Re:Richard Stallman on Steve Jobs: correction
by bad_user on Friday October 28, 2011 @01:41AM
(#3167143)
You're talking about choice, but software platforms are natural monopolies and the winner takes all. Sometimes there is room for a second place in case you carve out a niche, but there is no room for a third place.
So enjoy your freedom of choice, for now, but I remember a time when Microsoft was so strong that alternatives to Windows seemed destined to die.
And alternatives would have died, if Microsoft had their way with Trusted Computing ... and personally I could see Microsoft banning Firefox because "it duplicates existing functionality". But hey, Apple is cool, right?
Re:Richard Stallman on Steve Jobs: correction
by RyanMcGreal on Friday October 28, 2011 @07:38AM
(#3167856)
What if it were a criminal offence to break the lock on your car's hood so you could fix the engine yourself? That's the world the Free Software movement struggles against.
I might be considerably less upset if there were both "cars with locks on their hoods" and "regular cars without locks on their hoods" and if I was offered the choice between them.
It's quite possible to support the choice between FOSS and commercial software, and think that FOSS is a great thing for people to develop, without deciding that people whole build closed-source software are "immoral". Don't like it? Don't buy it.
I know this is a bit disingenuous and there are corner cases where it's hard to avoid closed-source. There are even a few cases where no amount of consumer choice (even, say, someone who avoids smartphones and 'cool gadgets') will allow you to escape closed source (e.g. government services available as closed-source software only or working only on platforms where you have to use closed source). The point still stands, broadly.