Re: Should the FSF back monopolisation by M$?

[Tarquin Mills]

In message <85fyk4l30v.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> David Kastrup wrote:
> Tarquin Mills <accus@use.net> writes:
> > In message <85r73ol4zk.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> David Kastrup wrote:
> >> Tarquin Mills <accus@use.net> writes:
> >> > Should the FSF back complete monopolisation by Microsoft, or should
> >> > it be against, as it aims to produce an operating system written in
> >> > 100% free software code?
> >> 
> >> It does neither mean that I back all my neighbors or am against all of
> >> them if I happen not to try bedding them.
> >> 
> >> Microsoft is by and large irrelevant to free software as long as
> >> they don't indulge in business practices that harm free software,
> >> like pressuring vendors into producing hardware that is incapable
> >> of running it.
> >
> > We are all part of the world and connected to each other, the Linux
> > magazines cannot exist without readers and adverts, the same is true
> > of other Linux companies including distros.
> 
> So what?  Free software existed before Linux, and certainly before
> "the Linux magazines" and their "readers and adverts".  The majority
> of free software _developers_ whose work gets collected in "distros"
> is not employed by Linux companies.  And Linux companies don't compete
> in that segment of the market that Microsoft is monopolizing, anyway.
 
According to a NYLXS radio program about 93-94% of the Linux kernel is 
written by people who are being paid. GNU/Linux, FSF's GNU Hurd and 
Microsoft's Windows are all in the same market, operating systems.

-- 
http://www.windowshaters.co.uk
Start an investigation into Microsoft http://www.petitiononline.com/oftsucks/
Reboot Movement (An Anti-Wintel Campaign)
http://www.speccyverse.me.uk/comp/reboot/