Free software is software that respects your freedom and the social solidarity of your community. So it's free as in freedom.
Shareware tends to combine the worst of commercial software with the worst of free software.
In the free/libre software movement, we develop software that respects users' freedom, so we and you can escape from software that doesn't.
I got bitten by the free software bug in February of 1998 around the time of the Mozilla announcement.
The more money Automattic makes, the more we invest into Free and Open Source software that belongs to everybody and services to make that software sing.
The idea of free software is that users of computing deserve freedom. They deserve in particular to have control over their computing. And proprietary software does not allow users to have control of their computing.
When it comes to software, I much prefer free software, because I have very seldom seen a program that has worked well enough for my needs, and having sources available can be a life-saver.
Defect-free software does not exist.
Software is like sex: it's better when it's free.
Yahoo is free, it's fast and it's Web-centric. AOL is slow, it costs money and requires proprietary software.
Free open-source software, by its nature, is unlikely to feature secret back doors that lead directly to Langley, Va.
I'm not of the opinion that all software will be open source software. There is certain software that fits a niche that is only useful to a particular company or person: for example, the software immediately behind a web site's user interface. But th...
Android is a major step towards an ethical, user-controlled, free-software portable phone, but there is a long way to go.
Whether it's Google or Apple or free software, we've got some fantastic competitors and it keeps us on our toes.
Certainly there's a phenomenon around open source. You know free software will be a vibrant area. There will be a lot of neat things that get done there.
Software patents are dangerous to software developers because they impose monopolies on software ideas.
However, writing software without defects is not sufficient. In my experience, it is at least as difficult to write software that is safe - that is, software that behaves reasonably under adverse conditions.
While I personally believe strongly in the philosophy and ideology of the Free Software movement, you can't win people over just on philosophy; you have to have a better product, too.
We're not done yet, but two things WordPress has been able to exemplify is that open source can create great user experiences and that it's possible to have a successful commercial entity and a wider free software community living and working in harm...
The software patent problem is not limited to Mono. Software patents affect everyone writing software today.
Why shouldn't we give our teachers a license to obtain software, all software, any software, for nothing? Does anyone demand a licensing fee, each time a child is taught the alphabet?
