To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
Languages
Recent
Show all languages
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

Alternative terms for free software

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Alternative terms for free software, such as open source, FOSS, and FLOSS, have been a controversial issue among free and open-source software users from the late 1990s onwards.[1] These terms share almost identical licence criteria and development practices.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    Views:
    441 795
    4 031
    314 675
    45 538
    361 013
  • ✪ The 10 Best Note-Taking Apps in 2019
  • ✪ RawTherapee 5.6 - A Free Lightroom Alternative That's Hard to Beat with ANY Paid Software
  • ✪ The 3 Best Task Management Apps in 2019
  • ✪ Top 5 Free Keyword Research Tools
  • ✪ Teaching Math Without Words, A Visual Approach to Learning Math

Transcription

- Hey, what's going on guys? So it has come to one of those fairly infrequent points in my life where I start to reevaluate some of the tools that I'm using to get my work done. And this time around my critical eye has fallen on the apps that hold my thoughts and machinations. I like that word, it's a good word, machinations. Anyway, yes, it is time to talk about note taking apps because after about a full week of let's be honest here far more research than I should have done for this topic. I am now ready to present to you my top 10 note-taking apps in 2019. Now before we dive in I do want to talk a little bit about my criteria for this list. First, the apps on this list primarily use text as their input method because I can type a lot faster than I can write and I want to be able to type and get data out at the speed at which I think. So while we're gonna talk about apps like Evernote and OneNote which can support drawing to an extent, we're not gonna focus on apps that primarily use hand writing as their method of input like Noteshelf 2 for the iPad. Plus a lot of those apps have integrations with Evernote anyway. Secondly, every app I'm gonna talk about here has some form of cross platform availability. Not every app on the list is available on every platform but nothing on this list is available on only one OS. And finally criteria number three which I find to be the most important criteria, I don't think an app is the note-taking app unless it combines its note-taking or editor area with its UI for browsing files or notes. I think this is crucial for note-taking app, because I'm constantly referencing different notes, searching for things, and I want to have all that available in one window. So that means apps like Google Docs and Microsoft Word, Dropbox Paper are all not going to make the cut here. Though I do have to admit the Dropbox Paper in particular has probably the best writing experience in writing app that I've ever tried. Though we do have one app on this list that does come very close to that level of greatness. So stay tuned for that app. Before we get to that one though, we do have to go to the other entries on my list. And where better to start than with Evernote. Yes, Evernote. The granddaddy of syncing note-taking apps. I've been using Evernote for darn near nine years at this point and I have to admit that it's a very powerful tool that I basically can't get myself to break away from. Its got a pretty capable rich text editor, the ability to share notebooks with other people. It's got tags, the ability to save searches and a ton of different integrations with other apps. It also features optical character recognition which means that you can scan in images with text and it can make that text searchable and you can also annotate images in the app as well. But for all its strengths, Evernote frustrates me, and that's primarily because you cannot create nested hierarchies of notebooks. You can do notebooks and you can notebook stacks, but that's it. Now some people out there, like the writer Michael Hyatt for example, advocate using a tag based structure to gain that hierarchy instead. But that doesn't really work because on the Evernote mobile apps those tags are not going to show in their hierarchy, they're all alphabetical, so it kind of breaks down. Still, Evernote is incredibly powerful, it's available on basically every platform. And because of those reasons I am continuing to use it at least for certain parts my work flow, even though I have many other options in 2019. Speaking of other options, let's now talk about OneNote. Microsoft OneNote is probably the closest competitor to Evernote in terms of features as you're gonna find similar image support, optical character recognition, the ability to annotate images and honestly the editor area is a lot more flexible and customizable than Evernote is. Additionally, Microsoft OneNote is free, like actually free. The only way you'd ever pay for Microsoft OneNote if you decided to upgrade your OneDrive storage as that's the only way the ever charge you money, they just use OneDrive for their storage. That being said, I personally just can't get into OneNote. I know a lot of people out there love it, it's incredibly powerful which is why it's on my list, but it doesn't work for me because you cannot sort notes within your notebooks by date modified, date created or alphabetically. You can only drag them around like they're actual note cards or pages in a notebook. And that combined with limited tagging capabilities and the same number of organizational levels of hierarchy as you get in Evernote, you don't get more, it makes OneNote kind of a no go for me personally. That brings us over to Bear, which is an absolutely beautiful app that I wish that I could use as a daily driver in my work flow. But Bear is a Mac and iOS exclusive and that's kind of a bummer because I also use Windows on a daily basis alongside my Mac and iPhone. That being said, if you are a Mac and iPhone only kind of person, Bear is definitely worth your consideration. This is primarily because unlike Evernote and OneNote, Bear has a beautiful hybrid markdown editor. And if you're not familiar with markdown, it's a markup language that allows you to format your text as you type by putting different symbols around your text. So for example, you can put two stars around a word to bold that word. Now a lot of markdown editors force you to write in plain text and then you can only preview your formatted text. But Bear doesn't do that, it actually format your text as you write which I really really like. Additionally, Bear also has a pretty interesting organizational system that does let you create as many levels of hierarchy as you like and they use tags to achieve this. By typing hash tags in your document and then using slashes to create additional tags beyond it you can create your own organizational structure. Now some people don't like having tags right in the editor window like that but some people might not mind that. And I also have to give a shout out to their archive feature which lets you archive notes and take them out of search and your organizational hierarchy but not delete them. Of course if you are an Apple exclusive kind of person then we do have to consider Apple's own notes program. Mainly because it's free