Free is too expensive (Economist)
Posted Apr 7, 2012 15:45 UTC (Sat) by khim
In reply to: Free is too expensive (Economist)
Parent article: Free is too expensive (Economist)
> You asking users to give up concrete advantages for nebulous freedoms (which they don't want and don't need).
That's what the FSF has always done, since the very beginning.
Sorry, but facts don't support your claims. First release of GCC supported VAX and SunOS. Later Cygnus developed extensive system which brought GNU tools to users of proprietary OSes and it was enthusiastically endorsed by FSF. And even when Linux finally made GNU/Linux OS usable support for users of other platforms continued.
RMS and FSF may sound like stuck-up zealots at times but they are very practical when it's important.
> It just does not work.
If it didn't work, then FLOSS would never have gained any significant amount of users in the first place. Clearly that's not the case.
See above. All the FOSS “success stories” (server, embedded, Android, etc) are in places where people care about normal users and not just about FOSS lovers. On desktop, where distributions reject such people Linux is confined to aforementioned 1% and lives at mercy of proprietary brethren: most (if not all) hardware for desktop is created without Linux in mind. Linux support is added later if at all. Compare support for server-related hardware (CPUs, NICs, etc) and for Desktop-oriented one (GPUs, WiFi, etc)
This is dangerous situation to be in.
to post comments)