Penguin or the Egg (Pt 2)
WE DON’T YET LIVE IN A WORLD where we can ditch proprietary software and still have the same level of functionality with free software, but that world is possible. This year marks the 30th anniversary of the Free Software Foundation, the organization that
GNU brought us most of what we now consider the core tools (like the GNU C Compiler) in GNU/ Linux. For that, every GNU/Linux user should be grateful. As Richard Stallman would say, Linux is just a kernel; GNU is the OS. And lucky us, the programs and utilities that comprise GNU are free.
Last month, I wrote about how proprietary software is needed in GNU/Linux, for the time being. It offers a usable experience to those who need features unavailable through free or open-source channels. That’s not all bad, either. The vast majority of games are proprietary and are likely to stay that way. Games, like films, don’t easily lend themselves to an open-source or free software model. Games are artistic storytelling media, not utilitarian tools.
I also talked about how bringing proprietary software (besides games) to GNU/Linux could draw more users to the OS. I can still hear Richard Stallman’s howls of rage (I hope my uses of “GNU/ Linux” satiates the beast). But we won’t need as many proprietary solutions if there are more free software solutions that meet users’ needs. Free software too often falls short, or has the perception of falling short. But here’s the thing: The onus falls on us, the community, to create a better experience.
Software costs money to develop. Hardware and server costs are hefty burdens. We can grow Linux as users by donating a few bucks.
Corporate sponsors back many free software projects with money, or by hiring staff who contribute code. Those firms realize the value of free software in day-to-day operations. However, not all projects are so lucky.
Companies back projects that further their own bottom line, which results in a disparity between desktop applications and server applications. Just look at the number of corporate sponsors for the Apache Foundation. When you look at the patrons for the GNOME and KDE projects, corporate names are far fewer in number.
Lest someone think the free software community is made up of hippie commie pinkos looking for handouts, there is money to be made. There’s nothing in the GNU General Public License that says you can’t sell programs. It simply stipulates that the source code must be made available. Companies like Automattic (WordPress) and Red Hat (Fedora) have built successful businesses by selling or offering support plans for free software.
If you don’t have dollars to spare, there are other ways to contribute. If you know how to write code, consider squashing a bug or two. There are also plenty of projects—like gnuTaxes—that need developers to pick up where the original creator left off.
If you’re a writer, create some documentation or write a how-to. Graphic designers can contribute artwork. Even helping someone out on a forum, IRC channel, or social media goes a long way. Investment, in time or money, will make free software grow. Just as democracy is best realized when citizens participate, the opensource community requires the contributions of users. That’s the spirit of free software: software for the people, by the people.
People will flock to freedom when they see it prosper, but will hesitate if it means a rough trail of usability and lack of features. Once we pave the roads, others will follow. Freedom is hard work, but we can do it.
Lest someone think the free software community is made up of hippie commie pinkos looking for handouts, there is money to be made.