I think we need more architectures in wide use because a monoculture is bad for many reasons. One reason not so often mentioned is that it's then harder to distribute proprietary binaries.
> the vast majority of commercial software is not FOSS.
The overwhelming majority of commercial software made is custom. Much of it is already Free (as well as bloody expensive), and the rest could be without changing anything to the underlying business models.
At the same time, the majority of commercial software used is proprietary. Because while Microsoft Word is only one piece of software, it is multiplied by the number of its users.
As a user, of course you'll find that almost all the software you would pay for is proprietary. But that's just availability bias: you miss all the software that has only one customer, and there is a lot of it.
> Wait, what? Why should governments step in to back FOSS?
Because we all profit from it and there is little market incentive to back them. The government funds museums, mathematics and a lot of other things for less reasons compared to FOSS.
> The city of Munich tried to switch to Linux.
They did switch to a GNU/Linux system. It is hard to be different when everybody around you isn't. There were interoperability issues with other bodies. This is one more reason why the government needs to step in to not only fund FOSS but to legally require open formats. Also, FOSS needs to be taught in schools.
We don't all profit from it, it's a total distraction for most people.
I can't believe the amount of time I've wasted on Linux just trying to get my sound card to work, or a printer. Or I could just buy Windows.
FOSS has a lot of "me too" and "reinvent the wheel" as well, to the point of distraction. At this point I think it's borderline useless outside of compilers and scientific computing.
Also, I really wouldn't waste children's time on FOSS. "Here's how to spend a week on Stack Overflow fixing your printer" is not a core subject.
> We don't all profit from it, it's a total distraction for most people.
Collectively we do, just like we do from mathematics or museums. Also, imagine what the FOSS ecosystem could be if the underlying technologies where funded by governments around the world.
> I can't believe the amount of time I've wasted on Linux just trying to get my sound card to work, or a printer.
First, if these issues exist, then that is one more reason to fund it. Second, when did you try a modern distribution the last time? It has been a long time since I had problems like that. Usually, when I buy hardware and it doesn't work with free driver I send it back because it's non-functional in my eyes. It's very rare that I need to do that.
> Also, I really wouldn't waste children's time on FOSS. "Here's how to spend a week on Stack Overflow fixing your printer" is not a core subject.
Cleary, the hypothetical printer issue is not what should be tought. Good upstream support is the manufacturer problem, and regulation for labels of driver support would help a lot.
What should be thought are not specific programs but programming and the value of FOSS. Maybe, a few selected and curated and sufficiently funded FOSS programs can be presented to show how common problems could be solved.
I bet path dependence has something to say about that. Try to force people to use Dvorak keyboards at work. Even though that layout is demonstrably better (more comfortable and easier to learn), people are already used to Qwerty, still have a Qwerty keyboard at home, and would generally resist change.
Switching to GNU/Linux triggers similar problem: different GUI, still Windows at home, IT has to re-learn everything… Oh, and drivers. These aren't GNU/Linux's fault, but they still tend to underwhelm users.
I, mean, seriously: ever tried to have your grandma use LibreOffice? The number one problem won't come from bugs. It won't even come from its inability to read such and such Microsoft Word document. It will come from her inability to "save as .doc" or "save as .pdf" so other people can read the document (and even if she could, it's still a hassle). Network effects are not LibreOffice's fault, but they still tend to underwhelm users.
