Should the Linux Desktop Be "Pure?"

jammag writes "According to Matt Hartley, many Linux desktop users don't like to admit that there's scads of closed source code commonly used with the Linux desktop. Hartley points to examples like proprietary drivers, the popularity of Skype among Linux users (in preference to the open source Ekiga), and the use of Wine. He concludes that, hey, if the code works, use it — a stance that won't sit well with purists. But his article raises the question: is it better to embrace some closed source fixes, and so create a larger user base, or to remain pure, and keep Linux for the specialists?"

Comments

Re:Why not both?

[lysse]

"We won't let you say that here." "How dare you tell me what I can and can't express? My freedom of speech is sacred!"

"Here's how I think the world should look." "How dare you tell the rest of us how we should act? My freedom is infringed by your expression!"

*sigh* Gotta love slashdotters.

Re:Why not both?

[akintayo]

I'm sorry but did you just compare the deaths of hundreds of people with an argument about software licenses ? Cause it seems like you did ? You really think that "freedom" of information is more important than democracy and the right to self determination, cause the former is entirely dependent on the latter to exist. And if you don't care about people fighting and dying for their right to self determination, maybe you should refrain from lecturing others.