Re: General Resolution: Removing non-free
Arthur H. Edwards
712 Valencia Dr. NE
Abq. NM 87108
(505) 256-0834
On 7 Jun 2000, Adrian De Leon wrote:
> "Arthur H. Edwards" <edwards@edwardsa-static.nmia.com> writes:
>
> > A lowly user interrupts:
>
> Another lowly user interrupts :)
> >
> > If the debian system goal is for its users to use only debian packages
> > then I think the resolution will probably always too optimistic.
>
> Where does it says that it is Debian's goal for users to only use
> debian packages?
>
I did pose this as a question and not rhetorically. I do hear people using
the term clean meaning, I believe, that all software was packaged so that
apt-get would give a complete upgrade of all software. I would like to do
this without having to pulse various other sites manually.
> > I still need to both read and write MS compatible file types (.doc,
> > .ppt, .xls) completely. That is without compromising formatting.
>
> Sadly, if you need to read/write MS Office files, without compromising
> formatting you will need MS Office. you can try AbiWord and Gnumeric,
> but they don't have all the features StarOffice, WP2000 or Aplix has.
I have been using StarOffice and have been pretty happy with its
functionality and its price.
> >I also need a flexible browser. I
> > have tried mozilla and I'm deeply underwhelmed.
>
> So download Netscape Navigator from ftp.netscape.com, or the opera
> beta. This GR will not prevent you from installing non-free software.
>
This was alluded to in the last paragraph of my original message. (It
would have been nice if you had included that in your quote.) I will,
indeed do that, although it will be inconvenient. I will probably not bolt
from the distribution because I like its relatively low-level installation
CD's that give me much easier control of my system. The loss of non-free
will, however, degrade my experience with Debian.
> Anyway, as a long time Debian user I agree with this GR. (not
that > anyone cares..)
It is in the same spirit that I posted my message. I do not intend to
drown out your welcome of this proposition. I merely state my point of
view because it is probably representative of a certain type of Debian
user. As long as you took the time to read my post, let me explain a
little more clearly my POV. I am a scientific user. I have been using
Linux only since the summer of 1997. I had used Red Hat for the first 1.5
years switching then to SuSE and finally, and happily, to Debian. I did
not switch to Debian for the same ideological
reasons as others support it, but rather because it was, to my mind, the
best distribution. Similarly, I changed to Linux not just because
it was free, but because it was so much better than, well, that
other operating system. Because I am a scientific user, I am accustomed to
paying what I consider reasonable prices for software. The free software
movement is interesting not just because it is free, but because it is
free and, in many cases, excellent. I could go on about my animosity
toward Microsoft, but that is most likely a given for linux users.
I'm stating my pov because the proposition seems to be deeply ideological.
I'm guessing that there is a large lection of the linux community that
agrees that this ideological stand is worth either a fair bit of
inconvenience, or loss of a fair bit of functionality. I merely posted to
point out that there are some (maybe many) of us for whom the ideological
piece is not as important as the overall quality (stability, functionality
and convenience) of the distribution. We are users with external
constraints who would like to meet these constraints within a Linux and
especially a Debian framework.
Reply to: