[Fsf-india] From free beer to free speech?

[VaRuN SiNhA]

>  > an upgrade to make my system work better with Linux.
> What about the rest of the OS?
My apologies for referring to GNU systems as "Linux" many places in my post.
I had just come back from my last Board exam and was feeling the after
effects of 10 weeks of....well....<indescribable> (No excuse, just
explanation)
>  >
>  > Let us suppose, we harp about FS as free beer. Get people attracted to
it
>  > because of it's low or zero cost.
> No. Proprietary software can do the  same thing and they don't have to
> worry about *attracting* people because  90% of the computer users are
> already *attracted*. Non  free software already has a  head start here
> and this point doesn't give us any advantage.
I stand corrected. But no one said revolutions were easy.
>  > IMHO,
> OK.
What was that all about?
>  > " The same logic that some PS
>  > companies follow: get the market addicted to their product (more often
than
>  > not my turning a blind-eye to piracy) and then swoop in with expensive
>  > upgrades. Why can't the FS companies do that?
> FS companies  can do  what proprietary software  companies do,  but to
> start with,  how do  a free software  company attract  customers? Both
> free software  and non-free software  costs the same according  to the
> hypothesis we are considering. So the only advantage we can claim that
> non-free software  doesn't have  is FREEDOM. You  are just  saying the
> same point in a different way :-))
I stand corrected once again. But do u think that freedom is *really* enough
of a reason for a business person to make the switch ?(The way I see it, the
main aim is to switch people from PS to FS; please let me know if I am
wrong) If they are told that they are getting free beer+free speech, don't
you think that is a greater incentive?

>have deals  with universities  to share
> code  and  thus receive  good  enhancements  (under  NDAs) and  follow
> excellent quality  processes (just look at  the number of  cmm level 5
> companies in India alone).
I was not aware of that. BTW, what is cmm level 5?

> The bottom line is, efficient, good quality
> code is not some thing  that non-free software can't achieve, and they
> already have these things. (OK, windows may have crashed, IIS may have
> less  market share  than  apache,  but these  are  not non-fixable  or
> non-changeable).
I sincerely feel that in the long run, FS will end up being as good if not
better than PS, for the simple reason that you will have thousands of groups
working with the same FS, each addding their own expertise, ideas and
modifications, rather than the strict (?) boundaries of the PS companies.

>  > Hypothetical cases:
>  >
>  > Case I:
>  >
>  > A company wants to setup an intranet. PS cost: 5 lakhs (top of my head,
I
>  > have NO idea what they really cost) FS Cost: 50, 000 (?)
> The moment we succeed in making people notice this price difference by
> harping  on the  low cost/no  cost aspect  of free  software, non-free
> software  companies will also  notice this  shift. (They  have trained
> marketing geniuses in their pay roll, just for noticing these things)
> Then  they  will  react  by  aggressive  price  cuts  and  promotional
> offers. The  hypothetical free software  company is killed  before its
> first business deal!
Even if the company is offered free speech+free beer?

>  > FS offers them nearly infinite flexibility: they can have it customized
to
>  > suit their needs, bug fixes will be almost immediate....
> True. This is because of the  FREEDOM and not because of *low cost* or
> *better quality*.  So we  should talk of  freedom rather than  cost or
> quality.
I never even implied that this had anything to do with it's cost. My whole
point was that it was because the free speech aspect. But the company became
aware of the free speech aspect through the free beer aspect.
>  > PS, on the other hand, has *very* limited flexibility, bug
>  > fixes...lol....take forever, and then also not always perfect.
> Ie, no freedom. That is exactly my point. Thank you.
Your welcome. But I think that was my point as well.
>
>  > I spent 3000 bucks on a boxed Linux.
> Out of  which more that 60%  is gnu and  you choose not to  mention it
> :-))
Correction: I  spent 3000 bucks on a GNU system.
>  > I have probably spent 10% of that on PS
> Does that  prove any  thing? If your  PC came with  licensed non-free
> software, then  you have  spent more on  proprietary software  than Rs
> 3000. If not, it is another issue altogether.
What it proves, or I *hoped* that it would prove, is that I am willing to
*pay* for freedom even while I am getting PS for (nearly) 0 cost. As I am
sure are many others.

