Thursday, June 30, 2005

Richard Stallman and GNU - political extremist

> you might take a look at the philosophy behind Free Software

Well, I've read the GNU ideological material before and am entirely familiar with what it advocates.

As a property rights advocate and observer of the national historical experience I disagree with practically every point espoused by GNU. Sure, ideas benefit society and in time all ideas eventually become part of the civilization knowledge base. Yet the originators of ideas should have opportunity to profit from their particular advancements. Software is a product that can cost extraordinary amounts to produce (cost of replication is an entirely different and somewhat irrelevant matter). It's no different than any physical product that is conceived, made, and sold to the audience of those that believe they could stand to benefit from said product in some manner.

GNU: "The system of owners of software encourages software owners to produce something - but not what society really needs. And it causes intangible ethical pollution that affects us all."

Actually for those who create commercial software that is not what society really needs, they soon learn of their error by the feedback mechanism of the marketplace. Notice the shear arrogance and conceit of Stallman/GNU as they assert to be wiser than everyone else such that they truly know what it is society really needs as pertaining to the production of software. And the silly appeal to some purposely vague "ethical pollution" - the hallmark reasoning tactic of a conceited group that sets out to assert its moral superiority over everyone else via innuendo.

GNU: "The economic argument for owners is erroneous"

I have no problem with folk that want to write software and give it away for free and share it with a community. People should certainly enjoy the freedom to do as they want in that regard. However to GNU, the so-called "freedom" that they espouse is really only in the fascist terms that they envision it. The true believer fanatics of the GNU creed would prefer that all software be created under the terms and conditions that they advocate. The continuing of existence of a commercial software marketplace of the traditional manner disturbs them deeply - it practically drives Stallman into conniptions.

GNU: "Society also needs freedom. When a program has an owner, the users lose freedom to control part of their own lives."

This is the standard line of all political socialism. The practical problem with socialism, of course, is that it is entirely too one-sided in terms of who has rights. True civil society is founded on a means to arrive at balanced relations between societal members. Hence users of software shouldn't be absolute in their rights as the GNU political ideology would have, but instead there needs to be a balance between those who create/fashion/fabricate and those that benefit by its acquisition/use. Private property rights and the marketplace is the means that societies achieve civil balance between differing parities and thus promote the greatest welfare.

GNU: "It also states that the purpose of copyright is to promote progress---not to reward authors. Copyright does reward authors somewhat, and publishers more, but that is intended as a means of modifying their behavior."

Well, here we have at least a cryptic (and grudging) admission that profit motive was what was considered by the Founders as the best means to promote human progress. The Founders were realist and thus sought how to best fashion government and its rules to the nature of man. The Founders were very wise by and large. Stallman, though, is nothing but a political extremist and his politics is counter to the bulwark of what the Founders fashioned.

Sunday, June 12, 2005

Linux GUI vs Mac OS X GUI

Is true - lots of Java developers indeed look favorably toward the Mac and its OS X:

Are many switching Java development from Windows to OS X?

But there's an even more potent and contentious schism brewing in the computing universe - lots of folks that have been fairly bullish for Linux are defecting to Mac OS X. We still see Linux as quite good as a server OS (the 2.6 kernel multi-threading enhancement finally enables Linux to be a good J2EE app server OS), but we've become completely disillusioned with Linux as ever becoming a viable desktop OS worthy of standing toe to toe with Windows.

There's simply no disputing that Mac OS X is clearly the superior GUI OS which has some Unix-inspired heritage underneath the hood. The Linux GUIs are not even in the same league.

A lot of the Linux stalwart devotees aren't too keen to hear this kind of talk, and naturally some of them get angry. These folks tend to be the free software political ideologues that view the use of computers and computer software as a political statement.

The rest of us folk just want a great computing experience that we can enjoy and benefit by.

The story of Java developers liking Mac OS X is a bit old by now - while Linux zealots vs Mac OS X is just really getting heated up in earnest. (Frankly the Linux zealots are stewing from a bad case of jealousy and envy. The fact that a proprietary GUI OS is so vastly superior to any open-software/free-software GUI attempts is a reality they can't cope with very gracefully.)

The success of Mac OS X is a jab in the eye of the software-must-be-free ideological fascist. That is perhaps one of the very best sociological benefits of the burgeoning success of proprietary Macintosh and its OS X.