4 ms·

I do not think you can say that the freedoms offered by Free software are entirely inaccessible to even the most technically illiterate users. We usually talk

I do not think you can say that the freedoms offered by Free software are entirely inaccessible to even the most technically illiterate users. We usually talk about things like the freedom to copy or study or modify software, but the most basic freedom is the freedom to use software (and by extension, your computer) however you wish. That is not something Apple's snappy interfaces deliver -- you are only free to use iOS for the things Apple approves, and subverting that control (i.e. jailbreaking) is no less intimidating than using a modern GNU/Linux distro. My experience has been that deliberate restrictions on software use affect non-technical people as much as they affect me: "What does 'activation failed' mean?" "Why can't I copy this DVD?" "I want to record this TV show and then watch it on my tablet, how do I copy it from my DVR?" "My friend had that app, why can't I find it in the app store? How do I install it?" Dismissing the freedoms offered by Free software as abstract and inaccessible ignores the reality of how people use their computers. Nobody is claiming that someone who never touched a computer in their life is going to be hacking the kernel, but it is not far-fetched to think that they might want to copy a movie or that they might be angry if their books mysteriously disappear one night. The snappy UI is little more than bait -- it is attractive to people who are frustrated by more complicated systems, but hidden behind it is a system that denies people the right to use their computers they way they want to use their computers. In other words, what I said in my comment: an attempt to take advantage of technical ignorance.

bunderbunder 13y ago
How can you say that the freedom to use the software however you wish exists for someone whose ability to use the software is contingent on them having an acquaintance to set it up and then lock them into a sandbox so that they don't break it? Maybe in principle that freedom could exist for the non-nerdy Linux user. But in practice it simply doesn't. Example: Retail Linux netbooks were an incredibly short-lived experiment. Reason? Customers kept returning them because they were having so many more of the kinds of issues you list than they did with even Windows computers.
- betterunix 13y ago
  "How can you say that the freedom to use the software however you wish exists for someone whose ability to use the software is contingent on them having an acquaintance to set it up and then lock them into a sandbox so that they don't break it?" A sandbox that stops someone from breaking their computer is a lot different from a sandbox that stops someone from installing software that a distant corporation did not approve. It is not a sandbox that stops people from doing things that make sense for them and that they do understand, like copying a movie from a DVD to their tablet. In other words, it is a stretch to even call it a "sandbox." It is not any different than what I do for my own user account on my own computer. "Maybe in principle that freedom could exist for the non-nerdy Linux user. But in practice it simply doesn't." Again, my experience differs. I have found that non-technical people are somewhat intimidated by complicated UIs, but that they become much more frustrated by simple UIs that tell them they are not allowed to do what they are trying to do, especially when they are trying to do something that seems simple and obvious. When my mother inserted a DVD into her computer and said, "Why can't I just copy this the way I copy files from a thumb drive?" was she not complaining about her lack of freedom? Do you really think it would be better for her to have a snappier UI, but to lack that freedom? I have also found that non-technical people are more constrained by the fact that they do not realize what their computer can do than by the UI, regardless of what OS they are using. Of course my mother did not turn her desktop into a DVR on her own -- the idea that it was possible to do so never even occurred to her. Now that she has that set up, it has become something she relies on. The UI may be ugly (even by "geek standards"), but do you really think she would be better off paying a monthly fee to use some locked-down DVR that does not even let her copy her recordings to her tablet, or that only allows her to record certain shows? (Yes, I like to use my mom as an example. Yes, I know she might be an exceptional case; however, other non-technical users I have interacted with seem to react similarly to these things, so I suspect this is not so uncommon.) I think you are not giving people enough credit. Example: the outrage when Amazon deleted books from Kindles. People were complaining about the violation of a freedom they simply took for granted, a freedom they never realized they had given up when they purchased a Kindle, a freedom that had nothing to do with the UI.

bunderbunder 13y ago

How can you say that the freedom to use the software however you wish exists for someone whose ability to use the software is contingent on them having an acquaintance to set it up and then lock them into a sandbox so that they don't break it? Maybe in principle that freedom could exist for the non-nerdy Linux user. But in practice it simply doesn't. Example: Retail Linux netbooks were an incredibly short-lived experiment. Reason? Customers kept returning them because they were having so many more of the kinds of issues you list than they did with even Windows computers.

betterunix 13y ago
"How can you say that the freedom to use the software however you wish exists for someone whose ability to use the software is contingent on them having an acquaintance to set it up and then lock them into a sandbox so that they don't break it?" A sandbox that stops someone from breaking their computer is a lot different from a sandbox that stops someone from installing software that a distant corporation did not approve. It is not a sandbox that stops people from doing things that make sense for them and that they do understand, like copying a movie from a DVD to their tablet. In other words, it is a stretch to even call it a "sandbox." It is not any different than what I do for my own user account on my own computer. "Maybe in principle that freedom could exist for the non-nerdy Linux user. But in practice it simply doesn't." Again, my experience differs. I have found that non-technical people are somewhat intimidated by complicated UIs, but that they become much more frustrated by simple UIs that tell them they are not allowed to do what they are trying to do, especially when they are trying to do something that seems simple and obvious. When my mother inserted a DVD into her computer and said, "Why can't I just copy this the way I copy files from a thumb drive?" was she not complaining about her lack of freedom? Do you really think it would be better for her to have a snappier UI, but to lack that freedom? I have also found that non-technical people are more constrained by the fact that they do not realize what their computer can do than by the UI, regardless of what OS they are using. Of course my mother did not turn her desktop into a DVR on her own -- the idea that it was possible to do so never even occurred to her. Now that she has that set up, it has become something she relies on. The UI may be ugly (even by "geek standards"), but do you really think she would be better off paying a monthly fee to use some locked-down DVR that does not even let her copy her recordings to her tablet, or that only allows her to record certain shows? (Yes, I like to use my mom as an example. Yes, I know she might be an exceptional case; however, other non-technical users I have interacted with seem to react similarly to these things, so I suspect this is not so uncommon.) I think you are not giving people enough credit. Example: the outrage when Amazon deleted books from Kindles. People were complaining about the violation of a freedom they simply took for granted, a freedom they never realized they had given up when they purchased a Kindle, a freedom that had nothing to do with the UI.