Re: [Fsfe-uk] Mac OS X refund

[Andrew Savory]

Hi,

On 1/24/08, Dave Crossland <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 24/01/2008, Andrew Savory <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On 1/23/08, Dave Crossland <address@hidden> wrote:
> > >
> > > http://www.synack.net/~bbraun/writing/osfail.html
> > > http://www.synack.net/~bbraun/writing/gettingos.txt
> >
> > We all know that switching to an open source model is difficult,
>
> Your proposition that Apple is switching to an "open source" model,
> let alone one that respects software freedom, is IMHO misguided and
> naieve, and their cynical manipulation of the software freedom
> movement to comb for quality engineers who don't feel strongly about
> software freedom is fully documented in those files.

Perhaps instead of "switching to" I should have said "trying". I
suspect you credit Apple with too much brains if you think the whole
scheme was simply cooked up to find quality engineers. You also come
across as a little bitter that those developers who contributed also
got hired (and are somehow evily removed from the pool of FLOSS talent
as a result).

But my point remains: trying an open source model is difficult for
corporations. Maybe a little help and understanding would go a long
way to encouraging them to continue (and encouraging more to start),
rather than decrying as 'cynical' and 'poisonous' any organisation
that doesn't quite make it in your judgement.

People often assume bad intentions of companies where simple ignorance
and stupidity is often a better explanation. Most companies are too
busy focusing on selling and shipping to worry about cooking up evil
schemes to subvert the free software movement. Next time you see
someone not releasing code back or contributing upstream in a timely
manner, take the time out to say "that's good and thank you, but it
would be even better if..." rather than "OMG! Apple can has evil
geniuz!"

FLOSS always wins out in the end (cf. a talk from someone at Sun at
Apachecon 07, sadly don't have the reference with me). But by abusing
anyone that doesn't get it quite right first time round, we're making
sure that it takes significantly longer to get adopted. That's far
worse than using a computer that's not 100% free, IMO.


A.