and unlike Bear, if you happen to not have access to an Apple computer at some point or you're a part-time Windows guy like me, you can at least access your notes at icloud.com. Now though Apple Notes doesn't have the awesome hyper markdown capabilities of Bear or some other apps we're gonna talk about, it does have really nice formatting tools. And to my eyes, the default formatting looks better than it does on Evernote. Additionally, yep, you guessed it, you can indeed create your own nested list of hierarchical folders and I love that feature. Moving on to the next item on our list, we are now at Google Keep which is a pretty nice and simple note-taking app that's available in the browser and also on pretty much all of your devices as well. Now when I was testing Google Keep the number one word that kept coming up to my mind was simplicity, it's a very simple note-taking app. Very simple but effective formatting options and you can even change the background color of your notes to visually distinguish them. The problem for me though is there's only one level of tags that you can create, you cannot create a hierarchical level of basically anything, so there's no hierarchical organization. So I guess if you're gonna use Google Keep as a note-taking app, you're gonna want to rely mostly on their search function. And I guess with it being Google, that search function is probably pretty good. But that being said, since it lacks true organizational hierarchy, I don't see this as a viable alternative to Evernote or OneNote or anything more complex. But if you want a scratch pad for taking notes and setting reminders for later, Google Keep could be a good bet. That brings us over to Notion. And I know a lot of you guys were waiting for me to talk about Notion. It's definitely the app that I get the most questions about these days and for good reason, because notion is stupidly powerful. It's definitely the most flexible tool on this list, allowing you to layout pages however you want, create an infinite hierarchy organization on the sidebar and even interlink between pages easily. It's also got a great hybrid markdown editor that's very similar to the one you're gonna find in Bear, though it does have some quirks that keep me from really loving it, such as the fact that you cannot precisely select text if it goes outside a single block of information. But my gripes about the editor aside, Notion can do things that no other app can do, that's mainly because the combination of a couple of different features. First, their table feature is actually a database feature, so every row in a table actually links to its own page And secondly, they've got a templating feature that allows you to make basically anything into a template. And I have combined these two features to build Notion out into an incredibly powerful video management platform that has made our editing process so much smoother. So in one area of the app I've got a database with all of our videos who's sponsoring them, their publish dates, all kinds of good information like that. But if you click into any video you'll see there's a very well laid out template that allows for us to create a B-Roll database, a script and also has some checklists that are automatically populated every single time you do a video. So for very complicated processes like going through the publishing process, we can just go to that automatically generate a checklist and make sure nothing gets left behind. Now like I said, I get a lot of questions about Notion over on Twitter and on Instagram. So if you guys want to see a more detailed Notion video on this channel, definitely let me know in the comments down below. Right now the verdict is out on if it's a great note-taking app, but it's definitely a great organizational app in general and it's, again, very flexible. All right, let's talk about Standard Notes. Now Standard Notes as far as I can tell, I could be wrong, but I think Standard Notes is the only app on my list that is developed by one single developer. Given that fact, I've got to say that I'm pretty impressed with everything the developer has been able to accomplish with this app. For one it is easily the most security focused app on list as everything you write is encrypted by default and only you can access it. Now you'll immediately notice that the free version of Standard Notes is just a plain text editor. There is a note browsing window but you can't write markdown, there's no rich text editing, it's just plain text. But upgrade to their extended version and you get a whole bunch of extensions that you can optionally turn on or off. There are several different editors to choose from, including multiple markdown editors, a rich text editor and even a code editor. And this is really cool, you can choose which editor you want to use on a note by note basis. You can create custom folders with your tags and these are infinitely nestable and you can even define custom searches based on those tags or even other information and then save those searches within the app. Standard Notes is not perfect though. For one, the image support is kind of lacking right now as you have to host your images elsewhere to have them displayed within the app. And you also cannot drag and drop notes between different folders or tags. Still, I've got to say that I am pretty impressed with what the developer accomplished so far. Now we are on to, me taking a break and playing with this puzzle because, well, there's a lot of items on this list. Alright, enough of that, let's talk about Slite. Slite is by design a very team focused note-taking app that could also work pretty well for a solo note-taker. It's got an absolutely fantastic hybrid markdown editor that I found pretty similar to the one in Dropbox Paper which allows you to format your text on-the-fly and also embed images and videos and even tables. I'm also a big fan of their table of contents view which lets you quickly zoom to different headings within your note. And this is something you'll find in Google Docs and Dropbox Paper and it's something we even built into the articles in the latest version of College Info Geek but it's very rare to find in a note-taking app, so props to Slite for including it. Now Slite also allows you to create a nested hierarchy of notes within the app so you can organize things. Though the way they implement it is kind of weird because one side you've got channels and then within the middle part of the app that's where you can create these collections which are infinitely nestful. The only problem is that you can only sort by a recency on a channel level. So their sorting options are a little less powerful than other apps can offer you. Now much like Notions, Slite is built primarily for teams, so you can collaboratively edit a document with somebody in real time. There's also this great comment section that puts comments in a nice little window to the side of your editor, I really like that. Slite is also available on mobile apps and on the web and basically every platform out there. So at least from a design perspective it seems to be one of the best note-taking apps that I could actually find when doing the research for this video. My main gripe with it right now, at