What is the difference between free and open source?
| Aspect | Free Software | Open Source |
|---|---|---|
| difference between free and open source | Ethical imperative: software must respect user freedom. | Practical methodology for collaborative development. |
| Definition | Four essential freedoms (FSF). | Ten criteria (OSI). |
| Founder | Richard Stallman, Free Software Foundation. | Eric Raymond, Open Source Initiative (1998). |
| Goal | Protect user rights as an ethical issue. | Promote business adoption through practical benefits. |
| Common software | Linux, Firefox, LibreOffice | Linux, Firefox, LibreOffice |
Difference Between Free and Open Source: Philosophy vs Practical
Many people use the terms interchangeably, but the difference between free and open source software lies in their underlying philosophies, not their technical capabilities. Understanding this distinction helps clarify why some advocate for ethical software freedom while others focus on collaborative development for business. Explore the comparison to see how these two movements shape the software you use every day.
What is the difference between free and open source software?
The core difference between free and open source software isnt technical—its philosophical. Both terms refer to software that grants users the freedom to run, study, share, and modify the code, but they represent two different worldviews. The free software movement, pioneered by Richard Stallman and the Free Software Foundation (FSF), frames this as an ethical imperative: software should respect users freedom (citation:4). The open source movement, co-founded by Eric Raymond and the Open Source Initiative (OSI) in 1998, rebranded the same category of software to emphasize its practical, collaborative development methodology for broader corporate adoption (citation:7).
In everyday use, nearly all free software is open source, and nearly all open source software is free (citation:4). The practical difference is subtle: a handful of licenses are accepted by one definition but not the other. For most users and developers, the terms are interchangeable, which is why the combined acronym FOSS (what is free and open source software) or FLOSS (Free/Libre and Open Source Software) is so common (citation:1).
The Core Philosophy: Freedom vs. Methodology
Free Software: A Matter of Ethics
The free software definition is grounded in four essential freedoms outlined by the FSF (citation:4): Freedom 0: The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose.
Freedom 1: The freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it do what you wish. Access to the source code is a precondition for this. Freedom 2: The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor. Freedom 3: The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others. This gives the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
The free in free software refers to liberty, not price. Think free speech, not free beer (citation:7). The movements goal is to protect these freedoms, ensuring they are never taken away by proprietary software restrictions. This is why the FSF promotes strong copyleft licenses like the GNU General Public License (GPL), which require that modified versions of the software remain free (citation:3).
Open Source: A Pragmatic Approach
The open source movement agreed with the principles of free software but disagreed on the messaging. They felt the term free was confusing and that promoting software freedom as a moral crusade made corporations uncomfortable. The term open source was coined to focus on the advantages of open source vs free software models: better quality, greater reliability, more flexibility, and lower costs (citation:6).
The Open Source Definition, maintained by the OSI, is a set of ten criteria that a license must meet to be labeled open source. While it covers the same ground as the four freedoms, it emphasizes practical outcomes like free redistribution, access to source code, and the allowance of modifications and derived works (citation:6). The goal was to present this software as a superior choice for business, divorced from the philosophical difference free software open source advocates typically highlight.
Free vs. Open Source: A Quick Comparison
Here is how the two perspectives stack up against each other, clarifying the different focal points of each movement.
Factor: Key Value, Free Software (FSF): Software should respect user liberty, Open Source (OSI): Collaborative development produces better software (citation:6)
Factor: Terminology, Free Software (FSF): Free as in free speech (citation:7), Open Source (OSI): Open as in source code is open for inspection
Factor: Guiding Document, Free Software (FSF): The Four Essential Freedoms (citation:4), Open Source (OSI): The Open Source Definition (10 criteria) (citation:6)
Factor: Primary Goal, Free Software (FSF): To protect users rights to share, study, and modify software, Open Source (OSI): To promote a collaborative, transparent development process (citation:1)
Factor: Example License, Free Software (FSF): GNU General Public License (GPL) (citation:3), Open Source (OSI): Apache License 2.0, MIT License (citation:8)
Why the Distinction Matters (And Why It Often Doesn't)
For the vast majority of users, the difference between free and open source software is irrelevant. If you use Linux, Firefox, or LibreOffice, you are using software that qualifies as both. The terms FOSS and FLOSS were created precisely to sidestep the philosophical debate and refer to the software category as a whole (citation:1).
The distinction becomes significant in two scenarios: 1. When choosing a license for your own project: Your choice reflects your goals. If you want to ensure your code and all its derivatives remain free forever, youll pick a strong copyleft license like the GPL (aligned with free software ideals). If you want your code to be used as widely as possible, including in proprietary projects, youll pick a permissive license like MIT or Apache 2.0 (aligned with open source vs free software licenses strategies) (citation:3)(citation:8).
2. When discussing the politics of technology: The distinction is central to discussions about software freedom, digital rights, and corporate control over technology.
Clearing Up the "Freeware" Confusion
This is the most common point of confusion. free software vs freeware comparisons are essential because freeware is available for use at zero monetary cost, but its source code is typically not available. You cannot study, modify, or share it. Examples include Adobe Reader and Skypes basic version. Freeware is closed-source, while FOSS is, by definition, open-source. Software is only free or open source if it grants you the four freedoms, not just if you can download it without paying.
