On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 10:58:51 +0100, [H]omer wrote:
> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>
>> It can't be easy being Fedora, overshadowed by Ubuntu
>
> Ubuntu took the compromise and distributed patent encumbered components
> and tainted drivers, whereas Fedora took the less pragmatic and more
> idealistic approach ... which was a more noble, if less popular choice.
>
> Now it seems factions within Ubuntu are looking to clean up some of the
> proprietary dirt, with the Gobuntu project. Predictably, that probably
> won't be popular either, but it certainly will be popular with *me*.
That's fine, if it's what you want. It isn't what quite a lot of other
poeple want. Narrowing choice is not a good thing. No one is forced to
used Ubuntu, or any other distro.
>
> Let those who want the enslavement of proprietary software, use
> proprietary software. If that happens to be the majority, then so be it.
> Good luck to them ... they'll need it.
Why are you slandering Ubuntu? Just because it makes different choices
from those you want?
>
> As if anyone needs reminding of where that particular road leads ...
Ubuntu isn't going anywhere like that, as far as I can see.
> take a good long look at the current state of Windows, then think about
> issues like Viruses, Botnets, Spyware, Abandonware, format lock-ins,
> DRM, activation, back doors, privacy, civil rights, data harvesting,
> spam, forced upgrades, extortionate licensing, poor service; and sloppy,
> bug-infested, bloated, insecure software.
>
> I'd hope that will *not* be an accurate description of Ubuntu, a few
> years from now.
Why should it be?
--
Kier
|
|