least right now is the experience of using it. Because it can be slow at times and I've also run to some bugs where a text actually isn't formatted after I've put the formatting tags around it. That being said, Slite is a pretty new company and I do have to admit that when I tested a few months ago it was much slower than it is now, so they're making big improvements and I'm gonna be keeping an eye on the team's progress going forward. But that is talk about the future and we are living in the present. And at present, in my opinion the note-taking app with the best organizational structure of them all is our ninth app on the list, Ulysses. Now Ulysses is often billed as an app for serious novelists and writers but I think it can also work really well as a note-taking app. And that's because primarily it has that amazing organizational system that I just alluded to. Not only can you create a nested hierarchy of as many folders as you want, but when you go into a top-level folder you're able to see the notes within subfolders along with notes in that top-level folder as well and I love that. Additionally, you can define sorting options for every single folder in the app. You can create custom searches, you can do tags, there's an archive view, there's an inbox view, there's a favorites view, there's recency views. Ulysses basically has it all and I absolutely love it. The biggest bummer is, just like Bear it's only on Mac and iOS platforms. So I can't use it unless I want to just totally give up my Windows PC as a writing device. So that leads us to this question. What does a guy who uses a Windows computer and a Mac computer on a daily basis and who really wants a great writing experience to do? Well in my case, the answer is to use the last app on our list which is Typora. Typora is a desktop writing app that has the best writing experience I've ever had next to Dropbox Paper. It's got that hybrid markdown writing system that automatically formats your writing as you type, it's much faster than Slite. And unlike Bear, again it's on Windows along with Mac and even Linux. It's also full of features for serious writers like a focus mode that dims the text that you're not currently working on. A table of contents mode for zooming between your outline headings just like in Slite, and themes, lots and lots of themes which you can customize with CSS if you want. However there are some caveats. Like I said, Typora is a desktop writing app. There is no mobile app right now which is kind of a bummer. The other thing is that Typora almost didn't make my list because unlike everything else that I've talked about, it doesn't actually store or sync your notes itself, it's purely a markdown editor. The reason still fits my definition of a note-taking app is because of its file browser. Once you've opened up a folder in the app you can easily drill down into all the subfolders and open up as many documents as you want. But again the biggest downside here is the lack of a good mobile app. Now I don't really care too much about this since I'm really only using Typora for serious writing, for like finishing articles or video scripts. But if you really need to access your Typora documents, remember they are just markdown files within your folder system on your computer. So if you're using Dropbox or Google Drive, then you can get a markdown editor for your iPhone or Android that can access those cloud platforms such as iA Writer. So now it's time to come to a verdict. Which app on this list wins? Honestly, it is pretty hard to come to a definitive conclusion on this because everyone has different features they want, different needs, different devices they use, different budgets. So instead of just recommending one app I'm gonna name some winners in a few different categories and then it's up to you to choose. For the actual writing experience, again, the win goes to Typora. Slite is also pretty good, but I'm waiting for it to get a little less buggy and a little more snappy. So I'm gonna be keeping my eye on that and using Typora in the meantime. For note organization, the win goes to Ulysses. Again with infinite nestable folders and tags and custom searches, really nothing else out there beats it, at least in my eyes. For overall capability and my general recommendation, I still have to give the win to Evernote. Yeah, it doesn't have markdown support which I really really want along those nestable folders, but otherwise it's got a ton of capabilities. Though I do have to say that Notion in particular is really nipping at the heels of Evernote in the capability department. And if you care more about those database and templating features, then you might actually think it's more capable. Now I do want to make one last note here. With all these devices and apps and capabilities we have, it can be really easy to overcomplicate things. Because if you're anything like me, having all these capabilities makes it very tempting to try and do too much. And that's why I am once again listening to Greg McKeown's excellent book Essentialism: The Disciplined Pursuit of Less. This was one of my favorite books from 2017 and it's one that, at least for me is worth returning to because it has great advice for figuring out how to narrow down your focuses in life. And honestly this is one of the areas where I tend to struggle the most. Now if you also want to get more focused with your priorities, you wanna start digging into essentialism, then you are in luck, because you can start listening to it for free today on Audible. All you need to do is go over to audible.com/thomas or text Thomas to 500-500 on your phone and you can download that audiobook or any audiobook of your choosing for free and you're also gonna get a free 30-day trial of their service as well. And once you start that trial you are quickly going to find out that Audible is the best place to get audiobooks on the entire internet. They have an unmatched selection of audiobook titles across tons of different genres, including biographies and psychology and sci-fi. And once you download an audiobook it is yours to keep forever regardless of whether or not you cancel, you're always gonna be able to listen to it across all of your devices. So if you want to gain the ability to learn new things wherever you are, whatever you're doing, whether it's going on a long bike ride or cooking or doing chores, then once again go over to audible.com/Thomas or text Thomas to 500-500 on your phone to get that free audiobook download and a free 30-day trial of their service. Big thanks as always to Audible for sponsoring this video and being a supporter of the channel. And as always guys, thank you so much for watching. Hopefully you got a lot of value out of this video. Hopefully you've got something that you can go try out now. And if you enjoyed this video, definitely hit that like button. And subscribe right there as well to get new videos when they come out every single week. You can also click right there to get a free copy of my book on how to earn better grades. Follow me on Instagram @tomfrankly or click right over here or smash your face into your phone screen to get one more video on this channel. Thanks for watching and I'll see you in the next one.

