• Captain Beyond@linkage.ds8.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    18 days ago

    https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Freeware

    Please don’t use the term “freeware” as a synonym for “free software.” The term “freeware” was used often in the 1980s for programs released only as executables, with source code not available. Today it has no particular agreed-on definition.

    There is a misunderstanding that the free in free software or FOSS refers to price (and is hence a synonym of freeware). https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/floss-and-foss.html

    Others use the term “FOSS,” which stands for “Free and Open Source Software.” This is meant to mean the same thing as “FLOSS,” but it is less clear, since it fails to explain that “free” refers to freedom.

  • Zerush@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    18 days ago

    FOSS is always Freeware, but Freeware isn’t always FOSS. Freeware don’t mean other thing that the soft is free to use, nothing more.

    • Captain Beyond@linkage.ds8.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 days ago

      FOSS is always Freeware

      “Free software” refers to freedom, not price. It’s possible for free-as-in-freedom software to be sold.

      “Freeware” is always about price, not freedom.

      • listless@lemmy.cringecollective.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        17 days ago

        only in theory. in reality, only one person would ever buy it then re-release the source code for free-as-in-beer. unless you’re talking about something other than GPL2/3.

    • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 days ago

      There’s some non-freeware FOSS projects, especially in pursuit of some support. While the better ones either have an easy to use build system and/or just negwares if you download their “trial” version, projects like Ardour is a lot more involved. It has actual noise injected into the sound output, it has a convoluted build system (for which they don’t provide build manuals - after forking, you’ll find out it will also need a specific version of VS to build), and on top of that, an expensive subscription model.

      • Flagstaff@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        18 days ago

        Interesting, didn’t know that. Ironically, I’ve unintentionally followed this definition anyway because I think open-source is so incredible that I always describe FOSS as specifically FOSS, not “just” freeware.

        In fact, I’ve pivoted so strongly to FOSS as of late that I haven’t even said the word “freeware” in… years… dang…

      • peregus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        18 days ago

        Unlike with free and open-source software, which are also often distributed free of charge, the source code for freeware is typically not made available.

        It clearly says “typically”, which includes the software that does open source the code.

        • ganymede@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          18 days ago

          when you feel up to reading the word after “typically” feel free to modify the attitude

          • peregus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            18 days ago

            What kind of attitude?

            the source code for freeware is typically not made available

            Typically it different than never. It means that sometimes the source code is made available and is the case of FOSS.>

            • ganymede@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              18 days ago

              edit: it just occurred to me you may not be a native english speaker, in which case i apologise. “typically not” means it usually doesn’t happen.


              For anyone who’s wondering:

              (From the GIMP manual)

              The GIMP is not freeware

              GIMP er ikkje såkalla “freeware”

              El GIMP no es freeware

              GIMP non è freeware

              GIMP n’est pas un freeware

  • stray@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    18 days ago

    I think y’all who are upset over the use of “freeware” are out of touch with how language is used in non-expert settings. Like, I’m definitely more tech-savvy than most people and I still didn’t know about “FOSS” as a term until seeing it on Lemmy and looking it up. This just means “free software” to me and doesn’t imply anything negative.

    It even says, “the premier free and open source image editing software for multiple platforms” right in the first paragraph, so what’s the issue? Do you think the headline will mislead someone into thinking that GIMP is proprietary?

    • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 days ago

      It reminds me of how inside people tried to claw back the meaning of the word “hacker” from general use as a negative. Sorry but that ship sailed a long time ago.

  • lordnikon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    I mean they call it out in the article that it’s free and open source. Hey it might get someone looking for freeware to get gimp instead.