X.org, distributors, and proprietary modules
Posted Aug 15, 2006 4:14 UTC (Tue) by bojan
In reply to: X.org, distributors, and proprietary modules
Parent article: X.org, distributors, and proprietary modules
> They don't need or want the source.
Which is quite understandable. Not every user is a developer. But, they still do benefit from the fact that the source is distributable and modifiable by others, as the cost of development and distribution is greatly reduced. This is especially true long term.
> Running Linux or another Free OS does nothing for them.
Of course it does. It lowers the cost of the development and distribution of the OS, therefore bringing down the cost of their machine. Something, I'm sure, they will have an interest in.
It is easy to focus attention on immediate and short term effects of free software end pronounce that "most users don't care". They may not be entirely sure as to why they *should* care (mostly due to lack of infromation), but the economic effects of free software are surely going to make them care, as these determine how much money users have to part with in order to do what they want to do.
PS. This is exactly why Microsoft isn't willing to let OEMs go and demands they sign a contract with Microsoft to ship every single PC preloaded with Windows. The "software cost" then gets counted as "hardware cost" and users don't have any other choice but to accept it as something that "simply is the way it is". Bill may be many things, but he sure isn't stupid (as the balance on his bank account clearly shows :-).
to post comments)