Advanced

FSFE opposes claim that free software harms

Posted by Ridcully on · 7 comments
opensource.com; By Patrick McBride
Mail this story
Print this story

Does no-cost software harm consumers? The FairSearch coalition thinks so, at least when it comes to Google: They say Google engages in predatory pricing when it distributes Android – a Linux-based mobile operating system – without charge.

Full Story

  Nav
» Read more about: Story Type: News Story; Groups: Android, Linux, Microsoft, Mobile

» Get new stories by e-mail: nightly or as they are published

« Return to the newswire homepage

  Related stories
» More like this

Comments (7)

Does no-cost oxygen harm consumers?

Do no-cost jokes harm consumers?

Do "pot-luck" dinners and picnics harm consumers? Does BYOB? In that case, the widespread practice of having friends over to dinner or a party, (not to mention making daily meals at home or bringing sandwiches to work) must do far far more harm to the economy than the odd bit of software.

Of course, I'm not as smart as those guys at Microsoft and Oracle -- so I probably just don't understand.
> Of course, I'm not as smart as those guys at Microsoft and Oracle -- so I probably just don't understand.

Well, that's their take on it at least. :)
The insanity of this position is that Linux is libre. If the "competitors" don't like paying for their base OS, then don't. use Linux too.
(I also wonder how Microsoft explains away the bit about MSFT earning more from their levy on Android phones than from Windows Phone).
Of course, Microsoft wouldn't be as deceitful as to give away "Express Editions" of their products...for nothing.
BernardSwiss: Ever watched the movie Idiocracy?

The Sport drink company - Brawndo - bought the FDA and FCC and replaced water by sport drink. The crops stop to grow.

When somebody says they should use water, Brawndo stocks drop so much that the computer automatically fires 50% of all people and mass riots start.

A perfect example of how riotting Microsoft / Oracle -employees could harm consumers!
@hkwint : Yeah, kind of like that (I have to watch that one again)

Elsewhere I suggest that the problem isn't really Ballmer. He's taking the blame (profits have only doubled, and the stock is flat) for keeping the priorities that the investors really want. If they get someone that really commits to the kind of changes they say they want, they'll probably dump that reckless gambler.

Post a comment

A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.

Your message:
|||||
10
Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help

Sign up and post (it is free)  or  Log in and post