The difference between free/open source doesn't matter to me. I just want functional software. If someone is really "only wanting open source" then they need to stop using windows and when they move to linux they need to not use any proprietary drivers, codecs, ect. What will happen when you do that? You will get a nonfunctional computer thats what.
Ubuntu has a version for those who want to try it(ubuntu includes all kinds of proprietary stuff in the default build):
A-Patch doesnt do that .. its a new feature of WLM and Yahoo .. (some kinda friendship) .. A Very good Alternative to A-Patch is Mess Patch - www.Mess.be.
I know that, I meant just using WLM.
Who knows. Seemingly every suggestion gets shot down, so he's on his own to do his own leg work for searching for alternatives.
I'd rather use an open-source alternative if its as good as the propierty software, but in this case, with Unlocker, I can't.
The difference between free/open source doesn't matter to me. I just want functional software. If someone is really "only wanting open source" then they need to stop using windows and when they move to linux they need to not use any proprietary drivers, codecs, ect. What will happen when you do that? You will get a nonfunctional computer thats what.
Ubuntu has a version for those who want to try it(ubuntu includes all kinds of proprietary stuff in the default build):
For me, it is a big difference. However, you are right, Ubuntu in itself isn't truly FLOSS. Only Gobuntu is, which really isn't functional. I tried Ubuntu, hit upon some snags, so back Vista. I'm just gonna use Vista, but try and use as much open-source software as I can. However, of course, if there is better freeware (I don't want to use pay for software apart from Windows itself), I will generally use it.
A few. I had to make my laptop boot from the cd drive in order to access it, which has now made my cd drive a ct a bit odd on occasions, which isn't great. The try-out version (as in before you install), couldn't display the internet. I was willign to wokr around all of this, but when it came to installing, I couldn't find an option to install on to my read-made partition for it, and when I went to manual, it kep giving me an error message for when I tried to select a drive or something. Overall, I didn't have a lot of trust in it, unfortunately.
Still, if I was to buy a new laptop, I would go for it pre-installed, or insdtall it myself if I wasn't worried about possibly overwriting Windows.
Ad-Aware SE Personal, SpywareBlaster, Spybot - Search and Destroy, Avast Home Edition, Comodo Free, CCleaner, Defraggler, Recuva, Windows Live Messenger with A-Patch, Windows Media Player 11, Vista Codecs, Microsoft Office 2007 Enterprise, Dial-a-fix, HijackThis, Unlocker, Dizzy, Foxit Reader, are closed-source / proprietary software / non-free software.
Firefox, AVStoDVD, InfraRecorder, Frostwire, BitTorrent, FileZilla, Paint.NET, VLC Media Player, Media Player Classic, OpenOffice, XPize or Vize, Notepad ++ are open-source / free software.
Any free alternatives to the closed- source / proprietary software / non-free software I would like to try out.
The difference between free/open source doesn't matter to me. I just want functional software. If someone is really "only wanting open source" then they need to stop using windows and when they move to linux they need to not use any proprietary drivers, codecs, ect. What will happen when you do that? You will get a nonfunctional computer thats what.
Ubuntu has a version for those who want to try it(ubuntu includes all kinds of proprietary stuff in the default build):
I use a freeware programme called Audacity. I connect a microphone to my computer and play tape-recodings of meetings, interviews, etc with a tape-recorder and record them as wav files with Audacity. If they are recordings of meetings, etc, I can then transcribe them with Express Scribe (also free) using a foot-pedal attached to my computer.