List free software you believe is better than its proprietary alternative.
dwm == xmonad == awesome == i3 > stumpwm == ratpoison > openbox == fluxbox > xfce == lxde > mate > kde > gnome > cinnamon >>> Windows explorer
mpd + ncmpcpp > foobar2k == clementine == deadbeef == banshee > winamp >>> itunes
mplayer == mpc-hc > vlc >>> non-free... quicktime I guess?
obviously, rtorrent > deluge == qbittorrent == transmission >>> utorrent
other than that, though
photoshop > gimp
premiere > lightworks
rhino >>> whatever open cad software exists
fl studio > whatever else
Firefox, Inkscape, mpd+<any gui or control program>, mplayer/mplayer2/mpv, smplayer suite, qbittorrent, libreoffice, virtualbox/qemu
Krita is better than GIMP.
Blender is better than other mesh modeling programs and non-linear compositing video editors (but the learning curve is the steepest).
Unfortunately Inkscape is not better than Illustrator.
Goose - Apache Licensed
Thunderbird (vs Outlook?)
PostgreSQL - GPLv2 I think
vuze, deluge, rutorrent (vs mutorrent)
If you're a programmer or superuser virtual anything non-multimedia is better when free.
Software made for non-commercial purposes (as in, free as in beer software) is already better than non-free (same sense of free) software. Because the developers are not driven by money, they don't need to worry about keeping a userbase; because of this, they do not need to worry about hiding flaws in their software. Bad software is sometimes hard to detect-- in a time where security has never been more important, this point is absolutely crucial. Free software tells you upfront its flaws.
Free as in freedom software is a natural extension of this; it tells you of its flaws and allows you to go fix them if you're able. Nonfree software has none of this; it is inherently inferior. In that sense, all nonfree software is worse than free software.
In the general sense, free software is often better
this is true with a few obvious exceptions (FL studio). In many cases, free software is better by having no competitors. I can hardly think of any programming language implementations which are nonfree. Even C# is free. This is because developers know better and they aren't willing to put up with nonfree software for its flaws. No developers == no use == the language never takes flight. (Historically nonfree implementations could survive because free implementations were not readily available; with the advent of the internet this point is null. We're watching history repeat itself with Shen, for example.)
If you're offering software for no money, what is the problem with showing off that nice source code you wrote? Are you afraid some freetard nerd will fork it only without the bitcoin miner?
mpv > WMP, MPC-HC
mpd + frontend of your choice > itunes, WMP, foobar
rtorrent, transmission, qbittorent > MPAAtorrent
vim, emacs > notepad, sublime
bash, zsh... > Powershell
every single WM for Linux > dwm.exe
every single DE for Linux > Windows Explorer
firefox, chromium > IE
Apache, nginx > IIS
pretty much every filemanager > Windows Explorer
alone the UI in Illustrator is such disgusting to use.
Maybe it is because i am non-designerfag but why make it so hard to properly format text? I ended up using LibreOfficeDraw for my poster.
hiding stolen code
hiding shitty spaghetti code which might get you fired if it became publicly known, as some basement dweller would fix in a day what you couldn't fix in a year
>better than its proprietary alternative
Being proprietary automatically makes it worse. How could you possibly add a feature to proprietary software unless the author decides to do so? With free software, you just do it without having to redesign the application from scratch.
Why do people hate ITunes?
It's the best way to manage songs. On foobar you can't organize shit.
And don't tell me it's because of placebo output drivers.
The only thing that ITunes lacks is FLAC support, really...
I'll tolerate proprietary software, but not drm. Actually I do tolerate the sublime drm, that's a model I don't mind, but it really just serves as motivation to learn vim.
Also pretty much every free media player is better than the proprietary alternative.
They're thinking in the normal user, who doesn't use those. And you certainly have alternatives.
Funny thing is that if they actually started adding those features, /g/ will go full retarded and call it bloat.
The only proprietary crud I dabble about to and fro is the wireless card and maybe a few blobs here there. Well, I do mean to and fro, simply, and not complications of the security of waves, lovely.
Generally if it's a category of software that developers personally use and stand to personally benefit from improving it, it will be better than the closed source version. This includes browsers, operating systems, text editors, etc. However, software that developers as a community generally do not care about, the proprietary versions commonly have an advantage. This includes software for a specific proffesion, like video editing and photo editing software.
>somebody follows and stays consistent with their beliefs
God forbid someone doesn't like being spied on
And here you can see the evidence of full blown autism, everybody. He has formed very fine tuned opinions which he believes are the ultimate truth, when in fact they are autistic opinions based on insignificant facts.
Paint.net>>>paint if you need simple shit, otherwise use something else.
Everything> any other windows search engine ever coded.
Seriously, this shit is so fast even on my laptop's HHD
any linux distro is immediately easier to program on than any proprietary crap. all you need to do is apt-get or yum or whatever and off you go. but for everyday productivity, proprietary beats the shit out of open source. also lots of specific applications companies use are going to be better than their free alternatives, if they have any free alternative at all (hospitals, airplanes, machining plants, fucking nuclear reactors, etc)
Industry standard, used everywhere by everybody for everything including all the plebs who don't even know they're using it. Same for mkvtoolnix stuff and handbrake.
Same deal. Used by basically everyone, there aren't even any real proprietary competitors for the same niche.
>free software movement values freedom over convenience
>non-free software devs only concerned with convenience, function
>start thread asking which free software is "better" than non-free software
>ignore the word "better" (central issue)
Daily reminder that GNU license isn't true freedom. If you want to write actual free software, use the BSD license.
>no coherent explanation
>doesn't specify which GNU license/s
>hasn't read any of them or the MIT licenses