Do we need to go to that moralist side of the conversation?
Free software is about ethics, moral if you wish. It is a personal choice
(no oath to be made). It is a collective endeavor too (freedoms 2 and 3).
And what is wrong with convenience?
Nothing. We all want convenience. But freedom is more important than
convenience. We want free software that is as convenient as possible and the
free software movement has been going in that direction since the beginning.
Nobody is arguing in favor of less convenient software for penance but
because the more convenient software is proprietary, hence unacceptable. It
can be used during the transition phase though: dumping all proprietary
software at once is a recipe for failure to only use free software in the
long term, the goal. However, it must be acknowledged as a transition: the
proprietary software used now is a problem we will solve, accepting the use
of a technically worse but ethically better free programs, developing
technically better free programs or helping their developments in other ways,
paying for a more expensive hardware that can run in freedom, etc.
