His standard may not be completely unrealistic, but it is borderline and would make my life and work, pretty inconvenient.
Another common point is that they adore the guy sticking to his believes. You know what, believes can be wrong too…
His is way out simply because his needs and thinking is waaaay different from ordinary people (software users). I couldn't care less how proprietary is equipment in my car, all I want is it to run smoothly. On the other hand mechanic servicing my car couldn't care less what powers his computer as long as it does what he needs.
I am sure there will be a lot hand waving about the greater good without any demonstration of such good.
I don't think any radical idea was ever good.
What? Something that seems radical today is the norm of tomorrow.
Columbus looking for new trade routes was radical, but good. Ending world hunger is a pretty radical idea, but it will be good. Being an entrepreneur is radical.
Although, how radical the idea was pretty dependent on the lost knowledge of Eratosthenes and the black plague cutting off the Mongol lands.
The FSF exists to provide balance: remember we have companies radically promoting proprietary software, we just don't notice it because that's what companies normally do. The FSF promoting free software seems a little odd because they're not a company and the software is free, however it's not really any different.
There's absolutely no chance of proprietary software disappearing (at least in capitalist countries), but without Stallman free software might have been much less popular.
But I think the issues around Facebook and the iPhone show the rising walled-garden environments we see today have serious issues concerning one's control of one's data.