The freedom of choosing

No matter how good hardware is getting year after year, computers are only as good as the operating system they run, which lets users take advantage of the hardware. It is thus only expectable that a prerogative of such users would be to tweak and customize their operating system according to their needs, up to the point of choosing what operating system to buy together with a new computer (or choosing to buy no OS at all). However, it’s not that easy: we all know the vast majority of PCs are sold with an operating system pre-installed (Microsoft Windows), and it’s not always possible (and not in all countries) to decline the license agreement shown on the first use of the operating system and obtain a reimbursement of the price paid for it (don’t forget that even if the computer comes with it, Windows is not free of charge).

It would be quite a lot better if PCs were sold without any operating system at all and the user could always have a choice of buying Windows with them or not. In fact, it wouldn’t change much for those who want Windows, but it would change a lot for those who don’t (take for example software developers, people who want to build their own media centers or home network, and might benefit more from using a flavor of UNIX) as they wouldn’t waste money on something they wouldn’t use. And obviously, it’s primarily a matter of freedom of choice, not merely of money.

Professor Renzo Davoli of the University of Bologna, Italy, has launched a campaign to press for the passing of a law that would facilitate things in such a matter. The proposal, sent to the Minister of Economic Development Pierluigi Bersani, revolves around three main points: when computers are sold, the price for hardware must be listed separately from the price for the operating system license, if any; buyers must be given the choice to buy plain hardware, without any operating system; the prices listed for the operating system license must be realistic and must not depend on private agreements among third parties. There is also an online petition aimed at estimating how many people agree with this idea.

I believe the proposal is noteworthy and meaningful. The key point here is not which operating system is better or which one is more complete, cheaper or more effective. The key point is that different people have very different needs and want different things; hence, everyone must have the right to choose what they pay for. It’s the freedom of choosing and the right of not wasting resources, two principles that most of the times are not being granted.