[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 22:34:01 +0000 Tom Brough <tombrough@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > For the most part, when considering software applications, there is for > the most part a good choice of both free and proprietary applications, > so in essence there is little need to use proprietary software UNLESS it > supports a "must have" feature (and this is purely the choice of the > individual user) that is not supported in free software. Even so it is > preferable that the user seeks assistance from the developer community > through honest dialog, to get the "must have" feature put on the wish > list for future revisions of the free software alternative. Definitely. > If we follow "Neil's" path (appologies to Neil if he thinks I am picking > on him, its not intentional), and only foster thoes users who are > prepared to use 100% free software and understand the freedom issues > inside out, then quite frankly (and remember I have gone on record to > say that I have great empathy with Neil's views) I would NOT be a > GNU/Linux user today. Hang on, I didn't say to cut 'em loose and throw away the key. The point is open discussion of the consequences of these decisions. Support will be available, it's just that the support will be hampered by the use of closed binaries. Those who use proprietary code cannot complain about a lack of support if their decision to use proprietary code makes it impossible to determine the true cause of the problem. It's about ensuring that the real PRICE of proprietary code is clear - a price that has to be paid by everyone in the community in the end. Free software will always welcome you back from the proprietary abyss but it's better if you don't leave in the first place. (Which brings us back to pre-installed GNU/Linux.) :-) > The GNU/Linux user community can not grow from a "puritain" user base > alone, IMO the growth would be too slow and too painful. example: GNU HURD. > On the other > hand a rapid acceleration of users using GNU/Linux "mixed" with > proprietary solutions, may not understand that some of the software they > are using is at odds with the FSF movement and its aims and purpose. And > worse still foster a belief in the proprietary hardware vendor camps > that they can "get away with it" example: Linspire or any release that arises from the unholy MS-Novell deal. > I want to ensure that when people do use proprietary software in > conjunction with free software platforms, that they are aware of the > issues and consequences of such use, and that they should be seeking / > demanding a free and transparent alternative from the suppliers of such > items. And commiting themselves as much as humanly possible to the > process of migrating to a free alternative as the first opportunity > available. Absolutely agree. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgpGRzAHvM45M.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html