Science-fiction ;-)

[Sebastian Heinlein]

Quoting Gnu/Linux Technology <linux.fr at laposte.net>:

> Some crazy suggestions in absolut...based of what I do after an
> installation of Ububtu.
>
> 1) Remove Evolution replaced by Thunderbird
> 2) Remove Totem replaced by VLC
> 3) Add xmms + Streamtuner + Streamripper, Beagle.
> 4) Add all non free stuff  : java, flash, w32codec, libdvdcss, xnview,
> frostwire, aMule, Skype, Google Earth
>   => I could see during install party that it is the more diificult
> part to explain why this stuff is not inside Ubuntu according to GPL.

The explanation is quite short: "We want to provide you a free system, so it
only includes free software by default". It is our competetive edge - that we
provide free software.

But indeed there is a strange user behavior: many users are looking for an
alternative for their Windows system, because they want a system they don't
trust their current one in the aspects of privacy, security or stabiliy (I
don't know if the latest one is still valid today). But as soon as they 
use the
alternative they seem to forget that the root of their problem was the
proprietary nature of their former software.

> Newbies don't understand why the distro is not functionnal out of the
> box (like it was in 2004 releases of Simply MEPIS).

Why do so many users expect that GNU/Linux works out of the box in all 
aspects?
Show me a system that fulfills all your software needs by default. Most users
install a lot - even on a preinstalled Windows system. The OS that works for
everyone by default is a myth. And this myth is only valid as an ideal - a
positive utopia - but not as a standard that gets only applied to free
operating systems.

Furthermore the system is for free (the one in beer)! So the expections 
of some
users are just immoderate. But it's perhaps a long term effect of the software
piracy, that many people forget the price of software.

Since open source includes also the aspect of a free competition, the focus
should be/is on making it easier for the user to install proprietary 
stuff, but
not on providing it by default. Furthermore it is important to show the user
clearly, that he or she leaves the land of the free, when he or she installs
non-free software - as you already said before.

Ubuntu provides a quite complete desktop by default. And we should be proud of
this.

> Could there be a walk around to easily offer this option? Perhaps by
> enabling non-free repos in Synaptic?

There is gnome-app-install: Applications -> Add/Remove. You can find 
flash, java
, mp3 support and other applications there and they are only a few 
clicks away.
With edgy even only four clicks... [1] Where else can you install software so
easily? :)

> This choices are more political than technical, but we have to talk
> about to find how to allows more and more users to migrate to open-systems.

Not really. It is also a legal issue. There is a reason why some of these
applications are called non-free: you are not free to redistrubte them. So it
is  also the desicion of the software vendors, if they wants to see their
software shipped in multiverse.

On the one hand you talk about "open" systems, but on the other hand you want
them to not be completely free anymore. If you want them to migrate to open
system you should provide them a free system by default.

Free software has gone a long way and there is perhaps still a long 
road ahead.
To be honest I think that it would be a pitty to sacrifice our motivations and
intentions for a small user gain.

Cheers,

Sebastian

[1] Choose "show all available applications", check the corresponding
application, confirm the licence and click on apply or ok.

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.