[FSF India] RH, SuSE etc

[Radhakrishnan CV]

On 12 Nov 2001 at 14:57, Khuzaima A. Lakdawala wrote:

   Please forgive me if I am wrong in interpreting the above but
   you are suggesting that it is not possible for a free software
   company to survive without compromising on the fundamental
   principles of free software. *That* is a really depressing
   scenario indeed!

It is really depressing. A company that extends IT enabled services
based on free software might survive. But I am yet to see a company
that creates free software and survives without compromising on the
principles. Software companies generate revenue by selling licences,
whereas a free software company cant do it.

   As for the need to look into the real reasons behind the
   closing of free software companies, that's clearly the job of
   economists, not of free software advocates. Nevertheless, if
   at all such an exercise is undertaken, I bet it will be found
   that the reasons had nothing to do with the ideology of free
   software but were in fact the same reasons why so many other
   high flying technology companies unrelated to free software
   also closed down in the crash of the new millennium -- namely,
   bad or flawed business models. We cannot blame the ideology
   for failure in implementation; we cannot say, for instance,
   (please forgive the cliched analogy) that because the Soviet
   Union failed it is not really possible to have a truly
   socialist state.

Ideal states are only theoretical posssibilities based on which
humans go forward, but not necessarily be possible to translate
entirely into reality. Soviet Union proved that and it applies to
anything idealistic.

   You have missed a *crucial* point here. We should not be the
   least bit worried about *existing* GNU/Linux users. We should
   be worried about *potential* GNU users!  Users who have
   probably *already* "fallen a prey to Microsoft". How shall we
   describe one of these distributions to them? "This is an
   alternative to Microsoft. This is supposed to be free software
   but because of some business compulsions this one too has some
   proprietary software just like Microsoft. But it is
   technically superior, more secure, cheaper..."

It is a sad truth that novices still depend upon the distributions
termed as unethical. Later on, when they find themselves comfortable
with experimenting and know more about the GNU system and its
underlying philosophy, they move to a distribution which they
consider to be better. I believe, the users' experiences guide them
more rather than the goading of the veterans.


-- 
Radhakrishnan