ESR Says Linux Followers Should Compromise

jpheasant writes "Eric Raymond argues time is running out to win over the iPod generation. To get there, he says the Linux community will need to make 'compromises.' For starters: 'Linux believers will have to reach out beyond self-absorbed geeks who learns Klingon and attends science fiction conventions in his spare time.'" From the article: "I mean that we need to be prepared to go to the rights holders for these proprietary codecs and say, we'll give you money, give us a license; and this is something that the Linux community has a huge antipathy to doing because we've got all this idealism about open source. And in the long run, I think that's true, I view comprising with the proprietary codec vendors as a tactical move designed to get us larger end user market shares, so that in the end we can push more things to the open."

Comments

you can't ignore him

[commodoresloat]

he's got a gun.

Eric Raymond - the VA Linux guy?

[Animats]

Eric Raymond? This is the guy who ran VA Linux into the ground, right? This is like getting economic advice from Enron management.

Oh, right, Bush did that.

Why beat microsoft?

[LordoftheLemmings]

Well for one most open source programs are free so if you are giving your software away for free and still loseing to microsoft, doesn't that mean there is something seriously wrong with your software?

Re:Ice cream koan

[mrsbrisby]

So who appointed you to speak for customers? I'm a customer and I own plenty of non-free software that I consider a win for me. Or is this one of those cases where you think you know more about what other people need than they do?

It's a case where if you take part of a quote out of context, it helps you build your case.

Or maybe you didn't understand it.

Eiter way, the original quote is:

Microsoft has the development resources to compete with GCC and Linux. A lot of people forget that if you ever produce a valuable piece of software, Microsoft can, and may compete with you. Unless you're built on Free Software, Microsoft will probably win. And unless you're built on Free Software, your customers will definately lose.

Now, those "non-free softwares" that you buy that are a win for you- are they non-free softwares that Microsoft directly competes with?

Because if not, you're arguing apples to oranges. I said if Microsoft decides to compete with non-free software, Microsoft will probably win, and the customers will lose. I say this because in the past, Microsoft competes with non-free software and wins. And where they win, the customers lose. Ask anyone who has "upgraded" from a now defunct company to Microsoft Great Plains to get a good handle on what I'm talking about.