Re: [tlug] Free

["Lyle H Saxon" <llletters@example.com>]

On 8/6/07, Marty Pauley <marty.pauley@example.com> wrote:
> On 05/08/07, Lyle H Saxon <llletters@example.com> wrote:
> >
> > I still maintain that the *perception* of something being free and its
> > *actually* being free are two different issues.
>
> I'm not going to start on that argument, as it will quickly head off
> into philosophy, metaphysics, relativity, and religion :-)

Ha-ha!  Yeah!  One acquaintance of mine who was convinced that his
computer was irreparably damaged when W-2K died on him, was so pleased
to get his computer back from me working (with Suse 9.1 Linux) that he
wrote back saying "This is great!  It's like a religion or something!"

> > I think it's tragic
> > that people think Windows is like a piece of hardware inseparable from
> > the machine as it rolls off the assembly line.
>
> I agree with you.  I have spent the last week trying, and failing, to
> get a new laptop without Windows.

Just yesterday, I stumbled upon a laptop from Epson Direct with Linux
for about Y60,000, see:
http://shop.epson.jp/pc/lx1000  I tried to post that information to
the list, but it doesn't seem to have made it through for some reason
(or did I miss it?  Did you see it?).

> > And one last comment about "free".  I think there is nothing free
> > about Microsoft's products.  Microsoft is *not* free in cost; *not*
> > free to use as one likes; *not* free to transfer to others, etc. etc.
> > Saying it's "free" is an outrage.
>
> "Free" is a strongly emotive word, especially on lists like this.  Is
> it still an outrage if we say that Windows has an insignificant cost
> to the buyer when included with a new PC?

No problem there!  I wasn't arguing what general users think, I was
upset that thinking individuals were saying it is free as though that
were an irrefutable fact.  That I found extremely offensive!

>  That is what I am trying to
> say.   You may strongly dislike the fact that Windows is included by
> default with most PCs, but what is wrong with the low-cost statement?

No problem.  And I fully realize that the pre-installed version is
cheaper than the boxed version, but it isn't free (even if the user
thinks it is)!

> The main problem I have with bundled Windows is not the cost, because
> it is insignificant.  I don't want my PC purchase to increase the
> Windows usage statistics, since I'm not going to use it.  I wasn't
> able to buy a bare PC this week, but I was able to choose between
> Vista and XP, so I choose XP so I won't help the Vista statistics.

Yeah - that sounds good.  I would have done the same thing, except
since there's that Epson laptop option for about Y60,000, I think I'd
go for that.

> > Anyway, thanks for being civil, I really do appreciate that!  I hope
> > you don't take offense at my strong feelings regarding the non-freedom
> > of Microsoft.
>
> I am not offended.  I share some of your opinions and feelings about
> this, and I know that Windows is not actually free, in any sense.  I
> just think that the inaccurate perception of the general public is
> more significant than you do.

There has been a huge misunderstanding then!  I have never thought
that the general public knows what is going on with computers or
thinks about what, if any, cost is involved for the software.  I was -
however - outraged that people who know better were saying that it's
free as though that were the case in an absolute sense.  If they had
said "it is perceived as being free by average users" I wouldn't have
had any complaint at all.  So maybe the entire problem was no more
than sloppy use of terminology?  I think there's a huge difference
between saying "it is free" and "it is perceived as being free by many
users".  The first statement being an outrageous lie, and the second a
statement of probably truth.

Anyway!  I'll post something if I decide to get that Epson laptop.

Lyle