Rahul Sundaram wrote: > The distinction between commercial and FOSS is a false one. You mean > proprietary or non-free software. There is a lot of commercial FOSS > applications and products available today. I didn't mean to imply that... But, it is also unfair to automatically label free (as in no cost) proprietary software as "bad". > Neither offers guarantees but Free software offers more choice and > flexibility if a vendor decides to cut off support for a product. And a good vendor won't do that. I wish you wouldn't use the term "Free Software" as it is open to interpretation of what one means by "Free". > >>> This is apart from the legal issues involved in combining non-free >>> modules and the Linux kernel for a distribution. >> >> I must have missed that part of the discussion. I didn't notice it >> was part >> of the discussion that nvidia drivers or ATI drivers be made part of a >> distro. > > Read back. That indeed is a major thrust of the discussion. Too many tangents.
