Re: [Fsuk-manchester] freedoms analogy

[MJ Ray]

Pete Morris wrote:
> [...] There is a notion that people need
> to be "informed" or "educated" about free software, with an
> implication once they have heard they will flock to it. I don't
> think this is a helpful belief.

I think this may be the misunderstanding that I alluded to earlier:
it's not that I think after any particular individual is informed,
they will necessarily agree to use free software; it's that I think
ignorance of the issues is more widespread than not agreeing.
Ignorance is the biggest problem we face, not dissent.

> In answer to yours and Mr Ray's question, the university in question
> is the University of East Anglia, but it's common to most
> universities. It is not that a university requires students to
> purchase Microsoft software, rather they purchase a campus licence
> under a system like CHEST, and then students are given a free copy
> of Windows/Office/whatever whilst they are doing the course. In this
> sense, the university is not mandating that a student spend their
> own money, but they are mandating that they only accept a certain
> file format. [...]

That's a shame.  I studied and worked at UEA.  I first used free
software there, on a SYS course unit.  I switched to free software
there, encouraged by widespread use in MTH.  I'm disappointed that
CHEST has expanded to the point of giving students copies of MS Office
and so on - surely that must cost a packet, so isn't free.

If they are mandating that they only accept one vendor's undocumented
file format, they are practically requiring Microsoft software, on
pain of losing marks.  Any such mandates ought to be for open
standards, and is why FSFE also campaigns for them at
http://fsfe.org/projects/os/os.en.html

Oh well, it gives me something else to object to when they call up to
ask me for money this year.

> [...] It all depends on your definition of "free": not everyone
> wants to be 'free' to modify the source code, some people want to be
> 'free' to use the software they are familiar with and be 'free' to
> have it work the way they were expecting.

Maybe they want that, but even buying MS Office they are not 'free' to
have it work the way they were expecting: witness the large user
interface changes between versions; combined with end-of-life
unavailability of old versions.

On another list, the charter includes "Please feel free to use this
list for announcements, questions and discussion topics, but please
try to keep it positive and polite. Pro-free-software political UK
news is welcome. Debating definitions of "free software" is not."
It would be nice if fsuk-manchester could at least agree on the
free software definition as what it means by "free".

Regards,
-- 
MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op.
Webmaster, Debian Developer, Past Koha RM, statistician, former lecturer.
In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Available for hire for various work http://www.software.coop/products/