Proprietary Software for Linux: A Good Idea?

Many Linux users shun proprietary software written for Linux. Yet some of these apps are hard to replace.


You Can't Detect What You Can't See: Illuminating the Entire Kill Chain

(Page 1 of 2)

When Linux enthusiasts think about software on the Linux desktop, they're likely thinking about applications that are available under various open source software licenses. Yet what about the other side of the software world – proprietary software for the Linux platform?

Despite the fact that proprietary applications do exist for the Linux desktop, I've found that most people tend to avoid them.

In this article, I'll explore some of the challenges proprietary software faces in gaining traction with Linux enthusiasts, in addition to providing some software titles that I think are worth looking into.

Software licensing

There are sizable groups of Linux users who have zero interest in seeing proprietary software gaining ground within the Linux space. Of course, this ignores the fact that most Linux users are already using proprietary software without even realizing it. There are also many users who feel strongly that proprietary software has no place in Linux.

Speaking for myself, I am fairly agnostic on the issue. I simply utilize what works best for my needs. This choice usually results in me selecting natively supported applications, most of which happen to be open source in nature.

Despite my open source software preference, I still do find myself using proprietary software such as Adobe Flash, the proprietary ATI driver for my dual-monitors, in addition to the likelihood of proprietary firmware for my wireless devices. I don't use this software because of its licensing, rather because it allows me to accomplish specific tasks throughout my day.

It has been my experience that I am not alone on this front. I'd even dare to say most Linux users today are less concerned with how software is licensed and more about what the application can offer.

On the flip side of this issue, I also realize that there are indeed individuals who are very conscientious about the code being run on their PCs. Utilizing pure Linux distributions such as Trisquel, these enthusiasts are able to ensure that their Linux experience is as pure as they like. If a user running Trisquel wants to install something like Flash, they're free to do so. Out of the box however, they'll be provided the non-proprietary alternatives instead.

If avoiding proprietary software is important to you, then I would recommend avoiding distributions such as Ubuntu and instead opt for Trisquel in its place.

Ubuntu picking up where Linspire left off

Newer Linux users might be tempted to believe that the idea of a software marketplace in Linux was born with Ubuntu. This of course is completely false. It was actually Linspire (aka Lindows), that first offered Linux enthusiasts the idea of a software marketplace where open source and proprietary software was offered side by side.

Before Ubuntu was even conceived of, Linspire offered paid subscriptions to a software repository called the Click-n-Run Warehouse (CNR). Considered highly controversial at the time, the CNR software repository allowed anyone with the ability to read English and a copy of Linspire Linux to install software with only a few clicks of the mouse. Unfortunately after the CNR concept was extended to other distributions, any perceived ease of use was shot right out the window.

Flash forward to 2012, Ubuntu offers their users a variation of this marketplace called the Ubuntu Software Center. Designed to be single source for software of all licensing types, there hasn't been very much concern over the software offered.

My guess as to why, is that Ubuntu users can access the software center without a subscription fee. This is a significant issue in which Linspire and Ubuntu differ. Like CNR, the Ubuntu Software Center sells proprietary applications right alongside the open source titles. Unlike CNR, however, the proprietary applications can be easily hidden by unchecking the correct repositories from the software sources dialog.

Do we need proprietary software for Linux?

Recently someone explained to me that proprietary software for Linux is completely unnecessary. After having a chance to really ponder this line of thinking, I decided to do some digging to see which applications might be difficult to find open source alternatives for. Needless to say, it didn't take me long to realize there are some proprietary Linux applications that are very difficult to replace.

Moneydance – To be brutally honest, Moneydance is the best personal finance management software available on the Linux desktop – period. It includes the stuff you might find in the open source arena, but it also includes online banking support (U.S. banking support, unlike other apps), mobile support for Android /iOS, plus a really clean user interface.

Page 1 of 2

1 2
Next Page

Tags: open source, Linux, software

0 Comments (click to add your comment)
Comment and Contribute


(Maximum characters: 1200). You have characters left.



IT Management Daily
Don't miss an article. Subscribe to our newsletter below.

By submitting your information, you agree that datamation.com may send you Datamation offers via email, phone and text message, as well as email offers about other products and services that Datamation believes may be of interest to you. Datamation will process your information in accordance with the Quinstreet Privacy Policy.