I while I understand the sentiment, I have found that paid software is more polished than foss software… most of the time. And when I need to get work done, I want to ensure that my software is stable and I will pay to do so.
That said, I feel software is like a bell curve, and the older the type of software is, the more it should be FOSS. Like word processors, 3D modelling, or image manipulation should be foss, while video editing and 3D scanning software is OK to be paid.
What I feel everyone should agree with is not being forced to use a subscription service to use the software. I will boycott software if it forces that upon their customers, looking at you Adobe, Autodesk and Microsoft.
I would never willingly use proprietary software. I don’t mind paying if I also have access to source code that is licensed foss.
I while I understand the sentiment, I have found that paid software is more polished than foss software… most of the time. And when I need to get work done, I want to ensure that my software is stable and I will pay to do so.
That said, I feel software is like a bell curve, and the older the type of software is, the more it should be FOSS. Like word processors, 3D modelling, or image manipulation should be foss, while video editing and 3D scanning software is OK to be paid.
What I feel everyone should agree with is not being forced to use a subscription service to use the software. I will boycott software if it forces that upon their customers, looking at you Adobe, Autodesk and Microsoft.
I wish that was possible, but it’s not feasible to get a lot done on a 15 year old ThinkPad or whatever, that doesn’t have any proprietary firmware.
You can at least use foss apps and keep the binaries to a minimum
Agree, I just wouldn’t call that “never willingly using proprietary software”.