Hello, I was glad to find a review of Trisquel 4.0 at Distrowatch at http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20101004#feature
I am very interested in the different GNU/Linux distros, especially in the fully free ones for different reasons. One reason is, that I am part of a team that is creating a distro ourselves. Anyway, the review itself leaves the reader with a positive impression of Trisquel. The Author, Jesse Smith, praises Trisquels layout founds that performance was nicely balanced with eye candy. No argument from me here. What bothers me is, that the author couldn't resist to attack fully free distros in general a little bit. He asserts that the reasons that he doesn't use fully free distros are that "most of these 100%-free software distros are based upon other distribution" (I belive, there are some which don't) and that "making a more-free Fedora or Ubuntu sounds a bit like comparing vanilla ice cream with extra vanilla." While I can understand this reason from a technical point of view (even it is not fully correct), with his second reason I can't aggree: He writes: "I am pro open-source software. Given the choice between a FOSS solution and a proprietary alternative, I would rather use the FOSS option. But in preferring libre solutions, I don't have anything against closed-source programs. Some FOSS-only distributions strike me as being more anti-proprietary than pro-free. [...] Frankly, I'm less interested in a revolution[...]" I am thinking about answering him, explaining, that he confuses "open source" with "free software" and what "free software" is all about. Maybe you want to write him as well - or would this be futile? Regards, Henry