>  > Simply because  I knew that spending  that 3000 was  BIG TIME worth
> Yes.  You  got freedom  along  with the  software  for  the money  you
> spend.  Please note  again,  that  Freedom is  the  advantage you  got
> here. It  is not low  cost, because according  to your post,  you have
> spent much less on non-free software.
I think you have misunderstood me. Badly. I *never* meant that I bought it
because of low cost. My point was, I was attracted to FS for other reasons,
but then in the end was willing to shell out money for freedom. I was not
willing to spend on PS, because it wasn't worth it.
>
>  > Why not others, if not me.
> Good question. But I don't understand its relevance in this context.
Sorry....that was a typo. It was meant to be "If me, then why not others".

>  > That  is  one  reason  why  I  believe  that  free-beer  aspect  is
>  > important.
> How?
Because by introducing people to FS through the free beer concept (something
every person will easily understand), they can they be made aware of the
free speech concept. But I personally feel it will be very difficult to
start people off straight away from free speech aspects.
>  >
>  > Case II My father is a professor. My mum also works. We aren't rich -
we're
>  > comfortable, but we won't go abroad every year. For us, cost is
probably
>  > *the* most important factor while purchasing most things (esp. computer
>  > related stuff).
> I am repeating this again and again. (I am not bored)
> A proprietary software company  can give you non-free software cheaper
> than free software. The only reason why you might want to go with free
> software is the FREEDOM that you get.
I am repeating this again and again. Why won't I be attracted to FS because
of free speech+free beer as against PS's offering of only free beer?
>
>  > My mum uses Windows at home simply because that's what came
>  > with it. Tomorrow, if someone came and said "Ma'am, here is this OS and
>  > office suite,  free of charge and  it's really good"  she would use
>  > it.
> Why would she throw away some thing she was using for a long time.
True. I stand corrected, once again.

> Not
> having to pay  for it is irrelevant because  she already has something
> to do her  job whether she paid for  it or not. The only  reason I see
> for why  she might  be interested is  FREEDOM, provided she  knows the
> importance of  freedom. So best thing we  can do is to  make sure that
> people understand the importance of freedom.
>
>  > doesn't care about freedom. She doesn't know *single* bit of any
> ....
>  > done and for as little as possible. She installs the free (beer) SW,
see
>  > that it absolutely ROCKS.
But HOW to I make her care about freedom from day one. How can I get to
start using it just on the argument of free speech? She doesn't know code,
she has little time for the ethics and morality of software.....but she will
definitely have time to notice a good product at a low price. If she can be
initiated to FS through free beer and then be made familiar with free
speech, isn't the goal achieved? Or are you more concerned about the means
and not the goal?

> She finds the same things for non-free software.
>  > She calls the  FS people. "Is it possible  for <certain feature not
>  > present> to be done?"
> Again,  we  can get  her  to use  free  software  instead of  non-free
> software in the first place, only  if we inform her about the freedoms
> she gets with  free software and the lack of freedom  in case she uses
> non-free software.
But I feel for the common person (my mum included) free beer will grab their
attention more than free speech.
>  > She sees the quality of FS.

> From  the points you  have mentioned,  I am  even more  convinced that
> talking of low cost and quality  of free software will do more bad for
> free software than good, if at all any.

Good. Now maybe you can convince me. I would be grateful.

Thanks for being so patient and understanding (no sarcasm). You realize that
I am relatively new to all this.

After reading the two replies to my post, I must say I stand very much
corrected - I guess I am really greener than I thought <broad grin>

But I still stand by certain points. One thing is really bothering me: Can
someone please explain to me how to sell (not literally) FS to my mother
(and other such users) using the free speech argument? And how for them,
free speech will be more important than free beer? This is not a challenge
or anything, it is something I really have been thinking about and would
appreciate the help of the vetrans in this regard.

Regards,

Varun "GNU-Newbie-and-Loving-It!!" Sinha