There is an important distinction here. Freeware is computer software
that is available for use at no cost or for an optional fee. Freeware is
often made available in a binary-only, proprietary form, thus making it
distinct from open source software. Proprietary freeware allows authors
to contribute something for the benefit of the community, while at the
same time allowing them to retain control of the source code, future
direction of development and preserve its business potential. Open
source, on the other hand, is a development methodology, which offers
practical accessibility to a product's source (goods and knowledge). The
open source model of operation and decision making allows concurrent
input of different agendas, approaches and priorities, and differs from
the more closed, centralized models of development. The principles and
practices are commonly applied to the development of source code for
software that is made available for public collaboration, and it is
usually released as open-source software.
The Open Source Definition is used by the Open Source Initiative to
determine whether or not a software license can be considered open source.
This is far more than an issue of semantics. Collaboration is an
important aspect of creative development. Open Source Culture defines a
framework for collaborative development. Open source software is a
product of this model. Freeware on the other hand is merely something
that you don't pay for.
Examples of successful Open Source projects would include;
Apache HTTP server http://www.apache.org/
All of which have been widely adopted and are used everyday in web
development, communication and business.
Steven C. Barr wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Hirst"
> <[log in to unmask]>
>> I must take exception here. Audacity is not freeware it is an Open
>> Source Project:
>> The two are very different things.
>> Of course Audacity does not have the same features as Soundforge. It
>> is however solid and reliable. It will accept VST plugins and can
>> perform all the basic editing functions necessary for sound
>> capture/audio transfer. Whilst I would not suggest using Audacity as a
>> tool for audio restoration, it is a tool that I have recommended and
>> used in training and working with museum professionals. Used in
>> conjunction with a quality analogue playback and an audio interface
>> with a good spec, there is no reason why Audacity should not perform
>> as well as Soundforge, Adobe Audition, or any other commercial package.
> Okeh...it IS freeware!! How do I know?! I have downloaded both the
> current version and a beta-test newer version...for the grand total of
> (US or Canadian...eh?!)
> Of course, my "analog playback device" is a mid-seventies Viking "record
> player," with its ceramic-cartridge output (1 volt +/-) redirected into the
> "Line In" jack of my sound card...but I used a similar set-up to record any
> number of 78's...in some cases for CD reissues done by Mr. Lennick!
> To my (admittedly imperfect) ears, I find that the increased tracking
> (around an ounce or so) makes up in quality for its less-than-perfect
> of the cartridge...! Only problem is that N8-3d needles are getting VERY
> hard to find...?!
> Steven C. Barr
16 Ocean View
Tyne & Wear
tel: 0191 289 3186
email: [log in to unmask]