Re: [OT] Re: [Fwd: Re: Two 3.10 feature ideas]

[אנטולי קרס נר <tombackton gmail com>]

I wasn't implying closed-source software succeeds, it was sarcasm.

Anyway, arguing on different believes and priorities is pointless, I'll
stop here. I got the point, you want a bigger market share. But I don't
understand why. I mean, why is that the primary goal? It sounds like a
goal for a commercial company.

Anyway, you do what you believe in and I'll do what I believe in. I
understand now, why Gnome supplies all those "bad" plugins before it
tries to offer replacements.

There are enough modules for me to work not, which aren't related to
Facebook or Google.

See you around

On ו', 2013-04-12 at 19:29 +0200, Andre Klapper wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-04-12 at 19:40 +0300, אנטולי קרסנר wrote:
> > What does "competing on the market" mean? Do you get a salary for
> > working on Gnome projects, which depends on how many people use your
> > software?
>
> Primarily, markets are based on interest & attention, not money.
>
> > Since when is "increasing the user base" a primary goal? If that's we're
> > after, let's start writing closed-source software. Microsoft, Google,
> > Facebook and many others succeed more than Gnome, maybe we should just
> > follow them and abandon the Free Software idea.
>
> You imply that because of being closed-source, other projects are more
> successful, but it's more likely that they are successful for a number
> of other reasons while being closed-source. So that's a false cause.
>
> But we might differ on defining "success" here, I'm thinking in terms of
> userbase and marketshare, you might not.
>
> > Now seriously, which goal is more important: spreading software freedom
> > and free-as-in-freedom computing, or just getting more people to use
> > Gnome (which doesn't increase anyone's salary anyway)?
>
> To me both is important. Plus not sure why you mention salaries.
>
> > In my opinion, the point is that the developers themselves should care
> > about software freedom, and make that a high-priority goal, rather than
> > feeding their ego by having users migrate to Gnome.
>
> So "caring about software freedom" does not feed your ego by making you
> feel more morale compared to closed-source? Good, then.
>
> >  You can't spread
> > freedom if you're not consistent with your own ideas. People will say,
> > "all that open source/free software thing is bullshit, look at them.
> > They supply a direct connection to Facebook and GMail and Twitter from
> > the desktop, before them even bother to give us a free alternative. It's
> > all bullshit, let's go back to Windows."
>
> "People will say" misses a citation, but I can come up with that too:
> "People will say that the open source/free software thing is bullshit,
> they don't even offer basic integration with the most common services on
> the interwebs. Freedom is nice, but I need to get my work done."
>
> Anyway, I prefer to make GNOME good, easy, beautiful for everybody, not
> just for people who already know and care about software freedom.
>
> andre