-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Michael Poole wrote:
I'm not going to argue with your previous points, which are all basically accurate. > Related to (a), current programmable hardware cannot run *any* CPU at > speeds that most users would accept for desktop use. However, solving > that issue simply requires training users to expect even less > function[1]. There is a rather subtle, but vital, point here which you appear to be missing. Debian supports users of non-free software, and will continue to. The goal is to make it *possible* to run Debian on a fully free system. The goal is certainly *not* to make a fully free system a *requirement* for Debian. In other words: If Debian is running on *one* fully free system, then the Debian system doesn't require the use of non-free components. You may prefer to use non-free components, however, and the Debian system should retain compatibility with/support for them as long as developers are willing to do so. > It seems like this option is more palatable to Debian > than helping users get the most function for their hardware and time > investment. That statement is a strawman given what I just pointed out above. We understand that at any given time before the utopian free software world of the far future, there will probably be components where the free alternatives perform worse than the non-free ones. Most users will use a combination of the Debian system and a few non-free components, as they do now. If they start getting irritated with the non-free components, they may switch to the free alternatives, and/or try to improve them. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFE9M9jRGZ0aC4lkIIRApOZAJ90zk7TlcKU11FV1muKTa63XZUZawCcCNLf dMpFEZyGbeo50SMf6Wclwfw= =IPMP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]