"You can't complain about adoption while taking a holier-than-thou stance towards users. " He was saying they're getting plenty of action. They're just not sup

"You can't complain about adoption while taking a holier-than-thou stance towards users. " He was saying they're getting plenty of action. They're just not supporting users on specific hardware whose vendor is trying to block such action. It still is freedom. It just doesn't support that specific hardware. "Since when has FOSS meant that I _can't_ work with proprietary bits? As a user, this is my choice. " It really isn't if you're just a user. It's the developers' choices that dictate what software you can run on which hardware. Once their choices are made, you choose between what each offers. In this case... "If software is going to dictate where I spend my money, then I'm less inclined to adopt it." Nvidia is spending money on software that tries to block you from using free software with it easily. The volunteers developing one of those free packages refuse to build support for an anti-FOSS company putting up obstacles. Instead, they're doing work on companies helping them a bit or not putting up obstacles to their work. As a user, it would be weird for you to claim to want free software while buying a piece of hardware whose developers are working against that goal. They'll also use your dollars from that purchase to do more activity that reduces your freedom as a user. You're free to choose to buy that hardware but there's no reasons for volunteers, much less those maximizing free software, to be forced to do painful work to support your choice. It's reasonable to say you're on your own if your choices create unnecessary obstacles.