--- Cleve Allison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I meant it does not mean that you can't financially > profit.
Sure, there are plenty of ways to profit: services after the sale, customization of software, etc. But the old guard can't see beyond keeping source code closed and therefore a commodity. The problem for Micro$oft is that technology has evolved faster than their business plan. I mean, when a bunch of unwashed geeks around the world coding in their spare time can threaten the world's richest software company, it's time for Micro$oft to start doing what Adam Smith was yammering about: compete. I mean, damn, ain't it ironic that Micro$oft wants to be able to bundle a web browser for _free_ (gratis) in it's operating system because they want the "freedom to innovate", but when a bunch of geeks create a _free_ (libre) operating system, that's "un-American" (Jim Allchin, Micro$oft VP)? Craig Mundie's (another Micro$oftie) argument about the GPL being a threat to commercialization of software is essentially an attack on free speech. If you carry his argument to its logical conclusion, then any sharing of source code is bad and un-American. That's a bunch of crap. Science and the sharing of knowledge is our birthright and I'll be damned if someone tries to take that away from me. John Hebert __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email! http://mail.yahoo.com/ ================================================ BRLUG - The Baton Rouge Linux User Group Visit http://www.brlug.net for more information. Send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to change your subscription information. ================================================
