I just read Terry Hancock’s artilce on Is free software major league or minor?. Great article, and I’m very glad to see articulate discussion about these core subjects. Not enough is said about these matters.

However, I disagree strongly on several points that your article raises. I’ll take it point by point in an effort to not misrepresent your views and keep focussed on the statements that you have made.

Is free software really capable of serving end users or not? This issue has political consequences, which is part of what makes it important: either free software is “minor league” or it’s “major league”. Which we believe has a big impact on what our expectations can be and what our political and ethical stance towards proprietary and free software should be.

Language and lock-in

One of the favorite arguments for free software is that it avoids lock-in to a particular manufacturer’s products. Something similar happens due to choice of programming language, though, which accounts for the sometimes-baffling project rivalries in the free software world. While this may be a surprising result to end users, it makes a lot of sense if you think about how developers—especially free-software developers—work. Occasionally, you hear complaints about these “divisions” of the free software world, but is this really a bad thing?

That’s right, they’re the top dogs in the business; with “unprecedented control” in the technology industry and “access to a huge amount of consumer information”. And a concerned member of the technology community recently put out the call for scrutiny on the new big boys in town “from regulatory authorities to ensure a competitive… market”. Sounds like old news, huh? You know which big dirty corporate bad guys I’m referring to? The baddest of the lot… Google of course.