>>> It's one thing to promote free software by creating a free program >>> superior to a non-free one, pointing users to both, explaining the >>> advantages of the free program (including the freedom part), and >>> then letting the users decide. It's quite another thing to simply >>> hide the non-free program from users. ... Is the assumption here >>> that users are unable to see their own best interests, even when >>> presented with all the arguments? ... If no, why not point users >>> to both free and non-free alternatives and trust them to decide? >> >> ... > > My question grows out of the discussion here: > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2018-01/msg00036.html
Just to be clear, as (I suppose) few of subscribers there are able to judge about programs that run on iOS from their own experience. In this case, the alternative that you found technically superior to another is the nonfree one, and you expect that a user would most likely decide to choose it rather than free one, when presented with all arguments, am I right? _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
