I agree with Dustin that open source software is usually buggy, _but_ it is usually described that way. All software is buggy, but rarely does closed source software describe itself that way.
In fact, the nature of open source is that users are expected to debug it. Maybe this is where Andrew's confusion comes from: he expects open source to be the same quality as closed source, but does not realize that it is a group effort to make it the same quality. When a complicated open source software application is released in a new version, it is because a large number of beta testers contributed their efforts freely to file bug reports. It is interesting to me that closed source software publishers ask their users for the same effort, but do not reward the users with opening the source code. IMHO, we should be able to get a refund for buggy, closed source software that is paid for. Why should software be any different now than a physical product that we purchase? Computer technology and software development is mature enough now that we should expect a reasonable level of normal operability. John --- Dustin Puryear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Edmund Cramp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 9:38 PM > Subject: [brlug-general] $BIG_NUM (was Supporting > Linux vs. Linux Zealotry) > > > On the other hand - one of the good things about > GPL/Open Source > > programming is that, in general, code is released > when it works, and > > I disagree. Part of the philosophy of open source is > to release early and > release often. > > On a related note, I found a good article that seems > relevent: > > http://www.informit.com/articles/article.asp?p=352987&seqNum=4 __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
