>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.

You're right, the proprietary software varieties created by each company to carve out their unique money niche atop the free software platform they all run on (Linux and the base Java VM) ... they do cause problems.

>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?

Ask the corporations who are using proprietary software atop the free software base. The free software base works on all of them. The unique software attributes of those apps are introduced purposefully to keep people locked in, to keep the cash cows in the corral, etc.

>>>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.

Not yet. It was a few years ago that tracking people's Internet traffic, websites visited, having cookies even, was extremely controversial. In time, Microsoft will come around because there's too much money in it. Amazon, Facebook and Google are proving that.

>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.

Google tells you about this up front. You can choose not to use their services. Many don't.

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

Donations are different than fee-for-the-thing. In FLOSS a person can receive the product at no cost. That was a giving by the developers of that project. Then when someone chooses to donate, they are also giving.

In the FLOSS model, all people are giving. The developers give you the software. If you choose to give back money, time, labor or whatever, you give back.

In the proprietary model, developers are always only taking, and the people who buy the product are trapped as they have no choice but to "give their money" if they want to use the product. The developers pin them down in that way, and also take not just from those people who buy the product, but also take from everybody who doesn't pay them (as they are prevented from legally running the software unless they "give" their money) too.

It's just not the way it's supposed to be. Proprietary software models and hoarding of what people call "IP" goes against everything God setup, and runs contrary to the very nature of "love thy neighbor as thyself". You wouldn't charge yourself for something you created. You'd be so very happy to give it to yourself. Why isn't it the same when your neighbor walks up? It's the nature of the enemy's presence in this world, and a purposeful choice to follow his cues rather than the ones God setup.