To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
There's no much diference form MS to the FSF, both try to make you a slave in one way or another.
This has to be the biggest pile of ....!
I think this is a moment of further escalation in the free vs. proprietary conflict. It is quite a big step in the direction of increasing pressure to keep free software pure, thus forcing those who are still sitting on a fence to take a leap. As such I don't see anything wrong with it, quite the opposite I completely endorse it
There's no much diference form MS to the FSF, both try to make you a slave in one way or another.
Yeah, but MS just wants your money, they lock you in to get more of it. FSF wants you to help them smother closed software.
But you don't have to buy into either side 100%. MS can't make you upgrade and FSF can't force anyone to use GPL3 software. If people don't want to pay for Vista they won't. If people don't want something to be GPL3, they can fork it.







Member since:
2005-09-27
I believe your impression of the FSF is incorrect.
I don't that's the impression they give to me, and I've have informed my self, and what you say I've heart it before, and after all that I believe the same.
There's no much diference form MS to the FSF, both try to make you a slave in one way or another.