El dom 06 jul 2014 10:27:27 ECT, peter green escribió:
Quiliro Ordóñez Baca wrote:
Sounds like a cool marketing strategy. I think it is very important
to recognize freedom too in the marketing because people often forget
it and think that the reason to change to free software is for short
lasting motivations.
There are many reasons people use free software, some use it because
they belive propietary software is unethical, some use it because of
the price, some use it because they are fed up with tracking
installation counts for software licensing. Some use it because it's
the best tool for the job. Some use it because they don't want to be
tied to a single vendor for bugfixes. Some use it because they want to
be able to customise the software to fit their own needs.
I think you should bear in mind that your clients reasons may not be
the same as yours.
That is precisely what I am saying and to promote the fact that the
motivations to move to free software which involve freedom are long
lasting.
Also, mentioning freedom centers quality around it instead of
temporary functionality in lieu of freedom. This saves the business
from installing non-free drivers of firmware in favour of raising the
user's freedom.
I don't think one should conflate drivers and firmware. I also don't
think one should let perfect be the enemy of good.
Well then what is the problem with using Microsoft? It has a lot of
"open source" software which ignores the objective is freedom. With a
partially free system there is not freedom. That does not mean there
cannot be a gradual migration. I did it myself. I started giving
support to a mix of free and non-free software. Now I only work with
free software. The migration from some free software to nearly all
freedom was difficult. (No one has total freedom yet...there is
non-free hardware, bios and SaaSS.) Nevertheless, it is much better to
do it directly to freedom. You get used to working with new non-free
parts and that makes it hard to migrate.
In an ideal world firmware would be free software too but in many
cases the actual choice is between propietary firmware stored in the
hardware and propietary firmware loaded from disk. I fail to see how
the user is any more free with the former than the latter.
It is a step forward. The latter has already been surmounted. So there
is no need to take steps backward.
I would try to avoid any hardware that required propietary kernel mode
drivers because they are likely to limit my freedom to upgrade the
kernel in future.
Cool. That is the way.
OTOH if the choices for meeting the customers requirements are a free
OS with a handful of non-free drivers or a completely non-free stack I
think a free software advocate would be mad to push someone towards
the latter by refusing to implement the former.
It is always easier to be a double agent. Being loyal to freedom is not
for everyone....It takes a lot of guts and putting juicy some benefits
aside. Playing the double agent role will bite you in the end because
it makes you compromise values.
I appreciate your opinion. Please do not think I disrespect it.
Although I do not share your position, I can respect it because all
opinions come from the respective person's prior experiences.
--
Saludos libres,
Quiliro Ordóñez
600 8579
_______________________________________________
Fsuk-manchester mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsuk-manchester