[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Steam for Linux

From: Michael Mehrazar
Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Steam for Linux
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2012 21:29:22 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:10.0.9) Gecko/20121017 Icedove/10.0.9

Jason Self wrote:
> Quiliro Ordóñez said:
>> The only way to make a change is that the people that want to make 
>> the effort of change concentrate on making the free-way as easy. 
>> This will bring in even more "change making" people.
> I don't know. If someone adopts free software just because 
> it's "easy" and not because they value freedom then they're just as 
> likely to switch to something else that's "even easier" (but 
> proprietary) when it comes along because they're only evaluating 
> things based on "easiness." In order for their freedom to last they 
> need to value it, moreso than just having things be easy or 
> convenient.

Of course we need to do both. Free software needs to be both easier and
more educational about software freedom. But for the average user it's
vital that the easiness comes first.

As someone not from a technically background, I owe my current
understanding of software freedom to such easy to use programs as
Firefox. I was able to use the program as is, and, as I began to slowly
learn more about how Firefox was developed, I grew to appreciate the
importance of free software. This then prevented me from ever turning to
"easier and more efficient browsers", (e.g. Google Chrome), because I
recognized that Firefox status as free software what was most important.

If Firefox's was not as easy to use, I, and many others, would never
have been able to make my journey to free software. With too high of a
technical barrier this movement can not grow. Free software has done
amazing work on making so many of their project easier than ever before,
and they should be applauded. However, it can always be made easier.
This is where I still think a substantial amount of work needs to be done.

That all said, I agree with Jason that unless it is explained why free
software is important, many users will leave for the next easy thing.
(Such as the Chrome example) That is why I think that all free software
should try and link back to essays on the Free Software Foundation
website. In addition, perhaps they could link to short videos describing
free software. (Perhaps using Media Goblin?) This would be the best,
most effective way to educate users about the importance of free software.

Steven Hamilton <> wrote:
> One thing that comes to my mind is to try and convince (stupid, I know
>  game companies to open-up the source code for old games that have
> gone out of trend (which happens fast to most games). Something like
> tom-clancy's rainbow six, quake, etc. I don't know if that's even
> worth the try. But if it works, we'd have some cool games in GNU/Linux
> and BSDs. That way, the development/porting of games becomes a little
> less non-trivial and we won't be competing with the latest cutting
> edge games and maybe - just maybe - they won't mind opening up the
> source code since there's no competitive threat to their current
> games. Just a thought :D

I second this statement. In the past Id Software (Doom, Quake) has been
willing to do this. I hope more companies do this. It would be extremely
beneficial if this ever became the industry practice. Not just because
of the steady supply of quality, free software games available for
users. But also because, presumably, the source code available for such
complex games would be a tremendous resource for other, independent,
free software game developers.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]