Google Earth for Linux

Posted Jun 23, 2006 11:45 UTC (Fri) by Zack (guest, #37335) [Link]

I'm sorry you got offended. The point was it that the "works for me" reasoning is harmful to Free Software en large.
People running different architectures or alternative free operating systems are being left out, and that is unfair.

Just to give an example, OpenBSD is currently pushing hard to make sure your wireless laptop drivers will be free in the future. It's a considerable effort, and the Free Software community will be richer for it.
Now we, the GNU/Linux/x86 users who "made it into mainstream", are leaving them behind. They do their part to make sure our Software Freedoms are respected, and it's only fair we should refuse to promise not to help them.

Now I am a run of the mill GNU/Linux on x86 user, so I can afford not to care for now.
The question is, "do I want that ?"

>When google ships non free software on multi-platforms it's subverting.
Yes, it's divisive.
>When microsoft makes all their possible to kill a potential free software alternative enforcing their abusive monopoly, it's decent.
No, it's divisive as well.

>This makes me wonder if perhaps the detractors are right,
Detractors doesn't make sense here
>and it's all just a big "let's eradicate non free software"
It should be.
>or "Free Beer is evil, Free Speech is the only way.
Zero-cost proprietary software is just as harmful as payed for proprietary software, so yes, "Free Beer is evil."

>You shut up." speech for most.
I'm sorry, I never told anyone to be quiet.

>At least google has the decency not to lock you into a non free software platform directly, and make their "gifts" available to most.
They already managed to lock you into a platform, either GNU/Linux on x86 or windows on x86.
That's not choice, it's Kang or Kodos.

>PS: don't make me say what I didn't say.
I didn't. I'm pointing out the non-obvious consequences of the "works for me" reasoning, which is that all architectures and operating systems not "blessed" by google will be left to rot until they reach viability.
It is harmful to the Free Software community on the long run and such behaviour shouldn't be cloaked up and defended as practicality.

It's not "harmless fun" because it introduces a mindset that is destructive.

If you realised and considered this already and do not feel the issue is that important, that's okay.
However there are a lot of people skipping over the inconvenient question of Software Freedoms here, since it's all "harmless fun", without giving their actions proper thought.
Using proprietary software has consequences, and people should think about those implications to decide whether they want to contribute to that.