Re: Non-free software and GNOME (The conclusion)

[Rob Brown-Bayliss <on_the_net clear net nz>]

On Tue, 2001-10-23 at 10:31, Andy Tai wrote:
> I strongly urge the GNOME Foundation not to accept
> this idea.  Mentioning (the proprietary) Star Office
> in GNOME Summary is one thing, but this idea is
> another.  This idea goes too far and is against the
> basic ideal of GNOME, that is, promoting free software
> replacements for proprietary software on the desktop. 

I might be wrong but I always thought that the idea was a free desktop,
there will always be free desktop apps for any platform.  People like to
code.

The fact is that most people believe that the more an object costs the
better it is, just look at the expensive wrist watches that don't keep
good time.  I know (as many people do) that this is not always the case,
but that is the way most people feel.  With out the option of buying
expensive software for their gnome desktop a lot of folks (including
smart people who make choices for a company) will belive that it's
second rate.

It's sad, but it's true.  Encouraging large software firms to develop
for Gnome can only be good for Gnome.

Once they are here, and people are useing gnome (becasue they can throw
lots of maoney at average apps) then there is a larger oportunity to
show them how good our apps are...



-- 

  Rob Brown-Bayliss
 ---======o======---