Re: FreedomBox

["nick G" <Nick6489@andrelouis.com>]

Oy there Matt.
As someone wo has bought programs in the passed, I understand what you are 
getting at.  I do think, and this is a suggestion mind you, that yyou should 
release the messenger program, free of charge, to both the windows and linux 
comunity.  Doing that may very well be one of the best things your company 
would ever do.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Matt Campbell" <mattc@freedombox.cc>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2005 8:42 PM
Subject: Re: FreedomBox


Hello all,

I'd like to respond to some of the recent comments about FreedomBox and
the company behind it.

First, Linux is now one of the available operating systems on the trial
registration form.  We apologize for the inconvenience.

In response to Kenny:  Where on Earth did you get the idea that we sell
personal information or track web browsing activity?  We have never done
anything of that sort, and I find it insulting to suggest that we would.
  As consumers, I and the other people at Serotek hate spyware, just
like everyone else, so why would we spend time developign something that
we knew our users would hate?  We prefer to use our limited resources to
develop innovative products and services that users will enjoy. (Hint:
I'm currently Serotek's only programmer.) So I'd seriously like to know
what made you think that we sell personal information or track your
online activities, because there isn't an ounce of truth there.

We did change our minds about making the browser available free of
charge, but for good reason.  Would you actually use the FreedomBox
browser at no charge, with Festival or Flite, if it was available?  As a
consumer, I wouldn't consider it worthwhile to save a mere twenty-five
dollars to put up with one of those awful text-to-speech engines, for
all or even some of my web browsing.  Considering, as Cheryl pointed
out, that FreedomBox gives you access to sites that aren't otherwise
accessible under Linux, I'd say it's worth the twenty-five bucks.  It's
certainly the most inexpensive adaptive technology product of its kind
that I would consider usable by the average user.  If you want to
continue using Lynx with Speakup, that's fine.  Don't get me wrong;
Speakup is a good product, but we're in the twenty-first century now,
and Lynx is way behind the times by any measure.  Anyway, as a business,
we just didn't think it made sense to spend thousands of dollars worth
of programming time to support one of these undebatably inferior
text-to-speech engines.

As for Lorenzo's suggestion that we're no better than Freedom
Scientific, I find the comparison ludicrous.  As I said before, for
twenty-five dollars, our software is extremely affordable.  For only
$9.95 a month, you get access to a wealth of content and other services,
as well as painless software updates.  And we offer all of this under an
operating system for which Freedom Scientific has done nothing.

In response to Sean, we do understand and respect the culture of the
Linux community.  Yes, FreedomBox is like an AOL for the blind; and just
as AOL has been paying more attention to intermediate and advanced users
in recent years, so are we.  FreedomBox 2.0 may not yet have the
flexibility of some applications that you're used to, but we're working
on it; and as I stated earlier, we do respect your privacy.  Also, as I
hinted earlier, we have taken Linux seriously when other adaptive
technology companies have not.  In the face of opposition from others in
the company, Mike Calvo has personally fought for the development of the
Linux port of FreedomBox.  He has also permitted and even encouraged me
to contribute back to open-source software.  Have we done some things
that free-software purists don't like?  Sure, but we can't please
everyone; and I think we've done more good for the blind Linux community
than most open-source efforts directed at this community in recent
years, including my own.  Is paying a fair price in return for a good
product and service too much to ask?  Even Linus Torvalds uses
proprietary software when he believes it's the best tool for the job, so
I don't think usage and development of proprietary software is contrary
to Linux culture.

If you have any questions, comments, or concerns about the points I've
made here, please feel free to share them on this list.  I want to set
the record straight and clear up any confusion that remains about
FreedomBox and Serotek.  I hope this message has helped to accomplish that.
-- 
Sincerely,
Matt Campbell
Lead Programmer
Serotek Corporation
www.freedombox.info

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup