Free and safe closed source that is better, or open source and

>false dichotomy
/g/ is fucking stupid but we're not that fucking stupid

Closed source results in better quality, usually. Open source is basically charity from the poor.

>>59308736
>can't even reply to a post properly
They're really training you fuckers less, budget must be tight

>>59308613
How am I supposed to know it's safe if I can't audit the source code? Have you ever had the displeasure of working in a corporate programming environment? It's not exactly conducive to producing airtight programs.

>>59308613
>safe closed source
no such thing sweetie

File: 1488425510213.jpg (213KB, 1300x1180px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 1300x1180px

>>59308736
(!) CIA SHILL DETECTED (!)
(!) CIA SHILL DETECTED (!)
(!) CIA SHILL DETECTED (!)
(!) CIA SHILL DETECTED (!)
(!) CIA SHILL DETECTED (!)
(!) CIA SHILL DETECTED (!)

>>59308613
You were exposed as an idiot before you completed the question.

>>59309411
You are an idiot for believing the question is not designed to be on purpose restrictive.

>>59308736
This is true with linux, but try bsd with more centralized designs. You get professionally designed software, but still opensource. And botnet free, if you're willing to learn openbsd.