On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 03:19:34 AM -0400, Lars D. Noodén
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> What I am talking about is that software is a tool. It is a tool to
> help with teaching or research.
or many other jobs without equally far-reaching, ethicallly important
implications. Which makes my point below even more valid. You said:
> [SW] is a tool to manufacture or re-sell.
> Just as the sale of hammers is rather unimportant compared to what
> you do with the hammers, the sale of software is rather unimportant
> compared to what you do with the software.
and (in your other message):
>[cost of] software or further development [is] very small compared to
>the money that using the software brings in.
Well said. I agree. Just note that this is an excellent summary of why
almost all computer users will continue to ignore any rant on how good
it is that the source of the software they use is available, or waste
time migrating away from something they already know. Most people
don't want to live in a world where "software doesn't suck" (ESR) or
"they can't share knowledge with their fellow (!!!) programmers"
(RMS). They want to live in a world where they can get things done
*ignoring* how their software and that of their partners was
developed.
Any attempt to further spreading FOSS in this age ignoring this truth
is doomed to fail.
Ciao,
Marco
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
