juridical Question on software and GPL
Rui Miguel Seabra
rms at 1407.org
Sat Mar 27 12:16:29 UTC 2004
On Sat, 2004-03-27 at 12:49 +0100, Moritz Sinn wrote:
> accumulates less capital. less capital means a worse position in the
> competition against the proprietary company. the free software company
> will not be able to invest as much in e.g. marketing, advertisement so
> on. if the programmer earns less he'll change to another comapny were he
> gets more.
Well, if more guys like those in these kinds of lists (us, for instance)
help more people understand the need for Free Software, I bet with you
that sooner than later it'll be the other way around.
> microsoft didn't loose any significant share of market in the last years
> and i don't see why it should.
Any significant share, yes. But it's being eaten by all sides. Serious
parts are crumbling already (large scale moves to GNU/Linux based
> that ppl don't care about quality and that they only see the outer
> appearance was already mentioned in this discussion. they don't care
> about their freedom to change the software, to read the source code or
> what so ever. they just want to use it. if it would be diffrent linux
> would be on every computer and not windows.
You don't care about what you don't know you can (or have the right to)
have. That's what has to be change.
BTW, don't you think it's a little unfair for users to use only an
operating system kernel? That way they'll really miss Windows with all
those colourful widgets. Why not teach people about GNU/Linux, and how
freedom made it reach the current state of the art instead? :)
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?
Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the Discussion