No, I don't think I was missing anything. I was waiting for this sort of response before I elaborated on parts of what I'd said earlier.

I didn't say at any point the masses do not matter. We're differing on how (and actually even why) this mass has to be built. You're saying there are areas where people aren't entirely comfortable with free software (currently not easy enough, say) so they need to be improved (by the end user point of view) before everyone will all mass adopt and hence the philosophy will spread. All I tried to point out is, by doing this, you will gain your masses. But all you are spreading is adoption of the software, nothing more.

I tried to say the software (for the most part) exists right now. And has existed for a while. A primary reason they aren't as wide spread are because of societal inertia, and because people aren't necessarily aware of the freedom they are giving up in using non-free software.

Random anecdote. I am typing this on a laptop from a prominent manufacturer which comes pre-installed with a popular non-free operating system. The first thing I tried to do when I bought it, is to return the operating system install discs and request a refund. I was informed that is not possible, as:

a. I'd lose support if I formatted and installed another operating system. b. It is expensive for them to come and collect the discs (or have them pay me mail it in). c. They are required by contract to pay the operating system vendor a fee anyway, so they pass on the charges to me. They aren't interested in bearing the loss on my behalf.

Now, the ideal part of me directs me, on principle, to delete it anyway and install a free operating system. But a practical part informs me that 70$ (or whatever) of my hard earned money has gone into the pre-installed operating system. It keeps nagging me to keep this partition because it's convinced me "if I've spent for it, I cannot waste it".

Do I want it installed? No. Do I need it installed? Not really. Am I one of the 210 million who paid for it anyway? Yes. Did I have much of a choice? Yes and no. I could have tried really hard to find a company that sells a comparable machine without the popular operating system installed. But there are very few moderately big names that exist considering this operating system vendor has abused its power as a monopoly to force all major manufacturers to bundle it with their machines.

You did not say they don't value freedom. I said they've been conditioned to accept things the way they are. You didn't say they were unintelligent or don't understand. You did say it has to be "easy to achieve a desired set of functional tasks with minimum focus on technicalities" as a prerequisite to software's adoption. Now with that definition, and my lack of enthusiasm to try too hard, I will be quite happy with the original operating system my computer came with. Sure, it has some bugs and viruses hit often, but I can still get some things done. It's "good enough" on the surface.

At this point you're saying "give him a much better alternative, and he'll switch". I'm saying, "explain to him there is a decent free alternative, and the value of that freedom, and he'll switch". But the important difference here is someone who switched because I explained to them why, is much less likely to switch back when something even better is offered by the proprietary OS vendor.

I don't get your argument involving companies like RedHat. RedHat is a major supporter of many free software projects, and doesn't ship anything proprietary with their operating systems. They break even the most commonly used functionality like playing mp3s, to retain a fully free collection of software in their distributions. I respect them for this, and it has resulted in me re-encoding many CDs to other free formats. By your definition of good, I should have just installed a 3rd party XMMS plug in, say, and restored this functionality. It would have been "easier with less technicalities", right?

All I am attempting to say is, now that I've shifted with the right mindset, once mp5pro++ comes out, which is 10 times as small as Ogg Vorbis 3, and sounds 100 times better, I will not consider it. If I shifted purely because Vorbis sounded better, or I whined to the developers about making it technically better (and easier to use), or coded it myself and only advertised that it was technically better (and easier to use), I will be tempted to re-encode all my discs again in mp5pro++ is launched, eXtremeDRM+++ or not.

The mass that you gained when you first introduced them to the glory of the free alternative on the basis of its ease of use, will begin to fade away.

Of course, the technical community is a minuscule of the population. And this is just software. There are billions who probably won't even be affected in their lifetime in the least by any of this "free/non-free" nonsense with respect to something like computer code when their own villages don't have electricity or something. But every sort of social change needs some starts. This is a small one.

Harish | http://wahgnube.org/