RMS, Free software and the Ubuntu CDs

[Alexander Skwar]

Michael T. Richter wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-02-07 at 12:45 +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
>> > Does being 100% free make for better software for the masses, no.
> 
>> Try asking an Xorg developer whether proprietary nVidia/ATI drivers is
>> making it easier for them to support Xorg on that hardware and provide a
>> better Xorg "for the masses".  
> 
> That wasn't the question asked.  The question asked was "does being 100% 
> free make for better software for the masses?"

Actually, I think he answered that question pretty well. Matthew
wrote, that Xorg guys might say, that a "100% free" systems DOES
make it better for the masses, as the Xorg guys can debug and improve
the software.

There's also yet another aspect in how "100% free system" make
for a better system for the masses. If something's 100% free, it
can be used by different systems/programs, which embed/use the
other system to make it do things, the original author might not
have thought about.

> Here's a clue as to the right answer, though: go to Sourceforge and find 
> a random project.  (To be fair select a random project that's out of 
> "Alpha" stage.)  Compare that project to similar commercial offerings.  
> I'd guess that at least 8 times out of 10 the free version isn't as 
> good.

I'd guess that the opposite is true. How often do you find so-called
*stable* software in the commercial area, that isn't even half as good
as an alpha version from the FLOSS sector? Quite often, this also
extends to documentation - ie. I find documentation in the commercial
area to be lacking quite often.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
HOST SYSTEM RESPONDING, PROBABLY UP...