Contents

Terms

Free software

In the 1950s to the 1990s software culture, the "free software" concept combined the nowadays differentiated software classes of public domain software, Freeware, Shareware and FOSS and was created in academia and by hobbyists and hackers.[2]

When the term "free software" was adopted by Richard Stallman in 1983, it was still ambiguously used to describe several kinds of software.[2] In February 1986 Richard Stallman formally defined "free software" with the publication of The Free Software Definition in the FSF's now-discontinued GNU's Bulletin[3] as software which can be used, modified, and redistributed with little or no restriction, his four essential software freedoms.[3] Richard Stallman's Free Software Definition, adopted by the Free Software Foundation (FSF), defines free software as a matter of liberty, not price and is inspired by the previous public domain software ecosystem.[4] The canonical source for the document is in the philosophy section[5] of the GNU Project website, where it is published in many languages.[6]

Open-source software

In 1998 the term "open-source software" (as abbreviation "OSS") was coined as alternative for "free software". There were several reasons for the proposal of a new term.[7] On one hand a group from the free software ecosystem perceived the Free Software Foundation's attitude on propagandizing the "free software" concept as "moralising and confrontational", which was also associated with the term.[8] In addition, the "available at no cost" ambiguity of the word "free" was seen as discouraging business adoption,[9] as also the historical ambiguous usage of the term "free software".[10] In a 1998 strategy session in California, "open-source software" was selected by Todd Anderson, Larry Augustin, Jon Hall, Sam Ockman, Christine Peterson, and Eric S. Raymond.[11] Richard Stallman had not been invited.[12] The session was arranged in reaction to Netscape's January 1998 announcement of a source code release for Navigator (as Mozilla). Those at the meeting described "open source" as a "replacement label" for free software,[13] and the Open Source Initiative was soon-after founded by Eric Raymond and Bruce Perens to promote the term as part of "a marketing program for free software".[14] The Open Source Definition is used by the Open Source Initiative to determine whether a software license qualifies for the organization's insignia for open source software. The definition was based on the Debian Free Software Guidelines, written and adapted primarily by Bruce Perens.[15][16] Perens did not base his writing on the four freedoms of free software from the Free Software Foundation, which were only later available on the web.[17] According to the OSI, Stallman initially flirted with the idea of adopting the open source term.[18]

On the end of 1990s the term "open source" gained much traction in public media[19] and acceptance in software industry in context of the dotcom bubble and the open-source software driven Web 2.0. For instance, Duke University scholar Christopher M. Kelty described the Free Software movement prior to 1998 as fragmented and "the term Open Source, by contrast, sought to encompass them all in one movement".[10] The term "open source" gained brought spread as open source movement which inspired many successor movements like the Open content, Open-source hardware, Open Knowledge movements. Under the impression of the success of "Open source" several journalists reported around 2000 the earlier "Free software" term and movement and its leader Stallman as being "forgotten".[20][21][22] In response, Stallman and his FSF objected to the term "open source software" and fought since then for the term "free software".[23][24] Due to the rejection of the FSF and its leader Richard Stallman of the term open source software, the ecosystem is being divided in its terminology. For example, a 2002 European Union FOSS developer survey revealed that 32.6% of them associate themselves with OSS, 48% with free software, and only 19.4% are undecided or in between.[1] As both terms "free software" and "open-source software" have their fans and critics in the FOSS ecosystems, also unifying terms have been proposed; these include "software libre" (or libre software), "FLOSS" (free/libre and open-source software), and "FOSS" (or F/OSS, free and open-source software).

FOSS and F/OSS

The first known use of the phrase free open-source software (in short FOSS or seldom F/OSS) on Usenet was in a posting on March 18, 1998, just a month after the term open source itself was coined.[25] In February 2002, F/OSS appeared on a Usenet newsgroup dedicated to Amiga computer games.[26] In early 2002, MITRE used the term FOSS in what would later be their 2003 report Use of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) in the U.S. Department of Defense.[citation needed] The European Union's institutions later also used the FOSS term while before using FLOSS,[27] as also scholar in publications.[28]

Software libre

While probably used earlier (as early as the 1990s[29]) "Software libre" got broader public reception when in 2000 the European Commission adopted it.[30] The word "libre", borrowed from the Spanish and French languages, means having liberty. This avoids the freedom-cost ambiguity of the English word "free".

