[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Should the FSF back monopolisation by M$?

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Should the FSF back monopolisation by M$?
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 19:12:07 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Tarquin Mills <> writes:

> In message <85fyk4l30v.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> David Kastrup wrote:
>> Tarquin Mills <> writes:
>> > In message <85r73ol4zk.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> David Kastrup wrote:
>> >> Tarquin Mills <> writes:
>> >> > Should the FSF back complete monopolisation by Microsoft, or should
>> >> > it be against, as it aims to produce an operating system written in
>> >> > 100% free software code?
>> >> 
>> >> It does neither mean that I back all my neighbors or am against all of
>> >> them if I happen not to try bedding them.
>> >> 
>> >> Microsoft is by and large irrelevant to free software as long as
>> >> they don't indulge in business practices that harm free software,
>> >> like pressuring vendors into producing hardware that is incapable
>> >> of running it.
>> >
>> > We are all part of the world and connected to each other, the Linux
>> > magazines cannot exist without readers and adverts, the same is true
>> > of other Linux companies including distros.
>> So what?  Free software existed before Linux, and certainly before
>> "the Linux magazines" and their "readers and adverts".  The
>> majority of free software _developers_ whose work gets collected in
>> "distros" is not employed by Linux companies.  And Linux companies
>> don't compete in that segment of the market that Microsoft is
>> monopolizing, anyway.
> According to a NYLXS radio program about 93-94% of the Linux kernel
> is written by people who are being paid.

By whom?  "Linux companies"?  And how do they arrive at those numbers.

> GNU/Linux, FSF's GNU Hurd and Microsoft's Windows are all in the
> same market, operating systems.

But GNU does not compete in it.  It is there for the taking.  And it
will remain there for the taking when the last Linux company has
closed down.  As will all previous free software.  The Linux companies
are packagers of free software, and there is a harsh competition going
on in that market, with narrow margins and a fight to keep at the
forefront.  Microsoft instead has a separate market segment, because
it is wildly incompatible with the rest, and it does not compete in
packaging but rather in producing and marketing restricted material.

And the Hurd is not in a market at all, anyway.

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]