[FSF India] RH, SuSE etc

[Khuzaima A. Lakdawala]

Radhakrishnan CV <cvr@river-valley.com> writes:

> 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.

Selling licenses is the *only* way for a software company to generate
revenue? Well, I guess other folks in the free software community must
be wrong because they think otherwise:
http://www.stromian.com/bizmod.html
http://eu.conecta.it/paper/Economics_open_source.html
http://eu.conecta.it/paper/Some_business_case_examples.html

[A request to others on this list to please find and post links to
alternative free software business models.]

And I guess people like "FSF Europe" are simply wasting their time
trying to help "companies to develop [new] business models based on Free
Software or fit existing models to 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.

If you think that the analogy is wrong or misplaced, please ignore it,
but please don't start a tangential discussion on the analogy itself,
ignoring the main point being made before citing the analogy.

> 
>    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.

For my opinion on this flawed approach, please see 
http://gnu.org.in/pipermail/fsf-india/2001-August/000312.html

A techno-social movement like ours requires active, convincing and at
times even aggressive advocacy. If the movement's leadership simply
sits back and lets the "users' experiences guide them", it will be
doomed to failure.

Regards,
Khuzaima

> 
> 
> -- 
> Radhakrishnan
> 
> _______________________________________________
> http://gnu.org.in/mailman/listinfo/fsf-india
> 
> 

-- 
Khuzaima A. Lakdawala