FLOSS

FLOSS was used in 2001 as a project acronym by Rishab Aiyer Ghosh for free/libre and open-source software. Later that year, the European Commission (EC) used the phrase when they funded a study on the topic.[31][32][better source needed]

Unlike "libre software", which aimed to solve the ambiguity problem, "FLOSS" aimed to avoid taking sides in the debate over whether it was better to say "free software" or to say "open-source software".

Proponents of the term point out that parts of the FLOSS acronym can be translated into other languages, for example the "F" representing free (English) or frei (German), and the "L" representing libre (Spanish or French), livre (Portuguese), or libero (Italian), and so on. However, this term is not often used in official, non-English, documents, since the words in these languages for "free as in freedom" do not have the ambiguity problem of English's "free".

By the end of 2004, the FLOSS acronym had been used in official English documents issued by South Africa,[33] Spain,[34] and Brazil.[35] Other scholars and institutions use it too.[36]

Richard Stallman endorses the term FLOSS to refer to "open-source" and "free software" without necessarily choosing between the two camps, however, he asks people to consider supporting the "free/libre software" camp.[37][38] Stallman has suggested that the term "unfettered software" would be an appropriate, non-ambiguous replacement, but that he would not push for it because there was too much momentum and too much effort behind the term "free software".

The term "FLOSS" has come under some criticism for being counterproductive and sounding silly. For instance, Eric Raymond, co-founder of the Open Source Initiative, has stated in 2009:

"Near as I can figure ... people think they'd be making an ideological commitment ... if they pick 'open source' or 'free software'. Well, speaking as the guy who promulgated 'open source' to abolish the colossal marketing blunders that were associated with the term 'free software', I think 'free software' is less bad than 'FLOSS'. Somebody, please, shoot this pitiful acronym through the head and put it out of our misery."[39]

Raymond quotes programmer Rick Moen as stating:

"I continue to find it difficult to take seriously anyone who adopts an excruciatingly bad, haplessly obscure acronym associated with dental hygiene aids" and "neither term can be understood without first understanding both free software and open source, as prerequisite study."

Ownership and attachments

None of these terms, or the term "free software" itself, have been trademarked. Bruce Perens of OSI attempted to register "open source" as a service mark for OSI in the United States of America, but that attempt failed to meet the relevant trademark standards of specificity. OSI claims a trademark on "OSI Certified", and applied for trademark registration, but did not complete the paperwork. The United States Patent and Trademark Office labels it as "abandoned".[40]

While the term "free software" is associated with FSF's definition, and the term "open-source software" is associated with OSI's definition, the other terms have not been claimed by any group in particular. While the FSF's and OSI's definitions are worded quite differently the set of software that they cover is almost identical.[24][41]

All of the terms are used interchangeably, the choice of which to use is mostly political (wanting to support a certain group) or practical (thinking that one term is the clearest).

The primary difference between free software and open source is one of philosophy. According to the Free Software Foundation, "Nearly all open source software is free software. The two terms describe almost the same category of software, but they stand for views based on fundamentally different values."[42]

Licences

The choice of term has little or no impact on which licences are valid or used by the different camps, while recommendations might vary. At least until the release of the GPLv3,[43][44][45] the usage of the GPLv2 united the Open source and free software camp.[46][47] The vast majority of software referred to by all these terms is distributed under a small set of licences, all of which are unambiguously accepted by the various de facto and de jure guardians of each of these terms. The majority of the software is either one of few permissive software licenses (the BSD licenses, the MIT License, and the Apache License) or one of few copyleft licenses (the GNU General Public License v2, GPLv3, the GNU Lesser General Public License, or the Mozilla Public License).[48][49]

The Free Software Foundation (List of FSF approved software licences) and the Open Source Initiative (List of OSI approved software licences) each publish lists of licences that they accept as complying with their definitions of free software and open-source software respectively. The Open Source Initiative considers almost all free software licenses to also be open source and way around. These include the latest versions of the FSF's three main licenses, the GPLv3, the Lesser General Public License (LGPL), and the GNU Affero General Public License (AGPL).[50]

Apart from these two organisations, many more FOSS organizations publish recommendations and comments on licenses and licensing matters. The Debian project is seen by some to provide useful advice on whether particular licences comply with their Debian Free Software Guidelines. Debian does not publish a list of "approved" licences, but its judgments can be tracked by checking what licences are used by software they have allowed into their distribution.[51] In addition, the Fedora Project does provide a list of approved licences (for Fedora) based on approval of the Free Software Foundation (FSF), the Open Source Initiative (OSI), and consultation with Red Hat Legal.[52] It exist also the copyfree movement, the BSDs as also the Apache and Mozilla Foundation with own points of views on licenses.

Public-domain software

There is also a class of software that is covered by the names discussed in this article, but which doesn't have a licence: software for which the source code is in the public domain. The use of such source code, and therefore the executable version, is not restricted by copyright and therefore does not need a free software licence to make it free software. However, not all countries have the same form of "public domain" regime and possibilities of dedicating works and the authors rights in the public domain.