Real-World Examples: Licensing in Action
To see the practical implications, look at how different projects use licenses: The Linux Kernel (GPL v2): Linus Torvalds chose the GPL for the Linux kernel. This ensures that any company that distributes a modified version of the kernel must also release its source code. This copyleft provision has prevented proprietary forks and ensured that all improvements to the kernel benefit the entire community (citation:8).
The Android Operating System (Apache 2.0): Google chose the Apache 2.0 license for much of Androids open-source code. This permissive license allows smartphone manufacturers to use Android without being forced to open-source their own proprietary modifications or hardware drivers, which was crucial for widespread industry adoption (citation:8).
React and Node.js (MIT): Meta (formerly Facebook) chose the highly permissive MIT license for React. This minimalist license imposes almost no restrictions, encouraging maximum adoption by developers and companies, who can freely use it in any project, commercial or otherwise, without complex legal obligations (citation:3)(citation:8).
Frequently Asked Questions
Here are answers to common questions users have when navigating the world of FOSS.
Free Software vs. Open Source: Philosophical vs. Pragmatic
While they define almost the exact same set of software, the 'free software' and 'open source' movements approach it from fundamentally different angles.Free Software (FSF)
• A social problem that restricts freedom
• User rights and ethical imperative (citation:4)
• Richard Stallman and the GNU Project (1983) (citation:4)
• Strong copyleft (e.g., GPL) to ensure freedoms are preserved for all users (citation:8)
• Think 'free speech, not free beer' (citation:7)
Open Source (OSI)
• One option among many, but open source offers practical advantages
• Practical benefits: quality, reliability, cost (citation:1)
• Coined in 1998 by the Open Source Initiative to rebrand 'free software' for business (citation:7)
• Accepts all OSI-approved licenses, from permissive (MIT) to copyleft (GPL) (citation:6)
• A superior development model for better software (citation:6)
The FSF judges software by its adherence to an ethical standard of freedom. The OSI judges software by whether its development and distribution model meets a practical, collaborative standard. In practice, the software they promote is nearly identical, but the 'why' behind their advocacy is worlds apart.From Developer to Contributor: Minh's First Open Source Pull Request
Minh, a 26-year-old web developer in Austin, had used open source tools like React and VS Code for years without a second thought. To him, 'free' software was just stuff you could download without paying. He never considered the philosophical debate.
While building a side project, he found a bug in a small MIT-licensed library. On a whim, he fixed it and submitted a pull request. The maintainer thanked him and merged the fix within 24 hours.
That experience shifted his perspective. He wasn't just a user; he was a participant. He started to understand the 'open source' value of community collaboration, even if he still didn't care about the ethical arguments of the 'free software' movement.
A year later, Minh contributes to a project under the GPL. This time, he thinks more deeply about the license. His code, and any future changes to the project, must stay open. He realizes that while he started with a pragmatic approach, he now values the freedoms the GPL guarantees for all future users.
Quick Summary
Same software, different philosophy.'Free software' is a social movement for user freedom; 'open source' is a development methodology for better software. In practice, they refer to almost identical licenses and projects.
The four freedoms are the foundation.Software is only 'free' (in the FSF sense) if it grants you the freedom to run, study, share, and modify it (citation:4).
License choice reflects your goal.Choose a copyleft license like the GPL if you want to ensure your code and its derivatives remain free forever. Choose a permissive license like MIT or Apache 2.0 if you want your code to be used as widely as possible, even in proprietary projects (citation:3)(citation:8).
Freeware is not FOSS.Freeware is price-based, while FOSS is rights-based. If you can't see and modify the source code, it's not free or open source software (citation:2)(citation:7).
Extended Details
If it's free and open source, does that mean it's freeware?
No, absolutely not. Freeware is software that costs zero money, but its source code is usually secret and cannot be changed. FOSS gives you the freedom to study and modify the code, which is a much more powerful set of rights (citation:2)(citation:7).
Is open source software always free of charge?
Yes, you can almost always download and use it for free. However, the licenses allow companies to sell it, too. Companies like Red Hat built billion-dollar businesses selling support and services for free software. The 'free' in FOSS isn't about price, so selling it doesn't violate the principles (citation:6).
Can I use open source software in my commercial business?
Absolutely. All OSI-approved open source licenses allow commercial use. Some have conditions (like the GPL requiring you to share your code if you distribute changes), but none forbid you from using it to make money. In fact, that's one of the key criteria of the Open Source Definition (citation:1)(citation:6).
If the licenses are almost the same, why do two movements exist?
It's a matter of marketing and philosophy. The free software movement, started in the 80s, focuses on the user's moral right to control their software. The open source movement, started in the late 90s, focuses on the practical business and technical benefits of collaborative development (citation:7). They share code, but not the same ideology.
- What is the code for Samsung battery reset?
- How to calibrate a Samsung battery?
- How do I reset my Samsung battery stats *#9900?
- How to stop background apps from draining battery?
- How to see which app is running in background?
- What drains a phone battery the fastest?
- How can I check what is draining my phone battery?
- How to find which apps are draining the battery?
- What is the most common cause of parasitic battery drain?
- How do I check to see whats draining my battery?
Feedback on answer:
Thank you for your feedback! Your input is very important in helping us improve answers in the future.