5 ms·
Because lack of such free software can hinder people who might be otherwise interested in switching to a free operating system from actually doing so. A free r
by tjr 15y ago
Because lack of such free software can hinder people who might be otherwise interested in switching to a free operating system from actually doing so.
A free replacement for Flash is likely to become less useful in this situation, as other non-proprietary solutions are becoming prevalent.
- kbutler 15y agoThe point is that a clone makes it so people "can" switch, if they want. A "unique to free software" solution makes it so people want and need to switch. Between the two, I think creating incentives is more powerful than removing obstacles. (Given strong enough motivation, people will overcome obstacles. Lacking strong motivation, why bother?)
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- greenyoda 15y agoWhy would a lack of a GPL Flash replacement hinder someone from switching to Linux? Flash is already available for Linux (I've run it under Ubuntu), and while it's not "free software", it's free of charge.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- tjr 15y agoFrom the FSF's perspective, being "free software" is what is important. They encourage people to use only "free software", and thus they see a need for a "free" replacement for Flash.