Re: Best android app

[Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com>]

On 17/10/2022 18:54, Jean Louis wrote:
> 
> Though for that, we can't steer users to review non-free software as
> that means to let them give up on their freedom.

I am unsure who has intention to steer users to non-free software. There 
was a message mentioning some application. I assume that the person was 
just unaware of strict rules. It will happen in future as well and I am 
against excessively aggressive reaction.

The person may be already familiar with that non-free apps. We had a 
chance to ask about features missed in free applications and actual 
experience. Perhaps the same tasks may be performed in a bit different 
and less obvious way and no modification of Org and Co is required. 
However you insist that we have to through away such possibilities and 
adding outcome from such conversations to web site is prohibited, so it 
makes it significantly harder to use obtained information in later 
discussions.

Better balanced position is necessary otherwise it would be just 
weakness in communication with people who do not care if some software 
is free.

> I find it unfortunate that some people create proprietary software
> that uses Org files.

It sounds like you regret about absence of a kind of vendor lock. File 
formats and communication protocols must be free. There are enough 
examples when free software can not be developed due to lack of 
specifications. Why would you expect cooperation from vendors if you 
wish to have fences at your side in similar cases?

It is more productive to consider proprietary apps as feature requests 
and to put efforts into improving of Org suite.