X
Tech

What "free" means with Open Source software

A lot of the times when discussing GNU/Linux and it being "free", many people think that this means it costs nothing. While it is true that GNU/Linux costs nothing, the word "free" mainly means that GNU/Linux is free as in your freedom to use it, study it, crack it open, change it for your needs, copy it, and you will not be controlled by a single entity on how you use the software.
Written by Chris Clay Clay, Contributor

A lot of the times when discussing GNU/Linux and it being "free", many people think that this means it costs nothing. While it is true that GNU/Linux costs nothing, the word "free" mainly means that GNU/Linux is free as in your freedom to use it, study it, crack it open, change it for your needs, copy it, and you will not be controlled by a single entity on how you use the software. This means no activation, no nagging to buy it, no hardware profiling and sending it to some server somewhere out there. GNU/Linux does have a hardware profiling feature called "smolt", however it is disabled by default and is up to the user to enable it. And, it is not used for any sort of licensing check (unlike Microsoft which uses hardware profile collecting to monitor what machines you are using and to see if you are violating licensing agreements), smolt is used to help the developers see what kind of hardware that GNU/Linux is being used on. While most users will simply install and use GNU/Linux, it's nice to know that if a user wanted to crack it open, they are open and allowed to do so without worry.

These are some of the goals that Richard Stallman has aimed to achieve since he formed the GNU General Public License in 1989. He started the GNU operating system which includes compilers and utilities that are part of the core of the GNU/Linux operating system, commonly called Linux. Stallman himself had used proprietary and locked down software, and as a developer found that he knew how to fix problems but since the vendor kept it locked down and closed the source, was unable to do so. He knew that it is far more efficient to develop and fix software by having the code publicly available. Linus Torvalds came along in the early 1990's and developed the Linux kernel, the piece that was missing from Stallman's GNU operating system. Thankfully, Linus decided to place the Linux kernel under the GNU GPL umbrella. Together they formed what we know as GNU/Linux or Linux. This is probably the largest success story of open source, having two projects come together to form one.

Today, I solely use GNU/Linux for these reasons, but I am not a software developer so I rarely try to open up the code. But I have occasionally opened the source code with curiosity, and it's interesting to see how things work. I also like to try things before I buy them, and with Windows I can't do this without opening up my wallet every time and buying a new copy somehow, either retail or with a new PC. This is why I have abandoned the Windows train. What I really like about GNU/Linux is with new releases, I can download and try it, and see how it works, before making any changes to my computer and never touching my wallet. This is achieved by either running a "live" USB or DVD version of it. Most distributions offer this as a simple download. Fedora offers very well done documentation on how to do this. I also run VirtualBox (free virtual machine software), and install full running versions of Linux releases, so I can preview them there as well. Virtual machines can be created and removed with ease.

And when problems arise, help is immediately a question away on the vast number of forums and mailing lists, which often have direct access to the developers of the software. With proprietary software, solving a problem usually involves opening a ticket with the software vendor and working with a tech support rep, but often does not involve direct access to the developers.

Why pay for software and re-pay every few years, when you can do the same thing with free and open software, that is written and used by the community? And why allow vendors that release proprietary software continue to control your PC and your budget? There's nothing to lose by running a "live" version of any Linux distribution, and see how it works for you. It's free, afterall.

Editorial standards