Hi,
Luciano Miguel Ferreira Rocha wrote:
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 10:10:51PM +0100, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
<snip>
According to my knowledge vi (at least some implementations) and mozilla are free.
So is Linux. And I'm not sure about vi, I could only find a draft of a licence that wasn't sure about being GPL compatible. Yet, my point was that Mozilla is ported to run on Windows. Should Free software developers do that? And most of those developers program on Windows (that's why Mozilla is faster and better in Win32 than any other platform). Shouldn't we just stopping using Mozilla?
What is your base to say this? As far as I know mozilla runs much better on GNU/Linux, although that might be due to the OS and not the program. Maybe the development is more win32 orientated because of the major problems in a win32 environment? Anyway, I do not think you should stop using a program just because it aims to be multi-platform. Free software is free software, be it on a free or a non-free OS.
Free software developers shouldn't use non-free software and promote free software IMHO.
By developing free software they're promoting free software. By personally using some not-so-free (not free, anyway) software they don't start promoting non-free against free software.
My point exactly on mozilla, I believe.
My biggest reasons for not staying with Linux are technical.
And the biggest reasons for Linux being widely used are technical, as are the biggest reasons for Hurd not being widely used nor developed upon...
Regards, Luciano Rocha
thx for your time, Wim