Further, for distributors to be sure that software is released into the public domain, the usually need to see something written to confirm this. Thus even without a licence, a written note about lack of copyright and other exclusive rights often still exists (a waiver or anti-copyright notice), which can be seen as license substitute. There are also mixed forms between waiver and license, for instance the public domain like licenses CC0[53][54] and the Unlicense,[55][56] with an all permissive license as fallback in case of ineffectiveness of the waiver.

Non-English terms in anglophone regions

The free software community in some parts of India sometimes uses the term "Swatantra software" since the term "Swatantra" means free in Sanskrit, which is the ancestor of all Indo-European Languages of India, including Hindi, despite English being the lingua franca.[57] Other terms such as "kattatra menporul (கட்டற்ற_மென்பொருள்)" for free software, where kattatra means free and menporul means software is also being used in Tamil Nadu and Tamils in other parts of the world. In The Philippines, "malayang software" is sometimes used. The word "libre" exists in the Filipino language, and it came from the Spanish language, but has acquired the same cost/freedom ambiguity of the English word "free".[58] According to Meranau "Free" is KANDURI, Diccubayadan, Libre.

See also

References

  1. ^ a b Free/Libre and Open Source Software: Survey and Study FLOSS Deliverable D18: FINAL REPORT – Part IV: Survey of Developers by Rishab Aiyer Ghosh et al "According to this ongoing discussion, one would expect a sharp polarization of the whole community of developers of non-proprietary software into two very different parties, one of Open Source developers and one of Free Software developers. However, figure 39 shows that, although there is clear evidence of these parties, still a share of almost one fifth of the whole sample does not care anyway if they belong to the one or to the other party." (2002)
  2. ^ a b Shea, Tom (June 23, 1983). "Free software – Free software is a junkyard of software spare parts". InfoWorld. Retrieved October 13, 2019. "In contrast to commercial software is a large and growing body of free software that exists in the public domain. Public-domain software is written by microcomputer hobbyists (also known as "hackers") many of whom are professional programmers in their work life."
  3. ^ a b "GNU's Bulletin, Volume 1 Number 1, page 8". GNU.org.
  4. ^ "What is free software? / The Free Software Definition". GNU.org. September 20, 2011. Retrieved October 23, 2011.
  5. ^ "Philosophy of the GNU Project". GNU.org. Retrieved October 13, 2019.
  6. ^ "The Free Software Definition – Translations of this page". GNU.org.
  7. ^ Karl Fogel (2016). "Producing Open Source Software – How to Run a Successful Free Software Project". O'Reilly Media. Retrieved April 11, 2016. But the problem went deeper than that. The word "free" carried with it an inescapable moral connotation: if freedom was an end in itself, it didn't matter whether free software also happened to be better, or more profitable for certain businesses in certain circumstances. Those were merely pleasant side effects of a motive that was, at its root, neither technical nor mercantile, but moral. Furthermore, the "free as in freedom" position forced a glaring inconsistency on corporations who wanted to support particular free programs in one aspect of their business, but continue marketing proprietary software in others.
  8. ^ OSI. "History of OSI". conferees decided it was time to dump the moralizing and confrontational attitude that had been associated with "free software" in the past and sell the idea strictly on the same pragmatic, business-case grounds
  9. ^ "Goodbye, "free software"; hello, "open source"". The problem with it is twofold. First, ... the term "free" is very ambiguous ... Second, the term makes a lot of corporate types nervous.
  10. ^ a b Kelty, Christpher M. (2008). "The Cultural Significance of free Software – Two Bits" (PDF). Duke University press – durham and london. p. 99. Prior to 1998, Free Software referred either to the Free Software Foundation (and the watchful, micromanaging eye of Stallman) or to one of thousands of different commercial, avocational, or university-research projects, processes, licenses, and ideologies that had a variety of names: sourceware, freeware, shareware, open software, public domain software, and so on. The term "open-source", by contrast, sought to encompass them all in one movement.
  11. ^ Michael Tiemann (September 19, 2006). "History of the OSI". Archived from the original on October 1, 2002. The people present included Todd Anderson, Chris Peterson (of the Foresight Institute), John "maddog" Hall and Larry Augustin (both of Linux International), Sam Ockman (of the Silicon Valley Linux User's Group), Michael Tiemann, and Eric Raymond.
  12. ^ "The Saint of Free Software (page 2)". Archived from the original on June 12, 2008. Stallman hadn't been invited to the first such gathering of "open source" leaders, a "free software summit" held in April...
  13. ^ Eric Raymond. "Goodbye, "free software"; hello, "open source"". we have a problem with the term "free software" ... we came up with a replacement label we all liked: "open source".
  14. ^ "Frequently Asked Questions". Open Source Initiative. Archived from the original on April 23, 2006. How is "open source" related to "free software"? The Open Source Initiative is a marketing program for free software.
