Re: Emacs Mac port

[David Kastrup]

Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

> However, our response should not be purely technical, because the
> problem is not purely technical.  A big part of the problem is that
> these people judge the "best" experience in a shallow, superficial
> way, considering convenience alone and disregarding freedom.  When you
> judge based on freedom, SmackOS is a horrible experience.
>
> We need to do more to point out this issue to the people who
> habitually disregard it, or don't know about it.
>
> I suggest showing other people fsf.org/tedx and
> http://gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-even-more-important.html.
> Also http://gnu.org/proprietary/malware-apple.html.
>
> Your personal example can influence people.  If you put GNU/Linux on
> your Mac, and tell your friends, "I want freedom.  I will sacrifice
> some convenience so I can be free," you will influence some of them
> somewhat.

Personally, these days I find that the most convincing treatises about
the importance of software freedom are written by Apple and Microsoft
themselves.

Just read the "license agreement" of their software to users and ask
them for every sentence whether they really agree (plan plenty of time
for that: I think the "privacy agreement" for Windows 10 alone runs to
about 20 pages).  It was solemn for MSDOS, sobering for Windows 3.1,
troubling for Windows 95, and has become so outlandish since then that
it's hard to believe if you read the entire thing.

These days "don't agree to stuff you haven't read" is pretty much
sufficient for leaving little but Free Software as a serious option.

-- 
David Kastrup