This week on Destination Linux, we’re going to discuss why being a supporter of open source does not mean that you are anti-commercial. Later in the show, we’re going to go on a Treasure Hunt in Jill’s silicon world of wonders and hardware museum! Plus we’ve also got our famous tips, tricks and software picks. All of this and so much more this week on Destination Linux. So whether you’re brand new to Linux and open source or a guru of sudo. This is the podcast for you

Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Hosts of Destination Linux:

Ryan (DasGeek) =
Michael Tunnell =
Jill Bryant =
Noah Chelliah =

Want to Support the Show?

Support us on Patreon =
Support us on Sponsus =
Destination Linux Network Store =

Want to follow the show and hosts on social media?

You can find all of our social accounts at

Segment Index

Other Links:


  1. Ermagurd!!! They read my question!! :smiley: :smiley:

    Thank youuuuuuuuuu

    It’s a complicated one, just weighing all the options and really appreciated the range of input. I’ll share the final solution when I come to it.

  2. Thanks everyone - I remember those Macs though I like @jill_linuxgirl 's a lot more now that it doesn’t have Apple software on it :wink:

    On the commercial topic raised by @MichaelTunnell:
    I agree with @kernellinux on considering the motive of the company behind their open source work. I’ve tended to think better of firms that work in open source because they seem to have some intention of giving to the community as well as earning a living from producing their product - which they absolutely need to do, unless they’re so well-off that they can basically afford to donate their time and products. The other side of the giving to the community coin, to use a metaphor that suits this, in my opinion, is for users of the community to make a commitment to donating based on their ability and their use of the products. I love the freemium model and community/enterprise versions. Again I think there’s an element of good-will involved so the generosity of firms who are making their product available for free to the community, does need to be balanced by suitable payment, an undoubtedly should be made by commercial users, in my opinion.

    As far as contributed code from Big Tech firms goes, yes we appreciate their contributions but I also think anybody coming to the table with a possible conflict of interest needs to have their work even more thoroughly scrutinised if possible. It seems to me when there’s a lot of money involved, making and having more can become the over-riding motive and that might go-against some values of the open source community.

    I’m not anti-commercial, because as @dasgeek points out, people need to eat; and economies work by having people be paid for their skills, though I do look at the ethics of companies whose products I use and try to make that a factor in where I take my business, to the extent that I can afford to, and in choosing who I’d work for. That’s why I would still choose LibreOffice over MS Office, even if MS Office were “free” in monetary terms and LO were not, and contribute code to LO if I were able to, rather than be employed by MS. Just my thoughts :slight_smile:

  3. Answered by a listener write in!

Continue the discussion at


Avatar for MichaelTunnell Avatar for ak2020 Avatar for Ulfnic Avatar for jill_linuxgirl