  15. ^ "The Open Source Definition by Bruce Perens"., Open Sources: Voices from the Open Source Revolution, January 1999, ISBN 1-56592-582-3
  16. ^ "The Open Source Definition"., The Open Source Definition according to the Open Source Initiative
  17. ^ "Slashdot.org". News.slashdot.org. February 16, 2009. Retrieved October 23, 2011.
  18. ^ Tiemann, Michael (September 19, 2006). "History of the OSI". Open Source Initiative. Archived from the original on October 1, 2002. Retrieved August 23, 2008. We realized that the Netscape announcement had created a precious window of time within which we might finally be able to get the corporate world to listen to what we have to teach about the superiority of an open development process. We realized it was time to dump the confrontational attitude that has been associated with "free software" in the past and sell the idea strictly on the same pragmatic, business-case grounds that motivated Netscape. We brainstormed about tactics and a new label. "Open source," contributed by Chris Peterson, was the best thing we came up with. Over the next week we worked on spreading the word. Linus Torvalds gave us an all-important imprimatur :-) the following day. Bruce Perens got involved early, offering to trademark "open source" and host this web site. Phil Hughes offered us a pulpit in Linux Journal. Richard Stallman flirted with adopting the term, then changed his mind.
  19. ^ The Mysteries of Open Source Software: Black and White and Red All Over by Brian Fitzgerald, Pär J. Ågerfalk University of Limerick, Ireland "Open Source software (OSS) has attracted enormous media and research attention since the term was coined in February 1998." (2005)
  20. ^ Leander Kahney (March 5, 1999). "Linux's Forgotten Man – You have to feel for Richard Stallman". wired.com. Archived from the original on June 22, 2001. Like a Russian revolutionary erased from a photograph, he is being written out of history. Stallman is the originator of the free-software movement and the GNU/Linux operating system. But you wouldn't know it from reading about LinuxWorld. Linus Torvalds got all the ink. Even the name of the operating system, to which Torvalds contributed a small but essential part, acknowledges Torvalds alone: the Stallman part – the GNU before Linux – is almost always left out. It makes Stallman mad. At a press conference during the show, one unlucky journalist thoughtlessly called it Linux and got an earful for his mistake.
  21. ^ "Toronto Star: Freedom's Forgotten Prophet (Richard Stallman)". linuxtoday.com. October 10, 2000. Retrieved March 25, 2016. "But if [Richard] Stallman is winning the war, he is losing the battle – for credit....Red Hat's Web site lists the major milestones in 'open source' software, beginning in the 1970s with AT&T's Unix system and jumping to Torvalds' kernel in 1991, completely bypassing Stallman. (Red Hat does, however, provide a link to the GNU Web site, but most people have no idea what it represents.)"
  22. ^ Nikolai Bezroukov (November 1, 2014). "Portraits of Open Source Pioneers – Part IV. Prophet". Retrieved March 25, 2016. "And in the second part of 1998 "open source" became a standard umbrella term encompassing commercialized GPL-based software and first of all major commercial Linux distributions (Caldera, Red Hat, Slackware, Suse, etc). Still like is often is the case in religious schisms, Raymodism overtake of Stallmanism was not complete and Eric Raymond had run into his own PR problems with his unsuccessful attempt to grab an "open source" trademark, that generated a lot of resentment in the community. Later his "surprised by wealth" letter undermined his role of influential evangelist of "open source is the best economical model for the development of the software" message. He became an object of pretty nasty jokes, but that does not help RMS to restore the role of FSF."
  23. ^ Why "Free Software" is better than "Open Source" on gnu.org by Richard Stallman (1999)
  24. ^ a b FSF. "Why "Open Source" misses the point of Free Software". Nearly all open source software is free software; the two terms describe almost the same category of software.
  25. ^ "Posting re "free open source software", 18 March 1998".
  26. ^ "Using m$ products is supporting them :(".
  27. ^ European Parliament resolution of 19 January 2016 on Towards a Digital Single Market Act (2015/2147(INI)) on www.europarl.europa.eu
  28. ^ Free and Open-Source Software by ANDRÉS GUADAMUZ (2009)
  29. ^ Quo vadis, libre software? by Jesús M. González-Barahona v0.8.1, work in progress, September 2004
  30. ^ "EU".
  31. ^ "Free/Libre and Open Source Software: Survey and Study". Archived from the original on July 7, 2011.
  32. ^ "UNU-MERIT »".
  33. ^ "Free/Libre and Open Source Software and Open Standards in South Africa: A Critical Issue for Addressing the Digital Divide". National Advisory Council on Innovation. Archived from the original on August 29, 2004.
  34. ^ "FLOSS deployment in Extremadura, Spain". Archived from the original on December 16, 2007.
  35. ^ "Relatório da ONU aponta o Software Livre (FLOSS) como melhor". Archived from the original on February 10, 2009.
  36. ^ Karopka, T; Schmuhl, H; Demski, H. "Free/Libre open source software in health care: a review". Healthc Inform Res. 20: 11–22. doi:10.4258/hir.2014.20.1.11. PMC 3950260. PMID 24627814.
