How do you deal with "industry standard" software?
Hello,
I would like to ask you about some thing. How do you deal with "industry standard" softwares? It's every where.
"Like it or not, FreeCad is not an industry standard"
It maybe FreeCad but on a basic level it maybe word, outlook, google, windows, java, docx files, ...
Personally I feel sad when I can't find an alternative and do nothing.
It's a world where you can't use another softwares. You need to use this and can't say anything. They are more smarter than you and every thing else and you feel ridiculous with your "Free/Libre/OpenSource/wikipedia/internet software".
There is definitely nothing ridiculous in insisting on the control of your own computing!
I am a translator!
> There is definitely nothing ridiculous in insisting on the control of your own computing!
Most people I talk to are struggling to use a computer anayway so controlling it looks highly unrealistic for them. In that sense, they find that idea ridiculous indeed and a total waste of time.
I tried to make some people read the explanations on the GNU website (with exactly zero success so far, but I keep trying) but I could not find some good text elaborating on the kind of control such people could have and how.
Sure, most people cannot read/write source code. Even those who can cannot possibly study the source codes of all the programs they run: it is far too much work. Nevertheless, anybody can directly exercise two of the four freedoms defining free software: using the free software program without any restriction (its license cannot discriminate users or prohibit certain applications) and sharing it to help a friend or anybody else.
Also, and crucially, the user control of free software is not only individual. It is collective too. Because any user who can read source code is free to study the source code of a free software program, it does not abuse its users (DRM, spyware, backdoor, etc.) and all users (including those who cannot read source code) see the benefits of that freedom. Because any user who can write source code is free to modify the source code of a free software program, she can correct bugs or implement new features, even if the original authors have abandoned the project or if they refuse the proposed features (the program is then forked). All users, including those who cannot write source code, can benefit from the improvements. They can even contract developers to work on the free software program and have it evolve the way they (the users, not the developers) want.
That is what I would say in a nutshell. For a longer explanation, I would point to https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-even-more-important.html
Hope that I would do not off topic.
All information input or stored in a computer is "changeable/modifiable". It's a "parasiting" ting to say you can not or are not allowed to do.
You can improve files or software. I'll call them "parasites"!. Windows is "basically" sequence of instruction that your computer can do. It's not a natural/logical thing to stop the user to do certain things on a tool (a computer) that was basically build to "change" information. It change all the time. It's like saying you are forbidden to cook. You need "industrial" meal.
Where there truly is no alternative, I would simply use it; provided you do not pressure or advocate for others to use it you have done nothing unethical, and there are still ways to resist without abstaining: even just stating your ethical concerns to others is extremely powerful!
However, it's also worth remembering industry standards are just fashion for practices. Like clothing fashion, some rules are rational and others are strictly enforced despite not being so reasonable, yet many are merely guidelines that can be broken with bearable or even no consequences.
For instance, while Microsoft's Word and Outlook may be "required", in some cases using LibreOffice and Evolution with the appropriate plugins is often perfectly workable. Unless you are regularly receiving documents with extremely complex and incompatible components, the only consequences will likely be lack of support from standard channels and minor inconveniences for you and occasionally others around you.
Also like clothing fashion, such standards are partly upheld by peer pressure- the "feeling silly" you mention when questioning them. It is incredibly difficult, and something I struggle significantly with too; the best I can offer, for what it's worth, is to remember this is purely an *ethical* and not a factual matter. It is no more arrogant or presumptuous to seek accommodation from your superiors or seniors as a free software user than it would be as a vegan or a religious person.
I don't really have issues with Word documents, since they usually open in Libreoffice without any difficulties. If I had problems opening a Word document, I would probably ask the sender for a PDF. I generally send people PDFs myself. In my field the "industry standard" is LaTeX, so this isn't often an issue.
My university uses Outlook for email, but I access it using a desktop email client (Claws Mail) via IMAP and SMTP, which are standard protocols. So while the university uses proprietary software, I don't have to run it.
Google docs are a big problem. I don't know of a way to deal with them without using proprietary JS, and I'm not sure if there are any good alternatives to it for collaborative word processing. When I am working with people who are familiar with LaTeX (but not version control) I use ShareLaTeX which I believe is free software.
I guess Windows would be an issue if you are forced to use Windows software. This hasn't come up for me recently.
Java isn't nonfree, because while Oracle JDK is proprietary, OpenJDK is free.
I would say the biggest issue that has come up for me lately is Zoom, which seems to be used at all universities nowadays. This is less of a problem now that universities have opened up, but I didn't really have a way of dealing with this during the remote year, because all of my classes used it.
The joys of Zoom! I tried phoning in initially, which might have been workable if not for the terrible audio quality.
For Google Docs, however, could Etherpad or Collabora Online be viable alternatives (assuming everybody else agrees to use them)?
I did use Etherpad once (my previous university has an instance) and it was pretty good. I think it's a good alternative when you don't need much formatting. I wonder if it has support for tables? That would be a useful feature.
I have not tried Collabora. But I don't need to use a word processor very often, since LaTeX is the standard in my field. I only have to use Google Docs when someone else sends me a document.
I cannot say for all pads but https://pad.sfconservancy.org does not have tables.
That situation does complicate things slightly- unfortunately, as someone on the receiving end of a document, I agree there's not much you can do (unless editing is not a requirement- there are easy workarounds for downloading). If only people would just stop using WYSIWYG document editors once and for all :).
(As for Etherpad, I don't think it supports tables- just basic text formatting.)
https://yewtu.be/watch?v=iM-MR0yQvTg
Lol. I like this one. https://yewtu.be/watch?v=Oo-cIGVaOYE
Where I live people are more or less like that. I don't like very much : https://yewtu.be/watch?v=b-Cr0EWwaTk&list=PLDF41563FBF004B57&index=2
I prefer this one, it's more "natural" : https://yewtu.be/watch?v=1S1fISh-pag&list=PLDF41563FBF004B57&index=7
>"Lol. I like this one. https://yewtu.be/watch?v=Oo-cIGVaOYE"
What an amazing little movie! Brilliant! Too bad it was promoting Java.
Here a lot of people think that you can't do professional work with Free Software or GNU/Linux. It's for "amateurs" or "academia". And the only good thing is to use Microsoft software for "serious" work. I don't know I can deal with that.
(Joke inside: They are all or a lot of the time civil engineers with their complicated software, for everything you can do with your computer).