Re: Mac OS X refund

(resending, mailing list rejects default webmail format)

Hi

On 1/22/08, Kevin Donnelly <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Monday 21 January 2008 12:48, Andrew Savory wrote:
> > Ah, but you're making assumptions on what I do. I do practise what I preach
> > - I use the same software to host my sites as I encourage customers to use.
> > I do not (and would not) preach to customers that they should switch to
> > Linux desktops, OpenOffice, etc - except in a few very special cases - and
> > so there's nothing hypocritical here.
>
> Ah, I understand now.  You're a bit like an 18th-century liberal espousing
> universal suffrage, but not for the lower classes, women or blacks.  I still
> don't see how the zealotry of insisting that closed software should still
> have a privileged position in the landscape wins out over the pragmatism of
> advocating the benefits of free software (eg access to your own data), but
> that's a circle for you to square.  I find it hard to believe that the time
> or useability advantages are all on one side, however.

Wow ... that's quite a leap. From "not hardline enough to be Free
Software" to racist, chauvinist supremacist? You, sir, are a master of
reductio ad absurdum.

My point is this: of course it would be wonderful if all of the people
I talk to would make the switch to using Free Software desktops right
away. However, it would have a detrimental impact for them for all the
obvious reasons (lack of suitable replacements for all proprietary
packages, retraining requirements, etc). Therefore I focus on helping
people get the benefits of FLOSS _now_ where it is _most suitable and
appropriate_. It seems like quite a sensible approach to me, and I'd
love to hear a reasonable explanation of why this is _not_ a sensible
approach. Oh, and this does not mean I hate poor black women, ok?

> >   It's a bit like saying that everybody should do their bit
> > > to reduce global warming, but that your work requires you to hop on a
> > > plane
> > > every week - your message is bound to be weakened somewhat.
> >
> > Was the net effect of Al Gore's work positive or negative? Positive.
> > How many flights did he make whilst doing his presentations? Lots.
> > Was his message weakened? Only to those with a weak grasp on reality to
> > being with.
>
> I never mentioned Al Gore - I had in mind the common or garden business
> person, in fact.  their message would certainly be weakened ... if it were
> sincere to begin with, of course.

Well, replace Al Gore with anyone doing particularly good works for
the environment.
I am not claiming that Free Software is 100% suitable for "prime time"
on the desktop, so I don't think that using a proprietary OS is
hypocritical.


A.