject: Reply with quote

@Devil: Also note the problems with the Anti-Cheating tool, which had to be written for D3. The sources are closed, so how to use it with Loki's D3? I do not agree that OpenSource has less safety. Also, Closed Source does not also mean a big boss and money, as you said - look at the tools for D3. Ppl always say Closed Source = Commercial.

@Munk/zico: I see lots of advantages to use commandlines: What sense would a GUI make for such options like "-window"? Also, the user can be much faster, especially choosing and selecting files or calling commands (e.g. the TAB-key). I am not saying that commandline tools are always better... GIMP in a commandline? LOL. Munk sry for my reaction but it is just wrong that commandline is just for automatic use, and users have ALWAYS probs with it. Why do you think many ppl use commandline today? I am using Linux for a long time and discovered the shell - as many Linuxers did. So this was what I meant.

I totally agree to what Lion criticized about Closed Source. I had those problems with D3 tools. Sometimes, you just get problems if there is a (probably good) D3 tool (converter, creator etc.). However, you can only download the binary. And this will probably not run on other systems. Sometimes, you may emulate, but the results are not good (ever used strace for wine?). Sou you can probably not use it, and you cannot look at the sources to write your own proggy for your system. Moreover, bugs cannot be fixed, and you cannot ask the author to fix them. And in THIS POINT my freedom has an end (disagree with zico) - I do not have the freedom to choose a d3 tool from Fischlein or PD. In such cases, cosed source sets your freedom to a minimum. And I'm just asking myself why they did not release the sources - none of those tools are commercial. As it already was said: Closed Source has lots of disadvantages for the user - And I am a user.

Maybe this explains what I said on the beginning of this thread. I did NOT want to offend anyone... I just criticized something about D3 and told you how the future should not be. If ppl have different opionions they should discuss them - why not? You do not have to be enemies then (However, some people started offending me sarcastically because they had another opinion - which was not fair at all).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Marix
Forum-Nutzer


Joined: 30 May 2001
Posts: 1015
Location: Germany

PostPosted: 25.03.2008, 00:27    Post subject: Reply with quote

King Lo wrote:
[...] However, you can only download the binary. And this will probably not run on other systems. [...] Moreover, bugs cannot be fixed, and you cannot ask the author to fix them. And in THIS POINT my freedom has an end (disagree with zico).


So would your freedom better be served if the closed-source program wouldn't exist?

_________________
„Der einzige Weg, die Grenzen des Möglichen zu finden, ist ein klein wenig über diese hinaus in das Unmögliche vorzustoßen.“
--Arthur C. Clarke
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Munk
Forum-Nutzer


Joined: 30 Jun 2001
Posts: 2140
Location: Herzogenrath

PostPosted: 25.03.2008, 14:43    Post subject: Reply with quote

King Lo wrote:
I do not have the freedom to choose a d3 tool from Fischlein or PD. In such cases, cosed source sets your freedom to a minimum.


You always have the freedom of:

write your OWN tools.


Just because you may not be able to do it yourself, you cannot force others to share THEIR work with you.


Last edited by Munk on 25.03.2008, 14:45; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Floyd
Forum-Orakel


Joined: 20 Mar 2001
Posts: 2912
Location: Dresden, Germany

PostPosted: 25.03.2008, 21:28    Post subject: Reply with quote

King Lo wrote:
... and you cannot look at the sources to write your own proggy for your system.

selbst wenn du die quellen hättest, würdest du die nicht verwenden, weil
King_Lo im Chat wrote:
[20:15.46] DIIIA-King_Lo: floyd this code is crap

außerdem hast du alle notwendigen quellen: das sdk und d3edit. ach ja, ich vergaß:
King_Lo im Chat wrote:
[20:15.46] DIIIA-King_Lo: floyd this code is crap
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Do_Checkor
Administrator


Joined: 19 Nov 2000
Posts: 7768
Location: Oldenburg (Oldb.)

PostPosted: 25.03.2008, 22:31    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am not participating at this topic anymore but as this seems to be some of these never ending discussions (I don't want to interrupt) it IS kind of bad practise to have in the Test+Feedback Forum so this should be the last move now... Cheers...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Floyd
Forum-Orakel


Joined: 20 Mar 2001
Posts: 2912
Location: Dresden, Germany

PostPosted: 25.03.2008, 22:41    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dark wrote:
ich finds immer wieder GEIL...
EIN englischer post und ALLE labern nur noch fremdsprachig - LOL

^2, zumal Lion auch deutsch lesen kann.
abtrennen ist schwierig, da dadurch die diskussion zerpflückt wird.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Lion
Forum-Nutzer


Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 55
Location: The Netherlands

PostPosted: 26.03.2008, 01:25    Post subject: Reply with quote

Never ending?

If you mean the `zico vs me' discussion - that one's resolved as far as I'm
concerned. The underlying issue was a difference in opinion about what
intrinsic rights someone has to his/her own creations. Zico says the author
(or copyright holder) of a program should be allowed to say what people
can and can't do with the program. I say the rest of the world should not be
forced to make sacrifices that would benefit only the author/copyright holder,
even if they do want to use the program.

No one, even in a "free world" as GNU puts it, is forcing you to just keep the
whole thing to yourself. If you don't like the rules, that's what you should do.
I think our rules are messed up, although I'm glad the copyright system still
supports copyleft licenses such as the GNU GPL.

As for the rest of the thread... well, I try to stay out of it, too. It appears to
be just a bunch of misunderstandings and different opinions. I do think
people should understand the issue, but I'm not going to try and force
everyone to learn more about this; they have to be willing to do so.

If your opinion is different, there's nothing for me to say about it as long as
you've done your research so as to avoid any misunderstandings that would
affect it. Zico has done his research. If you want to learn more about it, I'll
be glad to help.

(Just to be clear, this post is not specifically directed at Checkor. Winken)

_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Descentforum.DE Forum Index -> Pilotenbar - MessHall - Meckerkasten All times are GMT + 2 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
PayPal


Descent is a trademark of Interplay Productions.
Descent, Descent II are © Parallax Software Corporation.
Descent III is © Outrage Entertainment.
Descentforum.DE and Descentforum.NET is © by Martin "Do_Checkor" Timmermann.
Powered by phpBB © 2001-2008 phpBB Group