Jeff Coffler wrote:
> From: "Mark Lanctot":
>
>> For regular consumer products, product updates and
>> bugfixes ARE free. Think of router firmware, for
>> example. No one charges for that. But on the
>> other hand, these aren't updated forever (a few
>> years at most), and few new features are added,
>> with new features being added to the next piece of
>> hardware and often finalized before release.
>
> "Low-end" routers might have free updates (and few
new features), but
> this isn't the case with commerical routers.
Commercial routers (like
> those from Cisco, for example) are supported for
many years, and
> generally get new features at the same frequency as
other new routers
> (unless the router is so old that it doesn't have
sufficient memory to
> store the new firmware).
>
> To get these new features moving forward, you have
to pay for it.
>
> Security updates are free, but are also a "manual
process" (i.e. more
> time consuming for the customer).
Ah, I've never worked with a Cisco router but I
see your point.
>> Open source can co-exist with a financial
>> structure, mostly in the form of donations at this
>> point.
>
> As I said, I like the model that Slim users now.
>
> The fundamental problem with donations: It is
difficult to predict what
> donations will come in. This, I think, would make
it difficult to
> justify the expense of additional staff to fix stuff
- you never know if
> future donations would be able to fund new staffing
levels. I suppose
> you could hire short-term contractors with some of
those funds, but then
> the company may develop "spotty" service (i.e.
sometimes bugs are fixed
> quickly, sometimes not, depending on contractors -
and funds - available
> at the time).
>
> For open source projects that take donations, they
generally use
> donations for things like new hardware and stuff. I
don't think the
> donations that come in are all that great (in my
honest opinion). I
> certainly don't think they'd fund employees (which,
with salary,
> benefits and the like, cost a whole lot of money).
>
Agreed.
I just don't want to see a mandatory recurring
payment scheme for all users. That would kill my
interest in the device and I'd probably sell both
of mine if that happened.
It's a bit of a vicious circle. As the Squeezebox
gets more and more popular, more and more people
are requesting more and more esoteric, specialized
features. The software is being changed to
accommodate some of this, but the cycle is
accelerating and the enhancement requests are
piling up.
As more users are battering the software from all
sides and as the software gets more and more
sophisticated due to the new features and
enhancements, more bugs are starting to appear.
Don't get me wrong, Dan's doing a fantastic job
and often doesn't get the credit he deserves, but
it's getting to be a lot for one man to handle and
it will only get worse.
--
___________________________________
Mark Lanctot
___________________________________
__________________________________________________________
Find your next car at http://autos.yahoo.ca
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
