> Carsten Agger <[email protected]> writes: > > https://help.ubuntu.com/9.04/installation-guide/i386/what-is-linux.htm
That link seems to be dead from where I'm sitting. However, this one is not: https://help.ubuntu.com/9.10/about-ubuntu/C/free-software.html There has always been somewhat of a discrepancy between the commitments laid out by Ubuntu's manifestos and the actions of Canonical. One of the most prominent ways in which Ubuntu has distinguished itself from other distributions is how they've been helping people install patented codecs and proprietary software themselves. The most prominent of the alternatives have been: * "Those repositories are not part of the project" (Debian, Fedora) * "Buy our PowerPack/EnterpriseDesktop" (Mandriva, RedHat, SuSe) * "We're a non-profit community project. No one will sue us" (Arch, Mint, etc.) I don't see Ubuntu as particularly more problematic than any of the above. In fact, since the inclusion of proprietary software in Ubuntu is a corporate decision that affects everyone of its users, and not a matter of people choosing convenience for themselves, an argument against it might have a more persuasive effect. For instance, in at least one case we could argue that it has been made un-needed. What I find most absurd is perhaps that Adobe Reader is included in Canonical's repository, when the free readers work at least as well. /Stian _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
