[clug] Internode dumps FOSS for MS Exchange

[Lana Brindley]

On 17 February 2010 15:00, Chris Smart <mail at christophersmart.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 2:19 PM, Lana Brindley <lanabrindley at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Oh, I love this topic!
> >
> > I've written something about it too, so I won't repeat myself here, but
> will
> > engage in some linkspam instead:
> > http://lanabrindley.blogspot.com/2009/06/linux-zealotry.html
>
> Thanks for that, an interesting read.
>
> You seem to be saying that we shouldn't be focused on getting everyone
> to use free software, nor to fight to destroy Microsoft's market
> share. Rather, we should simply just present free software as an
> option, and then leave it at that. Take it or leave it. If they want
> it, they can take it and join. If not, then they are free to do what
> they please.
>
> I really like that, and I agree.
>
> Your last sentence seems to contradict your point of view however,
> when you say that we are indeed fighting against a monopoly.
> "The cause, after all, is software freedom, not Linux on every
> desktop. Quite frankly, software freedom is something I'm more than
> willing to fight for, but a monopoly? Isn't that what we're fighting
> against?"
>
> So are we fighting against Microsoft, or aren't we?
>

Yeah, I can see how you could intepret it that way. What I was getting at,
though, is that software freedom is the antithesis of a monopoly. Perhaps
using the word "fighting" in that sense was the wrong choice.


>
> As an aside, Free software doesn't mean "Linux." So moving people to
> free software wouldn't create a monopoly on the desktop, because there
> are lots of other options. And anyway, even if free software does
> become a monopoly, users still have choice - something they don't have
> at the moment.
>

I'm not sure that that makes sense. The word 'monopoly' would imply that
there is no choice.


>
> Really, it all breaks down to your world view - open source 'cause
> it's cool, or free software because proprietary software is evil
> (broadly speaking).
>
>
Absolutely, 100% agree with you. It bothers me immensely when people's main
point when discussing free software is that Microsoft is evil. Admittedly,
societies tend to form well when they have a single, well defined 'enemy',
and Gates is surely that enemy in this situation, and has helped to create
the free software community such as it exists today. It doesn't mean I have
to like it though ;)

I really am much more on the side of "this free software jag is cool, I want
to use it" idea, than the "Microsoft is evil, so I'm going to use Linux
instead" camp. I can't help but think that those who are here simply because
Linux != Microsoft will probably find some other band wagon to jump on soon
enough. Google-bashing, maybe?

L


-- 
Cheers! Lana

Good-bye. I am leaving because I am bored.
 - George Saunders

-----------------------------------------------
http://lanabrindley.blogspot.com
-----------------------------------------------

Please avoid sending me Word, Powerpoint or Windows Media attachments.

See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html for more
information.

------------------------------------------------