
> Same old story.
> 
> I keep hearing about people who accept ruinous compromises just to get
> some users.
> 
> Users acquired in this way are not good users if you don't explain them
> the four freedoms and the importance of free software, the importance for

> you to have FULL control of your computer.
> 
> Using Ubuntu they don't have a full control of their computer because of
> the non free parts.

I'm sory but not all installations of Ubuntu have proprietary software.
Only those that require proprietary drivers, or firmware get it in
installation, all other proprietary software is installed by the user after
installation of Ubuntu, and that is something the user can do with any
distribution.

Maybe we should remind you that Ubuntu installer only installs proprietary
drivers when there's no free driver, or when the free driver is unstable.
And only installs proprietary firmware when it's needed by the driver.
Ubuntu also doesn't install by default support prorietary codecs, and free
implementations of patent tainted codecs. So I can't see any ruinous
compromise here. I see compromise, but not ruinous.


 
> Why should we point at the worst? Why are you comparing with the iBad?

We're comparing with the worst because people are sugesting to do with
Ubuntu the same we should do with the worts (do not use it).


> You should avoid compromises and fight for free software.

I think we all agree that we want to avoid, it doesn't meen that it's
always possible.


> I know lots of people who use ubuntu..  with skype... picasa..  and so
on.
> 
> What's the difference between using "some" non free sofware and "all" non

> free software in the areas where it is available?

The network effect is reduced. It's not stopped, but not reduced. I also
belive that people in those situations are more prone to change to free
only.

> Where do you draw the line?

For me?
For me the line is simple, Free Software only. But in this field I'm more
edducated that most (as are you). And this is what I trie to get from
others. But it's not reasonable that people buy a new laptop to use only
Free Software, they should and will have more attention when buying a new
one, but that will be when there're more reasons to do so.

> Try instead of using a fully free distribution, contribute to it, make it

> better.
> More people using a fully free distro means that distro will have a big
> weight, a big user base and so hardware vendors could choose it instead
of
> ubuntu.

And if I don't have a computer where I can use only Free Software? Will you
buy me one?


With my cumpliments
Diogo
-- 



