Re: Paying For Linux

On 2025-05-28, MikeS <mikes@is.invalid> wrote:

On 28/05/2025 12:48, Borax Man wrote:

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.os.linux.advocacy.]
On 2025-05-27, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

Is there ever a situation where you might actually want to pay for
Free Software?
>
Yes, there is. Remember, Free Software is about the freedom do do
things your own way. That includes spending your money the way you
choose, not the way somebody else forces you to do.
>
<https://www.zdnet.com/article/should-you-ever-pay-for-linux-5-times-i-did-and-why/>

 
I have done so.  When I first used Linux, I wasn't even sure it was
free.  Intially I thought the version I had was a 'trial' or 'shareware'
version.  I was prepared to pay, but the fact there were many distrs,
and I might switch stifled that idea.
 
I still ended up buying Red Hat 7.3.

>
"Free" software was originally just that. Individuals or organisations
were proud of an application and were pleased to share it with others
without any payment. Some developers are still true to that concept. The
rest, whether they call it 'trial', 'limited', 'shareware' or
'donationware', are just using different forms of marketing.
>
Linux today mostly involves a distribution. To my mind not many of those
are truly 'free'.
>

It was sometimes called "Freeware" if I remember correctly.  Games like
Bananoid, a DOS Arkanoid style VGA game were distributed as Freeware, so
the full game cost nothing.

Most distros are free, are they not?  I paid for Red Hat 7.3, but it was
available for free.  I paid because it was easier to get the CD's that
way and I got a manual.