I completely agree that the FSF needs to make a better case. The PDF guide is simply too generic and vague - most non-technical users won't understand what it's

I completely agree that the FSF needs to make a better case. The PDF guide is simply too generic and vague - most non-technical users won't understand what it's saying. But I can fully understand how difficult it is to make a convincing case. How do you explain these issues in a simple, digestable format that takes a minute or less to read? And let's be honest, sometimes the open source version of a piece of software isn't superior to a closed source one (in terms of capability or UX). Perhaps the focus should be more on issues (such as privacy, for example) and questions to ask when using a program or service i.e. make people aware of the issues and the choices available to them? Give users information so they can make informed choices, but respect the fact that many will still go with closed source solutions. BTW, I wonder why ChromeOS isn't on their list given that ChromeBooks will probably be a popular purchase during the holiday season. And I actually think in terms of arguing for or against an OS, ChromeOS is probably the easiest to argue persuasively against. For example, you can tell people you can't print to your desktop printer without an internet connection and that every time you print (even to your desktop printer), Google records that action. Some people won't care, but others might not be happy with that. If you then go on to say that Google potentially [1] tracks and records your every action in the OS, you'll be raising awareness of important privacy issues. [1] I say potentially because Google doen't reveal what they track and record in ChromeOS and that in itself is a question people should ask themselves when they use ChromeOS i.e. is it important for me to know what Google records of my online behaviour? Until Google reveal what they track and record, should I refrain from using their OS?