Microsoft Becomes Sponsor of Open Source Initiative

Re:Microsoft Becomes Sponsor of Open Source Initiative by jrochkind1 on Wednesday September 27, 2017 @08:19AM (#15346993)

So, there _is_ a difference. But it's _not_ true that open source (as defined by OSI) says "nothing" about the rights it gives users. It says something. "free software" says something else/more (which may or may not be a good thing, that's a value judgement). "free software" is indeed an (intentionally) confusing name meant to discredit "open source".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft Becomes Sponsor of Open Source Initiative by Phlogistique on Wednesday September 27, 2017 @08:42AM (#15347169)

> "free software" is indeed an (intentionally) confusing name meant to discredit "open source".

That's factually wrong. The word "free software" was invented before.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft Becomes Sponsor of Open Source Initiative by DonHopkins on Wednesday September 27, 2017 @08:46AM (#15347198)

You've got the directions of the arrow of time and cause and effect backwards.

"Free Software" and "Copyleft" came WAY first. "Open Software" came later, and was meant to intentionally and personally discredit RMS, "free software" and "Copyleft".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft Becomes Sponsor of Open Source Initiative by jrochkind1 on Wednesday September 27, 2017 @12:06PM (#15349174)

OK, thanks for the correction.

I still think it's important to note that a) they are NOT "the same" (as some people in the thread are saying), and b) "open source" as defined by OSI does NOT "say nothing about the rights it gives users" (as other people in the thread are saying). Neither are true.

[ Parent | on HN ]