> > > 2) using more free software is better than not running it at all > > > 3) incentivating usage of non-free software on free software operating > > > systems doesn't incentivate the creation of free software > replacements > > > > this is a word play. I know people who used OpenBSD for a while > > and stopped using it because a proprietary application they > > depended on was not available; and i know people who would use > > Linux/OpenBSD/whatever if emacs/gcc were not available and made > > so easy to use on Windows, because gcc is centric to their > > business and emacs integrates it so well. > > Now THIS is wordplay and pure speculation. > If GCC wasn't available or made so easy to use, they'd merely use another > one. The reason they don't use a Free Software operating system as nothing > to do with the availability of GCC. > > Mostly its some stupid reason like managemente dictates usage of tool X > which only works on Windows, for instance.
How is it that stating a fact (that this person knows someone who had made a decision) a play on words and speculation? If it helps to make it clear that it is not speculation, I too know people who have made a conscious decision not to use OpenBSD simply because a program that was absolutely essential to getting something done (be it a personal need or a managerial directive), and only X OS supported that, but not OpenBSD.
