Before open source (90s): high quality software, decisions made by smart engineers, bug-free minimalist freewares, engineering degrees.
After open source: buggy/ad-infested software, decisions made by "the community" (who doesn't know anything about how computers work), bloated monsters constantly downloading updates, gender-studies degrees.
Other urls found in this thread:
github.com
anyforums.com
twitter.com
>Before open source (90s)
Wrong
>high quality software, decisions made by smart engineers, bug-free minimalist freewares, engineering degrees.
>bug free
>high quality
>"""smart""" engineers
wrong
> high quality software
> excel
Very disinformative text. Thanks, Sup Forums troll.
Are you retarded? Open source software and FOSS software is software made by people who care about writing it, so they generally make it good, and ad free. The shitware you're talking about is mostly made by companies with engineers that just want to shit out a final product that does what their shitty bosses say it needs to do.
>After open source: buggy/ad-infested software, decisions made by "the community" (who doesn't know anything about how computers work), bloated monsters constantly downloading updates, gender-studies degrees.
you sure you aren't thinking of freeware?
>90s
>high quality software
This is bait
No shut up idiot.
OBSESSED
2/10 some people will reply seriously to this
(((Open source))) has poisoned white minds with (((communism))). Back during the 90s you could guarantee the software was made by whites, but open source brought (((diversity))) and (((multiculturalism))) to a field that originally belonged to whites. Men like (((Richard Stallman))) want you to think you need (((free software))) so you can be (((liberated))) but all they want you to do is accept working (((for free))).
open source is for communists. y-you're not a communist, are you?
Why the fuck do companies and open source software projects make "diversity" efforts anyway. Everyone knows a) nobody gives a shit about their efforts and b) it just incites unnecessary drama, making everyone lose focus on project goals.
Free software > Open source
>try to shitpost about FOSS
>true Sup Forums anons show up to defend it
>lmao obsessed, freeze peach, etc.
fuck off already
>put me in the """"""screenshot"""""""""""""""
A lot of open source software is developed by volunteers, reaching out to demographics that typically do not involve themselves in software development increases the number of volunteers.
>Why the fuck do companies and open source software projects make "diversity" efforts anyway.
Because they've been infiltrated, that's why. Just like universities were, back then. The long march.
Yes FOSS was a mistake.
Solaris was always better than Linux and even Linux is trying to be Solaris10 (and failing).
Hell Windows 2000 had better innovation than Linux today.
No, (((Sup Forumsack))), (((intuitive))) (((languages))) was a (((mistake))).
no, but the left is a mistake.
Open source doesn't mean you have to merge shitty and SJW pull-requests.
Robert Conquest's 2nd law of politics: Any organization not explicitly right-wing sooner or later becomes left-wing.
(This is basically thermodynamics applied to human organizations)
And despite some libertarian overtones FOSS was pretty lefty from the beginning, specially the FSF.
it has nothing to do with open source, it has everything to do with technology - and the internet - becoming more accessible to everyone.
As the barrier to entry gets closer to zero, the more retards we're gonna get.
The best part about it is that for a closed source dev, the goal is to get your application or code to be adopted by as many ppl as possible. That's how they get cred and that puts money on their bank accounts. Since the "clients" are an ever-expanding group of retards, that's what they have to cater to.
I have used Linux exclusively for the past 4 years, but now I see the error of my ways.
I will immediately buy a legal copy of Microsoft Windows 10 and install it.
Sup Forums used to be much more left-wing than it is now. Is that an exception to that principle, or has the left wing distorted itself so far the principle no longer properly applies?
>And despite some libertarian overtones FOSS was pretty lefty from the beginning, specially the FSF.
That's an understatement.
The GPL is communism.
BSD general is this way
>not using the superior MIT license
Sorry kiddo, the first computer systems didn't have a concept of proprietary software. If you bought a huge computer you got the source code for everything on it. This was the norm.
RMS started the free software movement because he was used to it in the 1970s. People just shared code like food recopies. This changed in the early 1980s and he didn't like this change which is why he started the free software movement.
Now GTFO because you have to be 18+ to use Sup Forums.
Providing link for maximum trolling: github.com