The Free Software Foundation have mailed a blank hard disk drive to Microsoft and is asking for the Windows 7 source code to be put on it and mailed back to them. Will this even work? The Free Software Foundation is urging Redmond WA to release the source code of Windows 7 so that it may be worked on by volunteers and more bug fixes applied. But this would be a massive job. Windows 10 probably uses a lot of Windows 7 code, so releasing the source as “free software” is never going to happen. Imagine Windows source on Github with many abandoned forks of it all over the web and code appropriated for ReactOS development, although I do not think they would be allowed to use it, it would give an insight into how to do something. This is a very bold move, it is not going to work, but they can dream. Do they just want to steal source code so they can improve Wine and run more Windows apps on Linux? The FSF says they want to help Microsoft, but would they even help maintain the Windows operating system and kernel, or would they just use the code for their own ends?
Microsoft themselves have used free software, the FTP command used in CMD is BSD code, so they are making use of free software themselves. But they are not going to give away the secrets of their operating system for free. At least, this is a cool hashtag and all, we know that this will not happen. the FSF are possibly losing sight of what they are supposed to stand for and are focusing too much on grandiose plans instead. We have Linux, BSD and other operating systems we could use instead of Windows, we do not need to beg from Redmond WA to get the Windows 7 source and then fork that to build a new operating system, this is frankly ridiculous. What will they do next? It seems that the FSF are falling for the trick of following a trendy cause instead of maintaining their core business model. Do they even care about free software anymore? Honestly, there are some types of software and some markets where the support and services model works. Obviously Red Hat has made it work, as have others. But there are some markets, especially in the consumer segment, where that doesn’t work at all. Businesses are much more likely to pay an expensive monthly support fee for software that drives their business, whereas consumers can’t afford that for something that doesn’t make them any money and is primarily for entertainment and socializing.
Do you refuse to buy a car unless the manufacturer publishes its blueprints and trade secrets? No.
Do you refuse to buy food from a supermarket unless they publish all of their store design plans, all of the recipes to all of their products, including trade secrets? No.
Do you refuse to use a bank unless they publish all of their proprietary systems for keeping money safe? No.
Normal people don’t expect a business to reveal all of their designs and trade secrets (which is what source code amounts to). They just want a product at a reasonable price. If they really care about how their car is made, then they can go and study that (and so computer scientists can study how to create an operating system), but BMW isn’t going to give away all of their proprietary secrets, just like Microsoft isn’t. If the autistic FSF was logically consistent then why don’t they demand the same from other industries? Why don’t they demand that car manufacturers publish all of their design documents and fabrication processes so that the world can learn from them? Really this amounts to an issue of intellectual property, and if you were logically consistent, then you would go and lobby the government about intellectual property laws. But this is not happening, people are happy using a car, they do not demand the blueprints and trade secrets from manufacturers. They just want it to get them around every day.