Sheelamohanachandran2010 - Shutterstock

Sheelamohanachandran2010 – Shutterstock

Anyone would think that free software’s ability to promote technological and human development with job sharing, revisions and adjustments where many people around the world collaborate and missing more, the ability to access it easily would be something that love everyone . But this life is one surprise after another, and it turns out free software also has its detractors with things to say. Let’s see what they are.

  • “Free software is a fudge because toquetean too many hands. Nothing like operating systems and programs serious companies “. Nobody doubts that developers of proprietary software companies providing professional can be like the top of a pine tree but need not be more than those programmers who have decided to focus its activities on free software with the same training and experience . Furthermore, by means of proprietary software development itself, improvements and developments are less and much slower: it is not the same facilitate unlimited access to software, the dynamics of development accelerates exponentially and never stop, as with free software that allow him handling a small number of employees, jealously hiding the competition, which is widely testee when it’s released and, after a while, only those same employees decide what modifications carried out and which are not in the next version. zillion heads develop more and better than a few .

  • “Free software is free and does not generate economic movement “. It need not be so: there is no problem in one to develop systems, programs or free software applications and decide to sell. You can collect perfectly for distribution, user manuals and support . All that happens is that every code developed should be public , unlike proprietary software, which only executable files published.

  • “Free software is not suitable for critical systems because it is not safe” . Again, the absurdity of believing that this technology is worse than the deprivation by absurd prejudices: that the software code is available for anyone wishing to analyze and modify it does not mean that systems and programs developed they are less safe, and can be easily checked . What really is not possible is to ensure that any proprietary software is safe before it is marketed, as its essence prevents such verification.

  • “Free software is death for small development companies” . No way: 90% of the free software that develops in the world is made to order , ie, for individuals and businesses who live it. And this technology is not the big companies could use if they were passed to it to remove the small practice: is not the same freer than free software, and it’s free so perhaps could sweep competitors

fallacies against free software

Rawpixel – Shutterstock

  • “Patenting modified source code is possible because of the free software” . The existence of this technology has no relation to the characteristics of the laws governing software patents and its laxity or hardness and the possibility of voids or legal umbrella in a given jurisdiction to harmful practices.

  • “Free software is bad for the development of the technology market” . If we said that umpteen heads develop more and better than a few and that programmers can live it, it is obvious that market would be strengthened by extensive marketing of free software .

  • “The legal regulations for the use of free software in public administration and schools are unfair. The implementation of this software or proprietary should be decided based on free competition “. First, free competition works in the private sector transactions , not in the exercise of state institutions, and since Administration, if any, is the client who hires technological services and free competition has every right to choose in favor of the non proprietary software. Furthermore, the main interest of the public administration are efficiency and moderation in the budget use, so that le favors free software with saving on licenses and others.

It is noteworthy that many of the people who call themselves liberal economics detest the possibilities of free software, not only because the concept itself and etymology, but also because support attempts to control the technology market for the benefit of proprietary software , even with fallacies against free software. But the rise of the latter is unstoppable, so you better get used.

Recommendations