100% Free Linux Distributions: To be or not to be? This is the dilemma!
Since the beginning of «GNU» y «Linux», the maxim to be upheld by its developers, members, users and supporters, has always been the provide a Software Ecosystem as a product, an alternative, a viable solution, for all those men and societies that wish to see their freedom to use, share, modify or distribute the same, many times from the perspective of gratuityAlthough the latter, that is, free, is not something that is indivisibly linked to the principle of freedom.
In addition to seeing your guaranteed security and privacy before proprietary and closed software products, of companies and governments that often do not enjoy good credibility or good intentions. That is why, from the beginning until today, there are Distributions faithful to the principle of being 100% free.
Reasons why, «GNU/Linux» has triumphed and has been consolidated little by little within the hearts and reasons of many men and societies, to the point that now at the business, corporate and organizational level, both in the public and private spheres, and not because of the smallness but because the great thing, is taking every day an increasing relevance and an increasing use.
But, many times at a cost that usually implies that, to be used, it is filled or refilled with products or elements of proprietary and closed software, which tend to make more effective and efficient «GNU/Linux», for the benefit of companies and governments, but which in turn could subtract «libertad, seguridad y privacidad» to others (employees, users, men and companies). And so: that's the dilemma!«¿Ser o no ser 100% libres?»
Panorama
My position
First, I want to make it clear that my very personal position on this is:
My full support and desire for primacy to the effort made by all those developers, groups and communities, who take the time and effort, almost always altruistically (without payment), on behalf of the noble and important values contained in the 4 freedoms of Free Software, to provide many Free Operating Systems, based or not on the Linux Kernel, with or without GNU programs, that comply with these principles mentioned above.
Although also, I recognize and value in its proper dimension, to:
All those developers, groups and communities mainly, such as public and private organizations, that beyond their possible or probable double intentions, cooperate or try to facilitate the implementation and use of both Distributions and Free and Open Software Programs, through the contribution of drivers, firmware, code fragments, platforms, services or applications, closed or open, free or proprietary, free or paid, in order to achieve the transition and future and massive adoption of Free and Open Software.
My opinion
By this I mean that I personally did not try to be a A Purist, an Extremist or a «Talibán del Software Libre», as many tend to call those who hardly see something that is not «100% Libre», they bring out their conspiracy theories or their fears (irrational or not) to surface, attacking, discrediting and / or insulting others individually or projects in general.
Sure, they may have their bases for this, but you have to know how to recognize the inevitability of transience, in terms of merger or merger. harmonic coexistence of a certain minority portion of Private and Closed Software within Free and Open Software, for a better and more viable migration to a world «100% Libre».
He believed that there is room for everyone, that is, the one or those who want to develop, use or promote «Distribuciones 100% Libres», and the one or those who want to develop, use or promote mixed solutions that meet their needs, without requiring a «Guerra Santa» technological or ideological, or minimal things such as insults or vulgarities against each other.
The actual situation
We must bear in mind that at present the world of «Software Libre» and «Código Abierto»is very immersed in the public and private organizations, giving rise to a large number of them requiring their benefits to operate correctly. And that, to achieve this objective, they often resort to internal or external developments, private or closed, to complement or solve what the «Software Libre» and «Código Abierto» not resolved yet.
Developments and contributions that are often available to all users and members of the Communities, by means of repositories that we know as «Not Free (Non-free). Or through the official web pages of its creators or sponsors. Contributions that can often be Free and / or Open, and not partially or totally free, that is, they usually offer a free version of a software with reduced features or functionalities and another paid version, but complete.
Important data
Point that leaves us with a current panorama where the industry «Software Libre» and «Código Abierto», Despite still being mostly free and community-based, it also represents a large part of the formal industry when it comes to revenue. Since, according to expert estimates for this year 2019 , the same report is expected until 17.000 million, until almost 33.000 million dollars for him 2022 year.
And while, a Red Hat survey states that:
68% of organizations have increased their use of open source and 59% intend to continue this growth.
Many experts claim that the world currently lives in the golden age of «Software Libre» and «Código Abierto», as:
43% of large organizations already use open source in the integration of their applications and 42% say that open source solutions are part of their digital transformation strategy.
Conclusion
As we can see, el «Software Libre» and «Código Abierto» grows and strengthens, also with the direct or indirect support of the Public and private organizations, and their free and / or proprietary, closed and / or open, free contributions and / or payments to it.
What does not prevent or deteriorate, that at an individual or collective level and to the liking of each one, can continue to support, promote, or bet on pure developments, that is, the «Distribuciones 100% Libres», of which there are many and they are also growing in number and quality.
Yes that's your intention beyond the pertinent criticism or not, by the other vision that runs in parallel, we invite you to explore the Official list of 100% Free Distros of the Free Software Foundation (FSF) based on GNU, a unofficial list of 100% Free Distros that don't use GNU (validate its content and validity) and / or read our previous publication related to the subject, called: 100% free Linux distributions.
For the rest, leave us your comment on the subject so that we all know and discuss them in Community.
