FWIW, as a 10+ years user (first time caller :p) I strongly support sticking with the status quo. There are plenty of systems that don't require firmware to work, and often when people say it doesn't "work" they really mean that its functionality is more limited. I use Debian specifically because it has a good free license policy that separates these things out cleanly and makes it easy to get rid of all the proprietary junk -- by never installing it. Debian is, in my experience, the most stable and accessible way to reliably have a free system, and I would be very disappointed to lose that. I think the ideological element is important, drawing a line in the sand and making it clear to users that if hardware isn't working, the manufacturer is at fault. And I like to know that myself, so I can return the hardware and replace it — it can sometimes be hard to find documentation as to whether hardware will be useable or crippled with the need for proprietary crap. I have not personally encountered these widespread problems you describe with modern hardware — more sporadic issues — but I am not a bleeding edge, buy it ASAP person. (This is another ideological point: we are destroying the environment with e-waste thanks to unnecessary hardware upgrades and planned obsolescence.) I think sacrificing a core aspect of Debian for the sake of covenient access to novelty hardware is a real shame.
There are definitely people who use forks because it's easier to install non-free firmware. What's the problem with that? Let them use forks. A distro can't be all things to all people. Debian is unique in this area, and it would be a shame to sacrifice that and make it just like all the rest. And it's unclear what benefit there is to attracting a larger and larger userbase as a bottom-line. It is not a commercial project, so they will not be paying customers. The best-case scenario is that people are attracted to making contributions or becoming more interested in free software, which I thought was the main goal. So if that isn't prioritized, what's the point? Further, there are security concerns with blobs. Yes, we can get microcode updates, but were those updates themselves actually audited? As far as I know, they are just as opaque as the code they're replacing. They could be making security worse, and we won't know until someone finds the exploits. The rare event where a microcode update is released and it increases security is far outweighed by the vast majority of the situations where installing opaque code is detrimental to security. If people are unhappy with the status quo, my proposal would be to encourage more people to work on free alternatives. There is an ocean of possibilities here, from open hardware to reverse engineering. My feeling is that a lot more could be done to better support hardware that doesn't involve non-free code at all. There are many free projects that have never made it to Debian. Anyway, I'm just a user/lurker, so I appreciate that my voice doesn't carry much weight. And this discussion is a bit old now, so I hope I'm not stepping on toes. Just my two cents! Thank you everyone for all the hard work you do to make my computer significantly less infuriating to use. It's the best operating system I've ever used, and I have used quite a few. -pnppl