See comments below and scattered throughout.

Let's look at the open Android system. Let's say I want a new phone. I go to AT&T and look at Android phones from Samsung, HTC, and others. I find they're all running different versions of Android and the apps on my current phone aren't compatible. So, I go to Verizon. Surely I'll have better luck there. Verizon and Google are practically in bed with each other. I see similar, but different phones from Samsun, HTC, and oh! Motorola, which is now owned by Google. Surely, they must all support the apps on my current phone. Ummm.. nope. Where's the freedom in that?

>Free software is about giving those who HAVE the ability to change the software the ability to do so. It's a philosophy. All proprietary software hinders. It removes the ability to correct, extend or modify the app, and not only from the millions of users who don't care and don't possess the technical ability to change the software, but also from those with the desire and technical ability to do so. Proprietary software ties everybody's hands and creates only one thing: a total monopoly. Free software creates an inherent and immediate free market so that the best advances will winnow their way to the top.
>
>There's a reason why Linux is on 1.5 million new Android activations per DAY, and Windows [anything] is not. How many Win8 licenses have been sold so far? 50 million? Android + Linux does that every month. And they're only getting stronger.
>
>>Even though Google tracks everything they do to target market them...
>

The big difference is, Microsoft doesn't pry into what most people consider to be personal. That is, my email. Google has stated several times they scan email. They match up email address, IP, etc, across EVERY Google site to find out everything they can about you. Then, they target advertise. And even worse, Google takes payment to push your product higher up in the search, so it's more likely to be seen. Microsoft does not promote seach based on advertising revenue.

>You're right. Proprietary (closed source solutions) harm us in all forms because we (those with the desire and ability to do so) are prevented from going in and modifying them to remove the tracking features, while still giving the search and toolset features. The monopoly they create is modified to be so desirable, so ubiquitous that it becomes part of our everyday lives through the tools which are beneficial for use.
>
>Do we have alternatives that don't track or mine our search data or usage for non-system-enhancement related purposes?
>
>Does Bing monitor anything? Yahoo? Amazon? Wikipedia? Yes. Wikipedia, an open source platform, is the ONLY one that does not track and mine for non-system-enhancement purposes. Telling.
>

Does FLOSS take donations? Does it pay a salary to someone at the top?

>Bottom line: I agree with you, Craig, it would be great to have free-from-tracking-us tools. I think the only way they'll exist is if they're FLOSS because businesses are in the business of making money no matter what their outward service is or appears to be. They don't care who gets trampled in the process so long as the cash cows keep mooing.
>
>FLOSS cares about people.
>Proprietary models care about money.