This seems to be going to the MasLinix blog. In my opinion the defense of freedom seems important to me and there we have the FSF to recommend ethical distributions such as Trisquel. An Ubuntu user will always seem more ethical to one of Moco $ oft. I personally will not recommend or use hybrid distributions like Manjaro or Ubunto for ethics, but I will defend and encourage you to try them. A greeting.
That is the attitude, that is, as I expressed: "My total support and desire for primacy to the effort ..." to 100% Free and Open Software. Without condemning, judging a priori as bad, Machiavellian or conspiratorial, any external effort or reinforcement of Free Software by companies and governments, even if it temporarily implies using something proprietary or closed, while the SL completely solves what it has to solve. Whoever wants to use 100% excellent, whoever wants to use something hybrid as well. That makes me emphasize that there are many Windows users who use only Windows and the rest is Free, such as Office Automation, Browsers, PDF Readers, Image Editors, among many other apps. Then what? They are also heretics of the SL for using it on Windows or Mac. I thought not! That is why I insist, extremisms are bad.
I started with GNU / Linux distributions with proprietary components, but each time I am decreasing them, and in a while I change to a totally free distribution.
Of course it is more ethical to use Ubuntu than Windows. But you have to strive and make sacrifices to get the freedom you need.
And it is important to inform yourself. Many people who use Ubuntu and many other GNU / Linux distributions are unaware of the purpose of Free Software.
Greetings Igor! Thank you for your very successful comment.
Here is a confusion of terms. It may seem to you something or someone more or less moral. But you are ethical or you are not and it does not depend on your appreciation.
Now, the use or not of free software has nothing to do with ethics and it seems to me in particular that no one should be judged whether or not they use Linux or Windows. My mother, for example, uses Windows because the computer we bought her came from the factory with that installed, but that does not mean that it is less moral (or ethical as you call it) than you who use Linux.
In my case, I am a specialist in Oracle databases. I use proprietary software because that is what it feeds me and with that I support my family.
In fact, it is unethical for you to discriminate against those who use Microsoft without knowing the situation. I doubt that if your financial solvency depended exclusively on using Microsoft software, your attitude towards proprietary software would remain the same.
That is why I insist, excellent for those who use, support and promote SL but without falling into the extremism of disqualifying the side that uses pure SP or mixed with SL, because at the end of the day, we all start there, and we use it in greater or lesser measure for various reasons and causes.
An article as always very interesting. It is known to everyone (at least who wants to learn minimally about free software) that it is used to manage certain devices (smart televisions, routers, cars, etc.) simply because software is needed to manage its operation and free and open source software it is free and is available to be edited as the interested party is interested.
The use does not mean recognition of it, that is why no one knows that free software is being used when it is actually being done and you do not know it unless you dive in many cases to be able to find out about this data. With this they get that proprietary software is more visible, which is considered the most profitable because it always usually has a cost.
This fact mentioned by Linux Post Install is an idea that is associated with free software that is known more for free software than for being free, although it does not have to be free. I can come to understand that its free (with suggestion of voluntary donation) is to make more attractive more interesting for the user who does not know what free software is but because it is free if they can be encouraged to use it (a very representative case is: LibreOffice). To break this "necessary" association of free = free software, an ideological / philosophical commitment of the user is necessary so that he is inclined to make some kind of donation, even if it is symbolic (€ 1 that although it seems a shame if there are many users and they make that gesture is no longer little, union makes power).
The ideal would be 100% free both at the operating system level (distribution) and applications, on the other hand there is the sad reality of hardware and other elements (formats, codecs ...) that make us have to depend on proprietary elements in the system and applications because if it is not done it cannot give a minimally satisfactory user experience.
Without a satisfactory experience, free software does not become popular, at this point I would like to make visible the efforts made by distros such as Linux Mint or KDENeon that I know more closely, that with each version it is seen how elements are added so that people who have no experience in GNU / Linux it is easier for them, at least in the part that touches them.
In short, I wish you could live in a 100% Free world but today I sadly regret that it is a utopia, with Free Software you can try although you can always still find insurmountable pitfalls such as, for example, if you have an urgent need (or that or nothing) to use a proprietary app, which does not have a version for GNU / Linux because you are annoyed; With a 100% Free world at the systems and applications level, this problem would not exist, but we are not in that world, that society, unfortunately.
Excellent comment! And I agree, for now a 100% Free IT Ecosystem is still utopian, especially at the Hardware level. While we will continue to advance and support the growth and expansion of the SL until we achieve that ideal of 100%, with or without the support of public and private Organizations, regardless of their probable or possible double standards or intentions.
The bipolarity of this author is incredible, in some parts he praises the work of GNU and its tools and in another paragraph he is discrediting his work and that of his community; nothing more to comment.
Excellent the rest of the article where it is taken seriously and neutrally, as it should be! Regards.
There is much talk about software and little about hardware and its implications, being as it is, the main stumbling block. On my pc, it is impossible to install a 100% free system, sometimes wanting is not power.
Nor can we forget that acquiring a compatible PC is a technological gap and sacrifice. Being up to date is impossible, too many sacrifices ...
Greetings.
Very true. Thank you for your comment, José Miguel.