I wouldn't have characterized that as evil per se, but the fact that they are just not disclosing these restrictions is at the very least a communications failure, if not a shady business practice. It would have been completely understandable if they had just mentioned the existence of these restrictions, but they haven't.
If you start using LFS, you are effectively losing features and the product becomes worse for a lot of their users, a lot of them paying customers.
The question is not whether this was being just inflammatory (it was) but rather whether it was unwarranted criticism.
Comments
I wouldn't have characterized that as evil per se, but the fact that they are just not disclosing these restrictions is at the very least a communications failure, if not a shady business practice. It would have been completely understandable if they had just mentioned the existence of these restrictions, but they haven't.
If you start using LFS, you are effectively losing features and the product becomes worse for a lot of their users, a lot of them paying customers.
The question is not whether this was being just inflammatory (it was) but rather whether it was unwarranted criticism.
Disclaimer: I am the author of the article.