Free and Open Source Software is superior to proprietary software.

Before I elaborate upon my argument, I would like to agree with my opponent on one of the eloquent points he made; more often than not, FOSS thrives due to the general inadequacy of proprietary software! My opponent used several examples, among them the Mozilla project. Mozilla Firefox is considered by many to be a preferable alternative to Microsoft's Internet Explorer, despite the fact that IE is produced by arguably the most powerful software company on Earth. Most computer-saavy users will tell you that there are better browsers out there. By the mid-1990s, Internet Explorer and Netscape's browser were gunning for market share, with Netscape slowly edging ahead. MS was able to put an end to that browser war by bundling IE with the Windows operating system and making deals with OEMs to ensure that IE would ship with every "PC". Thus, it is observable that IE is the predominately used browser because MS attempted (and nearly succeeded) in creating a software (browser) monopoly. Yet, every year, there are converts to Mozilla's Firefox (and other browsers). Why? Because in their supposed success, MS grew complacent and IE stagnated while Firefox developed further. Yes, the inferiority of proprietary software does drive innovation in their respective fields. Unfortunately, that is about all it does. That does not make it inherently "better" or superior. The lack of a market leader in video production or gaming does not necessarily mean that there are no open source alternatives exemplify the virtues I had laid out in my first argument. There are numerous video and photo editors available for multiple platforms that not only stack up against proprietary editors, but empower and respect the user more than their proprietary equivalents. Granted, it is not always easy to modify a piece of software. However, it is a fundamental right of the user, even if you have absolutely no clue how to do that in the first place. If you have plumbing in your home, it may be that you don't understand it, but maybe your neighbour does! They may suggest you rearrange a few pipes and valves to your benefit. You're not breaking any laws by doing that, are you? It's your house and your plumbing. Perhaps paying for a piece of software is not so bad, but more importantly, you should be able to do with it what you like. My opponent makes the case that there is no specific reason for anyone in the community to help you, however that is entirely false; they have every reason to help you, because, as we have established, the community is what drives the open source movement. It is their responsibility as the user to not only help other users, but also to note flaws that other users are having trouble with, so that they can be worked out and the software perfected. The corporation has no reason to help you. Your money is in their hands now, and while they may very well help you, they have no real obligation to help you, unless otherwise specified. As far as the issue of the availability of information, I feel that that is a moot point. The internet, and the community itself, more than compensate for the lack of "mainstream" experts writing books. It simply makes more economical sense for a poor school or organization to run a free distribution of GNU/Linux and free software. French members of Parliament are running Ubuntu exclusively, not only because of the obvious financial advantage, but because it is a feasible, stable alternative. Additionally, my opponent should be aware that WINE is in fact, an open source attempt by those in the Linux community to port Windows applications to a different platform- much to the chagrin of Microsoft, a company which stubbornly refuses to acknowledge Linux as a platform, alienating countless potential users. I hope that I have effectively been able to rebut my opponent's arguments and have furthered the debate. Proprietary software certainly plays a role in the development of FOSS, however that is not to say that it lends any credence to the argument that proprietary software is superior.