  37. ^ "Interview with Richard Stallman, Edinburgh, 2004". Free Software Foundation.
  38. ^ FOSS and FLOSS.
  39. ^ Please forget to FLOSS Armed and Dangerous, Eric S. Raymond, 26 March 2009
  40. ^ "Trademark Electronic Search System (TESS)". (Direct link not possible, site search required) Word Mark: OSI CERTIFIED ... Goods and Services: (ABANDONED) IC A . US A . G & S: software licensed under open-source licenses. ... Serial Number: 76020694 ... Owner: (APPLICANT) Open Source Initiative ... Live/Dead Indicator: DEAD
  41. ^ "Innovation Goes Public". Archived from the original on December 28, 2008. (javascript slide #3) When I say "Open Source", I mean the same thing as Free Software.
  42. ^ Stallman, Richard. "Why Open Source misses the point of Free. Software". Free Software Foundation. Retrieved October 23, 2011.
  43. ^ Kerner, Sean Michael (January 8, 2008). "Torvalds Still Keen on GPLv2". internetnews.com. Retrieved February 12, 2015. "In some ways, Linux was the project that really made the split clear between what the FSF is pushing which is very different from what open source and Linux has always been about, which is more of a technical superiority instead of a – this religious belief in freedom," Torvalds told Zemlin. So, the GPL Version 3 reflects the FSF's goals and the GPL Version 2 pretty closely matches what I think a license should do and so right now, Version 2 is where the kernel is."
  44. ^ McDougall, Paul (July 10, 2007). "Linux Creator Calls GPLv3 Authors 'Hypocrites' As Open Source Debate Turns Nasty". informationweek.com. Archived from the original on April 13, 2008. Retrieved February 12, 2015. the latest sign of a growing schism in the open source community between business-minded developers like Torvalds and free software purists.
  45. ^ Landley, Rob. "CELF 2013 Toybox talk". landley.net. Retrieved August 21, 2013. GPLv3 broke "the" GPL into incompatible forks that can't share code. [...] FSF expected universal compliance, but hijacked lifeboat clause when boat wasn't sinking.[...]
  46. ^ Byfield, Bruce (November 22, 2011). "7 Reasons Why Free Software Is Losing Influence: Page 2". Datamation.com. Retrieved August 23, 2013. At the time, the decision seemed sensible in the face of a deadlock. But now, GPLv2 is used for 42.5% of free software, and GPLv3 for less than 6.5%, according to Black Duck Software.
  47. ^ James E.J. Bottomley, Mauro Carvalho Chehab, Thomas Gleixner, Christoph Hellwig, Dave Jones, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Tony Luck, Andrew Morton, Trond Myklebust, David Woodhouse (September 15, 2006). "Kernel developers' position on GPLv3 – The Dangers and Problems with GPLv3". LWN.net. Retrieved March 11, 2015. The current version (Discussion Draft 2) of GPLv3 on first reading fails the necessity test of section 1 on the grounds that there's no substantial and identified problem with GPLv2 that it is trying to solve. However, a deeper reading reveals several other problems with the current FSF draft: 5.1 DRM Clauses [...] 5.2 Additional Restrictions Clause [...] 5.3 Patents Provisions [...]since the FSF is proposing to shift all of its projects to GPLv3 and apply pressure to every other GPL licensed project to move, we foresee the release of GPLv3 portends the Balkanisation of the entire Open Source Universe upon which we rely.CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link)
  48. ^ "Top 20 licenses". Black Duck Software. November 19, 2015. Archived from the original on July 19, 2016. Retrieved November 19, 2015. 1. MIT license 24%, 2. GNU General Public License (GPL) 2.0 23%, 3. Apache License 16%, 4. GNU General Public License (GPL) 3.0 9%, 5. BSD License 2.0 (3-clause, New or Revised) License 6%, 6. GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) 2.1 5%, 7. Artistic License (Perl) 4%, 8. GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) 3.0 2%, 9. Microsoft Public License 2%, 10. Eclipse Public License (EPL) 2%
  49. ^ Balter, Ben (March 9, 2015). "Open source license usage on GitHub.com". github.com. Retrieved November 21, 2015. 1 MIT 44.69%, 2 Other 15.68%, 3 GPLv2 12.96%, 4 Apache 11.19%, 5 GPLv3 8.88%, 6 BSD 3-clause 4.53%, 7 Unlicense 1.87%, 8 BSD 2-clause 1.70%, 9 LGPLv3 1.30%, 10 AGPLv3 1.05%
  50. ^ "Licenses by Name". Open Source License. Open Source Initiative. Retrieved October 23, 2011.
  51. ^ "License information". Debian.
  52. ^ "Licensing". Fedora. Archived from the original on January 10, 2010.
  53. ^ "11/17: Lulan Artisans Textile Competition". June 17, 2009.
  54. ^ Validity of the Creative Commons Zero 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication and its usability for bibliographic metadata from the perspective of German Copyright Law by Dr. Till Kreutzer, attorney-at-law in Berlin, Germany.
  55. ^ The unlicense a license for no license Archived January 22, 2017, at the Wayback Machine on ostatic.com by Joe Brockmeier (2010)
  56. ^ The Unlicense Archived September 4, 2016, at the Wayback Machine on unlicense.org.
  57. ^ "FSF-India's homepage". Archived from the original on July 5, 2008. Think of it as swatantra software
  58. ^ "Re: Free Software, some thoughts". My suspicion is that if RMS were Filipino, he would have used Malayang Software to avoid the confusion regarding economics v. liberty.

External links

This page was last edited on 30 November 2019, at 17:41
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.