"How Open Source is Really Maintained" comes to mind: https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1280/1*Q_8HbGbbfEmAjwPqB...
Pretty much my entire development stack.
The programming community in general is bloody amazing. I feel very grateful to be a part of it.
TreeProjects Personal Database: http://personaldatabase.org/ - searchable, inter-linkable, hierarchical notes and media tracking for projects
Godot Game Engine: https://godotengine.org/ - the scene graph system wherein a "scene" is just a saved subtree of nodes and can be instantiated at any point within a parent scene is so far beyond the clumsy scene/prefab split in eg. Unity
The list really is quite impressive. And then there are the things I don't use, but still impress the hell out of me. Skewer mode being the frontrunner there.
Then there is Firefox. Easy to complain about memory usage and whatnot, but it really is an impressive piece of engineering for what I paid for it.
Some people are extremely happy with KDE Neron though.
The core stays on the latest Ubuntu LTS but the KDE is updates real quick to the latest version.
If we're including programming languages under "software": Clojure.
If we're including libraries under "Software": Lacinia and Reagent.
If we're including databases: ArangoDB.
Linux. Arch for my fancy stuff, Alpine for my servers.
SQLite and Fossil, from the inimitable D. Richard Hipp, plus rsync and rclone to keep everything in its place.
Yes, I'm a minimalist.
Of course, good is so intrinsically tied up with free that we cannot pry them apart. Not for the sake of money (I do contribute, I do donate), but for the convenience and accessability, and of course the principle.
Oh, and GIMP. How could I forget?
It's incredibly faster.
It does a spectacular job at emulating how real painting feels.
The color picker is a lot better in Krita, in my opinion.
Krita can use (some) Photoshop brushes out of the box, just add them in.
It has an (arguably) better interface, and four color schemes out of the box.
The Bad in Comparison:
It doesn't have the non-painting effects of Photoshop, which can be a huge downside if you tend to use those on your projects.
With Microsoft, even Visual Studio Team Services is free - private Git hosting for up to five users, a decent CI/CD orchestration platform, a private Nuget feed, project planning, etc.
especially with competition from atom + with electron improvements leading to atom not having totally garbage performance
- Everything sponsored by the CNCF (https://www.cncf.io/)
- Everything Hashicorp (https://www.hashicorp.com/)
- OpenStack (https://www.openstack.org/)
And a small bonus:
- Dotmesh (https://dotmesh.com/), snapshot awesomeness
Dropbox (basic) - Support across platforms with cli.
Amazingly complete CRM system with a robust and fast web based IMAP client.
I'm also always blown away by how incredibly easy to use and at the same time how powerful hugin is. In this long list of for-pay stitching applications, Hugin is the only one of two which are free (again, beer and speech) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_photo_stitching_...
Coders provide software worth billions in man hours for free and trying to find quality "artistic" content is impossible. Every little clip art image costs many dollars.
Why do coders provide their services for free so generously while artists are mainly worried about their copyrights?
a) More typically an individual work, with one person having a vision that they do not want to have compromised by others. Arguably harder to have contributions in a way that doesn't stand out in many cases, which means one work made by a small army of contributors sharing the workload doesn't happen often.
b) the "work for me for free" demands are worse for artists than for coders. "Freeloading" is seen a lot more critically/abusive than in software circles. (although it does happen with open-source projects as well of course, and long-term maintainers burn out accordingly as well).
c) approximately nobody pays artists to produce freely licensed works
d) free work by artists might be in direct competition to their ability to make money from their art.
e) Parts vs final product: a lot of open-source development is in pieces that other projects build on. Similarly, you can find quite a lot of "pieces" of art for free: sound templates, stock/reference images, textures, ..., which is not very visible to someone looking for "free graphics". Similarly to how many people not involved with software do not understand on what mountain of free libraries a lot of software stands.
f) More visible if reused, which leads users of graphic resources to want individual ones instead of the same as everyone else. E.g. games will more likely stand out by graphics but use the same engine as X other games.
It's paid by advertisers. Docs and mail are just the Trojan horse to get you to use Google for searching.