Open vs Closed source OSs

Continuing the discussion from I'm giving up on the Librem 5:

“There’s no consumer programs available for it (not even common ones such as Libre Office or Mozilla Firefox)”
That is just factually incorrect. There’s plenty of desktop environment options, Firefox, chromium, thunderbird, all are available. There’s a whole ports catalog of software available.

Also Android is Open Source so using it as an example of closed source seems to be missing the mark.

As far as “everyday Joe” being able to use OpenBSD or any other open source OS, my wife and kids whom are not technical have no problem using OpenBSD since the majority of what they do takes place in the web browser.

So, where are we moving the goalposts to next?

And to preempt the “well they couldn’t install the OS that way”, there’s a reason why pushing for *nix systems to be pre-installed is a thing. Most people won’t install windows/osx either, they use what’s already installed.


Closed source is by definition a bug. (Some may choose to call it a feature.) As this is by definition an unfixable, serious bug, the rest of the discussion is not relevant. However the rest of the discussion has been touched upon in this forum in previous topics.


That statement is just pure bias beginning with a bug metaphor followed by pedandtic utterance to shut the discussion down. If you close the discussion by fiat, it is no longer a discussion is it?

1 Like

The everyday Joe Part…

Opensource just Works in the back. You use it with your Car, your TV, your Dishwasher, your Washing Mashine, your Wifi Router.

FreeBSD is an open Source derivate running on Playstation, Nintendo Switch, Linux run Steamdeck. It runs on Airplaines, Starlink Satilites and Spcestuff by SpaceX and Nasa. Every Supercomputer runs Linux and is likely that 99,9 % of your Interet runs on Linux. Amazon, Facebook, Google, Twitter… and so on. The consite is: Even its free and Open Source it can run sneaky closed source Code from Suveillance Capitalists.

By the Way: Linux powerers your Android Phone too.


My wife used Elementary OS for years (had to move away because university had Windows only requirements). She’s 100% not a computer person. She was fine. She could even work with her iPhone on the laptop.

So not sure what all the drama is about.


The Drama is, here because Closed Source in the past, lock your system down if you not buy new hardware. Thinking about a Windows Vista System, that run one Device - a Printer or a Tank or some expansive Device in your hospital, to make 3D Pictures of Bodies. And you need to activate this if you do a fresh reinstallation (after som Ransomeware).
If you can’t activate cause Microsoft do not support the DRM… that’s why Open Source is much much better. You can reflash the Device or do some Upgrade if some components lost. With Closed Source DRM you can just change some Parts and it will need a reactivation for the new changed System. Its not reliable. So no - Open Source is better.

Its like to teach someone to fish (Open Source) instead of sell Fishes. Even Microsoft understand why Open Source is so powerful. I think Jack is young or likes sometimes to be a afternoon troll for fresh input and diverse views on manifested thoughts.

And by the way, we are here to help creating better open Source alternatives for Data collecting and selling Software, like Apps and Webpages on Smartphones, Internet or snitching Devices.
Today it become more profitable to sell Systems and Computers that nudge and sell/collect Data.

Its like users become domesticated, instead with free experience the nature and environment, the unfree, not open source Computer put them in a sand box with limited information to nudge and herd them, like they are in a cage.

Domesticated users vs. feral users?

Feral users also seems like the makings of a reality series TV show: “Users gone wild!”.

1 Like