Erm, I think we're missing the point here by discussing corporate/university policy, that wasn't what the original post was about.

The question in the original post was to do with Linux enthusiasts' attitudes to supporting proprietary standards.

The problem in a nutshell: Potential home users of Linux going to be put off switching to Linux if it can't run Flash sites as well as Windows, but Flash is a proprietary standard which open source enthusiasts often hate.


I do agree that people should think about these issues, especially when you consider how much money people could save with OSS, but I don't think leaving out support does make people think.

Ordinary users would just assume that the lack of support for a common proprietary standard is a defect. They would say something like "It doesn't run YouTube? I'm not using it then!" and go and buy a commercial product instead.

Most people don't know what "open source" means, because it only has significance if you're familiar with the basics of software development. A lot of people think it just means "freeware".


You're right, this is a question of balance. Proprietary support brings market share but erodes the advantages of OSS. You need both in order to succeed.