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
